The Brief

Lisa Peterson interviewed first at Kohl’s, then at TJ Maxx and Target. She applied for jobs at Raley’s, Safeway, Applebee’s, and Olive Garden, too. Once, she advanced to a second interview at the Cheesecake Factory, but like the rest, no job offer followed.

Peterson is 60 years old, with white hair that falls just below her shoulders. She holds her hands near her face, wiggling her fingers as she pauses to recall months spent searching for an entry-level job.

For deaf adults like Peterson, finding work isn’t easy. Either they take a position that requires little person-to-person communication, or their employers must hire a sign language interpreter, which can cost a business more than a hundred dollars an hour. Once hired, some deaf adults say they struggle to attain promotions or feel a sense of belonging at work, especially when there are few other deaf people around.

“I’ve been really just trying to prove that I can work,” said Peterson, speaking through an American Sign Language interpreter earlier this year. “…It’s been a year and a half that I’ve been doing this, and I’m trying to figure out what’s wrong with me. Is there something wrong with me? Is there something wrong with them?”

State and federal disability law require companies to make “reasonable” accommodations for employees who are deaf. California goes further than federal law by offering a more expansive definition of disability, but the definition of reasonable still depends on the size of the employer. Small businesses can argue that the hourly cost of hiring a sign language interpreter is an unreasonable burden. Large employers, such as the government or big companies, are expected to shoulder the cost of interpreters, both at the interview stage and upon hire, said Andy Imparato, executive director of Disability Rights California, a nonprofit organization.

Compliance is “all over the place,” he said.

Working behind the scenes

The last time Peterson searched for a job was 1984, right after she had dropped out of community college. With the help of NorCal Services for the Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing, a Northern California nonprofit, she found a job in the state controller’s office, doing data entry. She stayed 18 years, until her daughter was diagnosed with diabetes. In 2020, Peterson decided it was time to work again and took classes at NorCal Services for the Deaf. 

To help job seekers like Peterson, California’s Employment Development Department contracts with NorCal Services for the Deaf to place career counselors within the state’s publicly run job centers. For over a year, Peterson went to a Sacramento job center near her home in Fair Oaks, often going twice a week, to work on her resume, apply for jobs, or “just keep the ball rolling,” she said.

She had about 12 interviews, many of which she said went well. Employers are responsible for providing interpreters at interviews, but in Peterson’s case, the state covered the costs.

“My ideal job would be retail,” she said, explaining that she wants something that allows her to be around people, such as hanging or organizing clothes in a store. But in interviews, she said, employers tried to steer her into backroom roles.

Lisa Peterson outside of the Sacramento Works job training and resources center in Sacramento on April 23, 2024.

(

Miguel Gutierrez Jr.

/

CalMatters

)

Ryan Gallagher, an Employment Development Department program coordinator, was responsible for helping Peterson secure each interview. Speaking through a sign language interpreter at his Sacramento office, he said businesses often place deaf employees in warehouses, back kitchens, or in data-entry positions that have limited face-to-face communication. “They don’t want to give the client that opportunity because they don’t want to spend that much money on an interpreter,” he said.

In the past 12 months, he has had roughly 60 clients, about half of whom have found jobs. Most go on to work at Amazon, FedEx, or GoodWill, he said.

Over time, Peterson started considering other positions outside of retail. In April, after a year and a half of searching, Peterson accepted a part-time job at FedEx, where she helps put packages together in a warehouse and earns about $18 an hour.

“I’m happy with the work I’ve accepted at FedEx,” she said. “There’s really no time to socialize. It’s pretty busy there.”

Neither working, nor looking for work

In a 2007 survey of deaf youth across the country, more than three-quarters said they would probably or definitely graduate from college, and nearly everyone said they ultimately wanted to get a paying job.

Those dreams are statistically unlikely in California. Roughly 22% of deaf adults 25 and older have a college degree in the state, compared to about 37% for the “hearing” population, according to a recent study by the National Center for the Deaf. The unemployment rate in California is about the same for deaf people as it is for the hearing population, but there’s a catch: The unemployment rate only considers those who are seeking work.

In California, roughly 44% of deaf adults are neither working nor looking for work — compared to about 26% of hearing people. Some deaf adults are in school or taking care of children, as Peterson did for years. Others receive Social Security Income, a government program to help low-income adults with disabilities, or don’t work for other reasons. The study only includes people ages 16 to 64.

