Sponsored message
Logged in as
Audience-funded nonprofit news
radio tower icon laist logo
Next Up:
0:00
0:00
Subscribe
  • Listen Now Playing Listen
  • Listen Now Playing Listen

The Brief

The most important stories for you to know today
  • 11 new laws that will impact schools in 2026
    A slightly low angle view of the California State Capitol with a blue sky in the background.
    The California State Capitol in Sacramento.

    Topline:

    California students are likely to see fewer cell phones and more gender-neutral bathrooms next year as new state education laws go into effect.

    New Office of Civil Rights to open: Assembly Bill 715 establishes a state Office of Civil Rights to help school districts identify and prevent discrimination based on antisemitism, gender, religious and LGBTQ status. It will also handle questions and complaints.

    Shielding schools from immigration raids: Protecting students from immigration raids was a priority for legislators this year, resulting in several pieces of new legislation.

    Read on... for more new laws that will affect California schools.

    California students are likely to see fewer cell phones and more gender-neutral bathrooms next year as new state education laws go into effect.

    Protecting students from immigration raids was a priority for state legislators this year, resulting in several new laws, including one prohibiting school staff from allowing immigration officers to enter campuses or providing student or family information.

    The most controversial of the new laws is one meant to target antisemitism, although amendments made during the legislative session resulted in a bill that defines discrimination more broadly.

    New Office of Civil Rights to open

    Assembly Bill 715 establishes a state Office of Civil Rights to help school districts identify and prevent discrimination based on antisemitism, gender, religious and LGBTQ status. It will also handle questions and complaints.

    The legislation, along with Senate Bill 48, creates four positions to track and report discrimination. These positions will be appointed by the governor and confirmed by the Senate after Jan. 1.

    “California is taking action to confront hate in all forms,” said Gov. Gavin Newsom in a statement. “At a time when antisemitism and bigotry are rising nationwide and globally, these laws make clear: our schools must be places of learning, not hate.”

    The legislation has been controversial, with some organizations saying it infringes on academic freedom and prioritizes the rights of certain students over others. The California Teachers Association and California Faculty Association have said the legislation could result in the censoring of educators.

    Parents can’t be jailed for truant kids

    Beginning Jan. 1, parents of chronically truant children will no longer be fined or face jail time.

    Assembly Bill 461 amends the state’s Penal Code to remove a section that makes it a criminal offense for a parent to have a child who is chronically truant, which is defined as missing school without a valid excuse for 10% or more of the school year.

    California law requires students age 6 to 18 to attend school.

    The Penal Code called for a fine of up to $2,000 or up to a year in jail for parents whose children habitually missed school.

    “Criminalizing parents for their children′s truancy ignores the root causes of absenteeism and only deepens family hardships, especially as many immigrant families now fear sending their children to school,” said Assemblymember Patrick Ahrens, D-Sunnyvale, in a statement. “(This bill) ensures support and resources to keep students in school and on track for success.”

    Gender-neutral bathroom required

    Beginning on July 1, all California school campuses, except those that have only one bathroom for male students and one bathroom for female students, are required to have a gender-neutral bathroom.

    Senate Bill 760, which was signed by the governor in 2023, requires that posted signs identify the designated bathroom as being open to all genders and that it be kept unlocked and available to all students.

    “SB 760 is a measure that aims to create a safe and inclusive environment not only for non-binary students, but to all students, by requiring each public school to establish at least one all-gender restroom,” said former Sen. Josh Newman, author of the bill.

    Cellphone use to be limited

    School districts, county offices of education, and charter schools have until July 1 to adopt a policy limiting the use of cellphones during school hours.

    Assembly Bill 3216, renamed the Phone-Free School Act, was approved in an effort to curb classroom distractions, bullying, and addiction to the devices. At least five other states, Florida, Indiana, Louisiana, South Carolina and Ohio, have similar laws.

    Last year, Gov. Gavin Newsom sent a letter to school district leaders urging them to restrict cellphones. Excessive smartphone use increases anxiety, depression and other mental health issues in children, he said. 

