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
  • Listen Now Playing Listen

The Brief

The most important stories for you to know today
  • 2030 plans for NASA's nuclear reactor on the moon

    Topline:

    The Trump administration is pushing efforts to place a nuclear reactor on the moon to power a future human base. A newly revealed directive from acting NASA Administrator Sean Duffy outlines a goal to launch the reactor by 2030, a timeline some scientists warn could be too ambitious due to high costs and technical challenges.

    Race for power: The initiative is part of the broader U.S. mission to return astronauts to the moon and assert leadership in space, as nations like China and Russia also pursue nuclear-powered lunar infrastructure.

    Critical energy and territory: At a press conference, Duffy pointed to a specific region of the moon rich in ice and sunlight as critical territory. Duffy also emphasized that nuclear energy is essential for sustaining life on the moon and warned that the U.S. is already falling behind.

    The Trump administration is accelerating plans to place a nuclear reactor on the moon to power a base for humans.

    The reactor would launch to the moon by 2030, according to a directive by acting NASA Administrator Sean Duffy that was sent to NASA officials in July and obtained by NPR. It's an ambitious target that has some in the scientific community concerned about high costs and a potentially unrealistic schedule.

    The plan follows the United States' goal to return astronauts to the moon and be a leader in space exploration as China and Russia also aim to use nuclear power on the moon by the end of the decade. Duffy said during a press conference on Tuesday that using nuclear energy as a power source on the moon is necessary to sustain life there — and that the U.S. is behind in its efforts.

    "There's a certain part of the moon that everyone knows is the best. We have ice there. We have sunlight there. We wanna get there first and claim that for America," Duffy said.

    Here is what to know about the administration's plans, and how using a nuclear reactor as a power source on the moon could work.

    Why a nuclear reactor on the moon?

    Spacecraft orbiting the Earth or stationed on the moon are typically powered by solar panels. But for any long-term human occupation of the moon, solar power alone won't be enough according to Roger Myers, an expert on space-based nuclear power.

    "The sun sets on the moon for two weeks," he says. "You have to have another source of energy: The sun and batteries do not work. We're going to have to have nuclear power."

    NASA now wants to launch a nuclear reactor of at least 100 kilowatts electric output, according to the directive. This would generate less power than typical nuclear reactors in the U.S. and could power only 70 to 80 homes, scientists say.

    How would it work?

    Nuclear reactors on the moon work in much the same way as reactors on Earth, according to Bhavya Lal, a former associate administrator for technology, policy and strategy at NASA. A controlled nuclear reaction in uranium fuel is used to generate heat that in turn can be used to make electricity.

    That's very similar to how the 94 commercially operated nuclear reactors in the U.S. operate, according to the U.S. Department of Energy. A typical nuclear reactor in the U.S. generates at least 1 gigawatt of power, which is equivalent to 100 million LED light bulbs, according to the department.

    The key difference between Earth and the moon is that "on Earth we have an atmosphere, so we can cool these reactors," Lal says. Many nuclear reactors are cooled by water, which in turn discharges the excess heat into the environment.

    Without an atmosphere or any bodies of water, nuclear reactors on the moon need to radiate their excess heat directly into space. That means they need large radiators that can help them dissipate the heat load. The reactors' design also requires them to operate at higher temperatures than on Earth.

    A man speaks at a podium with the slogan "Unleashing American Drone Dominance," displayed.
    Transportation Secretary and acting NASA Administrator Sean Duffy speaks during a news conference on new drone regulations and plans to use nuclear power on the moon on Tuesday.
    (
    Julia Demaree Nikhinson
    /
    AP
    )

    What are the risks and dangers?

    Moonquakes and meteorite strikes could damage a reactor, but the chances are slim. Moreover, even if something did happen on the surface, "there's no wind, there's no water that would move the radioactivity around," says Patrick McClure, the chief operating officer of SpaceNukes, a company developing space-based nuclear reactors. That's in contrast to Earth, where radioactive fallout can be spread over long distances by wind and rain.

    Kathryn Huff, professor of nuclear, plasma, and radiological engineering at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, said a nuclear reactor being on the moon is not the primary safety issue — the main concern is getting the reactor up there and what happens once it reaches the end of its lifespan. It is unclear how long the reactor could operate, but most in the U.S. can last at least 80 years, according to the Department of Energy.

