Topline:
The Metro light rail project that will connect Artesia to downtown L.A. will have a new name by next year — and Angelenos get to vote on it.
Why it matters: The project has long been called the West Santa Ana Branch, named after a historic rail corridor used by Pacific Electric until the mid-1950s — but it’s caused confusion.
What's next: Voting will run until Dec. 17. The new name will be announced in January 2024.
The Metro light rail project that will connect Artesia to downtown L.A. will have a new name by next year — and Angelenos get to vote on it.
The project has long been called the West Santa Ana Branch, named after a historic rail corridor used by Pacific Electric until the mid-1950s — but it’s caused some confusion.
“Every time we've gone to pitch this project, it just feels like the majority of the time we're explaining why it's called the West Santa Ana Branch, and how that has absolutely nothing to do with where it will run, the people it will serve,” says LA County Supervisor and Metro Board member Janice Hahn.
Supervisor Hahn represents much of the area the new line will serve. She’s been trying to get the project renamed for years.
“I was told by staff at Metro that that was not going to happen, because it would jeopardize a future funding request, but I think it's been just the opposite. I think we have lost funding because of this weird name that nobody can pinpoint where it is in Los Angeles County,” Hahn says.
The new name is going to remedy that. A panel of judges — made up of city leaders from along the route — sorted through 12,000 submissions and came up with 12 finalists. Some submissions came from contestants as young as 13.
“It was very heartening to me to see how people really have connected to the history of this territory,” Supervisor Hahn says. “They suggested names that were women-empowering… There were names that related to our Native American history. There were many Spanish names that the translations were everything from “hope,” to “rivers,” to “safe route.” It was just amazing how creative everybody was.”
The name will follow the project until its completion, which is currently estimated for 2035 then, the line will receive its designated letter and color. But Hahn is optimistic that this new name won’t just stick around, it’ll accelerate the project as a whole.
“I think the enthusiasm and energy that naming this train will create, in all my heart, I believe it will help with funding, it will help speed up the project, and I believe it will connect those who live in these cities now as well as way into the future for generations to come. I think the naming of this train will be a story that we tell for a long time.”
Here is a list of the 12 final names and their descriptions, courtesy of Supervisor Hahn’s office:
Voting will run until Dec. 17. The new name will be announced in January 2024.
Topline:
The California Supreme Court this week reversed the death sentence of Anthony Bankston , a Los Angeles Bloods gang member convicted of killing a rival Crip in the early 1990s because a prosecutor compared him to a dangerous animal, the first time a death sentence has been overturned under the 2020 Racial Justice Act.
The backstory: Bankston represented himself in court in 1991. A jury found him guilty. During the penalty phase of the trial, a prosecutor compared Bankston — appearing in a suit and tie — to a Bengal tiger at the zoo. The prosecutor’s story was that a journalist observed a Bengal tiger in a zoo, and was told by a hunter “that’s not a Bengal tiger.” The story was supposed to illustrate that Bankston in court was not the same person as Bankston on the street, whom the prosecutor described as “a killing machine.”
2020 Racial Justice Act: In 2020, the California Legislature passed the Racial Justice Act, which included a prohibition on certain animal images that pose a risk of appealing to racial bias. The law itself specifically mentions the Bengal tiger example. The California Supreme Court justices found that the prosecutor's comparison prejudicial in a unanimous ruling with two concurrences. They reversed Bankston’s death sentence but the murder conviction still stands, meaning the high court sent Bankston’s sentencing back down to a trial court.
The California Supreme Court this week reversed the death sentence of a Los Angeles Bloods gang member convicted of killing a rival Crip in the early 1990s because a prosecutor compared him to a dangerous animal, the first time a death sentence has been overturned under the 2020 Racial Justice Act.
Anthony Bankston represented himself in court in 1991. A jury found him guilty. During the penalty phase of the trial, a prosecutor compared Bankston — appearing in a suit and tie — to a Bengal tiger at the zoo.
