Tag: california

California “Hate Speech” Bill Would Crush Dissent

If enacted and it somehow clears legal challenges, California Senate Bill 771 will be the first online censorship law of its kind in America. It would also likely pave a path for other states run by people with no tolerance for dissent.    

On September 22, the California Legislature sent SB 771 to Governor Gavin Newsom. He has until October 13 to sign it. If he doesn’t veto or sign the proposal, it becomes law anyway.

Mainstream media outlets claim that SB 771 “targets social media platforms for the role they could play in aiding and abetting in hate crimes by pushing content that could lead to a hate crime.”

The bill allows people to sue social-media companies for up to $1 million per violation. If the litigant is a minor, the fine could double.

Tucker Carlson’s analysis of the bill is more accurate than the mainstream media’s. Carlson:

That’s a censorship law.… The state of California, under Gavin Newsom, is about to — we think — censor the opinions of Americans, not to protect anybody, but to shield themselves from criticism so they continue to do what they want to do in secret.

Coerced Censorship

The bill uses broad terms that make it easy to justify censorship. It reads:

California law prohibits all persons and entities, including corporations, from engaging in, aiding, abetting, or conspiring to commit acts of violence, intimidation, or coercion based on race, religion, gender, sexual orientation, immigration status, or other protected characteristics.

Merriam Webster defines “intimidated” as “to make timid or fearful.” Synonyms include “bully” and “frighten.” Fear and intimidation are subjective emotions that have significantly increased among America’s younger and more unstable generations. People are swimming in pools of victimhood and mental illness today. We constantly hear about a spike in anxiety. What happens when we create laws that allow litigation on the basis of largely subjective emotions?

But the more likely primary intent here is to coerce social-media companies into pre-censoring. The senior vice president of social-media company Parler, Elise Pierotti, said of the bill:

SB 771 isn’t about protecting civil rights, it’s California’s brazen attempt to export its one-party censorship regime to every corner of the internet. This bill hands Sacramento the power to bully platforms into preemptively scrubbing dissent on everything from border security to parental rights. We’ve seen Big Tech abuse vague “hate speech” rules to throttle conservatives for years, including shutting down our platform in 2021; now, lawmakers want to make it mandatory with teeth-shattering fines. This must be stopped before it buries the First Amendment.

Shoshana Weissmann, director of digital media at the R Street Institute, also suspects this is the drafter’s main agenda. She told the Daily Caller that “rather than risk liability for showing users content one could argue (even if it doesn’t actually) violate a law, platforms will over-moderate and remove posts in order to stay out of court.”

Keep reading

Newsom Blocks Firefighter Pay Raise After Record Wildfire

California Governor Gavin Newsom on Friday vetoed a bipartisan bill, designed to give raises to California state firefighters, only nine months after the state’s most expensive wildfire raged through Los Angeles.

The raise would have bumped their salaries by between 11 and 29 percent. 

Current base pay for state firefighters is $54,122 per year, while Los Angeles city firefighters make $85,315.

Governor Newsom argued that the bill would create “significant cost pressures for the state” and undermine collective bargaining power for salary increases. “Establishing a statutory floor for employees of a single department undermines this process, to the detriment of both the state and other bargaining units,” Newsom wrote.  

Union members condemned the governor’s decision.

“Cal Fire is an all-risk fire department, just like a San Francisco Fire Department or Santa Rosa or San Jose Fire Department,” Tim Edwards, the president of the Local 2881 union representing CAL FIRE workers, said. “We don’t have the staffing like they do. We don’t have the workweek like they do, and we definitely don’t have to pay like they do, but we do the exact same job at the exact same training, and we’re expected to do the exact same, the exact same services.”

Keep reading

More Left-Wing Terrorism: Palisades Arsonist Jonathan Rinderknecht Donated to Joe Biden and Kamala Harris

More left-wing terrorism.

Federal prosecutors on Wednesday announced that 29-year-old Jonathan Rinderknecht of Orlando, Florida, was arrested for intentionally setting the Palisades fire.

