Connect with us

California

California Man Indicted For Allegedly Making Threats To Georgia Prosecutor In Trump Election Case

Published

on

California Man Indicted For Allegedly Making Threats To Georgia Prosecutor In Trump Election Case


ATLANTA (AP) — A California man has been indicted by a federal grand jury in Atlanta for sending death threats to District Attorney Fani Willis, who is overseeing the prosecution of former President Donald Trump and 18 others on charges of illegally trying to overturn the 2020 presidential election in Georgia.

Marc Shultz, 66, of Chula Vista, is facing charges of transmitting interstate threats to injure Willis. Prosecutors alleged that Shultz posted comments to YouTube livestream videos in October 2023 that threatened Willis, including stating that the prosecutor “will be killed like a dog.”

“Sending death threats to a public official is a criminal offense that will not be tolerated,” Ryan Buchanan, the U.S. attorney in Atlanta, said in a statement Friday.

The April 24 indictment was unsealed Thursday. A federal public defender listed as representing Shultz didn’t immediately return emails seeking comment.

Advertisement

Records show Shultz appeared before a judge in San Diego on Thursday and was released on bail. Buchanan said Shultz would be formally arraigned in Atlanta in June.

Also Friday, Fulton County leaders testified before a special state Senate committee that they had no legal power to control Willis’ spending or her hiring of former special prosecutor Nathan Wade.

The Republican-led committee is probing Willis’ hiring of Wade to lead the team that investigated and charged Trump, lawyers and other aides in the Georgia case. Willis and Wade have acknowledged a romantic relationship with each other.

Trump and some other defendants in the case have tried to get Willis and her office removed from the case, saying the relationship with Wade created a conflict of interest.

Wade stepped down from the prosecution after Fulton County Superior Court Judge Scott McAfee in March found that no conflict of interest existed that should force Willis off the case. But he ruled that Willis could continue prosecuting Trump only if Wade left. Trump and others are appealing that ruling to a higher state court.

Advertisement

The allegations that Willis had improperly benefited from her romance with Wade resulted in tumultuous months in the case as intimate details of Willis and Wade’s personal lives were aired in court in mid-February. The serious charges in one of four criminal cases against the Republican former president were largely overshadowed by the love lives of the prosecutors.

Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis arrives for the final arguments in her disqualification hearing at the Fulton County Courthouse on March 1, 2024, in Atlanta, Georgia. (Photo by Alex Slitz / POOL / AFP) (Photo by ALEX SLITZ/POOL/AFP via Getty Images)

ALEX SLITZ via Getty Images

Willis told reporters Friday that she had done nothing wrong.

“They can look all they want,” Willis said. “The DA’s office has done everything according to the books. We are following the law. I’m sorry that folks get mad when everybody in society can be prosecuted.”

Willis is running for reelection this year and faces a Democratic opponent, Christian Wise Smith in a May 21 primary. Early voting for that election is ongoing.

Advertisement

But the lawyer who initiated the effort to remove Willis, Ashleigh Merchant, has also claimed that Wade’s firing violated a state law that required approval of the hiring of a special prosecutor by the county commission.

Fulton County Commission Chairman Rob Pitts, a Democrat, and Fulton County Attorney Soo Jo both told the committee that while the law appears to require county commission approval, judges decades ago interpreted the law in such a way to give Willis the freedom to hire who she wants without approval. Jo, who represents the commission, cited three separate Georgia Court of Appeals cases backing up that point

“What I have found is that the court has rejected the proposition that this particular statute requires a district attorney to obtain explicit permission from a county prior to appointing a special assistant district attorney,” Jo said.

State Sen. Bill Cowsert, the Athens Republican who chairs the committee, disputed that interpretation when questioned by reporters after the hearing.

“I think the clear language of the statute says that that requires county approval, and especially where it’s funded by the county,” Cowsert said.

