California
California officials get aggressive on homelessness after Supreme Court ruling
Los Angeles, CA – June 10: After his homeless encampment under the 110 Freeway was removed by the city of Los Angeles for the Summit of the Americas, Calvin Hall, 63, who has been homeless for four years, returns from grocery shopping through a fenced-off area to a new area near the 110 Freeway and the Los Angeles Convention Center. (Allen J. Schaben / Los Angeles Times via Getty Images)
Allen J. Schaben | Los Angeles Times | Getty Images
Across California, homeless encampments on city streets, in public parks and beneath highways have become among the most visible symbols of the state’s overwhelming challenges with affordable housing. Government officials are now using their newfound power to take on the problem.
In late June, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled 6-3, with the conservative majority voting together, that cities are allowed to enforce fines and make arrests for public camping and sleeping outdoors, and to threaten jail time for those who repeatedly refuse to move indoors and accept assistance.
The decision overturned a 2022 ruling by an appeals court, which favored a group of homeless people in the small Oregon city of Grants Pass.
After the decision, California Governor Gavin Newsom applauded the clarity outlined in the ruling and put out an executive order in July pushing local governments to “develop their own policies to address encampments with compassion, care, and urgency.”
The order included guidance for cities and counties in a state that had more than 181,000 homeless people in 2023. Newsom said in a statement in June that the court’s decision “removes the legal ambiguities that have tied the hands of local officials for years and limited their ability to deliver on common-sense measures to protect the safety and well-being of our communities.”
On Tuesday, Newsom signed two new laws. One will make it easier for service providers to place unhoused people into privately owned hotels and motels for more than 30 days, and the other speeds up the process for local governments to construct junior accessory dwelling units for shelter.
California accounted for nearly one-third of the country’s unhoused population last year, according to data from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. Over the past five years, the state has invested $27 billion to address the homelessness crisis, including $1 billion in encampment resolution funds.
California Governor Gavin Newsom (D) reacts as he speaks to the members of the press on the day of the first presidential debate hosted by CNN in Atlanta, Georgia, U.S., June 27, 2024. REUTERS/Marco Bello
Marco Bello | Reuters
San Francisco Mayor London Breed, who’s in the midst of a tight reelection campaign, has responded to the executive order with sweeps to clear encampments, and offered bus tickets out of town. Breed’s order cited data from this year’s Point-in-Time Count, which found that 40% of the homeless population in the city came from elsewhere in California or from out of state, up from 28% in 2019.
Breed’s challengers, including Levi Strauss heir Daniel Lurie and former interim Mayor Mark Farrell, have told CNBC about the need to increase safety on the streets and move away from public camping. Lurie said he would plan to build 1,500 shelter beds in his first six months of office. Farrell has called for an increase in police enforcement in areas struggling with both drugs and homelessness, and increased incentives for small businesses and affordable housing.
‘Real kick in the gut’
The changing approach has its share of critics.
Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass said the Supreme Court ruling “must not be used as an excuse for cities across the country to attempt to arrest their way out of this problem or hide the homelessness crisis in neighboring cities or in jail.”
Bass has publicly called for more housing and shelter beds for homeless individuals, coupled with supportive services, and said that criminalizing the actions or trying to push them away “is more expensive for taxpayers than actually solving the problem.”
Jennifer Friedenbach, executive director of the San Francisco-based Coalition on Homelessness, called the ruling “a real kick in the gut.”
Her group’s goal is to seek permanent solutions for homelessness via advocacy and ballot measures. Prior to the Supreme Court decision, unhoused public campers couldn’t be fined without the offer of shelter.
“This [was] a protection that at the very least there would be some attempt that the local municipalities had to do to try to offer them someplace to sleep,” Friedenbach said. “They literally have nowhere to go so when these operations happen, the [sweeps] typically exasperate homelessness and make it worse.”
Breed and Bass have both advocated for more access to affordable housing and shelter. In 2022, the California Department of Housing and Community Development found that by 2030, at least 2.5 million new homes need to be built, with at least 1 million of those going to lower-income families.
Inaction has broad economic repercussions. The National Alliance to End Homelessness found in 2017 that a chronically homeless person costs the taxpayer an average of $35,578 per year, costs that are reduced by nearly half when the person is placed in supportive housing.
