Beverly Hills seeks $400,000 in legal fees from abortion provider blocked from opening
The city of Beverly Hills is seeking more than $400,000 in legal fees from an abortion provider who accused officials of colluding with extremists to scuttle the opening of a clinic, drawing new outrage in a case that has already seen national outcry and official state censure.
Dozens of pro-choice protesters descended on the Beverly Hills City Council last week demanding city leaders abandon the pursuit of money spent fighting in court against the DuPont Clinic.
'What you guys are doing is so wrong,' said Marissa Levin, one of the activists. 'You should just settle with them.'
DuPont, which lost its lease months before it could open in 2023, would have been the only clinic in Southern California offering procedures after 24 weeks, making it a lightning rod of criticism for anti-abortion groups.
A California Department of Justice investigation found city officials illegally interfered with the clinic. Court documents show they waylaid permits and put its landlord 'on notice' after activists calling themselves Survivors of the Abortion Holocaust threatened them with relentless protest.
No members of the anti-abortion group lived in Beverly Hills. Many had never set foot in Los Angeles before. Their stated goal was to make Beverly Hills a test case for how they might continue to thwart abortion care even in places where it is politically popular.
'Through an intense pressure campaign in which the City exerted its governmental authority on both DuPont and the landlord of its building, the City succeeded in its mission of preventing DuPont from opening in Beverly Hills,' California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta wrote, laying out the investigation's findings last October.
By that point, the city and the clinic had been fighting in court for a year, with DuPont alleging in a 2023 claim that the city should pay for blocking its operation.
Sacramento lawmakers moved to prevent similar disputes, streamlining the permit process for abortion providers and stripping cities of most power to restrict them.
But the changes came too late for DuPont, which has given up plans to occupy the space. Beverly Hills officials maintain they did nothing wrong, but have accepted new rules and state oversight.
'The City cooperated fully with the Attorney General's investigation,' said Beverly Hills Mayor Lester Friedman in a press release. 'We disagree with the allegations in the Attorney General's complaint.'
The outcome rankled some Beverly Hills leaders. Councilmember John Mirisch voted against accepting the state DOJ settlement, saying Bonta had singled out 'a well-known, often stereotyped city, which also happens to be the state's only Jewish-majority city' while failing to pursue a similar case in Fontana, where a Planned Parenthood came under fire.
In December, a Los Angeles County Superior Court judge tossed out most of DuPont's remaining claims, saying the city was protected by the first amendment in all but a few of its actions.
The clinic appealed. The city struck back, filing a motion for more than $400,000 in attorney's fees, with the next hearing scheduled in June.
The move could hobble DuPont, which lost more than $1 million renovating a clinic it will never occupy, said Andrea Grossman, one of four founding members of Beverly Hills for Choice, whose advocacy turned the local skirmish into a national scandal.
Last week, she and her fellow 'abortion yentas' mobbed the Spanish Colonial Revival building to pressure the city to just let it go.
'Do not be the tool of extremists, do not let this be your legacy,' Grossman implored the council, reading from a petition signed by 640 people during the March 18 meeting. 'Do the right thing, take the legal victory and leave DuPont alone.'
One by one, women filed up to the microphone to echo that plea. Many invoked their shared Jewish values.
'Any claim that the city desires to financially harm DuPont is groundless and simply not true,' said Friedman. 'We continue to seek a fair and reasonable resolution.'
The activists were unimpressed.
'You're not telling the truth,' said Jennifer Freeland. 'I'm so glad to look at each one of you in the eye and say, 'Shame on all of you.''
