California lawmakers strike wildfire deal that leaves out most of Newsom’s big demands

Gov. Gavin Newsom on Saturday backed off his proposal to reduce costs for electrical utilities after their equipment sparks wildfires, agreeing instead to a narrower deal after homeowners, insurers and fire survivors argued his original plan would have shifted those costs onto them.

Instead, Newsom and Senate and Assembly leaders agreed on a narrower package of wildfire policies, including prohibiting private equity groups from investing in wildfire claims and denying utility CEO bonuses in the years their companies cause fatal fires.

Click Here to Subscribe to the California Political Review

The deal is a victory for lawmakers who refused to reduce damages to victims and shift costs away from utilities. Opponents included insurance companies, consumer advocates and survivors of the January 2025 Eaton Fire caused by Southern California Edison equipment that killed 19 people in Altadena.

Under the agreement announced Saturday, the state would create a “fast-pay” program for survivors’ property loss, pain and suffering in the wake of a utility-caused fire. It would include deadlines for determining which claims are valid within 60 days of receipt, and settlement offers within 30 days after that, but survivors could still pursue the long process of suing utilities if they choose.

The state also commits to  improving its local wildfire mitigation efforts and sharing more data on insurance coverage in areas with fire risk.

The final agreement, which lawmakers will vote on next week in Senate Bill 492, caps a contentious series of closed-door negotiations between Newsom’s office and legislative leaders on how much utility companies should pay after fires.

Newsom wanted utilities to have to pay less to insurance companies, some wildfire survivors, local governments and corporations claiming damages after a fire. His administration is concerned the mounting costs threaten investor confidence in the state’s three major for-profit utilities: Pacific Gas & Electric, Southern California Edison and San Diego Gas & Electric. He said that could lead to higher borrowing costs for the companies and higher electricity bills for Californians.

Newsom also argued his plan would prioritize paying survivors who lose their homes. In past fires, investors have funded lawsuits or claims have been sold to hedge funds, increasing the number of third parties seeking to profit from wildfire payouts, Newsom’s office has said.

Click here to read the full article in CalMatters

Insurance executives warn that Newsom plan to shift utility wildfire liability would raise premiums

Insurance company executives warned Gov. Gavin Newsom in a letter Wednesday that his plan to shift utility wildfire liability to property insurers would raise premiums across California.

“The party whose equipment ignites a catastrophic fire should bear the economic consequence of that fire,” the 15 executives wrote. “Shifting those costs to policyholders does not reduce the cost of electricity but does make homeownership more expensive and insurance coverage harder to find.”

As the legislative session nears its end, Newsom’s staff and lawmakers have been negotiating behind closed doors on a deal to limit utilities’ wildfire liabilities.

Click Here to Subscribe to the California Political Review

According to a confidential document that Newsom’s staff sent to lawmakers and was obtained by Politico, the governor wants to stop property insurers from recouping their losses from homes destroyed in utility-sparked wildfires.

That could increase homeowners’ property insurance rates by as much as 50%, according to the Personal Insurance Federation of California. The highest hikes would be for those families living in severe fire risk areas.

“The proposal would shift billions of dollars in wildfire costs away from utilities and onto insurance consumers across the state, making coverage more expensive and harder to find,” said Denni Ritter at the American Property Casualty Insurance Assn.

Southern California Edison and the state’s two other big for-profit utilities have been lobbying Newsom and lawmakers to further shield them and their shareholders from wildfire liabilities ever since last year’s Eaton fire caused the price of their stock to tumble.

Government fire investigators said the fire, which killed 19 people and destroyed thousands of homes, was caused by electrical arcing on Edison’s out-of-service transmission line in Eaton Canyon. Edison kept the line in place despite not using it since 1971.

More than 11,000 households have filed suit against the utility, claiming it acted negligently, which the company denies.

