The Brief

Despite being outspent in nearly every race, progressive candidates in Los Angeles made a strong showing in the March 5 election, with several either winning outright or forcing opponents into runoffs.

The results, though surprising to some, suggest L.A.’s political shift to the left shows little sign of slowing.

“I’m personally shocked at how well progressives did,” said David Levitus of left-leaning activist group L.A. Forward. “I was very nervous in the weeks leading up to this election just because of the low turnout.”

In what some experts say is a maturing of the progressive movement, candidates and organizations were able to stage strong grassroots door-knocking efforts across multiple campaigns. One organization launched an independent expenditure campaign for the first time, sending out mailers to counteract a negative campaign against a progressive candidate by the police union.

Progressive candidates also argue their message is resonating with voters. It's a message that focuses on increasing tenants rights and more aggressively building affordable housing; decreasing the use of an anti-camping law against unhoused people; shrinking the size of the L.A. Police Department’s budget; expanding environmental protections; and increasing efforts to combat climate change.

It was also an anti-establishment message in an age of growing cynicism toward politics.

“I think that people were ready for change,” said candidate Jillian Burgos, who is headed for a runoff against a better funded candidate in District 2. “I think that they are tired of the status quo.”

How candidates fared in key races

Voter turnout in the Primary Election appears to have been low — around 29%, according to the county. Low turnout elections tend to attract older and more conservative voters.

But progressives did well, as shown in the following races:

• L.A. Councilmember Nithya Raman was reelected in the 4th Council District, beating back a challenge by the better funded Deputy City Attorney Ethan Weaver; 
• Tenant rights attorney Ysabel Jurado remains ahead of a crowded field in the 14th Council District, likely forcing incumbent Councilmember Kevin de León into a runoff; 
• Burgos, a North Hollywood Neighborhood Council member, leads the group of candidates in the 2nd District, apparently forcing former Assemblymember Adrin Nazarian into a runoff; 
• The citizen-led Healthy Streets Initiative, which will require billions of dollars in investment into more bike and bus lanes as well as street safety measures, overwhelmingly passed with 65% of the vote;
• Deputy public defenders performed well in superior court judge races, with one beating an incumbent judge and three others winning spots in November runoffs. Three of the four were part of a progressive slate called The Defenders of Justice.

Progressives ran strong campaigns, particularly on the ground, observers said, with District 14 serving as one example.

Janet Torres, campaign field director for Jurado, recalled dispatching campaign volunteers to walk door-to-door to talk up the candidate and her platform. The district includes relatively flat downtown L.A. and Boyle Heights but also hilly El Sereno, Highland Park and Eagle Rock.

“The terrain in CD14 is tough,” Torres said.

An estimated 250 volunteers trekked up and down the streets within the district before the primary, knocking on 85,000 doors, Torres said. And in a break from typical campaign tactics, Jurado did not send out bulk mailers, except for 3,000 postcards handwritten by campaign staff.

“Nothing beats having one-on-one conversations with folks at their door and them really being felt listened to, feeling respected,” Torres said. “It was all gas, no breaks to make sure we were able to secure a win.”

A few thousand votes across the county still need to be counted.

De León, who was elected to the City Council in 2020, finished election night on March 5 ahead of his challengers, but that lead eroded over the next several days as more votes were counted. Jurado surpassed him in the vote count late last week.

The margin between the two candidates was small — roughly 400 votes as of Monday evening — but De León is a politically wounded incumbent.

In October 2022, he was heard on a secretly recorded audio tape engaging in a conversation that included racist and derogatory remarks. He apologized but most of the Democratic establishment had called on him to resign, including President Joe Biden.

Jurado said her campaign “consistently emphasized the marginalized voices in the district — folks that have felt forgotten and not listened to.”

Meghan Choi of Ground Game L.A., one of the groups whose members walked precincts for Jurado and other candidates, said her group and others have worked to build the progressive movement in Los Angeles.

“We’re really excited to see that there is in fact so much appetite for real change coming from Angelenos,” Choi said.

Taking a more personal — but labor intensive — approach to campaigning seems to have paid off, at least so far.

