The Brief

Gov. Gavin Newsom filed a defamation lawsuit on Friday against Fox News and one of its hosts, claiming the network lied about the timing of a phone call with President Donald Trump to protect the president and damage the governor politically.

The dispute stems from a phone call in early June as immigration raids and protests swept Los Angeles and the president deployed armed troops to the city over the governor’s objections.

The lawsuit seeks damages of $787 million — the same amount Fox News paid to settle a lawsuit brought by Dominion Voting Systems over false election conspiracies. In a letter to the network, Newsom’s lawyers offer to dismiss the suit if Fox retracts the claim and both the network and host Jesse Watters issue on-air apologies.

The suit marks an increasingly aggressive posture by the Democratic governor against Trump and his allies. Newsom, in the past, has relished high-profile dust-ups with the president and Fox News but has been careful not to overtly antagonize Trump in his second term. The L.A. troop confrontation seems to have changed that.

“If Fox News wants to lie to the American people on Donald Trump’s behalf, it should face consequences — just like it did in the Dominion case,” Newsom said in a written statement. “I believe the American people should be able to trust the information they receive from a major news outlet. Until Fox is willing to be truthful, I will keep fighting against their propaganda machine.”

In a statement, a Fox News spokesperson lashed out at Newsom and promised to fight the suit.

“Gov. Newsom’s transparent publicity stunt is frivolous and designed to chill free speech critical of him. We will defend this case vigorously and look forward to it being dismissed,” the statement read.

The lawsuit, filed in Delaware, accuses Fox News and Watters of lying about when the phone call between Newsom and Trump took place. The network then accused Newsom of lying about the call on air.

“It is perhaps unsurprising that a near-octogenarian with a history of delusionary public statements and unhinged late-night social media screeds might confuse the dates. But Fox’s decision to cover up for President Trump’s error cannot be so easily dismissed,” the suit states.

Newsom said he gave Fox News call logs showing that the call took place the night of June 6, while Trump claimed they talked “a day ago” on June 10. The lawsuit states that a different Fox News host, John Roberts, first “intentionally altered” how he presented Trump’s comment about the call’s timing to “obscure President Trump’s false statement of fact.”

Watters later played an edited clip of Trump’s statement and asked, “Why would Newsom lie and claim Trump never called him? Why would he do that?”

The suit states that the matter is “not trivial,” and “is about more than just misremembering a day or two regarding routine phone calls,” claiming that the four-day period in question “represented an unprecedented moment.”

“The President of the United States illegally commandeered the California National Guard and deployed uniformed troops onto the streets of Los Angeles over the Governor’s objections. Every hour, every Truth Social post, and every presidential utterance mattered,” the suit states. “History was occurring in real time. It is precisely why reporters asked President Trump the very question that prompted this matter: When did he last speak with Governor Newsom?”

The story first appeared on The LA Local.

5:18 p.m. Wednesday, May 6: This story has been updated with additional details.

Federal agents swarmed MacArthur Park on Wednesday afternoon in a joint operation targeted at suspected drug dealers.

Agents also searched six businesses in the Westlake neighborhood and said that at least 18 people were arrested as part of the investigation, which was called “Operation Free MacArthur Park.”

The suspects are allegedly tied to distributing fentanyl and methamphetamine out of the park, the U.S. Attorney’s Office said. Agents also raided a home in Calabasas and found 40 pounds of fentanyl believed to be part of the network of drugs distributed to MacArthur Park, according to authorities.

Agents in tactical gear and armored vehicles rolled through the neighborhood shortly after 2 p.m., according to images shared over social media, and an agent used a large saw to cut through a metal security door at a business storefront on Alvarado Street, NBC News reported.

The investigation included six businesses in Westlake and a federal indictment names 25 people, with several who have not been found.

Authorities arrested 18 people in connection to suspected drug trafficking in and around MacArthur Park. The suspects were identified in a news conference Wednesday by federal authorities.

(

Hanna Kang

/

The LA Local

)

The raids began Tuesday evening and are expected to continue, First Assistant U.S. Attorney Bill Essayli announced during a press conference outside the park.

He was flanked by agents from the Drug Enforcement Administration and the Los Angeles Police Department. Armored vehicles lined Alvarado Street and more agents in tactical gear stood under the shade of a nearby tree.

“We’re not leaving,” Essayli said. “We’ll come back as many times as we need to.”

The Los Angeles Police Department announced it provided assistance to its federal partners and clarified the investigation was not related to immigration enforcement.

Anthony Chrysanthis, special agent in charge for the DEA’s field office in Los Angeles, reiterated that the federal agency will return to Westlake.

