Censure or Censorship? Investigation into Santa Ana councilmember’s comments sparks debate

Comments by a Santa Ana councilmember known for his vocal criticism of police conduct will be investigated by the city, a majority of his colleagues decided this week, after three Santa Ana Police officers filed complaints over statements that included calling some “killer cops.”

Click Here to Subscribe to the California Political Review

The debate over whether Councilmember Johnathan Hernandez should be formally censured took center stage at Tuesday’s meeting when Mayor Valerie Amezcua and councilmembers Phil Bacerra, Thai Viet Phan and David Penaloza directed city staff to conduct a formal investigation into the complaints.

Councilmembers Benjamin Vasquez and Jessie Lopez were opposed.

A city staff report for Tuesday’s meeting said the City Council had “received complaints alleging that Councilmember Hernandez defamed, harassed and retaliated against certain officers of the Santa Ana Police Department,” and one of those who raised complaints also filed a civil lawsuit in August seeking financial compensation, accusing Hernandez of violating the city charter. Neither the officers’ official complaints nor specific details about the allegations have been made public — a previous closed session when the council discussed the complaints was not open to the public.

“This attempt to silence a dissenting opinion is a violation of my First Amendment right to free speech,” Hernandez said. “I strongly oppose this censure because using a censure in response to public criticism risks undermining free speech and the ability of elected officials to advocate for their constituents.”

City Attorney Sonia Carvalho outlined the censure process as an official condemnation or expression of disapproval. Acts such as improper interactions with city employees or the illegal disclosure of closed-session information in violation of the Brown Act would be grounds for censure, she said. A censure could result in restrictions such as removal from committees, loss of travel funds, or limited staff access.

Hernandez recused himself from Tuesday’s discussion, instead leaving the dais and addressing the council during the public comment portion of the meeting. He wore a shirt with “Arrest the cops who killed Brandon Lopez,” a reference to his cousin.

Hernandez has been critical of police in the past over his cousin’s death. Lopez was shot and killed in Santa Ana by Anaheim police officers during an hours-long standoff in 2021 following a pursuit. Hernandez, who witnessed the shooting, had arrived with other family members to the scene and identified himself to police as a mental health professional. He accused police of ignoring information he offered about his cousin’s mental state, after Hernandez said he told them his cousin was mentally ill and suicidal.

Several residents spoke in support of Hernandez, urging transparency regarding the complaints. A few characterized the move as censorship or retaliation.

“Before you move forward with any kind of censure, the public deserves full transparency. What exactly are the allegations? Who’s behind them?” asked one public comment speaker, Aliyah Nunez. “Who’s the next person that’ll be silenced for asking the hard questions or standing up to power? This is how corruption grows — not from outsiders, but from within.”

Click here to read the full article in the OC Register

Santa Ana council drops idea of ICE notification policy after federal warning

Santa Ana councilmembers voted to drop work on a proposed policy that would have required the city’s Police Department to publicly post alerts about federal immigration enforcement activity.

Click Here to Subscribe to the California Political Review

letter from U.S. Attorney Bill Essayli was received June 7, warning city leaders that implementing the policy could endanger officers, disrupt criminal investigations and expose city staff and elected officials to federal prosecution.

Discussing the letter during a closed session on Tuesday, June 17, the council voted 5-2, with councilmembers Benjamin Vazquez and Johnathan Hernandez opposed, to kill the proposal now. Councilmembers had asked city staff previously for more information about how the policy would work and what could be the implications.

“After reviewing the legal analysis and potential criminal liability and consequences to staff and elected officials, the council voted to discontinue further work on the councilmember-generated policy proposal,” City Attorney Sonia Carvalho reported out of the closed session.

Click here to read the full article in the OC Register

Radical Left Groups Gathering In Santa Ana To Oppose Deportation of Criminal Illegal Immigrants

A coalition of radical-Left groups that are gathering this evening in Santa Ana to riot in “solidarity” with the rioters in Los Angeles. They’re demanding an end to US Immigration and Customs Enforcement efforts to arrest and deport illegal immigrants – many of whom are criminals. These political advocacy groups believe in open borders and share a common opposition to the deportation of illegal immigrants – even if they are dangerous criminals.

