The Brief

A visibly frustrated federal judge announced Thursday that he would rule that the city of L.A. misled attorneys about promises to follow through on a settlement agreement that requires specific deadlines to clear encampments and add shelter beds in each city council district.

“I would find that you were misled in this matter,” U.S. District Judge David O. Carter told plaintiffs’ attorneys at a hearing in downtown L.A.

“I will not have this agreement broken … period,” Carter said of the settlement deal in the case.

It comes following a high-profile lawsuit brought by the downtown business group L.A. Alliance for Human Rights, which resulted in the city agreeing in April 2022 to settle the case.

Under that settlement, the city agreed to build thousands of shelter beds and present specific district-by-district deadlines for outreach and removal of encampments.

But Carter said he would rule that the city misled the plaintiffs from March to October of last year about promises to do outreach at encampments and set timelines to clear them.

A plan to help bring people into shelter ‘fell apart’

“The city had an obligation to provide encampment reduction milestones and deadlines 15 months ago. The city failed to do that,” a lead attorney for the plaintiffs, Elizabeth Mitchell, told LAist after the hearing.

Then, she said, “they made certain representations [last March] of what their plans were, [on] a district-by-district level,” she added.

“And we gave them an additional six months extension to do those things — to meet those milestones and deadlines. And they didn't do anything that they promised they were going to do.”

Both sides of the case agreed in writing on Thursday that the city and plaintiffs met on March 15 of last year “to discuss the City’s non-compliance with the [settlement] Agreement.”

Both sides agree that at that meeting, the city’s representative claimed the city had detailed plans to come into compliance. Specifically, that it would hire outreach contractors to assess the needs of unhoused people in each council district by July 1 and have specific deadlines for encampment removals by Oct. 1.

But that didn’t happen, according to the jointly agreed set of facts. The outreach contractors weren’t hired and the encampment clearance deadlines weren’t provided by Oct. 1, according to a court document outlining what both sides agree on. When the city did provide that plan a few days later, it was inadequate, according to the plaintiffs.

[Click here to read the jointly agreed facts Carter cited in finding that the city misled the plaintiffs.]

An attorney for the city, Scott Marcus, said during the hearing that the process to hire outreach providers “fell apart” but wasn’t communicated to the plaintiffs. He acknowledged the city was delayed in implementing this part of the settlement agreement, but said it’s now in compliance.

Carter said he hadn’t decided what sanctions, if any, to issue against the city for his finding that they misled the plaintiffs. He announced he’d hold further hearings Friday morning and next Thursday.

“I don’t know what to do about that yet, but I’m going to put people under oath,” Carter said.

The alleged issues Carter pointed to stem from commitments both sides agreed were made by the mayor’s then-homelessness chief, Mercedes Marquez, to the plaintiffs at the March 15 meeting. She no longer works for the mayor.

Marquez told LAist over text message that she does “not want to be anybody’s scapegoat.”

The plaintiff’s attorneys, however, say their goal is to help bring people indoors.

“We brought this case for accountability. We brought this case to bring people inside, off of the streets,” Mitchell told LAist after the hearing.

“I think today is one more step in that right direction.”

Response from the mayor

Mayor Karen Bass was in France during the hearing with a delegation of city officials examining Olympics preparations, and a spokesperson for her didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.

Carter said he spoke on the phone with Bass during the lunch break in the hearing.

He said Bass was “amenable” to his request for full transparency for the court and the public about how homelessness dollars are being spent, including details from invoices submitted by services providers. He credited her efforts to address homelessness.

“Absolute transparency — all invoices from that point forward,” Carter said, earlier in the hearing, about what he wanted.

Speaking broadly about local government spending on homelessness programs in the L.A. area, Carter said there are hundreds of millions of dollars that are “flowing through with no accounting.”

What happens next

The hearing is set to resume at 9 a.m. Friday, with Carter calling a representative of the L.A. City Controller’s Office to ask about its auditing powers.

