The Brief

Three in 10 people now say that Americans may have to resort to violence to get the country back on track, according to a new NPR/PBS News/Marist poll.

To be sure, a strong majority disagree with that (70%), but the 30% who now say violence may be necessary is up 11 points since April 2024, an increase driven by Democrats. Eighteen months ago, just 12% of Democrats agreed; now, 28% do.

But, still, a slightly higher percentage of Republicans — 31% — also say Americans may have to resort to violence. That's also up 3 points since last year. (Independents have also increased from 18% to 25%.)

The findings come after a string of high-profile acts of political violence, including the assassination of conservative activist Charlie Kirk last month.

Three-quarters of people — 77% — described political violence as a major concern. Respondents are split, however, on whether they're more concerned with violence toward public officials (49%) or protesters (50%).

Here, there's a very sharp political divide — 70% of Democrats said protesters, 74% of Republicans said public officials.

The survey of more than 1,400 people nationwide was conducted over five days last week. Respondents were reached in various ways, by phone, cell and landline, online and via text in both English and Spanish. It has a +/- 3.1 percentage point margin of error, meaning results could be roughly 3 points higher or lower.

The survey was wide-ranging, showing that:

• Most think the country is going in the wrong direction.
• A majority of respondents believe the country has gone too far in restricting free speech.
• There's a sharp partisan divide on whether the National Guard should be deployed to cities to curb crime.
• The overwhelming majority believe children should be vaccinated before being allowed to go to school.
• Controlling gun violence is more important than protecting gun rights.
• And the files on the late financier/convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein should be released.

Americans still sour on direction of the country, but partisanship is notable

By a 62%-to-38% margin, respondents said they believe the country is headed in the wrong direction.

But, with Donald Trump as president, Republicans are far more positive about the direction of the country compared to last year when Joe Biden was president.

Consider that in an October 2024 New York Times/Siena poll that asked a similar question, 9 in 10 Republicans said the country was headed in the wrong direction. Now, almost 8 in 10 said it's going in the right direction.

The reversal was evident with Democrats, too, but not quite as sharply. In October, 54% of Democrats thought the country was headed in the right direction. Now, 90% say it's going the wrong way.

Independents feel similarly to the way they did last year, but are 6 points higher in saying the country is headed in the wrong direction now (68%).

A whopping 79% think the country has gone too far in restricting speech.

That crosses political lines, with 88% of Democrats, 86% of independents and 64% of Republicans saying so.

People also believe the federal government should play a minimal role in regulating speech. Just 15% said they think the government should play a major role in doing so. Another 44% said it should only play a minor role, and 41% said it should play no role at all.

The numbers were similar across political parties, but with Trump as president Republicans were more likely than Democrats or independents to say the government should play a major role — 22% of Republicans said that, while just 13% of Democrats and 11% of independents agreed.

Respondents also said by a wide margin that the Supreme Court should be responsible for defining what speech is considered unacceptable or too extreme — 62% said that compared to 26% for Congress and 11% for the president.

There was a sharp partisan split on support for the deployment of the National Guard in local communities to reduce crime or assist local law enforcement.

Overall, by a 52%-47% margin, respondents said they support it in trying to reduce crime, but three-quarters of Democrats oppose the effort (60% strongly). A majority of independents (56%) also oppose, but 89% of Republicans are in favor.

The numbers were nearly identical on assisting law enforcement.

Wide support for requiring vaccines for children before entering school, but not as strongly among Republicans

The overwhelming majority — 82% — support requiring children to be vaccinated against certain diseases, such as measles, mumps and rubella, before attending public school.

That includes 71% of Republicans, but they believe so far less strongly than Democrats and independents. For example, 77% of those who voted for Democrat Kamala Harris in 2024 felt strongly that children should be vaccinated, while only 30% of Trump voters did.

Most say controlling gun violence is more important than protecting gun rights

Roughly 6 in 10 said they believe that controlling gun violence is more important than protecting gun rights. But, like on many issues, Democrats and independents feel one way — 90% and 63%, respectively, said controlling gun violence is more important — while Republicans overwhelmingly feel another way. Three-quarters of Republicans said protecting gun rights is more important.

There was a notable split, however, among a key Trump base group — white voters without college degrees. White men without degrees were 58% in favor of protecting gun rights, a majority white women without degrees (56%), on the other hand, said controlling gun violence was more important.

High disapproval of Trump's handling of the Epstein files

By a 61%-20% margin, respondents said they disapprove of how the Trump administration is handling the files related to the death of Jeffrey Epstein, the late financier and convicted sex offender who died by suicide while in prison six years ago.

