
Keep that downtown Los Angeles dining reservation. It's safe to go to dinner
It sounded like the alarm for a severe weather warning. At 8:19 p.m. on Monday evening, my phone blared with a public safety alert that a curfew was in place from 10 p.m. to 6 am. in downtown Los Angeles. It came just as I crested the hill on the south 110 Freeway that offers a sweeping view of the city below.
I was on my way to meet a friend for dinner at Kinjiro, a snug izakaya in the heart of Little Tokyo.
The area is one of the downtown neighborhoods most gravely affected by the aftermath of the recent demonstrations protesting President Trump's immigration policies and the ensuing raids.
Mayor Karen Bass' curfew, enacted a week prior in an effort to quell any chaos associated with the demonstrations, meant the streets were empty. It was the latest hurdle in an ever-expanding list of challenges for Los Angeles restaurants, which in the last five years have faced drastic drops in business from a pandemic, Hollywood writers' strikes and fires.
All along 2nd Street, the windows and doors were hidden behind plywood. Graffiti featuring choice words for the police and Immigration and Customs Enforcement covered nearly every surface.
The frequently bustling Japanese Village Plaza, where shoppers dine at a revolving sushi bar and stop for cheese-filled corn dogs, was desolate. When I made it to the izakaya, it was clear that they were closed. The windows had been boarded up and a security gate was pulled across the entrance.
We drove over to Bavel in the Arts District, curious to see if one of the city's most consistently booked restaurants was feeling the effects of the curfew, which covered the area of downtown between the 5 and 10 freeways and from the 10 to where the 110 and 5 freeways merge.
You can probably measure the state of dining in Los Angeles by the fullness of the dining room at Ori Menashe and Genevieve Gergis' Levant-leaning restaurant. A last-minute prime table at 8 p.m. on any other night? No chance. When we arrived as walk-ins, we found a patio that was mostly empty, sparse patrons at the bar and a dining room that felt devoid of the usual Bavel energy. A quick scroll through the week's upcoming reservations on OpenTable showed multiple openings each night.
I drove home past curfew, expecting to see a checkpoint of sorts or maybe even an increased police presence. There wasn't a single police car or protester. All the streets were open.
The 8 p.m. curfew, first issued on June 10, was changed to a 10 p.m. curfew on Monday. On Tuesday, the curfew was lifted altogether, but many downtown restaurants are still struggling to fill their dining rooms.
Just last week, Kato restaurant lost 80% of its reservations. Jon Yao, Ryan Bailey and Nikki Reginaldo's Arts District tasting menu restaurant celebrates Yao's upbringing in the San Gabriel Valley. It was named the No. 1 restaurant on the L.A. Times 101 List three times. Earlier this week, Yao won the James Beard Award for best chef in California. If there's a destination restaurant in downtown Los Angeles, this is it.
On Tuesday, in light of the lifted curfew, the restaurant was still looking at a 70% drop in reservations for the upcoming week.
'The direct impact of the media's portrayal of DTLA being unsafe, which it is not, has impacted Kato immediately, and we were forced to close two nights,' Bailey says.
On Friday, around 20 of the reservations canceled were for dinners booked weeks and months in the future.
'I had two specific instances where the guest called to say they were canceling their upcoming trip to L.A. based on not feeling safe in L.A. anymore,' Bailey says.
'The optimist in me hopes that the curfew, especially given the lifting now, does not cause long-term damage to downtown,' says Cassy Horton, co-founder of the DTLA Residents Assn. The organization works to create a thriving urban community in downtown that supports new and existing residents in the area.
'This is why we have been advocating so strongly to make sure our small businesses can open up,' says Horton. 'We need our neighbors across the region to really rally behind downtown right now because we need their support.'
Hours after the curfew was lifted Tuesday, downtown started to show signs of coming to life again.
Just before 7 p.m., a line began to form at Daikokuya in Little Tokyo. The small ramen shop is known as much for the perpetual wait as it is for its steaming bowls of tonkotsu ramen. It was a hopeful sight during a week of uncertainty, in an area that was the epicenter of the demonstrations.