Advertisement

He went on to suggest the committee, which doesn’t directly have the power to sanction Willis, might change the law to give counties more control over spending by state officers funded by counties, including district attorneys and sheriffs. Fulton County officials said they don’t believe they currently can control how Willis spends money once it’s appropriated to her.

Cowsert said increased county oversight would be “extraordinarily complex” for district attorneys managing funds contributed by more than one county. While Willis and 15 other district attorneys in Georgia only prosecute cases from one county, others prosecute cases from as many as eight counties.

Senate Democratic Whip Harold Jones II of Augusta said the hours of questioning over details of how Fulton County budgets money shows the panel is “on its last legs,” noting three of six Republicans didn’t appear for a committee meeting called on short notice.

“They’re not even interested in this anymore,” Jones said. “There’s nothing else to talk about, quite frankly. And we found that out today.”



Source link

California

California bill to bar police from taking second job with ICE advances in state Assembly

Published

on

California bill to bar police from taking second job with ICE advances in state Assembly


Wednesday, March 4, 2026 4:43AM

CA bill to keep police from moonlighting with ICE advances

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (KABC) — A bill that would prevent police officers from moonlighting with federal immigration enforcement agencies, such as U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, is advancing through the California State Assembly.

AB 1537 passed the State Assembly’s committee on public safety on Tuesday.

The bill also requires that officers report any offers for secondary employment related to immigration enforcement to their place of work.

Those failing to comply could face decertification as a peace officer in California.

Advertisement

The bill was introduced by Assemblymember Isaac Bryan, whose district includes Mar Vista, Ladera Heights, Mid-Wilshire and parts of South Los Angeles.

Copyright © 2026 KABC Television, LLC. All rights reserved.



Source link

Continue Reading

California

Can’t win in primary election? Drop out, California Democrats say

Published

on

Can’t win in primary election? Drop out, California Democrats say


play

California Democrats running for governor, your party has a message for you. Think carefully about your candidacy and campaign ahead of the swiftly approaching filing deadline.

California Democratic Party Chair Rusty Hicks urged candidates looking to assume the state’s highest office to “honestly assess the viability of their candidacy and campaign” as March 6, the final day to declare candidacy, nears. Hicks said that concerns about the crowded field of Democrat candidates “persist” in an open letter on Tuesday, March 3.

Advertisement

It comes as five leading candidates, several of which are Democrats — Katie Porter, Eric Swalwell, and Tom Steyer — are in a “virtual tie” per a recent poll, the Desert Sun reported, which is part of the USA TODAY Network.

Two Republican candidates pushing out California democrats in the gubernatorial bid may be “implausible,” but “it is not impossible,” Hicks said of the reasoning behind his latest message. Steve Hilton and Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco, both Republicans, lead in RealClear Polling’s average of various polls.

The party chair spotlighted the need for California Democrats’ leadership, particularly over Proposition 50, the voter-approved measure that will temporarily implement new congressional district maps, paving the way for Democrats to secure more seats in the U.S. House of Representatives.

“If in the unlikely event a Democrat failed to proceed to the general election for governor, there could be the potential for depressed Democratic turnout in California in November,” Hicks said. “The result would present a real risk to winning the congressional seats required and imperil Democrats’ chances to retake the House, cut Donald Trump’s term in half, and spare our nation from the pain many have endured since January 2025.”

Advertisement

During a press conference on March 2, Gov. Gavin Newsom said that when he is out in communities, people aren’t talking about the governor’s race. It’s an observation he called “interesting,” considering voting in the primary election starts in May.

“It’s been hard, I think, to focus on that race,” Newsom said, pointing to the attention on President Donald Trump, redistricting, and other matters.

What exactly is California Democratic Party asking of candidates?

In his open letter, Hicks gave directions to candidates.

First, assess your candidacy and campaign. If you don’t have a viable path to the general election, don’t file to get your name on the ballot for the primary election in June. Also, be prepared to suspend your campaign and endorse another candidate by April 15 if you decide to file but can’t show “meaningful progress towards winning the primary election.”