“They have gone back to basics — and that is the ground game,” said Fernando Guerra, professor of political science at the Center for the Study of Los Angeles at Loyola Marymount University. “They have mastered how to do it. It's incredibly difficult to implement but they’re doing it.”

Political action groups help fight ‘fire with fire’

In Jurado’s case, according to her campaign field director, there was a cadre of young people willing to walk the district. Torres said groups including Ground Game L.A., Boyle Heights Vota, Sunrise Movement, The Alliance of Californians for Community Empowerment, and Democratic Socialists of America helped walk precincts.

Jurado overcame massive spending on behalf of one of her opponents, Assemblymember Miguel Santiago, who ended up finishing third in the primary. Santiago’s campaign was bolstered by nearly $700,000 in independent expenditures on his behalf — mostly by labor unions who supported his work in Sacramento.

Raman faced more than $1.3 million in independent expenditures against her, including by the police and firefighters unions, real estate interests, and the Hollywood Chamber of Commerce.

In Raman’s case, progressives decided to “fight fire with fire,” said Levitus, from L.A. Forward.

For the first time, the organization launched its own independent expenditure campaign. on behalf of Raman. It spent $300,000 on her behalf, mostly on mailers.

Unite Here Local 11, the hotel and restaurants workers union, also spent $100,000, mostly on get-out-the-vote efforts for Raman.

Raman won reelection outright with 50.64% percent of the vote. It was just a few hundred votes that put her over 50%, allowing her to avoid a runoff in November against her closest challenger, Ethan Weaver.

“Given how close the vote was, I have very little doubt that she would have probably ended up under 50% had it not been for what we did,” Levitus said.

Levitus also said progressive voter guides are having a growing influence on voters.

He pointed to guides from his own organization, Knock L.A. and L.A. Progressive, as well as from individual influencers like televisionT.V. writer and comedian Adam Conover, who is active in politics.

Conover has more than 350,000 followers on Instagram.

The voter guides can be particularly influential in judicial races, where candidates had little money to get their message out.

“We’re making these races competitive,” said Ivette Alé-Ferlito of La Defensa, which campaigned on behalf of judges. “All of this political education we’ve been doing has catapulted judicial races into the public sphere.”

L.A. Forward in recent years also began a judicial leadership academy that trains people to be candidates for judicial seats.

One of the City Council candidates endorsed by those guides was Burgos, who finished second and made it into the runoff in District 2 despite being far outspent by her opponents. Burgos is an optician, owner of the North Hollywood theater company Dainty Dames Events, and a member of the North Hollywood Neighborhood Council.

Burgos also pointed to endorsements and volunteer help from L.A. Forward, Streets for All, Feel The Bern San Fernando Valley, and California Women’s List.

“They just really put the time in for us,” she said.

And she echoed a familiar theme.

“We made sure to knock doors, really have those conversations with people. Our people were passionate,” she said.

Burgos said she believes her social media campaign was effective, too. She produced Tik Tok and Instagram reels that not only promoted her candidacy but were also instructive about city governance.

“I would talk about how to use 311, how to report a pothole, how city council works, different things that really teach the community,” she said. “A lot of people gave us good feedback about the topics. I pretty much make a reel every day,”

Looking forward to November

Despite those successes, progressive didn’t fare well in all races.

In the more conservative 12th City Council District race in the western San Fernando Valley, incumbent John Lee won reelection handily, beating back a challenge by former Ethics Commission President Serena Oberstein.

In the 10th District, which covers Koreatown, mid-Wilshire and Leimert Park, pastor and community organizer Eddie Anderson had 19% of the vote early this week and appeared to be out of the runoff.

Progressive L.A. County District Attorney George Gascón garnered just 25% of the vote and was forced into a runoff with former Republican state attorney general candidate Nathan Hochman. Gascón’s showing was low for an incumbent and it shows November may be a big challenge for him.

Gascón has faced withering criticism for his policy of reducing criminal penalties to address mass incarceration.

The March results have progressive leaders like L.A. City Councilmember Hugo Soto-Martinez optimistic about the general election..

“The appetite for progressive bold policy is stronger than I thought,” he said.

