The Brief

Southern California officials reacted strongly Friday to a U.S. Supreme Court decision that effectively removes some legal protections for unhoused people who sleep on streets and in other public places when shelter beds are full.

Some officials, like Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass, slammed the decision, calling it both “surprising” and “disappointing.” She and others cautioned local governments against using jail time as a means to address homelessness.

Reaction to the ruling

“This ruling must not be used as an excuse for cities across the country to attempt to arrest their way out of this problem or hide the homelessness crisis in neighboring cities or in jail,” Bass said in a statement.

Lindsey Horvath, chair of the L.A. County Board of Supervisors and the Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority Commission, shared Bass' concerns, saying that the ruling “green lights the criminalization of homelessness.”

“We know what works in Los Angeles County — partnership, accountability, scrutinizing the status quo, and aligning all resources,” Horvath added in her statement. “It is not arrest. It is not pushing people from community to community.”

But others, like Orange County Supervisor Katrina Foley, said they saw the high court's decision as a way to further push local governments to create more housing.

“In order to truly solve homelessness, enforcement must accompany an aggressive effort to build all types of housing opportunities from permanent supportive, affordable, and workforce housing,” Foley said.

What the decision does and doesn't mean

The decision, released by the federal court Friday morning, is expected to have broad implications for how cities like Los Angeles treat people experiencing homelessness. The justices ruled 6-3 to reverse a lower court opinion that found bans on sleeping in public unconstitutional.

Shayla Myers, senior attorney with the Legal Aid Foundation of Los Angeles, said that the topic was divisive across the board and that there were cascading consequences for criminalizing homelessness with anti-camping bans.

“We know after decades of research on this topic that ordinances that prevent people from sleeping outside when they have no place else to go does nothing to solve the homelessness crisis and in fact make[s] it worse,” Myers said in an Friday on AirTalk, LAist's public affairs show that airs on 89.3 FM.

Myers stressed that the ruling does not tell jurisdictions what they should do, but rather states that bans on sleeping in public don’t violate one part of the U.S. Constitution.

The backstory

This case began when the small city of Grants Pass, Oregon started fining unhoused people for using cardboard boxes, pillows and blankets to sleep in public, with possible jail time for repeat offenders. Lawyers representing unhoused people in the city challenged that policy, and lower courts agreed that the city’s ordinance was unconstitutional.

Advocates for the unhoused have agreed with lower court opinions holding that public camping bans amount to cruel and unusual punishment because they essentially criminalize the involuntary state of being homeless and needing somewhere to sleep.

A similar case in Boise, Idaho led to a ruling by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, which applies to nine Western states including California.

Why it matters

Local governments have complained these restrictions leave them hamstrung in responding to growing encampments that they see as threats to public safety and health. Elected leaders in California have asked the Supreme Court for more leeway to fine and punish people living on public property.

In many ways, the decision aligns with desires from L.A. business leaders, who feel the status quo has led to chaos that threatens businesses in many neighborhoods.

The L.A. Chamber of Commerce and the Central City Association, two L.A. based business groups, filed an amicus brief with the Supreme Court saying: “Business owners are bearing the brunt of the homelessness crisis … Los Angeles businesses, customers, and workers should not be forced to endure the unsafe environments on their doorsteps while local governments’ reasonable efforts to help are thwarted and no end is in sight.”

Inglewood’s Citizen Police Oversight Commission hasn’t met in almost nine years — its web page no longer exists, and its roster of commissioners, supposed to be 11 strong, appears only to have five names. 

This may be a violation of the city’s own code, one expert told The LA Local.

The commission didn’t do much in the first 15 years that it did meet, multiple sources told The LA Local, after the city stripped its investigative authority in its early days. The commission hasn’t met at all since 2017, when meeting minutes recorded Lee Denmon, the commission’s chair, optimistically pitching a shift to a public safety focus.

“We didn’t have any teeth,” Denmon told The LA Local in April. “This commission was formed to fail.” 

Even with limited power, police commissions are one of only a few venues where community members can bring grievances against a local police force. An active oversight commission can serve a range of roles, from hiring police chiefs to recommending disciplinary actions against officers. It’s this type of accountability and transparency that activists and family members of Bryan Bostic, who died in Inglewood police custody, have been calling for since his death on March 10.

Every one of the Inglewood commission’s monthly meetings was canceled between late 2017 and 2022, according to city records. Since then, the city hasn’t even bothered to post a notice of cancellation. 

“It just kind of fizzled out,” Denmon said.

Inglewood Mayor James Butts told The LA Local the city no longer has a police commission and that it doesn’t have any members. 

“It was toothless. It had no subpoena power,” said Butts, the former Santa Monica police chief. “If you want to have a good police department, you have a good police chief and, if possible, you have members of the council that have police management experience. That’s the best police oversight that you can have.”

Inglewood code uses mandatory language for its police commission, expert says 

Inglewood’s Citizen Police Oversight Commission hasn’t met in almost nine years — its web page no longer exists, and its roster of commissioners, supposed to be 11 strong, appears only to have five names.

