The Brief

The last thing David Ramirez remembers, he was protesting peacefully at a pro-Palestinian encampment at UCLA in the early hours of May 2, 2024.

Then, he said everything seemed to move in slow motion, and there was “nothing but ringing” in his ear.

Listen 24:29

Apple

Spotify

After the George Floyd protests of 2020, California took steps to reign in violent policing of protests by passing laws restricting how law enforcement uses less-lethal weapons, like tasers and rubber bullets. But high profile protests in 2024 and 2025 – including this summer’s protests against the ICE raids in Los Angeles – have revealed major flaws in those laws. LAist Senior Editor Jared Bennett joins us to talk about an investigation around these flaws and what they mean for people exercising their right to free speech.

Why California's protest law is flawed and the consequences to protesters

After the George Floyd protests of 2020, California took steps to reign in violent policing of protests by passing laws restricting how law enforcement uses less-lethal weapons, like tasers and rubber bullets. But high profile protests in 2024 and 2025 – including this summer’s protests against the ICE raids in Los Angeles – have revealed major flaws in those laws. LAist Senior Editor Jared Bennett joins us to talk about an investigation around these flaws and what they mean for people exercising their right to free speech.

Subscribe

• Apple
• Spotify

He’d just been shot in the head with a less-lethal projectile by law enforcement officers while they cleared the encampment. Ramirez described his experience at a news conference this past May.

“My first instinct was to remove the foreign object, but it triggered profuse bleeding,” he said while standing in front of a poster bearing the image of his wound.

In 2021, California lawmakers passed a law that was supposed to prevent injuries like the one Ramirez sustained. The law, Assembly Bill 48, forbids law enforcement from targeting peaceful protesters with chemical agents and less-lethal projectiles like the 40mm kinetic energy projectiles that injured Ramirez. Officers also aren’t supposed to aim less-lethal projectiles at the head.

Ramirez and three other people suing law enforcement over the violent response to the 2024 campus protests say officers with the Los Angeles Police Department and California Highway Patrol broke state law that day.

The law requires that agencies report on their use of less-lethal weapons and resulting injuries. More than a year later, Ramirez still doesn’t know who fired the projectile that hit him in the head, and neither agency has reported injuring any protesters while clearing the encampment.

Four years after California lawmakers tried to rein in violent policing at protests, Ramirez’s lawsuit and more recent protests against federal immigration raids have put law enforcement’s actions under a microscope and revealed major gaps in enforcement of California’s existing protest laws.

LAist found that hundreds of agencies do not appear to document the use of less-lethal weapons, as required by law. The extent of that documentation varies from agency to agency, making it difficult to hold law enforcement accountable when something goes wrong.

While the California Department of Justice is responsible for posting all such reports on a public website, the agency says it's not responsible for making agencies write the reports or evaluating what’s in them. Compliance with the law is left entirely up to the agencies — some of which told LAist they don’t have staffing or capacity to manage.

Cristina Garcia, a former state Assembly member from Bell Gardens and primary sponsor of Assembly Bill 48, said she and other lawmakers passed the law to protect the rights of Californians, and said it should be up to the DOJ to make sure that’s happening.

“Is this [law] being implemented properly, are we meeting expectations, are we breaking promises? That should be asked of the DOJ,” she said. “If we don’t have enforcement, do we really have a law?”

What the law says

California lawmakers passed Assembly Bill 48 after seeing the police response to protests in the summer of 2020 that followed the murder of George Floyd by a Minnesota police officer.

Still from LAPD body camera footage, showing officer shooting Benjamin Montemayor with a projectile during the protests of 2020.

(

YouTube

/

Courtesy LAPD

)

Under AB 48, officers are only allowed to deploy crowd control tools — including chemical agents or less-lethal projectiles — in response to violence, physical threats or to an “objectively dangerous and unlawful situation.”

The law forbids authorities from aiming at protesters' heads, neck or vital organs, or firing indiscriminately into a crowd.

The same year AB 48 became law in 2021, U.S. District Judge Consuelo B. Marshall issued a court order placing similar restrictions on the LAPD, specifically.

Civil rights lawyers told LAist in June that the LAPD and other agencies responding to protests that month against federal immigration enforcement appear to have violated this law and the court order. They’ve secured a separate court order forbidding the LAPD from targeting journalists and filed several lawsuits on behalf of protesters.

The law gives agencies 60 days to publish reports about their use of force at protests. The LAPD missed this deadline to report on their response to the protests in June on Aug. 5.

LAPD has not responded to repeated questions about the delayed report.