That included almost 9 in 10 Democrats and 7 in 10 independents. Republicans, though, were more split — 45% approved, 25% didn't and 30% said they don't know enough to say.

But two-thirds of Republicans (and 77% of respondents overall) said they support releasing all the files with the names of victims redacted. So they appear to be giving Trump the benefit of the doubt to do what they think should happen — eventually.

Copyright 2025 NPR

This story first appeared on The LA Local.

Since 1977, Richard Santillan has been to every Opening Day game at Dodger Stadium. 

“The tradition goes from my father, to me, to my children and grandchildren. Some of my best memories are with my father and children here at Dodger Stadium,” Santillan told The LA Local, smiling under the shade of palm trees near the entrance to the ballpark Wednesday morning. He was there to protest the team less than 24 hours before Opening Day.

Santillan, like countless other loyal Dodgers fans, is grappling with his fan identity over the team’s decision to accept an invitation to the White House and owner Mark Walter’s ties to ICE detention facilities.

More than 30 people joined Santillan on Wednesday morning for a press conference held near 1000 Vin Scully Drive to convey a message directly to the team. 

“We are demanding the Dodgers stop participating in funding of inhumane treatment of families and do not go to the White House to celebrate with the criminal in chief,” Evelyn Escatiola told the crowd. “Together, we have the power to make a change.”

Escatiola, a former dean of East Los Angeles College and longtime community organizer, urged fans to flex their economic power by “letting the Dodgers know that we do not support repression.”

Jorge “Coqui” Rodriguez, a lifelong Dodgers fan, spoke to the crowd and called on Dodgers ownership to divest from immigration detention centers owned and operated by GEO Group and CoreCivic.

Jorge Coqui H Rodriguez speaks at a press conference outside Dodger Stadium on March 25, 2026, to demand the Dodgers not to visit the White House following their 2025 World Series win.

(

J.W. Hendricks

/

The LA Local

)

In a phone interview a day before the protest, Rodriguez told The LA Local he did not want the Dodgers using his “cheve” or beer money to fund detention centers. 

“They can’t take our parking money, our cacahuate money, our cheve money, our Dodger Dog money and invest those funds into corporations that are imprisoning people. It’s wrong,” Rodriguez said. 

Rodriguez considers the Dodgers one of the most racially diverse teams and said the players need to support fans at a time when heightened immigration enforcement has become more common across L.A.

The team’s 2025’s visit to the White House drew ire from the largely Latino fan base, citing the Trump administration’s ongoing attacks on immigrants. 

In June, the team came under further scrutiny when rumors swirled online that federal immigration agents were using the stadium’s parking, which immigration authorities later denied in statements posted on social media accounts.

The team again came under fire after not releasing a statement on the impacts of ICE raids on its mostly Latino fan base at the height of immigration enforcement last summer. The team later agreed to invest $1 million to support families affected by immigration enforcement.

When he learned the Dodgers were pledging only $1 million to families in need, Rodriguez called the amount a  “slap in the face.” 

“These guys just bought the Lakers for billions of dollars and they give a million dollars to fight for legal services? That’s a joke,” Rodriguez said. “They need to have a moral backbone and not be investing in those companies.”

According to reporting from the Los Angeles Times, former Dodgers pitcher Clayton Kershawsaid last week that he is looking forward to the trip.

“I went when President [Joe] Biden was in office. I’m going to go when President [Donald] Trump is in office,” Kershaw said. “To me, it’s just about getting to go to the White House. You don’t get that opportunity every day, so I’m excited to go.”

The Dodgers have yet to announce when their planned visit will take place. 

Santillan sometimes laments his decision to give up his season tickets in protest of the team. His connection to the stadium and the memories he has made there with family and friends will last a lifetime, he said. On Thursday, he will uphold his tradition and be there for the first pitch of the season, but with a heavy heart.

“It’s a family tradition, but the Dodgers have a lot of work to do,” he said.

A local favorite mom-and-pop bookshop in Eagle Rock is facing displacement due to a steep rent hike. The owners say theirs is just one of several small businesses along Eagle Rock Boulevard struggling to keep up with lease increases.

Over the past 19 years, many in the neighborhood have come to love READ Books for its eclectic collection of used titles and shop dog Florence.

Co-owner Jeremy Kaplan said it’s been a delight to grow with the community over the years.

“Like seeing kids come back in, who were in grade school and now they’re in college,” Kaplan said.