Edison is offering settlements to victims of the Eaton fire. A $21-billion state wildfire fund that Newsom and lawmakers created in 2019 to protect the state’s three big utilities from bankruptcy after a fire is reimbursing Edison for its payments to victims.

At a news conference Wednesday, Newsom defended his plan, which also includes limiting the fees of attorneys in wildfire litigation and stopping hedge funds from profiting on the claims.

Newsom said that current law allows insurers to be paid before victims after a fire.

“The insurance industry is going to do everything to make sure they get paid first,” Newsom said.

Click here to read the full article in the LA Times

California to sue Trump administration again over mail-in voting restrictions

Gov. Gavin Newsom announced Monday that California intends to sue the Trump administration again over President Donald Trump’s efforts to impose new restrictions on mail-in voting ahead of the November midterms. The announcement came after the U.S. Supreme Court allowed the administration to move forward with key parts of Trump’s March executive order on elections, pausing a lower court ruling that California and other states had previously won. Trump’s order called for the federal government to create state-by-state citizenship lists and for the U.S. Postal Service to impose new requirements on mail-in ballots.

Click Here to Subscribe to the California Political Review

The Supreme Court did not rule on if Trump’s order is legal. Instead, the decision allows the administration to continue pursuing the order while leaving the door open for California and other states to challenge specific policies as they are implemented — setting up another round of litigation just as mail-in voting will begin in some states. “California will be suing AGAIN to block these Orwellian rules from being implemented,” Newsom said in a news release. California and 22 other states, along with Washington, D.C., initially sued the Trump administration in April, arguing that the order illegally interfered with states’ constitutional authority to run elections. A federal judge agreed in June and blocked key parts of the order, finding that Trump had overstepped his authority. The judge also found that the Postal Service did not have authority to control mail-in voting.

Click here to read the full article in the Sacramento Bee

Gov. Newsom Wails Grimes: About Assaults on the Free Press, then Signs ‘Stop Nick Shirley Act’ into Law

‘California Passes a law making it a crime to report a crime’

California Governor Gavin Newsom signed the “Stop Nick Shirley Act,” Assembly Bill 2624, by Assemblywoman Mia Bonta (D-Oakland) into law Saturday August 22, 2026. Bonta claims her bill is about “privacy for immigration support services providers.”

Gov. Newsom two days ago screeched on X about unfair attacks on the free press:

“A free press cannot function under constant threats and retaliation from the government. Reporters must be free to hold those in power accountable — without fear of retribution. The assault on the free press must end!”

Click Here to Subscribe to the California Political Review

And then he signed the “Stop Nick Shirley Act” into law. 

Republicans nicknamed the bill the “Stop Nick Shirley Act” for independent YouTuber and citizen journalist Nick Shirley after he exposed Somali daycare fraud in Minnesota. 

Bonta, wife of California’s Attorney General Rob Bonta, claims it does not fine or jail journalists simply for “uncovering” Democrat fraud.

However, her bill will fine citizen journalists a minimum $4,000 for exposing fraud inside “Immigration Support Service Providers” – illegal services to illegal aliens.

Bonta’s bill would impose huge civil sanctions on independent investigative reporters for “harassing” what Bonta calls “immigrant services” workers who, in fact, are providing taxpayer-funded goods and services to illegal aliens. It is designed to use as a weapon to intimidate and punish journalists who dissent from mainstream views.

AB 2624 is reminiscent of AB 2098 from October 2022 when Gov. Newsom signed a bill to censor California doctors accused of “Spreading COVID Misinformation” during Covid. Assembly Bill 2098 put unconstitutional restrictions on free speech by medical professionals, and subjected them to disciplinary actions by the Medical Board of California if they did not adhere to the “approved COVID treatment consensus.”

Even before AB 2098 went into effect, it was already used as a weapon to intimidate and punish doctors who dissented from “mainstream views.” However, the bill was ultimately ruled unconstitutional and the governor and COVID “experts” were defeated over their law to punish doctors for “Covid Misinformation.”