    "It cannot blow up the moon," said Huff, who was also assistant secretary for Nuclear Energy at the Department of Energy under the Biden administration. "If you're considering bringing that reactor off the moon someday, making sure that its reentry into the Earth's atmosphere is flawless will be pretty important because I think no one really wants to see a repeat of the Kosmos 954 [incident]."

    Kosmos 954, a nuclear-powered satellite by Russia, malfunctioned in January 1978 while reentering Earth's atmosphere and exploded over Canada, spreading radioactive debris across the country.

    McClure says that there are safety measures in place to ensure uranium fuel used in any lunar reactor would not be radioactive when it is launched. Moreover, he says, the reactor would not be activated until it reached what he described as a "nuclear safe orbit" of at least 621 miles above Earth.

    Is this the right time?

    The news that NASA will be developing reactors for the moon comes at a particularly challenging time for the agency.

    At least 20% of NASA's workforce has opted to leave the agency through the Trump administration's deferred resignation program, and the administration has also proposed decreasing NASA's budget. A fiscal year 2026 budget request released in May would reduce funding for the agency by about 24%, from nearly $25 billion to nearly $19 billion — though the House and Senate are discussing recommendations that would keep funding for the agency around the current budget.

    However, the agency recently got a boost, reversing earlier proposals to retire some NASA programs, including funding toward upcoming moon missions. Trump's One Big Beautiful Bill Act allocates nearly $10 billion in additional funding for NASA through 2032, including backing for Mars missions and plans to return to the moon.

    The reactor project could consume a lot of that money. Lal and Myers estimated in a recent report that developing such a reactor would cost around $3 billion over five years.

    In his directive, Duffy said that if China or Russia were to reach the moon first, either country could "potentially declare a keep-out zone which would significantly inhibit" the U.S. from establishing presence if it's not there first.

    But the urgency to return to the moon with a nuclear reactor in a five-year timeline will be extremely difficult to meet, said Huff. She also suggests there should be a multiyear authorization process that includes input from several agencies, including NASA and the Energy Department, on nuclear safeguards before and after launch.

    The U.S. should also prioritize the science of the mission and not focus on being first, Huff also said.

    "You have to center a lot of this work, especially in space, in the scientific and technological community rather than in a community of the military and defense," she said. "I do hope to see that NASA's leadership in this space will imbue the project with a sense of international collaboration with our friends and allies."
    Copyright 2025 NPR

  • Federal changes may cause drastic drop in coverage
    A doctor in a collared shirt and tie, but no coat, holds s a woman's hands. An examining table is behind them.
    County officials estimate that recent Medi-Cal changes could put coverage at risk for hundreds of thousands of residents.

    Topline:

    The number of Californians without health insurance could double from 2 million today to 4 million by 2030, according to a report from the 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.

    Losing coverage: 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.

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

    Why it matters: 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's being proposed: 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. LA 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.

    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.

  • Sponsored message
  • California says insurer mishandled wildfire claims
    Ruins of a burned building with a State Farm sign outside. The off-white brick exterior of the building remains standing. The sign outside reads "State Farm John Diehl 626-791-9915." Wreckage of other buildings is visible in the background against gray skies.
    An insurance office burned by the Eaton Fire in Altadena.

    Topline:

    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 investigation: The state analyzed 220 randomly selected claims filed in response to last year’s fires and found hundreds of violations by State Farm in more than half them — what state attorneys dubbed a “troubling pattern” in their filing.

    The insurer's response: State Farm denied the allegations and called them politically motivated.

    Read on ... for more on the state's action against its largest home insurer.

    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.

  • Official World Cup watch parties announced
    The FIFA World Cup trophy is displayed during the official draw ceremony held at the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts in Washington, D.C. on Dec. 5, 2025.

    Topline:

    Details are out for FIFA’s World Cup Fan Zone parties in LA County in June and July. Watch tournament matches at ten locations from Venice Beach to Pomona, from free to $$$ with food, drink, and big screens.

    Why it matters: The FIFA Fan Zones offer people an opportunity to get a taste of the tournament while not breaking the bank to pay for tickets.

