The Brief

Children’s Hospital of Orange County is now the latest Southern California medical provider to stop offering gender-affirming care to youth, blaming investigations and escalating actions from the federal government.

The hospital, as well as other hospitals in San Diego and Riverside counties under the Rady Children’s umbrella organization, has said that it will stop offering gender-affirming care to patients under 19 effective Feb. 6.

The decision has forced patients to scramble to find health care in a span of two weeks or risk complications from a forced withdrawal from hormone therapy.

The backlash from community members has been swift after dozens of protesters recently hit the streets outside CHOC’s hospital in Orange to rally against the decision.

CHOC said it’s making the decision under duress to preserve funding for all its patients amid proposed federal rules that would pull all Medicare and Medicaid reimbursements for hospitals that offer gender-affirming care to minors.

“This was a very difficult decision, made to ensure we can continue serving all children and families across the communities we serve,” a CHOC spokesperson said in a statement to LAist.

But parents of CHOC patients who attended a rally Saturday opposing the move said that they were not consulted by hospital leadership for the decision. Some said they would have advocated for CHOC to preserve its gender-affirming care for all patients if they were.

Security guards stood watch over the rally from the roof of an adjacent CHOC-owned building.

(

Kevin Tidmarsh/LAist

)

Haley Horton, a health care advocate who carpools to CHOC with trans youth patients, said the hospital's move was a “business decision.”

“ I know my son's nurse who's at this hospital doesn't want that happening,” Horton said. “I know the doctors at this hospital don't want this to happen.”

The background behind the decision

An ongoing concern for hospitals is the potential that their Medicaid and Medicare funding will be revoked if they offer gender-affirming care to minors.

The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services are currently in the middle of a public comment period for two proposed rule changes that would stop the use of federal dollars for gender-affirming care for youth, and restrict all Medicare and Medicaid funding for hospitals that provide the care.

Those rules have not taken effect and are expected to be challenged by LGBTQ+ legal rights organizations.

A CHOC spokesperson also confirmed to LAist that the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ inspector general’s office had launched an investigation into the hospital. Legal experts interviewed by LAist have referred to subpoenas and investigations launched by the federal government as “scare tactics,” and say that it’s possible they won’t hold up in court.

According to TransFamily Support Services, a San Diego-based organization that also protested the closure of Rady Children’s Hospital’s clinic in San Diego, the hospital system will continue to offer services like hormone replacement therapy to people 19 and older.

CHOC did not respond to a direct question from LAist asking the hospital what provisions were being made for families who now have two weeks to find another health care provider in an extremely precarious market. When Children’s Hospital Los Angeles closed its gender-affirming care clinic last July, administrators gave families a six-week off-ramp to find another provider, and many doctors wrote out prescriptions to tide people over for months.

What families are saying

Though Horton's son isn't trans, she said she has been in touch with the families she knows with trans teenagers who are patients at CHOC. She told LAist that those families did not attend the weekend rally in order to protect their mental health as they “scramble” to find alternate care.

The rally also drew turnout from elected officials and public figures, like Tustin School Board Trustee Allyson Muñiz Damikolas.

Damikolas said she came out on behalf of her kids, who are also patients at CHOC due to a complex medical condition, and to support trans youth nationwide.

Chris Kluwe, a former NFL player turned political advocate who’s running to represent Huntington Beach in the state assembly, said CHOC’s leaders were “cowardly bureaucrats who aren't willing to stand up and do the right thing” in the face of a “tyrannical federal government."

Chris Kluwe, who's running to represent Huntington Beach in the state assembly, showed up to rally against the CHOC clinic's closure.

(

Kevin Tidmarsh/LAist

)

OC LGBTQ+  groups denounce the move

“ I'm a transgender woman and I'm here to tell you that denying people this gender affirming care doesn't make gender dysphoria go away,” said Stephanie Wade, chair of Lavender Democrats of Orange County. “All it does is make it metastasize into suicidal depression. And I've been there. I dealt with this as a child. We can't take this away from kids.”

Wade pointed to studies that show that trans youth who are denied access to gender-affirming care are more likely to attempt suicide.

Stephanie Wade of Lavender Democrats was one of many local LGBTQ political leaders attending Saturday's rally.