California legislators are trying to make investigating fraud illegal, as Elon Musk correctly noted on X.

Within days of announcing her new bill, Ms. Bonta claimed “Right-wing agitators, ineffective legislators, and Trump loyalists are intentionally spreading significant misinformation about Assembly Bill 2624.”

Assemblyman Carl DeMaio (R-San Diego) calls it what it is:

CENSORSHIP: The “Stop Nick Shirley Act” that makes it illegal to post videos of fraud against taxpayers is now law. Democrats decided to stop independent journalists from investigating fraud instead of stopping the fraud.

DeMaio should know. On Wednesday, Assembly Democrats censored him on the floor of the Assembly during debate over Bonta’s bill.

“California Democrats don’t care about freedom of speech. They silenced @carldemaio when he attempted to debate the Stop Nick Shirley Act bill. Who is next?” I posted to X.

Click here to read the full article in the California Globe

Newsom’s taxpayer-funded California diaper program could “lead to waste,” state records warned

Newborns outgrow their first diapers in weeks. Experts say so. California records show it, and several organizations that competed with Baby2Baby to run the state’s free diaper program made the same point.

One nonprofit pointed to a federal diaper pilot in California that found 83% of family requests were for Size 4 and up. Another warned that providing too many diapers of a single size “can lead to waste as babies may outgrow infant diaper sizes before they are used.”

Agency officials raised similar concerns with Baby2Baby, one of whose co-CEOs serves on the board of First Partner Jennifer Siebel Newsom’s California Partners Project. Baby2Baby ultimately won the multimillion-dollar contract to manufacture and distribute California-branded free diapers.

Click Here to Subscribe to the California Political Review

Officials questioned Baby2Baby about its plan to send every new baby home from the hospital with 300 to 400 diapers in only the two smallest sizes. They noted that that many diapers at once “might be overwhelming” and that parents “may want alternative sizes… so not to waste product.”

The Newsom administration went with Baby2Baby’s plan anyway. The recently released contract locks in 400 California-branded diapers for every baby, limited to Newborn and Size 1, handed over once at hospital discharge with “no right to return or exchange diapers.”

Continuing coverage of California’s diaper program

CBS California Investigates has been following the state’s no-bid Baby2Baby diaper deal since May, when our fact-check found the loudest criticisms of the program were wrong, but the state refused to release the contract.

The Newsom administration then delayed releasing the records for 66 days while lawmakers weighed giving agencies even more time to respond to requests like these.

In the meantime, the investigation revealed that what the governor called a “competitive bid process” was actually “non-competitively bid”. It was legal, exempted by a single sentence in the state budget, one of dozens of similar exemptions covering more than $1 billion in state contracts.

Six hours after that investigation was published, the state released the 356 pages of records.

Thirty minutes later, the governor’s office responded, calling our reporting “demonstrably false.” CBS California then published a point-by-point review, checking every claim against the state’s own records. That review also revealed that the governor’s proposed budget funded the Baby2Baby program at the expense of traditional diaper bank funding, which lawmakers later restored.

Click here to read the full article on CBS News

Newsom discovers the working class on his way out the door

Gavin Newsom is promising to do something he’s never accomplished before: Improve the lives of the working class.

Newsom has been campaigning for president most of the time he’s been California’s governor, with all his national and international appearances, podcasts and websites. Now he’s discovering the working class through Substack on his way to New Hampshire after seven years of failure.

Click Here to Subscribe to the California Political Review

“The world just got its first trillionaire. At the same time, millions of people are struggling to get by and a generation is falling behind their parents,” Newsom posted on X. “If that’s not a five-alarm fire, I don’t know what is”

The fact that younger generations are falling behind prior generations is not news, especially in California, where by the state’s own data the cost of living has increased by more than 30% since Newsom was elected governor in 2018.

The fire started here.

