'Taylen and Wyatt's Law' Passes Committee With Amendments
(FOX40.COM) — On Tuesday, April 22, the family of the two brothers attacked by a mountain lion in El Dorado County took their grief to the Capitol in support of a Senate bill that could potentially save others from a similar tragedy.
But things didn't go as they'd hoped.
Brothers Taylen and Wyatt Brooks, avid outdoorsmen, were attacked by a mountain lion in broad daylight over a year ago.
Brothers attacked by mountain lion in Northern California identified
The lion severely injured Wyatt, biting him in the face. The lion then turned to Taylen, lunged at his throat, and dragged him to the ground. The brothers fought for their lives, but deputies ultimately found Taylen deceased.
On Tuesday, surviving brother, Wyatt, and his family took to the Senate Natural Resources and Water Committee for another fight, advocating for SB818, otherwise known as 'Taylen and Wyatt's law'.
'This landed on the family like like a nuclear bomb,' Malcolm Brooks, Wyatt and Taylen's Uncle, told reporters. 'It sort of just galvanized us to make sure that what happened to Wyatt and what happened to Taylen is not just something that becomes a footnote in a history book.'
The proposal would establish a pilot program in El Dorado County, allowing houndspersons with an annual hazing permit to use hounds to haze mountain lions. Their goal is to reduce attacks on residents and livestock, all while restoring the apex predator's fear of humans.
Mountain lions are protected under California law, making it illegal to hunt, capture, or kill them.
Stolen vehicle with military-grade munition found in Northern California
Republican State Senator Marie Alvarado-Gil (R-Jackson) represents El Dorado County and authored the bill.
'This is not an open season to hunt mountain lions,' Sen. Alvarado-Gil, (R)-Jackson, said. 'This is a step to study the behavior of mountain lions in El Dorado County that has led to a fatal killing of one of our beloved community members.'
Several in attendance supported the proposal, but a notable number also spoke in opposition.
'SB 818 is illegal, ineffective, and runs contrary to the best science of how people and livestock can live safely in El Dorado County,' Sharon Negri, co-founder of Mountain Lion Foundation, said. 'The people of El Dorado County deserve solutions that actually work.'
'We shouldn't be making policy on one incident,' Beth Pratt, California Regional Executive Director for the National Wildlife Federation, tells FOX40. 'We should be making policy to help prevent patterns of incidents where we find scientific solutions that can do that.'
The proposal has passed the committee with big amendments, including the removal of hounding, and instead requires the California Department of Fish and Wildlife to create a broader conflict reduction plan including education, grants for protective measures, and continued research.
The State Senator, Brooks family, and Sheriff of El Dorado County shared frustration.
'The bill, as it was in its original language, was a good bill,' Jeff Leikauf, Sheriff of El Dorado County, says.
'I am ashamed and I am angry today because I stand here with a family who has entrusted their elected leaders to make a decision to save lives, not a decision to save their re-election campaigns,' the Sen. continued.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
30 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Kilmar Abrego Garcia pleads not guilty to human smuggling charges in Tennessee federal court
NASHVILLE, Tenn. (AP) — Kilmar Abrego Garcia, whose mistaken deportation has become a flashpoint in President Donald Trump's immigration crackdown, pleaded not guilty on Friday to human smuggling charges in a federal court in Tennessee. The plea was the first chance the Maryland construction worker has had in a U.S. courtroom to answer the Trump administration's allegations against him since he was mistakenly deported in March to a notorious prison in El Salvador. The Republican administration returned Abrego Garcia to the U.S. last week to face criminal charges related to what it said was a human smuggling operation that transported immigrants across the country. The charges stem from a 2022 traffic stop in Tennessee during which Abrego Garcia was driving a vehicle with nine passengers. His lawyers have called the allegations 'preposterous.' Friday's hearing will also focus on whether Abrego Garcia should be released from jail while awaiting trial on the smuggling charges. A federal judge will hear arguments from Abrego Garcia's lawyers and attorneys for the U.S. government. Before the hearing began in Nashville, Abrego Garcia's wife told a crowd outside a church that Thursday marked three months since the Trump administration 'abducted and disappeared my husband and separated him from our family.' Her voice choked with emotion, Jennifer Vasquez Sura said she saw her husband for the first time on Thursday. She said, 'Kilmar wants you to have faith,' and asked the people supporting him and his family ''to continue fighting, and I will be victorious because God is with us.'' Abrego Garcia is a citizen of El Salvador who had been living in the United States for more than a decade before he was wrongfully deported by the Trump administration. The expulsion violated a 2019 U.S. immigration judge's order that shielded him from deportation to his native country because he likely faced gang persecution there. While the Trump administration described the mistaken removal as 'an administrative error,' officials have continued to justify it by insisting Abrego Garcia was a member of the MS-13 gang. His wife and attorneys have denied the allegations, saying he's simply a construction worker and family man. U.S. attorneys have asked U.S. Magistrate Judge Barbara Holmes to keep Abrego Garcia in jail, describing him as a danger to the community and a flight risk. Abrego Garcia's attorneys disagree, pointing out he was already wrongly detained in a notorious Salvadoran prison thanks to government error and arguing due process and 'basic fairness' require him to be set free. The charges against Abrego Garcia are human smuggling. But in their request to keep Abrego Garcia in jail, U.S. attorneys also accuse him of trafficking drugs and firearms and of abusing the women he transported, among other claims, although he is not charged with such crimes. The U.S. attorneys also accuse Abrego Garcia of taking part in a murder in El Salvador. However, none of those allegations is part of the charges against him, and at his initial appearance June 6, the judge warned prosecutors she cannot detain someone based solely on allegations. One of Abrego Garcia's attorneys last week characterized the claims as a desperate attempt by the Trump administration to justify the mistaken deportation three months after the fact. 'There's no way a jury is going to see the evidence and agree that this sheet metal worker is the leader of an international MS-13 smuggling conspiracy,' private attorney Simon Sandoval-Moshenberg said. In a Wednesday court filing, Abrego Garcia's public defenders argued the government is not even entitled to a detention hearing — much less detention — because the charges against him aren't serious enough. Although the maximum sentence for smuggling one person is 10 years, and Abrego Garcia is accused of transporting hundreds of people over nearly a decade, his defense attorneys point out there's no minimum sentence. The average sentence for human smuggling in 2024 was just 15 months, according to court filings. The decision to charge Abrego Garcia criminally prompted the resignation of Ben Schrader, who was chief of the criminal division at the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Middle District of Tennessee. He posted about his departure on social media on the day of the indictment, writing, 'It has been an incredible privilege to serve as a prosecutor with the Department of Justice, where the only job description I've ever known is to do the right thing, in the right way, for the right reasons.' He did not directly address the indictment and declined to comment when reached by The Associated Press. However, a person familiar with the matter who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss a personnel matter confirmed the connection. Although Abrego Garcia lives in Maryland, he's being charged in Tennessee based on a May 2022 traffic stop for speeding in the state. The Tennessee Highway Patrol body camera video of the encounter that was released to the public last month shows a calm exchange between officers and Abrego Garcia. It also shows the officers discussing among themselves their suspicions of human smuggling before sending him on his way. One of the officers says, 'He's hauling these people for money.' Another says Abrego Garcia had $1,400 in an envelope. Abrego Garcia was not charged with any offense at the traffic stop. Sandoval-Moshenberg, the private attorney, said in a statement after the video's release that he saw no evidence of a crime in the footage. Meanwhile, the lawsuit over Abrego Garcia's mistaken deportation isn't over. Abrego Garcia's attorneys have asked a federal judge in Maryland to impose fines against the Trump administration for contempt, arguing that it flagrantly ignored court orders forseveral weeks to return him. The Trump administration said it will ask the judge to dismiss the lawsuit, arguing that it followed the judge's order to return him to the U.S. ___ This story has been corrected to show the Trump administration said that the human smuggling operation transported immigrants across the country, not that it brought immigrants into the country illegally. ___ Finley reported from Norfolk, Va.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Judge blocks Trump's election executive order, siding with Democrats who called it overreach
ATLANTA (AP) — A federal judge on Friday blocked President Donald Trump's attempt to overhaul elections in the U.S., siding with a group of Democratic state attorneys general who challenged the effort as unconstitutional. The Republican president's March 25 executive order sought to compel officials to require documentary proof of citizenship for everyone registering to vote for federal elections, accept only mailed ballots received by Election Day and condition federal election grant funding on states adhering to the new ballot deadline. The attorneys general said the directive 'usurps the States' constitutional power and seeks to amend election law by fiat.' The White House defended the order as 'standing up for free, fair and honest elections' and called proof of citizenship a 'commonsense' requirement. Judge Denise J. Casper of the U.S. District Court in Massachusetts said in Friday's order that the states had a likelihood of success as to their legal challenges. 'The Constitution does not grant the President any specific powers over elections,' Casper wrote. Casper also noted that, when it comes to citizenship, 'there is no dispute (nor could there be) that U.S. citizenship is required to vote in federal elections and the federal voter registration forms require attestation of citizenship.' Casper cited arguments made by the states that the requirements would 'burden the States with significant efforts and substantial costs' to update procedures. Messages seeking a response from the White House and Department of Justice were not immediately returned. The ruling is the second legal setback for Trump's election order. A federal judge in Washington, D.C., previously blocked parts of the directive, including the proof-of-citizenship requirement for the federal voter registration form. The order is the culmination of Trump's longstanding complaints about elections. After his first win in 2016, Trump falsely claimed his popular vote total would have been much higher if not for 'millions of people who voted illegally.' Since 2020, Trump has made false claims of widespread voter fraud and manipulation of voting machines to explain his loss to Democrat Joe Biden. He has said his executive order secures elections against illegal voting by noncitizens, though multiple studies and investigations in the states have shown that it's rare and typically a mistake. Casting a ballot as a noncitizen is already against the law