The Brief

On the afternoon of May 15, Brook Haley made his way to UC Irvine’s physical sciences quad. There, the longtime humanities lecturer joined other faculty and students who’d gathered to commemorate the 1948 Nakba, draw attention to the ongoing siege on Gaza and reflect on the aftermath of crackdowns on campus protests.

Last spring, hundreds of police officers in riot gear dismantled UCI’s Gaza Solidarity Encampment. Haley was among dozens of activists who were arrested and charged with a misdemeanor for failing to disperse. This year, the event’s organizers, Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP), invited him to make a short speech. Haley prepared remarks about the suppression of speech and academic inquiry.

But before Haley got the chance to speak, he said, campus police descended on him and pulled him from the crowd.

At the time, Haley told LAist, he had no idea why he was being detained. He would eventually be told it was for vandalism of a campus fountain.

“I was shaking,” he said. “I couldn't believe it.”

Haley was arrested, jailed and banned from campus for two weeks. Faculty who can't come to campus, can't teach. Faculty who can't teach, can lose their jobs.

And while Haley has managed to hold onto his, the incident shows the precarious position for faculty who want to join in activist movements but who otherwise lack job protections.

What happened at the protest?

UCI has not turned over any video of the incident.

One video from a community member shows at least three police officers leading Haley away from the group. One of them held Haley by the wrist. The other held on to Haley’s elbow. Another officer followed close by. Haley wore a disposable surgical mask, a pink trilby hat, a keffiyeh and a black backpack.

When they got to the patrol car, Haley said, the officers informed him that he’d been arrested under suspicion of felony vandalism.

And then, for the second time in a year, Haley was taken to a Santa Ana jail.

Haley, a UCI alumnus, is a lecturer in the school of humanities.

(

Courtesy Brook Haley

)

UCI spokesperson Tom Vasich said via email that campus police arrested Haley for vandalizing the Infinity Fountain in the center of campus “by pouring red dye into it.” A student was also arrested for vandalism, he said.

In California, vandalism can be a misdemeanor or a felony, depending on the amount of damage caused by the suspect. Kimberly Edds, a spokesperson for the O.C. District Attorney's Office, said prosecutors have not decided whether to press charges against Haley and the student.

Haley was released on bond the following day.

Why was Haley banned from campus?

When he and the officers got to the patrol car the day of his arrest, Haley said he was told they had video evidence of him committing the crime. LAist asked UCI for the footage but was denied. In an email, Vasich said: “This remains an active investigation, and [campus police are] still acquiring information.”

On top of the potential felony charge, Haley was banned from campus for two weeks.

According to Haley, a detective filled out the ban notice while they were still in a campus parking lot. The notice cites California Penal Code Section 626.4:

The notice warned Haley that he could be arrested if he entered campus before the ban was lifted.

Jonathan Markovitz, a senior staff attorney at ACLU of Southern California who specializes in freedom of expression, said the penal code section allows for a ban of up to 14 days.

But, he added via email: “[T]he ban is only allowed when there’s reasonable cause [to believe that] the person has willfully disrupted the campus, AND can only last for as long as the university has reason to believe the person CONTINUES to pose that kind of threat.”

Initially, one of Haley’s colleagues helped cover his class. Then, Haley’s supervisors in the school of humanities let him continue teaching on Zoom. Without their help, Haley told LAist, he could have lost his job.

What is due process at a public university?

LAist sent a list of questions about the two-week ban to UCI, including:

• Is a two-week ban standard when a non-tenured faculty member is arrested on campus?
• Would it be accurate to say that when a non-tenured faculty member is arrested on campus, they are usually fired, since they are unable to perform their work duties given the two-week ban?

Vasich, the campus spokesperson, said the university “would not have a comment about a personnel issue.”

State law allows ban recipients to submit a written request for a hearing. In a separate email, Vasich added: “Any UC Irvine affiliate can request a hearing to appeal the decision.” He also shared a blank copy of the notice Haley received.

Fearing his employment was at risk, Haley asked his union — the University Council of the American Federation of Teachers (UC-AFT) — to represent him in conversations with the UCI’s Academic Personnel office.

In an email, Haley said the office’s response “made us feel that an appeal was not a timely or productive way to face the threat of my dismissal.”

