The Brief

Despite Superintendent Alberto Carvalho’s promise two years ago to settle the conflict, Los Angeles Unified continues denying millions of dollars in federal aid that the Archdiocese of Los Angeles argues it is owed for ongoing services to low-income students in Catholic schools. The archdiocese maintains that the district is diverting the money to bolster its students’ funding.

Both the California and the U.S. departments of education have chastised the district for breaking federal regulations in dealings with the archdiocese. Now, a Los Angeles County Superior Court judge has ordered the district to turn over documents and data that it withheld.

That information, which should illuminate the district’s decisions, could either restart stalemated talks or lead the archdiocese to turn to the courts to order a settlement after seven years of fighting.

“We do not believe further litigation is necessary, and we can achieve equity for non-public school students,” said Paul Escala, the archdiocese’s superintendent of schools. “However, we will pursue all means to see that all students receive their legally entitled services.”

Title I rules for private schools

Congress requires that low-income students in private and public schools receive equivalent Title I funding to pay for counseling, tutoring, teacher aides, and learning specialists. The dispute with LAUSD concerns how much money should be allocated for the archdiocese’s schools and how to ensure the funding gets to the students.

Under Congress’s rules, private and religious schools do not receive Title I funding directly. Instead, districts determine the eligibility of private and religious schools within their borders, administer the funding, and provide the services directly or through vendors after consulting with the schools. Los Angeles Unified, until recently, hired the Title I staff and put them on its payroll (see Frequently Asked Questions by the California Department of Education).

The system worked amicably for years. Districts can choose from several ways to determine Title I eligibility, and LA Unified picked the fairest and most efficient method for the 100-plus schools within the archdiocese with low-income students, Escala said. The district used census data to determine the number of Title I-eligible students in an attendance area, then awarded a proportionate share of the money to archdiocese schools. Long Beach Unified uses the same method.

More paperwork, more confusion, less money

Then in 2018-19 and the following year, coinciding with the new administration of Superintendent Austin Beutner, the district chose another option for calculating private schools’ eligibility — student registrations for the federal school lunch program. Not only did this method require a lot more time, paperwork and verification by the schools, but the district changed the reporting rules several times with little notice and failed “to engage in timely and meaningful consultation,” the California Department of Education concluded in a 58-page report issued in June 2021 in response to a formal complaint by the archdiocese.

Los Angeles Unified’s Office of Inspector General removed hundreds of students’ eligibility after examining parents’ school lunch forms in the two dozen schools it chose to audit and failed to include any students from other schools it didn’t audit.

The result was to cut Title I funding to the archdiocese by more than 92%, from about $9.5 million in services 2017-18 for 102 schools to $767,000 for fewer than two dozen schools, according to Escala. In 2023-24, funding crept up to about $2 million for 43 schools. The district cut its total share allocated to private schools from between 2% and 2.6% of about $291 million to 0.5%, according to the California Department of Education.

‘Totally unreasonable’ demands

The state Department of Education harshly criticized the district. The timetable for demanding documentation was “totally unreasonable,” and the district “engaged in a pattern of arbitrary unilateral decisions” and failed to justify its decisions to the archdiocese, the report said.

In ignoring the archdiocese’s Public Records Act requests for documentation to justify the cuts, the district took a “hide-the-ball approach (that) breached both the spirit and the letter” of the law, the report said.

The spirit of Title I, as stated in the law’s preamble, Escala said, is to maximize participation. The intent of other options like surveys and free-lunch verification is for schools to prove they have higher proportions of low-income families than neighboring schools, he said.

LAUSD is doing the opposite, Escala said.

“The district’s using these other methods as a way of filtering and screening and reducing participation,” he said. “You’re extracting children you know qualify simply because a “t” wasn’t crossed or an “i” wasn’t dotted. It is beyond reproach, because they (LAUSD officials) don’t apply the same standard to their own schools.”

LAUSD had an obligation to give (the Archdiocese) the requested information. LAUSD’s hide-the-ball approach breached both the spirit and the letter of the duty to consult. — The California Department of Education in a June 2021 rulingLA Unified declined to comment on the state’s report, and last week, a spokesperson wrote in an email that “Los Angeles Unified does not typically comment on pending or ongoing litigation.”