The LAPD’s website does include reports on previous protests. And the department is among just 32 out of the 624 law enforcement agencies in California that have sent crowd control reports to the California Department of Justice.

LAist reviewed news reports and police documents and found several instances where agencies used less-lethal weapons during protests, yet no crowd control records were posted online as required by state law.

In one instance, an LAPD officer allegedly shot a man in the jaw with a less-lethal projectile on June 8. While LAPD has started conducting an internal investigation into the incident, a report has yet to be generated. It’s been 93 days since the man was shot.

San Francisco police officers fired pepperballs, a form of less-lethal projectile with a chemical irritant, while responding to anti-immigration enforcement protests on June 8, according to news reports. The agency does not appear to file AB 48 reports with the California Department of Justice, and LAist has been unable to locate any such reports on the agency’s website.

The San Francisco Police Department has not yet responded to a request for comment.

In another, UC Riverside PD documented using a less-lethal weapon during a joint response during UC Berkeley’s pro-Palestinian protests in a separate report, yet has not created an AB 48 report for that incident.

UC Riverside Police Lt. Jason Day said his small department didn’t have the capacity to compile the reports.

“A lot of times things are just going to have to get set aside,” he told LAist.

LAPD creates a perimeter to move back anti-ICE protesters on San Pedro Street on June 9, 2025.

(

Carlin Stiehl/Los Angeles Times via Getty Images

/

Los Angeles Times

)

Documenting injuries

Civil rights attorneys and experts told LAist that monitoring the use of chemical agents and less-lethal projectiles at protests is important because, despite their name, these weapons are dangerous.

“They absolutely are lethal weapons. They’ve killed people, they've permanently disabled people, caused really significant and substantial injuries to people,” said Rebecca Brown, an attorney who is representing Ramirez and other plaintiffs in a lawsuit against agencies for allegedly misusing less-lethal weapons. “These should not be brought to a protest in the first place.”

Dozens of injuries have been documented by news organizations, on social media and in lawsuits from the May 2 protest where Ramirez was injured.

The LAPD and CHP both filed reports about their use of force at the UCLA protest, but neither documented any injuries as a result of less-lethal weapons.

Carlena Orosco, an assistant professor of criminal justice at California State University, Los Angeles, said the nature of protest response, where multiple agencies often respond to incidents together, makes it difficult to document injuries.

“There are going to be data limitations when it comes to not only identifying categories of injuries, but also ensuring that they are reported comprehensively and accurately… especially when we think of a crowd situation,” she said.

For Brown, law enforcement’s failure to fully document the injuries they cause shows a lack of enforcement.

During the pro-Palestinian demonstrations, Brown said “CHP and LAPD did not put any effort into identifying who they hurt, identifying what their injuries were, what kind of treatment they needed.” Without an enforcement mechanism making sure they report injuries, she said law enforcement agencies are “only going to report on that when they have to.”

LAPD has not responded to multiple requests for comment. A spokesperson for the CHP said the agency could not comment due to pending litigation.

Who’s responsible?

Garcia, the former Assemblymember and lead sponsor on Assembly Bill 48, said it should be up to the California Department of Justice to make sure agencies are reporting what they need to comply with the law.

The DOJ doesn’t see it that way. The law requires the department to compile and publish a list of AB 48 webpages from all law enforcement agencies. But according to the DOJ's spokesperson, Elissa Perez, the law doesn’t ask the agency to do anything else by way of enforcement.

“The bill [AB 48] does not include requirements for DOJ to review, audit, or enforce law enforcement agency requirements,” Perez wrote to LAist.

The law also does not outline repercussions for non-compliant agencies.

According to the California Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training, which sets selection and training standards for California law enforcement, agencies are responsible for complying with the law, but there’s no repercussions if they don’t.

“The way the law is written, there is no stated enforcement mechanism,” Meagan Poulos with the commission wrote to LAist in an email. “The individual agencies are responsible.”

Orosco of Cal State LA said while it’s crucial to ensure law enforcement agencies follow the law, it would be difficult for the DOJ to check what is written in the reports filed by individual departments.

“I don't know how they would go about reviewing every department's information,” she said.

Without proactive enforcement of the law, LAist found there are few options for citizens to hold agencies accountable for their use of weapons at protests.

Officers who violate internal department policy can be punished, but those investigations often take years.

Civil lawsuits can also take years and the financial burden ultimately falls to the taxpayer. Los Angeles has so far paid $20 million to resolve lawsuits stemming from the LAPD’s response to protests in 2020.

Garcia said lawsuits like those cost taxpayer dollars and threaten existing services for constituents, so city officials should be interested in making their police departments follow the law.

