The Brief

At Venice High School, students now report to their sixth-period class for the first 10 minutes of the day. They stow their phones in portable metal cases with a clear, locking door.

And retrieve them at the final bell.

The new schedule is part of the Westside high school’s strategy to keep 2,300 students away from their phones, smartwatches, earbuds and other personal technology during the school day.

Dean of students David Galley said about 70 phones were confiscated outside of classrooms on the first day of the new policy.

“The kids we caught, they were all very, ‘Oh my fault. I won't do it again,’” Galley said. “They handed [the phones] over. It was very peaceful.”

The Los Angeles Unified School District Board voted in June to expand the district’s existing phone ban to include lunch and passing periods (“bell to bell”), and the policy took effect Tuesday.

The district reported no major disruptions in the first week, though educators LAist contacted said several schools are still waiting on their equipment.

The district set aside $7 million to purchase lockers (like those used at Venice High), pouches and other devices to store phones. A district spokesperson said in a statement that about half of schools chose to rely instead on the “honor system” and require students to keep their phones turned off and in their backpacks.

Not a cellphone in sight in math teacher Charles Styrbicki's Venice High classroom.

(

Brian Feinzimer

/

LAist

)

David Galley walks the Venice High halls looking for students who haven't yet turned over their cellphones.

(

Brian Feinzimer

/

LAist

)

In interviews with LAist, students and educators reported seeing fewer devices on campus, though compliance with the rules varied.

In Jessica Quindel’s data science class at Venice High, just two of about 18 students slid their phones into the numbered foam locker slots Wednesday.

“ If they're self-regulating and keeping their phone in their backpacks all day, that gets to the same benefit,” Quindel said. “We're not here to be like police officers. We just really want kids to connect and put their phones away so they can learn and connect with each other.”

Parents say ‘we are struggling at home’

The vast majority of teenagers — 95% — carry smartphones.

Board members cited rising concerns about the effect of phones and social media on youth mental health, bullying and distraction from classroom instruction.

Parent Norma Chávez said her “well-behaved” 13-year-old daughter has gotten her phone confiscated in the past.

“We are struggling at home to get the kids to stop using" phones, Chávez said. She hopes that a stricter policy at school will make it easier to limit screen time at home.

Chávez, who volunteers at Richard E. Byrd Middle School in Sun Valley and leads the Parent Teacher Student Association there, is also worried about the academic impact of smartphones in the classroom. The majority of students at the school are not reading or meeting math standards for their grade level.

"During the pandemic, the phone was their friend," Venice High School Principal Yavonka Hairston-Truitt said. "As it became the friend, it became difficult to part from friend. Difficult to go five minutes without looking at friend."

(

Brian Feinzimer

/

LAist

)

“We have to try anything we can so that we can help our kids improve their grades and do well in school,” Chávez said.

But some students LAist interviewed say the new policy strips them of a useful tool and doesn’t address underlying challenges in public education, including a lack of resources for extracurricular activities.

Sherman Oaks Center for Enriched Studies freshman Miles, 15, said that prior to the policy, he’d use his phone to take photos of assignments and when he’d finished his work.

“For day-to-day school life, it’s just really, really annoying,” he said.

“I think banning our phones just makes us more focused on our phones and missing our phones. If they want to get us more focused on our education, they have to make the education more interesting to us.”

He said that although the district spent millions of dollars to implement the restrictions, students have to raise funds to pay for band trips that include clinics where he can practice trumpet and ample time to socialize with his peers.

“It makes it a lot less fun when we have to jump through all these hoops to go to the places that we want to go,” Miles said.

Bravo Medical Magnet High School college advisor and parent Victoria Montes said students at the Boyle Heights campus were previously allowed to use their phones, with educator permission. Common tasks included scanning QR codes to sign into the campus college center or download information from prospective schools.

“I just wish that we could teach students how to use a tool rather than just take it away,” Montes said.

Venice High School math teacher and instructional coach Jessica Quindel said she was excited to see a student pull out a book in their homeroom class on the second day of the new policy. "I haven't seen a book in so long because they take out their phones," she said.

(

Brian Feinzimer

/

LAist

)

Venice High sophomore Sophia, 15, said instead of limiting access to technology, teachers can capture students’ attention by changing up the school day. For example, her English teacher sometimes takes the class to the school’s garden.

“There's other ways that you can re-ground yourself in a classroom without having your property or like something being stripped away from you like that,” Sophia said.

