The Brief

A federal judge ordered the Trump administration to restore a portion of the 800 federal science research grants that it suspended at UCLA last month, delivering a major setback to efforts to force the university into a $1 billion settlement.

California district court judge Rita F. Lin ruled Tuesday that the suspensions violated her June preliminary injunction in which she ordered the National Science Foundation to restore 114 grants it had terminated at the University of California and blocked the agency from cancelling other grants at the UC system.

”NSF’s actions violate the Preliminary Injunction,” Lin wrote.

Her June order came after lawyers for University of California researchers argued the science foundation grant terminations were arbitrary and capricious and in violation of federal law. Those grants and others were terminated over alleged Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion violations following several Trump executive orders in January.

Lin’s order to restore the suspended grants came in response to a court filing lawyers for the UC researchers submitted after 300 National Science Foundation Grants and 500 National Institutes of Health grants at UCLA were suspended. The suspensions froze $584 million. The lawyers aren’t acting on behalf of the UC system, though some are employed at the UC. It is not yet clear if all 300 suspended National Science Foundation grants are to be restored under Lin’s latest order. Lin told the Trump administration and lawyers for the UC researchers to file an update on the restorations Aug. 19.

Lin’s latest order doesn’t restore UCLA’s suspended National Institutes of Science grants because they weren’t covered in her initial June order.

Campuses rely on the funding to make scientific breakthroughs, develop new medicines, train graduate students and fuel the research that has made the U.S. arguably the world’s leader in scientific discovery.

Lawyers for the federal government contended that suspending the UCLA grants didn’t violate Lin’s June order, which barred terminations but was silent on suspensions. Lawyers for the University of California researchers said there’s no difference between suspensions and terminations because both mean researchers lose access to funding. They also argued that like in the June case, the suspensions of UCLA grants didn’t follow federal procedure that requires an agency to explain why each individual grant should no longer continue to receive funding.

“NSF’s indefinite suspensions differ from a termination in name only. ” Lin wrote in Tuesday’s order. She added that the letters informing UCLA of the grant suspensions “fail to provide a ‘grant-specific explanation’ for why the award has been terminated, as required by the Preliminary Injunction.”

Some federal judges have faulted the Trump administration for never defining what it considers DEI but cancelling funding to schools based on those violations anyway.

“Although a new presidential administration is entitled to develop programs with its chosen priorities, the Executive may not set out to suppress ideas it deems dangerous by trying to drive them out of the marketplace of ideas,” Lin wrote in her June preliminary injunction.

How we got here

The Trump administration suspended UCLA’s grants over allegations that the campus isn’t doing enough to combat antisemitism. The National Science Foundation sent a letter to UCLA on Aug. 1 that accused the campus of admitting students based on race, even though all public campuses in California have been barred from affirmative action since state voters eliminated the practice in 1996.

The letter also accused the campus of relying on admissions essays to determine an applicant’s race. But when the Supreme Court of the United States struck down affirmative action in 2023, the majority ruling allowed campuses to allow students to write about their race and identity in admissions essays.

The science foundation made similar accusations against Harvard University when it terminated that campus’s grants.

The 800 grant suspensions followed a federal Department of Justice report last month that accused the campus of not doing enough to address antisemitism, particularly related to events during last year’s pro-Palestine protests, which included overnight encampments erected by protesters. The report came months after UCLA commissioned a task force to investigate antisemitism on campus and come up with recommendations that UCLA leaders said they’d implement.

That report published the same day UCLA agreed to a $6.45 million settlement with four Jewish plaintiffs. That deal was opposed by several pro-Palestinian professors and students, some of whom are Jewish.

Last year a federal judge in the case sided with the Jewish plaintiffs who said that the anti-Israel sentiment displayed by protestors in the encampment violated their religious liberties because of their spiritual ties to Israel. “Jewish students were excluded from portions of the UCLA campus because they refused to denounce their faith,” the judge, Mark C. Scarsi, wrote in his preliminary injunction.

Various Jewish groups debate whether anti-Zionism is inherently antisemitic. The UCLA encampment included Jewish participants.

About a week later, on Aug 8, the Trump administration sent UCLA a settlement proposal of $1 billion that the school would pay over several installments in exchange for getting back the suspended science grants, CNN first reported. The settlement also sought to ban overnight demonstrations at UCLA, but that was already campus policy before last spring’s pro-Palestine protests; the UC reaffirmed those bans systemwide last fall.

How California responded

Gov. Gavin Newsom said Trump “has threatened us through extortion with a billion dollar fine unless we do his bidding” at a press conference on Friday hours after CNN first reported Trump’s settlement demand. Newsom said “we’ll sue” last Friday when a reporter asked how California will respond. The state’s attorney general has already filed 37 lawsuits against the Trump administration, including several tied to education funding.