'We checked with our friends who live right here and we were really mindful about coming tonight,' says Kevin Uyeda. He stood in line for ramen with fellow Echo Park resident Julie M. Leonard, both eager to make the short trip to Little Tokyo for dinner.
'I think there has been a lot of misinformation about the protests and the levels of everything,' says Leonard. 'I don't think the curfew was necessary. Most of the protests were peaceful.'
A few doors down, at Korean restaurant Jincook, the staff removed the boards covering the windows that afternoon.
'It's safe to come here,' says Jincook server Hendrik Su. 'We want people to know that we are open.'
At the Japanese Village Plaza, strollers rolled through the winding walkway with patrons sipping boba. Arts District residents Renee Sogueco and Chris Ciszek carried bags of leftovers from recent stops at Daikokuya and Fugetsu-Do, the more than a 100-year-old mochi and mango confectionery on 1st Street.
'Once we heard the curfew was lifted we wanted to come out,' says Sogueco. 'We've been feeling really bad about it with all the immigrant-owned businesses being affected. Daikokuya was fairly busy, but not as busy as we've seen it.'
Ciszek's parents decided to make the trip out from Virginia to visit, despite friends back home questioning the decision.
'People are seeing a lot of very curated images online,' says Ciszek. 'They don't reflect what's been happening downtown. From what we've seen, the protesters have been happy, dancing, playing music, not violently disruptive.'
I took a short drive west to the South Broadway block that houses Grand Central Market and found people eating tacos on the tables that line the sidewalk. A few locals sipped glasses of wine at nearby Kippered, the wine and tinned fish bar from Lydia Clarke and Reed Herrick.
'With everything boarded up, it doesn't feel inviting for tourists or people to come,' says Clarke. 'We still need people from outside the neighborhood, so people don't forget how great downtown is, how easy it is to come and pop around to a couple of places.'
With the curfew being lifted, many restaurants that closed, temporarily opened for lunch or moved to entirely new locations outside of downtown Los Angeles, started to announce that they would return to regular business operations.
Lasita, the Filipino rotisserie and wine bar in Chinatown, reopened for dinner. Steve and Dina Samson's Italian restaurant Rossoblu, which operated as a pop-up in Playa Vista over the weekend, returned to dinner service at its Fashion District location recently.
'I know we deal with so much in downtown, but when things get harder, our hearts get bigger,' says Clarke. 'I'm feeling really hopeful again.'
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

32 minutes ago
ICE agents denied entry to LA's Dodger Stadium amid anti-immigration enforcement protests
As anti-Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) protests continue in Los Angeles, dozens of federal ICE agents were seen near Dodger Stadium on Thursday, in what appeared to be a staging area, but were denied entry to the famed ballpark. The agents were dressed in tactical gear and gathered on the street that leads into the stadium in the Elysian Park neighborhood of Los Angeles. The official Los Angeles Dodgers social media account took to X on Thursday, saying that the agents were not allowed to enter the stadium grounds. "This morning, ICE agents came to Dodger Stadium and requested permission to access the parking lots. They were denied entry to the grounds by the organization. Tonight's game will be played as scheduled," the organization said. The Department of Homeland Security responded on X, saying the officers' appearance at the stadium "had nothing to do with the Dodgers." "CBP vehicles were in the stadium parking lot very briefly, unrelated to any operation or enforcement," DHS said. A small group of protesters was also seen near the stadium on Thursday as demonstrations in the city, which began on June 6, continue for nearly two weeks. The Dodgers organization had previously been facing growing criticism from protesters for not speaking out about the immigration raids that have been frequent in Los Angeles. "The largest economic engine in this area is silent! Wake up! Do better! We know you can!" Raul Claros of California Rising said at a news conference, pointing to Dodger Stadium behind him. The demonstration comes after reports of a string of ICE raids in Los Angeles on Thursday, including one outside of a nearby Home Depot on Sunset Boulevard earlier in the day. Los Angeles City Council District 1 workers alerted the Los Angeles Police Department of the ICE staging near Dodger Stadium, local officials told ABC News' Los Angeles station, KABC. The Police Department then notified the Dodgers organization, which allegedly told the ICE agents to leave the property, according to KABC, however, small group of federal agents were still at the location shortly after 11 a.m. This comes as President Donald Trump has recently instructed ICE officers to do "all in their power" to oversee the largest mass deportation program in history. "In order to achieve this, we must expand efforts to detain and deport Illegal Aliens in America's largest Cities such as Los Angeles, Chicago, and New York, where Millions upon Millions of Illegal Aliens reside," Trump wrote in a lengthy social media post over the weekend. In the first 100 days of the second term of the Trump administration, ICE made over 66,000 arrests, according to the federal agency as deportation efforts have since continued.


