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
  • What made the first U.S. tournament a success?

    Topline:

    Ahead of the 1994 World Cup, most Americans were unaware that the U.S. would be hosting the tournament. A survey from the time ranked soccer 67th among the nation's favorite sports (behind tractor pulling).

    What happened next: Despite this, the 1994 World Cup — the first held in the U.S. — took a surprising turn. Game after game, the Rose Bowl and stadiums across the country were filled to capacity, packed not only with tourists and die-hard fans but also with soccer novices who came out of curiosity and because tickets were relatively affordable, according to soccer historians.

    Where things stand: Soccer's momentum in the U.S. has only been growing since then, fueled by the launch of Major League Soccer and the success of the U.S. Women's National Team. The World Cup returns to the U.S. in June. This time, the games in L.A. — eight total — will be played at SoFi Stadium in Inglewood.

    The 1994 World Cup kicked off with a sold-out match. On a scorching afternoon in Chicago, some 63,000 spectators — including then-President Bill Clinton and Oprah Winfrey — were packed like sardines at Soldier Field to watch Germany vs. Bolivia. Their cheers and boos, as loud as thunder.

    Today, it's easy to imagine a World Cup game drawing such American fanfare. But back then, it was a much different story.

    "It was a big question as to how the U.S. would embrace it. Would people come to the games?" Mike Sorber, who played for the U.S. Men's National Team in 1994, told NPR.

    Ahead of the 1994 World Cup, most Americans were unaware that the U.S. would be hosting the tournament. A survey from the time ranked soccer 67th among the nation's favorite sports (behind tractor pulling).

    Despite this, the 1994 World Cup — the first held in the U.S. — took a surprising turn. Game after game, stadiums were filled to capacity, packed not only with tourists and die-hard fans but also with soccer novices who came out of curiosity and because tickets were relatively affordable, according to soccer historians.

    A man in a white and red striped uniform shirt kicks a soccer ball.
    Mike Sorber plays during an exhibition game at the Rose Bowl in 1994.
    (
    Al Bello
    /
    Getty Images
    )

    " I think all the naysayers were surprised," said Sorber, who is currently an assistant coach for Major League Soccer's New York Red Bulls. "The atmosphere was electric. It was like a big party."

    Soccer's momentum in the U.S. has only been growing since then, fueled by the launch of Major League Soccer and the success of the U.S. Women's National Team. When the World Cup returns to the U.S. in June, it will be greeted by a larger and more passionate fanbase than ever before.

    How exactly did a sport that struggled to gain traction for decades go on to break the World Cup's record for largest attendance and win over Americans' hearts? To answer that, NPR spoke to Sorber, along with soccer journalists and fans, about the breakthrough World Cup.

    Why did it take so long for the U.S. to embrace soccer?

    How far back the soccer tradition in the U.S. goes depends on whom you ask and where they're from.

    Chicago, Philadelphia, St. Louis and pockets of New York, New Jersey and New England all have deep soccer roots — often brought by European immigrants in the 19th century, according to Brian D. Bunk, who teaches the history of sports at the University of Massachusetts Amherst.

    As a result, the sport was largely associated with working-class and immigrant communities, Bunk added. Some also dismissed soccer over the perception that it lacked the physicality of sports like American football.

    People wave a yellow, blue and red flag as some hold soccer balls along a parade route.
    Colombian soccer fans wave their country's flag during the "Chicago Welcomes the World Cup" parade on June 15, 1994.
    (
    Eugene Garcia
    /
    AFP via Getty Images
    )

    "The argument that was often made against soccer is that it was an inferior form of football," Bunk said.

    There were brief bursts of excitement for the sport in the late 20th century — such as when legendary Brazilian player Pelé came to play in the U.S. in the late 1970s — but they never lasted long.

    By the 1980s, the future of soccer in the U.S. looked bleak. The North American Soccer League, which began in 1968, folded after the 1984 season. American soccer officials hoped a World Cup tournament at home could resuscitate interest.