Civil rights attorney Peter Bibring said the city may be violating its own code, which calls for the Inglewood police chief to report use-of-force investigation results to an 11-member body.

“The ordinance used mandatory language,” said Bibring, who formerly led the American Civil Liberties Union of California’s work on policing, then spent two years with the Los Angeles County Office of the Inspector General. 

“The city can’t just stop following the requirements of the municipal code because they don’t think it’s important anymore,” he said.

Inglewood Police Chief Mark Fronterotta and Interim City Attorney Rick Olivarez did not respond to a series of interview requests from The LA Local. 

The city’s website still lists commissioners for each of its four council districts: Carol Willis in District 1, David P. Stewart in District 2, Adrianne Sears and Matthew Chinichian in District 3 and Councilwoman Dionne Faulk in District 4. The LA Local attempted to reach out to Chinichian, Stewart, Sears and Faulk but did not receive a response, and did not find contact information for Willis.

Councilmembers Gloria Gray, Eloy Morales and Alex Padilla did not return requests for comment. Padilla is a former police officer and police use-of-force investigator. 

Inglewood’s city code does not give its police commissioners the same tools as others, such as the city of Los Angeles Board of Police Commissioners, who are responsible for setting policy and hiring top officers. 

But Bibring said even limited oversight commissions can be effective. They provide a forum for members of the public to raise concerns with police actions and for police to report the results of misconduct inquiries, he said.

“Commissions don’t necessarily need power to hire and fire to provide some measure of transparency that can be really meaningful,” Bibring said. “They provide an important window into what the department is doing.”

Police commission issues in Inglewood go back more than a decade

Inglewood’s Citizen Police Oversight Commission hasn’t met in almost nine years — its web page no longer exists, and its roster of commissioners, supposed to be 11 strong, appears only to have five names.

Inglewood officials first considered an ordinance to form a police oversight commission in 2002, according to city records. The first version of the commission had power to investigate complaints against the department with help from an independent police misconduct investigator appointed by the city. 

But two years later, after pushback from the city’s police unions surfaced legal concerns, records indicate the city killed the commission’s investigatory power.

Daniel Tabor was an Inglewood councilmember in 2008 when Inglewood police fatally shot four different people in the space of just a few months. But Tabor — today the vice president of the LA Board of Police Commissioners —  said he doesn’t recall Inglewood’s commission doing much. 

“It doesn’t have the same level of authority or responsibility or resources that we have in Los Angeles,” Tabor said. 

The U.S. Department of Justice launched a civil rights probe in the wake of those shootings and found flaws in Inglewood’s police oversight. Commissioners told the LA Times in 2009 they felt frustrated and powerless. 

Controversy continued to simmer for the next 15 years. The commission was already canceling many meetings in 2016 when police fatally shot Kisha Michael and Marquintan Sandlin. The city later fired the officers involved in that shooting.

Inglewood purged a batch of police records in 2018, days before a state transparency law took effect, and remains locked in a years-long court battle with the ACLU over the release of other police records. A judge ordered the city last winter to post police misconduct records online. 

The Inglewood Police Department has been under fresh scrutiny after Bostic’s still-unexplained death in Inglewood police custody in March. Beyond the department’s own investigation, the Los Angeles County District Attorney’s Office is investigating the police use of force, and the Los Angeles County Medical Examiner’s office is still looking into Bostic’s cause of death.

Activist Najee Ali said he believes the city would have “without question” been more transparent if it had an active police oversight commission. 

But Denmon, the former commission chair, said the commission would only have made a difference if it had more power.

“The only way it works is if someone is going to make (police) cooperate with the commission,” Denmon said.

LAist and The Los Angeles Sentinel contributed to this report. 

The number of Californians without health insurance could double from 2 million today to 4 million by 2030, according to a report from the state Legislative Analyst's Office. It’s the state budget office’s preliminary attempt to quantify how federal legislation known as the “One Big Beautiful Bill” will reshape healthcare access statewide.

The One Big Beautiful Bill is driving nearly 90% of the projected coverage loss, according to the LAO report. It's mostly Medi-Cal enrollees who are expected to be dropped when new work requirements take effect in 2027. The remaining 10% are largely people leaving the state's health insurance marketplace, Covered California, after enhanced federal premium subsidies expired last year.

What's the impact to coverage?

L.A. County officials estimate that recent Medi-Cal changes could put coverage at risk for hundreds of thousands of residents and cost the health departments about $800 million a year. A UC Berkeley Labor Center analysis projected more than 1 million Medi-Cal enrollees could lose coverage by 2028.

The LAO report also warns that county indigent health programs for uninsured residents will soon face a surge in demand they’re not prepared to meet. Those county programs had enrolled about 850,000 people statewide before the federal government expanded Medicaid coverage in 2014. Total enrollment is currently 10,000 statewide, but the trend is going to reverse, according to the report.

What's the impact to health-care providers?

More uninsured people means hospitals and clinics provide more services without getting paid. The LAO projects that uncompensated care costs at hospitals could grow by several billion dollars statewide by 2030. Clinics face steeper losses because they run on smaller budgets and depend more heavily on Medi-Cal revenue.