City officials testified Thursday that the controller is a lead auditing power at the city, but that they cannot audit programs under the mayor’s office — such as her Inside Safe motel program — due to the city charter.

Carter also asked that Bass attend a court hearing next week, after she’s back from France.

An attorney for unhoused advocates told Carter on Thursday that she’s concerned the focus has shifted from expanding shelter beds to removing encampments, rather than expanding bed capacity so people have a place to come inside.

Shayla Myers, who represents the advocacy group L.A. Community Action Network, said the plaintiffs were focusing more on “cleaning up visible signs of homelessness” than bringing people inside.

“When you provide shelter, people will come inside,” she said, pointing to Bass’ Inside Safe program.

The plaintiff’s attorneys, however, say their goal is to help bring people indoors.

“We brought this case for accountability. We brought this case to bring people inside, off of the streets,” Elizabeth Mitchell, a lead attorney for the plaintiffs, told LAist after the hearing.

“I think today is one more step in that right direction.”

Monopoly lovers can now buy up the Queen Mary, collect rent on Belmont Shore and park their token at a storied tattoo shop, Outer Limits.

The Long Beach landmarks line the spaces of a new Monopoly edition themed around L.A. County’s second biggest city, released just this month.

The Long Beach edition is part of an expanding series of Monopoly games featuring dozens of American cities, which Hasbro licensee Top Trumps started to produce about five years ago when interest in board games surged during the pandemic.

What it takes to make the cut

How does a city land on one of the world's most popular board games? Turns out, it’s not just a roll of the dice.

“We’re looking for places with strong community pride, places where people will really love seeing their city on a Monopoly board,” said Jennifer Tripsea, a partnership sales executive with Top Trumps.

Long Beach fit the bill and got to join a list of SoCal cities on Monopoly boards including Huntington Beach, Riverside and Palm Springs.

Tripsea said in some instances, a city will pitch themselves to the company — she didn’t disclose which have — but not every place makes the cut.

There has to be enough population — or local enthusiasm — to support a run of thousands of games.

Top Trumps sells the games online and through local businesses, sometimes the same ones featured on the board. That creates a built-in customer base: residents, tourists and collectors hunting for their next addition.

And while some businesses may offer to sponsor their way into consideration, their inclusion isn’t a given.

Tripsea said when deciding who earns a spot, the company weighs cultural relevance, brand standards and community input.

The community gets a turn

Once a city is selected, residents are invited to help shape the board.

That means emailing suggested landmarks and drafting potential Chance and Community Chest cards. For Long Beach, one Community Chest card directs players to collect $100 if they "attend a beach cleanup at Alamitos Beach."

Hundreds of submissions flooded in over the last year, many pointing to the same top attractions, Tripsea said. The Queen Mary and Aquarium of the Pacific take up the same spots on the board that are occupied by Park Place and Boardwalk in the original game.

Of course the Queen Mary historic ocean liner landed a plum spot on the Long Beach version of Monopoly.

(

Patrick T. Fallon

/

Getty Images

)

Others featured on the board are lesser known to outsiders, like Rosie’s Dog Beach and the Arts Council for Long Beach.

The arts nonprofit was “surprised and excited” to hear from Top Trumps last year that they were being included in a version all about Long Beach, said interim executive director Lisa DeSmidt.

“I describe Long Beach as a big city that's run like a small town, and that everybody kind of knows each other to some degree,” DeSmidt said. “Long Beach has a sense of community in that Long Beach takes care of Long Beach people.”

An intern for the Arts Council for Long Beach designed its space on the Monopoly board.

(

Arts Council for Long Beach

)

An intern for the arts council, Peyton Smith, designed its space on the board, featuring small, intricate renderings of landmarks like the Long Beach Airport and the pyramid arena at Cal State Long Beach.

For DeSmidt, the game serves as a kind of cultural snapshot highlighting the city’s mix of arts, neighborhoods and institutions. It’s reminiscent of the council’s own project mapping the city’s cultural assets.