    Shielding schools from immigration raids

    Protecting students from immigration raids was a priority for legislators this year, resulting in several pieces of new legislation.

    Assembly Bill 49, known as the California Safe Haven Schools Act, was passed amid a series of immigration raids that have resulted in the arrest of thousands of people. It went into effect as an urgency measure in September.

    The bill prohibits school staff from allowing immigration enforcement officers on school campuses or sharing student or family information with them without a warrant or court order. School districts have until March 1 to update school policies to align with the law.

    Senate Bill 98, also effective in September, requires leaders of school districts, charter schools, universities and colleges to notify staff and parents when immigration officers are on a campus. School safety plans should include an official procedure for making these notifications by March 1.

    This bill, which is in effect until Jan. 1, 2031, does not prevent governing boards from establishing stronger standards or protections.

    Protecting preschools, preparing families

    Assembly Bill 495, known as the Family Preparedness Plan Act, expands the pool of relatives that can be authorized to make decisions and care for children if parents are detained by immigration authorities or deported.

    Beginning Jan. 1, all adults related to a child by blood or adoption, within five generations, could be authorized to enroll a child in school or make decisions about their medical care while on campus.

    The bill also permits courts to appoint a person, nominated by a parent, to have joint custody of a child if they are detained or deported by immigration officials.

    It also requires school districts to provide information to parents and guardians regarding the right of children to have a free public education.

    The legislation also extends the requirements of AB 49 to child care facilities and preschools, prohibiting staff from collecting information or documents regarding the immigration status of children or their family. Instead, they are required to report requests for this information to the California Department of Education and the state Attorney General’s Office.

    Easing the road to college

    This year, California high school students will find it easier to be admitted to a California State University campus.

    Senate Bill 640 establishes a direct admission program that sends mailers to high school students who are eligible to attend participating campuses, informing them of that status. Qualified students must have completed all the required coursework and maintained the necessary grade point average.

    “Tens of thousands of California students are fully qualified to go to CSU, but don’t jump the hurdles of the admissions process,” said Sen. Christopher Cabaldon, D-Napa, the law’s author. “At the same time, nearly half of CSU’s campuses have substantial available enrollment capacity and need more students to sustain their high quality academic programs.”

    The legislation also requires the California Community Colleges system to promote the CSU dual admission transfer program, which guarantees CSU admission to eligible community college students.

    Student IDs to include suicide hotline number

    Student identification cards issued at California public secondary schools and institutions of higher education after July 1 will include the phone number for The Trevor Project, a crisis and suicide prevention hotline for LGBTQ youth.

    Suicide is the second leading cause of death among young people age 10 to 14, and the third leading cause of death for 14- to 25-year-olds, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

    “In today’s political climate, LGBTQ+ students face significant levels of bullying, harassment, and discrimination — negatively impacting their mental health and academic success,” according to Assemblymember Mark González, author of the bill. “AB 727 will provide critical resources to support LGBTQ+ youth in crisis and those who have experienced harassment.”

    Early education to take seats on board

    The next eligible seat that comes open on the California Commission on Teacher Credentialing in 2026 must go to an early childhood education teacher, according to Assembly Bill 1123.

    The bill calls for one of the six teacher representatives on the commission to hold a child development teacher permit. It also reduces the number of public representatives on the board from three to two to allow the governor to appoint someone who teaches early childhood development at a university or college.

    The commission, which governs the licensing and preparation of the state’s teachers, is made up of 15 voting members, including the state superintendent of public instruction, six practicing teachers, a school administrator, a school board member, a school counselor, a faculty member from a teacher preparation program, a human resources administrator, and three public representatives.

    The early childhood representatives will be seated after the next eligible seat is vacated or a representative’s term ends.

    In the 60 years since California first began issuing child development permits to early childhood educators, there has never been a voting member on the commission, which governs their licensure and preparation, said Assemblymember Al Muratsuchi, D-Torrance, author of the bill.

  • Prices go up again, up to $11K for finals

    Topline:

    FIFA is once again raising prices for a substantial number of games in the upcoming World Cup tournament that will be held in the United States, Canada and Mexico in June and July.