and can result in fines and deportation if convicted. Also blocked in Friday's ruling was part of the order that sought to require states to exclude any mail-in or absentee ballots received after Election Day. Currently, 18 states and Puerto Rico accept mailed ballots received after Election Day as long they are postmarked on or before that date, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. Oregon and Washington, which conduct their elections almost entirely by mail, filed a separate lawsuit over the ballot deadline, saying the executive order could disenfranchise voters in their states. When the lawsuit was filed, Washington Secretary of State Steve Hobbs noted that more than 300,000 ballots in the state arrived after Election Day in 2024. Trump's order has received praise from the top election officials in some Republican states who say it could inhibit instances of voter fraud and will give them access to federal data to better maintain their voter rolls. But many legal experts say the order exceeds Trump's power because the Constitution gives states the authority to set the 'times, places and manner' of elections, with Congress allowed to set rules for elections to federal office. As Friday's ruling states, the Constitution makes no provision for presidents to set the rules for elections. During a hearing earlier this month on the states' request for a preliminary injunction, lawyers for the states and lawyers for the administration argued over the implications of Trump's order, whether the changes could be made in time for next year's midterm elections and how much it would cost the states. Justice Department lawyer Bridget O'Hickey said during the hearing that the order seeks to provide a single set of rules for certain aspects of election operations rather than having a patchwork of state laws and that any harm to the states is speculation. O'Hickey also claimed that mailed ballots received after Election Day might somehow be manipulated, suggesting people could retrieve their ballots and alter their votes based on what they see in early results. But all ballots received after Election Day require a postmark showing they were sent on or before that date, and that any ballot with a postmark after Election Day would not count. Christina A. Cassidy, The Associated Press
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Longtime Newport News treasurer files as an Independent
NEWPORT NEWS, Va. (WAVY) — Longtime Newport News Treasurer Marty Eubank will seek re-election as an independent. Eubank filed paperwork and qualified with the Department of Voter Registration in May. For nearly three decades, Eubank has served as the Newport News treasurer. In March 2025, Eubank shared exclusively with WAVY-TV 10 that he would not seek re-election. Previous: Longtime Newport News treasurer will not seek reelection; 3 candidates enter race 'I did not have a change of heart. I have worked for the city for 41 years. I've been the longest-serving treasurer of 28 years for Newport News. I'm very proud of that. I very much looked forward to retiring this year,' he said. 'I did everything I could to position myself to run in this campaign for one more term. But after I met Sanu Dieng-Cooper, I talked to her and realized what a perfect candidate she would be to be my successor, which is something I've been looking for the past few years! She impressed me with her ideas, her vision, her knowledge of the office already, and her understanding of what it does. I realized she'd be the perfect candidate to win the Democratic primary. That's when I decided to bow out of the primary. I fully support Sanu. I 100% still endorse being the next Treasurer of Newport News. I'm confident that the voters will see how qualified she is. They will support and vote for her on June 17.' Your Local Election Headquarters on The Newport News Department of Voter Registration confirms that Sanu Dieng-Cooper and Derek Reason are the Democratic candidates for the June primary. There are no Republican candidates. Justin Kennedy, an independent candidate for treasurer, will appear on the November 4th ballot. Eubank told 10 On Your Side he filed as an independent following the 2025 NAACP Newport News Candidate Forum on April 30. 'I am confident she [Sanu] will win the Primary. But you can't predict an election, and that 1% off chance that Sanu might not win. Then I position myself to come back into the general election,' said Eubank. 'After watching the NAACP forum and listening to both sides, I was in the audience. I became concerned that Sanu Cooper has to be elected as our next treasurer. She has to!' Eubank also received a Freedom of Information (FOIA) request regarding the legitimacy of one of the candidates' businesses. WAVY-TV 10 received an independent copy of the FOIA from the Newport News Office of the Commissioner of the Revenue, which states the business in question 'does not hold a City of Newport News business license, as such a license is not required for the type of activity this business performs. The USDOT number associated with this business is currently listed as inactive in the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) database. The business's status with the Virginia State Corporation Commission (SCC) is also listed as inactive per SCC records.' asked Eubank about 'integrity' following the recent filing. 'I'm doing it for the right reason, not the wrong reason. I'm not going back on my word. I still fully support Sanu. I fully expect her to win. She has my 100% endorsement. Come June 17, I will be by her side celebrating. But I am trying only to position myself [just] in case. Elections can be unpredictable in the event that 1% off the chance the Sanu is not elected. I will be here to protect this office,' said Eubank. Eubank urges residents to watch the candidate interviews and forum to 'judge for yourself.' 'I have always been a Democrat. I will always be a Democrat. I view myself at this point as an Independent-Democrat, but I'm doing what I have to do. I'm doing this for the right reasons. For the citizens of Newport News,' he said. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