Districts have a financial incentive to minimize private schools’ funding eligibility. The federal government awards the total Title I funding to districts, which determine how much should be allocated for services to private and religious school students. Lawyers for the archdiocese point out that the less money that districts award, the more Title I funding they can spend on their own students.

The district appears to understand this, said Kevin Troy, an attorney for the archdiocese, citing a Jan. 29, 2019, email from the principal auditor of the district’s Office of the Inspector General to the archdiocese, in which the auditor stated that the archdiocese “receives over $10 million of Title I funds from the LAUSD every year — money that could otherwise be allocated to LAUSD schools.”

“There’s a moral and ethical question on the table,” Escala said. “You (LA Unified) have got children in need, and you’re not serving them right,” he added, referring to students in archdiocese schools.

The impact on one high school

Mark Johnson, principal of Bishop Mora Salesian High School, has seen the effect of the cuts on students. Before the cutback, Title I paid for a reading intervention teacher and part-time aide who worked with 40 to 50 students weekly — about 1 out of 8 students at the all-boy, 400-student school in the low-income Boyle Heights neighborhood of Los Angeles. Although on the district’s payroll, the teacher fit in like any other staff member, building personal relationships with the students and collaborating with their teachers.

“She (the teacher) had her own classroom and was just a regular teacher as far as any of our kids knew,” he said. She would work with the lowest-performing students on basic reading comprehension skills. “If they were working on a tough piece of literature, she would help them break it down so that they could write an analytical paragraph or essay.”

Pulling out students also reduced the class size for the remaining students, he said. Now, there is only enough money for a two-day-a-week coach from a contractor who sees at most a dozen students a week.

“We’re serving kids who are significantly behind grade level and families that deal with poverty and all the things that come along with that,” Johnson said. “So this kind of antagonistic relationship that has developed (with the district) ultimately hurts kids.”

The California Department of Education gave the district 60 days from its June 2021 ruling to consult with the archdiocese to fix deficiencies pointed out in the report and then recalibrate the proportional share of Title I funding for archdiocese schools. It ordered the district to begin providing the increased services for 2020-21, the next school year.

Instead, the district appealed the decision to the U.S. Department of Education, which issued its own findings in November 2023. In his decision, Adam Schott, deputy assistant secretary for policy and programs, found that the district could justify reducing the eligibility count based on its analysis of parents’ forms. But by doing that, they cut the funding for the dozens of schools that the district did not audit. He credited the district with consulting with the archdiocese to an extent, but said the district’s overall approach in demanding documentation was “inconsistent and confusing.”

Schott also ruled that the district violated federal regulations by claiming it didn’t have to share data with the archdiocese on how much it spent on Title I services for students and how much was unspent at the end of each year.

In December 2021, the archdiocese sued the district in Los Angeles Superior Court for ignoring multiple requests under the state Public Records Act to turn over Title I spending records and other relevant information. The court held off ruling until the complaint process played out.

On July 16, Judge Curtis Kin ordered the district to turn over all relevant documents, emails and records to the archdiocese by Aug. 20 and to pay $82,141 to the diocese in attorneys’ fees.

An appeal to Superintendent Carvalho

Weeks after he started work as Los Angeles Unified superintendent in February 2022, Alberto Carvalho told EdSource he had familiarized himself with the case and added, “I’m going to resolve this issue sooner rather than later.” He declined to elaborate due to litigation.

“What I can tell you,” he added, “is that we need more objective, transparent tools by which we assess and fund this guaranteed federal entitlement that’s driven by poverty.”

Escala said he remains hopeful. “I believe that Superintendent Carvalho has the ability to direct his staff towards that outcome. I have a great degree of confidence that when brought to him, this can get adjudicated appropriately.”

UCLA is launching the nation’s first digital humanities department and bachelor’s degree this fall. The new discipline combines classical humanities with technical know-how to examine a digitized and increasingly AI-enhanced world.

The major fuses technological tools for statistical analysis, coding, 3D mapping and data visualization with traditional humanities subjects like history, literature and global cultures. It’s a multidisciplinary approach to education that capitalizes on employers’ growing desire for recent graduates to think critically while also being able to harness new technology. And the major requires a great deal of teamwork among students, another skill hiring managers seek.

Students will learn how new technologies shape culture and the human biases that enter into the use of these new tools. Top of mind is the rise of generative artificial intelligence and training students to use it ethically while also understanding how easily it can produce misleading content.