“It’s easier to say ‘Deaf people don’t want to work’ than to try and address the larger systemic barriers at play,” said Carrie Lou Bloom, an author of the study.

In her other research, she has tried to understand what those barriers are. “If parents believed their kid could go to college, get a degree, and work independently,” she said, “their kid would be much more likely to achieve these goals.”

It’s the same trend for children who aren’t deaf. The difference, said Bloom: “Deaf youth just have more hurdles in front of them and less access to resources, role models, mentors.”

Drez Brownridge, a Deaf studies major, at Ohlone College in Fremont on June 17, 2024. Brownridge previously worked at Amazon loading boxes and storing goods. They said they struggled to communicate with their boss and access promotions at work.

(

Emily Steinberger

/

CalMatters

)

For Drez Brownridge, those hurdles began at birth. Brownridge, who uses they/them pronouns and communicated through an interpreter, said they grew up in Costa Rica with grandparents who don’t use or understand sign language. To communicate with their family, Brownridge used gestures, sent notes back and forth, and tried wearing hearing aids, often in vain. They first enrolled at Modesto Junior College in 2016 but dropped out during the COVID-19 pandemic after failing to pass English four times.

For decades, Brownridge lived on Social Security Income, receiving around $600 a month. They were allowed to work while receiving government benefits but their income, including Social Security, could not exceed $2,000 a month.

It wasn’t enough. “Especially in California, $2,000 a month isn’t going to get you very far,” they said. “You’re not going to be able to buy a car or a house, or conduct your life, just on Social Security Income.”

Who gets the promotion?

For those who do find work, other obstacles arise. “We often see people talking about feeling a sense of satisfaction from work, being a productive member of the community, feeling like they’re making a difference,” Bloom said. “Deaf people may not have these feelings about work, if they’re working in environments where they are constantly fighting for access, advocating for themselves, being left behind, being passed over for promotions.”

After leaving Modesto Junior College, Brownridge got a job at Amazon, where they made around $17 an hour. They worked nights, loading boxes and later, storing goods. They used their cell phone to type out notes to their manager and to other employees who didn’t understand sign language, but they struggled to build close work relationships.

Brownridge repeatedly applied for new positions at Amazon, hoping to make at least $25, but they never moved up. “I was disappointed at what I perceived as a barrier,” they said, “… And it wasn’t just me. There were a few other deaf employees as well that were facing the same frustrations, where they had worked there maybe five or 10 years, but just couldn’t move up.”

A spokesperson for Amazon, Sam Stephenson, said the company offers career development for all of its employers, as well as specialized services for those who need it.

If an employer declines to offer promotion opportunities because of a disability, it could qualify as discrimination, though it can be difficult to prove or find legal resources to help, said Imparato, with Disability Rights California. “It’s hard for an individual to go to these enforcement agencies.”

With limited staff and a high volume of complaints, California’s Civil Rights Department is forced to triage cases, Imparato said. In 2022, the department had more than 300 staff processing nearly 26,000 potential discrimination cases, according to the most recent data. Over the course of the year, the department reached just over 650 settlements, though many other cases used private lawyers or fell outside of the state’s legal jurisdiction.

Brownridge never complained about the lack of a promotion, they said. Instead, they left Amazon in 2022 and re-enrolled at community college, this time at Ohlone College, where they now major in Deaf studies. Attending a school with a large population of deaf students colored how they look back on their career at Amazon. “It wasn’t until I got into the Deaf community,” they said, “that I was told that it was my right to go for those jobs, that I had a right to succeed just like anybody else.”

Adam Echelman covers California’s community colleges in partnership with Open Campus, a nonprofit newsroom focused on higher education.

Financial support for this story was provided by the Smidt and Irvine foundations.

Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene became a household name in the run up to the 2020 election for divisive rhetoric, political stunts and enthusiastic support of President Donald Trump. But after growing disagreements with Trump during his second term, Greene announced she will leave Congress in January before her term is up.

Greene said it would not be fair to her northwest Georgia district, one of the most conservative in the country, to have them "endure a hurtful and hateful primary against me by the President we all fought for" while noting that "Republicans will likely lose the midterms."

Greene's split with Trump widened in recent weeks as she pushed for the release of documents related to convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.

