Students in a classroom at a high school in California on March 1, 2022.
(
Salgu Wissmath
/
CalMatters
)
Topline:
Emotional fights erupted over a controversial attempt this year to counter antisemitism in schools by restricting what teachers teach in classrooms, exposing a political quagmire for California Democrats who needed to balance the needs of Jewish communities against the fury of a growing pro-Palestinian base.
Why now: Stories like Assemblymember Rebecca Bauer-Kahan, as well as Hamas’ attack on Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, prompted California’s Jewish lawmakers to make countering antisemitism in schools their top priority this year. They sought to create a list of words and ideas that could not be mentioned in classrooms, including heavily disputed claims about Israel. The effort sparked the biggest, most emotional legislative fight of the year: Should the government regulate what can be taught in schools? If so, how far should it go?
The backstory: At issue was Assembly Bill 715, which Gov. Gavin Newsom signed into law this month after it went through multiple major, sometimes last-minute rewrites during months of political tussling. Champions have argued the law will protect Jewish students from rising bullying and discrimination, sometimes from teachers. While the state does not collect data on antisemitism in schools, reports of anti-Jewish bias statewide have doubled between 2021 and 2024, according to the California Department of Justice. Last year, more than 15% of all hate crime events in California were anti-Jewish, even though Jewish people make up about 3% of the state population.
Tears welling in her eyes, Assemblymember Rebecca Bauer-Kahan paused mid-sentence to calm herself on the Assembly floor.
Almost a century ago, the Nazis forced her grandmother to flee Austria, leaving behind her great-great-grandmother who died in the Holocaust, the Jewish Democrat from San Ramon told her fellow lawmakers. Last year, she said, her daughter told her that the bathrooms at her school had been vandalized with swastikas.
“My children deserve to show up at school and not have to face hate crimes in their building, to face the symbols that represented the end of their relatives,” she said.
Stories like hers, as well as Hamas’ attack on Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, prompted California’s Jewish lawmakers to make countering antisemitism in schools their top priority this year. They sought to create a list of words and ideas that could not be mentioned in classrooms, including heavily disputed claims about Israel. The effort sparked the biggest, most emotional legislative fight of the year: Should the government regulate what can be taught in schools? If so, how far should it go?
At issue was Assembly Bill 715, which Gov. Gavin Newsom signed into law this month after it went through multiple major, sometimes last-minute rewrites during months of political tussling.
Champions have argued the law will protect Jewish students from rising bullying and discrimination, sometimes from teachers. While the state does not collect data on antisemitism in schools, reports of anti-Jewish bias statewide have doubled between 2021 and 2024, according to the California Department of Justice. Last year, more than 15% of all hate crime events in California were anti-Jewish, even though Jewish people make up about 3% of the state population.
“We cannot hide from the profoundly unfortunate truth that Jewish kids are being isolated, made to feel unwelcome, and verbally and physically attacked. And far too often, our schools are failing to protect them,” Assemblymember Rick Zbur, a Los Angeles Democrat and co-author of the bill, said during a May hearing, when the bill started as merely a promise to curb antisemitism in schools.
Assemblymember Rick Chavez Zbur speaks to lawmakers during an Assembly floor session at the state Capitol in Sacramento on Oct. 1, 2024.
(
Fred Greaves
/
CalMatters
)
By July, it had undergone a major overhaul, including determining that any instruction that “directly or indirectly deny Israel’s right to exist,” equating Israelis with Nazis, or disrespecting “the historical, cultural, or religious significance of Israel to the Jewish people” would count as creating an “antisemitic learning environment.” It reinvigorated debates over whether criticism of Israel’s founding, or even the belief that Jewish people should have an independent country in their ancient homeland, counts as antisemitic — something Jewish thinkers do not agree on.
Mainstream Jewish groups maintain that anti-Zionism, a broad term that generally opposes the idea of a standalone state with a Jewish-majority population, is antisemitic. Many Jewish academics, however, don’t think it is antisemitic on its own, but they agree that blaming individual Jews for the actions taken by the Israeli government is antisemitic.