White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said “bring it on, Gavin” at a press conference Tuesday.

“A payment of this scale would completely devastate our country’s greatest public university system as well as inflict great harm on our students and all Californians,” said UC President James B. Milliken in a statement about the $1 billion settlement demand. UCLA has also continued its media blitz highlighting the human benefits of the university’s health and science research.

The settlement demand “does not make Jewish students safer,” the Jewish Public Affairs Committee of California said in a statement Tuesday. The advocacy group 39 organizations that offer family services, political advocacy, immigration legal aid and other nonprofit work.

The Jewish affairs committee pointed to several strides UC and UCLA made to curtail antisemitism and promote safer campuses. “Meaningful progress is already underway in California,” the group wrote.

This story first appeared on The LA Local.

Since 1977, Richard Santillan has been to every Opening Day game at Dodger Stadium. 

“The tradition goes from my father, to me, to my children and grandchildren. Some of my best memories are with my father and children here at Dodger Stadium,” Santillan told The LA Local, smiling under the shade of palm trees near the entrance to the ballpark Wednesday morning. He was there to protest the team less than 24 hours before Opening Day.

Santillan, like countless other loyal Dodgers fans, is grappling with his fan identity over the team’s decision to accept an invitation to the White House and owner Mark Walter’s ties to ICE detention facilities.

More than 30 people joined Santillan on Wednesday morning for a press conference held near 1000 Vin Scully Drive to convey a message directly to the team. 

“We are demanding the Dodgers stop participating in funding of inhumane treatment of families and do not go to the White House to celebrate with the criminal in chief,” Evelyn Escatiola told the crowd. “Together, we have the power to make a change.”

Escatiola, a former dean of East Los Angeles College and longtime community organizer, urged fans to flex their economic power by “letting the Dodgers know that we do not support repression.”

Jorge “Coqui” Rodriguez, a lifelong Dodgers fan, spoke to the crowd and called on Dodgers ownership to divest from immigration detention centers owned and operated by GEO Group and CoreCivic.

Jorge Coqui H Rodriguez speaks at a press conference outside Dodger Stadium on March 25, 2026, to demand the Dodgers not to visit the White House following their 2025 World Series win.

(

J.W. Hendricks

/

The LA Local

)

In a phone interview a day before the protest, Rodriguez told The LA Local he did not want the Dodgers using his “cheve” or beer money to fund detention centers. 

“They can’t take our parking money, our cacahuate money, our cheve money, our Dodger Dog money and invest those funds into corporations that are imprisoning people. It’s wrong,” Rodriguez said. 

Rodriguez considers the Dodgers one of the most racially diverse teams and said the players need to support fans at a time when heightened immigration enforcement has become more common across L.A.

The team’s 2025’s visit to the White House drew ire from the largely Latino fan base, citing the Trump administration’s ongoing attacks on immigrants. 

In June, the team came under further scrutiny when rumors swirled online that federal immigration agents were using the stadium’s parking, which immigration authorities later denied in statements posted on social media accounts.

The team again came under fire after not releasing a statement on the impacts of ICE raids on its mostly Latino fan base at the height of immigration enforcement last summer. The team later agreed to invest $1 million to support families affected by immigration enforcement.

When he learned the Dodgers were pledging only $1 million to families in need, Rodriguez called the amount a  “slap in the face.” 

“These guys just bought the Lakers for billions of dollars and they give a million dollars to fight for legal services? That’s a joke,” Rodriguez said. “They need to have a moral backbone and not be investing in those companies.”

According to reporting from the Los Angeles Times, former Dodgers pitcher Clayton Kershawsaid last week that he is looking forward to the trip.

“I went when President [Joe] Biden was in office. I’m going to go when President [Donald] Trump is in office,” Kershaw said. “To me, it’s just about getting to go to the White House. You don’t get that opportunity every day, so I’m excited to go.”

The Dodgers have yet to announce when their planned visit will take place. 

Santillan sometimes laments his decision to give up his season tickets in protest of the team. His connection to the stadium and the memories he has made there with family and friends will last a lifetime, he said. On Thursday, he will uphold his tradition and be there for the first pitch of the season, but with a heavy heart.

“It’s a family tradition, but the Dodgers have a lot of work to do,” he said.

A local favorite mom-and-pop bookshop in Eagle Rock is facing displacement due to a steep rent hike. The owners say theirs is just one of several small businesses along Eagle Rock Boulevard struggling to keep up with lease increases.

Over the past 19 years, many in the neighborhood have come to love READ Books for its eclectic collection of used titles and shop dog Florence.

Co-owner Jeremy Kaplan said it’s been a delight to grow with the community over the years.