“This ties into uplifting what makes Long Beach unique and what people love about it,” DeSmidt said.

Monopoly's lasting pull

Outer Limits Tattoo was also invited to be part of the game, where it now appears next to VIP Records on the board.

Recognized as the country’s oldest continuously working tattoo shop, Outer Limits’ history dates back to 1927, when it opened in the waterfront amusement district known as The Pike, now home to the Pike Outlets.

Outer Limits' general manager Matt Hand said once word got out that the shop was stocking the game, customers started showing up just to buy it.

“It’s just a cool thing,” Hand said. “Especially when it’s like, ‘The business where I get tattooed’ is on the board.”

A big reason Hand thinks these editions are catching on is nostalgia. Seeing your own city in a board game that you played as a kid — and may be now playing with your own kids — is thrilling.

“You're basically like a part of the game now,” Hand said.

You might have noticed a little more purple on your commute in Los Angeles recently. Turns out the jacarandas are putting on their annual show of blooms a little early this year.

Originally from the tropics, jacarandas respond to changes in temperature. They typically flower in our region from late April to mid-June.

But remember that sweltering heat wave we got in March?

“They got the clear sign: ‘It’s over 90 [degrees], it’s hot out. Even though you weren’t quite prepared, it’s time to put out some flowers,'” Loral Hall, community forestry senior program manager at environmental nonprofit TreePeople, told LAist.

Hall said not only do jacarandas grace us every year with thick canopies and carpets of purple, they’re relatively drought tolerant, pest resistant and able to grow in urban areas (like in a small square patch of dirt surrounded by concrete).

“They’re attention-grabbers here in Southern California,” said Hall, who grew up in Hollywood and has childhood memories of playing with the fallen purple blooms at a local park. “In a place where we don’t have really obvious seasons, [jacaranda blooms] are a sign that warmer weather is on the way.”

Hall also shared a lesser-known fact about jacarandas: There’s a white cultivar, too. The white version is much more rare in L.A., though with some of the trees rumored to be in a non-public area of the L.A. County Arboretum, Hall said.

A jacaranda at the LA Arboretum.

(

Katherine Garrova

)

How’d they get here? 

The jacaranda is native to the tropical and subtropical regions of Argentina and Brazil.

While we don’t know exactly when the jacaranda first arrived in our area, we do know they were brought to Southern California in the late 19th century and proliferated thanks to a local horticulturist named Kate Sessions.

Where are the purple hot spots? 

A couple years ago, a local data graphics editor even created an interactive map so you can find the purple hot spots.

They’re... everywhere, so it shouldn’t be too hard to stumble upon a jacaranda show.

The number of immigrants who have died while in Immigration and Customs Enforcement custody has reached an all-time high this fiscal year.

Twenty-nine people have died in ICE custody since October, the start of the federal government's fiscal year, already surpassing 2004's toll of 28, the previous record, according to government data.

The most recent death was of 27-year-old Aled Damien Carbonell-Betancourt, a Cuban man held in ICE custody in Miami. According to an initial report released by ICE on the evening of April 16, Carbonell-Betancourt was found unresponsive in his cell on the morning of April 12. The report lists the cause of death as a "presumed suicide," but the official cause remains under investigation.

The report said Carbonell-Betancourt entered the United States in 2024 without valid documents and later released into the U.S. via a program known as parole, which allows noncitizens to enter the country without a formal visa, often for humanitarian reasons.

He was arrested for resisting an officer with violence in 2025, and then transferred into ICE custody earlier this year, according to the ICE release.

The rise in deaths comes as detention numbers have skyrocketed during the Trump administration. Detentions are up more than 70% under President Donald Trump compared to the first year of the Biden administration. The Trump administration has carried out an unprecedented crackdown on immigration. Immigration officers have arrested and detained criminals in the country illegally, as well as many people without a criminal record and some migrants who are in the country with temporary protections from deportation.