The LAO also projects premiums on the individual health insurance market will rise as healthier people drop coverage.

What are proposals to help?

The LAO itself doesn’t recommend new spending and instead urges lawmakers to track what happens to hospitals, clinics and county programs before taking action. But both L.A. County and state officials are pushing tax efforts to combat federal cuts.

L.A. County voters will decide June 2 on Measure ER, a half-cent sales tax that would generate about $1 billion a year for hospitals and clinics. ANovember statewide ballot initiative would impose a one-time 5% tax on Californians worth over $1 billion and direct 90% of proceeds to Medi-Cal.

California regulators say State Farm has illegally delayed, underpaid and denied claims from policyholders affected by the 2025 L.A. fires — something fire survivors have said for months.

The California Department of Insurance announced Monday that it has taken the first step in the process to bring the allegations to a public hearing before an administrative judge. That could result in the state’s largest home insurer paying up to about $4 million in penalties, and suspension of its license for up to a year, meaning it could not write new policies in California during that time.

“Our investigation found that State Farm delayed, underpaid, and buried policyholders in red tape at the worst moment of their lives,” state Insurance Commissioner Ricardo Lara said in a statement.

The state analyzed 220 randomly selected claims — out of more than 11,000 filed with State Farm in response to last year’s fires — and found hundreds of violations in more than half them. Attorneys for the state called it a “troubling pattern” in their filing.

State Farm denied the allegations and called the state’s move “politically motivated” in a lengthy statement posted to its website.

Every Fire Survivors Network, a coalition representing thousands of L.A. fire survivors, pressured the state for months to investigate State Farm’s handling of wildfire claims.

Joy Chen, who co-founded the group after her home was damaged in the Eaton Fire, said the state’s action is far from enough.

“It’s just very disappointing to see our regulator issue a report that shows his own failures over the last 16 months,” she told LAist.

Only a few dozen homes have been rebuilt so far in both Altadena and Pacific Palisades since the fires destroyed more than 16,000 buildings, mostly homes, in those communities and nearby areas.

A survey by the nonprofit Department of Angels last year found that nearly three-quarters of L.A. fire survivors reported delays, denials and low payouts of their claims across all insurers.

“What we need is for all State Farm contracts to be enforced so that Los Angeles families can have the money that we need to move forward with getting back home,” Chen said.

The state’s alleged violations carry a fine of up to $5,000, and up to $10,000 if the violations are found to be willful. The case will be heard by a state administrative law judge, who will provide a recommendation to Insurance Commissioner Ricardo Lara on a possible penalty.

The Insurance Department said people with homeowners policies from any insurer can report problems with their claims at insurance.ca.gov or by calling (800) 927-4357.

Yes, you could put a screen in your backyard and call up your friends to watch a particularly compelling World Cup game after the tournament begins June 12.

But FIFA is turning each game into a public celebration, sponsoring 10 outdoor Fan Zone watch parties with large viewing screens across L.A. County through the final on July 19.

Details were released on Monday, including locations, dates and prices.

The Fan Zones open in a staggered schedule from one day to four days each, starting with the Original Farmers Market on June 18 - 21, and then popping up across the region until the glorious end on July 19 in downtown Burbank.

Ticket prices range from free (City of Downey, Union Station L.A., “Magic” Johnson Park, Whittier Narrows) to over $300 for a VIP experience with a viewing lounge and a concert at the downtown Burbank Fan Zone on the day of the World Cup final match on July 19.

Fan Zone kick off

At the first Fan Zone, at The Original Farmers Market from June 18 for four days, entry will cost you $5 per day or $17 for all four days. Kids age 3 and under are free. (FIFA says the zones are family friendly).

You’ll be able to see four matches there each of the four days, including Mexico vs. South Korea on June 18 at 6 p.m. and USA vs. Australia on June 19 at noon.

FIFA World Cup 2026 scarves are displayed during the ribbon cutting for the LAX/Metro Transit Center rail and bus public transportation station at LAX on June 6, 2025.

(

Patrick T. Fallon

/

Getty Images

)

You won’t have to squint to find your favorite player or catch the goals. The Farmer’s Market will include a 30-foot viewing screen as well as a 15-foot secondary screen to watch the games. There will be beer gardens, and you can purchase food from the Market's dozens of establishments.

Other Fan Zones

The West Harbor L.A. Fan Zone will give people an opportunity to experience the newest major development along the San Pedro waterfront, a 42-acre waterfront district that’s been years in the making.

The Union Station L.A. Fan Zone on June 25 is free and includes match viewing, music, food, and immersive fan experiences, featuring live DJs.

The final Fan Zone opens July 18 and 19 in downtown Burbank for the World Cup’s last two matches. FIFA says it’ll include “an adjacent international street fair filled with global flavors and cultural experiences.” Tickets range from $25 to over $300

The full list of the Fan Zones is here.

This of course, isn’t the only opportunity to watch World Cup matches with groups of people in SoCal. The city of L.A. will host its own watch parties.