Five years after Assembly Bill 48 became law, Garcia says proper enforcement requires constant partnership between cities, police departments, the DOJ, the media and constituents.

“Compliance and accountability is a constant, ongoing situation,” she said. “It's never a one-and-done. It's a partnership.”

Watchdog Editor Jared Bennett contributed to this report.

In an attempt to resolve evictions before they go to trial, the Los Angeles County Superior Court has launched new programs that seek to facilitate settlements by providing free attorneys to tenants and financial relief to landlords who are owed back rent.

Presiding Judge Sergio Tapia said these pilot programs are designed to stem the tide of evictions, which have risen sharply since the COVID-19 pandemic.

“We're trying to show litigants across the board, whether it’s tenants or landlords, that the court is the opportunity to try to find resolution faster,” Tapia told LAist.

Both tenant and landlord attorneys agree that settlements can often be the best path for both parties.

One program launched last month in downtown L.A.’s Stanley Mosk Courthouse gives tenants the right to request a mandatory settlement conference overseen by a court-appointed settlement officer.

These tenants, who rarely come to court with legal representation, will be given a free attorney to guide them though the settlement conferences, as long as they earn less than 125% of the federal poverty level.

But lawyers who represent landlords say their clients often feel local government is increasingly putting money toward helping renters, while leaving property owners struggling.

Where does funding come from?

Facing eviction without a lawyer “puts people at such an enormous disadvantage, when landlords normally have lawyers,” said Conway Collis, president of the Mayor’s Fund for Los Angeles, a nonprofit that is helping to fund the Mosk program’s free attorneys.

Other funding comes from Stay Housed L.A., a legal aid partnership funded by the county of L.A. and the city of L.A. through its “mansion tax.”

Landlords will be required to notify tenants about the program in the eviction paperwork they serve to tenants.

Settlement officers come from the court’s pool of temporary judges, who handle lower-level cases, such as traffic infractions. Other officers are retired judges or trained lawyers.

The settlement conferences are being held on the same day as regularly scheduled court hearings, one floor down from the Mosk courthouse’s eviction department.

How are the conferences working so far?

Elena Popp, the executive director of the Eviction Defense Network, which is providing lawyers for the program, said that on one recent day, landlords and tenants were able to reach mutually agreeable settlements in about half the conferences.

“We settled one,” Popp said. “We are very close to settling a second one. The other two are way further apart because the tenant really wants to stay on, but the landlord really wants them to go.”

Settlement deals look different in each case, Popp said. Sometimes they involve landlords letting tenants stay if they pay overdue rent. In other cases, tenants are given additional time to find new housing before they must leave. When settlements are reached, cases are sealed so that evictions won’t be visible on a tenant’s record, a black mark that makes it very difficult to find new housing.

When settlements can’t be reached, landlords and tenants go back upstairs to resume their normal proceedings, Popp said.

No matter how cases are resolved, she said, tenants can’t be expected to navigate legally complex processes on their own.

“One of the things that we stressed when we were setting this up is that you absolutely have to have a lawyer,” Popp said.

Compton program pairs settlements with money to landlords

Another pilot program launched last month at the Compton courthouse offers up to $10,000 to cover rent owed to landlords in cases that settle. Landlords will be required to inform tenants about the settlement conferences. To qualify, either the tenant or the landlord must earn no more than 120% of the area’s median income.

The settlement conferences at the Compton courthouse are overseen by Community Legal Aid of Southern California, and rent relief funding is administered by L.A. County’s Department of Consumer and Business Affairs.

Attorney Aaron Kohanim, who represents landlords, said he advises his clients to settle whenever possible, because going to trial is “a casino — you don't know if you're going to win.”

But he also said landlords generally view taxpayer-funded attorneys for tenants as unfair.

“Only one side gets a piece of that pot,” Kohanim said. “Landlords have to pay out of pocket for their attorneys. And on top of that, they are not allowed to collect rent in the middle of the case, so they're getting beaten by two different angles, versus a tenant who is just living there rent-free and they get a free lawyer.”

Tapia said the programs are currently limited to the Mosk and Compton courthouses because of funding constraints and limited resources. But the judge said if they prove successful, they could be expanded county-wide.

“If we're able to show success, that will allow us to recruit a more robust set of settlement officers to perhaps expand,” Tapia said. “We need to see how this pilot plays out first.”

Electric vehicle batteries are a lot like people, in one important respect: They're most comfortable in temperatures around 65 to 75 degrees Fahrenheit.

When the weather gets much colder or hotter than that, a battery works less efficiently. It has to work harder, too, to keep the vehicle's cabin comfortable for its equally picky human occupants.