    " Let's face it: You need to have the product in front of you to see what the heck this is all about," said Michael Lewis, who has covered soccer for five decades. He's the editor of Front Row Soccer, a website that follows the soccer scene in New York and New Jersey.

    FIFA also saw an opportunity. Soccer's global governing body viewed the U.S. "as the last and largest uncracked market for its sport," Pete Davies, who has written extensively about sports, told NPR's Fresh Air in 1994.

    "And it want[ed] to get into that market," he added.

    What led to the tournament's success in 1994? 

    What the U.S. lacked in soccer prowess, it made up for with its ability to put on a massive sporting event (thanks to the nation's football stadiums and experience hosting the Olympics) — and a fun one at that.

    " We have the sporting infrastructure — the stadiums — we have the hotels, the restaurants, the transportation systems," said Bunk, of the University of Massachusetts. "And so all of that stuff meant that the World Cup could go very smoothly."

    Americans also proved they were up for a good time — and World Cup fans knew how to bring the party. Drums, whistles, trumpets, singing, dancing and face paint were the hallmarks of a World Cup game.

    A person in a large sombrero has his face painted red, white and green.
    A Mexican fan, his face painted with Mexico's national colors, cheers in the stands at the Citrus Bowl stadium in Orlando, Fla., on June 24, 1994, prior to the start of the World Cup match between Mexico and Ireland.
    (
    Hans Deryk
    /
    AP
    )
    A man in light blue and white stripes hits a drum in the same colors at a crowded stadium.
    A soccer fan supporting Argentina plays a drum at the World Cup match between Argentina and Nigeria at Foxboro Stadium in Massachusetts in June 1994.
    (
    Richard Sellers
    /
    Allstar/Getty Images
    )

    That's what Kevin Tallec Marston, a research fellow at the International Centre for Sports Studies in Switzerland, remembers most vividly from the Belgium vs. Saudi Arabia match in Washington, D.C., which he attended as a teenager.

    "It was not the kind of fandom that Americans would associate with going to an NBA game, going to an NFL game," he said. "Seeing these people from all around the world with their own cultures, their own chants, their own songs, their own instruments."

    Univision played a major role in attracting both Spanish- and non-Spanish-speaking viewers alike, especially through World Cup announcer Andrés Cantor and his iconic "Goooooooooool!"

    "It created this sort of mythical element of what it was to watch the World Cup," said Tallec Marston, who, along with Front Row Soccer's Lewis, is a board member of the Society for American Soccer History.

    But perhaps what electrified Americans most was the strong performance of the U.S. Men's National Team. It started with a hard-fought 1-1 tie with Switzerland, followed by a stunning 2-1 upset over powerhouse Colombia. (The victory was later marred by tragedy: Colombian defender Andrés Escobar, who had accidentally knocked the ball into his own team's net, was shot and killed shortly after returning home.)

    That match was the first World Cup win for the U.S. men's team since 1950. The team's victory was witnessed by more than 93,000 fans at the Rose Bowl in Pasadena.

    Sorber, a midfielder in the starting lineup, said he had played for large crowds before, but never for an audience so enthralled by the U.S. team. It was "euphoria," he said.

    " All of a sudden, it really opened the eyes to the whole United States … that wow, this is what the future of soccer could be."

    Steve Davis covered the 1994 games as a young sports reporter for The Dallas Morning News. "It sort of lit a fire under people," he said. "I would think some Americans became soccer fans that day."

    The U.S. team went on to lose to Romania 1-0 and then to Brazil 1-0. Although the U.S. didn't win, Sorber said, the support and energy from American fans during those matches felt like a victory.

    " You had a huge turnout," he said. "So again, that was a big moment in U.S. soccer history … to reestablish soccer, to build that foundation and get more awareness for the U.S. national team."

