Politics
Ahead of second Trump term, California vows 'ironclad' abortion access
SACRAMENTO — California lawmakers are rushing to introduce legislation that reaffirms the state’s role as a reproductive rights “haven” as President-elect Donald Trump prepares to return to the White House and abortion rights advocates warn of an uncertain future.
Abortion remains legal in California, home to the strongest reproductive rights in the nation — unlike in some states, there is no required waiting period or counseling before the procedure, and minors can get abortions without parental involvement. In 2022, voters solidified abortion access in the state Constitution after the U.S. Supreme Court overturned the federal right, limiting healthcare for millions of women.
But as Trump prepares to take the White House again, California’s Democratic leaders are adamant that not enough has been done to secure reproductive access in case of further federal rollbacks.
“The truth is, this is an urgent and dangerous situation,” California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta said at a news conference in Sacramento on Monday, pointing to renewed legal challenges to the distribution of abortion pills. “The right-wing extremists continue to wage attack after attack on our bodily autonomy at the expense of the health or life of pregnant persons.”
Bonta, a Democrat, said new legislative proposals will make reproductive rights in California “ironclad.”
Gov. Gavin Newsom’s earlier focus on abortion rights after Trump’s first term — including ad campaigns in red states — have drawn criticism from California Republicans skeptical of his national political motives and praise from advocates who say it is better to be safe than sorry. He has signed dozens of bills firming up abortion access in recent years, but some of his plans have proved to be more flash than substance. A temporary law allowing doctors licensed in Arizona to provide abortions in California, for example, expired without any doctors using it.
“He makes the big pronouncements, but he’s not a very good executor of those policies,” said Assembly Republican leader James Gallagher of Yuba City. “It’s kind of become his M.O., to make a big splash and then nothing really ever comes of it.”
Democrats, however, see the need to shore up abortion access given the uncertainty of Trump’s plans. A bill introduced this week aims to ensure availability of mifepristone and misoprostol — the commonly used two-step medication abortion process — even if the Trump administration attempts to interfere.
At issue is how antiabortion government officials could revive and interpret the Comstock Act, a federal law that once banned the mailing of “obscene” materials related to abortions.
While Trump has said he has no plans to ban abortion nationwide, he has repeatedly flip-flopped on the issue and taken credit for appointing conservative Supreme Court justices who reversed the federal right to abortion with their decision in the landmark Dobbs case.
Reproductive health advocates are worried that under his second term, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration could limit access to abortion medication. To lead the FDA, Trump has tapped Dr. Marty Makary, who has echoed antiabortion messages on Fox News about fetal pain — something disputed by major medical organizations.
The California bill by Assemblymember Maggy Krell (D-Sacramento), a legislative newcomer and former Planned Parenthood attorney, aims to ensure that Californians continue to have access to medication abortion for the foreseeable future and protects “manufacturers, distributors, authorized healthcare providers and individuals” from any legal action for distributing or administering the pills.
“There are emerging threats to the availability of mifepristone and misoprostol, and California may not be able to guarantee a continued supply,” the bill states. “Previously, Governor Newsom implemented a plan to stockpile doses of misoprostol. While this effort was successful, the Legislature finds that the state needs to renew its stockpile to ensure that Californians can continue to exercise their constitutional rights.”
Last year, Newsom rushed to stockpile hundreds of thousands of abortion pills after a Texas judge ruled against the authorization of the medication.
“We will not cave to extremists who are trying to outlaw these critical abortion services. Medication abortion remains legal in California,” Newsom said then.
But, facing expiration dates, the state released the stockpile to the public before the U.S. Supreme Court decision that rejected the Texas court’s ruling.
In Washington, Democratic Gov. Jay Inslee chose to hold on to a similar stockpile in case Trump was elected again.
A spokesperson for Newsom said California “remains ready” to procure more pills if needed.
In another precautionary move last year, Newsom signed a law that allowed abortion providers in Arizona to temporarily practice in California. The action came after the Arizona Supreme Court reinstated an 1800s law that essentially banned all abortions.
No Arizona providers ended up using the program, which expired Dec. 1, according to the California Department of Consumer Affairs. Concerns settled in Arizona after Democratic Gov. Katie Hobbs signed a bill that repealed the court decision, and voters last month passed a state constitutional amendment guaranteeing a right to abortion.