CBS News
33 minutes ago
- CBS News
What to know about the MOP and the B-2, the bunker-buster bomb and plane that could be used to strike Iran
B-2 Spirit Bombers: The planes that could be used to target Iran's Fordo nuclear site Israel's strikes against Iran have killed a number of its top nuclear scientists and battered its nuclear facilities, but complete destruction of Iran's ability to make weapons-grade uranium is believed to be out of reach — unless the U.S. agrees to help. At least one key uranium enrichment site, Fordo, has so far been unscathed. Located 300 feet beneath a mountain and protected by Russian-produced air defenses, Fordo is believed by military experts to be key to Iran's nuclear program. Nuclear non-proliferation experts say this is where Iran has tried to enrich uranium for weapons purposes and expand its stockpile of enriched uranium. Israel's best chance at destroying the facility at Fordo could lie with a U.S.-produced bomb that's so heavy that it can only be dropped by a U.S. plane. At a hearing Wednesday, Democratic Sen. Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire raised this with Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth. "It's being reported that the president is being asked to consider providing the bunker-buster bomb that is required to be carried only by the B-2 Bomber and would require a U.S. pilot," she said, asking Hegseth whether he had been asked to provide President Trump with options for striking the Middle East. He declined to answer. Mr. Trump is considering joining Israel's offensive against Iran, and approved attack plans Tuesday, but has not made a final decision, CBS News has reported. The White House said Thursday that the president would make a decision on whether to order a strike within the next two weeks. Sources told CBS News that the president had discussed the logistics of using bunker-buster bombs as he weighs whether to wade into the conflict between Iran and Israel. Massive Ordnance Penetrator bomb In this photo released by the U.S. Air Force on May 2, 2023, airmen look at a GBU-57, or the Massive Ordnance Penetrator bomb, at Whiteman Air Base in Missouri. U.S. Air Force via AP, File The bomb that Shaheen was referring to is the GBU-57 Massive Ordnance Penetrator, known as a MOP. It is designed to attack "deeply-buried facilities and hardened bunkers and tunnels," according to the Air Force. It's guided by military GPS and is meant to reach and destroy targets in well-protected facilities. The MOP measures about 20.5 feet in length and 31.5 inches in diameter, according to the Air Force. It weighs in at just under 30,000 pounds, including about 5,300 pounds of explosive material. The Air Force says that the MOP's explosive power is over 10 times that of its predecessor, the BLU-109. It's designed to penetrate up to 200 feet underground before exploding. The warhead is encased in a special high-performance steel alloy, which is meant to enable it to carry a large explosive payload while maintaining the penetrator case's integrity during impact, according to an Air Force fact sheet. Boeing developed the GBU-57, and as of 2015, the aerospace company had been contracted to produce 20 of them, according to the Air Force. Because of the GBU-57's weight — it's the heaviest bomb produced by the U.S. — the B-2 Spirit is currently the only aircraft in the Air Force that is equipped to carry and deploy it. B-2 Spirit A U.S. Air Force B-2 Spirit stealth bomber lands at RAF Fairford in Gloucestershire. Steve Parsons/PA Images via Getty Images One of the key attributes of the B-2 Spirit is its stealth — it's able to evade air defenses and reach heavily defended targets. It's aerodynamically efficient and its internal weapons bays can carry two of the GBU-57 bombs. Because of what the Air Force refers to as the plane's "low-observable technologies," the B-2 Spirit has a "high level of freedom of action at high altitudes." It's built with a combination of "reduced infrared, acoustic, electromagnetic, visual and radar signatures." This, along with composite materials, special coatings, wing design and other classified processes, make the B-2 difficult for even the most sophisticated defense systems to detect and track. Without refueling, its range is about 6,000 nautical miles. The B-2 took its first flight in 1989, in California, but now, Whiteman Air Force Base, in Missouri, is the only B-2 base. It's been used for airstrikes in the Kosovo War, in Afghanistan and in Iraq. The prime contractor for the B-2 is Northrop Grumman. For years, some lawmakers and defense experts have suggested that the U.S. provide Israel with GBU-57 bombs and jets capable of carrying them — but the idea is controversial, with critics arguing the move would be provocative.