    Price hike: The price increases took place in FIFA's latest sales window that kicked off on Wednesday, with 40 out of 104 games now costing more than in the last sales window, according to an NPR examination of prices. The most expensive "Category 1" tickets for the final will now cost $10,990, a broad area that covers most of the lower two bowls of MetLife Stadium in New Jersey, where the last game of the tournament will be held in July.

    Why have prices risen?: FIFA has not replied to NPR's queries. But previously FIFA has justified its prices citing strong demand for tickets as well as noting it's adapting its pricing to the North American market. FIFA has also repeatedly said it's a non-profit that steers the vast majority of revenue from the World Cup to grow soccer around the world.

    Read on . . . for more on which matches have seen ticket prices increase.

    FIFA is once again raising prices for a substantial number of games in the upcoming World Cup tournament that will be held in the United States, Canada and Mexico in June and July.

    The price increases took place in FIFA's latest sales window that kicked off on Wednesday, with 40 out of 104 games now costing more than in the last sales window, according to an NPR examination of prices.

    The hikes can be stark. The most expensive "Category 1" tickets for the final will now cost $10,990, a broad area that covers most of the lower two bowls of MetLife Stadium in New Jersey, where the last game of the tournament will be held in July.

    That's significantly more than the nearly $8,700 at which these tickets were priced in FIFA's previous sales window earlier this year — and much higher than the $6,370 at which they were priced when sales kicked off last year.

    The increases come even after FIFA has faced heavy criticism about the record prices being charged and its adoption of dynamic pricing for the first time. A group representing European fans and consumers called FIFA's prices "exorbitant" and filed a formal complaint this month with the European Commission in a bid to get the soccer body to lower prices.

    Meanwhile, a group of Democratic lawmakers wrote a letter to FIFA accusing the organization of "price gouging at the expense of the people who make the World Cup the most-watched sporting event in the world."

    FIFA has not replied to NPR's queries. But previously FIFA has justified its prices citing strong demand for tickets as well as noting it's adapting its pricing to the North American market. FIFA has also repeatedly said it's a non-profit that steers the vast majority of revenue from the World Cup to grow soccer around the world.

    Price increases cover a wide range of games

    Most of the price increases in the initial stage of the tournament were for teams that tend to draw more fans such as Brazil, Argentina, England and Germany — as well as co-host Mexico.

    Although price hikes tended to be of less than $100, they still mark a substantial escalation from the initial prices at which FIFA started selling those tickets. Some increases were quite big though. Mexico's opening game against Saudi Arabia now costs as much as $2,985, up from $2,355 in FIFA's last sales window and up from its initial price of $1,825.

    Most of the knockout games also increased in price, including the one being held in Philadelphia on July 4th — and the hikes tend to get more substantial for match-ups later in the tournament.

    For example, the two semi-finals of the tournament also saw hefty price hikes. The game that will be held in Dallas in July will now cost as much as $3,710, up substantially from $3,295 in the last sales window.

    The current sales window will last all the way through the tournament. FIFA has not said how many tickets are left to sell, only that it will continue to drop tickets periodically, including potentially for games that appear to be sold out.
    Copyright 2026 NPR

  • Sponsored message
  • Developer drops plans after pushback
    Two women with gray hair carry signs that read "No Data Center."
    Opponents to a planned data center in Monterey Park have spoken out at rallies and City Council meetings over the last several months.

    Topline:

    A developer that had proposed a nearly 250,000-square-foot data center in a Monterey Park business park has withdrawn its application and says it won’t fight an upcoming ballot question banning data centers in the city.

    Why now: HMC StratCap notified the city on Tuesday that it was pulling its proposal to build a data center in a local business park after months of pressure from residents and advocates who raised concerns about pollution, energy use and health risks. The parent company of the developer — DigiCo Infrastructure REIT — said that HMC sought to "work with the City to establish productive land uses" for its Saturn Street property "that are supported by the broader community." Representatives for HMC StratCap have not responded to requests for comment.

