The Brief

A highly anticipated — and controversial — new program, championed by Gov. Gavin Newsom, will begin in Los Angeles County on Dec. 1. It’s called CARE Court and will allow family members to ask a judge to step in with a treatment plan for loved ones living with severe and untreated mental illness.

The basics of CARE Court: People living with a serious and untreated mental illness, like schizophrenia, could be referred for a court-ordered, voluntary care plan that could last up to two years. The petition could be filed by people including county behavioral health workers, first responders or family members.

“I would have had my petition by the first day,” Mike Estrada said from his home in Berkeley.

A feeling that the process is ‘a constant slap in the face’ 

For years, Estrada struggled to get help for his mother, Josie Estrada, who lived with schizoaffective disorder. The experience exasperated him so much that in 2020 he produced a one-hour documentary on her story, Benevolent Neglect.

The film is sprinkled with grainy family footage and stills of Josie’s life in California’s Central Valley. Estrada points out that his mother was “adored by the family.”

The documentary also includes videos shot on Estrada’s cellphone during some of Josie’s more difficult moments.

“In 2007, my mom began experiencing hallucinations. During acute episodes, she’d hear people inside the house,” Estrada tells the camera.

Estrada said the voices would tell his mother not to take her psychiatric medications. For more than a year, Josie lived out of her car after her erratic behavior got her evicted from her apartment. Time and time again, Estrada would plead with first responders to hospitalize her.

Often the people who were supposed to help would be hamstrung by a lack of psychiatric beds and what Estrada sees as overly strict criteria for hospitalizing someone against their will.

“As a family it’s just a constant slap in the face. Constant disrespect. In the meantime, our loved one is suffering, deteriorating before our eyes,” Estrada said.

His mother died in 2019, but he’s hopeful CARE Court will give families like his more leverage to get help.

Gov. Gavin Newsom speaking in March 2022 with local mental health service providers and officials about CARE Court.

(

Robert Garrova / LAist

)

Officials report an ‘unprecedented demand’ 

There are concerns, however, about whether the county’s behavioral health care system will have enough staff to meet the need.

In June, L.A. County supervisors voted to expedite hiring for CARE Court.

“In order to meet a variety of our expectations, including CARE Court — we’re focused on setting up the court infrastructure — the point is the judge will have to have a place to send that individual,” Supervisor Holly Mitchell said during the board meeting.

“I think the supervisors were right to be concerned about what kind of infrastructure is in place,” Dr. Lisa Wong, director of the L.A. County Department of Mental Health, told LAist.

“We’ve been having this unprecedented demand for mental health services in our system, so we know that the system is stretched. And we know that with CARE Court, we’re going to be working with some really high acuity individuals,” Wong added.

Wong said hiring has improved this year, but it’s still a major stress point as the county works to bring thousands more behavioral health beds online. And, Wong points out, the initial petition is just the beginning.

“What happens when that person has to go into treatment and how do we keep them engaged?” she said.

Defense attorneys' role

Some of that help will come from the new Independent Defense Counsel Office, which is separate from but administered by the Public Defender’s Office.

A new panel of about 50 specially selected attorneys will work with an estimated 1,900 respondents within the first six months of CARE Court.

“It will not only be there to represent the client’s legal interests and protect their civil liberties, but also to serve as a facilitator and an encourager and a supporter throughout the treatment program,” said Marco Saenz, Independent Defense Counsel program director.

He said those lawyers might encourage respondents to follow through with treatment, but they’ll also work to hold the behavioral health system accountable in providing services.

But the success of CARE Court will ultimately hinge on the participant

“Under the statute, the respondent can walk away at any time,” Saenz told LAist. “It’s completely voluntary. How that will work, we will see.”

Coercion or voluntary? 

CARE Court may be voluntary, but civil liberties groups continue to warn about stripping of individual rights.

If the care plan fails, the person could be hospitalized or referred to a conservatorship. That could mean forced treatment down the line.

Some 40 groups including JusticeLA, Disability Rights California and ACLU California Action signed a letter in 2022 opposing CARE Court. It reads, in part, that the plan is: “a system of coerced, court-ordered treatment that strips people with mental health disabilities of their right to make their own decisions about their lives.”

Mike Estrada would have been OK with conservatorship for his mother.