The California legislation “was designed to serve as a swift stop gap measure to preserve continued access to abortion care, if necessary, during this very precarious moment,” California Department of Consumer Affairs spokesperson Monica Vargas said in an email when The Times asked for data about the program’s use.
Newsom also signed a law last year that allowed medical residents from states with “hostile” laws to get abortion training in California. The state does not require the California Medical Board to track whether that program is being used as intended, a spokesperson said.
For Republican critics like Gallagher, those programs are instances of “political theater” meant more to draw attention to an issue than provide substantive policy. Newsom this week called a special legislative session in Sacramento to prepare for legal combat with Trump on issues such as abortion and immigration — a move heralded by liberals as smart preparation for an unpredictable president and criticized by conservatives as unnecessary panic.
“In California, abortion is constitutionally protected, and you have a president-elect who has said very clearly he will not support any national abortion ban,” Gallagher said. “This perceived threat that they’re trying to make into a political volley … it’s just Newsom drawing attention to himself.”
Some abortion advocates said that they’d rather have a nimble governor like Newsom and be cautious even if the emergency plans don’t always pan out.
“Now more than ever is the time for innovative policy solutions,” said Shannon Olivieri Hovis, a spokesperson for Essential Health Access. “And inevitably, it is going to be the case that not all solutions we put forth will be equally effective.”
Other bills introduced this week seeking to fill California’s reproductive health access gaps include a proposal to financially penalize cities and counties that block the building of abortion clinics, as has happened in Beverly Hills and Fontana.
Assemblymember Mia Bonta (D-Oakland) introduced a package of bills that would ensure hospitals enforce laws that require emergency rooms to provide abortion care; make it easier for Medi-Cal recipients to get birth control; and prevent birthing centers from closing.
About 40% of California counties don’t have abortion clinics, including rural areas where transportation can be a hurdle. In September, the state sued a Humboldt County Catholic hospital after a patient said she was denied an emergency abortion even as she feared for her life because of miscarriage risks.
“We have to be absolutely clear-eyed about the political and social moment we’re in right now … when we have a proven misogynist as a president,” said Mia Bonta, who is married to the attorney general, referring to Trump’s sexual abuse allegations and “your body, my choice” refrains that surged after his election.
“I think while California has done an amazing job, we still have a lot of work to do to shore up the infrastructure of support for people who are seeking healthcare and abortion access and protection of our reproductive and sexual freedoms.”
Politics
Democrats demand Kristi Noem be fired or warn impeachment will follow
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
House Democrats ramped up pressure on Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Kristi Noem on Tuesday, calling for her firing and warning that impeachment proceedings would follow if she remains in office, citing deadly actions by federal agents in Minnesota.
The calls came from both House Democratic leadership and Judiciary Committee Democrats, marking a coordinated escalation from public condemnation to formal impeachment threats.
In a joint statement, House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries, Democratic Whip Katherine Clark and Democratic Caucus Chair Pete Aguilar accused the Trump administration of using federal law enforcement to carry out deadly violence.
“Taxpayer dollars are being weaponized by the Trump administration to kill American citizens, brutalize communities and violently target law-abiding immigrant families,” the leaders said. “The country is disgusted by what the Department of Homeland Security has done.”
NOEM SAYS SHE GRIEVES FOR FAMILY AFTER CBP-RELATED SHOOTING IN MINNEAPOLIS, VOWS THOROUGH INVESTIGATION
House Democrats ramped up pressure on DHS Secretary Kristi Noem on Tuesday. ( Al Drago/Getty Images)
The leaders warned that unless Noem is removed, impeachment proceedings would follow.
“Kristi Noem should be fired immediately, or we will commence impeachment proceedings in the House of Representatives,” the statement said.
“We can do this the easy way or the hard way.”
The demands come as Noem faces widespread criticism after federal agents killed two U.S. citizens in Minnesota this month.
Separately, Rep. Jamie Raskin of Maryland, the ranking Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, called on Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, to immediately begin impeachment proceedings if Noem is not fired or forced to resign.
“Unless Secretary Noem resigns or is fired, the Judiciary Committee’s Chairman, Jim Jordan, should immediately commence House Judiciary Committee impeachment proceedings to remove her from office,” Raskin said.