“The illegitimacy of my arrest and the trauma of the experience dissuaded me from pursuing the appeal once the union determined what was best for me as a member,” Haley added. “The open hostility that the chancellor has shown for Palestine activism generally and leaders of SJP, who had invited me to speak, also made it harder to see the appeal as a reasonable step.”

Honora St. Clair, a UC-AFT’s field representative, said via email “the university's position was that there was no appeal process, that this was a criminal matter and not an employment matter.”

“I argued that a wrongful arrest accompanied by a two-week campus ban impacts his employment and therefore our position is that this is an employment matter. [The Academic Personnel office] disagreed and told us there is no role for the union in this matter,” St. Clair added. “Dr. Haley did not commit any vandalism and we believe he was targeted because of his activism. We will aggressively pursue every avenue available to clear his name and hold the university accountable.”

The union launched a letter writing campaign to urge UCI chancellor Howard Gillman to lift the ban. More than 7,400 people signed on.

Haley said he is “absolutely confident [that his arrest] will lead to no charges or eventual innocence.” Following his release from jail, Haley had to navigate other obstacles to teaching, including getting locked out of the university assignment portal. The police confiscated his backpack when they arrested him, which contained more than a dozen midterm exams that still needed grading.

Thanks to colleagues in the school of humanities, Haley was able to retrieve his bag. When he opened it, he found his students’ papers, his dry erase markers, and a draft of the speech he didn’t get to deliver. The police kept his phone, his hat and his keffiyeh.

'It could happen to any of us'

On May 15, political science professor Cecelia Lynch arrived on campus in the afternoon to join the protest, she told LAist. She noticed a growing police presence.

“One is now left to wonder: Were they determined to arrest somebody or make a show of this? . . . I really don't know,” she said.

The student organizers had laid out a banner charging chancellor Gillman with being complicit in Israel’s war effort. The student activists also placed stuffed sheets with red markings in the quad, “to look like baby bodies,” Lynch said. At the time, the UN warned that if Israel did not allow aid to enter Gaza immediately, 14,000 babies could die.

Lynch was close to Haley throughout the event, she said. As she was planning to leave, she noticed Haley was being detained.

Last year, Lynch served as a liaison between pro-Palestine student activists and the police. Students asked her to take on the role again this year. Clad in an orange vest, Lynch approached the officers who encircled Haley.

“Excuse me, I’m a police liaison,” she remembered saying. “Can you tell me what’s going on?” One of the officers, she said, simply told her to “back up.”

In conversation with LAist, UCI professors who participated in this year’s event discussed Haley’s arrest in the context of a nationwide crackdown on pro-Palestinian activists, including the high-profile detention of visa holders and permanent residents.

“It is as though the chancellor and the university are almost doing the Trump administration's bidding — that's how it feels,” Lynch said.

Associate professor Sanghyuk Shin also attended the event. He described Haley's arrest as an “escalation of the repression that we've been seeing.” UCI “definitely sent a message,” he added, “whether intentionally or unintentionally.”

“What happened to Brook could happen to any of us,” Shin said. “I think we all need to stick together.”

Vasich shared the following statement: “UC Irvine respects the rights of individuals to free speech and peaceful assembly. At the same time, we are committed to helping maintain a safe and lawful campus environment and to protecting university property. The university continues to uphold its policies and all applicable laws.”

Getting back to his students

Haley earned his master’s degree and doctorate in comparative literature at UCI. And he remains a proud anteater, he said, in reference to the school’s mascot — in spite of his two arrests.

Haley said he has received dozens of emails from people expressing support. Emails from students have been especially moving. “They're telling me that I'm teaching them even though I'm not in class. That’s very powerful to me,” he said.

In March, Haley spoke with LAist about how campus protests might change in light of the Trump administration’s targeting of activists who aren’t U.S. citizens.

“I really thought, ‘Hey, I'm a white guy with U.S. citizenship. I have [multiple] degrees, employment from UCI for almost 30 years now.’ I thought that would provide me with some safety against suppression and persecution,” he said. “I do now believe that I was wrong.”

This realization, however, hasn’t changed Haley’s attitude toward activism.

Once he’s back on campus, he said, “I expect to be attending any rally for the organizations that I specifically support, especially my unions, affiliated unions, [and] SJP.”

This story first appeared on The LA Local.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

(

J.W. Hendricks

/

The LA Local

)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

What can small businesses do? 

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

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

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

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

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

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

What’s next 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Topline:

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

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

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

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

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

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