‘You hear students talking to other students’

At Garfield High School students were already banned from bringing phones on campus and will now have to store them in “Cellphone Airbnb” boxes (once their shipment arrives) at the start of each class.

Elizabeth Ruff, who teaches English at the East L.A. high school, supports the move to keep phones away from students during class. But she's concerned about how much time enforcing the new policy will consume.

An agreement between the district and the teachers union about the new policy pledges to make an effort to “minimize the impact to instructional time.”

"Anytime you implement a big sweeping change like this, there are going to be hiccups that are frustrating,” Ruff said. "If we can try to be patient with one another and reflect on what's going well and work to improve what's not going well, I’m hopeful that the end result will be a better learning environment for our students.”

Among the more manageable struggles students mentioned are figuring out what time it is and where to meet up with friends for lunch or after school.

“I found it to be a little annoying for sure, but it's nothing I can't, like, work out,” said Cyrus, 17, a senior at Los Angeles Center for Enriched Studies in Mid-City.

He said he’s seen fewer phones on campus since the school started using the locking pouches.

“People are definitely communicating more,” he said. “You hear students talking to other students … rather than just people being isolated on their phones.”

The story first appeared on The LA Local.

A stretch of residential streets between Koreatown and Pico Union is slated for changes to slow down traffic aimed at making it safer to walk and bike, as Los Angeles moves forward with street redesigns ahead of the Summer Olympic Games.

The project — currently referred to as Koreatown Pico Union Neighborhood Connect — would create a nearly two-mile, pedestrian-friendly route along New Hampshire Avenue, Berendo Street, and Washington Boulevard, connecting residential blocks with schools and Metro’s Wilshire/Vermont Station.

It’s designed as a lower-stress alternative to Vermont Avenue, a major corridor that carries heavy traffic through the area.

On a recent weekday afternoon near Berendo Middle School — one of the schools along the route — pedestrians were out and about, including students walking home, residents on a leisurely stroll with their dogs, and people biking through the streets. 

Sol Mendoza, who walks down the street from the school with her 5-year-old son every day, said she generally feels safe in the neighborhood but has concerns about how some drivers behave at crossings. 

“Sometimes the cars passing don’t stop or forget to stop,” she said, gesturing to the curb where her son was playing with his mini kick scooter. “They fail to see people walking and go really fast.”

The plan aims to slow vehicle traffic and improve safety for pedestrians and cyclists through measures including traffic circles, speed humps, crosswalk signals, traffic diverters, bike boxes and wayfinding signage, though final decisions will depend on community feedback, according to the Los Angeles Department of Transportation.

The City of Los Angeles is seeking to calm traffic and provide bicyclists and pedestrians an alternative to the high-traffic Vermont Avenue corridor.

(

Hanna Kang

/

The LA Local

)

Construction is expected to be completed by spring 2028, according to city documents, with final designs anticipated this fall. The project has been awarded about $5.4 million in funding from Metro through its Active Transportation grant program, according to city documents.

According to LADOT, the corridor would make it easier and safer to get to schools, including Berendo Middle School, Loyola High School, and Camino Nuevo Charter Academy. The proposal is part of the city’s Mobility Plan 2035, which identifies streets for improvements aimed at walking and biking.

A LADOT survey of 729 respondents last fall found that 68% want safer, quieter streets and 43% would consider biking along the route if safety improved. Top concerns included speeding traffic, dangerous intersections and limited visibility at crossings.

Mary Lee, who lives near the route, supports creating an alternative and safer path to Vermont Avenue for pedestrians. 

“I feel pretty safe here but when I’m walking along Vermont to go to the bank or a restaurant with my friends, I’m on edge because people on scooters whiz past me sometimes and they’re really fast. It’s also very loud,” she said.

Lee, who does not drive, said residential streets can also feel unsafe depending on how certain drivers behave.

“There are people who go really fast and don’t slow down when they turn,” she said. “You don’t know if they’ve actually seen you or not, and it doesn’t always feel safe.” 

She’s skeptical about how well the pedestrian-focused changes will work.

“It sounds promising, but who knows, it’s L.A., and a lot of people just ignore signs and break the rules,” she said.

Scooter riders in the area also see room for improvement.

Alfredo Hernandez, a delivery driver who frequents Koreatown, feels generally comfortable navigating the area on a scooter as an experienced rider but sees gaps in infrastructure. 

“I’d like to see more dedicated paths for people who are on scooters or walking,” he said. “I don’t think there’s enough of that.”

