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

The Brief

The most important stories for you to know today
  • House votes to claw back $1.1 billion
    Legislation in Congress would claw back two years of funding for the public media system, along with money for foreign aid programs.
    Legislation in Congress would claw back two years of funding for the public media system, along with money for foreign aid programs.

    Topline:

    The House of Representatives narrowly approved legislation today to claw back two years of federal funding for public media outlets. President Trump, who has attacked the mainstream media more broadly, has accused NPR and PBS of bias against conservative viewpoints.

    About the vote: The measure passed largely along party lines, 214 to 212.

    What's next: The measure, which also rescinded money for foreign aid programs, now goes to the Senate.

    Editor's note

    • LAist is an independent, nonprofit newsroom that is also home to L.A.’s largest NPR station, which broadcasts at LAist 89.3 FM. As an NPR member station, LAist pays NPR for on-air programming and the ability to publish NPR articles such as this one.
    • Annually, about 4% of LAist's budget has come from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. That accounts for $1.7 million in annual funding — money that pays the costs for about a dozen journalists and other expenses. LAist's coverage on the radio, on-demand and here on LAist.com is free to access for all.

    Read on ... for a history of public broadcasting and the controversy that has surrounded it.

    The House of Representatives narrowly approved legislation Thursday to claw back two years of federal funding for public media outlets. President Donald Trump, who has attacked the mainstream media more broadly, has accused NPR and PBS of bias against conservative viewpoints.

    The measure passed largely along party lines, 214 to 212.

    Editor's note

    • LAist is an independent, nonprofit newsroom that is also home to L.A.’s largest NPR station, which broadcasts at LAist 89.3 FM. As an NPR member station, LAist pays NPR for on-air programming and the ability to publish NPR articles such as this one.
    • Annually, about 4% of LAist's budget has come from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. That accounts for $1.7 million in annual funding — money that pays the costs for about a dozen journalists and other expenses. LAist's coverage on the radio, on-demand and here on LAist.com is free to access for all.

    The legislation is the first request by the Trump administration for Congress to take back money it already has approved through annual spending bills. The bill reflects a list of cuts totaling $9.4 billion that were requested by the Office of Management and Budget. The bulk of the cuts — $8.3 billion — are to foreign aid programs addressing global public health, international disaster assistance and hunger relief.

    The remainder would slash $1.1 billion for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, which allocates nearly all of the funds to local stations, for the next two fiscal years. By law, that money is supposed to be approved in advance as part of an effort to insulate public broadcasting from political influence over fleeting issues.

    House Majority Leader Steve Scalise formally introduced the legislation last week, saying it "codifies President Trump's cuts to wasteful foreign aid initiatives within the State Department and USAID, as well as woke public broadcasting, including NPR and PBS, at the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, which is a business the federal government shouldn't even be in."

    Heated partisan debate before the vote

    Republicans attacked the programs they targeted for cuts in speeches Thursday before the vote. "Don't spend money on stupid things and don't subsidize biased media," Ohio GOP Rep. Jim Jordan said.

    Democrats defended public broadcasting as providing essential services. They cited the need for local information during natural disasters and balanced news coverage.

    "NPR and PBS are targeted here today precisely because they are so good at delivering the truth," Texas Democratic Rep. Lloyd Doggett said. He pointed to Trump's social media attacks on the outlets, saying, "Trump doesn't want a country of engaged, informed Americans. He prefers those who salute on command."

    House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, who has accused Republicans of rubber stamping Trump's agenda despite their own misgivings, held up a doll of Elmo, the Sesame Street character, on the House floor.

    "The letter of the day is 'C'. How appropriate because this bill is cruel, and it cuts children's programs all across the country," he said.

    While a handful of Congressional Republicans have expressed support for their local public radio and television stations, there is intense pressure on them to side with the president. Heritage Action, a grassroots conservative group, designated the vote on the rescissions bill as the first "key vote" included on their scorecard tracking lawmakers' voting records this session of Congress.