BORDER PATROL COMMANDER GREGORY BOVINO TO LEAVE MINNESOTA, AS TOM HOMAN TAKES OVER
Federal agents try to clear demonstrators near a hotel, using tear gas during a noise demonstration protest in response to federal immigration enforcement operations in Minneapolis. (Adam Gray/AP Photo)
Raskin accused Noem of overseeing what he described as unlawful killings and a subsequent cover-up.
“Far from condemning these unlawful and savage killings in cold blood, Secretary Noem immediately labeled Renée Good and Alex Pretti ‘domestic terrorists,’ blatantly lied about the circumstances of the shootings that took their lives, and attempted to cover up and blockade any legitimate investigation into their deaths,” he said.
Separately, Sen. John Fetterman, D-Pa., called on Trump to fire Noem directly on Tuesday.
In a post on X, the senator accused Noem of “betraying” the department’s central mission.
In a joint statement with other Democratic leaders, Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., accused the Trump administration of using federal law enforcement to carry out deadly violence. (Roberto Schmidt/Getty Images)
However, President Donald Trump confirmed on Tuesday that he has no plans to ask Noem to step down from her role.
Trump was asked about Noem’s status during a gaggle with reporters outside the White House. He told the press that he still thinks Noem is doing a “great job.”
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
“Is Kristi Noem going to step down?” a reporter asked.
“No,” Trump responded bluntly.
He later said he believes she is doing a “very good job,” citing her role in closing down the border.
Fox News’ Anders Hagstrom contributed to this report.
Politics
Trump signs executive order to ‘preempt’ permitting process for fire-destroyed homes in L.A.
President Trump has announced an executive order to allow victims of the Los Angeles wildfires to rebuild without dealing with “unnecessary, dupicative, or obstructive” permitting requirements.
The order, which is likely to be challenged by the city and state, claimed that local governments have failed to adequately process permits and were slowing down residents who are desperate to rebuild in the Palisades and Altadena.
“American families and small businesses affected by the wildfires have been forced to continue living in a nightmare of delay, uncertainty, and bureaucratic malaise as they remain displaced from their homes, often without a source of income, while state and local governments delay or prevent reconstruction by approving only a fraction of the permits needed to rebuild,” Trump wrote in the executive order, which he signed Friday.
The order called on the Secretary of Homeland Security and the Federal Emergency Management Agency to “preempt” state and local permitting authorities.
Instead of going through the usual approval process, residents using federal emergency funds to rebuild would need to self-certify to federal authorities that they have complied with local health and safety standards.
The order comes as the city and county approach 3,000 permits issued for rebuilding. A December review by The Times found that the permitting process in Altadena and Pacific Palisades was moving at a moderate rate compared to other major fires in California. As of Dec. 14, the county had issued rebuilding permits for about 16% of the homes destroyed in the Eaton fire and the city had issued just under 14% for those destroyed in the Palisades fire.
While Mayor Karen Bass did not immediately provide comment, the executive order drew intense pushback from Gov. Gavin Newsom.
A spokesperson for Newsom, Tara Gallegos, called Trump a “clueless idiot” for believing the federal government could issue local rebuilding permits.
“With 1625+ home permits issued, hundreds of homes under construction, and permitting timelines at least 2x faster than before the fires, an executive order to rebuild Mars would do just as useful,” Gov. Gavin Newsom wrote in a post on X, citing the number of permits issued solely by the city of Los Angeles.
Newsom said that the federal government needed to release funding, not take over control of the permitting process. The governor said that what communities really lack is money, not permits.
“Please actually help us. We are begging you,” Newsom wrote.
Instead of descending into the permitting process, Newsom called on the president to send a recovery package to congress to help families rebuild, citing a letter from a bipartisan delegation of California legislators that called for federal funding.
“As the recovery process continues, additional federal support is needed, and our entire delegation looks forward to working cooperatively with your administration to ensure the communities of Southern California receive their fair share of federal disaster assistance,” wrote the California legislators on Jan 7.
Los Angeles City Councilwoman Traci Park, who represents Pacific Palisades, responded in a statement that read: “If the federal government is interested in expediting recovery from the most expensive disaster in this country’s history, they can start by committing to real financial support — to close insurance gaps, to repair critical infrastructure damaged in both the fire and the debris removal process, to help this region rebuild two entire communities from the ground up.”