In the spring of 2022, a woman named Shelby Bunch began appearing at government hearings in Riverside County, demanding that officials there address what she believed was an epidemic of fraud in local elections.

Bunch often introduced herself as a representative of New California, a secessionist movement that seeks to break away from what it describes as the tyranny of a Democratic-controlled state.

She accused Riverside officials of colluding in criminal activity and warned that they would soon “be answering to law enforcement.” She once closed her comments by telling the Riverside County Board of Supervisors to “have a crappy day.”

The supervisors didn’t seem to take Bunch seriously, but she found a powerful ally in Riverside Sheriff Chad Bianco.

Based on her various claims, including that the county’s electronic voting machines had been remotely manipulated, the sheriff put one of his senior investigators in charge of a criminal probe into the registrar of voters.

The investigator, Christopher Poznanski, quickly came to the conclusion that there was no evidence of a crime. On July 20, 2022, he sent Bunch an email letting her know he was closing the case.

“I understand this may not be the desired outcome,” he wrote. “But know that I did not take this case lightly and considered all of the information.”

Bunch was furious. She demanded that Poznanski investigate the “corrupt machines.”

But Poznanski was unmoved. “I respect your passion for this cause, but I will conduct no further investigation into the matter,” he wrote.

Bunch continued to write Bianco directly, urging him to reopen the case. Then, in early September, she got some help.

Shelby Bunch comments on election oversight at the Riverside County Board of Supervisors hearing on Oct. 4, 2022.

(

Screenshot via the Riverside County Board of Supervisors

)

A figure in the “constitutional sheriff” movement, which asserts that elected sheriffs are more powerful than anyone — including the president and the courts — sent Bianco an email.

“I just heard this past week that a group of your constituents requested that you investigate election fraud in Riverside County and that your investigator was unable to find anything and you closed your investigation,” Steve Tuminello wrote to Bianco. “I know that as a Constitutional Sheriff you realize how extremely important Election Integrity is, and that you would welcome any assistance in these investigations.”

Bianco, whose career has been guided by the movement, wrote back to say he had launched another, more ambitious investigation.

Emails obtained by CalMatters trace the development of a years-long case that ultimately led to Bianco’s unprecedented seizure of 650,000 ballots in March. They reveal that his sprawling investigation was based on the thinnest of evidence and raise alarms over how the November elections could be disrupted by the unproven claims of fringe groups and ideologically aligned officials.

That scenario is particularly troubling in Riverside County, which is home to one of a few dozen congressional districts in the country that could determine control of the U.S. House of Representatives in the midterm elections.

Bianco’s emails with Bunch also show that he doubted some of her group’s allegations.

In one exchange in 2023, Bunch suggested the county supervisors were complicit in election fraud and might have ties to drug cartels.

“This is absolutely ridiculous,” Bianco responded. “Just because ‘someone’ convinced themselves of something doesn't mean its reality.”

Bianco told Bunch her group was “acting stupid.”

“I actually cant believe I took the time to respond,” he wrote.

Still, he pushed the investigation forward.

In a 2024 podcast interview, Bunch said the sheriff had been hamstrung by the courts. She told her host that Bianco had “tried to get a search warrant on the machines … but the judge, he just laughed. He said, ‘I’m not giving you anything.’”

Her coalition, she said, needed a judge who was ideologically aligned with Bianco.

“If we can get just one judge,” she said, “the whole dam will break.”

“Who’s gonna be the one judge that steps up?”

In 2026, she would get her answer.

‘Don’t have to ask permission from anybody’

The “constitutional sheriff” movement is rooted in the beliefs of a Southern California-based white supremacist who was active in the 1970s and 1980s and argued that sheriffs were the country’s only legitimate law enforcement officials. Its members cite the 10th Amendment, which says that powers not specifically delegated to the federal government fall to the states. The amendment, however, makes no mention of sheriffs.

The main organization behind the movement, the Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association, is led by a former sheriff named Richard Mack.

Richard Mack, a former Arizona sheriff, speaks during a rally for gun-rights advocates in Olympia, Washington, in 2014.

(

Elaine Thompson

/

AP

)

Since 2020, Mack has held a series of events alongside prominent election conspiracy theorists, encouraging sheriffs to investigate voter fraud in their own counties. Sheriffs, he said, “don’t have to ask permission from anybody.” As a result, many conspiracy-minded local groups have flocked to their county sheriffs for support when other officials have rejected their theories of election fraud.

