The Brief

Southern California university administrators are now at the center of the turmoil over campus encampments that went up over the Israel-Hamas war.

USC’s faculty senate issued a censure resolution on Wednesday against university president Carol Folt and provost Andrew T. Guzman.

UCLA faculty will vote Friday afternoon on whether to censure Chancellor Gene Block, and will conduct a vote of no confidence.

USC has been in the national spotlight since the provost's decision last month to cancel the valedictorian's traditional commencement address over alleged safety concerns. That student, Asna Tabassum, had come under criticism by pro-Israel student and outside groups for her social media activity; her Instagram bio linked to a slideshow critical of Zionism.

In the weeks since that decision, the university canceled its main commencement ceremony altogether and has faced off with numerous student encampments now seen at universities throughout the country. Many students have been arrested or suspended.

Faculty have been critical of Folt and Guzman's ability to respond to these events, culminating, for now, in the censure resolution on Wednesday.

UCLA has also been under scrutiny for its handling of campus protesters and encampments, with many faculty condemning Block's ability to rise to the occasion.

What is a censure?

A statement of strong disagreement.

In its resolution, the USC Academic Senate wrote that faculty are dissatisfied with how top administrators decided to withdraw a valedictorian’s speech, cancel commencement ceremonies, and the treatment of student protesters and faculty.

“I understand there are many different viewpoints among members of the Trojan Community regarding our recent decisions," Folt said in a statement to LAist.

While Folt didn’t respond directly to the censure motion, she said she’s committed to working with the senate and other faculty through a task force recommended by the academic senate.

What is a vote of 'no confidence'?

Six years ago, USC faculty issued a vote of no confidence against then-president Max Nikias after several scandals rocked the campus. What’s the difference?

A vote of no confidence is basically asking the president to resign. That’s not the case here at USC. The resolution calls for a task force to investigate top administrators' decisions, and faculty say that will lead to transparency

A vote of no confidence is still an option.

"I hope the administration realizes ... it really depends on what they do next," said Devin Griffiths, an associate professor of English and comparative literature at USC. He is not a member of the academic senate, but he helped start the petition that led to the censure resolution, and attended the Wednesday meeting.

"[The academic senate] need to explain to faculty what a vote of no confidence would mean," Griffiths said.

But the bottom line: faculty are upset that top administrators haven’t shared decision-making with faculty or talked to student protestors and faculty to understand the various reasons they’re upset about the encampment and commencement.

How damaging is this action?

There are no real teeth to censure. USC trustees hire and fire the president. It’s unclear whether trustees have lost confidence in Folt.

It took much bigger problems and a no confidence vote for Nikias to step down.         

What's happening at UCLA?

An online petition said to be started by UCLA faculty and staff is asking UCLA Chancellor Gene Block to resign over the police clearing of protestor camps. Block had already announced he’s stepping down this summer.

On Friday, UCLA faculty announced they'd be considering a vote of censure and a vote of no-confidence.

UCLA did not reply to a request for comment.

The University of Southern California board of trustees has appointed interim president Beong-Soo Kim to be its 13th full president.

Kim was named as the interim leader in February 2025 and began the role this summer. He most recently served as USC’s senior vice president and general counsel, and as a lecturer at the law school. Prior to joining USC, he worked at Kaiser Permanente and was a federal prosecutor for the Central District of California.

Kim succeeds Carol Folt, who was brought on to stabilize the university following a series of scandals under the administration before hers. She formally stepped down from her role in July, following criticism of her ability to handle student protests and concerns over fiscal stewardship.

Soon after his term began, Kim oversaw the university’s effort to manage a $200 million deficit, which also led to hundreds of layoffs.

“We did have to make some difficult decisions last year with respect to our budget and layoffs,” Kim told LAist. “And I'm really pleased that as a result of those difficult decisions, we're now in a much stronger financial position and really for a number of months have been really focusing on the opportunities that we see on the horizon.”

In a call with LAist, and joined by USC board chair Suzanne Nora Johnson, Kim touched on bright spots and some of his priorities. He also touched on the relationship between USC and the Trump administration before a sudden ending to the call.

This interview has been lightly edited for clarity.

LAist: You've talked about addressing the mass layoffs and budget challenges. What do you see as the way forward?

Beong-Soo Kim: Our research expenditures have actually been going up over the last year, over the last couple of years. We're focusing on: How do we provide the best possible educational value to our students? We're focusing on how to maintain and strengthen our academic culture of excellence, open dialogue and engagement with different viewpoints.

And we're also really kind of leaning into artificial intelligence and asking questions as a community about how we incorporate AI responsibly into our education, into our operations, into our research. And there are obviously a lot of important ethical questions that we're working on, and it's really an quite an exciting time to be in the position that I'm in.

What are you excited for?

Well, a couple things that we're really looking forward to are, as part of the anniversary of the United States, we're going to be hosting a National Archives exhibition [of] founding documents in late April. We're also looking forward to helping host the L.A. Olympics in 2028. We have our 150th anniversary coming up in 2030 as a university.

So there's a lot that's on the horizon. We also have the Lucas Museum opening up across the street later this year and, of course, George Lucas is one of our most beloved Trojan alumni. So there's so much vitality, so much energy on the campus right now.

USC has, for the most part, avoided the sort of conflicts that the University of California system and elite private institutions across the country have had with the Trump administration. What can you share about how you plan to manage USC’s relationship with the federal government?

Well, we really make an effort to engage with all levels of government, as well as foundations, the private sector, community groups. That kind of engagement is really more important nowadays. Universities can't just go off on their own. It's important for us to partner and find opportunities to work with others. And that's what we've been doing.

And that's part of the reason why I think that our research has continued to go strongly. And I give a lot of the credit to our faculty and researchers who can continue submitting grant applications and continue to do research in areas that are critically important to the benefit of our community, our nation, and our world. And I think that we -—

Suzanne Nora Johnson: —Actually I'm so sorry, but we have to complete the board meeting, and we've got to run. Thank you so much for your time. I really appreciate it. We'll be in touch. Bye. Thanks. Bye.

Huntington Beach will ask the U.S. Supreme Court to review a decision striking down the city’s controversial voter ID law.

What’s the backstory?

Huntington Beach voters approved a measure in 2024 allowing the city to require people to show ID when casting a ballot. That contradicts state law — voters in California are asked to provide ID when they register to vote but generally not at polling places.

The ensuing court battle

The state and a Huntington Beach resident promptly sued the city over the voter ID law and won an appeals court ruling striking down the law. The California Supreme Court declined to review the decision earlier this month. The state also passed a law prohibiting cities from implementing their own voter ID laws.

Then, the City Council voted unanimously this week to ask the U.S. Supreme Court to weigh in.

Does the city have a shot?

The Supreme Court gets 7,000 to 8,000 requests to review cases each year. The Court grants about 80 of these requests, so the city’s chances of getting the court’s attention are statistically slim.

There’s also a question of whether or not the city’s voter ID case meets the Court’s criteria for review — SCOTUS addresses questions of federal law. Mayor Casey McKeon said it does, in a news release, noting a 2008 Supreme Court decision that upheld a state’s voter ID law — in Indiana. But Huntington Beach is a city, and the question in its voter ID case is whether or not a city can implement its own requirements for voting, even if it clashes with state law.

Go deeper

• Huntington Beach's controversial voter ID law is illegal
• Huntington Beach clashes with California over voter ID requirement in court
• HB Mayor defends Voter ID measure as Gov. Newsom seeks to ban it
• Listen 26:32

  The Trump Administration wants your confidential voter data. What’s behind their battle with CA and other states?