    Why it matters: For people pushing back on data centers in the region, Monterey Park is shaping up as a test case for how local organizing can stop them. The developer’s decision to withdraw its application comes ahead of a June 2 special election on Measure NDC. If approved at the ballot box, Monterey Park would be the first to ban data centers by public vote. The developer, which had threatened legal action against the city for data center restrictions, now says it will not contest the proposition.

    The backstory: The data center proposal had been moving through the city's planning pipeline for two years before it started showing up on the City Council's agendas and coming to the attention of residents, who were outraged the plans had not been well-publicized by the city. Hundreds of people flooded City Hall during council meetings over the last several months, demanding the city heed their concerns. In response, the council approved a temporary moratorium on data center development, put the issue on the ballot and will consider a separate ordinance banning data center development altogether.

    What’s next: Members of groups like No Data Center MPK and San Gabriel Valley Progressive Action are celebrating the application's withdrawal, but say they will continue to advocate for Measure NDC and the data center ordinance, which the City Council is expected to vote on in the coming weeks. Meanwhile, organizers are joining the effort to stop a proposal to build a battery energy storage system in the City of Industry, which they see as laying the groundwork for a data center.

    Go deeper: How Monterey Park residents pushed back on a data center — and changed the course

    Topline:

    A developer that had proposed a nearly 250,000-square-foot data center in a Monterey Park business park has withdrawn its application and says it won’t fight an upcoming ballot question banning data centers in the city.

    Why now: HMC StratCap notified the city on Tuesday that it was pulling its proposal to build a data center in a local business park after months of pressure from residents and advocates who raised concerns about pollution, energy use and health risks. The parent company of the developer — DigiCo Infrastructure REIT — said that HMC sought to "work with the City to establish productive land uses" for its Saturn Street property "that are supported by the broader community." Representatives for HMC StratCap have not responded to requests for comment.

    Why it matters: For people pushing back on data centers in the region, Monterey Park is shaping up as a test case for how local organizing can stop them. The developer’s decision to withdraw its application comes ahead of a June 2 special election on Measure NDC. If approved at the ballot box, Monterey Park would be the first to ban data centers by public vote. The developer, which had threatened legal action against the city for data center restrictions, now says it will not contest the proposition.

    The backstory: The data center proposal had been moving through the city's planning pipeline for two years before it started showing up on the City Council's agendas and coming to the attention of residents, who were outraged the plans had not been well-publicized by the city. Hundreds of people flooded City Hall during council meetings over the last several months, demanding the city heed their concerns. In response, the council approved a temporary moratorium on data center development, put the issue on the ballot and will consider a separate ordinance banning data center development altogether.

    What’s next: Members of groups like No Data Center MPK and San Gabriel Valley Progressive Action are celebrating the application's withdrawal, but say they will continue to advocate for Measure NDC and the data center ordinance, which the City Council is expected to vote on in the coming weeks. Meanwhile, organizers are joining the effort to stop a proposal to build a battery energy storage system in the City of Industry, which they see as laying the groundwork for a data center.

    Go deeper: How Monterey Park residents pushed back on a data center — and changed the course

  • Attorney general is out at DOJ

    Topline:

    President Donald Trump announced Thursday that Attorney General Pam Bondi is out from the top job at the Justice Department. Her departure comes amid simmering frustration over her leadership and her handling of the Epstein files.


    Why now? In social media post, Trump called Bondi "a Great American Patriot and a loyal friend, who faithfully served as my Attorney General over the past year."

    What's next: Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche, who is Trump's former personal attorney, will step in to serve as acting attorney general, the president said.

    The context: Bondi, a longtime Trump loyalist, is the second member of the president's Cabinet to be forced out. Her departure comes almost one month after Trump fired Kristi Noem as secretary of Homeland Security. Bondi leaves after a tumultuous 14 months in charge that critics say damaged the Justice Department's credibility, hollowed out the career ranks and undermined the rule of law.

    President Donald Trump announced Thursday that Attorney General Pam Bondi is out from the top job at the Justice Department. Her departure comes amid simmering frustration over her leadership and her handling of the Epstein files.

    In social media post, Trump called Bondi "a Great American Patriot and a loyal friend, who faithfully served as my Attorney General over the past year."