Todd Presner is a UCLA professor of European languages and transcultural studies, and co-led the effort to create the digital humanities department. He said contemporary culture has witnessed a rift between computational subjects and the traditional humanities, and both are enhanced by merging the two.

“It's actually at our own peril when scientists are not speaking to folks in the humanities with historical knowledge, ethical knowledge, cultural knowledge, right?” he said. “And at the same time, I'd say when the humanities are not understanding the technologies in the world today, they also could be seen as irrelevant.”

Presner has taught a course showing students how to get under the hood of large language models, which store the reading material generative AI tools like Claude and ChatGPT use to spit out answers. “Students can essentially upload their own training data to some of these smaller models and see how easily they can be manipulated,” he said.

New major, old discipline

UCLA students will be able to declare digital humanities as a major this year, but campus professors have taught courses in the discipline for more than two decades. It’s the second most popular minor at UCLA, which was one reason the school decided to transform it into a major, said Alexandra Minna Stern, dean of the UCLA College Division of Humanities where digital humanities is based. Last academic year 750 UCLA undergraduate students took a course in digital humanities. Stern expects 50 to 100 students to eventually declare the major, and would be thrilled if 40 signed up this year.

The department will launch with 23 faculty, including lecturers, plus four staff members. Stern eventually wants a few more faculty, but UCLA’s currently under a hiring freeze. No academic unit at the university was cut to make way for the new digital humanities. Faculty hail from multiple humanities fields as well as information studies and data science, so classes will occur across several campus buildings.

She said at least one museum will provide internship opportunities. Based in the Los Angeles area, the Wende Museum specializes in collecting artifacts and oral histories of refugees as well as other dissident groups and digitizing them — a key aspect of digital humanities training. She aims to secure similar arrangements with other museums so students can further apply what they learn in professional settings.

The major’s introductory courses are clustered around data networks, such as statistical reasoning, and courses on culture, such as the symbolic history of Jerusalem or film depictions of antiquity. Upper division courses can center on how contemporary technology is shaped by political, cultural, and social forces or a class on social media data analysis.

One student’s experience

Kedaar Sridhar, 26, graduated from UCLA in 2022 with a computer science major and a minor in digital humanities.

The social media data analysis course was his favorite in the minor. For a class project, he and a team of students analyzed the hashtag “facemask” on social media while much of the world was still in the throes of COVID-19. He relied on the coding language Python as well as sentiment analysis tools to classify how different countries felt about face masks in public based on the social media posts featuring that hashtag.

If he could do college all over, he’d major in the new digital humanities program because it combines the application of contemporary data software with the probing analytical questions that the humanities embody.

“I think computer science is the what, digital humanities is the how and the why, and how do you actually apply it, and why is it important to be applied,” he said.

Sridhar credits the minor with landing him an internship at Microsoft. All the applicants knew computer science, but digital humanities distinguished him, he said. An interviewer asked what the minor entailed, and he said “it’s human-centered data storytelling, working with groups, working in projects, getting a tangible outcome.”

The interviewer said that’s what they’re looking for.

In the past year he co-founded his own company, Grantlytics, an AI-based platform focused on helping nonprofits fundraise by writing proposals, finding funding opportunities and identifying promising donors.

As an employer, he’s looking for much of what the digital humanities major offers. Without it, Sridhar would prefer a candidate with a humanities and coding or math background. But digital humanities “automatically is that interdisciplinary nature because it combines those two worlds together.”

What employers want

Sridhar’s preference for someone who is well-rounded appears to be backed by recent survey data.

Hiring managers who recruit recent college graduates indicated this year that these workers are mostly employable, but with caveats. The annual survey by the National Association of Colleges and Employers shows that the skills recent graduates are most proficient in aren’t what employers prioritize most.

For example, 99% of hiring managers say oral and written communication and persuasion skills are important. But the same hiring managers indicated that just 55% of recent college graduates score well in communication skills. The same goes for critical thinking: Around 94% of hiring managers rate this competency highly but they report that just half of recent graduates are able to gather data from diverse sources and draw conclusions or work well in a fast-paced setting.

Where recent graduates do better is in technology, but hiring managers care slightly less about those. About 75% of employers place high importance on adapting to new technology or using tech to achieve company goals; they say that about 65% of recent grads are competent in that skillset.