    Post-1994

    In total, over 3.5 million people attended the 1994 World Cup — the largest attendance in FIFA history to this day. Despite its success, soccer's American fanbase didn't grow overnight.

    "Soccer's growth isn't linear," writer Davis said.

    Two years later, the professional Major League Soccer (MLS) launched. Around that time, FIFA's World Cup video game franchise helped introduce soccer to an even broader audience. All the while, the U.S. Women's National Team emerged as a dominating force and accelerated the rise of women's soccer globally. Across the U.S., youth soccer exploded in popularity.

    A woman holds a shirt in her right hand. She's in a black sports bra.
    Brandi Chastain celebrates after kicking the winning penalty kick at the 1999 women's World Cup final against China on July 10, 1999.
    (
    Roberto Schmidt
    /
    AFP via Getty Images
    )

    The arrival of international superstars to MLS, like David Beckham in 2007 and Lionel Messi in 2023, added fire to the nation's passion for the sport. MLS, which began with 10 teams, has since expanded to 30 clubs.

    Together, these moments helped transform the soccer landscape in the United States. The 2022 World Cup in Qatar drew an average of 4.7 million American viewers per game, according to Nielsen. Each year, millions of Americans watch England's Premier League matches on TV and streaming platforms.

    When it comes to America's favorite sports, soccer now ranks third, surpassing baseball, according to Ampere Analysis, a data firm focused on entertainment industries.

    Davis, who is now the director of legacy programs for the North Texas FIFA World Cup Organizing Committee, said it's validating to see the sport he has loved and played since childhood resonate with more people at home.

    "I did have some faith that it was going to grow," he said. "But I would be lying if I said I thought we'd be here in 2026, seeing how big it's become."

    The challenges ahead 

    Although this isn't the first time that the U.S. has hosted the World Cup, the upcoming tournament is expected to be vastly different.

    "One of the key aspects of the '94 World Cup was taking football to the new horizon," said Tallec Marston, who co-wrote Inventing the Boston Game. "So it'll be interesting because we are no longer in a new frontier."

    Hosted by the U.S., Canada and Mexico, this year's competition will introduce more teams and matches than ever before. It will also return to a far more diverse United States. In 1994, about 8% of the country's population was foreign-born. As of 2025, immigrants make up 15% of the nation.

    A man in a green shirt is kicking a soccer ball while suspended in the air in an oversized mural.
    Two men walk past a mural of a soccer player in Guadalajara, Mexico, on April 29. Mexico will co-host the biggest World Cup in history, along with the United States and Canada, from June 11 to July 19.
    (
    Ulises Ruiz
    /
    AFP via Getty Images
    )

    "You're going to have a representation of countries and nations that we will have never seen before. And so that will be very exciting to see," Tallec Marston said.

    The current U.S. Men's National Team has far more experience on the World Cup stage compared with the 1994 team. Since then, the team has qualified for every World Cup except one, in 2018. There's much excitement for this group of young players, many of whom are playing for top European clubs.

    The controversies leading up to the games are also quite different. In 1994, the uncertainty was whether many Americans would attend the matches. This year, the question is whether they will be able to afford to — with dynamic pricing driving ticket costs sky-high.

    The tournament will also take place during a politically volatile period in the United States. The ongoing war with Iran has led to questions about whether the Iranian team will participate.

    The Trump administration's travel restrictions and harsh immigration crackdown have also sparked debate as to how many tourists will feel comfortable traveling to the United States. The administration is also requiring a bond of up to $15,000 for travelers from 50 countries that it deemed as having immigration risk factors, such as high overstay rates and screening and vetting deficiencies. Five nations that qualified for the World Cup — Algeria, Ivory Coast, Senegal, Tunisia and Cape Verde — are on the list.

    For all these reasons, Lewis, who wrote Around the World Cup in 40 Years, about his experience covering eight men's World Cups, expects that "there'll be magic, but there'll be headaches too."