Advertisement

When is the next California election? Primary election in 2026

California voters will trim the field of candidates for governor on June 2. Only the two candidates who receive the most votes, regardless of party preference, will move on to the November election.  

Paris Barraza is a reporter covering Los Angeles and Southern California for the USA TODAY Network. Reach her at pbarraza@usatodayco.com.



Source link

Continue Reading

California

Supreme Court blocks California law limiting schools from telling parents about trans students

Published

on

Supreme Court blocks California law limiting schools from telling parents about trans students


The U.S. Supreme Court has temporarily blocked a California law that limited when schools could require staff to disclose a student’s gender identity, clearing the way for schools to tell parents if their children identify as transgender without getting the students’ approval.

Rear view of multiracial students with hands raised in classroom at high school

The decision came after religious parents and educators, represented by the Thomas More Society, challenged California school policies aimed at preventing staff from disclosing a student’s gender identity.

Erwin Chemerinsky, dean and professor of law at the University of California Berkeley School of Law, said the ruling favors parents’ ability to be informed. “The Supreme Court today rules in favor of the claim of parents to be able to know the gender identity and gender pronoun of the children,” Chemerinsky said.

Advertisement
FILE:{ }transgender flag against blue sky background { }(Photo: AdobeStock)

FILE:{ }transgender flag against blue sky background { }(Photo: AdobeStock)

The decision temporarily blocks a state law that bans automatic parental notification requirements if students change their pronouns or gender expression at school. The Thomas More Society called the decision a major victory for parents, saying the court found California’s policy likely violates constitutional rights.

Chemerinsky said the Supreme Court’s action is an emergency ruling. “This law is now put on hold. So what this means is that schools can require that teachers and other staff inform parents of the gender identity or gender pronouns of children,” he said.

scotus.PNG

Kathie Moehlig, founder and executive director of Trans Family Support Services, said she is concerned about how the ruling could affect students who do not have supportive families.

“I am really concerned about our kids that do come from these non affirming homes, that they know that they’re going to get in trouble, that they’re going to possibly have violence brought against them possibly kicked out of their homes,” Moehlig said.

Moehlig said parents should eventually know, but that the conversation should happen when a student feels safe. “Our students are going to be less inclined to confide in any adults that might be able to help to get them access to mental healthcare, to a support system. They may still tell their peers but they’re certainly not going to tell any other adult,” she said.

Advertisement

Equality California, a LGBTQ+ civil rights organization, shared a statement:

Equality California, the nation’s largest statewide LGBTQ+ civil rights organization, released the following statement from Executive Director Tony Hoang in response to today’s U.S. Supreme Court shadow docket ruling in Mirabelli v. Bonta regarding California’s student privacy protections for transgender youth. Today’s decision by the U.S. Supreme Court to intervene in this case is deeply disturbing. By stepping in on an emergency basis, the Court has effectively upended California’s student privacy protections without hearing full arguments and before the judicial process has run its course. While not surprising, this move reflects a dangerous willingness to short-circuit the established judicial process to dismantle protections for transgender youth. While this case continues to be litigated, the ruling revives Judge Benitez’s prior decision, which broadly targets numerous California laws protecting transgender and gender-nonconforming students — threatening critical safeguards that prevent forced outing and allow educators to respect a student’s affirmed name and pronouns at school. These protections exist for one reason: to keep students safe and ensure schools remain places where young people can learn and thrive without fear. To be clear: today’s decision does not impact California’s SAFETY Act, which prohibits school districts from adopting policies that forcibly out transgender students. The SAFETY Act remains in full effect, and we will continue defending it. Transgender youth deserve dignity, safety, and the freedom to learn without fear. We will never stop fighting for transgender youth and their families. Equality California will continue working with parents, educators, and advocates to ensure schools remain safe, welcoming, and focused on the success and well-being of every student.

The case now returns to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, which will decide whether the California law is constitutional.



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending