The Brief

It's been nearly three weeks since we found out Californians decisively passed Proposition 50 to redraw the state’s congressional district maps. The Associated Press called the vote within minutes of polls closing, but the vote won’t become official until after results are certified in early December — and yes, votes are still being counted with about 12,000 to go statewide.

In the meantime, we’re keeping tabs on potential legal battles, the status of the national redistricting arms race, and how Prop. 50 is already shaping choices for the 2026 midterm elections.

Here's what's been going on so far.

Texas’ map is getting reviewed by the Supreme Court

• What happened: A federal court ruled that Texas cannot use its recently redrawn congressional maps in the 2026 midterm elections, finding it was racially gerrymandered. The Supreme Court has now taken up the case, and has temporarily allowed the map to stand while it figures out which map Texas should default to as the case goes under review.
• Wasn’t this the map that led to Prop. 50 to begin with? Yep. A quick refresher: Over the summer, President Donald Trump encouraged Texas officials to start an unusual mid-decade redistricting process to help Republicans gain five seats in the House of Representatives in the 2026 midterms. After Texas’ state legislature produced those new maps, Gov. Gavin Newsom announced that California would respond with a similar move to redistrict in favor of Democrats and neutralize Texas' map — which eventually became Prop. 50. 
• Does the case affect Prop. 50? No. But there's a separate challenge underway in California. More on that below. 
• What does this mean for the House elections in 2026? If Texas winds up having to use its older map drawn in 2021 for next year's midterms — either as a default while the Supreme Court reviews the case or a result of the newer map being struck down — Democrats will be ahead in the nationwide redistricting battle. But if the new map stands, Democrats and Republicans remain neck-and-neck in the redistricting battle.

California Republicans and the DOJ filed a lawsuit

• What happened: Shortly after Election Day, California Republicans announced they were challenging Prop. 50 in federal court, arguing the new district maps favor Latinos at the expense of other groups in violation of the Constitution. The federal Department of Justice filed last week to join the lawsuit.
• Does this change anything? Not at the moment. The lawsuit requests a preliminary injunction — essentially a pause on Prop. 50 going into effect — while the case gets reviewed, but it’s not clear if the court will grant one. Any injunction would have to happen very soon, since candidates are already gearing up for the 2026 elections.

Here’s how O.C. cities voted on Prop. 50

Voters wait to cast their ballots in the California Statewide Special Election at the Huntington Beach Central Library on Tuesday, Nov. 4, 2025.

(

Allen J. Schaben/Los Angeles Times via Getty Imag

/

Los Angeles Times

)

• What happened: Prop. 50 won in Orange County, but data from the county's registrar’s office gives us a clearer picture of how that vote broke down across cities. 
• Who voted no? “No” votes led by more than 60% in Villa Park, a mostly residential enclave in the heart of Orange County, along with Newport Beach and Yorba Linda, traditional Trump strongholds.
• Supporting Prop. 50: The cities of Santa Ana, Irvine, Anaheim and Tustin were among those with the highest support for the measure. You can see the full breakdown of vote margins across O.C. here.

Prop. 50 moved an entire district out of the Inland Empire 

• What happened: The previously safe-Republican 41st Congressional District, which covered the Inland Empire and Coachella Valley in Riverside County, is now primarily in blue L.A. County, with some small slices of Orange County.
• What cities are in the new 41st District? It includes Downey, Lakewood, Sante Fe Springs and Brea. You can see a map of the district here. The 41st District currently stretches through Riverside County from Corona to Palm Desert. It’s represented by Republican Rep. Ken Calvert.
• Geographic changes this big are unusual, right? Yes — even though Prop. 50 shifted most California congressional districts, this change stuck out. As Jodi Balma, a political science professor at Fullerton College, told LAist: "The others, you could kind of understand how the borders changed and some segment of the district remained the same. But this one just wholesale was picked up from the Inland Empire and moved to Los Angeles, and it's a completely new district."
• Who could represent the new 41st District? So far, there's only one candidate in the race. That’s Democratic Rep. Linda Sánchez, who currently represents the 38th District. She could have chosen to run in either the newly drawn 38th District (covering Bell, Diamond Bar, Rowland Heights and part of Yorba Linda) or the new 41st District, since both include communities she currently represents. Here’s what she said when she announced the decision:
  

  “After Proposition 50 passed and split my current district, deciding where to run was an emotional but ultimately an easy choice — I chose home. Boundaries may change, but my commitment to fighting for the people I love will never waver.”

