Man stabbed during argument in front yard of Linda Vista home
SAN DIEGO (FOX 5/KUSI) — A 31-year-old man is recovering after being stabbed Thursday morning during an argument in the front yard of a Linda Vista home, authorities said.
According to the San Diego Police Department, the incident occurred shortly before 5 a.m. in front of a residence in the 6400 block of Lanston Drive, where the victim became involved in a confrontation with another man. During the altercation, the suspect stabbed the victim twice — once in the upper back and once in the shoulder — before fleeing the scene.
Woman, 30, critically injured in San Diego motorcycle crash
Witnesses told investigators the suspect got into the front passenger seat of a small white Mercedes SUV and drove off. He is described as a Black male in his 30s, bald, and wearing a brown jacket. The suspect is still at large.
The victim was transported by ambulance to a local hospital, where he is being treated for his injuries, which officials say are not life-threatening.
The SDPD's Western Division Investigations unit is handling the case. Anyone with information is encouraged to call Crime Stoppers 888-580-8477.
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 This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.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
8 hours ago
- Yahoo
Trump offers no rest for lifelong US activist couple
They've lost count of how many times they've been arrested, but even with a combined age of 180 years, American couple Joseph and Joyce Ellwanger are far from hanging up their activist boots. The pair, who joined the US civil rights rallies in the 1960s, hope protesting will again pay off against Donald Trump, whose right-wing agenda has pushed the limits of presidential power. "Inaction and silence do not bring about change," 92-year-old Joseph, who uses a walker, told AFP at a rally near Milwaukee in late April. He was among a few hundred people protesting the FBI's arrest of Judge Hannah Dugan, who is accused of helping an undocumented man in her court evade migration authorities. By his side -- as always -- was Joyce, 88, carrying a sign reading "Hands Off Hannah." They are certain that protesting does make a difference, despite some Americans feeling despondent about opposing Trump in his second term. "The struggle for justice has always had so much pushback and difficulty that it almost always appeared as though we'll never win," Joseph said. "How did slavery end? How did Jim Crow end? How did women get the right to vote? It was the resilience and determination of people who would not give up," he added. "Change does happen." The couple, who have been married for more than 60 years, can certainly speak from experience when it comes to protesting. Joseph took part in strategy meetings with Martin Luther King Jr -- the only white religious leader to do so -- after he became pastor of an all-Black church in Alabama at the age of 25. He also joined King in the five-day, 54-mile march from Selma to Montgomery in 1965, which historians consider a pivotal moment in the US civil rights movement. Joyce, meanwhile, was jailed for 50 days after she rallied against the US military training of soldiers from El Salvador in the 1980s. Other causes taken up by the couple included opposing the Iraq war in the early 2000s. "You do what you have to do. You don't let them stop you just because they put up a blockade. You go around it," Joyce told AFP. - 'We'll do our part' - Joseph admitted he would like to slow down, noting the only time he and his wife unplug is on Sunday evening when they do a Zoom call with their three adult children. But Trump has kept them active with his sweeping executive actions -- including crackdowns on undocumented migrants and on foreign students protesting at US universities. The threats to younger protesters are particularly concerning for Joyce, who compared those demonstrating today to the students on the streets during the 1960s. "They've been very non-violent, and to me, that's the most important part," she said. Joyce also acknowledged the couple likely won't live to see every fight to the end, but insisted they still had a role to play. "We're standing on the shoulders of people who have built the justice movement and who have brought things forward. So, we'll do our part," she said. Joyce added that she and Joseph would be protesting again on June 14 as part of the national "No Kings" rally against Trump. "More people are taking to the streets, we will also be in the street," she said. str/bjt/nl/mlm
Boston Globe
11 hours ago
- Boston Globe
Discrimination cases unravel as Trump scraps core civil rights tenet
The Justice Department now is reviewing its entire docket and has already dismissed or terminated 'many' cases that were 'legally unsupportable' and a product of 'weaponization' under the Biden administration, said Harmeet Dhillon, who heads the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division. Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up 'We will fully enforce civil rights laws in a way that satisfies the ends of justice, not politicization,' she said in a statement to The Washington Post. Advertisement The review includes cases and reform agreements forged after years-long investigations that the administration says lacked justification. Civil rights experts estimate that dozens of discrimination cases involving banks, landlords, private employers, and school districts could face similar action. 'What we're seeing is an attempt by the Trump administration to really dismantle a lot of the core tools that we use to ensure equality in the country,' said Amalea Smirniotopoulos, senior policy counsel and comanager of the Equal Protection Initiative at the Legal Defense Fund, a nonprofit that has long advocated for the civil rights of Black Americans and other minorities. Advertisement At the center of this effort is 'disparate impact analysis,' which holds that neutral policies can have discriminatory outcomes even if there was no intent to discriminate. The legal standard stems from Griggs v. Duke Power, the landmark 1971 Supreme Court decision that became a staple of civil rights litigation. In that case, attorneys relied on statistical evidence to show how standardized testing prevented Black employees in North Carolina from advancing at the energy company. The legal theory has been consistently recognized by the Supreme Court, written into federal regulations and enshrined into employment law by Congress. But President Trump declared it unconstitutional in April, issuing an executive order that kicked off an intense review of civil rights regulations, enforcement actions, and settled cases. Now, government agreements and orders that relied on disparate impact in pursuing sex, race, and disability discrimination cases are being undone. On May 23, for example, the Justice Department terminated an agreement with Patriot Bank, a Tennessee-based lender accused of failing to lend in predominantly Black and Latino neighborhoods in Memphis, from 2015 to 2020. Prosecutors used statistical evidence to show disparities in the bank's lending practices alongside evidence of intentional discrimination, such as targeting most of its advertising in majority-white neighborhoods. A three-year agreement to reform its lending practices had been in place for a little over a year before Trump's Justice Department moved to end it, noting the bank was in compliance with the reform agreement. Patriot declined to comment. Civil rights advocates worry about the future of similar enforcement. Advertisement Disparate impact has long been anathema to conservatives, who say it can result in quotas and deny equal opportunity to white people. But past Republican administrations opted not to take this issue on, partly because of Supreme Court precedent and partly because it might prove politically unpopular. 'What changed is just political will,' said Kenneth L. Marcus, who headed the Education Department's Office for Civil Rights during both George W. Bush's administration and Trump's first term. 'The second Trump administration is more willing to take on potentially contentious civil rights issues than any Republican administration this century.' Trump issued a slew of executive orders to eradicate diversity, equity and inclusion, or DEI, programs - calling them 'illegal and immoral' days after he returned to the White House in January - and ordered the government to close diversity offices and fire staff. His administration has since launched investigations into corporations, law firms and colleges over their diversity initiatives, while going to battle with Harvard University for its refusal to comply with a set of demands to alter its governance, admissions, and hiring practices. When Trump set his sights on disparate impact in April, he called it a 'pernicious movement' that ignores 'individual strengths, effort or achievement.' He ordered federal agencies to review any cases and reform agreements that rely on the theory - and terminate them as they see fit. The actions are long overdue, said Dan Morenoff, executive director at the American Civil Rights Project, a nonprofit law firm that opposes the use of disparate impact and diversity initiatives. He contends that the government's use of disparate impact has been, in many cases, legally dubious, adding that its assumptions are fundamentally flawed. Advertisement 'The people who most appreciate disparate impact appear, usually, to be deeply wed to the idea that any discrepancies are best explained by discrimination,' he said. The Supreme Court most recently upheld the use of disparate impact analysis in a 2015 housing case. But that decision was decided on a 5-4 vote in an opinion written by Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, now retired. Some conservatives believe the court's current conservative supermajority might give them their wished-for outcome. 'It's clear what the Trump administration is aiming for is to get this question to the Supreme Court in hopes the Supreme Court will take that tool away,' said Smirniotopoulos of the Legal Defense Fund. The rollbacks are already underway. In 2023, the Justice Department alleged that Atlanta-based Ameris Bank avoided providing home loans to Black and Latino home buyers in Jacksonville, Florida, in a practice known as redlining. The bank almost exclusively advertised in majority-White neighborhoods and made little effort to do business in majority Black and Latino neighborhoods, according to its lawsuit. Only 2.7 percent of Ameris's mortgages went to borrowers in Black and Latino communities from 2016 to 2021, the complaint said, while its competitors issued more than three times as many loans during that window. Ameris knew about the disparities but failed to correct them, the government alleged. Though it admitted no wrongdoing, Ameris quickly settled the case, agreeing to a set of measures whose progress would be monitored by the court. Then, on May 19, the Justice Department moved to unwind the settlement, saying that the bank has 'demonstrated a commitment to remediation' while freeing it from its legal obligations to implement the reforms. The bank did not object to the move. Prosecutors did note that Ameris had disbursed the entirety of a $7.5 million loan subsidy fund for borrowers in Black and Latino neighborhoods. Advertisement A judge granted the request a day later. Ameris declined to comment. The government moved to terminate cases involving two banks in Alabama and Tennessee that had agreed to court-monitored reforms tied to allegations of discriminatory lending practices. It also moved to dismiss a case in Kinloch, Mo., against property managers accused of refusing to rent to prospective Black tenants at disproportionate rates. There are at least eight other housing and lending cases across seven states that are similarly candidates for dismissal, according to a review. While the administration blamed the Biden administration for mishandling these cases, it has also dismissed cases going back decades. It did not directly concern disparate impact, but the Justice Department in April dismissed a 1966 consent order with a Louisiana school district concerning its desegregation efforts.