Click Here to Subscribe to the California Political Review

One, at Harbor and MacArthur, is being organized by the following groups:

VietRise: an local front group for the Tides Center, a secretive radical NGO with tens of millions in funds.

The Harbor Institute: a Santa Ana front group for the radical National Day Laborers Organizing Network. This group, along with VietRise, spearheaded last year’s failed ballot measure to allow non-citizens to vote in Santa Ana elections.

Freedom Road Socialist Organization: “A national organization of revolutionaries fighting for socialism in the United States.”

The Orange County Rapid Response Network: another radical open borders group. One of its main purposes is giving a heads up to illegal immigrants – even if they are criminals – if an ICE raid is in the offing.

Friends of the Filipino People in Struggle: a radical group that supports the Communist Party of the Philippines (CPP) and its armed wing, the New People’s Army.

Chicanxs Unidxs (formerly Chicanos Unidos)

Orange County CSO

Asian Youth Collective: “A collective of anti-imperialist Asian and BIPOC youth.”

Click here to read the full article in OCI

U.S. Attorney warns Santa Ana an ICE notification policy could violate federal law

The top federal prosecutor in Southern California is warning Santa Ana officials that a proposed policy requiring public notice of federal immigration enforcement operations could endanger officers, disrupt criminal investigations and expose city employees to prosecution.

Click Here to Subscribe to the California Political Review

U.S. Attorney Bill Essayli issued the warning in a letter sent Friday to Santa Ana City Attorney Sonia Carvalho, saying the proposal to publicize courtesy alerts from Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) “will not only hurt public safety, but it will also subject the city and its employees to potential criminal prosecution.”

The proposal, which Santa Ana councilmembers discussed at a May meeting and asked their staff for more information, would require the Police Department to post ICE notifications online within 48 hours of receiving them. The alerts envisioned by some councilmembers would include the time, location and nature of the enforcement activity, and be shared publicly in English, Spanish and Vietnamese.

Some councilmembers raised questions about the legality of the policy and whether it could expose the city to retaliation and asked for more staff analysis.

Essayli’s letter sparked backlash from Councilmember Jessie Lopez, who criticized both the message and the messenger.

“This is from a Trump-appointed U.S. attorney. This guy was literally handpicked by him,” Lopez said. “This is a chilling reminder of how this administration is using the Department of Justice to intimidate local governments that stand with immigrant communities.”

Essayli described the proposed policy as one that would tip off “child predators, fentanyl traffickers and human smugglers.”

But Lopez said that’s “a disgusting take on the spirit of the policy, which is to be transparent in what is happening in our neighborhoods.”

Councilmember Johnathan Hernandez, who co-authored the proposal, has also defended the policy as a transparency measure.

“What we are looking to propose is that the city should facilitate providing this information on a publicly available website,” he said at the recent council meeting.

But Essayli argued the measure could put lives at risk.

“Broadcasting information about ICE operations gives offenders the opportunity to destroy evidence, arm themselves and retaliate against officers and the public,” he wrote.

He added that ICE operations often target serious non-immigration crimes, including child exploitation, fentanyl trafficking and gang activity.

Click here to read the full article in the OC Register

Santa Ana Officials to Assess Risks of Publicly Disclosing ICE Activity in the City

Santa Ana City Council members want to know the impacts – like losing federal funding – and potential legal liability of publicly disclosing federal immigration activity within the city. 

Click Here to Subscribe to the California Political Review 

It comes after revelations that Immigrations and Customs Enforcement officials and the Department of Homeland Security have visited various parts of the city since January, spurring resident concerns that top city administrators haven’t been up front about the issue. 

[Read: Will Santa Ana Alert Residents of ICE Activity Amid Federal Immigration Crackdown?]

Last Tuesday, city council members directed the city attorney and police chief to come back with answers on what are the risks, liabilities and impacts of disclosing ICE and Department of Homeland Security courtesy calls to residents two days after the fact.

From January 22 to April 26, the city has received 42 notifications from federal officials. 