And some say progressive candidates may expect to fare even better in November when more voters, young people in particular, are expected to cast ballots.

“The electorate has embraced some of these progressive reforms,” said Sara Sadhwani, assistant professor of politics at Pomona College. “Although I think we will see just how far they have done so come November.”

A federal judge on Thursday ordered major changes to reported conditions at the Adelanto ICE Processing Center in San Bernardino County, granting a preliminary injunction that requires federal immigration officials provide people with clean drinking water and adequate medical care.

U.S. District Judge Sunshine Suzanne Sykes ruled that the detainees who brought the lawsuit “demonstrated they are likely to prevail” on their claims that conditions at the facility violate Fifth Amendment protections against inhumane conditions of confinement. While the case will continue to work its way through the courts, the judge issued the ruling now, finding that people being detained could suffer irreparable harm without court intervention.

The suit came after two deaths at the facility within weeks of each other last fall: Ismael Ayala-Uribe, a 39-year-old former DACA recipient, and 56-year-old Gabriel Garcia-Aviles. Both deaths are still under federal investigation as scrutiny over the conditions inside immigrant detention centers in the Trump administration continues to mount.

In their lawsuit, lawyers for the detainees said Adelanto violated ICE detention guidelines by failing to provide clean drinking water, nutritious meals, sanitation, access to medical care and medicine, as well as medical intake screening upon arrival at the facility. They also alleged violations of rules around recreation time outside, visitation time for family, daily headcount to ensure detainees are alive, and accommodations for people with disabilities.

In response, Sykes ordered 24-hour access to clean drinking water, meals with a sufficient number of calories, and access to soap and hygiene products free of charge. The injunction also requires the facility to be cleansed daily and for mold to be identified and removed. Detainees are to be provided blankets and temperature-appropriate clothing, as well as access to recreational yard time outside for at least four hours every day.

The order prevents Adelanto, which is located about 90 miles northeast of Los Angeles, from limiting family visitation during regular business hours, including removing time restrictions and physical contact, such as hugging or holding hands, with family members. It also says the facility can not cancel a visitation if a family member needs to use the restroom during the visit.

The majority of people being held in immigration detention centers in California have not been accused of committing crimes, only of civil immigration violations.

The court ordered Adelanto to perform at least two headcounts every day, once overnight and once during the day, to ensure detainees are present and not incapacitated. The court also ordered restrictions on sending detainees to isolation, barring a life safety risk to staff or if the detainee requests it.

The ruling requires Immigration and Customs Enforcement and other named defendants to immediately provide detainees with the condition upgrades the judge ordered.

The Department of Homeland Security declined to comment on the ruling. DHS attorney Pushkal Mishra argued in court last week the federal government couldn’t be held liable for the actions of its contractor, GEO Group, which runs Adelanto and 18 other immigration facilities around the country.

In a motion to dismiss the case, DHS argued that it should not have “to take over the daily management of a federal contract from a private contractor.”

GEO Group did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Disability access in ICE facilities has been a recurring issue since the Trump administration took office for a second term. According to the complaint, one person described being placed in handcuffs and ankle chains for court appearances despite using a cane. Others alleged people with mobility issues were routinely assigned top bunks. The new court order requires the government to provide people with disabilities with reasonable accommodations.

The court has given the federal government 14 days to create a plan to address medical care and disability needs for detainees. The order requires all detainees to be given an intake screening upon arriving for physical or mental illnesses, ensure ongoing treatment and medication, and treat and segregate detainees to prevent the spread of communicable diseases. The order also mandates that every detainee must have access to primary, secondary, and tertiary medical care and be advised of their patient rights.

Sykes ordered that the government must provide two independent monitors for the duration of the lawsuit to ensure compliance with the court orders. Detainees must also be given the opportunity to submit grievances to the monitors in English or Spanish that are contained in a lockbox only accessible to the monitors.

A report by the California attorney general this year found that six people have died in detention facilities in the state since the start of the Trump administration’s mass deportation campaign. Nationwide, 22 people have died this year in immigration detention.

This week, the Mexican federal government called on state attorneys general to criminally investigate cases where Mexican nationals have died in ICE custody.