Rinderknecht was an Uber driver at the time he intentionally set the fire.

Earlier this year in January, fires exploded in Los Angeles after LA Mayor Karen Bass cut firefighting funds.

Prosecutors said Rinderknecht intentionally set the fire in January which left 12 people dead and caused more than $150 billion in damage.

According to FEC records, Rinderknecht donated to Joe Biden and Kamala Harris in 2020.

The New York Post reported:

The Uber driver accused of sparking the most destructive wildfire in Los Angeles history chipped in a small donation to Joe Biden’s 2020 presidential campaign, records revealed.

Jonathan Rinderknecht, 29, shelled out $2 to hybrid PAC ActBlue on two separate occasions just days apart in 2020 – $1 on Sept. 4 and another buck on Sept. 11, according to the Federal Election Commission.

Records also show the alleged Palisades Fire arsonist — born in France — was registered to vote in Florida, though he never declared a political party.

Per Fox News reporter Matt Finn: Jonathan Rinderknecht asked Chat GPT last July to create this “dystopian” image that shows a forest burning on the left and people running from it. In the middle, people in “poverty.” On the right, the rich watching the world burn.

Keep reading

Deadly Palisades Fire set ‘maliciously’ by Florida firebug Jonathan Rinderknecht, feds say

A 29-year-old Biden-supporting Uber driver obsessed with images of fire has been charged with setting a blaze that later grew into the Palisades Fire, authorities said Wednesday — nine months after the most destructive wildfire in Los Angeles history erupted.

Jonathan Rinderknecht, 29, is accused of “maliciously” sparking a brush fire on Jan. 1. That fire was knocked down by the Los Angeles fire department, but continued to smolder unnoticed, underground for days before high winds rekindled it into the raging Palisades inferno, federal prosecutors said.

The Palisades Fire left 12 people dead, destroyed nearly 7,000 homes and businesses and caused about $150 billion in damages.

Rinderknecht, who lived in the area at some point, allegedly ignited the flames near a popular hiking trail in the hillside of a state park at about 12:12 a.m. on New Year’s Day – just moments after dropping off his Uber passengers nearby, federal prosecutors said.

Keep reading

Katie Porter Has Bizarre Meltdown During California Governor Candidate Interview

Democrat former Rep. Katie Porter, running for California governor, had a bizarre meltdown during a pre-recorded interview with CBS Sacramento affiliate KOVR-TV reporter Julie Watts that was released Monday and went viral Tuesday.

Porter served three terms in Congress, from 2019 to 2025, leaving her House seat to run what turned out to be a losing Senate bid in the 2024 jungle primary. Porter, who became notable for her use of a whiteboard in House hearings, is currently the leading candidate for governor–polling around 20 percent support in a crowded field of Democrats, Republicans, third party and independents.

Watts interviewed eleven candidates running in next year’s jungle primary for governor to be held on June 2. The two top vote getters regardless of party advance to the general election on November 3, 2026.

The candidates were asked the same questions, with Porter melting down over being asked if she needs the votes of the forty percent of Californians who voted for President Donald Trump last year.

Keep reading

California Governor Vetoes Bill Mandating New Health Curriculum for Elementary and Middle Schools

California Gov. Gavin Newsom has vetoed a bill that would have directed the State Board of Education to approve new teaching for health classes in elementary and middle schools.

The bill, sponsored by Assemblywoman Tasha Boerner, a Democrat who represents Encinitas, California, sought to compel the State Board of Education to finalize health education resources by mid-2028. These materials were to follow the guidelines set in a 2019 statewide plan for health instruction.

In explaining his choice, Newsom said the bill should be considered only after finishing an ongoing evaluation of health teaching programs across California. This study aims to assess current practices and identify potential improvements before mandating new tools.

According to opponents of the measure, implementing the bill could lead to introducing lessons as early as third grade that teach children that reproductive organs do not always align with an individual’s sense of gender.