    "Pam did a tremendous job overseeing a massive crackdown in Crime across our Country, with Murders plummeting to their lowest level since 1900," Trump said. "We love Pam, and she will be transitioning to a much needed and important new job in the private sector, to be announced at a date in the near future."

    Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche, who is Trump's former personal attorney, will step in to serve as acting attorney general, the president said.

    Bondi, a longtime Trump loyalist, is the second member of the president's Cabinet to be forced out. Her departure comes almost one month after Trump fired Kristi Noem as secretary of Homeland Security.

    Bondi leaves after a tumultuous 14 months in charge that critics say damaged the Justice Department's credibility, hollowed out the career ranks and undermined the rule of law.

    Under Bondi, the department jettisoned its decades-old tradition of maintaining independence from the White House, particularly in investigations and prosecutions, to insulate them from partisan politics.

    Instead, she used the department's vast powers to go after the president's perceived foes. That includes the high-profile cases against former FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James, which were brought after Trump publicly called on Bondi to prosecute them.

    A federal judge later tossed both cases after finding the acting U.S. attorney who secured the indictments was unlawfully appointed.

    Other political opponents of the president or individuals standing in the way of his agenda also have found themselves under DOJ investigation, including Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell, California Democratic Sen. Adam Schiff, and former Obama-era intelligence officials James Clapper and John Brennan.

    Bondi also oversaw sweeping changes to the career workforce at the department. The agency fired prosecutors and FBI officials who worked on Capitol riot cases or the Trump investigations.

    The elite section that prosecutes public corruption was gutted; the Civil Rights Division, which protects the Constitutional rights of all Americans, experienced a mass exodus of career attorneys who say the division is being turned into an enforcement arm of the White House.

    Political firestorm over Epstein files

    Bondi, a former Florida attorney general, has defended her actions. She has portrayed the firings as a necessary house cleaning of politicized career officials. She's also tried to focus on what she views as major accomplishments during her tenure: targeting drug cartels, cracking down on violent crime, and helping in immigration enforcement.

    But ultimately, the department's handling of the files related to the investigations of the late convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein played a large role in her downfall.

    Early in her tenure, Bondi told Fox News that she had Epstein's client list "sitting on my desk right now to review." A few months later, the Justice Department and the FBI said there was no client list and that no additional files from the Epstein investigation would be made public.

    That touched off a political firestorm and ultimately led Congress to pass the Epstein Files Transparency Act, which forced the Justice Department to make public all of the Epstein files in its possession.

    The department failed to meet the Act's 30-day deadline to release the materials, fueling frustrations on Capitol Hill, before eventually releasing millions of pages of files. Democratic and Republican lawmakers also expressed concerns about heavy redactions that were made to many of the documents.

    Copyright 2026 NPR

  • City cuts ties with largest shelter operator
    A woman wearing a purple shirt and black pants walks through a parking lot of a grey, two story building
    A woman walks through the parking lot of a homeless shelter in Long Beach that contractor First to Serve operated until the city launched an investigation into its billing practices.

    Topline:

    Long Beach has fired the contractor that operated almost all of its homeless shelters following an audit of the $69 million the city has spent on homeless services over the last five years.

    First to Serve: The nonprofit First to Serve ran 423 of the city’s 500 shelter beds until yesterday, but after a closed-door City Council meeting last month, Long Beach cut ties and quickly swapped in the L.A.-based nonprofit People Assisting The Homeless (PATH). Long Beach is now investigating First to Serve which could result in the city pursuing criminal or civil charges. The investigation stemmed from a broader review of Long Beach’s homelessness programs launched by City Auditor Laura Doud in 2023.

    What's next: As of Wednesday, the sites were being operated by PATH. The city plans to release bids in the next month or two to evaluate new operators for each of the four shelters. In response to the audit, the city said it’s already tightening up its processes, including the launch of a new tracking system and stricter oversight standards.

    Long Beach has fired the contractor that operated almost all of its homeless shelters following an audit of the $69 million the city has spent on homeless services over the last five years.