The White House has released a series of documents that President Donald Trump said in a primetime address reveals "shocking vulnerabilities in our election infrastructure."

Yet Trump, who for years has baselessly claimed the 2020 election was stolen from him, did not detail allegations of widespread illegal votes in that election. Numerous reviews have debunked his claims about that election.

Instead, he focused on allegations that China had accessed voter data and that noncitizens are found on certain states' voter rolls, among his claims.

Yet Trump has often spoken of issues with elections that fall apart under scrutiny. His administration's system for identifying noncitizens on voter rolls has incorrectly flagged citizens, for example.

The remarks came as his war in Iran approaches the five-month mark, some Republican lawmakers want him to focus on the economy, and as his approval rating remains near second-term lows.

This is a breaking news story and will be updated.
Copyright 2026 NPR

The state is often knocked by the rest of the country as being "slow" to count votes. But here's the deal: that's a feature, not a bug, of the election system.

The backstory

Things take a while here largely because California works so hard to expand the ways people can vote. For example:

• Californians in recent years overwhelmingly vote by mail — nearly 90% of votes cast in the 2024 presidential election were mail-in ballots. In that same year's primary the percentage was just as high. Those ballots can be postmarked up to and including Election Day. They're counted as long as the ballot arrives within seven days (for the June primary, that was June 9).
• California offers same-day voter registration at any voting center. These new voters must cast a provisional ballot, which is counted once election officials confirm their eligibility (they are overwhelmingly accepted — for example, Los Angeles County reports that historically between 85% to 90% have been counted.)
• Voters also have the right to cast provisional ballots if there's any problem on Election Day — like if poll workers aren't able to void an outstanding mail-in ballot, or if there’s any issue calling up voter information from e-pollbooks. Again (see above), provisionals take longer to process because eligibility has to be confirmed.
• Vote-by-mail ballots require signature matching. When the one received doesn't match the one on file, county registrars must contact that voter to let them know — and give them the chance to correct it.
• And, with more than 23 million registered voters, we're really, really big. In the 2024 general election more than 16 million Californians voted (down from nearly 18 million in the 2020 presidential election). Either way, that’s more people than the total populations of all but three other states.

Why things have sped up, some

But things have sped up considerably in the 30 counties that have adopted a 2016 law called the Voter's Choice Act, including L.A., Orange and Riverside counties. In recent elections, the changes associated with that law — like voters not being locked into a designated polling location — drastically cut down the number of provisional ballots cast, which helped move things along faster than they had before.

A closer look at ballot counting times in California where an increasing number of vote-by-mail ballots has slowed ballot counts.

(

Courtesy California Voter Foundation

)

Still, accuracy and a commitment to "expanding the franchise" — translation: allowing more people to vote — means the process is not designed to produce instantaneous results.

L.A. County Office of Education’s letter to Los Angeles Unified School District earlier this month, warning it was at risk of running out of money, has escalated tensions between county overseers and the state’s biggest school district.

LACOE has told the district it must revise its $21 billion budget by mid-August — or risk the appointment of an external advisor with the power to override the LAUSD board and superintendent’s decisions.

The district has already announced the elimination of hundreds of jobs, primarily in its administrative offices, and approved another plan to cut an estimated $3.6 billion over the next three years through furloughs, layoffs and school consolidations.

But LACOE says it wants a more specific plan with more details, and has assigned a fiscal expert to help.

What does it all mean — for teachers, staff and most importantly, the almost 400,000 students in LAUSD schools? We break it down.

What’s in the letter?

The letter outlines a list of why the County has determined the district will become insolvent.

These include:

• Running out of money: The district's own projection has shown that its operating cash will be $231 million in the red by November 2027. “A district that cannot maintain a positive cash balance is unable to meet payroll and other obligations as they come due,” wrote Debra Duardo, the L.A. County superintendent. 

• New labor agreements with teachers, principals, school support staff and other employees: Recently approved contracts, which the unions say are essential to helping employees weather the region’s increasingly high cost of living, will cost an additional $1 billion in the next school year. These increases outpace the state’s  cost of living increases. 
  