“Teaching controversial gender theories to students as young as eight or nine years old is not a practice that most Californians support, nor want to see happening in our schools,” state Senate Minority Leader Brian Jones, a Republican from Santee, wrote in a Sept. 26 letter to the governor, urging him to veto the bill.

Jones, in his letter, wrote that the 2019 health framework “introduces the theory that reproductive anatomy does not necessarily determine a person’s gender.”

Keep reading

California’s Vague ‘Hate Speech’ Bill Would Force Big Tech To Censor Mainstream Conservative Views

alifornia lawmakers are once again leading the charge — not toward progress, but toward repression. Their latest move, Senate Bill 771 (SB-771), is being packaged as a bold stand against “hate” on social media. In reality, it’s a direct assault on the free expression and constitutionally protected speech of ministries, minority groups, and faith-based organizations.

The bill would force Big Tech to remove content that could be interpreted as “harassment” or “intimidation” based on race, gender identity, sexual orientation, and more — or face financially devastating lawsuits.

If Gov. Gavin Newsom signs this bill into law as expected, it will become one of the most dangerous speech-restricting laws in the country. Cloaked in the language of civil rights, SB-771 is built to punish dissent from progressive orthodoxy.

The target is anyone who dares to speak publicly about values or perspectives that conflict with the state’s ever-expanding list of protected identities. In practice, this means community groups sharing discussions on traditional family structures, cultural views on gender roles, or advocacy for certain social issues may find themselves silenced — not by law enforcement, but by tech giants eager to avoid legal risk.

The bills says:

California law prohibits all persons and entities, including corporations, from engaging in, aiding, abetting, or conspiring to commit acts of violence, intimidation, or coercion based on race, religion, gender, sexual orientation, immigration status, or other protected characteristics.

 3273.73. (a) A social media platform that violates Section 51.7, 51.9, 52, or 52.1 through its algorithms that relay content to users or aids, abets, acts in concert, or conspires in a violation of any of those sections, or is a joint tortfeasor in a violation of any of those sections, shall, in addition to any other remedy, be liable to a prevailing plaintiff for a civil penalty for each violation sufficient to deter future violations but not to exceed the following:

(1) For an intentional, knowing, or willful violation, a civil penalty of up to one million dollars

(2) For a reckless violation, a civil penalty of up to five hundred thousand dollars.


This language may appear just, but its sweeping terms — “intimidation,” “coercion,” even “aiding” — are dangerously vague. In the hands of ideologically motivated actors, they can be weaponized to silence constitutionally protected discourse under the guise of enforcing civil rights.

That’s the chilling brilliance of SB-771: it outsources censorship to the private sector under threat of state-enforced financial ruin. The law doesn’t need to directly ban speech — it just makes the cost of hosting it too high for Big Tech to tolerate. This will especially impact small ministries, minority-led organizations, and faith-based nonprofits with limited legal or technical resources. For them, one flagged post — perhaps a cultural reference taken out of context — could mean being shadow-banned or deplatformed altogether.

Keep reading

Gavin Newsom Just Gave California’s 800,000 Uber and Lyft Drivers a One-Way Ticket to the Unemployment Line

California Governor Gavin Newsom just gave his state’s Uber and Lyft drivers a one way ticket to the unemployment line.

Newsom signed a landmark agreement on Friday that would allow Uber and Lyft drivers to form a union.

The Democrat said at a press conference that the unionization deal will offer ride-hailing drivers a “voice, to give them choice, give them dignity and a say about their future.”

“I say that because it needs to be said: I’m not naive about how people are feeling about their future,” he explained.

California has become the second state in the nation, after Massachusetts, to allow Uber and Lyft drivers to unite at an industry level to negotiate for higher pay and benefits, such as health coverage.

The arrangement was finalized in August through talks between Democratic lawmakers in Sacramento, SEIU union officials, and representatives from Uber and Lyft.

The measure, known as AB 1340, was introduced by Assemblymembers Buffy Wicks and Marc Berman and sponsored by SEIU California.

It establishes rules that allow app-based drivers to bargain collectively for improved wages and access to employee-style benefits, including health insurance.