One solution is more interim housing, said Adrian Covert, senior vice president of public policy at the nonprofit Bay Area Council.
“We know that we cannot build permanent housing in California faster than the rate at which our broken housing market is creating homeless people through our housing shortage,” Covert told CNBC. “You have to have someplace for them to go so they don’t endure that trauma on the street. And that’s where interim housing comes into play.”
WATCH: California responds to Supreme Court ruling on encampments
California
Up to 20 billionaires may leave California over tax threat | Fox Business Video
California Congressman Darrell Issa discusses reports that as many as 20 billionaires could leave the state amid concerns over a proposed new wealth tax which critics say is driving high-net-worth taxpayers out of California on ‘The Evening Edit.’
California
California’s exodus isn’t just billionaires — it’s regular people renting U-Hauls, too
It isn’t just billionaires leaving California.
Anecdotal data suggest there is also an exodus of regular people who load their belongings into rental trucks and lug them to another state.
U-Haul’s survey of the more than 2.5 million one-way trips using its vehicles in the U.S. last year showed that the gap between the number of people leaving and the number arriving was higher in California than in any other state.
While the Golden State also attracts a large number of newcomers, it has had the biggest net outflow for six years in a row.
Generally, the defectors don’t go far. The top five destinations for the diaspora using U-Haul’s trucks, trailers and boxes last year were Arizona, Nevada, Oregon, Washington and Texas.
California experienced a net outflow of U-Haul users with an in-migration of 49.4%, and those leaving of 50.6%. Massachusetts, New York, New Jersey and Illinois also rank among the bottom five on the index.
U-Haul didn’t speculate on the reasons California continues to top the ranking.
“We continue to find that life circumstances — marriage, children, a death in the family, college, jobs and other events — dictate the need for most moves,” John Taylor, U-Haul International president, said in a press statement.
While California’s exodus was greater than any other state, the silver lining was that the state lost fewer residents to out-of-state migration in 2025 than in 2024.
U-Haul said that broadly the hotly debated issue of blue-to-red state migration, which became more pronounced after the pandemic of 2020, continues to be a discernible trend.
Though U-Haul did not specify the reasons for the exodus, California demographers tracking the trend point to the cost of living and housing affordability as the top reasons for leaving.
“Over the last dozen years or so, on a net basis, the flow out of the state because of housing [affordability] far exceeds other reasons people cite [including] jobs or family,” said Hans Johnson, senior fellow at the Public Policy Institute of California.
“This net out migration from California is a more than two-decade-long trend. And again, we’re a big state, so the net out numbers are big,” he said.
U-Haul data showed that there was a pretty even split between arrivals and departures. While the company declined to share absolute numbers, it said that 50.6% of its one-way customers in California were leaving, while 49.4% were arriving.
U-Haul’s network of 24,000 rental locations across the U.S. provides a near-real-time view of domestic migration dynamics, while official data on population movements often lags.
California’s population grew by a marginal 0.05% in the year ending July 2025, reaching 39.5 million people, according to the California Department of Finance.
After two consecutive years of population decline following the 2020 pandemic, California recorded its third year of population growth in 2025. While international migration has rebounded, the number of California residents moving out increased to 216,000, consistent with levels in 2018 and 2019.
Eric McGhee, senior fellow at the Public Policy Institute of California, who researches the challenges facing California, said there’s growing evidence of political leanings shaping the state’s migration patterns, with those moving out of state more likely to be Republican and those moving in likely to be Democratic.
“Partisanship probably is not the most significant of these considerations, but it may be just the last straw that broke the camel’s back, on top of the other things that are more traditional drivers of migration … cost of living and family and friends and jobs,” McGhee said.
Living in California costs 12.6% more than the national average, according to the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis. One of the biggest pain points in the state is housing, which is 57.8% more expensive than what the average American pays.
The U-Haul study across all 50 states found that 7 of the top 10 growth states where people moved to have Republican governors. Nine of the states with the biggest net outflows had Democrat governors.
Texas, Florida and North Carolina were the top three growth states for U-Haul customers, with Dallas, Houston and Austin bagging the top spots for growth in metro regions.
A notable exception in California was San Diego and San Francisco, which were the only California cities in the top 25 metros with a net inflow of one-way U-Haul customers.