    The locations: The Original Farmers Market in L.A., June 18-21; The City of Downey, June 20; LA Union Station, June 25-28; Hansen Dam Lake, July 2-5; Magic Johnson Park, July 4-5; Whittier Narrows, July 9-11; Venice Beach, July 11; The Fairplex, July 14-15, July 18-19; West Harbor, July 14-15, July 18-19; Downtown Burbank, July 18-19

    Some are free: The Fan Zones in the city of Downey, Union Station L.A., “Magic” Johnson Park, and Whittier Narrows are free of charge.

    Go deeper: Will SoFi workers reap the benefits of the World Cup?
     

    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.

    Fan Zones across L.A. County:

    The Original Farmers Market in L.A., June 18-21
    The City of Downey, June 20
    LA Union Station, June 25-28
    Hansen Dam Lake, July 2-5
    "Magic" Johnson Park, July 4-5
    Whittier Narrows, July 9-11
    Venice Beach, July 11
    The Fairplex, July 14-15, July 18-19
    West Harbor, July 14-15, July 18-19
    Downtown Burbank, July 18-19

    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.

    Multi-colored scarves are displayed with the worlds "FIFA LOS ANGELES" printed on them. A sign with a pointed finger reads "METRO".
    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.

  • Education can be costly and court cases linger
    Students of various skin tones walk on campus grounds during the day.
    Many college campuses either don’t track their populations of rural students.

    Topline:

    Up against a massive court backlog that can drag their cases for years, asylum seekers face steep costs when pursuing their dreams of college in California.

    Facing a double blow: Asylum-seeking students in California often face a double blow: they are charged higher tuition for nonresidents and excluded from most financial aid. For students and their families, this can mean thousands of dollars paid out of pocket and years of financial stress as their immigration cases remain unresolved. Before establishing residency, asylum-seeking students are charged non-resident rates, which are about three times what state residents pay for public universities and roughly eight to 13 times more for community colleges, depending on the district.

    Policy changes stoke uncertainty: As of February 2026, a little over 2.3 million immigrants are awaiting asylum hearings nationwide, according to Syracuse University’s Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse, which tracks federal activity. The most recent data shows California alone had about 169,000 pending asylum cases in its immigration courts by the end of 2023 — the second-largest backlog of any state. The average wait for an asylum hearing in California was 1,412 days at that time. The Trump administration paused asylum cases in November, creating even further delays. The administration has now allowed cases to resume for applicants from all but 40 countries.

    Up against a massive court backlog that can drag their cases for years, asylum seekers face steep costs when pursuing their dreams of college in California.

    Asylum-seeking students in California often face a double blow: they are charged higher tuition for nonresidents and excluded from most financial aid. For students and their families, this can mean thousands of dollars paid out of pocket and years of financial stress as their immigration cases remain unresolved.

    Before establishing residency, asylum-seeking students are charged non-resident rates, which are about three times what state residents pay for public universities and roughly eight to 13 times more for community colleges, depending on the district.

    All asylum seekers are disqualified from federal financial aid. The few who qualify for California’s state aid may never know their options, or face hurdles in obtaining it due to a patchwork of financial aid processes.

    The state’s higher education systems are not mandated to track asylum seekers, making state budget impacts nearly unquantifiable during legislative attempts to expand financial aid eligibility.

    “I only see them struggling,” said Eric Cline, social services program director at OASIS Legal Services, which supports LGBTQ+ asylum seekers across the Bay Area and Central Valley. “I’m always surprised (when) a few clients tell me 'I just graduated from college.’ I think, ‘Wow, how did that happen?’”

    Policy changes stoke uncertainty for asylum seekers

    Asylum seeking is one of the least-protected immigration statuses in the U.S. Asylum seekers, who’ve fled their home countries fearing persecution and are asking the U.S. for protection, differ from refugees, whose status is granted before they enter the country. Asylum seekers apply upon arriving in the U.S.

    Applicants can stay as their cases remain pending for years, though experts say the Trump administration is expediting deportations for numerous asylum seekers and ending cases before they can receive a full hearing.

    As of February 2026, a little over 2.3 million immigrants are awaiting asylum hearings nationwide, according to Syracuse University’s Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse, which tracks federal activity. The most recent data shows California alone had about 169,000 pending asylum cases in its immigration courts by the end of 2023 — the second-largest backlog of any state. The average wait for an asylum hearing in California was 1,412 days at that time.