The Intercept
35 minutes ago
- The Intercept
How Democratic Leaders Quietly Support Trump's March to War With Iran
Support Us © THE INTERCEPT ALL RIGHTS RESERVED Some Democrats are fighting to stop war with Iran, but party leaders are silently acquiescing or, worse, supporting an attack. Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., conducts a news conference in the U.S. Capitol in Washington on May 20, 2025. Photo: Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call via Getty Images As President Donald Trump barrels toward a direct war with Iran, the most powerful Democrats in Congress are issuing statements that are at best tepid and confusing. At worst, they are cheering escalation. Even with some Democrats on Capitol Hill pushing for a War Powers Resolution and other legislation to stop Trump from attacking without congressional approval, the Democratic Party's most powerful politicians refuse to mount any meaningful opposition to a strike. Many outright favor direct U.S. involvement in yet another regime change war. Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., the most powerful Democrat in the Senate, where he is the minority leader, presents himself as a major opponent of Trump. As recently as June 15, for example, he boasted about his participation in the No Kings Day mass protest against Trump. Yet when it comes to the prospect of a direct war with Iran, Schumer is not only supporting Trump, but less than three weeks ago was goading the administration to be 'tough' on Iran and not make any 'side deals' without Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's approval. — Chuck Schumer (@SenSchumer) June 2, 2025 'The United States' commitment to Israel's security and defense must be ironclad as they prepare for Iran's response,' he said in a follow-up statement released on June 13, after Israel attacked Iran. 'The Iranian regime's stated policy has long been to destroy Israel and Jewish communities around the world.' Schumer did include a perfunctory nod to talks — 'a strong, unrelenting diplomatic effort backed by meaningful leverage.' The 'meaningful leverage' in question, however, is bombing Iran — something Schumer tacitly supports. Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., the most powerful Democrat in the House, responded to Israel's attack with a toothless statement that was vaguely supportive of war and packed with every pro-Israel cliche in the book. 'Our commitment to Israel's security is ironclad,' he said. 'It is clear that the Iranian regime poses a grave threat to the entire free world. There is no circumstance where Iran can be permitted to become a nuclear power.' Jeffries, too, mentioned diplomacy, but with no urgency. 'As soon as is practical, it is imperative to find a rigorous diplomatic path forward and avoid any situation where U.S. troops are put in harm's way,' he said. As with Schumer, 'diplomacy' is a box to be checked, a vague normative preference, but not a demand — and certainly not a requirement. A host of powerful Democrats issued strikingly similar statements. They repeatedly reinforced every premise of Trump's pending bombing campaign, namely the alleged imminent danger posed by Iran. This premise is undermined by U.S. intelligence assessments and leaks to both the Wall Street Journal and CNN, which suggest Iran hadn't decided to make a bomb and would be three years away from producing one if it did. If all of the statements look similar, it's because, according to DropSite and the American Prospect, many members of Congress are simply copy and pasting approved language from the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, or AIPAC, the flagship pro-Israel lobby group. These outlets found that, in statements on congressional websites and social media, nearly 30 members of Congress used nearly identical language about how they 'stand with Israel' and another 35 gave their unequivocal support in similar terms but without the magic words. Among the influential Democrats pledging their unflinching support for Israel was Rep. Gregory Meeks, D-N.Y., the ranking member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee. Like many others, Meeks hauled out a talking point about how 'Israel has a right to defend itself' — meant to front-run any discussion of Israeli aggression by asserting the premise that any and all military action is inherently defensive. It's a dubious premise in most contexts, but especially Orwellian in this one since Israel preemptively attacked Iran based on claims of an 'imminent threat' in direct contradiction of US intelligence. Even if one thinks Israel has a 'right to defend itself' in the abstract, under no neutral reading of international law is Israel doing so by bombing another country without legal basis to do so. The decidedly unhelpful approaches by powerful Democrats don't end there. Rep. Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick, D-Fla., and Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, D-NH, influential members of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs and the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, respectively, both issued mealy-mouthed statements trying to split the baby between 'diplomacy' rhetoric and reinforcing every pretense for U.S. involvement in Israel's bombing of Iran. These non-positions — or worse, positions in favor of unprovoked, almost certainly illegal war — are notable precisely because there are some lawmakers who are at least trying to do something to stop a direct, all-out conflict between the U.S. and Iran. According to the latest count by Prem Thakker, 37 members of Congress have thrown their weight behind some kind of effort to stop war. These fall into two camps. The first is a resolution in both the House and Senate that invokes the 1973 War Powers Act, which says that only Congress can declare war, a principle that has been routinely violated by U.S. presidents. Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., is leading this push in the Senate, where few cosponsors have signed on. (Someone with knowledge of the effort told us that the organizers aren't accepting co-sponsors in a bid to gain bipartisan support first.) Reps. Thomas Massie, R-Ky. and Ro Khanna, D-Calif., are leading the sister effort in the House, and it has 28 supporters total, including Reps. Rashida Tlaib, D-Mich., and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. D-N.Y. A total of 27, or 12.7 percent, of House Democrats have lent the bill their support. There is another effort afoot, too: the No War Against Iran Act that was already in motion before Israel attacked Iran on June 13, though it was introduced after the attacks began. The Senate bill, spearheaded by Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., would prevent federal funds from being used for a war that's not approved by Congress. Sens. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., and Tammy Baldwin, D-Wisc., are among its eight Senate supporters. Democratic leaders, however, are leaving their colleagues out to dry. Schumer, for instance, declined to join Sanders's bill as a cosponsor — despite having cosponsored the same effort in 2020. This tacit and open support for Trump's war aren't limited to active leadership; the upper echelons of the party establishment have been noticeably silent. Democratic elites by and large agree with both Israel's unprovoked attacks on Iran and Trump's direct involvement. Presidents Joe Biden and Barack Obama haven't publicly opposed Trump's reckless threats and build-up to war with Iran. Obama, for example, has re-emerged into the spotlight — but made no mention of Iran or Trump's push for war during a public appearance this week. Former Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton — despite frequently criticizing Trump for his military parade, detainment of a U.S. senator, and anti-abortion policies — hasn't spoken in opposition to a US war with Iran. And, likewise, 2024 Democratic nominee Kamala Harris, who has been speaking out against Trump, has yet to publicly criticize Trump's build up to bombing Iran. Surveying these responses — somewhere between muted disinterest and consent — there's only one plausible conclusion: Democratic elites by and large agree with both Israel's unprovoked attacks on Iran and Trump's direct involvement in this potentially catastrophic regime change war. It's unlikely most Democratic hawks will come out in open support of an attack that carries such political risks; like with Iraq 20 years ago, things could quickly go off the rails. Yet, even as party leaders seek to burnish their credentials as the 'resistance' to Trump, they're tacitly, and sometimes openly, giving Trump a green light to lurch America into yet another open-ended war of choice. Join The Conversation