The result? Electric vehicles can't drive as far or as efficiently in extremely hot or cold weather.

AAA has been testing exactly how big an effect temperatures have on modern EV batteries. In its latest research, shared exclusively with NPR, it found that hot temperatures reduced range by an average of 8.5%. Cold weather cut vehicles' range by a whopping 39%.

AAA ran similar tests back in 2019 with a different vehicle lineup. Back then, the cold weather hit to range was approximately the same, while the high-temperature range loss was higher, 17%. The different slate of vehicles complicates direct comparison, AAA warns, but does suggest some improvements in how EVs handle the heat.

But not the cold. "There's been a lot of technology changes," says Greg Brannon, the director of automotive engineering at AAA. New battery chemistries; more efficient EV designs; fancier software. But when it comes to winter range performance, "the electric vehicles actually didn't change all that much from back in 2019."

Greg Brannon, the director of automotive engineering at AAA, at the Automotive Research Center in Los Angeles.

(

Courtney Theophin/NPR

)

These results show that drivers need to be prepared for their real-world range to shrink in the winter — and to a lesser extent, at the height of summer. EVs can still be practical choices in hotter or colder climates, as long as drivers adjust for predictable range loss. "It can be overcome," says Brannon. "But you have to plan for it."

A treadmill in a freezer

AAA conducts these tests at its own expense, part of a slate of research the group does into emerging vehicle technology for the benefit of auto club members. The tests are carried out at its Automotive Research Center in Los Angeles. Specifically, inside the historic headquarters of the Automobile Club of Southern California: a Spanish Revival-style building, all stucco and red tiles, built around a century-old Moreton Bay fig tree, with a courtyard filled with oranges, palm trees and fountains.

It's possibly the most picturesque place for a California driver to get a smog check. (Yes, AAA offers that here.) But it's not, at first glance, a likely spot for testing how vehicles perform in extreme temperatures, especially not on an April day in the mid-60s. (The locals complained about it as "jacket weather.")

The Automotive Research Center in Los Angeles, located inside the historic headquarters of the Automobile Club of Southern California.

(

Courtney Theophin/NPR

)

But tucked away inside this building is a room that's heavily insulated and packed with powerful heaters and coolers. It can be cranked down to 20 degrees Fahrenheit, or up to 95.

Inside, there's enough space for a single vehicle, parked very carefully on top of two giant steel rollers — each of them 4 feet in diameter — that are hidden beneath floor level.

This is a chassis dynamometer, or "dyno" for short. "For lack of a better term, I guess it's kind of like a treadmill for a car," says Megan McKernan, who manages the research center.

For each test, the two rollers are carefully positioned to match up with the wheels of the test vehicle. Then the car is driven right on top of them, making sure the wheels touch nothing else. The vehicle is tied down with heavy, bright-pink chains, so it can't move forward off the "treadmill."

A test vehicle is positioned on a chassis dynamometer. "For lack of a better term, I guess it's kind of like a treadmill for a car," says Megan McKernan.

(

Courtney Theophin/NPR

)

Now, it's time for Richard Gonzalez to "drive" the vehicle — without actually going anywhere. Once he gets inside and presses the accelerator, the wheels make those giant rollers turn. For hours.

This is about as fun as it sounds. Gonzalez much prefers other parts of his job, like track tests, where AAA evaluates how well cars can, say, automatically brake to avoid pedestrians. But podcasts help pass the time.

The point is to see how far the battery can go, under these controlled conditions, at a certain temperature.

Once the car's battery is drained so much that it can't maintain highway speeds, the test is over. And AAA has a new data point showing how well a certain model's battery can take cold or heat.

A small hit in the summer, a big one in the winter

EVs are not the only kinds of cars that suffer in the cold. AAA also tested hybrids this time around and found a nearly 23% average loss in fuel economy in the 20 degrees F test.

"Internal combustion engine vehicles also lose range in extreme cold weather," points out Ed Kim, the chief analyst with the research group AutoPacific, who was not involved in AAA's research. The Environmental Protection Agency has estimated a 10% to 30% drop in gas vehicle fuel economy in cold weather, depending on the type of trip. "This isn't a problem that's exclusive to EVs. This happens to basically any kind of vehicle when it gets really cold."

In some colder parts of the world, EVs have already become dominant, despite the challenge of winter range loss. Norway has the highest rate of EV adoption in the world — 98% pure battery-electric in March 2026, according to the latest numbers. And Norway is hardly balmy.

Electric vehicles are parked in Geiranger, Norway. The country has the highest rate of EV adoption in the world.

(

Martin Berry/UCG/Universal Images Group via Getty Images

)

But in the U.S., it's a different story. Kim says that EVs have taken off much more in states where temperatures are warm or mild than in the chilly Midwest. State policies and charger availability also play a role, but Kim says fears about winter range — both valid concerns and misinformation-fueled myths — are a factor.

Still, Kim says even with a significant amount of range loss, many drivers in cold-weather regions would still find an EV more than sufficient for their daily needs. "How many people are actually driving more than 200 miles in a day?" he asks rhetorically.

Tips for getting the most from a battery, year-round. 

Range loss from extreme temperatures is inevitable, but EV drivers can prepare for it.

First, pick the right vehicle to battle the temperatures where you live. Some are better than others at handling cold or heat. There are several guides; the most fun comes from a Norwegian auto club that does a head-to-head test every year on a wintry mountain.

A little forward planning helps, too, Kim and Brannon both say. For an EV driver who charges at home overnight and has a typical commute, reduced winter range likely won't affect daily driving at all. But if you don't have a home charger or you're going on a long trip, factor range reduction in when you think about when and where you'll charge. And if you're fast-charging, try to do it on a battery that's been warmed up; charging is slower on a cold battery.

Brannon also recommends that drivers start their climate control while their vehicle is still plugged in. "Pre-conditioning" like that means that when you warm up the car's battery and its interior, you pull power from the grid, not your battery. That saves your vehicle's juice for your drive.

McKernan notes that if you have heated or ventilated seats, using those instead of the air conditioning or heater can be a big boost. The AC and heat are a surprisingly big draw on a vehicle's energy.

And keep your tires inflated to the manufacturer-recommended level and drive at moderate speeds. That boosts your vehicle's efficiency no matter whether it runs on gas, a giant battery or both — and no matter the temperature.
Copyright 2026 NPR

This story first appeared on The LA Local.

While deciphering posted parking regulations around L.A. lately, you may have noticed new signs.

“This property is owned or controlled by the city of Los Angeles,” the shiny red-and-white placards say. "It may only be used for its intended purpose and not used for immigration enforcement as a staging area, processing location, or operations base.”

The LA Local recently spotted them at Hollenbeck Park’s parking lot and at various parking lots close to Echo Park. The mayor’s office told The LA Local the city has installed 500 of them at various locations, including at MacArthur Park, Lafayette Park, the Los Angeles Zoo and Metrolink stations.

The city has received no reports that agents have used the city-owned spaces since the signs were installed. A spokesperson for the mayor’s office said that the city could sue for a restraining order if federal agencies violate the prohibition.

Why were the signs posted?

Mayor Karen Bass ordered that these signs be posted on all city-owned property in February as part of her Executive Order 17. A spokesperson for the mayor’s office said they placed the signs in locations “identified as more likely to be used for [Immigration and Customs Enforcement] operational activity.”

Since the federal government began sweeping operations in Los Angeles last year, immigration advocates and community members have called for the city to do more to keep immigrant residents safer.

In response, Bass issued Executive Order 17, saying the “City must and can do more to protect our City and all who live, work and visit the City of Angels.”

A sign at MacArthur Park prohibits federal agents from using city-owned property to stage for immigration enforcement operations.

(

Courtesy City of Los Angeles

)

How have federal immigration operations involved city property and employees?

In July 2025, about 100 federal agents conducted an operation in MacArthur Park. Days later, Bass issued a separate executive order clarifying the city’s property and resources could not be used for federal immigration enforcement. 

Meanwhile, LAPD Police Chief Jim McDonnell has made repeated statements that he doesn’t agree with or plan to enforce various state laws requiring federal agents to identify themselves and do their work without a mask. (After the Trump administration filed lawsuits, courts have blocked various provisions of those state laws in court anyway.)

Some advocates and Angelenos have called on LAPD to draw a clearer line between the local policing work they are responsible for and the immigration enforcement federal agents do.

Bass’ February order requiring the signs be installed came soon after.

The city has also prohibited its employees from working second jobs with federal immigration enforcement.

What else does Executive Order 17 do?

The order states that unless federal agents have a warrant or court order, they are not allowed to use city-owned or operated property to stage for operations. It also requires LAPD officers to identify federal agents and record their interactions with them. The police commission has since started to publicly report basic details about those interactions.

What happens if federal agents use the city spaces anyway?

The order does not establish what penalties federal agents could face if they are found to be using city property for staging. A spokesperson for the mayor’s office said that the city could sue or pursue a restraining order if federal agencies violate the prohibition.

“Any necessary response will be handled in accordance with the Executive Order and applicable City protocols,” the city statement said.