Felicity Figueroa, the chair of the Orange County Equality Coalition, called on hospital leadership to consult with the families and doctors, especially given that the proposed federal rules have not yet taken effect.

 “They're saying it's gonna affect the other kids who aren't LGBTQ,” Figueroa said. “But are they asking the parents of the other kids if they're willing to throw their neighbor's kids under the bus just because of a [possibility]? That's the thing. They aren't listening.”

Lasting concerns 

Brit Cervantes of OCGAPNet, an advocacy organization for gender-affirming providers in Orange County, said the closure of CHOC’s clinic would likely have ripple effects that could reverberate for years.

“ There's going to be a time where we exist beyond this administration, and we will have to work to rebuild this trust with our patients after we abandon them.  That is a very long lasting impact,” Cervantes said.

Cervantes, a medical professional, said that discontinuing hormone therapy can lead to major complications akin to what menopausal women experience.

In addition to the effects on local adolescents, the rally’s organizers also pointed to what they saw as a wider-scale erosion of rights and norms under the second Trump administration. It took place on the same day that ICU nurse Alex Pretti was shot and killed by immigration agents on the streets of Minneapolis.

Speakers at the rally outside CHOC blasted the hospital leadership for capitulating to the Trump administration.

(

Kevin Tidmarsh/LAist

)

Kanan Durham, executive director of the Huntington Beach-based nonprofit Pride at the Pier, linked the closure to “blackmail, intimidation and state violence” happening at other levels of the federal government, including the actions of immigration enforcement officers in Minneapolis.

“ Suggesting that evidenced-based health care that is supported by every major institution in the Western world is medical fraud is to set a foundation where the government can decide who is allowed to have health care and who is not,” Durham said. “They are making decisions based on their own moral judgements. And if that's where they're coming from, then any American, anybody living in this country has their health care under risk.”

The backstory

Children’s Hospital Los Angeles, which was the largest provider of pediatric gender-affirming care in the country, closed its Center for Transyouth Health and Development last July, affecting even patients over 19.

That was followed by other providers who said they’d stop or pause certain types of health care for trans youth, including Kaiser Permanente’s ongoing pause of gender-affirming surgeries and certain implants for people under 19.

Advocates say these closures are making it harder and harder for trans youth in Southern California to find the care that they need.

Pride at the Pier, OCGAPNet and TransFamily Support Services are also soliciting signatures for an open letter to CHOC and Rady’s leadership asking them to reverse their decision.

To weigh in on the CMS rule changes, visit this website.

Something unusual is happening with only a few days remaining before the U.S. men's national team opens its World Cup campaign against Paraguay: Tickets for the match are not sold out.

Although numbers fluctuate regularly, FIFA's ticketing website still shows 132 tickets left to sell for a game that's set to take place in Los Angeles on Friday. Meanwhile, resale platforms such as StubHub and SeatGeek — and FIFA's own marketplace — also show thousands of tickets on sale.

The number is even higher for Canada's opening match against Bosnia Herzegovina in Toronto on the same day, with 226 tickets left in FIFA's website and a high number of tickets available in resale markets.

That's unusual for high-profile events such as the opening matches of the World Cup — traditionally among the hardest to get tickets in the tournament. This year will feature three hosts in the U.S., Canada and Mexico — but so far only Mexico's opening match against South Africa on Thursday looks to be virtually sold out.

Ticketing experts widely agree on the reason: the prices. FIFA dramatically jacked them up for the tournament — especially for high profile games. The most expensive regular seats for the U.S. opener against Paraguay are priced at $2,735 — more than the final cost for the 2022 World Cup final — while the cheapest are $1,120.

Even President Trump said he wouldn't pay those prices.

"I would certainly like to be there, but I wouldn't pay it either, to be honest with you," Trump told the New York Post in a recent interview.

The other two remaining games for the U.S. national have far fewer tickets available, given that prices are well below the ones for the opening match.

Prices have also fallen sharply

There are not only plenty of tickets left to sell — a number of them are also available below FIFA's face value. According to Ticketdata, which tracks prices across the resale platforms, the cheapest pair of tickets for the opening match for the U.S. and Canada was $951 as of Monday morning, while in FIFA's resale platform, tickets were available for as low as $690.