Newsom and his Democratic supermajority have presided over one of the highest poverty rates in the country. California leads the nation in homelessness, despite billions of dollars dumped into anti-homelessness programs. Middle income and working class families are fleeing the state – many of those he claims to be championing.

If California was Newsom’s audition, Americans shouldn’t expect him to perform better with a bigger job. His record suggests he has no idea how to actually help improve the lives of average Californians, and meaningless phrases like “democratize the economy to save democracy” just prove he’s flailing.

Newsom has increasingly pitted workers against the rich in an effort to appease the left wing of the Democratic Party. But it’s flawed logic. I’m not any better or worse off because of Jeff Bezos’ yacht – his net worth doesn’t drive up my rent and his stock portfolio didn’t give me the second highest energy prices in the country. What drives up rent and energy prices is a housing shortage created by permitting delays, and an energy policy that overtaxes every gallon I pump.

Nationally, worker wages have stagnated, whereas in California they’ve grown much faster. But this isn’t the talking point Newsom might think it is since wages gains are eroded by California’s rapidly rising cost of living. Groceries cost 11% more than the national average here. Gas costs 40% more. Electricity costs 61% more. A bigger paycheck got swallowed by even bigger bills.

Newsom says he’s pro-worker, but he signed into law AB 5, the most anti-worker law ever imagined that hinders the surest way to gain wealth and climb the economic ladder – entrepreneurship. And his environmental agenda will cost each California household around $20,000, according to a study by the Pacific Research Institute.

The real problem is not my relationship to a rich person, it is my relationship to the cost of living. Wealth isn’t a finite resource, which is why it continues to increase across all cohorts.

All of us can get richer at the same time, but Newsom’s framing assumes that wealth is a fixed pie and that my neighbor’s gain must be my loss. It isn’t how a growing economy works, and it’s not why Californians are struggling. But whether I make $1 million a year or $1 a year is irrelevant unless one considers what those salaries can purchase.

As governor, Newsom has had a lot of influence over things like housing costs, housing production, gas prices, electricity rates, insurance carriers fleeing the state, tax burdens.

At times Newsom has taken some actions that might serve to improve some of these issues, like suing cities over stalling housing production. But the vast majority of the time he elected to do nothing or make matters worse.

Click here to read the full article in the OC Register

Newsom’s populist act: Oppose state billionaire tax, embrace federal one

Gov. Gavin Newsom is in his populism era.

He started the year vowing to stop corporate investors from buying up large tracts of single-family homes, a desire shared by both socialists and President Donald Trump.

Last month, after he was unable to keep a proposal to tax California billionaires from appearing on voters’ ballots, he tried to get ahead of the debate by pitching nationwide higher taxes on the wealthy.

Last week, he spoke to a crowd of national Latino policymakers about the need to “democratize our economy” in the face of artificial intelligence-driven job losses.

Newsom’s populist appeals come as he prepares to leave office and looks toward an expected 2028 presidential campaign in which widespread anxiety about wealth inequality and the effects of AI on the economy will feature prominently.

“The old bargain is dead, and AI is going to finish it off,” he said last week in Los Angeles, of the concept that Americans could support families with working-class jobs. “We need to wake up to that foundational reality.”

The posture is new territory for Newsom, who is not a natural populist and who maintains his longstanding relationships with wealthy tech donors who have railed against the proposed billionaire tax, Proposition 40.

As governor, he’s kept his image as a liberal who favors progressive income taxes and expanding the social safety net without teetering too far into the overtly redistributive politics of democratic socialists. He eschewed most new tax proposals and stood by several state corporate tax benefits that progressives have longed to scrap.

Click Here to Subscribe to the California Political Review

By focusing on AI-driven inequality now, Newsom is choosing a popular issue to define his expected 2028 run. But it’s not yet clear whether voters will buy his solution.