The prosecutor’s story was that a journalist observed a Bengal tiger in a zoo, and was told by a hunter “that’s not a Bengal tiger.” Instead, the journalist traveled to India, where he found a tiger, “all flexed out, he sees the claws out, he sees the fangs, . . . he hears the growl.”
The hunter tells him, “now you see a Bengal tiger.” The story was supposed to illustrate that Bankston in court was not the same person as Bankston on the street, whom the prosecutor described as “a killing machine.”
The California Supreme Court justices found that comparison prejudicial in a unanimous ruling with two concurrences. They reversed Bankston’s death sentence but the murder conviction still stands, meaning the high court sent Bankston’s sentencing back down to a trial court.
It was one of four decisions the high court released this week that stemmed from claims under the Racial Justice Act, which allows prisoners to appeal their convictions if they believe racial bias tainted their trials.
The court upheld death sentences for two of the men: Alex Demolle, who was convicted of raping and murdering an 11-year-old girl; and Marcos Esquivel Barrera, who was sentenced to death after being convicted of murdering two of his children.
In the fourth case, the court modified rulings against two condemned prisoners of Southeast Asian descent, but not because of their Racial Justice Act claims.
A spokesperson for the Judicial Council of California confirmed that Bankston’s case was the first reversal of a death sentence by the California Supreme Court because of violations of the Racial Justice Act.
According to the ruling in Bankston’s appeal, the Bengal tiger parable has come up several times in different cases, so much so that the high court called it a “well worn tale.”
In a 2010 case, the high court found that the Bengal tiger metaphor was not a prejudicial statement about a defendant’s Vietnamese heritage. In a 2018 case, a defendant said the Bengal tiger story was used to “dehumanize” him, an argument the California Supreme Court justices rejected.
But in 2020, the Legislature passed the Racial Justice Act, which included a prohibition on certain animal images that pose a risk of appealing to racial bias. The law itself specifically mentions the Bengal tiger example.
“In light of the passage of the RJA, we now make clear that, whatever the intent behind telling the story may be, the Bengal tiger story should no longer be told in California courtrooms,” Justice Leondra Kruger wrote for the majority. “There is no reason to permit prosecutors to continue running the risk of appealing to biases that undermine the very foundation of a system of equal justice, simply to make an unremarkable point about a defendant’s behavior outside a controlled courtroom setting.”
Comparisons of defendants to animals do not automatically qualify as violations of the Racial Justice Act. A case in the 4th District Court of Appeals this year found that comparing a defendant to a dog left in a car with a Slurpee was a fair comparison point to the notion of circumstantial evidence.
The Bankston ruling similarly noted that references like “eager beaver,” “happy as a clam,” “free as a bird,” or “quiet as a mouse” would not rise to the level of Racial Justice Act violations.
Bankston, who is Black, was convicted of two first-degree murder charges and one count of attempted murder for separate shootings in 1991. He was convicted of shooting and killing Benson Jones and attempting to murder Benson’s brother, Benjamin.
This article was originally published on CalMatters and was republished under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives license.
Topline:
Workers at SoFi Stadium begin voting today on whether to authorize a strike, just days before the World Cup launches in Los Angeles.
Why it matters: Some 2,000 unionized food and beverage workers at the stadium have been threatening to walk off the job for weeks over concerns about Immigrations and Customs Enforcement's role in tournament security and other demands, including premium pay for lucrative events like the World Cup. But they've yet to strike a deal with Legends Global, the company that runs the stadium's bars and food services.
The backstory: The contract between Legends and its workers expired last year, and the two sides are currently negotiating a new agreement. The union has been leveraging its role in the coming World Cup to push for higher wages, especially at mega-events like the World Cup that rake in major profits. Unite Here and Legends were at the bargaining table Wednesday, but Petersen said that they still hadn't made a deal.
What's next: The two sides are scheduled to return to the bargaining table on Monday.
Read on... about the ongoing dispute.
Workers at SoFi Stadium started voting Thursday on whether to authorize a strike, just days before the World Cup launches in Los Angeles.
Some 2,000 unionized food and beverage workers at the stadium have been threatening to walk off the job for weeks over concerns about Immigrations and Customs Enforcement's role in tournament security and other demands, including premium pay for lucrative events like the World Cup.
But they've yet to strike a deal with Legends Global, the company that runs the stadium's bars and food services.
" I think the combination of the World Cup being unable to get their stuff together and the greediness of the stadium owners may end up leading to workers having to call for a strike," said Kurt Petersen, co-president of the union representing SoFi workers, Unite Here Local 11.
The contract between Legends and its workers expired last year, and the two sides are currently negotiating a new agreement. The union has been leveraging its role in the coming World Cup to push for higher wages, especially at mega-events like the World Cup that rake in major profits. Unite Here and Legends were at the bargaining table Wednesday, but Petersen said that they still hadn't made a deal.
Workers are also concerned that FIFA's plans for its luxury suites will lock them out of lucrative jobs during the tournament. FIFA has brought in a company called On Location to offer exclusive packages that can cost tens of thousands of dollars or more. Union workers at SoFi say they're worried that those jobs will go to subcontractors without union protections.
Petersen said that workers represented by his union still don't have their schedules for the World Cup, and that the union doesn't have details on the company's agreement with On Location.
" It is kind of a mess," Petersen said. "Which is also adding fuel to people's anger. Like, really? We have this massive event coming, you want us to work super hard and you can't even tell us what we're gonna be doing when we're coming in, what our schedules are?"
Legends Global did not return a request for comment.
SoFi workers have also been pushing for protections from ICE, which will play a "key role" in tournament security, according to the former head of the agency.
Multiple officials including L.A. County Sheriff Robert Luna have said they've received assurances that federal agents won't be conducting immigration enforcement, but Luna said there are no guarantees. Petersen said workers want the option to walk off the job if they feel unsafe because of ICE's presence.
Unite Here filed an unfair labor practice charge with the National Labor Relations Board in April, saying ICE's planned presence at the World Cup threatened the union's ability to collectively bargain. The union has also asked California Attorney General Rob Bonta to investigate FIFA's accreditation process for stadium workers, which requires Social Security numbers and other personal information.
FIFA responded in a statement saying that data would be deleted after the fact, and the accreditation process does "not constitute pre-employment checks."
The sporting body did not respond to a request for comment on how a strike at SoFi Stadium could potentially affect the eight matches in Los Angeles.
The results of Unite Here's strike authorization vote could be out as early as Friday evening. If workers vote yes, fans who attend the first U.S. match in Inglewood on June 12 could show up to a picket line.
The two sides are scheduled to return to the bargaining table on Monday.
Topline:
Food vendors, artisans and performers interested in participating in the World Cup-themed event at MacArthur Park have less than a week left to apply for a spot to set up shop and sell their goods as part of the celebration.
How to apply: Applications are open through June 8. According to CD1, 26 applications have already been submitted for 40 available vendor spaces. There are no application or vending fees to participate, though vendors must have a valid vending permit by the start of the event. Council District 1 says it is conducting outreach to businesses surrounding the park and working with community partners to promote the opportunity.
About the two day event: The two-day open streets event is scheduled for July 10 and July 11. Wilshire Boulevard between MacArthur Park and Lafayette Park will be transformed into a space featuring screenings of the World Cup games.
This story first appeared on The LA Local.
Wilshire Boulevard between MacArthur Park and Lafayette Park will be transformed into a space featuring screenings of the World Cup games in July and vendors will have the opportunity to set up shop and sell their goods as part of the celebration.
Food vendors, artisans and performers interested in participating in the World Cup-themed event at MacArthur Park have less than a week left to apply for a spot.
Council District 1 is currently accepting applications for the two-day open streets event scheduled for July 10 and July 11. Interested applicants can apply online here.
Applications are open through June 8. According to CD1, 26 applications have already been submitted for 40 available vendor spaces.
“Vendor interest has been strong,” said Jonathan Romero, a spokesperson for CD1. “Reflecting a great mix of food and drink, arts and crafts, and health and community resources.”
There are no application or vending fees to participate, though vendors must have a valid vending permit by the start of the event.
For some MacArthur Park vendors, the event represents a potential opportunity to reach new customers during the World Cup.
Rabi Gaidani, a street vendor who sells clothing and shoes near MacArthur Park, said he had not previously heard about the Park to Park opportunity, but now plans to apply.
“I would love that,” he said. “When the World Cup comes, it’s super good. We have more chances with people coming from all over.”
But not all vendors are convinced the opportunity will be accessible to everyone.
Another vendor, who sells shampoos, soaps and creams near MacArthur Park, said she was unaware of the event. Her reaction reflects a frustration some street vendors say they have experienced for years: learning about city-sponsored events only after plans are already well underway.
The vendor, who asked not to be named due to her immigration status, said opportunities often do not reach the people who work around the park every day.
She added that the organizations the city partners with do not directly reach out to vendors like her.
Council District 1 says it is conducting outreach to businesses surrounding the park and working with community partners to promote the opportunity.
“I think they should improve how they select vendors,” she said.
She added that she worries the World Cup event could even draw customers away from businesses like hers, similar to what she says happens during large Guatemalan community celebrations in the neighborhood.
She said people tend to gravitate toward wherever the festivities are taking place.
“People want to go where the excitement is, where they’re showing the World Cup,” she said. “The World Cup isn’t going to bring us anything.”
More information about the event is available at cd1.lacity.gov/p2p.
Topline:
If the goal was to confuse everyone, the mission was accomplished. Just before Memorial Day, the Trump administration issued a sweeping new policy directive that took aim at legal immigration. It would have required most temporary visa holders and humanitarian parolees living in the U.S. to return to their home countries to await their green cards.
Why it matters: The memo and accompanying news release bucked a longstanding policy of allowing immigrants to remain in the U.S. while waiting for green cards, stating individuals would have to go back to their home countries except in “extraordinary” cases.
Confusion: Then, late last Friday, the Trump administration began downplaying the significance of the previous week’s orders, which had already caused panic, confusion and concern among immigrant families and attorneys.
Read on... for more on what to know about the Trump administration's new green card policy.
If the goal was to confuse everyone, the mission was accomplished.
Just before Memorial Day, the Trump administration issued a sweeping new policy directive that took aim at legal immigration. It would have required most temporary visa holders and humanitarian parolees living in the U.S. to return to their home countries to await their green cards.
The memo and accompanying news release bucked a longstanding policy of allowing immigrants to remain in the U.S. while waiting for green cards, stating individuals would have to go back to their home countries except in “extraordinary” cases.
Then, late last Friday, the Trump administration began downplaying the significance of the previous week’s orders, which had already caused panic, confusion and concern among immigrant families and attorneys.
The Department of Homeland Security told the New York Times that it wasn’t a blanket policy and that individual officers in the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services have always had the discretion to decide.
“That’s a CYA,” said Patrick Kolasinski, an immigration attorney based in Modesto. “To me, it seems really clear that what they’re doing in their covering-their-bases thing is … a little bit of public blowback, but also trying to avoid some litigation because trying to change this policy the way they did is completely illegal.”
An unnamed Department Homeland Security spokesperson also told the Times that the groups that could be heavily affected include people who overstay visas or come from countries whose citizens are heavy users of public assistance.
The department did not respond to a CalMatters question about the apparent reverse course of the newly announced policy, as reported by the New York Times.
Many questions remain unanswered about the new policy and how it will be applied, but legal experts say it is part of an ongoing pattern by the Trump administration targeting people trying to follow established guidelines for obtaining a legal status. Employers, especially those in the tech sector, have loudly balked at the new memo, saying the mandate could disrupt operations and cause talent to leave.
The new mandate will almost certainly end up in court, but where does that leave people now?
Here are a few things to know:
Relatives of U.S. citizens, laid-off tech workers, mixed-status families and international students are among those most at risk.
The change would mostly affect people already inside the United States who are applying for permanent residency, a process called adjustment of status. Roughly half of all green cards issued each year go to people already living inside the U.S., according to the Department of Homeland Security.
In 2023, 112,100 Californians received green cards through adjustment of status. That's more than any other state, accounting for nearly one in five of all U.S adjustments in 2023.
Family-based applicants make up the largest share, as opposed to employment-based applications. About 64% of all new green card recipients in 2023 obtained status through a family relationship with a U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident, according to DHS.
It’s not clear if the policy would apply to people with pending adjustment applications. Lynn Damiano Pearson, the director of legal strategy at the National Immigration Law Center, said immigration attorneys are already seeing U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services officers question applicants in ways that suggest the answer is yes.
Some immigration lawyers told CalMatters people were asked by officers in interviews last week why they were applying for green cards from within the United States, and if any factors would keep them from applying and waiting in their home countries.
“People are being questioned about consular processing in a way that seems to flow directly from this new memo and makes us assume, unfortunately, that this administration is planning to apply the policy retroactively,” Damiano Pearson told CalMatters last week.
The Department of Homeland Security did not respond to a question from CalMatters about whether the policy change applies to people with applications already in the pipeline Instead, in a written statement, the department said the policy “will have no noticeable impact on highly qualified applicants and skilled professionals who have followed the law.” The spokesperson declined to provide their name.
Congress created adjustment of status in 1952, and it has been used by administrations of both political parties for more than 70 years. More than half a million people use it each year. The new memo reframes that process as “extraordinary.”
“This memo is wrong. It’s reprehensible. It’s illegal,” said Jeff Joseph, the president of the American Immigration Lawyers Association. He said he is “100% sure that it’s going to be litigated.”
Nina Sheridan, a spokesperson for California Attorney General Rob Bonta, indicated the same. “The Trump administration continues to wage a campaign against legal immigration, putting up barriers and pushing out immigrants who are trying to follow the established process to obtain permanent residence,” she said. “We’re monitoring where the administration goes next with its latest attempt to flout longstanding law and policy, and we are evaluating our options.”
The Department of Homeland Security told CalMatters the memo “restates longstanding law and policy” that was “disregarded by the Biden Administration.”
Many people who applied for green cards have, with the government’s blessing, allowed their original visa to expire while they wait for their interview, sometimes for years because of backlogs in processing. Under the new policy memo, attorneys worry that could be used against them.
Lawyers are concerned people could be denied at their interview and then immediately placed into removal proceedings. Last year, people were taken into custody at their routine immigration appointments and then detained, sometimes for months.
Damiano Pearson said it is too early to say how often that could happen, but she said experts could not rule out the possibility that ICE agents might take people into custody immediately following their citizenship interviews.
For most applicants, consular processing would not be a quick plane ride home to sign some paperwork. Wait times and backlogs for Department of State processing can take years to resolve.
“This is not about buying a plane ticket and waiting a little bit longer,” said Ben Johnson, executive director of the American Immigration Lawyers Association. “For many people, consulate processing is not realistic or safe, and for others it can mean months or years of separation from U.S. citizen spouses, children, employers, and communities.”
Visa processing has been halted completely in more than 70 countries.
Immigrants who have overstayed their visas could face three to 10-year reentry bans if they are forced to leave and apply from abroad.
“We don’t know from the language of the memo if those issues will be taken into account,” Damiano Pearson said.
“This memo has obviously created a lot of panic and fear amongst people who thought they were well on their way to receiving a green card.”
Kolasinski, the immigration attorney, said he has clients with green card interviews this week who are nervous about what might happen next.
“You walk in, and you have no idea what kind of officer you’re going to get and what they’re operating under,” he said.
“There is no more rule of law. There is no more predictability. It’s completely the Wild West, and that’s been the case for a year and a half now,” said Kolasinski.
His advice to clients with interviews scheduled: Don’t go alone. “Nobody should be doing anything with immigration these days without a lawyer present,” he said.
CalMatters’ journalism engineer Mohamed Al Elew contributed to this report.
This article was originally published on CalMatters and was republished under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives license.