U.S. Rep. Linda Sanchez speaks at the U.S. Capitol on May 10, 2023 in Washington, DC.

(

Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images

/

Getty Images North America

)

The other SoCal congressional candidates running in 2026

As expected, the Prop. 50 map is causing a big game of musical chairs among sitting congressional representatives now deciding which new districts to run in. New candidates are also jumping in to see if voters in freshly redrawn districts will elect them to office. Here’s what Southern California’s choices are looking like for the 2026 elections:

• Two sitting Republicans face off to represent O.C. and Riverside: The 40th Congressional District is one of the only districts that’s significantly more Republican under Prop. 50, so it’s prime territory for GOP candidates. 
• Previously in the 40th District: It covered eastern Orange County, San Bernardino and Riverside counties, including North Tustin, Chino Hills, Yorba Linda, Laguna Hills and Mission Viejo. It’s currently represented by Republican Rep. Young Kim. 
• The 40th District after Prop. 50: It hangs on to parts of Orange County, including Mission Viejo and Villa Park, but now includes large swathes of Riverside County, including Lake Elsinore, Murrieta and Menifee. 
• Who’s running in 2026: The 40th’s current representative, Republican Rep. Young Kim, will run for reelection. Republican Rep. Ken Calvert, who currently represents the Riverside County areas being added to the 40th District, says he will run against Kim in 2026, so voters will see a rare race between two incumbents from the same party.

An open seat in southeast L.A. County

L.A. County Supervisor Hilda Solis speaks at a press conference on Feb. 18, 2025 in Los Angeles.

(

Carlin Stiehl

/

LAist

)

The mostly-blue 38th Congressional District seat is staying mostly blue, although it’s grabbed a larger piece of Orange County — and the seat is up for grabs.

• Previously in the 38th District: This L.A. County district included Montebello, Santa Fe Springs, Norwalk, Whittier and Diamond Bar, and is currently represented by Democratic Rep. Linda Sánchez.
• The 38th District after Prop. 50: It holds on to Montebello, Hacienda Heights, Rowland Heights and part of Diamond Bar, and adds on Bell and part of Yorba Linda. It also loses Norwalk, Whittier, Santa Fe Springs and La Habra to the 41st District. 
• Who’s running in 2026: With incumbent Sánchez running in the 41st District, the 38th is open. L.A. County Supervisor Hilda Solís, a Democrat, is already in the race. Solís previously served in the House from 2001 to 2009 before becoming Secretary of Labor under President Barack Obama and then being elected to the L.A. County Board of Supervisors in 2014.

Huntington Beach moves to a Democratic stronghold

The city has an all-Republican City Council that’s supported voter ID laws and restrictions on children’s books in public libraries. Under Prop. 50, Huntington Beach will join the 42nd Congressional District, which includes a heavily Democratic swath of L.A. County.

• Previously in the 42nd District: It was in L.A. County alone, covering Huntington Park, Downey, Bell, Lakewood and Long Beach. It’s currently represented by Democratic Rep. Robert Garcia.
• The 42nd District after Prop. 50: It covers the coast between L.A. and Orange counties, starting at Long Beach and going south to Huntington Beach, Costa Mesa and Newport Beach. The new district includes significantly more Republican voters than before, but it still has a Democratic majority. 
• Who's running in 2026: Incumbent Garcia is running for reelection. If he wins, that would put the progressive Long Beach Democrat — who has directly challenged the Trump administration on immigration enforcement and spending cuts from the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) — in place to represent some of the most conservative areas of Orange County.

This story was adapted from an issue of LAist's Make It Make Sense newsletter. You can sign up here.

In his final year in office, Gov. Gavin Newsom plans to go after large investors buying and owning California housing — in the same week that President Donald Trump also took rhetorical aim at Big Landlord.

It’s an unlikely meeting of the minds of two political foes who, in a race to head off the electorate's concerns about affordability, have landed upon the same populist message: Blame Wall Street.

Newsom plans to say during his State of the State address to lawmakers on Thursday that he wants to work with them to regulate the practice of investors buying up large stocks of housing to rent out, forcing California residents to compete with them to afford buying a home, according to the governor’s office.

Proposals could include “enhanced state oversight and enforcement and potential changes to the state tax code,” according to the governor’s office.

“When housing is treated primarily as a corporate investment strategy, Californians feel the impact,” a source in the office said. “Prices go up, rents rise, and fewer people have a chance to buy a home.”

That sounds similar to a proposal Trump made on his social media platform Truth Social on Wednesday. The two previously closely aligned on policy related to clearing of homeless encampments.

“I am immediately taking steps to ban large institutional investors from buying more single-family homes,” the president wrote, sending stock prices of major publicly traded residential investment firms plummeting. He urged Congress to put the proposal into law and promised to unveil additional housing policy proposals at the World Economic Forum summit in Davos, Switzerland later this month.

Newsom is stopping short of calling for an outright ban on institutional investors’ ownership, though the source said he will seek to “curb” it with the goal of making home ownership more affordable for California residents.

He hasn’t yet proposed anything concrete. Whatever Newsom seeks to do, he’ll need the approval of the state Legislature.

Trump, for his part, did not offer any details about his proposal, such as how institutional investors would be defined under the proposed law or why he targeted single-family homes in particular. The White House’s press office did not respond to an email with those questions.

The twin announcements come after years of long-shot efforts by California progressives to address a surge in companies buying up single-family housing stock in the wake of the Great Recession. The issue has been the subject of renewed anxiety in post-fire Los Angeles, where a recent report by RedFin showed investors (loosely defined as any buyer with a name that includes “LLC,” “Inc” or “Corp”) have purchased 27 of 61 burned vacant lots that sold in Altadena — more than 40%.

Asked about that report in an interview on MS Now this week, Newsom said he had signed an executive order last year seeking to protect homeowners who find it too expensive to rebuild from falling for “predatory” lowball offers for their properties. But he acknowledged “the broader market conditions are challenging.”

The proposals mark new territory for Newsom’s housing affordability platform. The governor, now in his final year in office, has spent most of the past seven years focused on boosting construction. It’s a pivot toward populism for the governor, who is widely expected to run for president in 2028.

Blaming deep-pocketed investors for the nation’s housing woes has become an increasingly ideological-spanning exercise in recent years, with politicians as diverse as New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Vice President J.D. Vance championing the cause.

Shortly after Trump’s post, Republican Sen. Bernie Moreno of Ohio, an enthusiastic supporter of the president, promised to introduce legislation in his own post on X.

Is this actually a problem in California?

Many housing industry professionals, economists and policy researchers are skeptical.

“It’s really hard to buy a house right now so people are looking for someone to blame for that, but I think (institutional investors) are more of a symptom of the affordability crisis than they are a perpetuator of it,” said Caitlin Gorback, a University of Texas at Austin economist who has studied investors’ effect on local real estate markets.

Research on the topic is mixed, though most analyses have found that by taking owner-occupied homes and converting them into rentals, these companies tend to increase the supply of rentals. That puts downward pressure on rents, while taking away purchasable homes, leading to higher prices.

Fewer than 3% of all single-family homes in the state are owned by companies that own at least 10 properties.That also takes away opportunities for would-be homeowners to buy a coveted single-family home. But even that comes with an under-appreciated upside, said Gorback: They provide more priced-out renters the opportunity to live in single-family homes — typically in wealthier, whiter and higher-resourced neighborhoods — something historically reserved for those who can afford to buy.

While apartment buildings are commonly owned and managed by large financial companies, single-family rentals weren’t seen as Wall Street-worthy money-making opportunities until the aftermath of the Great Recession. Since then, companies like Invitation Homes, Blackstone, Progress Residential and AMH Homes have typically focused on markets with relatively low prices and rapidly growing populations.

That doesn’t describe California. As a result, larger investors — however defined — make up a relatively small share of single-family landlords in the state. Fewer than 3% of all single-family homes in the state are owned by companies that own at least 10 properties, according to an analysis by the California Research Bureau, which conducts research for state lawmakers. A mere 20,066 are owned by firms with portfolios of 1,000 units or more. The largest of those owners is Invitation Homes, which owns over 11,000 homes in the state and reached a settlement with Attorney General Rob Bonta’s office last year over allegations it price-gouged tenants and illegally raised rents on more than 1,900 properties.

There are more than 16 million rental units across the state, according to Census data.

Though attacking big monied investors for the high cost of housing is a “huge distraction,” it has obvious political appeal, said Stan Oklobdzija, a UC Riverside public policy professor. “Attacking institutional investors is the latest iteration of appearing to do something without actually doing anything. …It's just kind of archetypical cheap talk.”

For nearly a decade, Democrats in the state Legislature have proposed bills to track or ban the practice. Former Gov. Jerry Brown in 2018 vetoed a bill to create a registry of institutional investors that own 100 or more single-family homes, noting that “collecting the data would not stop the purchase of these homes by private investors.”

In 2024, lawmakers proposed banning investors that own at least 1,000 single-family homes from buying more houses and renting them out, prohibiting institutional investors from buying single-family homes for any reason and banning developers from selling entire new single-family subdivisions to investors to rent. All three bills died in committees.

Assemblymember Alex Lee, author of the first proposal, revived the bill last year. It passed the Assembly and awaits a hearing in a Senate committee.

Lee, a Democratic Socialist who has long critiqued the role of big money in the state's real estate market, said he was "flabbergasted" to find himself on the same page with Trump, whom he described as a "far-right fascist." Though he expressed doubts that the Trump administration would follow through with the promises the president made in his social media post, he said that "Democrats need to wake up to this populist, but righteous, position."

"We can’t let the far-right capture the housing positions that the people care about," Lee said.

Newsom evidently agrees.

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

Once upon a time, we lived in a world where the “cool” kids were the ones up drinking until 5 a.m., weekend warriors who relished the pursuit of pleasure no matter the unsavory cost.

In today’s post-COVID world, however, things have gotten a little topsy-turvy. Nowadays, the cool kids are in bed by 9 p.m. so they can be up at 5 a.m., in time to slam down a shot of matcha and head to a day rave where all the attendees are — believe it or not — shockingly, sober.

The thing is, to the undiscerning eye, the crowd at a Daybreaker rave looks exactly the same as its typically drug-fueled nighttime counterpart: buoyant, animated and so very alive with its sea of thrashing bodies, quivering booties and smiling faces.

It’s a testament to a new paradigm shift, one in which adults are increasingly turning away from the hard stuff in favor of celebrating without alcohol. Nurtured by the desire for vitality, the small flame of “Dry January” has taken shape into something much greater — a whole new world of non-alcoholic gatherings.

From coffee raves to tea speakeasies and beyond, the world of adult beverages as we know it is rapidly changing. Whether you’re a social butterfly looking for a new scene or a homebody hoping to finally venture off the couch, we’ve featured three of our favorite non-alcoholic gatherings in L.A. Check ‘em out below in all their glory.

Bar Nuda (pop up locations)

Founded by Morris Ellis, a creative director and branding expert, and Pablo Murillo, a storyteller and entrepreneur, Bar Nuda is a pop up “bar” experience designed for those in mind who want to indulge in the social aspects of the barfly life without any of the lingering regrets the next morning.

“We've been on a mission to redefine a night out,” says Murillo, smiling as he places a drink in front of me. “Our slogan is ‘Drinks to Remember’, because we want you to go out and celebrate life.”

Bar Nuda helps you indulge in the social aspects of the barfly life without any of the lingering regrets

(

Janelle Lassalle

/

LAist

)

It’s a mission that’s more personal than professional — Murillo’s experience of losing his father to alcohol-related illness inspired him to redefine the narrative of what a night out could look like. His goal was a surprisingly simple concept: to create a warm, welcoming community where people could mingle without the standard social lubricant of booze.

“We wanted to really hold space for people like myself, you know?” Murillo continues. “When we started Bar Nuda, I was not sober, but I am now. Bar Nuda got me sober. We wanted to change the narrative for my family, but also be there for others to do the same and to say, hey, look, you can go out and have a really good time without drinking booze.”

Bar Nuda's slogan is “Drinks to Remember"

(

Janelle Lassalle

/

LAist

)

Bar Nuda partners up with local bars, neighborhood coffee shops and other venues around Los Angeles to create unique non-alcoholic based events for patrons; check out their Instagram for the details. Trivia Night, for instance, is a regular staple in their event roster, with most events starting at 7 or 8 p.m. Other events include benefit concerts (to raise money for CHIRLA, The Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights), Alcohol Free Game Night and even courses dedicated to making your own non-alcoholic based drinks.

“We do a ton of work with hospitality groups, venues and music festivals who are looking to build out their non-alcoholic programs,” says Brianda Gonzalez, founder of the non-alcoholic shop The New Bar, who partners with Bar Nuda. “Consumers are increasingly looking for other options when they go out and don't want to drink quite as much.”

Ellis and Murillo are certainly doing something right: to walk into one of their events is to feel like you’re, well, inside of a bar, filled with the sounds of warm laughter, buzzing conversations and the inevitable chaotic din of the trivia crowd. Drinks are prepared with a level of craftsmanship that might have you second guessing as to whether or not you’re drinking alcohol. The menu rotates seasonally, with many of the drink ingredients sourced directly from Mexico. The house favorite is the “Rosa Nuda”, made with tantalizingly tangy, fresh bougainvillea sourced by Bar Nuda’s Beverage Director Bryant J. Orozco.

As the guests at the bar form a small crowd, giggling about events to come, I take a sip of the Rosa Nuda before a huge smile spreads across my face.

The bartender laughs at me, pleased.

“Not bad, eh?”

Grab tickets here.

Daybreaker (rotating locations)

A recent Daybreaker event in Venice giving good vibes

(

Courtesy Daybreaker

)

The first time I attended a Daybreaker event was in Portland several years ago. I attended because friends of mine had told me there was a new, sober day rave spreading across town, and I simply didn’t believe them.

How very wrong I was. It may have been 9 a.m., but this crowd seemed just as rowdy, if not rowdier, than its nighttime counterpart. The only difference between the two was this crowd seemed decked out in yoga pants rather than rave gear.

Bubbling with energy at Daybreaker Venice

(

Bailey Templeton

/

Courtesy Daybreaker

)

“I wanted to have fun while still being able to function,” said Nemo, a DJ I met there. “At some point my body was not able to handle the disrupted sleep cycles and booze anymore, but I still wanted to be able to go to events and enjoy myself.”

To my great surprise, I discovered raving sober had its own unique appeal. The lack of alcohol kept me light and energetic rather than clouded in a drunken haze. I was able to dance for much longer than usual, and felt a familiar euphoric high similar to a runner’s high the longer I danced.

Daybreaker throws day raves in a number of different cities: Los Angeles, Seattle, Atlanta, New York. The next event in L.A. is Saturday Jan. 24 from 9 a.m. - 12 noon, to be held in a secret venue. Given it’s described as “dry January, wet with endorphins”, there’s a good chance it’s in a sauna, where Daybreaker is known to throw dance parties.

Celebrating life at 9am in Venice

(

Bailey Templeton

/

Courtesy Daybreaker

)

“We’re living in a cultural moment where people are craving clarity, connection, and control over their wellbeing — and ultimately belonging,” says Daybreaker founder Radha Agrawal.

“Post-pandemic, there’s been a mass re-evaluation of what we put into our bodies and how we spend our time. Gen Z in particular is leading the charge — they’re drinking nearly 30% less than millennials did at their age — and they’re looking for ways to connect without sacrificing health or mental clarity," he says.

"People want to wake up feeling good, not hungover, and they’re realizing that social connection can actually feel better without alcohol.”

Snag tickets here.

Bu Tea Den (DTLA)

In true speakeasy style, I reached Bu Tea Den through an inconspicuous metal door in a back alley downtown. Once inside, however, the vibe quickly shifted. A curious video was projected onto a wall by the entrance, lit up by colorful, digital Paisley shapes swimming about. Each Paisley had a customer’s name plastered above it, giving the surreal sensation that I was watching some sort of digital city like a god from up above on high. ‘PAISLEY ID’ read across the top of the screen.

Nearby, what I initially thought was an ATM was actually marked "AFTM: automated fortune telling machine". Patrons can take a quiz and receive a spiritual fortune of sorts, printed out neatly onto a slip of paper like an ATM receipt, along with a corresponding Paisley.

(According to the machine, my life path number is seven, my soul age is baby, and my chakral focus is sacral. "Trust what steadies you, even if it changes tomorrow.")

Writer Janelle Lassalle experiencing Bu Tu Den's AFTM — an automated fortune telling machine

(

Janelle Lassalle

/

LAist

)

Inspired by time spent in the Burning Man community, co-founders Severin Sauliere and Natalie Tran created the art installation to help inspire a sense of community at Bu Tea Den.

Sauliere and Tran are husband and wife: Sauliere is an artist/Creative Director, and Tran is Chief Steeping Officer in charge of tea operations. Their goal is to redefine happy hour by giving guests the opportunity to slow down and get social without the thundering din of techno music and flashy cocktails.

