The Brief

As Gov. Gavin Newsom’s national profile rises and as he considers a presidential campaign, some LGBTQ+ advocates have questioned the governor’s commitment to queer and transgender constituents.

That’s given statements about transgender people on his podcast, This is Gavin Newsom, and a conversation with the late conservative activist Charlie Kirk, in which Newsom called it “deeply unfair” to allow transgender athletes to participate in girls’ sports.

But Evan Low, former assemblymember and CEO of the LGBTQ+ Victory Fund, a political PAC promoting LGBTQ+ progressives, says Newsom is still a staunch ally of the community, one who helped secure marriage equality in the state as well as civil rights protections for adoption, hospital visitation and the workplace.

“He has that track record and that history and that should not be lost on members of the community,” Low said. “All of these things happened because we were able to build bridges [and] build coalitions versus that of an overly simplistic polarization of infighting.”

So, what was Newsom’s record in this latest legislative update?

What legislation did Newsom sign supporting LGBTQ+ Californians?

1. AB 82: This law expands current privacy protections for reproductive health care providers and patients to also include gender-affirming health care providers and patients. California won’t assist other states in investigating patients or doctors for providing reproductive health care like abortion or gender‑affirming care.
2. AB 678: This new law makes a change to a group that recommends solutions to homelessness to the state government. The Interagency Council on Homelessness now must coordinate with representatives from LGBTQ+ communities to better serve queer people experiencing homelessness.
3. AB 727 An existing law, which went into effect this summer, requires schools to print the 988 Suicide and Crisis Lifeline on student ID cards for grades 7 and up. This law will expand that rule to include the phone number and text line for the LGBTQ+ suicide-prevention hotline from the Trevor Project.
4. AB 822 This new law extends the Commission on the State of Hate for an additional four years. It is intended to help state agencies, law enforcement and the public stay informed about hate crime trends.
5. AB 1084 The law makes the process of changing legal documents (name, gender or sex identifier) faster and less burdensome, especially for adults. For minors who want to change their name or gender marker on their birth certificate or ID, as long as all living parents sign forms, there doesn’t need to be a hearing to approve it.
6. AB 1487 The bill renames a fund that offers grants for programs aimed at improving health care access for gender nonconforming people. It also broadens its scope to serve younger people and immigrants.
7. SB 59 This means that when someone files a legal petition to change their name or their gender marker on an official document in California, the court records are kept confidential. Previously, those protections applied only to minors, but this law immediately extends them, with the goal of minimizing the risk that court records could be used to out someone.
8. SB 278 The bill allows health care providers to share some anonymized HIV test results without written consent. The administrators of Medi-Cal plans say they need the data in order to identify gaps in care. Patients can opt out.
9. SB 450 The law protects adoption rights for LGBTQ+ parents. It means LGBTQ+ adoptive parents who leave California for a state with less inclusive adoption laws won’t lose their parental rights to children born in California.
10. SB 497 The law bans health care providers from disclosing medical records related to gender‑affirming care services in response to civil or criminal actions under other states’ laws.
11. SB 504 aims to improve how quickly HIV cases are tracked and treated in California by allowing health care providers to share identifying information about a person with HIV with local public health agencies — when necessary — to connect the person with care. It still limits who can access this information and specifies when sharing the information is actually necessary.
12. SB 590 expands existing laws around paid family leave to include chosen family members. That means LGBTQ+ people can designate a non-blood-related person to be considered a family member so they can receive benefits while caring for that person.

What bills did Newsom veto?

Newsom vetoed two notable health care access bills, including one — SB 418 — which would have offered an additional safeguard for people who receive hormone therapy to access treatments without disruption, amid federal attacks on gender affirming care.

“At a time when transgender people are being singled out for targeted discrimination, removal of their health care, and denial of their existence, it is heartbreaking that this bill was vetoed,” said state Sen. Caroline Menjivar, D-San Fernando, who wrote the bill, in a statement. “SB 418 was the most tangible and effective legislative tool introduced this year to help [Transgender Gender Diverse, and Intersex] folks weather this political storm.”

In Newsom’s veto statement, he said he supported the intent of protecting access to treatment, but thought the bill risked raising already high health insurance premiums. Craig Pulsipher, legislative director for Equality California, a co-sponsor of both vetoed bills, pushed back against the governor’s answer.

“The data and analysis on this bill show that the impact on health insurance premiums would be negligible,” Pulsipher said.

“The governor’s decision leaves trans Californians and many others who rely on hormone therapy vulnerable to treatment disruptions at a time when they are facing really extreme attacks from the federal government.”

