California
California should respect constitutional rights and stop defying the Supreme Court’s gun rulings
The new year saw the customary barrage of new California gun control laws. The most appalling is Sen. Anthony Portantino’s Senate Bill 2, a rebellious reaction to last year’s U.S. Supreme Court ruling NYSRPA v. Bruen. SB 2 has nothing to do with criminals. Rather, it selectively targets only one group—holders of a license to carry a concealed firearm for self protection (CCW).
SB 2 is one of a flurry of statutes rushed into law by California and a few other states whose purpose is to openly defy Bruen, which confirms that the “and bear” arms part of the Second Amendment means what it says. Already, these Bruen tantrum laws are being struck down in federal court appeals. SB 2 is now partially enjoined pending appeal. But the purpose of these laws is clear — first, to make California an even more dangerous legal minefield for gun owners and second, to signal defiance of the Supreme Court.
It’s not like there’s been a sudden violent crime wave among California CCW holders. Carry license holders in all states have been documented for decades to actually have a lower crime rate than the general population. In fact, a majority of states don’t even bother anymore requiring a license for law-abiding citizens. Only six states and D.C. still cling to their old licensing systems that consider the right to carry a privilege to carry—often a privilege contingent on being a VIP or contributing money to the political campaign of the right official.
The rebellion of a few lower courts and legislatures against the Supreme Court’s gun rights rulings has dragged on ever since its 2008 D.C. v Heller and 2010 McDonald v Chicago decisions, which struck down bans on handgun possession. Since then the courts in California and other anti-gun rights states have used a fabricated scheme subjecting any new gun control law to a “balancing test.” Thus the Second Amendment becomes “…the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed unless the government thinks it’s really, really important to infringe it.”
For sixteen years now lower courts have played this game of subverting the Supreme Court. The game goes like this—the legislature passes a new, obscure gun law that creates a whole new class of criminals out of people who weren’t criminals before. Then gun rights groups challenge the law in court, and eventually get it overturned. That takes several years and hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal costs. Then the legislature passes a new raft of gun control laws, like the five that just went into effect New Year’s Day. More years pass while they are challenged in court and found unconstitutional. Rinse and repeat.
Meanwhile, several million Californians are put in legal peril as status criminals. Where does it end?
It’s obvious by now that California state officials have no intention of respecting our nation’s highest court. They must be compelled, at long last, to honor the civil right that is the second one listed in our Bill of Rights. And yes, there is precedent.
In 1957, another Democrat governor who openly defied another Supreme Court civil rights decision was compelled by President Eisenhower to allow Black students to attend classes at Little Rock Central High School. So next year, President Donald Trump should deliver an ultimatum to those rogue states who continue to scoff at the Supreme Court’s Bruen, Heller, and McDonald decisions, including California. Sixteen years of rebellion against the Supreme Court is enough.
Timothy Wheeler, a retired surgeon, is Director Emeritus of Doctors for Responsible Gun Ownership
California
California Continues Targeting Food Additives, Dyes With Executive Order on Ultra-Processed Foods
California Governor Gavin Newsom has issued an executive order that mandates state agencies explore the food safety of ultra-processed foods, food dyes, and “generally recognized as safe” (GRAS) ingredients, and recommend actions to mitigate the adverse health effects.
The executive order characterizes ultra-processed foods and ingredients as “industrial formulations of chemically modified substances extracted from foods, along with additives to enhance taste, texture, appearance, and durability, with minimal to no inclusion of whole foods.” Common examples include packaged snacks, chips, crackers, cookies, candy, sugary beverages, and highly processed meats like hot dogs and lunch meats. It also calls attention to the myriad chemicals, such as food colorants, authorized for food use in the U.S., claiming that more than 10,000 such substances are currently present in the U.S. food supply, in comparison to the 300 authorized for use in the EU.
Many food chemicals enter the nation’s food supply through the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA’s) GRAS process, which lawmakers and scientists have criticized as a “loophole” allowing potentially toxic additives in food. In a recent article by Harvard medical and law experts, the authors called GRAS a “laissez-faire approach to monitoring the safety of ingredients” that poses a threat to public health.
In this context, California has passed several precedent-setting pieces of state legislation on chemical food additives and colorants in recent years, such as the California Food Safety Act and the California School Food Safety Act.
Continuing state efforts to crack down on chemical food additives, Gov. Newsom’s latest executive order includes, but is not limited to, the following mandates:
- No later than April 1, 2025, the California Department of Public Health (CDPH) will provide recommendations to the Governor’s office regarding potential actions to limit the harms associated with ultra-processed foods and food ingredients that pose a public health risk (e.g., the inclusion of warning labels on certain ultra-processed foods)
- The Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA), in consultation with CDPH, will investigate the adverse human health impacts of food dyes, and provide a briefing to the Governor’s office no later than April 1
- No later than April 1, CDPH and OEHHA will report to the Governor’s office on the feasibility of state-level evaluation of food additives considered GRAS, as well as state actions that can be taken if companies fail to notify FDA of certain food additives through the GRAS process
The executive order also includes actions aimed at decreasing the purchase of ultra-processed foods; increasing access to healthy foods; and improving the nutrition of and increasing the amount of fresh, local-grown ingredients used in California school meals.
Some groups have previously criticized California’s approach to food additives regulation for leading the charge on an emerging patchwork of state regulations, however. For example, prior to the passage of the California School Food Safety Act, the Consumer Brands Association (CBA) stated, “[The bill] sets a dangerous precedent for state politicians to substitute their own views on food safety ahead of the scientists and risk-based review system that stringently protects America’s food supply. Americans deserve unified guidance that follows the science, not a patchwork of confusing laws.”
California
High wind warning for California for Tuesday and Wednesday, according to the NWS
California
Perry, real-life donkey who inspired iconic 'Shrek' character, dies at 30
Monday, January 6, 2025 12:57AM
Perry, a famous donkey from Palo Alto that helped inspire the movie character “Donkey” in “Shrek,” has died.
PALO ALTO, Calif. — A famous donkey from California that helped inspire the movie character “Donkey” in “Shrek” has died.
Perry was 30 years old.
In an Instagram post, BPDonkeys, wrote on Friday, “We are heartbroken to share that our beloved Barron Park donkey, Perry, passed away yesterday at the age of 30. He was a beloved member of our community and we know many people will be touched by his passing. Memorial plans will be announced soon.”
Perry resided at Cornelis Bol Park in Palo Alto, California and served as a support animal.
Paying for his care, and for the other donkeys, slowly became a point of controversy overtime. The city faced a budget deficit last year. A city councilmember pushed back at paying tens of thousands of dollars.
A memorial will be held for Perry at a later date.
Copyright © 2025 KGO-TV. All Rights Reserved.
-
Health1 week ago
New Year life lessons from country star: 'Never forget where you came from'
-
Technology1 week ago
Meta’s ‘software update issue’ has been breaking Quest headsets for weeks
-
Business6 days ago
These are the top 7 issues facing the struggling restaurant industry in 2025
-
Culture6 days ago
The 25 worst losses in college football history, including Baylor’s 2024 entry at Colorado
-
Sports5 days ago
The top out-of-contract players available as free transfers: Kimmich, De Bruyne, Van Dijk…
-
Politics4 days ago
New Orleans attacker had 'remote detonator' for explosives in French Quarter, Biden says
-
Politics4 days ago
Carter's judicial picks reshaped the federal bench across the country
-
Politics2 days ago
Who Are the Recipients of the Presidential Medal of Freedom?