California
California loses $160M for delaying revocation of 17,000 commercial driver’s licenses for immigrants
California will lose $160 million for delaying the revocations of 17,000 commercial driver’s licenses for immigrants, federal transportation officials announced Wednesday.
Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy already withheld $40 million in federal funding because he said California isn’t enforcing English proficiency requirements for truckers.
The state notified these drivers in the fall that they would lose their licenses after a federal audit found problems that included licenses for truckers and bus drivers that remained valid long after an immigrant’s visa expired. Some licenses were also given to citizens of Mexico and Canada who don’t qualify. More than one-quarter of the small sample of California licenses that investigators reviewed were unlawful.
But then last week California said it would delay those revocations until March after immigrant groups sued the state because of concerns that some groups were being unfairly targeted. Duffy said the state was supposed to revoke those licenses by Monday.
Duffy is pressuring California and other states to make sure immigrants who are in the country illegally aren’t granted the licenses.
“Our demands were simple: follow the rules, revoke the unlawfully-issued licenses to dangerous foreign drivers, and fix the system so this never happens again,” Duffy said in a written statement. “(Gov.) Gavin Newsom has failed to do so — putting the needs of illegal immigrants over the safety of the American people.”
Newsom’s office did not immediately respond after the action was announced Wednesday afternoon.
After Duffy objected to the delay in revocations, Newsom posted on X that the state believed federal officials were open to a delay after a meeting on Dec. 18. But in the official letter the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration sent Wednesday, federal officials said they never agreed to the delay and still expected the 17,000 licenses to be revoked by this week.
Enforcement ramped up after fatal crashes
The federal government began cracking down during the summer. The issue became prominent after a truck driver who was not authorized to be in the U.S. made an illegal U-turn and caused a crash in Florida that killed three people in August.
Duffy previously threatened to withhold millions of dollars in federal funding from California, Pennsylvania, Minnesota, New York, Texas, South Dakota, Colorado, and Washington after audits found significant problems under the existing rules, including commercial licenses being valid long after an immigrant truck driver’s work permit expired. He had dropped the threat to withhold nearly $160 million from California after the state said it would revoke the licenses.
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration Administrator Derek Barrs said California failed to live up to the promise it made in November to revoke all the flawed licenses by Jan. 5. The agency said the state also unilaterally decide to delay until March the cancellations of roughly 4,700 additional unlawful licenses that were discovered after the initial ones were found.
“We will not accept a corrective plan that knowingly leaves thousands of drivers holding noncompliant licenses behind the wheel of 80,000-pound trucks in open defiance of federal safety regulations,” Barrs said.
Industry praises the enforcement
Trucking trade groups have praised the effort to get unqualified drivers who shouldn’t have licenses or can’t speak English off the road. They also applauded the Transportation Department’s moves to go after questionable commercial driver’s license schools.
“For too long, loopholes in this program have allowed unqualified drivers onto our highways, putting professional truckers and the motoring public at risk,” said Todd Spencer, president of the Owner Operator Independent Drivers Association.
The spotlight has been on Sikh truckers because the driver in the Florida crash and the driver in another fatal crash in California in October are both Sikhs. So the Sikh Coalition, a national group defending the civil rights of Sikhs, and the San Francisco-based Asian Law Caucus filed a class-action lawsuit on behalf of the California drivers. They said immigrant truck drivers were being unfairly targeted.
Immigrants account for about 20% of all truck drivers, but these non-domiciled licenses immigrants can receive only represent about 5% of all commercial driver’s licenses or about 200,000 drivers. The Transportation Department also proposed new restrictions that would severely limit which noncitizens could get a license, but a court put the new rules on hold.
-
Detroit, MI5 days ago2 hospitalized after shooting on Lodge Freeway in Detroit
-
Technology3 days agoPower bank feature creep is out of control
-
Dallas, TX4 days agoDefensive coordinator candidates who could improve Cowboys’ brutal secondary in 2026
-
Health5 days agoViral New Year reset routine is helping people adopt healthier habits
-
Nebraska2 days agoOregon State LB transfer Dexter Foster commits to Nebraska
-
Iowa3 days agoPat McAfee praises Audi Crooks, plays hype song for Iowa State star
-
Nebraska3 days agoNebraska-based pizza chain Godfather’s Pizza is set to open a new location in Queen Creek
-
Entertainment2 days agoSpotify digs in on podcasts with new Hollywood studios