There are about 60,000 people currently in immigration detention.

In a statement to NPR, DHS denied there's been a spike in deaths and attributed the increase to the large number of people in detention. DHS said as of April 16, "death rates in custody under the Trump administration are 0.009% of the detained population."

The agency added that ICE provides migrants with access to medical care.

"For many illegal aliens this is the best healthcare they have received their entire lives," the statement said. The statement went on to encourage detainees to self-deport. "Being in detention is a choice. We encourage all illegal aliens to take control of their departure with the CBP Home App," the statement said.

During a congressional hearing also on Thursday, acting ICE Director Todd Lyons said there are a high number of deaths this fiscal year "because we do have the highest amount in detention that ICE has ever had since its inception in 2003." Lyons added that the agency spent "almost half a billion dollars last fiscal year … to ensure that people have proper care."

He reiterated details noted by other DHS officials: that detainees get a complete physical within 14 days and are seen by a medical professional within 24 hours of being admitted.

"No death is what we want. We don't want anyone to die in custody," Lyons, who handed in his resignation hours after testifying, said. "I hope that's a policy of anyone that has to be tasked with detaining someone."

When asked how many people were still working in the Office of Detention Oversight, he was not able to provide a number.

Lyons was also asked about the delay in public reporting and tracking detainee deaths. On April 13, Georgia Democratic Sens. Jon Ossoff and Raphael Warnock sent a letter to Lyons and DHS Secretary Markwayne Mullin raising concern over the rising number of detainee deaths and noted that of the 49 deaths in custody at the time since January 2025, "ICE has issued an interim death notice within 48 hours in only 15 cases" and argued that reports contained less details.

"We are reporting. We are working on that timeline," Lyons said during the House hearing, agreeing that the detainee death reports were considered essential work even during the agency's funding lapse.

Facilities in Texas and California are the deadliest

Adelanto ICE Processing Center in Adelanto, Calif., and Camp East Montana in El Paso, Texas have each reported the deaths of three detainees, the most out of ICE's sprawling detention operation. 

According to ICE's initial reports, the deaths of the six immigrant detainees were attributed to a number of causes, including suicide, alcohol withdrawal, liver failure and kidney failure. Other detainees displayed symptoms like shortness of breath.

One of the deaths at Camp East Montana was ruled a homicide by the El Paso County Medical Examiner's Office.

Initially, DHS said that Geraldo Lunas Campos had died in Camp East Montana after experiencing "medical distress." It also claimed Lunas Campos had become "disruptive while in line for medication" and was placed in segregation. But later, the El Paso Medical Examiner's Office ruled his death a homicide due to "asphyxia due to neck and torso compression." The FBI is now investigating the death.Chris Benoit, an attorney representing the family, told NPR Lunas Campos came to the U.S. in the mid-1990s as part of a wave of Cubans immigrants during the balsero crisis after the fall of the Soviet Union.

"For all sense and purposes he is an American," Benoit said. "He's lived here for decades and raised his family here and his kids love him and miss him."

According to DHS, Lunas Campos had been convicted of multiple crimes, including petty larceny, unlawful possession of a weapon during a robbery and sexual contact with a child under 11.

In a court petition seeking eyewitness testimony, Lunas Campos' three children said they planned to file a wrongful death lawsuit.

Rahul Mukherjee contributed to this report.
Copyright 2026 NPR

Combatting bacterial and viral infections is getting tougher because of their growing resistance to drugs. Antibiotic drugs can no longer be counted on to conquer nasty bacteria. Antivirals don't always overpower the viruses. This is a huge problem but it is one that widely acknowledged and researched.

There's an additional medical challenge though, that matters a lot. Namely, drug-resistant fungi.

Yep, fungi.

It's a topic that doesn't get discussed much — and that worries Paul Verweij, professor of clinical mycology at Radboud University Medical Center in Nijmegen, the Netherlands. He says there's a "silence surge" in drug-resistant fungi and that it's mostly happening under-the-radar.

This is a particular challenge in lower-income countries.

"Look at, for instance, Candida auris [a type of yeast that can cause severe infections and is often drug-resistant] -- you need very, very strict infection control measures in hospitals, you need good diagnostics, good infection control, you have to follow-up with patients and that's just not available in these lower- middle-income countries," he says. "People will die, and you won't know they have a fungal infection. You wouldn't know if it was resistant."

Verweij teamed up with 50 scientists around the world – from Brazil to Nigeria to China — to call for action against drug‑resistant fungi in Nature Medicine this week.

NPR spoke with Verweij, who's been working on this issue for more than 20 years. His interview has been edited for length and clarity.

What's the link between agriculture and drug-resistant fungi?

Fungicides are used to protect plants against fungal disease. Everything — watermelons, maize, wheat, flowers — use lots of fungicides. If we didn't use the fungicides, you'd probably have a yield loss maybe of 30% or 40%.

The problem is that the fungicides are quite similar to the drugs we give to patients. So the fungus becomes resistant to the fungicide and, at the same time, our medical azoles [a class of antifungal drugs] do not work as well anymore.

The fungi which cause disease in humans are not causing disease in plants. So this is an unintended effect.

How does the resistance get from farms to hospitals? 

So the molds – the hairy fungi – have spores which are released into the air. These spores travel long distances. It's not really well-understood but the idea is that they go right up to these jet streams, very high into the atmosphere and then can travel for continents. We inhale the spores all the time.

How serious are fungal infections?

With fungi you have two types of infections. First, we have very severe infections, and they usually occur in [hospitalized] patients who have some kind of defect in their immunity. So, yeast found in the bloodstream or mold in the lungs. Second, we have infections of the skin, the hair and the nails, which are irritating but are not life threatening.

In the past 10 to 20 years, we see more and more resistance in fungi in both those categories.

There are very few studies looking at the clinical impact. We did a study in the Netherlands, and we found that if you compare an infection [where azole antifungal drugs work] and where it's resistant. There's about a 20% difference in mortality — you're 20% more likely to die. So that's a significant impact. And there's the new skin disease [Trichophyton indotineae] where you don't have mortality but we've had patients who have been on treatment for four years and are still suffering from the infection.

Why is it hard to create new antifungals?

The main challenge is that fungi, if you look at the cell structure — how they are built up — it's very similar to the human cell. This is different from bacteria, because bacteria are much simpler. And viruses are even more simple because they don't even have a cell.

For fungi, because they're similar to human cells, it's quite difficult to find a drug which kills the fungus but does not harm the human cell. So in the past 75 years, we have developed only five classes of antifungals. The azoles are, by far, the most important.

The problem is that if you can't use one of these classes then maybe you'll have one alternative left. It's already causing problems. For instance, if the fungus is in the brain, you have a very few drugs which actually get into the brain.

What can be done?

At a mycology meeting we found a global community who wanted to collaborate [on this issue].

For example, you really want to know what people are using [on crops] and see if you can reduce that or if there's any unnecessary use. Another important factor is: If you introduce new fungicides, they [should] undergo an assessment to see their impact on human fungal pathogens. It's important to establish if there's a risk for cross resistance.

Are you optimistic? 

I've worked in this field for a long time, and I think that it is changing.

WHO published a fungal pathogen list in 2022 for the first time — that had a major impact. A decade ago, when the World Health Organization came out with its global action plan against antimicrobial resistance, fungi were only mentioned twice. Now, after 10 years, it is being revised. And as a mycology community, we feel it is really important now that fungi are addressed.

The problem is, in fungi, we need to do the basic stuff: Develop the tools. Do the surveillance. Set up the [laboratory] networks. And it's sometimes difficult to get these basic things funded.

But overall, I think it's really changing. People are realizing this is not a local problem — it's really global.