Stern, the dean, is careful not to overstate the promise of digital humanities to halt the freefall of the broader humanities as a major students want. The share of U.S. college students majoring in fields such as literature, history, philosophy and foreign languages is at a historic nadir — just 8% of degrees conferred were in the humanities, down from nearly 15% nearly two decades ago. The trend at UCLA is similar.

She knows things are tough for humanities departments, but “an art history grad is more likely to get a job these days than a computer science grad,” she said, citing data tracked by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. “There are ebbs and flows across time” with which degrees lead to jobs and that students gravitate toward.

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

It’s been a busy week with the Trump administration’s legal battle over mail in ballots.

The Supreme Court weighed in and fresh court documents were filed as preparations for the November general election are well underway.

Confused about where things stand? You’re not alone.

One Southern California county tells LAist nothing has happened that changes how it runs elections since last time around in the June primary. And an election law expert says that as of now, people should plan to vote as you normally would.

“If there is some interference with mail in ballots, there are lots of voting centers and other ways that people can cast ballots,” said Rick Hasen, a UCLA professor of law and director of the Safeguarding Democracy Project. “But I don't think it's going to come to that.”

As the Nov. 3 general election approaches, local officials are encouraging voters to turn in their ballots early.

Here’s what we know.

Counties deep in election prep

As the legal battle plays out, local election officials are already gearing up for the November general election.

Bob Page, Orange County Registrar of Voters, told LAist his office starts working on an election up to nine months ahead of time, with the first November ballots being printed for overseas and military voters at the end of next week.

County election officials in California will start mailing ballots to all voters by Oct. 5. Page said O.C. will start printing ballots for the 1.9 million local voters the week of Labor Day.

“Those deadlines are set. You can't mess with them,” Page said in a briefing from the Partnership for Large Election Jurisdictions Wednesday.

A woman casts her ballot at an official Orange County ballot drop box in Santa Ana in October 2020.

(

Frederic J. Brown

/

AFP via Getty Images

)

Hasen told LAist elections take a really long time to put in place, and something as mundane as envelopes are bought by the millions in counties such as L.A. and Orange. The design of mail in ballot envelopes are part of the new government requirements being challenged in court.

“In California, we now mail ballots to every single voter, so it would be incredibly expensive and difficult to try to change what that mailing would look like,” Hasen said.

In Orange County, for example, ballot envelopes are already in the works. Page noted the U.S. Postal Service approved of the design last month.

What does it mean for local voters?

O.C. will be handling the November election like it did with the June primary, following existing state and federal law, Page said.

“We have to keep track of what's going on in the different courts … But for right now, there's nothing that's happened that changes how we would conduct this election,” he said in an interview.

He also noted that he will make sure O.C. voters get a ballot, “however that gets to them.”

Hasen shared a similar message for voters.

“As of now, nothing has changed,” he said. “And let's wait and see where things are in a week.”

Get your ballots in early

Local election officials, including Page, are encouraging voters to turn in their ballots before Election Day. Ballots can start being processed as soon as they’re returned, so the more people vote early, the more ballots can be included in the first round of results released on election night.

“If there's concerns about the speed at which ballots get counted or processed, the best way to address that for voters … is to vote early,” Page said.

An election clerk holds “I voted” stickers at Beverly Hills City Hall on Tuesday, Nov. 5, 2024.

(

Carlin Stiehl

/

LAist

)

Hasen agreed, adding that it’s much better for election administration and voter confidence if more ballots are returned and processed earlier.

O.C. voters will be able return their ballots by mail, to 128 drop boxes and to more than 190 vote centers, according to Page. L.A. County has started to send outreach postcards with early election reminders to most of its more than 5.8 million registered voters as of last week.

What’s going on with the legal battle?

In March, President Donald Trump issued another executive order on voting that he said was to reduce “the risk of fraud.” Trump has claimed for years that there's widespread voter fraud, despite the lack of evidence.

The order, among other things, instructs federal officials to create lists of eligible U.S. citizen voters in each state, directs USPS to only send mail in ballots to people on those lists and have USPS review the design of ballot envelopes.

Parts of the order were blocked in June by U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani in Boston. The Supreme Court paused that ruling earlier this week, giving what’s been described as an interim win to Trump. The administration saw another win on Wednesday when Talwani lifted her nationwide ruling that blocked USPS from moving forward with the executive order.