That July version of the bill drew heavy opposition from a vast coalition of education groups, from teachers unions to school boards, civil rights advocates and Muslim community organizations, who feared censorship of pro-Palestinian voices and infringement upon academic freedom. They would remain opposed through its many iterations, and many of them urged Newsom to veto it.
Their concerns lingered even as the bill was ultimately watered down in the final days of this year’s legislative session to address bias more broadly: The final version no longer mentions the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and bars using professional development materials that violate the state’s anti-discrimination laws. It also requires “factually accurate” instruction that is free of “advocacy, personal opinion, bias, or partisanship” — a controversial element the bill’s authors said they ran out of time to tackle and promised to “clean up” next year.
“In its current form, this bill only reinforces broader national trends of silencing constitutionally protected speech, erasing historically relevant curriculum, and persecuting anyone who expresses even the slightest opposition to the federal administration,” said Assemblymember Robert Garcia, a freshman Democratic lawmaker from Rancho Cucamonga and former teacher and school board member, who ultimately abstained from voting on the measure.
The squabble over the bill was messy, marked by hundreds of attendees, hourslong hearings, and accusations of bad faith from both sides. Bauer-Kahan called a teachers union advocate who opposed the bill antisemitic. After the bill passed out of the Legislature, a handful of pro-Palestinian activists protested from the Assembly gallery for more than an hour, yelling: “You will all have blood on your hands!”
Assemblymember Rebecca Bauer-Kahan speaks in support of SCR 135, which would designate May 6, 2024 as California Holocaust Memorial Day on the Assembly floor at the state Capitol in Sacramento on April 29, 2024.
(
Miguel Gutierrez Jr.
/
CalMatters
)
The tension highlights the discomfort for California Democrats, who, despite having traditionally defended Israel, have had to reckon with a base growing increasingly critical of Israel. They faced a tough choice: Support the bill and risk upsetting some of the most powerful labor allies as well as their pro-Palestinian constituents, or oppose the bill and risk being labeled as antisemitic or unwilling to combat antisemitism. Amid the pressure, some Democratic lawmakers voted for the bill even as they warned it could be used to censor free speech. Others abstained instead of taking a side.
“I'm actually surprised that California state legislators would want to even touch it, because it's just so radioactive right now,” said Kim Nalder, a political science professor at Sacramento State University. “It just feels like at this political moment, we want to lower the temperature, not shine a spotlight on ways in which we might target each other.”
The issue was such a hot potato that many lawmakers avoided tackling it early in the legislative process, when policy differences are often ironed out, said Sen. Sasha Renée Pérez, a freshman progressive Democrat from Pasadena who chairs the Senate Education Committee. When the bill arrived in her committee in June, it still had no substantive language. Some lawmakers told her to not touch it either, while others left it up to her to “take care of it,” she said.
“The ball got thrown to me,” she told CalMatters. "And people knew that they were doing that."
'People would end up being very angry on both sides'
The Gaza war has forced a tidal shift within the Democratic base, as voters’ support for Israel’s military campaign tanked over the past two years. That has forced some Democrats, even moderates who have historically backed Israel, to condemn the country and pull away from pro-Israel donors. Young Democrats are also more critical of Israel than their older peers, so any vote that could be perceived as silencing pro-Palestinian voices is risky.
“A very strong part of Democratic and leftist values that we are seeing expressed now is anti-genocide or anti-war,” Nalder said. “(For) my students who are politically active, this is one of the chief issues that they care about.”
The bill also came as President Donald Trump ordered immigration agents to arrest student activists critical of the Israeli government and withheld billions of dollars in funding from universities for their alleged failure to protect Jewish students. At least half a dozen other state Legislatures sought to fight antisemitism in schools this year, with some adopting a highly disputed definition of antisemitism in state education codes. Enraged, some opponents accused California Democrats of taking a page out of Trump’s playbook.
But the Democratic lawmakers had to balance all that with the risk of upsetting the Jewish community, a key voting block. A no vote could be construed as antisemitic, making the lawmaker vulnerable to challenges in the next election, Nalder said.
The bill was the sole priority of the 18-member California Legislative Jewish Caucus, which is composed entirely of Democrats and led by Assemblymember Jesse Gabriel of Encino and Sen. Scott Wiener of San Francisco, who chair the budget committees in their respective chambers.
Neither would speak with CalMatters about what happened with the bill. Gabriel’s office did not respond to several CalMatters emails seeking an interview, whereas Wiener declined to comment, pointing CalMatters to the bill authors instead.
David Bocarsly, executive director of the Jewish Public Affairs Committee, which sponsored the bill, said the caucus’ backing was crucial.
“The Jewish caucus was able to leverage their influence and respect with their colleagues and effectively represent the Jewish community’s needs,” he said.
Pérez acknowledged the political challenge, telling CalMatters she would have preferred to hold the bill until next year, but said legislative leaders had promised to deliver a bill the governor could sign this year. She said some colleagues told her it was “an impossible situation” to navigate.
“They felt like there was no winning,” she said. “Regardless of what they would try to do to make amendments to it … people would end up being very angry on both sides.”
A debate over academic freedom
The clash over AB 715 is the latest episode of yearslong strife over how to teach about marginalized communities in California’s K-12 schools and who should be included.
In past years, the fight primarily focused on ethnic studies — a mandatory high school course on the history and culture of groups such as Latinos, Asian Americans, African Americans and Native Americans. The state adopted a model curriculum in 2021, after years of fine-tuning amid disputes over which ethnic minority groups to teach about and criticism from Jewish advocates, who accused past versions of being antisemitic.
Jewish lawmakers championed a bill earlier this year that aimed to tackle antisemitism by restricting the ethnic studies curriculum, but the effort was stopped early in its tracks, and legislators turned to AB 715 instead.
“This is a bill about protecting Jewish students, and it shouldn't have been controversial,” said Bocarsly, of JPAC. “If we don't teach empathy and understand it, we're going to build a generation of intolerance, and that's what we're trying to correct for.”
He said AB 715 was “the hardest political fight in JPAC’s history” and that the initial definition of an antisemitic learning environment was only meant to offer teachers guidance.
But opponents had two major concerns: that the bill’s initial definition of antisemitic learning environment risked silencing discord about Israel, and that even in its final watered-down version it could chill free speech and open teachers up to lawsuits for teaching about anything controversial.
“Jews are most safe when democracy flourishes, when pluralism flourishes, not when rights are taken away,” said David Goldberg, president of the California Teachers Association and a Jewish father to three children who attend public schools.
A classroom at a high school in Imperial County on Dec. 12, 2023.
(
Kristian Carreon
/
CalMatters
)
What’s safe for Jews was itself a matter of disagreement among the bill’s backers and dissenters. Bocarsly said CTA leadership’s opposition to every version of the bill shows that they “have little interest in supporting a bill that would protect Jewish students.”
Goldberg, in an interview, called that accusation “a lot of chutzpah, frankly.”
The fact the bill even tried to prescribe what an antisemitic environment looked like in classrooms was concerning to Kenneth Stern, a scholar on hate. More than 20 years ago, he was the lead author of the highly controversial definition of antisemitism that’s been adopted by some states this year. It all but labels anti-Zionism as a form of antisemitism. Now, nearly 50 countries, including the U.S., have embraced the definition.
Though Stern wrote the definition, he opposes using it to restrict speech in schools, arguing that it could threaten academic freedom and fuel censorship by chilling discussion about controversial topics. Stern said despite all the revisions made during the process, the final version will likely make antisemitism worse.