    Some of Trump's supporters have been frustrated that Congress has not moved sooner to officially back the cuts recommended or put into motion already by the Department of Government Efficiency or DOGE, launched by Elon Musk. Musk initially vowed to cut $2 trillion from the federal budget, then scaled back to $1 trillion. The actual amount so far has been a small fraction of the trillion promised. But Musk's imprint slimming down or gutting some federal agencies has already reverberated in fallout in the U.S. and around the world.

    Musk's recent departure from the administration and high profile public feud with the president haven't affected the plans of top GOP leaders on Capitol Hill to schedule votes to formally wipe out spending for the targeted agencies and programs. House Speaker Mike Johnson said Tuesday he expected additional votes on rescissions requests based on DOGE's efforts.

    After the heads of both NPR and PBS testified before a House oversight panel in March, the speaker argued in a statement on social media that NPR and PBS "have consistently and knowingly betrayed the public trust. Instead of fair and balanced reporting, they routinely ignore facts to advance a far left agenda." He added, "The American people support the free press, but will not be forced to fund a biased political outlet with taxpayer funds." This is in alignment with criticism from the Trump administration.

    Conservative views on public media have changed


    Two former Republican lawmakers say that the GOP sentiment toward public broadcasting has shifted over time — from frequently backing public broadcasting to being skeptical of it, to viewing it as a hostile force.

    "I always supported PBS on the rationale that just because Barnes and Nobles sold books didn't mean public libraries were no longer needed," former Oregon Sen. Gordon Smith, who served from 1997 to 2009, tells NPR. "But even in those days, I would admonish my friends in PBS to strive for better political balance. This, they haven't done."

    Smith says he gave the same advice after later becoming chief of the National Association of Broadcasters, a trade group to which PBS and NPR do not belong. "Given the size of the public debt and PBS's ability to find other financing and sell advertising, well, they've left themselves vulnerable," Smith says.

    Former U.S. Rep. Charles Bass came to office with former U.S. House Speaker Newt Gingrich's big Republican wave. Bass went on to represent New Hampshire's 2nd Congressional District for 14 years.

    "The debate over whether to fund public television or public radio networks is more divisive than it was," Bass says. "By that process, it is likely to be more imperiled."

    "To some extent it's influenced by the perception that it's more liberal than it actually is," Bass says. "There is a bent to it, but it's not as significant as the commercial networks — Fox and MSNBC on either end and CNN in the middle. They really are."

    Bass says public broadcasting stands apart for avoiding commercial priorities. But, he says, technological changes in how people consume media have raised valid questions about the need for federal subsidies.

    He says that the shift in formats from music to all news and public affairs talk by many NPR member stations increased content that has proved controversial and attracted scrutiny by critics, especially on the right. 

    Yet he also says the lines have hardened within Republican ranks toward public broadcasting as cultural warfare has become increasingly important to the party faithful: first with Gingrich, then with the Tea Party, and now MAGA Republicans with Trump at the lead, each of which have sought to present public media as unworthy of taxpayer dollars.

    "I would be pondering this seriously. I wouldn't be a lock-step supporter or opponent of public radio or television funding," Bass says. "That's true even though I probably listen to [New Hampshire Public Radio] as a news source more than any other source of news."

    History of public media funding


    Congress created CPB, a private nonprofit entity, in 1967. President Lyndon B. Johnson signed the law making CPB the entity to oversee federal grants to more than 300 public television stations and more than 1,000 public radio stations.

    In the early years, there were questions about the federal role for CPB. In 1969, Fred Rogers, the host of the popular children's show "Mister Rogers' Neighborhood," testified about the benefit of continued federal funding. His defense of CPB was credited with changing the mind of a key senator, John Pastore, D-R.I., who had pressed Rogers on the value of public television.

    Rogers described themes in his half-hour program addressing children's feelings and offering ways to handle them. He told the congressional panel, "I feel that if we in public television can only make it clear that feelings are mentionable and manageable we will have done a great service for mental health."

    Lawmakers from both parties frequently appear on their local public stations for interviews. They participate in debates hosted by local stations during House and Senate campaigns.

    But for decades, Republicans in Congress have vowed to defund public media outlets. In 1994, then-House Speaker Newt Gingrich argued for zeroing out CPB's budget. That didn't advance, but in more recent years Republicans have included provisions in annual spending bills to strip all federal money for NPR and PBS. But these have failed to be included in final versions of government funding bills enacted by presidents of both parties.