    The Trump administration paused asylum cases in November, creating even further delays. The administration has now allowed cases to resume for applicants from all but 40 countries. In the San Francisco immigration court system, which is popular among asylum seekers due to higher acceptance rates, a combination of firings by the Trump administration, retirements and relocations whittled the 21 immigration judges to two, according to reporting in Mission Local. Left behind is a caseload of nearly 119,000 immigration cases, the highest of any immigration court in California.

    President Trump’s “Big Beautiful Bill” also established new fees for asylum seekers, placing additional pressure on an already low-income population. Applicants must now pay an initial $100 application fee plus $100 per year while their case is pending, $550 for a work permit, and $745 each year to renew the permit. In addition, a new rule proposed by the Department of Homeland Security would effectively end the ability of asylum seekers to obtain work permits at all.

    People walk in a large plaza in front of a large brick collegiate building. Lawns flank the plaza, which is partially shaded by a tree.
    Royce Hall on the UCLA campus
    (
    Genaro Molina/Los Angeles Times via Getty Imag
    /
    Los Angeles Times
    )

    As they await a decision, asylum seekers are excluded from federal aid and some state financial aid programs, including Cal Grants under California law.

    For one asylum seeker, Carol, being ineligible for financial aid meant she had to take time off from school to work to make ends meet. CalMatters is not using her full name because she fears speaking publicly may jeopardize her asylum case.

    Carol did speak before the Assembly Higher Education Committee in 2023 urging lawmakers to pass AB 888, which would have expanded Cal Grant eligibility to certain asylum seekers. The bill ultimately did not pass.

    She said she arrived in the United States at 17 and had spent more than six years waiting for her case to move through immigration courts, a period during which she said she was ineligible for financial aid.

    “I’ve had to delay my educational journey several times, including going part-time and even taking a semester off from school to work,” Carol told lawmakers.

    Without access to aid, she said she experienced homelessness, couch surfing and at one point slept on a mattress topper on a hardwood floor because she could not afford a bed. She worked multiple jobs at a time, skipped meals and attended class without the required course materials.

    Her story, she said, was not new. Carol told the committee that four years earlier her brother had testified with a nearly identical experience on behalf of a previous bill that was ultimately vetoed, a cycle she argued could have been prevented.

    “Had California taken action then, I wouldn’t have had to face the harrowing experiences that I shared with you today,” she said.

    Despite the barriers, Carol graduated from Cal State Long Beach and worked as a caseworker with the International Rescue Committee, helping resettle refugees and asylum seekers. She told lawmakers she hopes to pursue a law degree and become an international human rights attorney.

    The narrow path to college aid for asylum-seeking students

    Many asylum seekers arrive eager to continue studies they began abroad, but quickly run into what Cline calls “a brick wall."

    “All of our clients are low-income … they’re almost never eligible for generalized financial aid,” he said. “When you take away the financial aid aspect, it makes (college) pretty inaccessible.”

    For California residents, annual undergraduate tuition is $15,588 at the University of California, $6,838 at the California State University and about $1,380 for 30 units at a community college. Students classified as non-residents — including some asylum seekers before establishing residency — can pay $54,858 at a University of California, about $20,968 at a Cal State before campus-based fees, and roughly $10,140 to $13,560 for 30 units at a community college, depending on the district. These figures do not include campus-based fees, housing or living expenses.

    Even when students do manage to establish residency, the cost is still steep. For the many asylum seekers who arrive in the United States as adults, they may not have attended a California school previously, barring them from qualifying for state financial aid.

    AB 540, the 2001 law that exempts undocumented students from paying non-resident tuition, only applies if the student attended a California high school or community college for three years.

    Those who qualify through AB 540 can fill out the California Dream Act Application for state financial aid, such as Cal Grants, university system-specific grants, state loans, and the state’s middle class scholarship.

    The application process can still be confusing for asylum seekers whose status is not fully accounted for in the design of the application. For example, asylum seekers often have Social Security numbers for work authorization, but affirming so while answering the financial aid pre-screening questions leads to undetermined eligibility because the questions don’t take into account the nuances of applying as an asylum seeker.

    Colorful stickers and small pins lay on a table.
    Stickers and flyers on a table in the Undocumented Community Center at the College of San Mateo in San Mateo, on Nov. 28, 2023. At this center, undocumented students can access financial and legal aid as well as guidance in navigating grant applications.
    (
    Amaya Edwards
    /
    CalMatters
    )

    Asylum seekers often require extra help from financial aid counselors, but even counselors may not know how to help navigate eligibility rules. Students often wind up seeking help from undocumented student resource centers on public campuses, which are designed to help students who lack legal residency and those from mixed-status families find aid and academic support.