Even though claims of widespread voter fraud have been debunked, these sheriffs have used their discretionary power to open investigations, many of them based on allegations that echo President Donald Trump's false claims about the 2020 election.

Bianco, who could not be reached for comment for this story, describes himself as a constitutional sheriff and agrees with the movement’s core tenets.

He has maintained power in Riverside even as the county’s shifting demographics have altered its historically conservative political landscape. Today there are more registered Democrats in Riverside than there are Republicans. But that shift to the left has coincided with a religiously fueled radicalization on the right.

One of the key figures of that movement is Tim Thompson, the pastor of a powerful Riverside church and Bianco’s political ally. Thompson has led an effort to stack local school boards with members who have rolled back transgender student rights and rejected textbooks that mention Harvey Milk, one of the nation’s first openly gay elected officials. He recently celebrated a parishioner who was pardoned by Trump after being convicted for his role in the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol.

Thompson has also taken an interest in the local judiciary. In 2022, he supported a former prosecutor named Jay Kiel, who was running to fill a seat on Riverside’s Superior Court.

When Kiel joined Thompson on his popular podcast, he promised to “bring a little balance back to the bench” to counteract the state’s liberal Legislature. Kiel also praised Bianco and said Riverside needed “judges that are willing to stand up and say, this is the law, and I’m going to follow it.”

He won the election.

A new group emerges

By late 2024, a new group had taken control of the effort to prove voter fraud in Riverside County. The Riverside Election Integrity Team included many of the same people who had been working closely with Bunch, but they had very different tactics.

The group’s leader, Greg Langworthy, had testified alongside Bunch for years. While he was part of the same Christian conservative circles, he rejected her antagonistic approach. Langworthy is soft-spoken and polite. At board hearings, he wears button-down shirts and the occasional pocket protector. If Bunch was the movement’s firebrand, Langworthy is its genial middle school math teacher. He focused his group’s efforts on ballot counting, conducting audits of past elections to prove to local officials that the county’s voting system is rife with error.

Greg Langworthy gives public testimony on election oversight during a Riverside County Board of Supervisors meeting on April 2, 2024.

(

Screenshot via the Riverside County Board of Supervisors

)

Langworthy’s group asked the county registrar for records from the November 2025 election for California’s redistricting measure, Proposition 50, which passed with overwhelming support across the state and by a wide margin in Riverside. The measure redrew California’s congressional maps and gave Democrats a chance to pick up several House seats in the midterms.

Langworthy said he reviewed the data and found that the registrar’s office had counted 45,896 more ballots than it had received. His group demanded meetings with individual supervisors and asked the district attorney and the sheriff to look into the matter.

The alleged discrepancy wasn’t enough to change the election results in Riverside, and Langworthy said he was not interested in overturning the measure. “Prop. 50 just happened to be the next election,” he said.

On Feb. 10, the Riverside supervisors held a special hearing on the issue. Langworthy’s group had met with several officials but wanted to present its findings to the full board.

Hoping to lay the matter to rest, the board asked the Riverside registrar, Art Tinoco, to show the group that it had misread the data his office had provided. Tinoco said Langworthy and others had relied on raw data that did not include provisional and other ballots. The actual discrepancy between ballots cast and ballots counted, he said, was 103 — a figure independently confirmed by the Riverside Record.

Tinoco spoke for more than an hour, but members of the Riverside Election Integrity Team were not convinced. One by one they approached the podium with prepared statements, laying out their audit.

The supervisors struggled to hide their frustration. But Langworthy didn’t need the board; he had Bianco. Just one day before that hearing, an investigator from the sheriff’s office had appeared in court asking for a warrant to take hundreds of thousands of ballots from Tinoco’s office.

The judge handling the matter was Jay Kiel.

The investigator’s sworn statement, intended to justify the warrant, focused almost entirely on Langworthy’s audit and Bunch’s claims. In three years of investigating the matter, the sheriff’s office had failed to produce any of its own evidence to support a case.

Kiel signed off on the warrant and sealed it, preventing the public from seeing the justification for Bianco’s seizure of the ballots.

Over the next few weeks, Bianco's office removed 1,500 boxes of election materials from the registrar’s office. If stacked, they would rise as high as the Empire State Building.

It was the first time in the nation’s history that a sheriff took possession of previously cast ballots.

‘You intend to ignore my directives’

The California attorney general, Rob Bonta, appears to have been caught off guard.