“I wanted her to have some chance of building her life back. And there was no way it was going to happen without her being stabilized,” Estrada said.

Mike and Josie Estrada.

(

Courtest Mike Estrada

)

There are also continued concerns about whether the public guardians’ offices throughout the state will be able to handle the potential increased conservatorship caseload. Public guardians' offices are responsible for guiding care for people who are deemed unable to do so themselves because of a serious mental illness.

“Everybody keeps saying, ‘We need facilities, we need facilities, there’s no room at the inn.’ And that’s true. If you talk to my members throughout the state, they are struggling to find placements,” said Tom Scott, executive director of the California State Association of Public Administrators, Public Guardians, Public Conservators.

What's next

As CARE Court continues to roll out across the state, Estrada wants families like his to be allowed input in the process. And he wants to see counties held accountable for making it work.

Some counties, including San Diego, San Francisco and Orange County have a head start on L.A., because their CARE Court efforts launched in October.

According to California Health and Human Services, as of early November, there were a total of 80 CARE Court petitions statewide.

Saenz said the case volume in some places outside of L.A. County has been lower than what was anticipated.

But as a nearly 30-year veteran public defender who has represented “innumerous” clients living with mental illness, Saenz said he’s holding out hope that CARE Court will be able to help a population that is not generally reached.

“It’s another tool in our toolbox, and to the extent that we’re participants in it ... we’re going to be there to be supportive in any way we can,” Saenz said.

“But time will tell.”

The Los Angeles World Cup host committee has quietly posted its guidance on human rights after months of speculation over where the plan was and when it would be published.

Advocates had pushed the committee, an arm of the Los Angeles Sports & Entertainment Commission, to produce its plan. But now that it's out, they're not satisfied with what they're seeing.

The human rights guidance is required by FIFA and outlined on the host committee's website. It includes a list of online resources including where to file complaints with various local and state level agencies and a summary of local, state and federal laws protecting human and civil rights. The committee is also touting a partnership with L.A. County in which people can call 211 to report a concern during the tournament.

"Los Angeles is weeks away from hosting one of the largest sporting events in the world, and yet what has been posted is not a plan,” Stephanie Richard, director of the Sunita Jain Anti‑Trafficking Initiative at Loyola Law School, said in a statement. “It is a list of laws and hotline numbers."

The human rights document also skirts fears around ICE and its potential presence at the tournament and surrounding celebrations. Todd Lyons, the agency's head, said earlier this year that ICE's investigatory branch will play a key role in security for the tournament.

But ICE and immigration enforcement aren't mentioned on the host committee's web page on human rights or in its outline of its approach to human rights. "Immigration status" only gets a mention in the list of existing anti-discrimination laws.

"It certainly could have been much stronger," Angelica Salas, executive director of the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights in Los Angeles, said of the plan. She added that her organization participated in a roundtable on the plan, and she was disappointed ICE and recent immigration sweeps weren't mentioned in the resulting document.

"In order for all of this to happen, immigrant workers are part of it," she said of the World Cup. "Your hotel workers, your service workers, stadium workers, drivers." 

LAist reached out to spokespeople for the host committee for comment via email, phone and text, but did not hear back in time for publication. FIFA's press team also did not respond to an email from LAist.

According to the host committee's website, the human rights plan is the result of coordination with the city and county of Los Angeles, the city of Inglewood, and 14 roundtable discussions held in the fall of 2025.

"As a non-profit organization, the Host Committee’s role is primarily and necessarily focused on aligning and collaborating with governmental and non-governmental organizations," the document sums up the committee's approach.

The plan also promises more actions, including "Know Your Rights" training for L.A. residents and visitors and "Know Your Responsibilities" training for businesses and vendors. The committee also says it will develop a "rapid response" strategy to respond to potential problems at the tournament.

Available details on those plans were scant. And with the tournament just 30 days away, labor unions and community groups are continuing to voice concerns about potential ICE presence at SoFi Stadium and other potential consequences of the tournament coming to town.

The mayor of Arcadia has agreed to plead guilty to a charge she acted as an agent for China, federal prosecutors announced Monday. She has resigned from her position with the city.