“Newsom is balancing two pressures,” said Kevin Liao, a Democratic strategist who worked on billionaire Tom Steyer’s “tax the rich” gubernatorial campaign this year. “There’s a desire to meet the demands of his constituents and the current appetite to be against billionaires, and to address the massive wealth inequality in the state and the country, with the cold political reality that much of his career and presumably his future ambitions have also been built on the financial support from a lot of wealthy folks in Silicon Valley.”

Four tax measures on the California ballot

Even as he adopts a more progressive posture while appearing in other states, Newsom is walking a fine line back home, where his vocal opposition to California’s billionaire tax proposal could confuse voters staring at multiple tax measures on the November ballot.

Proposition 3, sponsored by the California Teachers Association, is also a tax on the rich: It would make permanent the state’s higher income tax rates for the top 2% of earners. That money goes into the state general fund, 40% of which pays for schools.

Voters approved those rates temporarily in 2012 at the behest of then-Gov. Jerry Brown, and extended them again in 2016. If they expire as planned in 2030, the state stands to lose between $5 and $15 billion a year in revenue.

Early polling shows that measure is popular, but CTA President David Goldberg acknowledged it will be tricky to campaign in favor of it with another tax on the ballot. The union opposes the billionaire tax because it would not send the same proportion of its revenues to schools, instead prioritizing healthcare.

Click here to read the full article in CalMatters

Conservatives flip script on Newsom after he demanded 25th Amendment for Trump: ‘Propped up a vegetable’

The California governor accused the president of cognitive impairment, drawing fierce pushback from Republicans online

California Gov. Gavin Newsom ignited an online firestorm on Thursday evening when, in response to President Donald Trump’s election integrity speech, he suggested that it was time to invoke the 25th Amendment and remove the president for displaying what he described as cognitive impairment.

“The only thing missing in Donald Trump’s speech was tin foil. This was a legitimate 25th Amendment moment — the rambling of a mad king,” Newsom said.

Newsom’s call to use the 25th Amendment plays into preexisting calls from Democrats to examine Trump’s cognitive performance, but also sparked controversy online about how Democrats could seriously question Trump’s mental state when they dismissed similar concerns about now-former President Joe Biden.

Click Here to Subscribe to the California Political Review

The 25th Amendment, ratified in 1967, allows the Cabinet to deem the president unfit for duty or allows Congress to establish an independent body to make that call.

To some critics, that case was much stronger under the last administration.

“You literally propped up a vegetable and lied to the American people about his cognitive decline for four years and never mentioned the 25th amendment once,” the official Republican National Committee X account wrote in response, referring to Republican doubts that Biden had the mental acuity to run the country at age 82.

“Given Newsom’s defense to this day of President Biden, calling him one of the greatest presidents ever, there’s a saying around sitting this one out that applies here…” Fox News contributor Joe Concha wrote on X.

“Gavin Newsome wants to remove [Trump] from office for disclosing California could have tens of thousands of aliens illegally registered to vote and that China attacked 220 million voters,” Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said.

Trump addressed the country on Thursday evening, informing the public that his administration had discovered a series of weaknesses in election integrity.

In particular, Trump said newly declassified documents would reveal foreign data theft carried out by China, that members of the U.S. government had known about election vulnerabilities for years, that Americans had been misled about those weaknesses and new evidence of “election fraud.”

Fox News Digital could not independently verify the content of the documents that were released by the White House.

Like many Democrats, Newsom cast doubt on the motives behind Trump’s speech, which came just four months ahead of the November midterms.

Click here to read the full article at FoxNews

 

King Newsom, His Arrogance, and the Massive Devaluation of California Citizens

Connect the dots and determine the nexus of the non-profit integrated ‘healthcare’ industrial complexes

The takeover of free enterprise medicine in the state of California by Newsom and his predecessors, and then the transforming of it into communist healthcare, has come at great cost to the people of California, including physicians like me and the rest of the 100,000 plus doctors practicing here, and you.  I watched it happen during my career in Sacramento, and there is nothing I could do to prevent it and help us.  But there is something you and I can do now, and that’s what this paper is about!  