Park also said that “dangling SBA loans and hazard mitigation funding in front of victims while summarily denying FEMA claim and other support to municipalities behind the scenes is subterfuge, not support. The City can only approve permits that have been submitted and the reality is that many disaster victims are still not ready to move forward with their rebuilds. This federal government can fix that by allowing desperately needed financial assistance to flow down to the Los Angeles region and let us get to work.”
Los Angeles County Supervisor Kathryn Barger, who represents Altadena, said she would “welcome any effort to responsibly accelerate rebuilding.”
Barger said permits take 30 days to move through the county’s plan check, but often encounter delays due to “complex multi-party work of architects, engineers, and builders.”
She also called for more federal funding and long-term disaster aid.
“The most urgent need in the Altadena region is financially driven,” she said in a statement to The Times.
Some in the Palisades agreed that money was a bigger issue than permitting.
“When I talk to people it seems to have more to do with their insurance payout or whether they have enough money to complete construction,” said Maryam Zar, a Palisades resident who runs the Palisades Recovery Coalition.
Zar called the executive order “interesting” and said that it was fair of the president to call the recovery pace slow and unacceptable.
Jonathan Zasloff, a UCLA Law professor who focuses on land use, called the executive order “childish and irresponsible policy.”
Zasloff, who lost his Palisades home in the fire, said that the president does not have the authority to get rid of state and local law just because he doesn’t like them. Instead, Zasloff said, the president should focus on fully funding disaster recovery so that the city and county can have adequate staff to process permit applications.
“My house burned down in the Palisades. Getting rid of the building codes would make it easier to rebuild something, but it could also make things a lot more dangerous,” he said.
Politics
Mamdani’s early moves as mayor clash with affordability pledge: ‘Ripple effects are significant’
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani ran on a message of making the Big Apple more affordable for everyday Americans, but some of his actions in the first few weeks of his tenure have served to undercut that reality.
In the early days of his time as mayor, Mamdani has already shown a penchant for vehemently defending low-wage, unskilled delivery-app workers in a manner that industry executives and business experts think will hit consumers’ pocketbooks. He sued a delivery app startup earlier this month for allegedly violating the city’s worker-rights laws, and warned the broader range of delivery app companies operating in the city to abide by ramped up worker rights being imposed at the end of the month, or else.
At a press conference announcing the lawsuit and accompanying demand letters issued to delivery app companies warning them to follow the updated worker protections, Mamdani also accused the delivery-app startup, MotoClick, of stealing workers’ tips. Among the reforms Mamdani has signaled he plans to vigorously enforce is a mandated tipping framework that estimates show could push more than half-a-billion in additional costs on consumers annually.
The updated protections will also add more delivery-app companies, such as those that deliver groceries, to the list that must follow the delivery-app worker rights laws, including a mandated minimum wage higher than what some emergency medical services (EMS) personnel in the city make.
‘ZOHRANOMICS’: NYC MAYOR ZOHRAN MAMDANI’S SOCIALIST MATH DOESN’T ADD UP
Zesty is now in beta in San Francisco and New York as DoorDash tests and refines its personalized matching experience. (iStock)
“We know affordability is not just about the cost of goods — it’s about the dignity of work,” Mamdani’s Commissioner of the Department of Consumer and Worker Protection (DCWP) Sam Levine told companies including DoorDash, GrubHub and Uber. “Today’s lawsuit against Motoclick is not just an action against one company, it’s a warning to every app-based company from this Administration. You cannot treat workers like they are expendable and get away with it. We will seek full back pay and damages. We will seek full accountability.”
Mamdani pointed to a recent report put out by Levine, which showed disobeying city mandates going into effect later this month, requiring apps to give the opportunity for customers to tip before or at the same time that an order has been placed, significantly impacts the amount of incoming tip revenue. Levine’s report that Mamdani touted estimates alternative tipping frameworks, such as only allowing tips upon completion of a delivery, have altered tipping revenue by an estimated $550 million per year.