The law creates an antisemitism prevention coordinator to advise education and legislative leaders and says the person in that role should use federal guidelines published under former President Joe Biden as “a basis” for decision-making. The controversial definition of antisemitism Stern wrote is labeled as the most prominent definition of antisemitism in those guidelines, though it mentions others.
“I understand why people care about (preventing antisemitism in schools),” he said. “They want the Legislature to do something. I think the legislators are sincere that they want to do something. This is the wrong thing.”
Educators like Goldberg worry the bill could allow bad-faith critics to also dispute a wide array of controversial topics taught in schools. Will it become the basis for critics of the transgender community to pressure teachers to say there are only two genders, he wondered.
Gabriel Kahn, a Jewish teacher in Oakland who said he’s being investigated by his school district after challenging the content of an antisemitic training last year, said he fears prosecution for voicing the need to distinguish between antisemitism and criticism of Israel.
“What I’m most afraid of is that in the Democratic state of California, we can pass a censorship bill that protects a foreign nation from criticism implicitly,” he said. “What does that say about the future of academic freedom in our country?”
CalMatters reporter Carolyn Jones contributed reporting.
Makenna Sievertson
breaks down policies and programs with a focus on the housing and homelessness challenges confronting some of SoCal's most vulnerable residents.
Published February 20, 2026 12:29 PM
RVs parked beside the Ballona Wetlands, a nature and wildlife area, in Council District 11, which is represented by Councilmember Traci Park.
(
Frederic J. Brown
/
AFP via Getty Images
)
Topline:
A judge has ruled that the city of Los Angeles cannot move forward with a program that would allow local officials to remove and dismantle more recreational vehicles the city deems a nuisance.
Why it matters: The city planned to roll out a new state law that gives L.A. County authority to dispose of abandoned or inoperable RVs worth up to $4,000. The previous threshold was $500.
The arguments: Some city officials who support the new law say L.A. must have the tools to get unsafe and unsanitary RVs off the streets for good. But opponents argued the law does not apply to the city of L.A. — only the county — and that the city’s “illegal” actions would harm vulnerable Angelenos who live in RVs.
Why now: In a new ruling issued Thursday, Superior Court Judge Curtis A. Kin agreed with the opponents. The judge said the new law “provides no such authority to the City of Los Angeles.”
A judge has ruled that the city of Los Angeles cannot move forward with a program that would allow local officials to remove and dismantle more recreational vehicles the city deems a nuisance.
The city planned to roll out a new state law that gives L.A. County authority to dispose of abandoned or inoperable RVs worth up to $4,000. The previous threshold was $500.
Some city officials who support the new law say L.A. must have the tools to get unsafe and unsanitary RVs off the streets for good.
But opponents argued the law does not apply to the city of L.A. — only the county — and that the city’s “illegal” actions would harm vulnerable Angelenos who live in RVs, according to court documents.
In a new ruling issued Thursday, Superior Court Judge Curtis A. Kin agreed with the opponents. The judge said the new law “provides no such authority to the City of Los Angeles.”
The backstory
The ruling stems from a legal challenge by a coalition of housed and unhoused residents in West L.A. around the city’s implementation of Assembly Bill 630, which became law Jan. 1.
The L.A. City Council voted in December to approve a motion instructing various city departments to “immediately implement” the law.
Councilmember Traci Park, who introduced the council motion in October, told LAist previously that nuisance RVs create health and safety issues that put entire neighborhoods at risk. Park said residents want solutions, not frivolous lawsuits.
Shayla Myers, an attorney with Legal Aid Foundation of Los Angeles, told LAist after the ruling Thursday that the lawsuits aren’t frivolous when the petitioners keep winning.
“It is incredibly unclear why the city did not simply accept the plain language of AB 630 and instead forced our client to go to court, wasting court resources, city resources at a time when the city doesn't have resources to spare,” Myers said.
City Attorney Hydee Feldstein-Soto’s office did not respond to LAist’s requests for comment on the city’s implementation of AB 630.
What’s next
L.A.Mayor Karen Bass proposed AB 630 in partnership with Assemblymember Mark González, who introduced the California assembly bill. González said in a statement to LAist last month that his office is “working with our partners to clarify the law to ensure the City can fully implement AB 630."
González has introduced another bill, AB 647, that would expand the language of the law to include “any public agency” within L.A. County.
David Wagner
covers economic pressures in Southern California, from housing costs to tariffs.
Published February 20, 2026 11:23 AM
An electric top handler moves cargo off of semi-trucks at Yusen Terminals at the Port of Los Angeles in San Pedro on Feb. 11, 2025.
(
Joel Angel Juarez
/
CalMatters
)
Topline:
Los Angeles port leaders say they’re preparing for an increase in imports now that the U.S. Supreme Court has invalidated President Donald Trump’s sweeping emergency tariffs.
The reaction: On Friday’s episode of LAist’s AirTalk, Port of L.A. executive director Gene Seroka said he’s expecting “an uptick in cargo” following the court ruling. “Right now, American executives are telling me that they're on the phone and communicating with their counterparts representing manufacturers in Asia to see how much product they can get, how quickly it can be ready, and then when it can be shipped over to avoid these tariffs,” Seroka said.
The context: U.S. importers have already paid about $133 billion under tariffs imposed by the Trump administration through the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. The Supreme Court ruled this act does not give Trump the authority to impose such broad tariffs. Since Trump put the tariffs in place last April, Seroka said the Port of L.A. has seen “a roller coaster of a year.”
“When that policy was softened and tariffs came down, we had a record July, our best month in the history of the Port of Los Angeles,” Seroka said. “That set the tone for the balance of the year. It was ups and downs based on more than 110 announcements emanating from Washington on trade policy and tariffs.”
What will this mean for consumers? It’s unclear if importers will ever be refunded the tariffs they’ve already paid. Kevin Klowden, chief global strategist for the Milken Institute, said there isn’t an obvious mechanism in place to get that money back to companies. As for consumers, the Tax Foundation estimates the average U.S. household has faced about $1,300 in increased costs due to the tariffs. Klowden says it’s unlikely consumers will ever get a direct refund. “If the tariffs come in at a lower threshold under the other agreements, under the other legislation that the government is using, then we might see some prices reduce,” he said.
Keep up with LAist.
If you're enjoying this article, you'll love our daily newsletter, The LA Report. Each weekday, catch up on the 5 most pressing stories to start your morning in 3 minutes or less.
Mikolaj Marciniak sits in the doorway of his RV, parked in L.A. County's RV safe parking lot. The transitional housing program has helped connect a dozen people to permanent housing.
(
Isaiah Murtaugh
/
The LA Local
)
Topline:
The 24-hour, 14-spot RV safe parking lot is a unique component of the county’s massive homeless service ecosystem, tailored specifically to RV dwellers who aren’t ready to relinquish their vehicles.
More details: The RV safe parking lot program has guided a dozen RV dwellers to permanent housing in its nearly first year of operation, a result that’s convinced L.A. County officials to keep the program rolling at least another year.
Some background: More than 72,000 people are homeless on a given night in L.A. County and RVs are the most common type of shelter for people living outdoors, according to the county’s 2025 count, with nearly 6,300 counted across the county last year.
Read on... for more about the parking lot in South L.A.
This story was originally published by The LA Local on Feb. 20, 2026.
In an old asphalt parking lot off of Crenshaw Boulevard, L.A. County homelessness officials have been testing out their first RV-based transitional housing program.
For some of the residents of the 11 RVs parked in the South L.A. lot today, it’s the closest thing to stable housing they’ve had in years.
The 24-hour, 14-spot RV safe parking lot is a unique, albeit tiny, component of the county’s massive homeless service ecosystem, tailored specifically to RV dwellers who aren’t ready to relinquish their vehicles.
“We got everything. We got water. We got restrooms. People are so nice,” said Mikolaj Marciniak, who has been living with his partner in an aging RV for over a year. “Sometimes all you need is a little bit of help.”