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Fox News
16 minutes ago
- Fox News
NY lawmaker lambastes failed commemoration of Oct 7 attack, as Dem leadership accused of 'antisemitism'
The New York assemblyman behind an effort to formally commemorate the Oct. 7, 2023, terror attack in Israel lambasted leadership for tanking what was supposed to be a "poignant" bill remembering the tragedy. Assemblyman Lester Chang, R-Brooklyn – one of the few GOP members from New York City in the 103-47 Democratic-majority chamber – said he had been working on a resolution for New York state to officially remember the terror attack since hostage negotiations began a year ago. "I'm a Navy veteran of 24 years and I did a tour in Afghanistan. So I understand what war is all about," said Chang. "I've seen atrocities out there." Once American figures like then-candidate Donald Trump began helping hostage negotiations, Chang said he directed his staff to craft a message – which he said took more than a month of back-and-forth to make sure it was "balanced" and did not have a partisan streak. "We submitted it in January, as a resolution, and it was rejected… because [leadership] said it was 'controversial,'" Chang said. "We were astounded but not surprised. So we converted it to a bill," he said, adding that, in the end, a bill would be better because a resolution only commemorates an event for that year, while a bill would codify the remembrance for eternity. With a handful of Democratic co-sponsors, Chang and colleagues believed they had the right balance to attempt to put it up for a vote, but as the New York Post reported, it was reportedly ultimately blocked by House Speaker Carl Heastie, D-Bronx, and other top Democrats. Chang said the bill, destined for the smaller governmental operations committee, was redirected to the larger Ways and Means committee, and that four members were "switched out." The top Republican on that panel, Assemblyman Ed Ra, told the New York Post that remembering Oct. 7 and/or combating antisemitism should never be "political." Republican Assemblyman Ari Brown, who, like Ra, represents Long Island, accused Albany Democrats of "veiled antisemitism," telling the Post the legislature is "rotten" with it. The assembly also tanked a resolution from Brown that complimented Chang's bill. Compounding that was, as Chang described, no GOP bills have been successfully put through the process at all this session. "Having me as a Republican [sponsor] – that would [procedurally] choke them – not because of me, the person, but as a member of that party." Chang said he would just as soon "give this bill to a Democrat" to sponsor if it meant commemorating the Oct. 7 attack. He added that, as a person of Chinese ancestry who represents largely Asian and Italian Bensonhurst, he has no religious horse in the race. "That should make it more poignant as a non-Jewish person pushing this bill in a mostly Christian and Buddhist district," he said. At least seven Democrats did come out in support of the Oct. 7 remembrance legislation, all of whom hail from New York City. Senate Minority Leader Rob Ortt, R-Niagara Falls, echoed Chang's concerns in comments to Fox News Digital. "Many New Yorkers had loved ones injured or worse in the terror attacks in Israel on Oct. 7," Ortt said. "The least we can do is commemorate this tragic day." "Instead of taking commonsense action, Albany Democrats would rather play politics, and have time and again refused to defend our Jewish brothers and sisters." Fox News Digital reached out to Heastie for comment and response to the allegations but did not hear back.
Politico
2 hours ago
- Politico
A muted backlash to Trump's new travel ban
What up, Recast fam. On today's agenda: Donald Trump's newest travel ban is an indication he's become more sophisticated in deploying his immigration agenda during his second swing through the White House. In 2017, when a freshly inaugurated Trump — then a political novice — issued his haphazard and sweeping executive order banning people from Muslim-majority nations, it incited chaos at airports and drew widespread protests from critics who called it racist and an executive overreach. Legal challenges prevented the full scope of that initial ban from being implemented, but ultimately a watered down version was upheld by the Supreme Court the following year. The newest ban, which targets mainly African and Middle Eastern nations, went into effect on Monday and has a decent chance of making it through the courts. (More on that momentarily.) But the most notable shift from Trump's first term was the muted response from the public on the new ban, which fully restricts people visiting the United States from Afghanistan, Burma, Chad, the Republic of the Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Haiti, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen, and imposes partial restrictions on people from Burundi, Cuba, Laos, Sierra Leone, Togo, Turkmenistan and Venezuela. One reason may be that the ban's implementation comes amid the escalating tensions in Los Angeles over Trump's unilateral deployment of National Guard troops and Marines into the city to restore order after protests against ICE raids. But it may also be that the president's opponents are overwhelmed by other episodes. 'There's just so many attacks coming from the Trump administration on all fronts,' said Kerri Talbot, co-executive director of the Immigration Hub. 