“We will be watching this place every day, all the time. We’ve been gathering evidence for 60 days,” Chrysanthis said. “Privately, we get phone calls every day. ‘What are you doing about this?’ So, if you live in an area where you see drug activity, you can plan a friendly visit from law enforcement.”

Chrysanthis said the operation at the park was chosen because “this place is symbolic to Los Angeles.”

“The communities have to go back to the people. We have to make our city safe again for all people in Los Angeles. So today the message starts,” he said.

Troy Feller, volunteer with the faith-based organization Dream Center, was handing out lunch to people in the park when agents arrived. Feller saw police and agents wearing tactical gear pull up to the park.

“They started wrapping up the area really quickly. We’re out here every week and we have never seen something like this,” Feller said.

By 4:30 p.m. the road closures around the park reopened. A vendor swept up the sidewalk around their stall. Boxes of aspirin, back pain ointment and fake eyelashes spilled onto the sidewalk, along with broken glass.

A hole cut through the metal security door was visible from the sidewalk where an agent used a saw to cut into the vendor’s stall. Boxes of Monistat and Neosporin hung from inside the stall.

Araceli Arrega said she found out about the raid from the news coverage of the federal raid.

“I found out on TV they were cutting up my store. We don’t sell drugs here. I sell creams and medicine,” Arrega said. “They didn’t find anything. I can’t open my store until I fix my door.”

Aura Garcia, who owns Vitamins and Plus next to Arrega’s store, said law enforcement officers went to her daughter’s home and took her into custody. Garcia said officers also handcuffed her 13-year-old granddaughter in the process.

Garcia is still uncertain about whether the arrest is related to the federal operation. Their store was raided Wednesday, but she reiterated that they do not sell drugs.

Susana Cruz, an employee at the market La Bendición de Dios near Alvarado and Sixth said, “They thought that we sold drugs here, but they didn’t find anything.”

Cruz said federal agents raided the market and threw all the products to the floor, which includes creams and other pharmaceutical items. Agents also pulled down a security camera at the market.

Jose Ramirez, a street vendor on Sixth and Alvarado said, watched the aftermath of the raid from the sidewalk.

“I don’t know if this is all for show, but this made people afraid and the businesses that are barely surviving, I don’t know what’s going to happen to them,” he said. “There’s other ways to combat drug trafficking. I don’t know what the mayor is thinking.”

Others in the neighborhood said they support the operation in response to the ongoing drug use at the park.

Victoria Sykes, has lived in the neighborhood for the past five years and has been visiting the area for at least two decades.

“I’ve seen people dealing drugs here on Alvarado and I personally support what happened here today because I think drugs should leave this neighborhood. It’s not safe. We need to clean it up,” Sykes said.

The federal indictment names several people, including Mallaly Moreno-Lopez, 31, and Jackson Tarfur, 28, who are both from the Westmont neighborhood in South Los Angeles. Authorities claim that the couple hand-delivered drugs to storefronts and dealers street-level dealers. Federal documents detail 27 drug deals of fentanyl and methamphetamine from March 9 to April 15 in and around MacArthur Park.

The indictment references multiple street gangs, including 18th Street. Chrysanthis with the DEA said the operation is intended to send a message to the drug traffickers who operate out of the park.

“This is our park. This park belongs to the people of Los Angeles and to anyone who wants to sell drugs, I want them to look around because at any day we can come back and take it,” he said.

When asked why the operation took place now, Chrysanthis said, “FIFA is coming. The Super Bowl is coming. The Olympics are coming. It’s time to give the community back to the people of LA.”

Los Angeles city streets will worsen and repairing them will become more expensive unless the city overhauls its approach to maintenance, according to a report from transportation advocacy group Streets For All.

“We’re looking towards a dire future for the streets of Los Angeles if we continue on the status quo,” said Josh Vredevoogd, who heads creative and research for the organization that spearheaded Measure HLA and co-authored the report published in late April.

The critical condition that L.A.’s streets could find themselves in is the result of underinvestment, opting for smaller-scale treatments and delaying compliance with long-standing federal accessibility laws, according to the report.

One of the potential solutions the report names is changing the city’s charter to mandate a five-year infrastructure plan, and that’s the option local leaders have recently angled toward too.

The context behind the report

The Streets For All report picks up on questions that surfaced late last year when transportation advocates noticed the city had halted resurfacing, which treats a street from curb to curb. While some resurfacing has since resumed, the Bureau of Street Services estimates its current budget will only allow 60 lane miles of resurfacing this fiscal year compared to more than 300 lane miles the prior year.