But the building where Kaplan and wife Debbie rent was recently sold, and the rent increased by more than 130% to $2,805 a month, Kaplan said. He told LAist it was an increase his small business simply could not absorb.

Kaplan said he originally was given 30 days notice of the rent increase. After some research, assistance from Councilmember Ysabel Jurado’s office and some pro-bono legal help, Kaplan said he pushed back and got the 90-day notice he’s afforded by state law.

California Senate Bill 1103 requires landlords to give businesses with five or less employees 90 days’ notice for rent increases exceeding 10%, among other protections.

Systems Real Estate, the property management company, did not immediately respond to LAist’s request for comment.

What can small businesses do? 

Nadia Segura, directing attorney of the Small Business Program at pro bono legal aid non-profit Bet Tzedek said California law does not currently allow for rent control for commercial tenancies.

Outside of the protections under SB 1103, Segura said small businesses like READ Books don’t have much other recourse. And even then, commercial landlords are not required to inform their tenants of their protections under the law.

“There’s still a lot of people that don’t know about SB 1103. And then it’s very sad that they tell them they have these rent increases and within a month they have to leave,” Segura said.

She said her group is seeing steep rent hikes like this for commercial tenants across the city.

“We are seeing this even more with the World Cup coming up, the Olympics coming up. And I will say it was very sad to see that also after the wildfires,” Segura said.

Part of Bet Tzedek’s ongoing work is to advocate for small businesses, working with landlords who are increasing rents to see if they are willing to give business owners longer leases that lock in rents.

What’s next 

After READ Books posted about their situation on social media, commenters chimed in to express their outrage and love for the little shop.

While he looks for a new spot, Kaplan says he’s forming a coalition of local businesses and activist groups to see what can be done to help other small businesses facing similar displacement. He wants to address the displacement issue for businesses like his, which have made Eagle Rock the distinctive neighborhood that it is today.

Owl Talk, a longtime Eagle Rock staple selling clothing and accessories in a unit in the same building as READ Books, is facing a “more than double” rent increase, according to a post on their Instagram account.

Kaplan said he’s been in touch with the office of state Assemblywoman Jessica Caloza and wants to explore the possibility of introducing legislation to set up protections for small businesses like his, including rent-control measures or a vacancy tax for landlords. Kaplan said he also reached out to the office of state Sen. Maria Durazo.

By his count, Kaplan said there are about a dozen businesses within surrounding blocks that are at risk of closing their doors or have shuttered due to rent increases or other struggles.

When READ Books was founded during the Great Recession, Kaplan said he knew it was a longshot to open a bookstore at the same time so many were struggling to stay in business.

“It was kind of interesting to be doing something that neighborhoods needed. That was important to me growing up, that was important to my children, that was important to my wife growing up,” Kaplan said.

“And then somebody comes in and says, ‘We’re gonna over double your rent.”

Topline:

Frozen budget: Most of the city’s Bureau of Street Lighting budget comes from an assessment that people who own property illuminated by lights pay on their county property tax bill. The amount people pay depends on the kind of property they own and how much they benefit from lighting. A typical single-family home currently pays $53 annually, and in total, the assessments bring in about $45 million annually for the city to repair and maintain streetlights. Changing the amount the Bureau of Street Lighting gets from the assessment requires a vote among property owners who benefit from the lights.

Ballots: L.A. City Council’s vote gives city staff the green light to prepare and send out those ballots. Miguel Sangalang, who oversees the bureau, said at a committee meeting earlier this month that he expects to send out ballots by April 17. Notices about the ballots will be sent out prior to the ballots themselves.

Near unanimous vote: L.A. City Councilmember Monica Rodriguez was the only “No” vote Tuesday, saying she wanted to see a more current strategic plan for the bureau. Sangalang said the bureau developed a plan in 2022 that lays out how money will be spent. Councilmember Imelda Padilla was absent for the vote.

Vote count: Votes will be weighted according to the assessment amount. Basically, the more you’re asked to pay yearly to maintain streetlights, the more your vote will count. Ballots received before June 2 will be tabulated by the L.A. City Clerk.

How much more money: According to a report, the amount needed in assessments from property owners to meet the repair and maintenance needs of the city’s streetlighting in the next fiscal year is nearly $112 million.

Use of the money: Sangalang said at a March 11 committee meeting that the extra funds would be used to double the number of staff to handle repairs and procure solar streetlights, which don’t face the threat of copper wire theft. That would all potentially reduce the time it takes to repair simple fixes down to a week. Currently, city residents wait for months to see broken streetlights repaired. The assessment would come with a three-year auditing mechanism.