Mamdani also stood by in tacit agreement during the press conference as delivery-app worker advocates called for an increase to their already mandated minimum wage they have that is approximately $4.50 higher for delivery-app drivers than the city’s base minimum wage of $17 per hour. The workers said they wanted a mandate that they get paid $35 per hour, to which Mamdani replied: “closed mouths don’t get fed.”
Mamdani campaigned on raising the base minimum wage to $30 per hour for all New Yorkers by 2030.
New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani at a press conference defending worker rights for delivery-app drivers on Thursday, Jan. 15, 2026. (Michael Nagle/Bloomberg via Getty Images)
Meanwhile, his eager enforcement to protect delivery-app drivers will include making sure a wider breadth of delivery-app companies, such as those who deliver groceries like InstaCart and Shipt, abide by New York City’s extended minimum wage laws for their workers – plus the other mandates related to the tipping structure and more.
DCWP has indicated plans to set a minimum pay rate for all delivery apps by early 2027.
HOURS AFTER TAKING OFFICE, NYC MAYOR MAMDANI TARGETS LANDLORDS, MOVES TO INTERVENE IN PRIVATE BANKRUPTCY CASE
“The challenges facing delivery workers, small businesses, and consumers are real, and deeply interconnected. That’s why this issue cannot be reduced to a single policy lever or viewed in isolation,” a spokesperson for the Bronx Chamber of Commerce told Fox News Digital. “Small businesses across the Bronx and throughout New York City are already under extraordinary pressure. When additional costs are layered on without a full economic analysis, those costs are predictably passed down to consumers or absorbed through reduced hours, reduced staffing, or closures. When businesses close, communities lose jobs, services, and economic anchors, and the ripple effects are significant.”
The Chamber of Commerce spokesperson added that Mamdani has an opportunity “to lead by tackling affordability in a holistic way,” which they said would require “comprehensive cost analysis and coordinated solutions that support workers while ensuring the small business ecosystem and consumer affordability are not unintentionally harmed.”
Signage reading ‘Days of a New Era’ is juxtaposed behind New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani during a press conference he attended about reining in ‘junk fees.’ (Adam Gray/Bloomberg via Getty Images)
When reached for comment about the discrepancy between Mamdani’s message of making New York City more affordable for everyone, versus his push to protect delivery-app worker rights that could impact consumer pricing, a New York City Hall spokesperson argued that “the insinuation that putting more money in the pockets of delivery workers undercuts affordability is absurd.”
“Delivery Workers are important members of our city’s economy, and deserve to be paid fairly – anything less is unacceptable,” the spokesperson added. “As Mayor Mamdani continues to stand up for everyday New Yorkers and actualize his ambitious agenda to make New York City truly livable for families. Affordability has been, and will continue to be, a guiding light.”
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
But DoorDash’s head of public policy for North America, John Horton, said that ensuring delivery-app workers “earn double what many first responders in the city make” is not a policy solution they believe will make New York City more affordable. Currently, a local fire technician and emergency medical services union in the city is in the midst of a public awareness campaign to raise their wages because they make less than delivery-app drivers at $18.94 per hour.
Delivery-app workers in New York City must be paid $21.44 per hour according to local worker protection mandates. (iStock)
“A thriving New York will take a partnership between elected officials, the business community and workers to ensure we are all working in the best interests of New Yorkers in the midst of the city’s affordability crisis,” Horton added.
Fox News Digital followed up with Mamdani’s campaign to inquire about the complaint that EMS and some firemen in the city are making less than delivery-app workers, but did not receive a response in time for publication.
-
Sports1 week agoMiami’s Carson Beck turns heads with stunning admission about attending classes as college athlete
-
Illinois5 days agoIllinois school closings tomorrow: How to check if your school is closed due to extreme cold
-
Pittsburg, PA1 week agoSean McDermott Should Be Steelers Next Head Coach
-
Lifestyle1 week agoNick Fuentes & Andrew Tate Party to Kanye’s Banned ‘Heil Hitler’
-
Pennsylvania1 day agoRare ‘avalanche’ blocks Pennsylvania road during major snowstorm
-
Sports1 week agoMiami star throws punch at Indiana player after national championship loss
-
Cleveland, OH1 week agoNortheast Ohio cities dealing with rock salt shortage during peak of winter season
-
Science1 week ago‘It is scary’: Oak-killing beetle reaches Ventura County, significantly expanding range