    In 2011, the GOP-controlled House approved a bill to bar NPR from receiving any additional federal funding, but that measure failed to advance in the Senate. Seven House Republicans voted against that bill, including then-Wisconsin Rep. Sean Duffy, who now serves as Trump's transportation secretary.

    More recently during years of divided government, GOP leaders had to rely on Democrats to approve must-pass funding bills to avoid shutdowns. The debate over the issue of federal funding for public media became more of a backburner issue. CPB received $535 million for 2025. The spending bill approved with bipartisan votes in the House and Senate and signed by Trump in March approved the same level for the next two years.

    Just two months later, Trump issued an executive order to block funding for NPR and PBS. And this first effort by the Office of Management and Budget to ask Congress to rescind federal money lumped in public media with foreign aid — two areas the GOP base frequently holds up as priorities Washington needs to scale back or eliminate altogether.

    Concern for rural areas


    In advance of the vote, the two House co-chairs of the Public Broadcasting Caucus, Rep. Mark Amodei, R-Nev, and Rep. Dan Goldman, D-N.Y., released a statement urging the Trump administration to "reconsider" clawing back money for CPB.

    They touted public media's role in communicating during emergencies and its news coverage, and pointed out that rural areas are "particularly vulnerable" if funding is cut.

    "Public broadcasting represents less than 0.01% of the federal budget, yet its impact reaches every congressional district," the two noted. "Cutting this funding will not meaningfully reduce the deficit, but it will dismantle a trusted source of information for millions of Americans."

    Goldman told NPR that Trump's role in pushing this issue is "100%" making this a tough vote for GOP lawmakers to break with the president. "I think if they looked at the merits of it they would recognize it's essential funding — and public media, independent journalism plays an essential role." He added that Trump's issue is "effectively that independent media that exposes facts that may look unfavorable to him is therefore somehow biased, but the First Amendment protects freedom of the press specifically because the press is an essential form of accountability in our democracy."

    Some Republicans have defended their own local public television and radio stations and expressed a willingness to work with Democrats to avoid cuts that would force them to scale back coverage or staffing.

    Alabama Rep. Robert Aderholt, a Republican, pressed by Colorado Rep. Joe Neguse, a Democrat, in a hearing on the bill on Tuesday, said Alabama Public Television "has not been subject to these woke policies that some of these other states have," and suggested he could join a bipartisan effort to continue grants to local stations.

    But Aderholt noted "NPR is in a different category" and said most GOP lawmakers have had concerns about the outlet for some time.

    Public television and radio stations have mounted a grassroots lobbying effort to urge lawmakers to oppose the package. The Protect My Public Media campaign says more than 2 million messages have been sent to House and Senate offices. "This support is driven by the deep connections Americans have to their local public media stations and the essential services stations provide to their communities."

    The rescissions package now moves to the Senate. Under the rules, it needs a simple majority to pass and must be approved within 45 days of the president sending the request to Capitol Hill. That means if the Senate fails to pass the bill by mid-July, the administration would be required to release the $9.4 billion in funding for the foreign aid programs and CPB. Senate Majority Leader John Thune has indicated the Senate would take up the rescissions request soon.

    Disclosure: This story was reported and written by NPR Congressional Correspondent Deirdre Walsh and Media Correspondent David Folkenflik. It was edited by Deputy Business Editor Emily Kopp, Managing Editor Vickie Walton-James and Managing Editor Gerry Holmes. Under NPR's protocol for reporting on itself, no corporate official or news executive reviewed this story before it was posted publicly.

    Copyright 2025 NPR

  • Lineage sues solar power provider for $1B
    Aerial view of a sprawling commercial building with solar arrays installed on it's roof.
    The Lineage warehouse in Boyle Heights on August 31, 2026.

    Topline:

    Lineage Logistics sued a solar power provider and its contractor Thursday, blaming them for the fire that destroyed its cold storage facility and plagued Boyle Heights and surrounding communities with polluted, foul-smelling air for months.

    The lawsuit: The company accuses Altus Power, Inc., Los Palos Street Operating, LLC, and Pearce Services of failing to address faults in the massive solar array installed on the 500,000-square-foot facility’s roof. Lineage is seeking more than $1 billion in damages, alleging negligence and breach of contract caused the fire, forced the warehouse to shut down and led to a cleanup effort that has cost more than $100 million. 
    Los Palos, an Altus subsidiary, disputed Lineage’s claims and said that since the cold storage company was the tenant of the building they were responsible for cleanup and debris removal.

    The investigation: The fire remains under investigation by the Los Angeles Fire Department, and its cause has not yet been determined.  But because both the June and 2024 fires appear to have started around the facility’s roof, the solar array has been long suspected of playing a role in the blaze.

    Lineage Logistics sued a solar power provider and its contractor Thursday, blaming them for the fire that destroyed its cold storage facility and plagued Boyle Heights and surrounding communities with polluted, foul-smelling air for months.

    The company accuses Altus Power, Inc., Los Palos Street Operating, LLC, and Pearce Services of failing to address faults in the massive solar array installed on the 500,000-square-foot facility’s roof. Faulty electrical in that array led to a fire in 2024, and the same problems sparked the fire on June 17, Lineage claims in the suit.

    “This lawsuit is about Altus and Pearce starting this fire and then being nowhere to be found when the community needed help,” said Greg Lehmkuhl, president & CEO of Lineage, in a prepared statement.

    The fire remains under investigation by the Los Angeles Fire Department, and its cause has not yet been determined. 

    But because both the June and 2024 fires appear to have started around the facility’s roof, the solar array has been long suspected of playing a role in the blaze.

    Lineage is seeking more than $1 billion in damages, alleging negligence and breach of contract caused the fire, forced the warehouse to shut down and led to a cleanup effort that has cost more than $100 million. 

    Los Palos, an Altus subsidiary, disputed Lineage’s claims and said that since the cold storage company was the tenant of the building, they were responsible for cleanup and debris removal.

    “Lineage’s statement is riddled with misinformation in a blatant attempt to deflect blame for their role in this matter, including any damage caused by the release of substances from the warehouse, not the solar panel,” a Los Palos spokesperson said by email.

    A spokesperson for Pearce also disputed Lineage’s claims and said the company would be fighting the suit in court, adding they have been cooperating with the fire department’s investigation.

    “Investigation into the fire’s cause, origin, and reasons for its spread remains ongoing, and it is premature for anyone to draw conclusions,” a spokesperson for the company said by email.

    The company alleges in the suit that the solar provider used substandard equipment to connect electrical lines and that equipment started the Aug. 14, 2024 fire. The company told Altus, Los Palos, and Pearce, a subsidiary of real estate giant CBRE, to fix the faulty equipment before turning the solar array back on.

    Altus and Pearce knew that about 200 faulty electrical connections had been identified by May 2026, including about 10 near the area where the June fire eventually broke out, the suit claims. Lineage says it told the contractors to delay turning the system back on until they provided proof the faults were fixed, but the contractors did so anyway.

    “Altus and Pearce deliberately ignored Lineage’s request, prematurely re-energized the solar array, and negligently and recklessly caused this devastating fire,” the suit reads.

    Mayor Karen Bass and other elected officials have said publicly that Lineage should not rebuild its facility and continue operating in Boyle Heights. The company missed a 45-day deadline to clean up the facility imposed by Bass in August. 

    Lineage has since announced it had completed cleanup of the remnants of the facility on Sept. 5. The suit also suggests the company could be planning to stay in Boyle Heights, rather than simply seeking reimbursement for the fire. 

    The city’s Department of Building and Safety has put its plans to rebuild on hold, and South Coast Air Quality Management District has also issued multiple notices of violation over pollution from food that rotted inside the facility for months.

    “This was a solar fire, not a warehouse fire,” reads a press release announcing the suit had been filed in Los Angeles County Superior Court Thursday. “Cold storage is not a risk to communities — it is an essential service that lowers food costs, expands food access and creates jobs,” it added.

    The post Lineage sues solar company and contractor, blames it for warehouse fire in Boyle Heights appeared first on LA Local.

  • Sponsored message
  • A list of remembrance events in LA and OC
    Flowers are left at the September 11 Memorial and Museum in 2024, which is located on the land where the Twin Towers once stood before they were destroyed in the attacks on September 11, 2001, in New York City.
    Flowers are left at the Sept. 11 Memorial and Museum in 2024, which is located on the land where the Twin Towers once stood before they were destroyed.

    Topline:

    Here's a list of events in L.A. and O.C. counties on Friday and Saturday remembering 9/11.

    Read on... to see when and where events are scheduled near you.

    Alhambra

    9/11 Remembrance Ceremony
    Fire Station 71, 301 N. First St., Alhambra
    Sept. 11, 9 a.m.

    Carson

    25th Anniversary 9/11 Tribute
    Carson City Hall, 701 Carson St., Carson
    Sept. 11, 4 – 6 p.m.

    Chavez Ravine

    LAFD 9/11 Remembrance Ceremony
    Frank Hotchkin Memorial Training Center, 1700 Stadium Way, Los Angeles
    Sept. 11, 9 – 10 a.m.

    Gardena

    25th Anniversary 9/11 Commemoration Ceremony
    City Hall Complex, 1700 W. 162nd St., Gardena
    Sept. 11, 9 a.m.

    Hermosa Beach

    9/11 Remembrance Wreath Laying Ceremony
    Greenbelt at Pier Ave., Hermosa Beach
    Sept. 11, 7:30 a.m.

    Irvine

    911 Ceremony
    OCFA Headquarters, 1 Fire Authority, Irvine
    Sept. 11, 8 a.m.

    Malibu

    9/11 25th Anniversary Remembrance Ceremony at Pepperdine University
    Alumni Park, 24255 Pacific Coast Highway, Malibu
    Sept. 11, 9 a.m.

    Orange

    9/11 Memorial
    Orange City Hall, 300 E. Chapman Ave., Orange
    Sept. 11, 6:30 p.m.

    San Gabriel

    9/11 Remembrance Ceremony
    Fire Station 51, 1303 S. Del Mar Ave., San Gabriel
    Sept. 11, 6:40 a.m.

    Santa Ana

    2,100 Steps Memorial Walk
    Fairhaven Memorial Park, 1702 Fairhaven Ave., Santa Ana
    Sept. 12, 9 – 10 a.m.

    Santa Monica

    9/11 Remembrance Ceremony
    Fire Station 1, 1337 7th St., Santa Monica
    Sept. 11, 7:30 – 8:30 a.m.

    South Pasadena

    September 11 Remembrance Ceremony
    City Hall Courtyard, 1414 Mission St., South Pasadena
    Sept. 11., 6:45 a.m.

    Torrance

    25th Anniversary September 11 Memorial Ceremony
    Torrance City Hall, 3031 Torrance Blvd., Torrance
    Sept. 11, 8 a.m.

    West Hollywood

    September 11 Patriot Day display
    Sal Guarriello Veterans' Memorial, Santa Monica Boulevard and Holloway Drive
    Sept 11., 10 a.m.

    Yorba Linda

    Remembering 9/11 — 25 Years After the Tragedy at the Nixon Library
    Nixon Library, 18001 Yorba Linda Blvd., Yorba Linda
    Sept 11., 11 a.m. – noon

  • Lawsuit alleges intimidation by federal agencies
    Two women standing in the middle of a street hold up phones, videotaping. A man stands in front of them wearing a grey face covering, grey long sleeve shirt and a green vest with the word "police" printed on the back. He is holding a spray cannister.

    Topline:

    A new federal lawsuit filed Thursday accuses the Department of Homeland Security, the Department of Justice, the FBI and other federal agencies of violating the First Amendment and privacy rights of observers.

    About the lawsuit: The lawsuit describes disturbing encounters seven Common Cause members had with federal officers in Maryland, Minnesota and New Jersey after trying to observe immigration enforcement. They include being photographed, followed, reported to police, pepper-sprayed or threatened with a visit to their home by federal officers. Federal officers did show up at one Common Cause member's Minnesota home.

    Other lawsuits pending: The new lawsuit follows a handful of other cases brought by observers arguing First Amendment violations, but it is the most sweeping to date, as it includes incidents from multiple states and seeks national relief. It is asking a judge in Washington, D.C., to bar federal agencies from intimidating or retaliating against observers.

    For months, Minneapolis resident Michael Khalili drove around the Twin Cities area observing and documenting the activities of federal immigration officers after they swarmed his city last winter as part of an unprecedented surge.

    He points out that when federal immigration officers fatally shot fellow Minneapolis observer Alex Pretti in January, it was bystander videos that debunked inaccurate information Trump administration officials were spreading about Pretti, such as that he had committed an act of domestic terrorism and was a "would-be assassin."

    "That's the only reason why the government's lies fell apart," Khalili said. "And that's why it's critical that people are out there."

    But the 47-year-old father of two stopped observing ICE in recent months due to mounting risk and pressure from his family. Khalili said he follows the law when he drives behind ICE vehicles and is exercising his constitutional rights. But he said he's had repeated tense exchanges with federal officers who have taken photos of him and his vehicle, and told him to stop.

    A day after one such exchange in March, Khalili's Global Entry status was revoked (until a HuffPost journalist inquired about it, and it was reinstated). On another occasion in May, he said a state trooper threatened him with a harassment charge for following ICE. Then in June, after 15 Minnesota activists were criminally indicted for conspiracy to impede or injure an officer, Khalili realized one of the counts against a defendant in that case was for following ICE vehicles across state lines in May on the same day Khalili had been warned he could be charged for following ICE. Khalili's wife became worried.

    "She was concerned that federal agents could show up at our home and could arrest me in front of our children," Khalili said. "And so I agreed to stop doing this."

    But Khalili hasn't given up his quest to hold the federal government accountable. He is now a named plaintiff in a new federal lawsuit filed Thursday, along with the nonprofit Common Cause, that accuses the Department of Homeland Security, the Department of Justice, the FBI and other federal agencies of violating the First Amendment and privacy rights of observers.

    The new lawsuit follows a handful of other cases brought by observers arguing First Amendment violations, but it is the most sweeping to date, as it includes incidents from multiple states and seeks national relief. It is asking a judge in Washington, D.C. to bar federal agencies from intimidating or retaliating against observers.

    "The right of citizens to criticize and hold our government accountable is the backbone of American democracy – and it is under attack," Common Cause's vice president for litigation, Maryam Jazini Dorcheh, told NPR. "We want to make sure we're promoting participation in the political process. And obviously, if government officials are criminalizing peaceful observation, that hinders our mission," Jazini Dorcheh said.

    NPR has documented numerous instances of other people legally observing ICE describing intimidation and threats from the federal government. In Minnesota, it was a common occurrence for federal agents to tell observers they were breaking the law. NPR has previously covered how multiple activists in Maine were told by federal officers they could end up in a domestic terrorist database or on a watch list, and how a California man who runs an Instagram account tracking ICE activity was faced with an administrative subpoena seeking his identity.

    NPR did not receive an immediate response from DHS or DOJ about the lawsuit's allegations. The FBI declined to comment.

    The lawsuit describes disturbing encounters seven Common Cause members had with federal officers in Maryland, Minnesota and New Jersey after trying to observe immigration enforcement. They include being photographed, followed, reported to police, pepper-sprayed or threatened with a visit to their home by federal officers. Federal officers did show up at one Common Cause member's Minnesota home.

    Three people are standing on a sidewalk. On both sides of the sidewalk are mounds of snow. Each of them are holding up cell phones, pointed in the same direction, across the street.
    Observers film as ICE agents leave a residence on Jan. 28, 2026 in Minneapolis. NPR has documented numerous instances of other people legally observing ICE, describing intimidation and threats from the federal government.
    (
    Stephen Maturen
    /
    Getty Images
    )

    In another instance, the suit alleges that ICE officers told local police to ban an unnamed Common Cause member from a public parking lot outside of an ICE facility in Maryland, where the member was observing, and told the member they knew who they were because they had put their face through a facial recognition database.

    The 94-page complaint also draws from declarations filed in previous cases on behalf of observers in additional states, including Illinois, Maine and Tennessee.

    The events described in the complaint are "not one-off activities. This is not about, like, 'Oh, some folks got out of hand in one place,'" said Danielle Lang, the vice president of voting rights and rule of law at the nonprofit Campaign Legal Center, which is litigating the case. "This is a top-down policy of retaliation and it needs to be addressed as such."

    The lawsuit lists multiple directives from the Trump administration, including President Trump's National Security Presidential Memorandum 7 (NSPM-7) and the DOJ's memo to operationalize it, which link impeding immigration enforcement and extreme views on migration to domestic terrorism. The NSPM-7 memo was the basis for the federal government to investigate and spy on activists in Minnesota, which ultimately led to the charges against 15 people for conspiracy to impede ICE.

    Additionally, the suit lists public statements and internal memos that equate observers who record federal officers with "violent rioters" and "domestic terrorists," to argue there is a national policy in place to retaliate against observers. Furthermore, the Trump administration repealed guardrails that could have prevented federal officers from using facial recognition and license plate readers against peaceful observers, and DHS dismantled its Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties, the suit argues.

    The suit alleges that the federal government's retaliation against observers includes threatening force or arrest, collecting observers' personal information to intimidate them, using force, pursuing criminal charges, and imposing civil penalties such as administrative subpoenas or revoking observers' Global Entry or TSA PreCheck status.

    Michael Khalili was eager to join the Common Cause lawsuit to help fellow observers, since in his case there is documentation of some of his encounters.

    "If the paper trail for the petty things that they did to me can keep somebody else from being pepper-sprayed or murdered, like, why would I not do that? How could I not do that?" he told NPR.

    Last month he requested access to his state motor vehicle records on the number of times law enforcement officials have queried his license plate, driver's license or name and date of birth. Before he started observing, there were only two such queries. But since March 2026, law enforcement queried him 55 times, a detail that is included in the lawsuit.

    In addition, he has a March email from Customs and Border Protection notifying him that his Global Entry membership was revoked. Though the email only stated that the reason given for the change was "Your Global Entry has been revoked," it came one day after ICE officers stopped him, took photos of him and his license plate and told him to stop following them. Other observers in other states have also had their Global Entry status taken away, and some, like Khalili, had theirs reinstated after a reporter inquired.

    Khalili still suspects he is on a federal list of some kind, or that there is a flag on him. He recently went on vacation to Ireland with his family and when returning to the U.S, he was referred for additional questioning by U.S. immigration officials.

    He hopes this lawsuit can help bring about corrective changes and guardrails after what he calls a "nightmare" that the country and Minneapolis have been through.

    "And so that not only will I be able to go out and observe if I so choose, but that there's no reason why I have to go out and observe," Khalili said.

    Copyright 2026 NPR

  • Monthly "drop" highlights Spain's national dish
    An overhead shot of a large black paella pan filled with saffron-orange rice studded with chicken, charred green vegetables, and green peas, arranged in a starburst pattern with sprigs of rosemary and scattered purple and pink flower petals. The pan sits on a mustard-yellow tabletop.
    A finished pan of Chef Joshua Whigham's paella at Casa Leo's monthly Paella Drop, ready to be served to guests.

    Topline:

    Chef Joshua Whigham's monthly "paella drop" at Casa Leo in Los Feliz has grown from a 20-guest experiment into a waitlisted fixture.

    Tell me more: Each version of his paella — from market mushrooms and truffle to chicken and langoustine — is rooted in a different Spanish region. Casa Leo was added to the Michelin Guide California this year — just over a year after opening.

    Why is it important? Most Angelenos' idea of paella starts and stops at chicken, shrimp and saffron rice — the version built for tourists. Whigham, a 15-year veteran of award-winning chef José Andrés' kitchens, is using his monthly drop to highlight the dish’s variety with Southern California produce.

    Mark the date: The next drop is on Sept. 20 and features a cuttlefish paella.

    Casa Leo is a small Spanish restaurant located in Los Feliz near Griffith Park, where Chef Joshua Whigham is quietly bringing his own fresh approach to Spanish cooking — one that's specific and ingredient-driven in a way you'd be hard-pressed to find anywhere else in the city.