Part of the reason, city officials have said, is the high price of installing curb ramps. According to federal guidelines, curb ramps must be installed in compliance with ADA standards before a road is resurfaced. They come with a high price tag at $50,000 per curb ramp, according to Streets For All.

The city has instead prioritized “large asphalt repairs” this year. That’s a method of patching when there are structural failures like potholes or extensive cracking, "but the entire street doesn't yet need full resurfacing,” said Dan Halden, a spokesperson for the Bureau of Street Services.

By opting for large asphalt repairs, “City lawyers believe ADA repair requirements are not triggered,” Streets For All’s report says.

The report’s findings 

The group's report says that large asphalt repairs end up costing more per square foot than resurfacing, lead to more expensive repairs later and don’t result in any meaningful improvement to street condition.

Halden said large asphalt repairs are a “standard practice in pavement management.”

The report estimates that by not keeping up with curb ramp standards, L.A. will need to spend $4 billion to address its estimated 80,000 ramp backlog.

How does charter reform fit into this?

For years, advocates, namely Jessica Meaney of Investing in Place, have called on the city to create a long-term infrastructure development and maintenance plan, something major cities throughout the U.S. already have.

Vredevoogd said such a plan, known officially as a Capital Infrastructure Program, could include a streamlined method of street maintenance.

“They repave the street. They fix all the curb ramps. They put in new trees. They add Vision Zero improvements,” he said. “That’s what you see happening with more functional Public Works programs in other cities.”

Earlier this week, Mayor Karen Bass released a Capital Infrastructure Program focused on projects for the 2028 Olympic and Paralympic games. Bass’ plan is a one-off, though, and long-term infrastructure planning and budgeting isn’t part of the regular course of city business.

One of the recommendations that came out of the Charter Reform Committee earlier this year is to codify the creation of a five-year-long Capital Infrastructure Program in the city charter. If it succeeds, that recommendation would make a plan similar to what Bass released as part of the regular process of planning and budgeting.

The commission also recommended creating a director of Public Works position that would oversee and implement infrastructure planning.

Councilmember Eunisses Hernandez is the head of the city’s Public Works committee.

Her spokesperson, Chelsea Lucktenberg, said the councilmember sees charter reform “as a key part of the solution” to address the problems identified in Streets For All’s report, including how “our system is set up to prioritize short-term fixes over long-term maintenance.”

What’s happening in the shorter term?

Bass’ office said the mayor’s proposed budget for next fiscal year increases funding for the city’s pavement preservation program by 21% and includes a 45% increase specifically for access ramps.

Councilmembers Hernandez and Katy Yaroslavsky put forward a motion at the end of March asking city departments for an analysis of curb ramp construction, including a comparison with comparable jurisdictions.

Halden, the Bureau of Street Services spokesperson, said the city is “on track” to install 300 curb ramps by this summer, when the current fiscal year ends.

While officials are not concerned about an immediate oil shortfall, California consumers are likely to see another price hike in the coming weeks as the war in Iran strains the global market, lawmakers said on Tuesday at a hearing about the uncertain future of the state’s fuel supply.

The hearing came after the final oil tanker to pass through the Strait of Hormuz arrived at the Port of Long Beach this week — the last shipment from the Middle East expected to reach California for the foreseeable future.

“When this tanker is empty, it’s unclear where the next replacement ship will be coming from,” said Assemblymember Cottie Petrie-Norris, D-Irvine, and Utilities and Energy Committee chair at Tuesday’s hearing.

Californians have been feeling the pain at the pump since the U.S.-Israeli war on Iran spiked crude oil prices around the world. Today, drivers pay about $6.13 per gallon compared to the national average of $4.48, according to AAA.

While officials do not foresee California running out of oil, consumers should brace for additional price increases.

High gas prices are listed at a Chevron gas station in Los Angeles on March 9, 2026, as gasoline prices surge amid the ongoing war with Iran.

(

Frederic J. Brown

/

AFP via Getty Images

)

“Based on what we’re hearing from the industry and what we have heard, the pricing will move molecules towards California, but it will come at a price,” Siva Gunda, vice chair of the California Energy Commission, said.

Gunda said the costs will come from a bidding war to divert oil from Asian markets to the West Coast.

Ahead of Tuesday’s hearing, a California Energy Commission spokesperson said in a statement that the price spike is due to “the rapid escalation of crude oil prices because of the Iran War. These elevated prices are not unique to California, and prices are continuing to rise globally.”

However, Jamie Court, the head of Consumer Watchdog, a consumer protection group, said that California legislators, along with the state’s oil refiners, should take more responsibility for high prices. In a statement, Consumer Watchdog said oil refiners have been taking advantage of the current war to make record oil-refining profits, and Court said California Gov. Gavin Newsom “chickened out” of price gouging regulation.