The RV safe parking lot program has guided a dozen RV dwellers to permanent housing in its nearly first year of operation, a result that’s convinced L.A. County officials to keep the program rolling at least another year.
More than 72,000 people are homeless on a given night in L.A. County and RVs are the most common type of shelter for people living outdoors, according to the county’s 2025 count, with nearly 6,300 counted across the county last year.
Mikolaj Marciniak stands in his RV, parked in LA County’s RV safe parking lot. The transitional housing program has helped connect a dozen people to permanent housing.
(
Isaiah Murtaugh
/
The LA Local
)
Residents of the RV safe parking lot get access to a mobile bathroom unit, a stocked outdoor kitchenette and a few pieces of exercise equipment. Marciniak told The LA Local before he moved to the lot, RV life was difficult, with neighbors wanting him and his partner to move along. Twice, he said, their tires were slashed.
But in the fenced lot, he said, life is calmer.
“You are protected,” said Marciniak, who moved to the U.S. from his native Ukraine in 2020. “You feel [that] you belong.”
The couple has been living in the RV lot less than a year and is already looking for a permanent apartment through a housing voucher program.
Since the program began, nine of the RV safe lot’s residents have moved into permanent housing, with three more on their way, according to Mel Tillekeratne, executive director of Shower of Hope. The nonprofit provides case management for residents and helps connect them with medical and housing services.
“It’s not just about removing a RV off the street,” Tillekeratne said. “It’s making sure the person in there, whether it’s a senior, a young couple, that they go somewhere safe, and they’re happy and they don’t have to worry about homelessness again.”
RVs line up in an RV safe parking lot in South LA.
(
Isaiah Murtaugh
/
The LA Local
)
The lot, outside a vacant former county probation office, is not a permanent installation. The county is finalizing plans to extend the program by another year with funding from the county’s Measure A homeless service and affordable housing sales tax, according to Isela Gracian, senior deputy on homelessness and housing for L.A. County Supervisor Holly Mitchell
“There is more need. The challenge is that people believe it’s too high of a cost for the number of people it serves,” Gracian said. “Sometimes we need to have a program that’s a bit more expensive if it meets the needs of the people it serves.”
Mitchell, said Gracian, does not want to be part of the “whack-a-mole” game of shuffling RVs from block to block as residents and businesses call with concerns.
“The true solution is having homes” Gracian said. “The additional outcome is improvement to the physical environment for communities.”
The budget for this year’s Measure A revenue was sorted out early this month. County supervisors will hold a hearing on the rest of the budget for the county’s new homeless services and housing department on Feb. 27.
David Rodriguez
is an Altadena resident and has been connecting with fire survivors since the disaster.
Published February 20, 2026 10:15 AM
Work trucks are a common sight in Altadena over a year after the Eaton Fire.
(
David Rodriguez
/
LAist
)
Topline:
The experience of rebuilding a home, a community and a life after disaster can mean vastly different things for different people. LAist wants to know: what does rebuilding look like for you?
Why we're asking: LAist is putting together a community-centered photo project showcasing the many ways L.A. residents are experiencing rebuilding after the 2025 wildfires — whether that’s settling in a new community, physically reconstructing a house or returning to a neighborhood.
Read on ... to fill out our survey.
What does it mean to rebuild after disaster?
That depends on who you ask.
For some people, it’s rebuilding homes that were destroyed in the Eaton or Palisades fires. For others, it’s living in those destroyed communities, either having never left or just recently returned.
Some people might have moved away altogether to rebuild their lives, and others are still moving from place to place, waiting to return home.
Rebuilding your home, community and life can mean so many things. LAist wants to showcase the different ways L.A. residents are experiencing it through a community-centered photo project.
So, what does rebuilding look like for you?
Share your photos and experiences in the survey below and we may include your pictures and stories in an upcoming feature. We won’t publish anything you share without your permission.