“The court cases are coming fast and furious right now after the Supreme Court's ruling,” said Aaron Blacksberg, lead legal analyst on federal policy for the Institute for Responsive Government, during a virtual briefing earlier this week.

California Attorney General Rob Bonta and nearly two dozen other attorneys general filed a lawsuit Wednesday challenging a USPS final rule stemming from the executive order that was released last week.

Bonta argued its “President Trump's latest unlawful attempt to take control of mail voting.” Bonta vowed in a news conference to “fight this every step of the way,” adding that he expected to see other lawsuits from Democratic party leadership and the League of Women Voters.

USPS did not immediately respond to LAist’s request for comment.

In as little as a year, lowering your electricity bill could be as simple as buying a kit with a few solar panels and accessories, completing a quick online registration form, and plugging it into a standard outlet.

California lawmakers passed a bill on Wednesday night to formally legalize plug-in, or balcony, solar: small, portable and relatively inexpensive systems that do not require rewiring or the costly installation fees that often come with rooftop solar.

The legislation, SB 868, sailed through the state assembly and senate with bipartisan support. The bill now moves to the governor’s desk for signature.

The devices can be tented in a backyard, hung off a balcony or placed on a roof. Models range from as low as $300 to $2200, depending on size. The bill would open the solar market to people who were previously left out: renters, people with unsuitable roofs, and those lacking the capital to build out a rooftop system, which can cost in the tens of thousands of dollars.

“There’s no question SB 868 is the most exciting clean energy and energy affordability bill right now up for consideration in California,” said Bernadette Del Chiaro, senior vice president at the Environmental Working Group, a nonprofit that co-sponsored the bill. “You never get to pass a big controversial bill in one year. We’re poised to do that. It is a huge win.”

A wave of state legislation over the past 18 months is making balcony solar — a nascent technology in the U.S. — within reach of everyday Americans. Utah pioneered a law passed in March 2025, and others quickly followed.

Eight states now have bills on the books that allow a relatively straightforward process for purchasing and setting up balcony solar systems, including Colorado, Virginia and Maine. Bills in New York and New Jersey are awaiting the governors’ signatures, like California.

Advocates believe California’s market has massive potential. They’re motivated by Germany, where millions of solar panels dot balconies across the country.

Some of the state’s largest investor-owned utilities, however, opposed the legislation, citing safety and a concern that the systems would shift energy costs to people without solar power.

PG&E initially said it supported the bill if it were amended, but opposed the final version. Spokesperson Paul Doherty said the utility is concerned that certain safety and certification requirements on some systems would not be enforced until 2030.

But he said that the company “supports plug-in solar and the opportunities it could create for customers, particularly renters and others who have not had easy access to traditional rooftop solar.”

San Diego Gas & Electric also opposed the legislation, citing concerns that even if balcony solar is designed to prevent feeding power back to the grid, systems may malfunction and endanger workers or customers.

Southern California Edison originally opposed the bill but later took a neutral stance after bill authors updated safety standards and how people notify their utility of their systems, spokesperson David Eisenhauer said.

Notably, labor unions representing firefighters and PG&E employees dropped their opposition and took a neutral stance on the bill after lawmakers amended it to explicitly comply with state and national electrical codes.

If signed into law by Newsom, the legislation would exempt plug-in solar devices from what critics say is a cumbersome and expensive interconnection application process, and replace registration with a free and straightforward online form.

Some Californians have already installed plug-in solar panels, but utilities ask them to complete an interconnection agreement, citing state rules. If done through PG&E, for example, representatives from the utility said that process would cost roughly $100 to $800 and take about an hour. Typically, the approval comes through in three days, PG&E staff said.

But plug-in solar advocates argued that the interconnection process defeats the plug-and-play nature of the technology, and could double or triple its cost.

Their goal is to make the panels as ubiquitous and easy to install as any off-the-shelf appliance dotting the racks of a Home Depot or Costco.

The newly passed bill outlines several device requirements. The balcony solar systems must be capped at generating 1,200 watts per home, plug into a standard outlet, offset a customer’s onsite electricity use and meet state and national electrical codes. They also must be certified by an outside safety organization like Underwriters Laboratories and have a feature that would prevent electricity from feeding back into the grid if there’s a power outage.

Current plug-in solar models do not yet meet the outlined requirements, and customers therefore must still register their systems as though they are rooftop solar. Del Chiaro said there are already a few companies developing devices that will meet the standards in the new California legislation.