Other games across the 104-match tournament also still have many tickets left to sell — despite FIFA President Gianni Infantino's claim that every match is "already sold out." That's especially the case for lesser well known teams such as the Jordan against Algeria match, which still had hundreds of unsold seats in the FIFA's web site.

Demand for high-profile tickets such as Argentina and Portugal was far higher, however, with many of those games looking largely sold out.

Will the opening matches sell out?

Whether eventually the U.S. and Canada opening matches will sell out is hard to answer. Throughout the sales process, FIFA has closely guarded how many tickets it has actually sold and how many are left to sell, making it virtually impossible to gauge.

In addition, like other teams, FIFA could also sell tickets in other platforms including third-party ones such as SeatGeek, which can further obscure how many tickets are left to sell.

FIFA and organizers, however, are hoping for a surge in excitement that leads to a last-minute rush of sales for the opening matches as well as for those such as Jordan against Algeria that look far from being sold out.

Ben Shields, a senior lecturer at the MIT Sloan School of Management, says perceptions so far of the tournament have been shaped by how expensive tickets and travel has been for a tournament taking place across an entire continent.

That, he says, "does not seem to sit well with many."

But that could change.

"The hope or bet — for FIFA is that once the matches start — and the greatest players in the world compete for the most prestigious prize of them all, the sport as business lens will fade into the background and the World Cup will be seen and experienced as the enduring global institution that it is," Shields says. "We shall see."
Copyright 2026 NPR

Orange County’s top elected leaders on Tuesday are set to discuss what to do with $3.7 million recovered from the Andrew Do corruption scheme.

Do is now serving a five-year sentence in federal prison after he admitted to accepting bribes in exchange for awarding millions in tax dollars meant to feed needy seniors and people with disabilities in his district.

As part of the plea deal, Do acknowledged taking more than $800,000 in bribes through his two daughters, including a down payment on the house his youngest daughter Rhiannon Do later forfeited to resolve the criminal case. The scheme was first uncovered by LAist.

Federal officials recovered money from seized bank accounts and two properties connected to Do’s scheme — including the Tustin house his daughter bought.

The county Board of Supervisors is expected to publicly discuss plans for the recovered funds as they make decisions on the overall county budget at their meeting Tuesday. Public comment will also be taken.

What to do with the money?

Ahead of Tuesday’s discussion, Do’s successor said the funds should support residents of his former district who were deprived by Do and his alleged co-conspirators.

“For the past five years, every other district in Orange County has benefitted from the same community funds to support their cities, nonprofits, civic projects which strengthens their communities,” Supervisor Janet Nguyen wrote in a mass email to constituents last week. “However, our district went without because Do stole what belonged to our residents.”

“This money was stolen from the First District, and it must come back to the First District,” Nguyen added.

Nguyen was Do’s mentor and former boss more than a decade ago, before the two had a bitter falling out by 2016.

She encouraged residents of her district to send letters to the board and to speak during public comments.

Several county supervisors told LAist they supported a similar approach, one in which the recovered money goes to support the original intended recipients: seniors and people with disabilities in Do’s former district. Some supervisors have since advocated a broader view of how they’d want to use the money, noting that it was meant to address disruptions caused by the pandemic. Now that years have passed since the initial COVID-19 outbreak and lockdowns, some supervisors argue community needs have changed.

“We are so many years on, and the problems that money originally was to address (mostly Covid impacts) are now behind us, that I think we should have a discussion about how and where to spend it,” Supervisor Don Wagner told LAist via text message in March. “The budget is so tight and the needs so great across the county.”

Supervisor Vicente Sarmiento said he’d work toward a fair distribution of the funds to best serve residents, with a focus on current needs.

“We will definitely consider what areas of the County were harmed by Do’s scheme, but we must also remember that the funds were intended for relief efforts during the COVID-19 pandemic, a threat we are no longer facing,” he said in March. “We also need to consider addressing the current needs of residents with any dollars returned to the county.”

Millions more haven’t been recovered, at least yet

The amount of taxpayer money recovered so far is less than half of the $7.9 million Andrew Do admitted was diverted from specific meal contracts.

In a lawsuit seeking to recover funds, the county alleges the total amount lost in the scheme was even larger: $13.25 million. The county’s suit — scheduled for trial in November 2027 — covers all of the money Do gave to two nonprofits accused in the scheme, Viet America Society and Hand to Hand Relief Organization.