"It's not an upsell kind of thing," said Sauliere. "It's based on you chilling with your friends, having some tea together and talking. I'm not against alcohol, but it's everywhere. Having a space that doesn't have it challenges the dynamic a little bit."

Co-founder Natalie Tran, at Bu Tea Den “part tea lounge, part interactive art installation, and part intimate gathering space.”

(

Janelle Lassalle

/

LAist

)

The space is cultivated in the style of a tea lounge, with a number of booths scattered about facing the Paisley display. Guests can enjoy a unique tea experience at the bar in which they’re served several rounds of tea blends, along with snacks like Ube popcorn, Fridays - Sundays 5 - 9 p.m.

Billed as “part tea lounge, part interactive art installation, and part intimate gathering space,” Bu Tea Den isn’t just a place where you can come to enjoy a strong cup of jasmine tea: it’s also gearing up to become a community-oriented event space. Guests can come by for regular events like Mahjong at the Den, a Hong Kong style version of the popular game, or an upcoming "Tea and Tease" burlesque and comedy night on Saturday Jan. 17.

Get in on the fun here.

Homeownership has become increasingly out of reach for many young families, especially in pricey California. On Wednesday, President Donald Trump said he plans to make housing affordable again by cutting deep-pocketed investors out of the single-family home market.

“I am immediately taking steps to ban large, institutional investors from buying more single-family homes, and I will be calling on Congress to codify it,” Trump said on the social media platform Truth Social. “People live in homes, not corporations.”

But in California, housing policy experts say Trump’s strategy might not move the needle on affordability much. That’s because institutional investors aren’t buying many single-family homes in the Golden State to begin with.

“It's kind of a red herring,” said Richard Green, director of the USC Lusk Center for Real Estate. “Institutional ownership of single-family rentals is a very small share of all single-family rentals, let alone all of the housing stock in the United States.”

Less than 3% of CA homes 

Trump’s idea is not new. Democratic California lawmakers have also proposed limits on investor home-buying. To inform the legislative process, state researchers have looked into the question of how California homes are getting scooped up by institutional buyers.

The answer: Not many.

Statewide, 2.8% of single-family homes are owned by investors who own 10 properties or more. That’s according to the California Research Bureau, which produces nonpartisan policy research for the Governor’s Office and the state Legislature.

According to the Urban Institute, large investors own a much greater stock of single-family homes in cities including Jacksonville, Charlotte and Atlanta, where institutional investors own nearly 29% of single-family rentals.

Corporate ownership rates are much lower in California. In Los Angeles County, home to more than 10 million people, only about 72,474 homes are owned by large investors, according to the California Research Bureau. That number includes single-family homes as well as condos, townhomes and duplexes.

Would banning corporate owners reduce competition?

Invitation Homes is the largest owner of single-family homes in California, with more than 11,000 properties to its name statewide, including about 3,100 in Los Angeles County. Its business model involves buying single-family homes, updating them and then renting them out to tenants who may not otherwise be able to afford home-ownership.

LAist reached out to Invitation Homes for comment on Trump’s announcement. We were sent a statement from the National Rental Home Council.

“Housing affordability is a critical issue, and we appreciate the administration’s focus on ensuring Americans have access to a diverse mix of housing options,” the statement read.

The statement continued: “Professional single-family housing providers represent a small segment of the overall housing market, and the single-family rental industry remains focused on supporting renters while also supporting pathways to homeownership.”

David Garcia, deputy director of policy at UC Berkeley’s Terner Center for Housing Innovation, said getting rid of institutional investors probably wouldn’t do much to bring down home prices for young Californians.

“The vast, vast majority of homes that are purchased are by people who are generally going to live in them,” Garcia said. “So you're not really reducing the main competition for home buyers, which is other home buyers.”

Lack of supply, lots of demand fuel CA’s high prices

Garcia and USC’s Green both said California’s home prices are high because of lack of supply. Steady demand for California homes coupled with low building rates since the Great Recession have produced a market where the wealthiest buyers out-bid everyone else for the few homes coming up for sale.

Trump’s proposal echoes similar policy explorations from the L.A. City Council, which voted in 2021 to consider banning companies like Zillow and Redfin from buying homes within the city.

Details were scant in Trump’s post, but he said more information about his plans would be forthcoming.

In his Truth Social post, he said: “I will discuss this topic, including further Housing and Affordability proposals, and more, at my speech in Davos in two weeks.”