The direction comes after Councilmembers Johnathan Hernandez and Benjamin Vazquez requested a policy disclosing and detailing those notifications to elected officials, the city’s police oversight commission and residents, as well as posting them online.

“It is important that we know that the city will be in compliance with both state and federal law, and that there is no statutory law prohibiting a city from notifying residents of ice whereabouts, nor is there a statutory law that allows for the President to withdraw federal funding,”  said Hernandez, who is running for State Assembly, at Tuesday’s meeting.

Before the discussion, City Attorney Sonia Carvalho warned officials not to get into a full blown debate on the issue, but to just give direction to staff about the policy.

Mayor Valerie Amezcua echoed her remarks, pointing to an emailed memo Carvalho had sent to council members prior to the meeting.

City Spokesman Paul Eakins did not respond to a request for the memo on May 20.

Vazquez said the proposed policy is about transparency and trust.

“People should be empowered with information necessary to make informed decisions for themselves and for their families. It will make Santa Ana safe when we have trust in our government and our police department,” Vazquez said at Tuesday’s meeting.

Police Chief Robert Rodriguez said that there needs to be a balance between protecting law enforcement officers and disclosing information, adding that if he impedes or interferes with state or federal law, he could land in legal trouble.

“I will not break the law to enforce the law,” he said at the May 20 meeting. 

“We’ll reiterate we will not be involved in immigration enforcement. But at the same time, we have to ensure that we don’t compromise public safety, community safety, and ensure that we’re in compliance with both state and federal law,” Rodriguez said. 

The police chief said law enforcement agencies routinely give each other courtesy calls to keep the two departments from clashing with each other amid an ongoing investigation and don’t always provide details of their activity.

Councilwoman Thai Viet Phan – an immigrant herself – and Amezcua questioned what were the risks and the impacts of making such disclosures to the public as President Donald Trump’s administration has threatened to pull funding from sanctuary cities.

Click here to read the full article in the Voice of OC

Voters in California city reject measure allowing noncitizens to vote in local races

SANTA ANA, Calif. (AP) — Voters in a Southern California city rejected a measure that would have allowed residents who aren’t U.S. citizens to vote in local elections.

Click here to SUBSCRIBE to CA Political Review 

Measure DD was rejected by 60% of the voters in Santa Ana, a city of about 310,000 in Orange County that’s southeast of Los Angeles, the Los Angeles Times reported Monday.

Santa Ana, a predominantly Latino community, had more votes for Vice President Kamala Harris than President-elect Donald Trump. Experts say the rejection of the measure may indicate that voters, especially Latino voters, are shifting their attitudes about immigration.

“This is kind of in line with trends we’ve been seeing in both polling and elections of the Latino community getting more conservative on issues of immigration,” said Jon Gould, dean of the School of Social Ecology at the University of California, Irvine.

The measure faced steep opposition from local officials and conservative groups such as Policy Issues Institute, which claimed it would be costly and litigious and upend citizens’ rights.

Carlos Perea, an immigrant rights advocate who supported the measure, said those groups “hit the panic button.”

The results reflect Trump’s influence in a year when the former president campaigned heavily against illegal immigration said Perea, executive director of the Harbor Institute for Immigrant and Economic Justice.

It’s illegal for people who are not U.S. citizens to vote for president or other federal offices, and there is no indication of widespread voter fraud by citizens or noncitizens, though many leading Republicans have turned the specter of immigrants voting illegally into a major issue. They argue that legislation is necessary to protect the sanctity of the vote.

Click here to read the full article in AP News

Noncitizen Voting Measure Overwhelmingly Rejected in Southern California City

Voters in Orange County, California’s second largest city decidedly rejected the latest effort to authorize noncitizen voting in local elections.

Click here to SUBSCRIBE to CA Political Review 

It comes as voters in eight other states on Tuesday approved Republican-backed constitutional amendments strengthening their existing prohibitions on noncitizen voting.

In Santa Ana, California, 62.25 percent of voters opposed Measure DD, which would have allowed noncitizens and undocumented immigrants to vote in municipal elections. Only 37.75 percent of voters supported the measure, election results show.

Santa Ana, a city of more than 300,000 people, is the Orange County seat. Its city council added Measure DD to the ballot by a 4-3 vote last fall.