    " I think the games themselves should be exciting and fun," he said. However, putting the problems to rest, Lewis added, will be "easier said than done."
    Copyright 2026 NPR

  • The latest information on the vote
    Four signs in shades of blue reading "Re-Elect Joe,"  "Yes on W," "Elizabeth MOON" and JUDY ENNIS," are displayed on a lawn of grass.
    Campaign signs for Davis Joint Unified School District school board candidates are displayed outside a home in Davis.

    Topline:

    Left-leaning candidates running in three school board contests flagged by EdSource as races to watch are each leading comfortably in unofficial election results more than a week after a so-called “blue tsunami” swept the country. Unofficial results also show progressive candidates ahead in some races in the Inland Empire, a conservative stronghold where several far-right school board candidates ran on issues such as gender identity and parents’ rights. Counties have until Dec. 3 to certify election results.

    What else? In the Orange Unified School District, four moderate incumbents are far ahead of conservative challengers in separate races. One of them, board President Stephen Glass, defeated challenger Jack Chang, and has declared victory. The conservative candidates ran largely on parents’ rights and fiscal responsibility. All four incumbents are up by double-digit percentage points, Orange County election results show. The election follows last year’s recall of two conservative school board members.

    Read on... for more on the implications.

    Left-leaning candidates running in three school board contests flagged by EdSource as races to watch are each leading comfortably in unofficial election results more than a week after a so-called “blue tsunami” swept the country.

    Unofficial results also show progressive candidates ahead in some races in the Inland Empire, a conservative stronghold where several far-right school board candidates ran on issues such as gender identity and parents’ rights. Counties have until Dec. 3 to certify election results.

    In the Orange Unified School District, four moderate incumbents are far ahead of conservative challengers in separate races. One of them, board President Stephen Glass, defeated challenger Jack Chang, and has declared victory. The conservative candidates ran largely on parents’ rights and fiscal responsibility.

    “We won,” Glass said on social media. “We’ll keep putting students first and supporting every teacher, every classified professional and every family.”

    All four incumbents are up by double-digit percentage points, Orange County election results show. The election follows last year’s recall of two conservative school board members.

    In a race for the Davis Unified school board, an anti-transgender candidate who once stripped down to a bikini at a school board meeting, lost decisively, according to unofficial election results. Beth Bourne, president of the Yolo County chapter of Moms For Liberty, trails incumbent Elizabeth Moon by 89 percentage points, results show.

    In Palo Alto — where issues over academics dominated the race — newcomers Avery Wang and Linda Henigin are ahead in unofficial results for two seats. John Craig, who ran in tandem with Wang, conceded on election night. Wang ran primarily on retaining academic rigor, especially in math. “It’s the beginning of a movement,” Wang told Palo Alto Online.

    Henigin ran on a platform of improving student well-being following a recent spate of student suicides.

    Elsewhere in the state, school board candidates in conservative strongholds such as Chino Valley and Temecula fared poorly in local school board races.

    In Temecula, school board President Joseph Komrosky trails challenger David Sola by 10 percentage points, results show. Sola has declared victory. Komrosky had voted to ban critical race theory in district schools and attempted to ban teaching materials that mentioned slain gay rights icon Harvey Milk, drawing a sharp rebuke from Gov. Gavin Newsom.

    Komrosky’s apparent defeat was part of what The Press-Enterprise reported as “a seismic shift in local governance given recent elections that gave power to the Christian right.”

    In Chino Valley Unified in San Bernardino County, two conservative school board candidates are trailing far behind, results show. Chris Shaw, the husband of State Superintendent of Public Instruction candidate Sonja Shaw, trails Frank Gerdine by nearly 17 percentage points, while Meagan Lichthart is ahead of Shaun Smith, backed by Shaw, by 15 percentage points.

    This story was originally published by EdSource.

    EdSource is an independent nonprofit organization that provides analysis on key education issues facing California and the nation. LAist republishes articles from EdSource with permission.