    Kaveena Singh, the director of immigration legal services at the East Bay Sanctuary Covenant, which provides legal services to low-income immigrants, noted that she herself has written letters to financial aid offices to help explain the in-between nature of the few asylum-seeking students she has served.

    As an asylum-seeking student in his mid-20s, L. ended up qualifying for state financial aid through AB 540. However, he misunderstood for six years exactly what aid he qualified for. L. wished to withhold his name and the names of the institutions he’s attended for fear of negative impacts on his pending asylum case.

    Initially, community college didn’t cost him anything — but when he transferred to a large four-year university, the cost of college soared. He went to his university's financial aid office for help so often that all the staff there knew his name. It was a "big relief” when he was finally able to successfully fill out the California Dream Act Application, and obtain financial aid for his summer and fall quarters.

    L.'s asylum case has been pending for nine years. He, his dad, mom and younger brother arrived in the United States in the winter of 2016, claiming asylum under fear of political retribution. His father organized political assemblies in China, and his mother was forced to have an abortion under the one-child policy.

    “I just wish I could go home and visit family and friends and catch up for a good few weeks in the summer here and there to reconnect with my past,” L. said. “It's like there's two separate lives, like two entities being artificially cut.”

    L. worked throughout high school and college, and worried about affording school.

    Most days, the combination of family trauma and the limbo of waiting for his case means L. survives through “constant compartmentalization.”

    In the meantime, he tries to carry on — he studies politics, and is interested in international relations and human rights.

    "As rough as all that's happened, the silver lining is that one day hopefully I get a passport and a green card," L. said. "To help other people avoid such a hassle will be just as fulfilling for me."

    Previous legislative efforts have failed

    Legislative bills to extend state financial aid eligibility to asylum-seeking students have been introduced at least twice in recent years but have failed.

    One attempt came in 2019, when Sen. Ben Allen, a Democrat from El Segundo, introduced SB 296, a bill that would have extended Cal Grant eligibility to students with pending asylum applications. The measure passed the Legislature with some bipartisan support, but was vetoed by Gov. Gavin Newsom, who said that it would "impose costs on the General Fund that must be weighed in the annual budget process."

    “That was frustrating, but I understood it,” Allen told CalMatters. “The real issue is that we don’t have good data. Our schools don’t track asylum seekers, so we can’t easily calculate the cost.”

    UC data on asylum-seeking students is protected due to privacy policies, according to Stett Holbrook, a UC spokesperson. The Cal State system reports it has less than 500 students with "asylum status," which includes both those who have an asylum granted and asylum seekers, according to Cal State spokesperson Amy Bentley-Smith. The numbers are self-reported during the admissions process.

    In spring 2025, 13,507 students self-identified as “refugee/asylee” across the California Community Colleges — up from 11,537 the prior semester — per the CCC DataMart. The data does not include a category for just asylum seekers. Students can self-identify their immigration status while applying, but asylum seekers are not specifically tracked, according to the college system’s spokesperson Melissa Villarin.

    Four years after SB 296 failed, Democrat Sabrina Cervantes — then representing Riverside in the Assembly and now as a state senator — revived the proposal through AB 888, introduced in 2023. Like Allen’s earlier bill, AB 888 sought to make Cal Grants accessible to students with pending asylum applications by creating a direct eligibility pathway outside the AB 540 residency requirements. The bill passed the Assembly unanimously but was held in the Senate Appropriations Committee last September, effectively ending its chances for the year.

    Cervantes declined an interview with CalMatters. “My Assembly Bill 888 would have created a new pathway for pending asylum seekers in California to apply for Cal Grant financial aid in pursuit of their higher education,” Cervantes wrote in a statement.

    Newsom’s office declined to say whether he would support a future version of the proposal, pointing instead to his brief 2019 veto message.

    “There’s nervousness around anything that involves new expenses," Allen said. “... We’re going to have to spend some time seeing what information we can get with regards to better data to get better estimated costs. I think that will help to better inform the conversation."

    Andrea Baltodano and Chrissa Olson are contributors with the College Journalism Network, a collaboration between CalMatters and student journalists from across California. CalMatters higher education coverage is supported by a grant from the College Futures Foundation.

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