For months, Greene had been publicly pressing Trump and top Republicans in Congress to release all files from two federal investigations into Epstein. She was part of a small cadre of Republicans who helped force a vote on the House floor to release the files — a process that drove Trump to reverse his position on the documents and led to near-unanimous support for the measure this week.

But before Trump reversed course, he lashed out last week, calling her "Marjorie Traitor Greene," and told reporters, "Something happened to her over the last period of a month or two where she changed politically."

In her post Friday night, Greene defended her decision to fight for the release of those documents.

"Standing up for American women who were raped at 14, trafficked and used by rich powerful men, should not result in me being called a traitor and threatened by the President of the United States, whom I fought for," Greene wrote.

Greene's defiant push against Trump

On a brisk morning this week, Greene stood outside the Capitol with some of the women who say they were abused by Epstein.

"I've never owed him anything," Greene of the president on Tuesday. "But I fought for him and for America First. And he called me a traitor for standing with these women."

The cracks between Trump and Greene grew over the last year, as Greene increasingly pointed out where she saw the president falling short: she called the war in Gaza a genocide, criticized Trump's decision to bomb Iranian nuclear facilities, and pressed for expiring health subsidies to be extended, citing the threat of skyrocketing premiums for people in her district, including her own children.

And she was doing it not just on social media or right-wing outlets, but on programs like ABC's The View.

"What Happened to Marjorie?"

"I was thinking, if this was the first time I'd ever seen this person, it sounds like a normal congressperson from Schoolhouse Rock," said University of North Georgia professor Nathan Price after Greene's appearance on the daytime television staple.

For some, this new persona may be hard to square with the Greene many Americans first got to know: the congresswoman who embraced QAnon conspiracy theories, liked a post that called for violence against former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif. and heckled school shooting survivor David Hogg in 2020, before he became a prominent political activist.

Even Trump has publicly mused in recent weeks: "What happened to Marjorie?"

Georgia Republican strategist Brian Robinson says it's a fair question.

"I am open to the idea that she's had a 'road to Damascus' moment, a conversion, that she sees the errors of the toxicity and wants something that's better," Robinson said in an interview with NPR earlier in the week.

On her own social media and with journalists, Greene has been open about addressing claims from Trump and others that she has changed or abandoned the president. NPR reached out to Greene for further comment.

"Nothing has changed about me," Greene told the hosts of The View. "I'm staying absolutely 100% true to the people who voted for me, and true to my district."

Robinson said the changes could be part of a natural evolution for Greene, a former CrossFit gym owner from the Atlanta suburbs.

"We love to elect outsiders to Congress," Robinson said. "They go to Congress with very little idea of how it works. And if at some point you're like, 'I want to do substantive things that make America better, then I've got to do this a little bit different."

Or, Robinson said, she may be trying to broaden her appeal with an important constituency as she weighs a bid for higher office. Trump said last week he showed Greene polling earlier this year suggesting she would flounder in a race for Georgia governor or Senate.

"Is she intentionally signaling to women, 'The good old boys club ignores us, and I understand your struggles?" Robinson said.

Both Robinson and Price said Greene's evolution was more about style than substance. She has disavowed some of her more controversial views, but not others, like the unproven assertion that widespread fraud upended the 2020 election result.

The anti-interventionist, anti-elite principles that first propelled her to Congress also remain core to her identity. "What she's responding to is believing that the President has shifted on these issues," said Price.

Some potential political opponents see an opportunity in Greene's break with Trump. Robinson, who worked for Greene's opponent in her first primary race, says in the past he has warned potential challengers not to underestimate her.

"You are wasting your time," Robinson said. "She will beat you. And I would have said that into infinity until this week."

How Greene's district reacted to the shift

But in the 14th Congressional District, it was not clear this week that anything had changed. As chair of the Paulding County Republican Party, Ricky Hess spends a lot of time talking with voters.

"The issues that they want to talk about involve high property taxes, high health care costs, whether or not their kids will be able to buy a house when they graduate," Hess said this week ahead of Greene's resignation.

Hess told NPR he believes Greene's "America First" worldview resonates in this heavily working class and rural stretch of Northwest Georgia.

"She's pretty tapped into what her constituents are wanting, and I have to believe that most of her actions are in service to that," Hess said.