  • Sponsored message
  • State grant prevents deep service cuts
    Travelers with rolling suitcases wait on an outdoor train platform beside a gray, teal and black Metrolink locomotive numbered 922. In the foreground, a woman in sunglasses and a black hoodie stands with a blue suitcase topped by a patterned backpack, talking with a man in a gray hoodie. More passengers stand farther down the platform near double-decker passenger cars under an overcast sky.
    A Metrolink commuter train departs from the Moorpark Station on May 26, 2026 in Moorpark.

    Topline:

    Major service cuts at Metrolink, Southern California’s regional commuter rail service, are on hold for now thanks to a $20 million grant from the California State Transportation Agency. The Metrolink board of directors approved the agency’s $420 million budget on Friday.

    Why it matters: The previous budget proposal included slashing a third of weekday trains and 40% of weekend trains.

    Background: Metrolink staff have worked on this year’s budget since last September. The agency has pointed to slowing fare revenue, rising costs due to inflation and low ridership numbers for its budget troubles.

    Read on … for the latest on Metrolink’s budget.

    Major service cuts to Metrolink are on hold for now thanks to a $20 million grant from California’s State Transportation Agency. The Metrolink board of directors approved the agency’s $420 million budget on Friday.

    The previous budget proposal included slashing a third of weekday trains and 40% of weekend trains.

    “Thankfully, our customers were spared the disappointment and frustration of losing the service they rely on to travel the region for business and pleasure,” Tom Schamber, chief financial officer at Metrolink, said at the board meeting.

    How did we get here? 

    The Metrolink budget had been approved quarterly since June as staff worked out the annual budget.

    Metrolink staff have worked on this year’s budget since last September. The agency has pointed to slowing fare revenue, rising costs due to inflation and low ridership numbers for its budget troubles.

    “Fare box revenue ended the year $14 million under budget. This was sobering, and we realized that not only was fiscal [20]26 off, but our ridership expectations for fiscal year [20]27 would need to be recalibrated to this new baseline,” Schamber said.

    A majority of Metrolink’s budget is funded by Orange, Los Angeles, Riverside, San Bernardino and Ventura counties’ transportation agencies. For more than a year, Metrolink officials have been building a budget that member agencies, like the Orange County Transportation Authority and L.A. Metro, would approve.

    L.A. Metro and OCTA cut their subsidies to Metrolink by 3% and 10%, respectively.

    “The challenges ahead of us were becoming more evident,” Schamber said at Friday’s board meeting. “In addition to disappointing fare revenue and funding limitations, we must absorb inevitable cost increases in several of our largest contracts.”

    What we know about the grant

    The $20 million grant from the state comes with the expectation that Metrolink will retain the same service levels provided today, Schamber added.

    Metrolink CEO Darren M. Kettle said another expectation is that the agency must plan to maintain its services for the upcoming year.

    “We don't have a plan. We're working on a plan to make sure we have the funding to deliver the same level of service at a minimum,” Kettle said. “With respect to these conditions, based on what we know now, as of last evening, our staff is confident that Metrolink will be able to meet these conditions.”

    What’s next? 

    Kettle said staff got a head start on next fiscal year’s budget through the state grant application. Officials said the rail agency is also gearing up for the 2028 Olympic Games.

  • Transportation secretary says communications issue
    A Uniter Airlines plane on a tarmac near the terminal
    A United Airlines Boeing 787 Dreamliner sits on the tarmac earlier this year. Activity at Terminal 8 — United's main terminal — was disrupted Halloween morning due to a carbon monoxide leak.

    Topline:

    The Federal Aviation Administration grounded all flights nationwide Friday afternoon because of communications problems at regional air traffic control centers. The FAA notice said the ground stop was being imposed “due to extraordinary circumstances and for reasons of safety.” Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy said there is a communications issue affecting the 22 regional air traffic control centers that direct planes en route between airports nationwide. He said FAA technicians are investigating.