“Trump can be responsible for about 70 cents of this because of the crude oil increase, but the rest of the two extra dollars we’re paying at the pump … are on Newsom,” Court said.

Severin Borenstein, professor and faculty director of The Energy Institute, UC Berkeley’s Haas School of Business, said in the public hearing that the recent spike is just one part of a larger trend.

While higher gasoline taxes and stronger environmental regulations in California play a role in the comparatively high prices — adding about $0.72 per gallon in taxes and $0.50 per gallon in environmental programs, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration — a refinery fire in Southern California in 2015 led to a “mystery gasoline surcharge” driving up prices. Bornstein said this adds about $0.50 per gallon, on top of oil and refining costs.

The Commission’s Division of Petroleum Market Oversight said in the hearing that it’s also taken steps to deal with “branded” retailers like Chevron that have been overcharging California consumers at the pump.

“Everyone should be getting their gas at the generic brands,” Petrie-Norris said.

KQED’s Sara Hossaini contributed to this report.

Following a year-long inquiry into the admissions policies and practices at UCLA’s David Geffen School of Medicine, the Trump administration’s Department of Justice alleges that school leadership “intentionally selected applicants based on their race,” to the detriment of white and Asian applicants.

“UCLA’s admissions process has been focused on racial demographics at the expense of merit and excellence — allowing racial politics to distract the school from the vital work of training great doctors,” said Harmeet K. Dhillon, an assistant attorney general for the DOJ.

In a statement, an unnamed UCLA spokesperson responded that the medical school is complying with all federal and state laws.

“The admissions process at [the] David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA is based on merit and grounded in a rigorous, comprehensive review of each applicant. We are confident in our practices and our mission to maintain access to a high-quality education to all qualified students,” the statement said.

How does UCLA admit medical students?

The school’s website lists the following criteria:

• Undergraduate record
• Medical College Admissions Test (MCAT) scores
• Letters of recommendation
• Graduate record (where applicable)
• Life experiences (research, volunteerism, clinical, work, leadership, publications)
• Admission interviews
• AAMC PREview Exam scores (for Traditional MD Program Track applicants only)

The DOJ investigation focused on three items: median GPA scores, MCAT scores and the PREview Exam.

What does the DOJ say about academic scores?

The report looks at median GPA and found that based on materials provided to the DOJ, the scores for some applicant groups were lower than others for the 2023 and 2024 admitted classes. Here’s 2023:

How does race matter in the medical field?

The DOJ investigation also takes issue with “a theory that increasing ‘diversity’ of the healthcare workforce will improve healthcare outcomes for Black and Hispanic patients” that it says was promoted by the program’s director showing an “intent to racially discriminate under the guise of saving lives and conceal her true motive to treat certain applicants unfavorably based on their race.”

The investigation also looks at the PREview Exam, which it says asks open-ended questions about whether applicants are from marginalized backgrounds. “By design, this question asks Black and Hispanic applicants to reveal their race so that DGSOM can know and consider it.”

A number of studies suggest that when patients have doctors of the same race (called “concordance”) it leads to better medical results. A 2018 study of Black men in Oakland suggested doctors and same-race patients had better communication that led to better outcomes, and a 2025 study out of UCLA found Hispanic Medicare patients had a lower readmission rate and length of stay when treated by Hispanic doctors.

What is the Trump administration looking for?

In a press release, the department noted that “medical schools use substantial federal financial assistance to train the next generation of doctors,” and that this fuels its “focus on eradicating illegal race politics from admissions at medical schools.”

Still, the administration has also curtailed that funding. Last year, the Republican-backed “big, beautiful bill” that President Donald Trump signed into law capped federal debt for professional degree students—a move that could push students to borrow from private lenders, which provide far fewer protections for loan repayment and don’t offer loan forgiveness.

A history of lawsuits between Trump and UCLA

The Department of Justice has repeatedly gone after the University of California in Trump’s second term. Earlier this year, the department sued the university over allegations that UCLA officials allowed antisemitism on campus, and unsuccessfully demanded a range of concessions to bring UCLA more in line with its ideology, in addition to more than $1 billion in fines. The administration also tried to freeze the university’s research funding, prompting an effort to have the state of California be a backstop.

What happens now?

The DOJ says it wants to find an agreement with the university “to ensure that admissions practices are brought into legal compliance.” A UCLA spokesperson said the university is reviewing the report, but did not outline next steps.

Disclosure: Julia Barajas is a part-time graduate student at UCLA Law.