The Brief

The Meta researcher’s tone was alarmed.

“oh my gosh yall IG is a drug,” the user experience specialist allegedly wrote to a colleague, referring to the social media platform Instagram. “We’re basically pushers... We are causing Reward Deficit Disorder bc people are binging on IG so much they can’t feel reward anymore.”

The researcher concluded that users’ addiction was “biological and psychological” and that company management was keen to exploit the dynamic. “The top down directives drive it all towards making sure people keep coming back for more,” the researcher added.

The conversation was included recently as part of a long-simmering lawsuit in a California-based federal court. Condensing complaints from hundreds of school districts and state attorneys general, including California’s, the suit alleges that social media companies knew about risks to children and teens but pushed ahead with marketing their products to them, putting profits above kids’ mental health. The suit seeks monetary damages and changes to companies’ business practices.

The suit, and a similar one filed in Los Angeles Superior Court, targets Facebook, Instagram, YouTube, TikTok, and Snap. The cases are exposing embarrassing internal conversations and findings at the companies, particularly Facebook and Instagram owner Meta, further tarnishing their brands in the public eye. They are also testing a particular vector of attack against the platforms, one that targets not so much alarming content as design and marketing decisions that accelerated harms. The upshot, some believe, could be new forms of regulation, including at the federal level.

One document discussed during a hearing this week included a 2016 email from Mark Zuckerberg about Facebook’s live videos feature. In the email, the Meta chief wrote, “we’ll need to be very good about not notifying parents / teachers” about teens’ videos.

“If we tell teens’ parents about their live videos, that will probably ruin the product from the start,” he wrote, according to the email.

In slides summarizing internal tech company documents, released this week as part of the litigation, an internal YouTube discussion suggested that accounts from minors in violation of YouTube policies were actively on the platform for years, producing content an average of “938 days before detection – giving them plenty of time to create content and continue putting themselves and the platform at risk.”

A spokesperson for Meta didn’t immediately respond to requests for comment.

A YouTube spokesperson, José Castañeda, described the slide released this week as “a cherry-picked view of a much larger safety framework” and said the company uses more than one tool to detect underage accounts, while taking action every time it finds an underage account.

In court, the companies have argued that they are making editorial decisions permitted by the First Amendment,. That trial is set for June.

The state court litigation moved into jury selection this week, increasing the pressure on social media companies.

While the state and federal cases differ slightly, the core argument is the same: that social media companies deliberately designed their products to hook young people, leading to disastrous but foreseeable consequences.

“It's led to mental health issues, serious anxiety, depression, for many. For some, eating disorders, suicidality,” said Previn Warren, co-lead counsel on the case in federal court. “For the schools, it’s been lost control over the educational environment, inability of teachers to really control their classrooms and teach.”

A federal suit

Meta and other companies have faced backlash for years over their treatment of kids on their platforms, including Facebook and Instagram. Parents, lawmakers and privacy advocates have argued that social media contributed to a mental health crisis among young people and that tech companies failed to act when that fact became clear.

Those allegations gained new scrutiny last month when a brief citing still-sealed documents in the federal suit became public.

While the suit also names TikTok, Snap, and Google as defendants, the filing includes allegations against Meta that are especially detailed.

In the more than 200-page filing, for example, the plaintiffs argue that Meta deliberately misled the public about how damaging their platforms were.

Warren pointed to claims in the brief that Meta researchers found that 55% of Facebook users had “mild” problematic use of the platform, while 3.1 percent had “severe” problems. Zuckerberg, according to the brief, pointed out that 3% of billions would still be millions of people.

But the brief claims the company published research noting only that "we estimate (as an upper bound) that 3.1% of Facebook users in the US experience problematic use.”

“That’s a lie,” Warren said.

In response to recent interest in the suits, Meta published a blog post this month arguing that the litigation “oversimplifies” the issue of youth mental health, and pointed to past instances where it has worked with parents and families with features to protect kids.

The federal case faced a key hearing this week, as the defendants argued that a judge should summarily dismiss the case. A decision on that motion is likely coming in the next few weeks, Warren said.

Social media companies, like other web-based services, receive protection from some legal claims under a part of federal law. Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act gives legal immunity to website operators for potentially illegal content on their platforms.

Mary Anne Franks, a legal scholar in First Amendment issues at George Washington University who has long studied Section 230, said rather than online content in and of itself, the recent social media cases are focusing on the design of the platforms and their marketing.

“The litigation strategy is saying it's the way that you're providing that space and you're pushing this toward individuals that are vulnerable that is really an issue here,” she said. “It's your own conduct, not somebody else's.”

The companies are making key decisions behind the scenes, she said, and could be held responsible for them.

“You were manipulating things,” she said the plaintiffs are arguing. “You were deliberately making choices about what comes to the top or what is directly accessible or may be tempting to vulnerable users.”