“Like seeing kids come back in, who were in grade school and now they’re in college,” Kaplan said.

But the building where Kaplan and wife Debbie rent was recently sold, and the rent increased by more than 130% to $2,805 a month, Kaplan said. He told LAist it was an increase his small business simply could not absorb.

Kaplan said he originally was given 30 days notice of the rent increase. After some research, assistance from Councilmember Ysabel Jurado’s office and some pro-bono legal help, Kaplan said he pushed back and got the 90-day notice he’s afforded by state law.

California Senate Bill 1103 requires landlords to give businesses with five or less employees 90 days’ notice for rent increases exceeding 10%, among other protections.

Systems Real Estate, the property management company, did not immediately respond to LAist’s request for comment.

What can small businesses do? 

Nadia Segura, directing attorney of the Small Business Program at pro bono legal aid non-profit Bet Tzedek said California law does not currently allow for rent control for commercial tenancies.

Outside of the protections under SB 1103, Segura said small businesses like READ Books don’t have much other recourse. And even then, commercial landlords are not required to inform their tenants of their protections under the law.

“There’s still a lot of people that don’t know about SB 1103. And then it’s very sad that they tell them they have these rent increases and within a month they have to leave,” Segura said.

She said her group is seeing steep rent hikes like this for commercial tenants across the city.

“We are seeing this even more with the World Cup coming up, the Olympics coming up. And I will say it was very sad to see that also after the wildfires,” Segura said.

Part of Bet Tzedek’s ongoing work is to advocate for small businesses, working with landlords who are increasing rents to see if they are willing to give business owners longer leases that lock in rents.

What’s next 

After READ Books posted about their situation on social media, commenters chimed in to express their outrage and love for the little shop.

While he looks for a new spot, Kaplan says he’s forming a coalition of local businesses and activist groups to see what can be done to help other small businesses facing similar displacement. He wants to address the displacement issue for businesses like his, which have made Eagle Rock the distinctive neighborhood that it is today.

Owl Talk, a longtime Eagle Rock staple selling clothing and accessories in a unit in the same building as READ Books, is facing a “more than double” rent increase, according to a post on their Instagram account.

Kaplan said he’s been in touch with the office of state Assemblywoman Jessica Caloza and wants to explore the possibility of introducing legislation to set up protections for small businesses like his, including rent-control measures or a vacancy tax for landlords. Kaplan said he also reached out to the office of state Sen. Maria Durazo.

By his count, Kaplan said there are about a dozen businesses within surrounding blocks that are at risk of closing their doors or have shuttered due to rent increases or other struggles.

When READ Books was founded during the Great Recession, Kaplan said he knew it was a longshot to open a bookstore at the same time so many were struggling to stay in business.

“It was kind of interesting to be doing something that neighborhoods needed. That was important to me growing up, that was important to my children, that was important to my wife growing up,” Kaplan said.

“And then somebody comes in and says, ‘We’re gonna over double your rent.”

Topline:

Frozen budget: Most of the city’s Bureau of Street Lighting budget comes from an assessment that people who own property illuminated by lights pay on their county property tax bill. The amount people pay depends on the kind of property they own and how much they benefit from lighting. A typical single-family home currently pays $53 annually, and in total, the assessments bring in about $45 million annually for the city to repair and maintain streetlights. Changing the amount the Bureau of Street Lighting gets from the assessment requires a vote among property owners who benefit from the lights.

Ballots: L.A. City Council’s vote gives city staff the green light to prepare and send out those ballots. Miguel Sangalang, who oversees the bureau, said at a committee meeting earlier this month that he expects to send out ballots by April 17. Notices about the ballots will be sent out prior to the ballots themselves.

Near unanimous vote: L.A. City Councilmember Monica Rodriguez was the only “No” vote Tuesday, saying she wanted to see a more current strategic plan for the bureau. Sangalang said the bureau developed a plan in 2022 that lays out how money will be spent. Councilmember Imelda Padilla was absent for the vote.

Vote count: Votes will be weighted according to the assessment amount. Basically, the more you’re asked to pay yearly to maintain streetlights, the more your vote will count. Ballots received before June 2 will be tabulated by the L.A. City Clerk.

How much more money: According to a report, the amount needed in assessments from property owners to meet the repair and maintenance needs of the city’s streetlighting in the next fiscal year is nearly $112 million.

Use of the money: Sangalang said at a March 11 committee meeting that the extra funds would be used to double the number of staff to handle repairs and procure solar streetlights, which don’t face the threat of copper wire theft. That would all potentially reduce the time it takes to repair simple fixes down to a week. Currently, city residents wait for months to see broken streetlights repaired. The assessment would come with a three-year auditing mechanism.