That leaves more than $4 million — and possibly much more — not yet recovered.

A spokesperson for the U.S. Attorney’s Office noted they have an ongoing criminal case against Do’s alleged co-conspirator Peter Pham.

“Assuming we obtain a conviction in that matter, we would expect to seek restitution,” the spokesperson, Ciaran McEvoy, said.

Pham left the country on a flight to Taiwan in late 2024 and remains a fugitive, according to McEvoy. The case against him also includes charges against another alleged co-conspirator, Thanh Huong Nguyen, who led the Hand to Hand nonprofit.

Fans of the U.S. Men’s National Soccer Team swelled the stadium at the Great Park in Irvine on Monday to watch players practice for the first time since arriving at the training facility they’ll call home for the first round of the 2026 World Cup.

“Seeing them play right now… it was really cool to see how they play and how they practice,” said Mila Ran, who came with her mother from nearby Mission Viejo.

“This whole time she’s saying, 'I want to go shoot, I want to go play,'” said Mila’s mother, Farah Ran.

They were among about 6,000 people who won free entry to the practice in a lottery that received more than 30,000 entries, according to Irvine officials.

Fans got to the venue early.

(

Adolfo Guzman-Lopez

/

LAist

)

The team’s biggest stars — Christian Pulisic, Antonee Robinson and others — showed off their ball handling skills, honed over years of play on U.S. youth fields and overseas in professional leagues. Fans yelled, waved U.S. flags, held up homemade signs, and did the wave several times.

The U.S. Men's National Team at their only open-to-the-public practice session in Irvine.

(

Adolfo Guzman-Lopez

/

LAist

)

After the roughly 45-minute practice, some players walked to the sidelines to take selfies with fans and sign autographs.

The players know it’s going to take more than this, however, to live up to expectations during the World Cup.

US men's national team player Tim Ream signs an autograph for a fan.

(

Adolfo Guzman-Lopez

/

LAist

)

“To be in a position to train in front of these people today… is such a unique opportunity and one that none of us take for granted,” said backup goalie Matt Freese before the practice. “We’re working as hard as we can, as focused as we can to leave the next generation inspired."

The U.S. men’s team and their training staff will use the Great Park facility over the next several weeks as the team plays Paraguay on Friday, Australia on June 19, and Turkey on June 25 in group play at SoFi Stadium in Inglewood.

Jury selection began Monday for the trial of the man accused of igniting a fire that led to the deadly and destructive Palisades Fire, which killed 12 people and destroyed thousands of structures.

Jonathan Rinderknecht is charged with one count of destruction of property by means of fire, one count of arson affecting property used in interstate commerce and one count of setting timber afire. He could face up to 45 years in federal prison.

How we got here

Prosecutors allege Rinderknecht set brush alight near a popular hiking trail in the Santa Monica Mountains on New Year’s Day, starting the Lachman Fire. Firefighters initially thought they put out the fire, but it remained smouldering underground for several days. High winds then brought the embers to the surface, sparking the Palisades Fire, which burned more than 23,000 acres.

What prosecutors say

In a court filing in April, prosecutors allege Rinderknecht displayed “extreme anger, indignation, and frustration” because he had to spend New Year's Eve alone. After driving around for Uber, Rinderknecht hiked up a popular trail and set chaparral alight in a clearing, according to prosecutors.

“He then started calling 911 multiple times, hiked down the hill, and fled the area in his car before firefighters arrived. Defendant returned to the area after he saw fire trucks arriving and then took videos of the firefighting efforts,” prosecutors wrote.

The filing also states that Rinderknecht threatened to burn down his sister’s home.

Prosecutors are expected to argue that Rinderknecht started the smaller blaze knowing it could turn into a bigger inferno.

U.S. District Court Judge Anne Hwang has previously expressed the government’s position could confuse jurors.

What the defense says

Defense attorney Steve Haney previously told reporters that prosecutors were trying to blame Rinderknecht for a fire that started days before the Palisades Fire.

"Well what about what happened between Jan. 1 and Jan. 7?" he asked. "Jonathan wasn't out there with a fire hose putting that fire out at the Lachman location, the Fire Department was. So why are they blaming him for whatever the Fire Department didn't do?"