A day after Bianco seized the first batch of ballots, Bonta sent him a letter asking him to “pause” his investigation. Bonta wrote that he was “concerned” that Bianco had taken the boxes without probable cause that a crime had occurred.

Bianco ignored him.

A few days later Bonta sent another letter. “I learned that you intend to ignore my directives and plan to start counting the seized ballots tomorrow,” Bonta wrote. “Let me be clear: this is unacceptable.”

Bianco called a press conference to tell reporters he would continue counting ballots and that the attorney general did not have the authority to stop him. What had been a behind-the-scenes battle immediately became national news.

“I will carry out my constitutional duty to pursue justice,” Bianco said. He called the attorney general “an embarrassment to law enforcement.”

According to the California Constitution, the attorney general has “direct supervision over every district attorney and sheriff ... in all matters pertaining to the duties of their respective offices.” There is no California case law directly addressing this provision.

Bianco believes he is the final authority on everything that happens in his county. In flouting Bonta’s orders, he has sparked a high-stakes legal showdown testing the constitutional separation of powers. The case is currently in front of the state Supreme Court.

Attorney General Rob Bonta speaks at a press conference at the California Department of Justice in Sacramento on Feb. 4, 2025.

(

Fred Greaves

/

CalMatters

)

Bonta didn’t file a lawsuit to try to stop Bianco until almost a month after he first learned about the ballot seizure, and only after the story exploded in the national press. At that point, according to sworn statements by investigators, Bianco’s office had already begun counting the ballots, opening about 22 boxes.

During that same period, Bonta filed at least a dozen lawsuits on other issues, many of them against the Trump administration.

A spokesperson for Bonta said the attorney general was trying to “work cooperatively with the sheriff’s office in order to better understand the basis for its investigation,” and that Bonta believed Bianco was complying with his directives.

The state’s initially tepid response, and its inability, thus far, to get Bianco to return the ballots raise concerns about how officials here will be able to protect future elections.

Bianco has already said he wouldn’t hesitate to seize ballots again, even in the June primary for California governor, when his own name will be on the ballot.

And there’s another critical election that Bianco could throw into flux: In the November midterms, the Riverside registrar will be responsible for counting a significant percentage of the ballots in California’s 48th Congressional District. Last year’s redistricting effort made the district competitive for Democrats. Of the 435 House seats nationwide, it’s one of fewer than three dozen that analysts consider too close to call. These races will ultimately determine which party controls the U.S. House of Representatives.

If Bianco takes ballots cast in the race for the California 48th, the ensuing chaos could transcend Riverside County.

A broader network

In the months before Bianco’s ballot seizure, the FBI seized reams of paper ballots cast in Fulton County, Georgia, based on debunked claims from citizen election-deniers, and sought electronic voter data from Maricopa County, Arizona, despite multiple investigations that have turned up no evidence of fraud. The Justice Department has demanded voter information in dozens of states, leaving many attorneys general to fight those demands in court. In speeches and on social media, Trump has escalated his voter fraud claims. He has said Republicans should “nationalize the voting.”

Some of the administration officials pushing these efforts are associated with the Claremont Institute, a conservative think tank that has consistently supported unverified election conspiracy theories. The founding director of the institute’s Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence, John Eastman, was disbarred in California last week for being one of the legal masterminds behind the attempt to stop the certification of the 2020 presidential election.

Several years ago, the Claremont Institute set its sights on sheriffs and began hosting week-long education sessions to provide them with a roadmap for promoting Trump’s brand of conservatism in their counties. Bianco attended the training, and the institute later gave him its “Sheriff of the Year” award — a bust of John Wayne — at a fundraiser in Huntington Beach.

Other sheriffs who were trained at the institute have since dedicated the resources of their offices to investigate baseless allegations of election fraud, but all of those efforts have failed.

In 2022, when it seemed as though Bianco’s investigation into Bunch’s claims had also reached a dead end, Mack’s constitutional sheriff’s organization offered the services of “an expert in cyber crimes” who could “provide Sheriffs with immutable evidence of election fraud” to help them push their investigations forward.

That expert was Gregg Phillips. Before Trump tapped him to lead emergency services at FEMA, he had a history of profiting from unfounded allegations of voter fraud, asking donors to fund his pursuit of concrete evidence and pocketing much of the money.

Recently, Phillips was back in the news with a different claim: He said he had been “teleported” against his will to a Waffle House in Rome, Georgia.

Jeanne Kuang contributed reporting for this story.

This article was originally published on CalMatters and was republished under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives license.