    Whigham spent 15 years working under José Andrés — the Michelin-starred, James Beard Award-winning Spanish chef — before striking out on his own a little over a year ago with Casa Leo. The restaurant has already been added to the Michelin Guide California and has built a reputation for a seasonal, genuine, personal approach. That shows up across the menu, from cocas (Iberian flatbreads) to a trout en escabeche dish inspired by Martín Berasategui, the Basque chef often credited as a pioneer of modern Spanish cuisine.

    Paella drop

    One Sunday each month, Whigham hosts a "paella drop," cooking the paella outside the restaurant on a propane rig built to fit the giant pan he uses. Originally open to just 20 guests, the pop-up has grown in popularity as word has spread — Whigham has incrementally raised the cap over time, and now cooks with an even larger pan that can accommodate up to 70 guests.

    It’s a setup that gets a lot of attention. He recalls a group of cyclists zipping by one day, with one of them yelling, "Holy shit, that smells good."

    A man with a light skin tone, wearing a flat cap, maroon T-shirt and tan apron, stands behind a large black paella pan resting on a metal burner stand outdoors. The pan holds finished paella garnished with purple flowers and rosemary. A tall patio heater and a wall-mounted planter with greenery are visible behind him.
    Chef Joshua Whigham stands beside the finished paella, cooked on a custom propane rig large enough to hold his oversized pan.
    (
    Courtesy CASA LEO
    )

    "Paella is Spain's national dish," Whigham says — and for many Americans, it's the only regional dish they know by name. Most Americans picture one version of paella — chicken, shrimp, saffron-yellow rice — but the dish looks different depending on where in Spain you are. While the dish has roots in the southeastern region of Valencia, its ingredients and preparation vary widely throughout the country.

    Showcasing that variety is one of Whigham’s aims. And he does it with strict adherence to tradition — he'll never include chorizo, since its heavy smoke and paprika flavors, he says, completely overpower the subtle, delicate taste of the saffron, broth and rice.

    In August, the paella included market mushrooms, summer truffle, chicken and langoustine.

    The next drop, on Sept. 20 (which just so happens to be World Paella Day), is a cuttlefish (sepia) paella.

    Whigham wanted the drops to serve as an opportunity to activate the space in ways beyond regular brunch and dinner service.

    Not a tourist menu

    Whigham says people's exposure to Spanish cuisine often stops at gazpacho, jamón, and that one paella experience they had while studying abroad in college.

    His approach, honed over almost two decades of cooking Spanish food, involves first surveying a dish's regional origins and then adapting it using Southern California ingredients, in a process Whigham calls "giving a traditional dish a sense of place."

    "That's the path I'm on — taking traditional dishes and making them ours,” he adds.

    A close-up overhead shot of a speckled ceramic bowl holding a portion of rice studded with charred vegetables and browned meat, garnished with purple flower petals and microgreens. A dollop of pale yellow aioli sits beside the rice on the same plate, against a dark wood table.
    A plated portion of Casa Leo's paella, served with a side of aioli and topped with edible flowers and microgreens.
    (
    Casa Leo
    )

    For example: marmitako, a humble Basque fisherman's dish traditionally made with tuna and potato, with a base consisting of tomato, bell pepper, red onion and fish stock. Whigham noticed poblano peppers were "exploding at the market" and swapped them in for the green bell peppers, using the same process and proportions — resulting in a richer tone, more of a capsicum flavor and a "nice low-key heat." Paired with the chili de árbol spice, it made the dish "warmer and richer and a little deeper in flavor."

    Less than two years in, Whigham says the Michelin recognition was a lovely surprise. "We weren't looking for it," he says. "This is what I do. I don't know how to do anything else but this."

    Still, he feels the weight of its importance: "A good restaurant, you feel it — the pulse of it, the heartbeat. That's what I want for people."

    Casa Leo

    Location: 4500 Los Feliz Blvd., Suite C, Los Angeles

    Hours: Dinner: Sunday–Thursday, 5:30–9:30 p.m.; Friday–Saturday, 5:30–10:30 p.m. Closed Tuesdays.

    Booking: Reserve via Resy; follow @casaleo.la for future paella drop dates.