Yet sadly, it does not take a genius to work out that all Newsom is condemning the state’s 800,000 Uber and Lyft drivers to losing their jobs altogether.

Companies such as Uber and Lyft are already aggressively driving down the wages earned by their drivers as part of their efforts to become profitable.

The decline in wages is also linked to the exploding popularity of ride-sharing as a profession, in many cases embraced by immigrants and people who are searching for more permanent work.

Nowadays, most long-time drivers reminisce about the “glory days” when they could earn a respectable living from their work.

Keep reading

California County Reinstates Mask Mandate in Certain Health Care Facilities

A county health officer in California issued an order requiring masking in acute care facilities starting on Nov. 1, an order authorities attribute to rising seasonal respiratory illnesses.

The mandate, which lasts until March 31 of next year, requires the use of face masks by people in acute care facilities, skilled nursing facilities, surgical and maternity centers, and infusion centers such as dialysis and chemotherapy centers, during respiratory virus season, not including patients.

“These respiratory viruses can cause serious illness, particularly in vulnerable groups such as infants, older adults, pregnant individuals, and those with weakened immune systems,” Lisa Hernandez, the Santa Cruz County public health officer, said in a statement. “This order aims to reduce the spread of these viruses and protect those most at risk from severe outcomes, including hospitalization and death.”

Santa Cruz County is located to the south of San Jose and other cities that make up Silicon Valley in California.

Last fall, officials in counties around California’s San Francisco Bay Area implemented similar mask mandates in health care facilities that lasted from Nov. 1, 2024, to April 2025.

An official in California’s Yolo County said last month that residents were advised to wear masks indoors because of COVID-19.

“Based on current wastewater levels of the virus that causes COVID-19, I recommend that everybody in West Sacramento wear a mask when they are around others in indoor public spaces,” Aimee Sisson, the Yolo County health officer, said in the statement.

The most recent data released by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) show that the rates of positive tests and emergency department visits across the United States are continuing to fall.

Positive tests fell to 6.7 percent for the week ending Sept. 27, down from 9.6 percent during the previous week, according to the data. The percentage of emergency visits for COVID-19 fell from 1 percent to 0.7 percent.

Nineteen states are experiencing “high” or “very high” levels of COVID-19, according to wastewater data reviewed by the CDC. Connecticut, Delaware, Nevada, and Utah are seeing the highest levels.

“COVID-19 activity has peaked and is declining in many areas of the country, but emergency department visits and hospitalizations are elevated nationally,” the CDC said in a separate statement.

Keep reading

California plan redistributes prime farmland in the name of “equity”

California Governor Gavin Newsom’s “agricultural equity” advisers have a plan to de facto nationalize farmland and redistribute it along largely racial lines.

This is according to a draft document released this summer by the California Agricultural Land Equity Task Force. According to the report, 82% of private farmland in California is owned by white producers; a fact authors blame on “inequities in resource distribution.” Their draft plan lists reparation-style recommendations to disrupt this status quo, restoring “stolen wealth” to the committee’s preferred groups.

California lost 1.6 million acres of farming and grazing land between 1984 and 2018—more than 47,000 acres per year or one square mile every five days. To address this crisis, the task force suggests removing prime farmland from the market altogether.

“In order to protect California’s Prime Farmland and Farmland of Statewide Importance, the Legislature should move to safeguard them in the public domain,” the report states.

By stripping owners of their right to freely sell or transfer farmland, the California government would be able to “halt the problem at the root,” the report claims. A state-funded entity could then buy up available farmland and redistribute it to “priority producers or land stewards”—defined as socially disadvantaged or historically excluded farmers.

The report predicts much of this available farmland will come courtesy of a 2014 California law that regulates water use. The controversial Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) shifted control from landowners to local agencies, giving government the power to dictate water use on private property and to impose fees for groundwater pumping. SGMA forces farmers to stop farming near “overdrafted basins,” in some cases calling for pumping reductions of 20-50% or more.

Keep reading