Hess said voters saw Trump and Greene as fighters on the same team. Though Martha Zoller, who hosts a political talk radio show that airs across North Georgia, said in an interview Wednesday she didn't believe everyone's minds were made up.

"People are kind of reeling, if you want to know the truth," Zoller said. "We haven't had a lot of listeners discussing it because they're waiting to see what happens."

Georgia political observers noted that Greene has been anything but a predictable politician — including her surprise resignation.

Trump has come to a truce with other politicians he's feuded with, including Georgia Republican Gov. Brian Kemp. And his future relationship with Greene could still evolve.

But Zoller said the conflict between Trump and Greene has been about more than just two big personalities falling out on the national stage.

"I think that the big discussion we're going to be having as Republicans over the next few years is what is the Republican movement once it's not Trump?"

Zoller said earlier this week it seemed clear that Greene wants to be part of that discussion. But with her resignation, the answer to that question is may be less clear now than before.

NPR's Stephen Fowler contributed to this report.
Copyright 2025 NPR

Promoting illegal car sideshows and street races in Long Beach, whether through social media, print, or group chats, could soon cost you up to $1,000 and six months in jail.

The Long Beach City Council on Tuesday voted to create a new ordinance that makes it illegal to encourage or advertise street takeovers, saying these exhibitions are an outstanding danger to the public and a nuisance to neighborhoods.

The item will come back to the dais as a draft prepared by the city’s attorney’s office, which would then be voted into law.

It will allow police to levy penalties on those they can prove promoted or encouraged people to attend the illegal exhibition, which often includes cars doing donuts and burnouts in public intersections ringed by crowds. Police will track promoters through testimony and social media. Promotion bans like this one already exist in other municipalities like San Jose and Alameda County.

It builds on a 2022 city law targeting those who attend these events, making it a misdemeanor for those within 200 feet of a street takeover. Tuesday’s vote also included an amendment that exempts accredited news reporters from the existing spectator ban.

The city’s northernmost 9th City Council District, where the proposal originated, continues to claim the majority of reported street races across Long Beach, with more instances reported there than other parts of the city combined.

Ninth District Councilmember Joni Ricks-Oddie said the law was a direct response to what her constituents experience regularly.

“Illegal street racing and sideshows remain some of the most dangerous public safety challenges in our city,” she said.

Between 2022 and 2023, the police received 349 calls about street racing or other exhibitions of speed — 210 of which were in Ricks-Oddie’s district that encompasses most of the city above South Street. When asked, police did not provide more up-to-date statistics.

Councilmember Tunua Thrash-Ntuk, whose district borders Rick-Oddie’s, said in the Longwood neighborhood, sideshows are a common occurrence on Susana Road, a street that borders unincorporated land and is next to an elementary school.

“Reckless driving is harmful for everyone,” she said. “It is unacceptable in areas that are highly utilized by children, and we must return our streets and neighborhoods to a state of normalcy.”

In the city’s plan to eliminate all vehicular deaths by 2026, commonly known as Vision Zero, a survey section found nearly a quarter of respondents listed traffic enforcement as the top priority. Ahead of the 2026 budget, respondents ranked public safety among the top three priorities for the city.

The city also plans to install three automated speeding ticket cameras in the 9th District, along Artesia Boulevard from Harbor Avenue to Butler Avenue; Atlantic Avenue from the L.A. River to Artesia Boulevard; and Long Beach Boulevard from Artesia Boulevard to 70th Street.

Long Beach is on track to have more than 50 traffic deaths this year.

Millions of Americans have shed pounds with help from drugs like Wegovy and Zepbound.

But people who take these drugs often experience unpleasant side effects.

"They lose weight, which is a positive thing," says Warren Yacawych of the University of Michigan, "but they experience such severe nausea and vomiting that patients stop treatment."

So at this year's Society for Neuroscience meeting in San Diego, Yacawych and other researchers held a session to describe their efforts to understand and solve the side-effect problem.

The weight-loss products are called GLP-1 agonists. They work by mimicking a hormone that reduces appetite and slows digestion.

Yacawych and his colleagues wanted to know if they could tweak these drugs to suppress appetite without making people queasy.

The team focused on two areas in the brain stem where GLP-1 drugs have a big effect.