Uber has failed to create an appeals system to give drivers due process when they’re kicked off the app, violating the California law it carved out that declared app-based drivers independent contractors, a lawsuit filed Monday alleges.

In 2020, voters approved Proposition 22, a ballot initiative that exempted Uber and other app platforms from labor law and allowed them to keep classifying their workers as contractors instead of employees. The measure included a promise that drivers would have an appeals process.

Rideshare Drivers United, a drivers group that says it has about 20,000 members in California, said Monday that because Uber has violated Prop. 22 by not delivering on all its promises, it should not be allowed to continue to assert that its drivers are independent contractors.

“Uber has not met the conditions to take advantage of Prop. 22,” Shannon Liss-Riordan, a Massachusetts-based lawyer who has challenged Uber and other gig companies for years and is representing the California group, told CalMatters.

Many deactivated drivers report that they struggle to appeal their cases. They say they are initially sent to sites where they appear to be talking with bots, then eventually reach agents who are working from a script and appear to be in another country. Rarely do they reach people who are empowered to truly help them, they say.

Liss-Riordan said at a news conference in San Francisco that she is seeking a declaration from the court saying that the company is violating the law it wrote, which she said should help drivers who are pursuing individual arbitration of their cases.

“We're going to seek back pay and other damages for them if they were unfairly deactivated, and we're also going to be seeking their rights under the labor code,” she said.

Among the promises of Prop. 22: guaranteed minimum earnings of 120% of minimum wage for active ride or delivery time; health care stipends for those who qualify; occupational accident insurance and accidental death insurance; and “mandatory contractual rights and appeal processes,” according to the initiative’s text. The text does not specify what the requirements for an appeals process should be.

Devins Baker said he has driven for Uber and Lyft in the Bay Area for eight years and was deactivated by Uber right before Christmas in 2024.

He told CalMatters that he thinks Uber deactivated him after he had to brake hard to avoid hitting a person who darted across the freeway, causing his passenger — who was not wearing a seatbelt — to fall out of his seat.

“I don’t know because we never find out which passenger complained,” Baker said, adding that he thinks some people report drivers to try to get a free ride from Uber.

Baker got emotional during the news conference, saying he is trying to “keep it together” and is scrambling to find other ways to make money so he will not become homeless.

Uber spokesperson Ramona Prieto called Liss-Riordan an “opportunistic trial lawyer” in an email to CalMatters and said the company will “fight this publicity stunt in court.” Prieto said the company provides drivers with a clear appeals process, and pointed to a company blog post from last week that explains what drivers can expect when they challenge deactivations.

'It has turned my life upside down'

Another deactivated driver from the Bay Area, Mirwais Noory, said Uber kicked him off the app in November 2024 over what the company said were safety concerns. He said he tried to show Uber dashcam video to plead his case, to no avail.

Getting deactivated caused financial hardship as he tries to support four children, he said. He has found work as a security guard since then, and now occasionally drives for Lyft.

“I’m the only one with income,” Noory told CalMatters. “It has turned my life upside down.”

Jason Munderloh, chair of the Bay Area chapter of Rideshare Drivers United, said at the news conference: “Once they’re deactivated, there is no unemployment insurance (because drivers are not considered employees). This leads to poverty and desperation.”

“The minute someone joins RDU, their first concern is pay and the second is deactivations,” Nicole Moore, president of Rideshare Drivers United, told CalMatters ahead of the news conference.

Uber, a multibillion-dollar company based in San Francisco, was the lead backer of the $205 million Prop. 22 campaign that was also funded by DoorDash, Lyft, Instacart and Postmates. Uber spent a total of $59.5 million in cash and in-kind contributions, and Postmates — which Uber bought in a deal that was completed in 2020 — spent $13.3 million.

The lawsuit filed Monday in San Francisco Superior Court is the latest of many legal challenges against Prop. 22, which CalMatters has found has no state agency assigned to enforce it. The state Supreme Court upheld the gig-work law in 2024.

The plaintiffs also allege Uber deactivates drivers based on grounds not specified in its “Platform Access Agreement,” and that the company does not provide drivers with enough information about their earnings to determine that they are receiving 120% of minimum wage.

Separately, Uber is facing a lawsuit by the state Justice Department and the cities of San Francisco, Los Angeles and San Diego over thousands of wage-theft claims that predate Prop. 22. A trial-clock deadline for that lawsuit as well as a similar one against Lyft is set for December 2027.

This article was originally published on CalMatters and was republished under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives license.