    What officials said: Secretary of Homeland Security Markwayne Mullin said there was no indication yet that “this was a nefarious attack against us. It’s just a telecommunications outage.” “Everybody’s safe. There’s no reason to be concerned about your loved ones if they’re flying,” Mullin said.

    The context: This is the first nationwide ground stop since January 2023 when a key FAA computer system malfunctioned. Before that the last time had been after the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. Friday’s ground stop was different than the one after Sept. 11 because planes were not being told to land immediately and pilots likely were able to communicate with ground controllers at airports, Arroyo said.

    What's next: There is no timeline for restarting flights. Mullin said investigators will look at whether there is any link to the FAA’s nationwide rollout of a new artificial intelligence system to help identify problems and reroute planes. But that system operates out of one location near Washington, D.C., and just sends recommendations to the air traffic control centers.

    The Federal Aviation Administration grounded all flights nationwide Friday afternoon because of communications problems at regional air traffic control centers.

    The FAA notice said the ground stop was being imposed “due to extraordinary circumstances and for reasons of safety.”

    Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy said there is a communications issue affecting the 22 regional air traffic control centers that direct planes en route between airports nationwide. He said FAA technicians are investigating. This is the first nationwide ground stop since January 2023, when a key FAA computer system malfunctioned. Before that the last time had been after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.

    Secretary of Homeland Security Markwayne Mullin said there was no indication yet that “this was a nefarious attack against us. It’s just a telecommunications outage.”

    “Everybody’s safe. There’s no reason to be concerned about your loved ones if they’re flying,” Mullin said.

    There is no timeline for restarting flights. Mullin said investigators will look at whether there is any link to the FAA’s nationwide rollout of a new artificial intelligence system to help identify problems and reroute planes. But that system operates out of one location near Washington, D.C., and just sends recommendations to the air traffic control centers.

    The government has been working to overhaul the outdated technology that air traffic controllers rely on since Congress approved $12.5 billion for the project last year. Miles of old copper wires have been replaced with fiber optic lines and old radio systems are gradually being replaced at airports across the country.

    But much work remains. Duffy has said that another $30 billion will be needed to complete the work, and the White House has begun lobbying Congress to approve it.

    The problem appeared similar to a regional air traffic control communication outage in September that snarled hundreds of flights across the Northeast, aviation safety expert Steve Arroyo said, except this time on a nationwide scale. It may be linked to the outdated technology used by air traffic controllers.

    “If you don’t have that ability, whether it’s because the old wires that they have are just run down or for whatever reason, you’ve got to stop airplanes on the ground,” said Arroyo, who is a former United Airlines pilot. “And not put them in the air where you’re going to risk not being able to communicate with them.”

    Friday’s ground stop was different than the one after Sept. 11 because planes were not being told to land immediately and pilots likely were able to communicate with ground controllers at airports, Arroyo said.

    ___

    AP writer Mead Gruver contributed to this report from Fort Collins, Colorado.

    This is a developing story and will be updated.

  • What's next after Newsom leaves office?
    California Gov. Gavin Newsom speaks during an event in San Francisco on Nov. 9, 2023.
    California Gov. Gavin Newsom speaks during an event in San Francisco on Nov. 9, 2023.

    Topline:

    By the time Gov. Gavin Newsom spared the lives of over 500 prisoners who were sentenced to death last week in the nation’s largest act of mass clemency, capital punishment had long become an afterthought in California.

    Why it matters: Voters as recently as 2016 indicated they wanted to keep the death penalty on the books when they passed a ballot measure to speed up executions and rejected one to repeal the practice. Death penalty opponents believe they won’t immediately have to run another campaign to repeal capital punishment if they prevail in the court case.