A California state trial begins

Meanwhile, the related state lawsuit went to jury selection this week.

The case, which makes similar claims about personal injury caused by the social media companies, has also drawn nationwide attention, and major industry figures like Zuckerberg are expected to appear on the stand.

The personal injury case focuses on an unnamed plaintiff who claims to have had her mental health damaged by an addiction to social media.

In a last-minute development this week, TikTok and Snap reportedly reached undisclosed settlements in the case. Meta and Google are continuing as defendants.

Franks said these trials could be a tipping point in regulating how tech companies design and market their products. While the companies have faced scrutiny in the past, she said, the glare of examination at trial could be especially bright.

“There's always been talk of it and the members of Congress have kind of said, ‘maybe we'll regulate you,’” she said. “I think now the platforms are really getting nervous about what this is going to mean if they look really bad on the stand.”

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

In an attempt to resolve evictions before they go to trial, the Los Angeles County Superior Court has launched new programs that seek to facilitate settlements by providing free attorneys to tenants and financial relief to landlords who are owed back rent.

Presiding Judge Sergio Tapia said these pilot programs are designed to stem the tide of evictions, which have risen sharply since the COVID-19 pandemic.

“We're trying to show litigants across the board, whether it’s tenants or landlords, that the court is the opportunity to try to find resolution faster,” Tapia told LAist.

Both tenant and landlord attorneys agree that settlements can often be the best path for both parties.

One program launched last month in downtown L.A.’s Stanley Mosk Courthouse gives tenants the right to request a mandatory settlement conference overseen by a court-appointed settlement officer.

These tenants, who rarely come to court with legal representation, will be given a free attorney to guide them though the settlement conferences, as long as they earn less than 125% of the federal poverty level.

But lawyers who represent landlords say their clients often feel local government is increasingly putting money toward helping renters, while leaving property owners struggling.

Where does funding come from?

Facing eviction without a lawyer “puts people at such an enormous disadvantage, when landlords normally have lawyers,” said Conway Collis, president of the Mayor’s Fund for Los Angeles, a nonprofit that is helping to fund the Mosk program’s free attorneys.

Other funding comes from Stay Housed L.A., a legal aid partnership funded by the county of L.A. and the city of L.A. through its “mansion tax.”

Landlords will be required to notify tenants about the program in the eviction paperwork they serve to tenants.

Settlement officers come from the court’s pool of temporary judges, who handle lower-level cases, such as traffic infractions. Other officers are retired judges or trained lawyers.

The settlement conferences are being held on the same day as regularly scheduled court hearings, one floor down from the Mosk courthouse’s eviction department.

How are the conferences working so far?

Elena Popp, the executive director of the Eviction Defense Network, which is providing lawyers for the program, said that on one recent day, landlords and tenants were able to reach mutually agreeable settlements in about half the conferences.

“We settled one,” Popp said. “We are very close to settling a second one. The other two are way further apart because the tenant really wants to stay on, but the landlord really wants them to go.”

Settlement deals look different in each case, Popp said. Sometimes they involve landlords letting tenants stay if they pay overdue rent. In other cases, tenants are given additional time to find new housing before they must leave. When settlements are reached, cases are sealed so that evictions won’t be visible on a tenant’s record, a black mark that makes it very difficult to find new housing.

When settlements can’t be reached, landlords and tenants go back upstairs to resume their normal proceedings, Popp said.

No matter how cases are resolved, she said, tenants can’t be expected to navigate legally complex processes on their own.

“One of the things that we stressed when we were setting this up is that you absolutely have to have a lawyer,” Popp said.

Compton program pairs settlements with money to landlords

Another pilot program launched last month at the Compton courthouse offers up to $10,000 to cover rent owed to landlords in cases that settle. Landlords will be required to inform tenants about the settlement conferences. To qualify, either the tenant or the landlord must earn no more than 120% of the area’s median income.

The settlement conferences at the Compton courthouse are overseen by Community Legal Aid of Southern California, and rent relief funding is administered by L.A. County’s Department of Consumer and Business Affairs.

Attorney Aaron Kohanim, who represents landlords, said he advises his clients to settle whenever possible, because going to trial is “a casino — you don't know if you're going to win.”

But he also said landlords generally view taxpayer-funded attorneys for tenants as unfair.

“Only one side gets a piece of that pot,” Kohanim said. “Landlords have to pay out of pocket for their attorneys. And on top of that, they are not allowed to collect rent in the middle of the case, so they're getting beaten by two different angles, versus a tenant who is just living there rent-free and they get a free lawyer.”

Tapia said the programs are currently limited to the Mosk and Compton courthouses because of funding constraints and limited resources. But the judge said if they prove successful, they could be expanded county-wide.