• Declining enrollment and attendance: About 40% fewer students attend LAUSD schools than two decades ago, in part because of lower birthrates and families leaving because of the region’s high cost of living. Over time, this can reduce revenue because state funding is calculated based on how many students show up for class each day. 
  
• Leadership stability: The LAUSD Board appointed Andrés Chait, a longtime district administrator, as superintendent in June, just days after his predecessor resigned amid an ongoing federal investigation. ”This transition occurs at the moment the district must execute substantial corrective actions,” Duardo wrote.

It also includes next steps. We’ll discuss those below.

Why did LACOE send the letter July 2?

The letter is part of a process outlined in California law meant to prevent districts from going bankrupt.

Specifically, LACOE is required to intervene anytime it determines the district may be unable to meet its financial obligations in the current or subsequent two years (California requires districts to budget in three-year blocks.)

Has this happened to LAUSD before?

The requirement to issue this letter is fairly new and tied to a 2021 change in state law.

However, LACOE has intervened in LAUSD’s finances in the past. The agency assigned a fiscal expert team to the district from January 2019 to December 2021 after determining the district was at risk of not meeting its financial obligations.

The team helped analyze staffing, enrollment and make adjustments to the budget, according to a statement provided by Elizabeth Graswich, executive director of LACOE’s public affairs and communications department.

How did LAUSD get to this point?

The shortest explanation is that LAUSD is spending more money than it brings in.

The last three budgets relied on billions of dollars in reserves to offset the deficit.

Some of those reserves were built up when the district was receiving federal pandemic relief money and that funding ended in 2024.

LAUSD, like other districts in the state, also faces increased costs on everything from employee salaries and benefits to providing services for students with disabilities and settlements for decades-old sexual assault claims.

The district’s unions, parents, and several board members have also called for increased scrutiny on how much money the district spends on third-party contracts, including with tech companies.

Is LAUSD making cuts? How will they affect students?

LAUSD has already eliminated hundreds of jobs, primarily in its administrative offices, earlier this year.

This summer the board approved another plan to cut an estimated $3.6 billion over the next three years.

That plan includes furlough days for all employees, the elimination of thousands more jobs and cuts to the trust that funds retiree health benefits.

Among the cuts is the elimination of $900 million that helps high-needs schools pay for counselors, tutors and other student supports.

Most of these cuts aren’t scheduled to go into effect until the 2027-28 and 2028-29 school years.

The county said in its letter that the district plan needs to be more specific and include how each proposed change will be implemented, when the change will happen and how the outcomes will be measured.

Has there been any push back to the letter’s findings?

The district did not appeal the letter’s findings to the state, according to a district spokesperson.

However, when LAist asked if the district disputed any of the findings, a spokesperson wrote that the district is quote “continuing conversations” with the County, and that a revision to the budget may not be required.

“We will remain in conversation with LACOE to ensure our financial plan remains responsible, transparent, and aligned with our long-term commitments,” the spokesperson wrote.

The teachers union has said the letter unfairly targets the union’s new contracts.

“To me it feels as though the message is, ‘We warned you not to approve these contracts, and yet you did, and now we're going to overstep,’” said Gloria Martinez, president of United Teachers Los Angeles.

Martinez said the overall problem is that California doesn’t adequately fund public education.

We’re about a month away from the start of the next school year. What happens next?

The county has appointed a fiscal expert to help the district revise its budget by mid-August. Otherwise, the county says this advisor could be given the power to override decisions by the board and superintendent.

What happens if the district runs out of money?

Districts that become insolvent can lose the power to govern themselves in an arrangement called receivership. Instead of the elected school board and appointed superintendent making decisions about everything from curriculum to the budget, that power is transferred to an external administrator.

Receivership is a condition of accepting an emergency loan from the state. Only 10 school districts, out of nearly 1,000 statewide, have entered receivership since 1990, including Inglewood Unified.

The impact on students varies from district to district. The process was designed to protect students from sudden school shutdowns, but it comes at a cost. Districts must pay back the emergency loan and community-members lose the ability to elect or recall decision-makers during the receivership.

Contact your school board member

The LAUSD's Board's next meeting is a closed session scheduled for 10 a.m. Tuesday, Aug.11.