    The backstory: The state hasn’t executed anyone since 2006. Newsom guaranteed that wouldn’t change when he issued a moratorium on the practice shortly after taking office in 2019. He later dismantled the San Quentin State Prison death chamber and sent condemned prisoners across the state to other facilities.

    By the time Gov. Gavin Newsom spared the lives of over 500 prisoners who were sentenced to death last week in the nation’s largest act of mass clemency, capital punishment had long become an afterthought in California.

    The state hasn’t executed anyone since 2006. Newsom guaranteed that wouldn’t change when he issued a moratorium on the practice shortly after taking office in 2019. He later dismantled the San Quentin State Prison death chamber and sent condemned prisoners across the state to other facilities.

    Of the 548 people whose sentences he moved to commute last week, the vast majority were waiting to be appointed lawyers for appeals and challenges. Just 45 faced imminent execution if the moratorium were lifted, though that was unlikely with Newsom’s successor, Gov.-elect Xavier Becerra, saying he also would not execute anyone while in office.

    And even before Newsom acted, a pending California court case that argues the death penalty is applied in such a racially biased manner that it’s unconstitutional, might end the imposition of death sentences indefinitely.

    Voters as recently as 2016 indicated they wanted to keep the death penalty on the books when they passed a ballot measure to speed up executions and rejected one to repeal the practice. Death penalty opponents believe they won’t immediately have to run another campaign to repeal capital punishment if they prevail in the court case.

    Still, the contradictory status quo remains: Like about half of U.S. states, California still has the death penalty on the books. It also allows for a death sentence under broader circumstances than any other state, according to the Death Penalty Information Center. Those include the murder of a police officer, prosecutor or any other public official, and murders involving gang activity or financial gain.

    Local prosecutors have vowed to continue pursuing the punishment when allowed, meaning the state is likely to slowly continue sending defendants to death row, even if the Supreme Court approves all of Newsom’s commutations.

    “I think for all intents and purposes, the death penalty is over in California and nobody will be executed again,” said Michael Romano, director of the Three Strikes Project at Stanford Law School, who chairs a state committee on revising criminal sentences. “The energy and focus and money around criminal justice reform have shifted elsewhere.”

    Romano predicted advocates will turn their attention to issues like restricting solitary confinement in jails and prisons and changing the cash bail system.

    It’s unclear where California voters stand, but in a nationwide Gallup poll conducted in October in the wake of a botched execution in Tennessee, American support for capital punishment dipped just below the majority for the first time in 55 years.

    The sweeping commutations mark how far California has moved in three decades, from the nation’s toughest crime laws to, under Newsom, experimenting with a Nordic approach focused on rehabilitation and preparing most offenders to re-enter society.

    Despite their 2016 vote in favor of the death penalty, Californians have also since 2012 passed ballot measures to reduce criminal sentences. The Legislature has passed several laws allowing prisoners new release opportunities and the state Board of Parole Hearings earlier this year allowed some prisoners serving life without parole to gain the opportunity to be resentenced, inspiring a legal challenge from law enforcement groups.

    Even Proposition 36, the tougher-on-crime measure voters approved overwhelmingly in 2024, focused on requiring defendants in drug- and theft-related cases to undergo treatment rather than go straight to jail. Results have been mixed, with few defendants getting mandated treatments, CalMatters has found.

    “It wasn’t, ‘Lock people up,’” Romano said. “It was, ‘We are going to give people rehabilitation.’”

    For San Bernardino County District Attorney Jason Anderson, that “doesn’t change the fact that the law still allows for the death penalty to be sought.”

    Anderson, who opposed Newsom’s commutations, is one of several district attorneys who have said they’ll continue to push for death sentences when appropriate, including in Los Angeles, Riverside and Orange counties.

    He discusses the likelihood an execution won’t happen with murder victims’ families when deciding whether to pursue the death penalty, Anderson said, but the moratorium doesn’t deter him. Nor, he noted, has it deterred juries that recommend the sentence.