This takeover had two profound effects on me when the federal and California government thieves and killers took over.  The new method of payment for my services to patients and the amount of payment was inadequate for me to go on; and the complete takeover of my skill and judgment was unethical.  Every covenant of the Hippocratic Oath I swore was breached by Democrats, Newsom,  and the healthcare industrial complex and I refused to be one of his tools of tyranny.  This all culminated in 2004, when I dropped my operating and admitting privileges at Dignity Healthcare (then called Mercy General Hospital) and Sutter Health (then called Sutter General and Sutter Memorial Hospitals), a sad day in my life.  

Click Here to Subscribe to the California Political Review

The time has come to end Newsom’s tyranny.  The evidence of his unbridled power and arbitrary destruction of the economy and medical profession in California is underway via the DOGE waste, fraud, and abuse investigation of President Trump, and soon will transform Newsom from hero to zero.

Why did Democrats, the bureaucratic structure of California government, and almost all of the elected officials (including Newsom most recently), within this wayward partisan California power peddler do all these wicked things to the people of California over time?  It is because of hostility toward the private sector, toward business, and toward the whole idea of anything or anyone who can show a profit!  Profit is an unacceptable word to them.  Simply put, Newsom, his predecessors, and the progressive bureaucratic machine has always been and remains so envious of the medical profession that they decided to conquer it, own it, control it, regulate it, and steal all our taxpayer funds for their own benefit.  This is why we must stop him and them! 

How can doctors as a profession fight that? They can’t. Doctors are supposed to be gentle, kind, caring, empathetic, compassionate, and follow the laws of ethical physicians. Instead, they were cheated out of their due income and forced to do the will of Newsom! Doctors don’t fight; they heal!  But when they are forced to work for a tyrant, they become punching bags, rummy headed, hopeful for a paycheck, completely punched out of any ethical standards, devoid of economic initiative, cowardly, resentful, and inflicted with wokeness.  They need a double shot of fight!  Show me a California doctor that doesn’t agree with what I just said, and I will show you an academic physician or scientist sellout in cahoots with King Newsom!

What do you think that has done to the quality of medical and surgical care in this state?  The gold standard of medicine in California from before the tyrants made their move has eroded to the no class standard you are witnessing today.  I DO NOT TRUST THIS SYSTEM, and guess what?  I am at the age where cancer and heart disease take hold, and I need the assistance of qualified physicians and surgeons to take care of me, as do you, the way my private practice Sacramento colleagues and I took care of patients before Newsom and his predecessors came on the scene.  We need excellent medical care for every single CITIZEN, birth to death.  We need our doctors back!

How did this nonsense ever occur in the first place?  The four big players in the Sacramento area decided to jump into bed with government in about 1985, when Mercy General Hospital and Sister Bridget, the administrator of that institution, decided to disband about  half of the private practice physicians and surgeons in the Sacramento region of admitting privileges and operating privileges in Mercy General, and consolidating Mercy institutions in the area into Catholic Healthcare West and ultimately the EVIL Dignity Health.  Sutter made the same evil move. Kaiser was an HMO from the start, a one stop shopping system, and became evil as well. And of course, UC Davis, the place I trained at, and which taught me how to be an ethical surgeon, copied the other three.  

So, the collegiality and trusting and communicating nature of the private practice physician was no more.  All four of these crooked integrated healthcare industrial complexes became subjects of Democrats and eventually “King Gavin” and the patients and doctors also became “subjects” of the crown, no longer “citizens” of the state.  Note that Gavin Newsom was in high school in 1985!