    The nonprofit First to Serve ran 423 of the city’s 500 shelter beds until yesterday, but after a closed-door City Council meeting last month, Long Beach cut ties and quickly swapped in the L.A.-based nonprofit People Assisting The Homeless (PATH).

    Long Beach is now investigating First to Serve, according to Deputy City Attorney Nicholas Masero. It’s unclear if that investigation could result in the city pursuing criminal or civil charges. Masero said that “we’ll make that determination as the investigations progress.”

    The investigation stemmed from a broader review of Long Beach’s homelessness programs launched by City Auditor Laura Doud in 2023.

    The audit, Masero said, looked into documents submitted by vendors like First to Serve “seeking reimbursement or payment on contracts.”

    “During our audit, we identified information that requires further review,” Doud wrote in a recent memo to the city manager. “To protect the integrity of our ongoing investigation, we cannot provide additional details regarding the matter at this time, nor can we discuss our audit in greater detail.”

    What she discovered, though, was enough to compel Long Beach to cut ties with First to Serve.

    By November, the city began to withhold payments and started the search for a new provider after finding enough instances of “contractual concerns that we were confident we needed to switch providers,” Masero said.

    Doud has not yet released the full results of her audit, but she said contractors like First to Serve must do a better job showing they’ve performed the work they were hired to do before they’re paid, and the city needs to verify the services were actually provided before paying.

    According to Homeless Services Bureau Manager Paul Duncan, Long Beach has paid First to Serve $13 to $14 million annually to operate four shelters, as well as for rapid rehousing and prevention programs.

    A man wearing a cap and plaid shirt is pictured in profile. He is seated, the backs of several people are pictured in the foreground
    Paul Duncan, Long Beach’s homeless services bureau manager, informed the city’s Homeless Services Advisory Committee on Wednesday, April 1, that the city had terminated contracts with its largest homeless shelter provider.
    (
    Thomas R. Cordova
    /
    Long Beach Post
    )

    The organization oversaw the shelter at 702 West Anaheim St., the Atlantic Farms Bridge Housing Community at 6841 Atlantic Ave., the Project Homekey site at 1725 Long Beach Blvd., and the former Luxury Inn at 5950 Long Beach Blvd.

    As of Wednesday, the sites were being operated by PATH. The city plans to release bids in the next month or two to evaluate new operators for each of the four shelters, Duncan said.

    In response to the audit, the city said it’s already tightening up its processes, including the launch of a new tracking system and stricter oversight standards.

    There’s been no official accounting of exactly what alleged wrongdoing is being investigated. According to their agendas, the City Council met in private on March 3 to discuss the situation, and then, on March 10, approved new contracts for PATH to operate the shelters without any public discussion.

    On Wednesday, Long Beach officials also appeared to try to tamp down the idea that the move to fire First to Serve was related to accusations raised last week by mayoral candidate Chris Sweeney.

    In a video posted to Instagram, Sweeney toured the shelter at 5950 Long Beach Blvd. and alleged there was fraud at the nearly empty shelter, where only 12 of its 78 rooms were being used.

    First to Serve’s other three shelters were 78% to 88% occupied, according to city data, though about one-third of the rooms at the 1725 Long Beach Blvd. site were under construction and are not being used.

    Officials say the city and First to Serve met weekly to review inventory at each shelter, transfer existing case files, and do walkthroughs of each site to make sure everything was accounted for.

    Mayor Rex Richardson, Councilmember Tunua Thrash-Ntuk, and other city officials celebrated the completion of the shelter at 5950 Long Beach Blvd. on Wednesday, Oct 29, 2025. Photo by Thomas R. Cordova. In a memo, the Long Beach health director Alison King said the decision to cut ties with First to Serve was related to the city auditor’s review of “prior administrative documentation” that “is not related to shelter operations.”

    Nevertheless, she wrote, “Based on the findings of that review, the City determined it is in the best interest of the community to move forward with a new service provider for shelter operations.”

    The city’s investigation has been ongoing since October, according to Masero.

    Nobody from First to Serve was immediately available to answer questions late Wednesday night.