The bill is meant to help reduce the cost of power for Californians and “eliminates red tape, so that people in California can actually use plug-in solar right now,” bill author and state Sen. Scott Wiener said during an Assembly hearing in June.

Del Chiaro estimated that just one 400-watt solar panel would cover about 14% of a typical renter’s apartment’s annual electricity bill and translate to energy-bill savings of roughly $250 a year. That system would provide enough juice to run a refrigerator, modem and Wi-Fi. A larger, 1,200-watt system would generate enough energy to power a window air conditioning unit, “enabling families, especially in our hotter regions, to afford to cool their home on increasingly hot days,” Del Chiaro said.

Dozens of environmental and community groups and a few cities supported the bill.

Plug-in solar advocacy group and nonprofit Bright Saver tentatively celebrated the action.

“It’s a clear statement that the biggest state in the union wants this,” said Cora Stryker, the group’s co-founder, although she said she was not happy with an amendment sunsetting the legislation in 2030 and other provisions that could slow down the market for balcony solar.

“The devil in the details makes it not a home run. It makes it a fight that continues,” she said.

Fiscal analysis of the bill estimates implementation will cost the state between $200,000 and $500,000 annually to fund program administrator positions.

If Newsom signs, staff in Wiener’s office estimated that people would be able to buy compatible plug-in solar kits in the spring of 2027.

From KQED’s Climate desk, “Flipping the Switch” documents California’s transition to clean energy and what it means for you. What works? What doesn’t? How much does it cost? Help us find these answers and more by donating today.

A judge on Wednesday suspended criminal charges against a former U.S. Marine arrested at President Donald Trump’s Los Angeles-area golf course with ammunition and a gun in his vehicle. He is undergoing a psychiatric evaluation.

Los Angeles County Judge John Lonergan Jr. sent Jeanine John Taele, 38, to a mental health court in Hollywood based on statements he made in a pretrial evaluation indicating he wasn’t mentally fit to stand trial. In the evaluation, Taele falsely insisted he had been a State Department official for 14 years.

When Taele was arrested earlier this month, he was seen wearing an earpiece and taking pictures of the golf course where Trump was scheduled to attend a Republican National Committee dinner. The event was at Trump National Golf Course Los Angeles in Rancho Palos Verdes, just south of L.A.

A search of his pickup truck in the golf course parking lot at the time turned up a loaded 9 mm pistol, binoculars and a badge that read “security protection agent,” according to the U.S. attorney’s office in Los Angeles.

Lonergan expressed particular concern over the 200 pages of Taele’s writings that investigators found following his arrest. The writings included schedules for first lady Melania Trump and members of the president’s Secret Service, as well as detailed lists for surviving “off the grid.” The judge did not say whether the writings included any specific political motives or ideologies.

“This case itself is alarming in this day and age with the violence that is creeping into our everyday lives, especially with our partisanship in the political environment” ahead of the midterms, Lonergan said.

The judge also cited a previous arrest in November 2025 at an AT&T store where Taele accused an employee of spying on him with Meta Glasses, stole the glasses, and was found muttering to himself in the parking lot. He was charged with second-degree robbery following that incident.

Taele was charged with several felonies including possession of a short-barreled rifle or shotgun and receiving a large-capacity magazine. He was also charged with carrying a concealed firearm in a vehicle, a misdemeanor.

Taele appeared in the Torrance, California, courtroom Wednesday, weeks after his Aug. 5 arrest, wearing a vest designed to prevent self-harm or suicide attempts. Nearly a dozen family members and friends tearfully watched from the courtroom.

Lonergan declined to set bail for Taele, who will remain in jail until a Sept. 9 hearing at the Hollywood Mental Health Court.

Taele’s attorney, public defender A.J. Bayne, said it was too early to tell whether Taele’s mental health would play a role in his legal defense.

“He’s a veteran, he served our country, and I don’t know enough right now, but he has a family that loves him, that has huge support for him,” Bayne said, adding that “people assume too much” about Taele’s motives on the day he was arrested at the golf course.

Taele is a decorated U.S. Marine who served two tours in Iraq and Afghanistan between 2008 and 2016, according to a Marine Corps spokesperson. He was a corporal who received countless accolades, including two Marine Corps Good Conduct Medals, a Navy Unit Commendation, a National Defense Service Medal, and a Global War on Terrorism Service Medal.