Yahoo
13 hours ago
- Yahoo
Tulsa's new Black mayor proposes $100M trust to 'repair' impact of 1921 Race Massacre
TULSA, Okla. (AP) — Tulsa's new mayor on Sunday proposed a $100 million private trust as part of a reparations plan to give descendants of the 1921 Tulsa Race Massacre scholarships and housing help in a city-backed bid to make amends for one of the worst racial attacks in U.S. history. The plan by Mayor Monroe Nichols, the first Black mayor of Oklahoma's second-largest city, would not provide direct cash payments to descendants or the last two centenarian survivors of the attack that killed as many as 300 Black people. He made the announcement at the Greenwood Cultural Center, located in the once-thriving district that was destroyed by a white mob. Nichols said he does not use the term reparations, which he calls politically charged, characterizing his sweeping plan instead as a 'road to repair.' 'This is, I think, a very significant first step,' Nichols said. 'And it's something we can all unite around. I think we can unite around housing specifically for affected populations. I think we can unite around investing in the Greenwood district and making sure that we're able to revitalize it to be an economic power again.' Nichols said the proposal would not require city council approval, although the council would need to authorize the transfer of any city property to the trust. The private charitable trust would be created with a goal to secure $105 million in assets, with most of the funding either secured or committed by June 1, 2026. Although details of the trust programs would be developed over the next year by an executive director and a board of managers, the plan calls for the bulk of the funding, $60 million, to go toward improving buildings and revitalizing the city's north side. 'The Greenwood District at its height was a center of commerce,' Nichols said. 'So what was lost was not just something from North Tulsa or the Black community. It actually robbed Tulsa of an economic future that would have rivaled anywhere else in the world." Nichols' proposal comes on the heels of an executive order he signed earlier this year recognizing June 1 as Tulsa Race Massacre Observance Day, an official holiday for the city. Nichols also realizes the current national political climate, particularly President Trump's sweeping assault on diversity, equity and inclusion programs, provides challenging political crosswinds. 'The fact that this lines up with a broader national conversation is a tough environment,' Nichols admitted, 'but it doesn't change the work we have to do.' Jacqueline Weary, is a granddaughter of massacre survivor John R. Emerson, Sr., who owned a hotel and cab company in Greenwood that were destroyed. She acknowledged the political difficulty of giving cash payments to descendants. But at the same time, she wondered how much of her family's wealth was lost as a result of the massacre. 'If Greenwood was still there, my grandfather would still have his hotel,' said Weary, 65. 'It rightfully was our inheritance, and it was literally taken away.' Tulsa is not the first U.S. city to explore the idea of reparations. The Chicago suburb of Evanston, Illinois, was the first U.S. city to make reparations available to its Black residents for past discrimination, offering qualifying households $25,000 for home repairs, down payments on property, and interest or late penalties on property in the city. The funding for the program came from taxes on the sale of recreational marijuana. Other communities and organizations that have considered providing reparations range from the state of California to cities like Amherst, Massachusetts; Providence, Rhode Island; Asheville, North Carolina; and Iowa City, Iowa; religious denominations like the Episcopal Church; and prominent colleges like Georgetown University in Washington. In Tulsa, there are only two living survivors of the Race Massacre, both of whom are 110 years old: Leslie Benningfield Randle and Viola Fletcher. Both received direct financial compensation from both a Tulsa-based nonprofit and a New York-based philanthropic organization, but have not received any recompense from the city or state. Damario Solomon-Simmons, an attorney for the survivors and the founder of the Justice for Greenwood Foundation, could not be reached for comment on the mayor's plan, but said earlier this year that any reparations plan should include direct payments to Randle and Fletcher and a victims' compensation fund for outstanding claims. A lawsuit filed by Solomon-Simmons on behalf of the survivors was rejected by the Oklahoma Supreme Court last year, dampening racial justice advocates' hopes that the city would ever make financial amends.