Supporters of the measure argued that about a quarter of Santa Ana residents can’t participate in city elections because they aren’t citizens and allowing them to vote would make “city-wide elections fair and inclusive.”

“Santa Ana will be a stronger city when all residents can participate in making decisions that affect their daily lives, including decisions about who gets to represent them at City Hall,” supporters wrote in an official argument in favor of Measure DD.

But opponents of the measure said allowing noncitizens to vote devalues citizenship. They also argued that if it passed, the measure would have required the city to take over its elections from the Orange County registrar, and the city has no experience running elections. Taking over the administration of the city’s elections would also cost millions of dollars that could be better spent on other priorities, they argued.

Opponents of the measure, including James Lacy, a longtime conservative activist and lawyer, and the Santa Ana Citizens for Voting campaign, focused much of their attention on the city’s many naturalized citizens who came to the country legally and earned the right to vote after pledging allegiance to the United States.

Lacy, whose mother was born in Russia and escaped communism, said the right to vote is “precious” and “the crown jewel” of citizenship. He believes that emphasizing that message to naturalized citizens is the key to defeating similar noncitizen-voting measures if and when they arise in other parts of California in the future.

“Naturalized citizens work hard, and must take a test, and pledge their allegiance to our nation to gain this important right [to vote],” he said in an email. “They are not about to devalue their achievements.”

Click here to read the full article in the National Review

Noncitizen voting measure soundly defeated in Santa Ana

Santa Ana voters rejected a ballot measure that would have allowed for noncitizen and undocumented resident voting by a wide margin, 62% to 38%, in yesterday’s election, with 100% of precincts reporting, according to the Orange County Registrar of Voters.

Click here to SUBSCRIBE to CA Political Review 

“Our campaign has now set the trend against noncitizen voting and discovered the keys to future victories in similar ballot measures across California and beyond,” said James V. Lacy, who organized the campaign against Measure DD, as it was known in Santa Ana. “The key to victory in the campaign is to elevate citizenship, and the crown jewel possessed only by citizens – their precious right to vote.” Lacy, a former General Counsel in the Reagan Administration, has been a statewide advocate and litigator in opposition to noncitizen voting measures across California.

Measure DD was placed on the ballot by a divided 4-3 vote of the Santa Ana City Council, who unlawfully tried to influence the outcome of the measure by placing prejudicial language in favor of it on the ballot. An Orange County Superior Court Judge ruled against the City to remove the biased wording, in response to a lawsuit filed by Lacy. The Judge’s Order is available here. Last week, the City paid Lacy and other plaintiffs over $35,000 for their attorneys fees in bringing the successful “public interest” lawsuit to correct the ballot measure language.

After winning the lawsuit, Lacy, with financial support from the conservative advocacy organizations United States Justice Foundation and Policy Issues Institute, organized “Santa Ana Citizens for Voting” with the assistance of Pasquale Talarico, a Santa Ana resident, who managed the campaign against Measure DD, which placed 1,500 street signs against the measure, and included social media and direct mail advertising. Opponents of Measure DD also included the Orange County Register editorial board, the Santa Ana Police Union which spent $9,000 on a mailing against the measure, and prominent citizens including the Mayor.

Click here to read the full article in New Santa Ana

California Conservatives Aim to Plunge ‘Dagger into the Heart’ of Illegal-Immigrant-Voting Movement

Opponents of the latest effort to approve illegal-immigrant voting in a California city believe they have a winning strategy that will defeat a ballot measure in Santa Ana and that could be used to stymie the noncitizen-voting movement in other parts of the state as well.

Click here to SUBSCRIBE to CA Political Review 

Measure DD, which is on the Santa Ana ballot on Tuesday, would authorize illegal immigrants who reside in Orange County’s second-largest city to vote in municipal elections. By a 4-3 vote, the city council added the measure to the ballot last fall.

More than 300,000 people live in Santa Ana, and the city serves as the county seat.

Supporters of the measure, including the American Civil Liberties Union, say that about a quarter of city residents can’t participate in elections because they aren’t citizens, and that allowing them to vote would make “city-wide elections fair and inclusive.”