Newsom rejected AB 554 for a similar reason. It would have required most private health plans in California to cover antiretroviral drugs, devices, or products like PrEP without delays in access caused by plans requiring prior authorization, step therapy, or cost‑sharing.

Medi-Cal managed care plans would have been exempt, but in his veto message, Newsom raised concerns about increased costs to health plans under cost-sharing provisions in the Affordable Care Act.

“We have seen many attacks from the Trump administration, including from the U.S. Health Secretary RFK Jr., threatening to fire members of a federal body that makes recommendations around preventive healthcare,” Pulsipher said. “We are extremely concerned about the impact of those actions in California on access to PrEP, which is a really important medication to prevent HIV.”

Pulsipher said he plans to address the governor’s concerns and reintroduce both bills next legislative session.

L.A. County leaders on Tuesday greenlit public transparency about payouts to county executives in response to LAist revealing a secretive $2 million settlement with the county’s CEO.

County supervisors unanimously approved a proposal by Supervisor Lindsey Horvath to have the county proactively inform the public about such settlements once they’re finalized and to look into creating a public website to describe them.

Among other things, the approved motion requires that all future settlements with county executives include language making it clear the agreement will be proactively disclosed to the public.

The backstory

The directive cited coverage by LAist revealing that two months ago, county CEO Fesia Davenport had quietly gotten a $2 million settlement payment from the county. As reported by LAist, Davenport’s settlement deal was labeled “confidential” and was not publicly reported out by the county.

The settlement was in response to her claims the supervisors harmed her reputation and caused her distress by putting a measure before voters — which was approved — that will create an elected county executive position. It’s among multiple reforms to restructure county government under last year’s voter-approved proposition, known as Measure G.

Davenport did not return a message for comment.

‘Public trust’ cited

“Transparency is central to strengthening public trust, without exception,” Horvath said in a statement after Tuesday’s vote. “Since joining the board, I have actively taken steps to ensure the public is included in the work of the county, especially concerning the use of public funds.

“Creating a clear process for department executive settlements is a commonsense action fundamental to good governance.”

David Loy, legal director of the First Amendment Coalition, commented on the decision, calling transparency the "oxygen of accountability in government."

“There is no reason why the county should not be proactive about posting and disclosing settlements that have been reached, especially with former executives or staff,” Loy said.

Davenport was one of several county executives to receive sizable settlement payouts over the past few years. Four additional county executives received payouts, according to Davenport’s claims that led to her settlement.

Costco now is one of the largest companies to sue the Trump administration over tariffs, hoping to secure a refund if the Supreme Court declares the new import duties illegal.

The Supreme Court is weighing the future of President Donald Trump's tariffs on nearly all imports. Justices seemed skeptical about their legality during last month's oral arguments. Lower courts previously had found Trump improperly used emergency economic powers to set most of the new levies.

Dozens of companies across industries have filed lawsuits to seek refunds in the event the Supreme Court finds Trump's tariffs illegal. The list includes makeup giant Revlon, the canned foods maker Bumble Bee and Kawasaki, which makes motorcycles and more. Now Costco has joined the queue.

"This is the first time we're seeing big companies take their heads out of the sand publicly," said Marc Busch, a trade law expert at Georgetown University. For the most part, small companies have been leading the legal action against tariffs, he said, adding, "It's nice to finally see some heavyweights joining in the fray."

In its suit filed with the U.S. Court of International Trade, Costco did not specify how much it's already paid in tariffs, but the retail giant worries that even if the Supreme Court eventually unravels Trump's tariff regime, it may not be able to recoup all that money.

Costco executives in May had said that about a third of what is sold in the U.S. comes from abroad, predominantly non-food items.

NPR's Scott Horsley contributed to this report.
Copyright 2025 NPR

The L.A. City Council voted 8-4 on Tuesday to continue allowing the Los Angeles Police Department to be armed with 40 mm foam bullet launchers and tear gas.

California law enforcement agencies are required to track and publicly document how they use military equipment, including less-lethal bean bag shotgun rounds, drones and armored vehicles, under state law AB 481 passed in 2022. The law also requires city leaders to approve or disapprove military equipment use annually. That vote came in front of the council Tuesday.

Another law passed after the George Floyd protests of 2020 restricted the use of crowd-control weapons, including tear gas and foam bullets, unless specific criteria are met. In 2020, a federal judge also imposed an injunction restricting LAPD’s use of force at protests, citing the “unfortunate history of civil rights violations by LAPD officers.”