Let us define Social Security, the way Ronald Reagan described it back in 1961 before he became the greatest governor of the state of California of all time.  He said, “Social security is a form of savings to keep destitution from following unemployment by reason of death, disability or old age.  And to this end Social Security was adopted, but it was never intended to supplant private savings, private insurance, or pension programs of unions and industries”.  Wow, how about that for a caveat!  

Medicare is an outright adjunct of Social Security, paid for out of your monthly Social Security check. And, it is the absolute REQUIREMENT of every citizen in America is to sign up with Medicare at age 65.  It’s the law!  Well, you might say, that’s great!  Now I’m entitled to government run healthcare for the rest of my life, especially if I didn’t live my life providentially, meaning a lifestyle of self-reliance, wise resource management, and foresight.  Providential emphasizes living joyfully within one’s means, avoiding debt, cultivating practical skills, and maintaining a general and emergency preparedness plan such that you NEVER EVER become a burden upon your fellow Californians, including your family.   

If you are old, where do you fit on that scale?  All you have to do is check your pocketbook and determine if you were gainfully employed, i.e. profiting and diligently saving throughout your life!  Did you blow it, or are you solid?  Based on President Reagan’s definition of Social Security, do you need Social Security?  If so, the only person you can blame is our oversized, oppressive, swindling government and yourself.

It was about the year 2012, when the Tea Party was strong, when a constitutional lawyer explained to me what Social Security really is.  I was shocked, but it’s true. Social Security is a Ponzi scheme, plain and simple.  A Ponzi scheme is an investment swindle in which some early investors are paid off with MONEY put up by later ones in order to encourage more and bigger risks.  And Medicare?  An adjunct of Social Security!  The by-product of a Ponzi scheme.  Ponzi schemes never work.

Let’s connect the dots and determine the nexus of the non-profit integrated “healthcare” industrial complexes defined above.  It is Medicare!  In 1951, an organization called the Joint Commission on Accreditation of Hospitals (JCAH), was established by Washington, DC.  The name changed to Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations (JCAHO) in 1987 and is now known as simply The Joint Commission.

Click here to read the full article in the California Globe

Trump accuses California of registering thousands of noncitizen voters; Newsom scoffs

Shortly after making an address to the nation alleging widespread voter security breaches and election interference by China Thursday, President Donald Trump said his administration has notified California that it is one of four states with more than 250,000 non-citizens registered to vote collectively between them.

“State election officials in California, Pennsylvania, New Jersey and Nevada have been notified of this serious threat to national security and DHS (Department of Homeland Security) stands ready to support their efforts to identify and remove ineligible registrants,” according to a Department of Homeland Security document released Thursday night after Trump’s speech.

Click Here to Subscribe to the California Political Review

California Gov. Gavin Newsom responded on X that “We have no idea where this latest claim comes from. The Federal Government sued (and lost) to get access to the state’s voter rolls. And if they already had them, why sue in the first place?”

Newsom was referring to a Department of Justice lawsuit against California and five other states seeking sensitive voter information. A federal judge dismissed the lawsuit in January.

Newsom continued: “California law is clear: You MUST be a U.S. citizen to vote in state and federal elections. Voter fraud is EXTREMELY RARE — and almost always committed by U.S. citizens. Donald Trump’s Administration has repeatedly pushed false and misleading claims about elections. They have provided NO evidence to support these new ‘claims.’ Why should anyone believe them now?”

Congress passed a law in 1996 prohibiting noncitizens from voting in federal elections, but California, Maryland, Vermont and Washington, DC allow noncitizens to cast ballots in some local elections.

In 2016, San Francisco voters authorized noncitizen parents or guardians of students who live in the San Francisco Unified School District to vote in school board elections. Oakland voters followed suit in 2022. A Superior Court judge initially overturned San Francisco’s law, but the state’s First District Court of Appeal rejected the determination that it was unconstitutional and reinstated the measure, allowing Oakland’s law to continue also. The conservative group that had challenged the law said it would not further challenge the law.

Click here to read the full article in the SF Chronicle