“Many have lived here for decades and contribute greatly to the local economy. They pay taxes, own homes and property, run local businesses, work and raise families in Santa Ana,” backers of DD wrote in an official argument of support.  “They should be able to vote for the city officials who make decisions impacting their daily lives.”

But opponents of the measure say that allowing illegal immigrants to vote devalues citizenship. James Lacy, a longtime conservative activist and lawyer, said that the right to vote is the “crown jewel” and “the most precious right any citizen in the United States has.”

Lacy told National Review that his campaign, Santa Ana Citizens for Voting, is specifically targeting the many naturalized citizens of Santa Ana who came to the country legally and earned the right to vote after pledging allegiance to the United States.

He believes helping naturalized citizens understand the value of that earned right is the “key to defeating noncitizen voting measures throughout the state of California in communities that have high Hispanic, high Latino registration.”

“I am the son of an immigrant. My mother was born in Russia, escaped communism,” Lacy said. “I understand immigrant families. And I inherently understand the value of achieving citizenship. I understand naturalization of citizenship, and how proud a person is who comes into the nation legally and becomes a citizen.”

Lacy, the founder of the United States Justice Foundation, has been a leader in the legal fights against noncitizen voting measures in San Francisco and Oakland. In recent years, voters in both Bay Area cities authorized illegal immigrants to vote in school-board elections, though Oakland leaders haven’t yet created a process for it to take effect.

Santa Ana, an increasingly diverse city in what used to be a conservative stronghold, is the next target for the illegal-immigrant voting advocates. Allowing illegal immigrants to vote will make Santa Ana a “stronger city,” they contend.

Lacy’s group successfully challenged their initial ballot language, which stated that the measure was aimed at noncitizens, “including those who are taxpayers and parents.” Lacy said that was an attempt to insert biased langauge onto the ballot.

Click here to read the full article in National Review

California city could buck national trend on noncitizen voting

Voters in one Orange County city will weigh in on a measure to expand voting rights for immigrants as Republicans work to curtail the practice nationally.

Click here to SUBSCRIBE to CA Political Review 

Their opponents, too, are eager for what happens in Santa Ana to be noticed beyond Orange County, a traditional conservative stronghold that has been politically and demographically transformed over the last generation by migration from Asia and Latin America. Measure DD’s defeat, said Orange County-based conservative lawyer and activist James Lacy, will be “a dagger plunged into the heart of the nationwide movement for noncitizen voting.”

Battling over the noncitizen’s ballot

Until about a century ago, noncitizens regularly voted in American elections, uncontroversial in a country founded on ideals of “no taxation without representation.” Throughout the late 18th and much of the 19th century, noncitizens could even be elected to local office and territorial legislatures. The right to vote was often used as a lure to draw people to newer states and territories eager for population growth.

“Even from the get-go, the idea of immigrant voting was seen not as a substitute for citizenship but a pathway to it — the idea that it could facilitate the newcomers’ civic education and attachment to their new lands and communities, and eventual citizenship,” said Ron Hayduk, a professor at San Francisco State University who has written extensively about the history of noncitizen voting in the U.S.

But a wave of anti-immigrant sentiment in the late 19th and early 20th centuries prompted states to do away with the practice. As of 1924, no state currently allows it. California’s constitution requires that one be a U.S. citizen aged 18 or older and in good standing otherwise (meaning not currently serving a felony sentence in prison) to vote in elections for state office.

Noncitizen voters were “factored into the calculations by the parties and the candidates, as well as determining winners and losers,” Hayduk said. “And that’s partly why it came under some contestation over time … as the number and the kinds of immigrants increased and changed.”

In 1996, Congress passed a law requiring anyone registering to vote in federal elections to certify, under penalty of perjury, that they are a U.S. citizen. The penalties for violating that law can be steep: Noncitizens who illegally cast a ballot can face not only a fine and prison time, but also deportation and the denial of future legal status.

But neither federal nor state law has anything to say about whether noncitizens can vote in local-level elections. That ambiguity has led nearly 20 cities across the country, including in the District of Columbia and Vermont, to give noncitizens some voting rights. (Takoma Park, Maryland, was the first to do so, in the early 1990s, but most of the noncitizen voting laws have come from a new wave of measures in the last few years.)

In 2016, San Francisco voters amended the city’s charter to permit noncitizens with children under 18 to vote in school board elections. Oakland voters approved a similar measure in 2022, although it was subsequently challenged in court and has yet to go into effect. (The suit was dismissed by a county court.) A state appeals court ruling last year to uphold San Francisco’s amendment inspired members of the Santa Ana city council to pursue something similar, to take effect by 2028.

The movement for noncitizen suffrage has triggered a backlash from Republicans who have moved to explicitly ban the practice in elections at all levels. Six states have already passed constitutional amendments explicitly banning noncitizens from voting in their elections, and eight more — Idaho, Iowa, Kentucky, Missouri, North Carolina, Oklahoma, South Carolina and Wisconsin — are voting on similar measures this fall.

“This is really a common-sense fix to an issue that might never become an issue, but it’s a lot easier to handle these things in a proactive manner than to react to them if they do,” Kentucky state Rep. Michael Meredith, who co-sponsored the constitutional amendment in his state, told local media this fall.

There is no evidence that noncitizens are casting ballots in federal elections, but former President Donald Trump and his allies regularly assert it is as a component of allegations that only mass election fraud could cause his defeat on Nov. 5. “Our elections are bad, and a lot of these illegal immigrants coming in, they’re trying to get them to vote,” Trump claimed at his September debate against Vice President Kamala Harris. Johnson has said, “We all know, intuitively, that a lot of illegals are voting in federal elections, but it’s not been something that is easily provable.”

Santa Ana’s Measure DD has been caught up in that maelstrom. In a city that declared itself a sanctuary city in response to Trump’s election in 2016, local supporters of the measure recognize that their success or failure will be watched beyond city limits — and that victory would serve as at least a small counterbalance to the noncitizen voting bans that may pass elsewhere in the country next month.

“A lot of national right-wing groups have been very against this because if it does pass, it will be historic,” said Jannah Pante, a 30-year-old union staffer who came from neighboring Anaheim to volunteer for the measure. “I think people see Orange County as the Trump town of California. … If this passes in the heart of the conservative county, I think it will very much inspire others to say, ‘We can also do this.’”

‘Is this election fraud?’

Measure DD would amend Santa Ana’s charter to effectively waive California’s citizenship requirement in the city’s rules about who is eligible to vote. The proposal makes no distinction between noncitizen residents based on their legal status, and leaves questions about defining residency to the city council. It would move responsibility for overseeing local elections from county to city government, but does not explain how it would administer them for two distinct classes of voters when both federal and local offices appear on the same ballot, as they will for Santa Ana’s mayoral election in November.

Shortly after the city council voted to place the amendment on the ballot last fall, it faced a legal challenge over seven words included in the original text of the amendment. Voters would have been asked whether noncitizens, “including those who are taxpayers and parents,” should get the right to vote in local elections.

But Lacy, who had filed previous lawsuits against San Francisco and Oakland’s noncitizen voting amendments, argued successfully in court that Santa Ana’s language reflected bias in favor of the measure, and a judge ordered the city council to remove it.

Even if the reference to taxpayers and parents was struck from the official ballot language, backers of Measure DD have worked to make that point as they campaign for the measure. They argue noncitizens pay more than $100 million in taxes in Santa Ana, and that they deserve a say in the local government structures that impact their daily lives.

By passing the measure, “we are reclaiming a right that immigrants had and our communities had … for the majority of the history of the United States,” Rigo Rodriguez, a member of the city’s school board, said at the Yes on DD canvassing kickoff.

Rodriguez was speaking from the parking lot of the Centro Cultural de Mexico in downtown Santa Ana, where volunteers handed out steaming cups of coffee and pan dulce to supporters training to canvass for the first time. Struggling to shield themselves from the beating sun, they practiced how to respond to common concerns voters might raise in doorstep conversations.

“‘Hey, I watch Fox News,’” one volunteer proposed. “‘Is this election fraud?’”

Click here to read the full article in Politico