    “All that other stuff is a side argument,” he said, of the long appeals process and unlikelihood of an execution.

    Since Newsom’s moratorium, Anderson’s office has secured death sentences against five men.

    Another one is on the way. Louis Gabriel Lucero of Victorville pleaded guilty this year to killing his girlfriend and her two sons in 2020. Last month a jury recommended the death penalty and a judge next month will decide whether to impose it or a sentence of life without parole. If he’s sentenced to death, Lucero would be among the first to be sent to a post-clemency death row.

    Of the 40 condemned prisoners from San Bernardino County, nine had their sentences commuted automatically by Newsom; the state Supreme Court will need to review those of 31 others who had more than one felony conviction. Anderson has filed a motion to unseal their criminal records so the details of their crimes and what he called their “recidivist nature” are public as the court considers Newsom’s requests.

    The Criminal Justice Legal Foundation, which opposes the commutations, has filed similar motions. State public defenders and anti-death penalty advocates have also filed briefs supporting the commutations.

    Anderson said while he respects differences of opinion on capital punishment, he disagreed most with Newsom’s wholesale commutations, saying the governor should have considered each case individually and that if his goal was to end the death penalty he has “enough power, prestige and political savvy to put another proposition on the ballot.

    “You have a law on the books that’s essentially been overridden by one person,” he said.

    Newsom said, in an open letter last week to Californians explaining his decision, that he didn’t want to create two tiers of murder victims in which some perpetrators deserved to die for their crimes and others did not.

    “I carefully considered different categories of capital crimes and offender characteristics,” he wrote. “I have learned, however, from speaking with the victims harmed by these crimes, that each experiences their loss as the worst of the worst.”

    Rather than propose another ballot measure, death penalty opponents are instead hoping a state court strikes down the death penalty in a case brought by the NAACP, the American Civil Liberties Union and the Office of the State Public Defender.

    In a novel challenge to the death penalty, the plaintiffs argue California death sentences are broadly applied with such stark racial disparities that it violates state constitutional protections against discrimination. They say four decades of sentencing data show that Black defendants are up to 8.7 times more likely to receive a death sentence than other defendants in murder cases. Defendants are 8.8 times more likely to receive the death penalty in cases with a white victim than a non-white victim. The state Supreme Court allowed the case to move forward in August; a Sacramento County court is now hearing evidence.

    The plaintiffs seek a court order barring counties from imposing death sentences. If they prevail, the death penalty would remain in state statute, said Avi Frey, deputy director of criminal law at the ACLU of Northern California, but “any county that tried to bring a capital prosecution would first need to demonstrate that they had basically corrected” any racial disparities.

    Natasha Minsker of the California Anti-Death Penalty Coalition said she’ll now advocate for district attorneys like Anderson to stop seeking the sentence. San Bernardino and Riverside counties are among the top 10 counties seeking death sentences in the nation, Minsker said.

    “The reality is most district attorneys in California understand that the death penalty is a failure,” she said. “That is where we’re turning our attention, to those counties that really are outliers.”

    Tinisch Hollins is a crime victim and executive director of Californians for Safety and Justice, which advocates for using state funds currently spent on incarceration on crime prevention programs instead.

    The commutations, she said, offer some finality in the death penalty debate that she hopes will allow policymakers to move on to other changes in the criminal justice system. She wants the state to expand victims’ services like cash assistance and mental health services for survivors of violence, and to consider more programs that allow prisoners to face crime victims as part of their rehabilitative efforts. And she said even those prisoners whose crimes were eligible for death affect the rehabilitation of others when they interact with other prisoners.

    “Their fate is already sealed,” she said, of those whose sentences were commuted to life without parole. “Even for people who have committed the most serious crimes and those who may not ever have the opportunity to return to society, what do we want to happen during their sentence? What do we want to put our dollars toward that will ultimately ensure our future safety?”

    This article was originally published on CalMatters and was republished under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives license.