"The first is affectionately known as the brain stem's vomit center," Yacawych says. "It's naturally designed to detect any accidentally ingested toxin and coordinate the feeling of nausea and the vomit response."

The second area monitors food intake and tells people when they're full.

The team found a way to direct GLP-1 to the area involved in feeling full, while keeping the drug out of the vomit center.

When the researchers did this, the mice no longer felt sick. But they also didn't get thin — probably because there are specific cells in the vomit center that do not induce vomiting but are critical to weight loss.

"So it's very challenging," Yacawych says, "to be able to separate these side effects, like nausea, from GLP-1's intended effects, like weight loss."

A possible workaround came from a team led by Ernie Blevins of the University of Washington. They gave obese rats a low dose of a GLP-1 drug along with the hormone oxytocin, which is itself an appetite suppressant. That allowed the rats to lose weight without feeling sick.

Not just nausea

Another side effect of GLP-1 drugs is a decrease in thirst, which could be dangerous for people who are already losing lots of fluids from side effects like vomiting and diarrhea.

"If you're in that state of dehydration and you're not feeling thirsty to replace those fluids, that would be a problem," says Derek Daniels of the University at Buffalo.

To understand how GLP-1 drugs reduce thirst, Daniels and a team began studying the brains of rats. And they got lucky.

"We had a happy accident in the lab," Daniels says. "And the happy accident involved a rat called the Brattleboro rat."

Brattleboro rats are laboratory rodents with a genetic mutation that makes them thirsty nearly all the time. But the scientists discovered that these rats are also very sensitive to GLP-1 drugs, which drastically reduced their water consumption.

The team studied the rats' brains to see where GLP-1 was influencing thirst. That led them to several areas of the brain that appear to affect thirst but not appetite.

The discovery could help scientists preserve thirst by designing drugs that "target good places but not bad places," Daniels says.

Appetite and addiction

A team from the University of Virginia found that GLP-1 drugs are already targeting a brain area that plays a role in addiction as well as eating. It's a region involved in emotion and the reward system.

When the researchers delivered GLP-1 to this brain area in mice, it reduced their desire for "rewarding food, like a burger," says Ali D. Güler of the University of Virginia.

But the animals continued to eat healthy, nonrewarding foods, he says — a bit like people choosing a salad bar over dessert.

Identifying this brain area should help scientists find GLP-1 drugs that target the reward system while avoiding areas involved in appetite, Güler says. And that could lead to new treatments for alcoholism and other substance use disorders.

The finding also could explain the observation that people who take GLP-1 agonists tend to reduce their consumption of alcohol.

WASHINGTON — The U.S. Supreme Court on Friday temporarily blocked a lower court ruling that found Texas' 2026 congressional redistricting plan pushed by President Donald Trump likely discriminates on the basis of race.

The order signed by Justice Samuel Alito will remain in place at least for the next few days while the court considers whether to allow the new map favorable to Republicans to be used in the midterm elections.

The court's conservative majority has blocked similar lower court rulings because they have come too close to elections.

The order came about an hour after the state called on the high court to intervene to avoid confusion as congressional primary elections approach in March. The justices have blocked past lower-court rulings in congressional redistricting cases, most recently in Alabama and Louisiana, that came several months before elections.

The order was signed by Alito because he is the justice who handles emergency appeals from Texas.

Texas redrew its congressional map in the summer as part of Trump's efforts to preserve a slim Republican majority in the House in next year's elections, touching off a nationwide redistricting battle. The new redistricting map was engineered to give Republicans five additional House seats, but a panel of federal judges in El Paso ruled 2-1 Tuesday that the civil rights groups that challenged the map on behalf of Black and Hispanic voters were likely to win their case.

If that ruling eventually holds, Texas could be forced to hold elections next year using the map drawn by the GOP-controlled Legislature in 2021 based on the 2020 census.

Texas was the first state to meet Trump's demands in what has become an expanding national battle over redistricting. Republicans drew the state's new map to give the GOP five additional seats, and Missouri and North Carolina followed with new maps adding an additional Republican seat each. To counter those moves, California voters approved a ballot initiative to give Democrats an additional five seats there.

The redrawn maps are facing court challenges in California, Missouri and North Carolina.

The Supreme Court is separately considering a case from Louisiana that could further limit race-based districts under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. It's not entirely clear how the current round of redistricting would be affected by the outcome in the Louisiana case.