Eileen Wang, 58, faces one count of acting as an illegal agent of a foreign government, according to the U.S. Attorney’s Office. The charge carries a potential sentence of up to 10 years in federal prison.

What we know about the criminal case

According to the U.S. Attorney’s Office, Wang and Yaoning “Mike” Sun of Chino Hills worked at the direction of the Chinese government and with individuals based in the U.S. to promote pro-People’s Republic of China propaganda in the United States. Those actions occurred between 2020 and 2022, prosecutors said.

According to federal prosecutors, Wang and Sun operated a website — known as U.S. News Center — billed as a news source for the local Chinese American community in Los Angeles County. They posted content on the site, described as "pre-written articles," based on directives from Chinese government officials.

Sun, 65, pleaded guilty in October 2025 in federal court to acting as an illegal agent of a foreign government. He is serving a four-year federal prison sentence.

Prosecutors also said Wang communicated with John Chen, whom they described as “a high-level member of the [Chinese government] intelligence apparatus,” in November 2021, and asked him to post an article from her website.

In a group chat, Wang referenced the article and wrote: “This is what the Ministry of Foreign Affairs wants to send,” according to the U.S. Attorney’s Office.

Chen pleaded guilty in New York to acting as an illegal agent of the People’s Republic of China and conspiracy to bribe a public official. In 2024, he was sentenced to 20 months in federal prison.

What's next

Wang, who was elected to the City Council in November 2022, was expected to make her first appearance in U.S. District Court Monday afternoon.

Citing a plea agreement, prosecutors said she's expected to enter the guilty plea within the next few weeks.

Arcadia's mayor is selected from the elected council members. A post on the city's website announced that Wang had resigned her position as of Monday and that a new mayor would be picked from the remaining council members at the next meeting.

The Supreme Court on Monday gave itself more time to consider a national ban on telemedicine access to the abortion pill mifepristone.

Justice Samuel Alito extended an earlier order he issued by three more days, so rules for prescribing mifepristone online or through the mail remain in effect through Thursday at a minimum.

The case at issue

The tumult over the future of telemedicine access to mifipristone started on May 1 with a ruling from the U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals. That ruling re-instituted prescribing rules from before the pandemic that required patients to receive mifepristone in person in a doctor's office or clinic.

The Food and Drug Administration determined that the rule was medically unnecessary in 2021. The state of Louisiana sued last fall, arguing that telemedicine access undermines the state's abortion ban.

What is telemedicine abortion?

The telemedicine abortion process starts with a patient connecting with a healthcare provider on the phone or online. If the patient is eligible, that provider can prescribe two medications — mifepristone and another pill called misoprostol. Patients can pick up the medicine at a local pharmacy, or providers can mail the drugs to a patient's home.

That access is a big part of the reason why the number of abortions nationally has actually increased since the Supreme Court overturned the constitutional right to abortion in 2022. Now, most abortions in the U.S. use this combination of medications, and one quarter happen via telemedicine.

After the 5th Circuit ruling, some providers said they would continue offering telemedicine access to abortion medication using a different protocol that involves higher doses of misoprostol and no mifepristone.

Researchers say that method is just as safe and effective, but tends to cause more pain for patients and more side effects, like nausea and diarrhea. Misoprostol has other medical uses, such as treating gastric ulcers and hemorrhage, and has been on the market longer than mifepristone. It is likely to remain fully accessible, even if mifepristone is restricted.

Since the FDA's prescribing rules for medications apply to the whole country, a change to the rules about how mifepristone can be accessed has national impact. That means it affects states with constitutionally-protected access to abortion, states with criminal bans, like Louisiana, and all states in between.

States' rights

Nearly two dozen Democratic-led states submitted an amicus brief in this case, writing that the appeals court decision put the policy choices of states with bans above the choices of states "that have made the different but equally sovereign determinations to promote access to abortion care."

There are also stakes related to the power of FDA and other expert agencies to set rules. While the Trump administration's FDA did not respond to the Supreme Court's request for briefs, a group of former leaders of the agency, who served under mainly Democratic and some Republican presidents, wrote about this in an amicus brief.

They defended the FDA's process in approving the medication and modifying the rules for prescribing it, and say the appeals court decision "would upend FDA's gold-standard, science-based drug approval system."

Copyright 2026 NPR