Councilmember Hugo Soto-Martinez — who introduced an amendment asking city leaders to ban the LAPD’s use of 40 mm foam bullet launchers and tear gas — said military equipment use is allowed only in specific instances but that the police department has deployed the weapons “in ways that should make everyone here on this body pause.” He cited examples of weapons used against journalists and protesters during this summer’s protests against federal immigration activity in L.A.

“In recent months, we’ve watched this equipment deployed in ways that echo the same intimidation tactics we condemn in ICE raids — tactics that erode trust and violate basic legal protections,” he said. “Our residents should be able to exercise their rights without being met with [foam] bullets or tear gas.”

LAPD Chief Jim McDonnell countered that such weapons are "a de-escalation tool, short of using deadly force. The last thing we want to use is deadly force."

He continued: "Taking a tool like this away from us puts us in a very bad position relative to city liability and relative to protecting our officers and the public that we serve.”

In 2024, Los Angeles was liable for more than $50 million in payouts related to civil rights violations and unlawful use of force by the LAPD, according to the city controller’s office.

 ”Rather than be swayed by emotion or swayed by the loud voices of a relative few," McDonnell said Tuesday, "we're here to protect 4 million residents of Los Angeles and all the visitors who come here."

How we got here

After this summer’s anti-ICE protests, the LAPD once again came under scrutiny for its use of foam bullet launchers and tear gas.

An LAist investigation found LAPD used crowd-dispersal tools on people who did not appear to pose a threat and, in some cases, did not appear to be protesting at all. LAist reporters witnessed LAPD officers firing less-lethal munitions into crowds and at protestors running away from police. They did not hear clear warnings about the use of crowd-dispersal weapons during some of the protests and could not locate evidence that adequate warning was provided during subsequent protests.

But at Tuesday’s council meeting, McDonnell said, these weapons are deployed as “a last resort to be able to restore order” and after people have been given time to leave.

The Los Angeles Press Club sued the LAPD after June’s protests, citing violations of journalists’ rights while covering protests. After a judge issued an injunction in that case prohibiting the use of force against journalists, the LAPD filed an emergency motion asking the judge to lift the injunction, stating it required “operationally impracticable standards.” The judge denied the LAPD’s request.

How to watchdog your police department

One of the best things you can do to hold officials accountable is pay attention.

AB 481 requires police departments — including those at transit agencies, school districts and university campuses, sheriff’s departments, district attorney’s offices and probation departments — to provide reports about the use of military equipment.

So how do you know if they're in compliance? It’s simple. Search for the law enforcement agency name and "AB 481" on any search engine, and a public page should pop up. Here’s the LAPD’s.

The city of Los Angeles has been working on major changes to its charter, which is basically the city’s constitution. The changes could bring sweeping reform to how the city works.

The Los Angeles City Charter Reform Commission has been meeting for several months on a wide range of topics, including City Council expansion, ranked-choice voting systems and land-use planning changes.

“It is weedy. It is academic. But the charter touches Angelenos’ everyday lives,” said Raymond Meza, who chairs the commission.

This week, the commission will host a town hall meeting in Echo Park in an effort to get more people involved in the process. It will take place outside on the northeast lawn of the park — weather permitting.

Despite getting a slow start, the commission is hosting multiple meetings in an effort to meet an April 2 deadline to submit proposals to the City Council. It’ll be up to the council to decide whether to place reform proposals on the ballot next November.

The commission has broken reform down into four subject areas, with committees for each.

They are:

• planning and infrastructure
• government structure
• better government
• personnel and budget

“We’re in an exciting moment,” said David Levitus of L.A. Forward, an advocacy group.

“Looking at the charter for reform is long overdue”

Reform Commission

The L.A. City Council created the commission last year after a series of scandals rocked City Hall. Former Councilmember Jose Huizar went to prison on federal corruption charges and secret audio tapes revealed backroom dealing on redistricting.

The panel is made up of four appointees by Mayor Karen Bass, two by the council president and two by the president pro tempore. Those eight selected an additional five through an open application process.

On Thursday, the full commission is expected to take up proposals for a two-year budget cycle and an expedited city hiring process. Advocates of the changes say extending budget planning from one to two years will allow city leaders to better anticipate spending and revenue.

They say the city hiring process is slow and byzantine.

Meza said the Echo Park meeting Saturday is an opportunity for members of the public to learn more about the process and speak at length with commissioners.

“We absolutely want to hear from people what is important to them as residents of the city of Los Angeles when it comes to their expectations of their city government," he said.

How to get involved

For a list of all upcoming meetings, go here.

To submit a public comment, you can email reformLAcharter@lacity.org.

There’s also a survey on the commission’s website at reformlacharter.lacity.gov.