“If we're able to show success, that will allow us to recruit a more robust set of settlement officers to perhaps expand,” Tapia said. “We need to see how this pilot plays out first.”

Electric vehicle batteries are a lot like people, in one important respect: They're most comfortable in temperatures around 65 to 75 degrees Fahrenheit.

When the weather gets much colder or hotter than that, a battery works less efficiently. It has to work harder, too, to keep the vehicle's cabin comfortable for its equally picky human occupants.

The result? Electric vehicles can't drive as far or as efficiently in extremely hot or cold weather.

AAA has been testing exactly how big an effect temperatures have on modern EV batteries. In its latest research, shared exclusively with NPR, it found that hot temperatures reduced range by an average of 8.5%. Cold weather cut vehicles' range by a whopping 39%.

AAA ran similar tests back in 2019 with a different vehicle lineup. Back then, the cold weather hit to range was approximately the same, while the high-temperature range loss was higher, 17%. The different slate of vehicles complicates direct comparison, AAA warns, but does suggest some improvements in how EVs handle the heat.

But not the cold. "There's been a lot of technology changes," says Greg Brannon, the director of automotive engineering at AAA. New battery chemistries; more efficient EV designs; fancier software. But when it comes to winter range performance, "the electric vehicles actually didn't change all that much from back in 2019."

Greg Brannon, the director of automotive engineering at AAA, at the Automotive Research Center in Los Angeles.

(

Courtney Theophin/NPR

)

These results show that drivers need to be prepared for their real-world range to shrink in the winter — and to a lesser extent, at the height of summer. EVs can still be practical choices in hotter or colder climates, as long as drivers adjust for predictable range loss. "It can be overcome," says Brannon. "But you have to plan for it."

A treadmill in a freezer

AAA conducts these tests at its own expense, part of a slate of research the group does into emerging vehicle technology for the benefit of auto club members. The tests are carried out at its Automotive Research Center in Los Angeles. Specifically, inside the historic headquarters of the Automobile Club of Southern California: a Spanish Revival-style building, all stucco and red tiles, built around a century-old Moreton Bay fig tree, with a courtyard filled with oranges, palm trees and fountains.

It's possibly the most picturesque place for a California driver to get a smog check. (Yes, AAA offers that here.) But it's not, at first glance, a likely spot for testing how vehicles perform in extreme temperatures, especially not on an April day in the mid-60s. (The locals complained about it as "jacket weather.")

The Automotive Research Center in Los Angeles, located inside the historic headquarters of the Automobile Club of Southern California.

(

Courtney Theophin/NPR

)

But tucked away inside this building is a room that's heavily insulated and packed with powerful heaters and coolers. It can be cranked down to 20 degrees Fahrenheit, or up to 95.

Inside, there's enough space for a single vehicle, parked very carefully on top of two giant steel rollers — each of them 4 feet in diameter — that are hidden beneath floor level.

This is a chassis dynamometer, or "dyno" for short. "For lack of a better term, I guess it's kind of like a treadmill for a car," says Megan McKernan, who manages the research center.

For each test, the two rollers are carefully positioned to match up with the wheels of the test vehicle. Then the car is driven right on top of them, making sure the wheels touch nothing else. The vehicle is tied down with heavy, bright-pink chains, so it can't move forward off the "treadmill."

A test vehicle is positioned on a chassis dynamometer. "For lack of a better term, I guess it's kind of like a treadmill for a car," says Megan McKernan.

(

Courtney Theophin/NPR

)

Now, it's time for Richard Gonzalez to "drive" the vehicle — without actually going anywhere. Once he gets inside and presses the accelerator, the wheels make those giant rollers turn. For hours.

This is about as fun as it sounds. Gonzalez much prefers other parts of his job, like track tests, where AAA evaluates how well cars can, say, automatically brake to avoid pedestrians. But podcasts help pass the time.

The point is to see how far the battery can go, under these controlled conditions, at a certain temperature.

Once the car's battery is drained so much that it can't maintain highway speeds, the test is over. And AAA has a new data point showing how well a certain model's battery can take cold or heat.

A small hit in the summer, a big one in the winter

EVs are not the only kinds of cars that suffer in the cold. AAA also tested hybrids this time around and found a nearly 23% average loss in fuel economy in the 20 degrees F test.

"Internal combustion engine vehicles also lose range in extreme cold weather," points out Ed Kim, the chief analyst with the research group AutoPacific, who was not involved in AAA's research. The Environmental Protection Agency has estimated a 10% to 30% drop in gas vehicle fuel economy in cold weather, depending on the type of trip. "This isn't a problem that's exclusive to EVs. This happens to basically any kind of vehicle when it gets really cold."

In some colder parts of the world, EVs have already become dominant, despite the challenge of winter range loss. Norway has the highest rate of EV adoption in the world — 98% pure battery-electric in March 2026, according to the latest numbers. And Norway is hardly balmy.

Electric vehicles are parked in Geiranger, Norway. The country has the highest rate of EV adoption in the world.

(

Martin Berry/UCG/Universal Images Group via Getty Images

)

But in the U.S., it's a different story. Kim says that EVs have taken off much more in states where temperatures are warm or mild than in the chilly Midwest. State policies and charger availability also play a role, but Kim says fears about winter range — both valid concerns and misinformation-fueled myths — are a factor.

Still, Kim says even with a significant amount of range loss, many drivers in cold-weather regions would still find an EV more than sufficient for their daily needs. "How many people are actually driving more than 200 miles in a day?" he asks rhetorically.

Tips for getting the most from a battery, year-round. 

Range loss from extreme temperatures is inevitable, but EV drivers can prepare for it.

First, pick the right vehicle to battle the temperatures where you live. Some are better than others at handling cold or heat. There are several guides; the most fun comes from a Norwegian auto club that does a head-to-head test every year on a wintry mountain.

A little forward planning helps, too, Kim and Brannon both say. For an EV driver who charges at home overnight and has a typical commute, reduced winter range likely won't affect daily driving at all. But if you don't have a home charger or you're going on a long trip, factor range reduction in when you think about when and where you'll charge. And if you're fast-charging, try to do it on a battery that's been warmed up; charging is slower on a cold battery.

Brannon also recommends that drivers start their climate control while their vehicle is still plugged in. "Pre-conditioning" like that means that when you warm up the car's battery and its interior, you pull power from the grid, not your battery. That saves your vehicle's juice for your drive.

McKernan notes that if you have heated or ventilated seats, using those instead of the air conditioning or heater can be a big boost. The AC and heat are a surprisingly big draw on a vehicle's energy.

And keep your tires inflated to the manufacturer-recommended level and drive at moderate speeds. That boosts your vehicle's efficiency no matter whether it runs on gas, a giant battery or both — and no matter the temperature.
Copyright 2026 NPR

This story first appeared on The LA Local.

While deciphering posted parking regulations around L.A. lately, you may have noticed new signs.

“This property is owned or controlled by the city of Los Angeles,” the shiny red-and-white placards say. "It may only be used for its intended purpose and not used for immigration enforcement as a staging area, processing location, or operations base.”

The LA Local recently spotted them at Hollenbeck Park’s parking lot and at various parking lots close to Echo Park. The mayor’s office told The LA Local the city has installed 500 of them at various locations, including at MacArthur Park, Lafayette Park, the Los Angeles Zoo and Metrolink stations.

The city has received no reports that agents have used the city-owned spaces since the signs were installed. A spokesperson for the mayor’s office said that the city could sue for a restraining order if federal agencies violate the prohibition.

Why were the signs posted?

Mayor Karen Bass ordered that these signs be posted on all city-owned property in February as part of her Executive Order 17. A spokesperson for the mayor’s office said they placed the signs in locations “identified as more likely to be used for [Immigration and Customs Enforcement] operational activity.”

Since the federal government began sweeping operations in Los Angeles last year, immigration advocates and community members have called for the city to do more to keep immigrant residents safer.

In response, Bass issued Executive Order 17, saying the “City must and can do more to protect our City and all who live, work and visit the City of Angels.”

A sign at MacArthur Park prohibits federal agents from using city-owned property to stage for immigration enforcement operations.

(

Courtesy City of Los Angeles

)

How have federal immigration operations involved city property and employees?

In July 2025, about 100 federal agents conducted an operation in MacArthur Park. Days later, Bass issued a separate executive order clarifying the city’s property and resources could not be used for federal immigration enforcement. 

Meanwhile, LAPD Police Chief Jim McDonnell has made repeated statements that he doesn’t agree with or plan to enforce various state laws requiring federal agents to identify themselves and do their work without a mask. (After the Trump administration filed lawsuits, courts have blocked various provisions of those state laws in court anyway.)

Some advocates and Angelenos have called on LAPD to draw a clearer line between the local policing work they are responsible for and the immigration enforcement federal agents do.

Bass’ February order requiring the signs be installed came soon after.

The city has also prohibited its employees from working second jobs with federal immigration enforcement.

What else does Executive Order 17 do?

The order states that unless federal agents have a warrant or court order, they are not allowed to use city-owned or operated property to stage for operations. It also requires LAPD officers to identify federal agents and record their interactions with them. The police commission has since started to publicly report basic details about those interactions.

What happens if federal agents use the city spaces anyway?

The order does not establish what penalties federal agents could face if they are found to be using city property for staging. A spokesperson for the mayor’s office said that the city could sue or pursue a restraining order if federal agencies violate the prohibition.

“Any necessary response will be handled in accordance with the Executive Order and applicable City protocols,” the city statement said.