'It is a little different since it's not the only thing they're doing when they're doing dozens of different actions,' she added, which includes mass deportations of migrants in the U.S. to El Salvador without first going through immigration courts. Was The Recast forwarded to you by a friend? Don't forget to subscribe to the newsletter here. You'll get a weekly breakdown of how race and identity are the DNA of American politics and policy. Others argue Trump and his aides have simply gotten more savvy in implementing his travel ban. The president's first-term ban applied to citizens from eight nations traveling to the U.S. and went into effect immediately — meaning those en route to the country or who had not left domestic airports when the order was issued were detained there. The proclamation issued last week is far more methodical and does not apply to those with existing legal status in the U.S. Further, the newest order cited perceived risks to national security, high rates of visa overstays and lax vetting protocols of the foreign nations as justifications for the ban. Those policy tweaks may have contributed to why there's been a less spirited critique of these new travel restrictions and why the effort might hold up in court. 'It's not an emergency like what he created in 2017,' said Edward Ahmed Mitchell, national deputy director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, which sued the administration over its first-term ban. 'I think there will be some time for reactions to pile up. But again, because this ban doesn't have any instant impact — in particular, people already have legal status — I think that's why you're not going to see the same reaction you saw in 2017 with mass protests breaking out at airports.' Others criticize congressional Democrats for being flat-footed on the immigration messaging, saying their statements railing against the ban will not cut it. 'There's no strategy, no conversation, no decent talking point,' said Nana Gyamfi, executive director of Black Alliance for Just Immigration. 'I think this would be an issue that a congressperson would give a damn about.' Some immigration advocates also criticize Trump in particular for going after Haiti, the poor, majority-Black nation that is approximately 600 miles south of Florida's shores and is heavily reliant on U.S. aid. Guerline Jozef, the co-founder and executive director of Haitian Bridge Alliance, recalled how Trump famously referred to Haiti as one of the 'shithole' nations during a 2018 White House meeting with a bipartisan group of senators where they were discussing details of an immigration lottery program. Trump at the time suggested the U.S. needed to admit more people from places like Norway instead. Jozef said Trump's recent refugee resettlement of white South Africans to the U.S. is evidence that he's not changed his attitude toward majority-Black nations. 'The [administration's] main goal is to create pain, trauma and terror, instead of welcoming people with dignity [from] the countries they have put in the list,' she said. 'They continue to intentionally create those policies … that are centered in the destruction and the unwelcoming of Black people.' We'll continue to monitor how this latest immigration ban and the ongoing clashes in Los Angeles continue to play out. All the best,The Recast Team NEW JERSEY GOV PRIMARY Nearly a dozen candidates are vying for the Democratic and Republican nominations to replace Phil Murphy, New Jersey's term-limited governor. As my colleagues Madison Fernandez and Danial Han point out, this primary contest is the most competitive in recent history, with the Democratic side appearing to be a bit more up in the air than the GOP contest. Rep. Mikie Sherrill is seen as the betting favorite to secure victory in today's Democratic primary, which is expected to draw a relatively low turnout. Newark Mayor Ras Baraka, however, earned national attention last month when he was arrested during a demonstration with several lawmakers who were attempting to inspect Delaney Hall, a privately operated federal immigration detention center that Democrats and progressive activists accused of violating safety protocols. Other candidates in the crowded primary field include Jersey City Mayor Steven Fulop, Rep. Josh Gottheimer, New Jersey Education Association President Sean Spiller and former state Senate President Steve Sweeney. Trump, of course, looms large in the GOP primary. He endorsed Jack Ciattarelli, a former state representative who narrowly lost to Murphy four years ago. His chief opponent is Bill Spadea, a former radio host who also is claiming the MAGA mantle. New Jersey is just one of two states holding statewide elections in the fall. The other is Virginia, and while the latter is considered the more swingy of the two, Trump made traditionally blue New Jersey's contest far closer than predicted in the 2024 presidential election, losing to Kamala Harris there by just 6 percentage points. Polls close at 8 p.m. Eastern. WHAT WE'RE WATCHING THIS WEEK HOGG TIRED — There continues to be fallout from the extraordinary admission from Democratic National Committee Chair Ken Martin that 'I don't know if I wanna do this anymore.' POLITICO's Holly Otterbein obtained a Zoom recording from last month where Martin described his deep frustration over DNC Vice Chair David Hogg's vow to drop $20 million to oust Democratic lawmakers in safe seats that Hogg sees as ineffective. And more: FIRST IN THE RECAST – The National Hispanic Leadership Agenda, a leading coalition of Latino civil rights and advocacy organizations sent a memo to top Senate Republicans, including Majority Leader John Thune, expressing their 'grave concern' and demanding a course correction on the president's 'big beautiful bill' currently before Congress. 'Latino communities, who disproportionately work in lower-wage jobs that do not offer employer-sponsored health insurance, will be especially affected,' the coalition writes in their memo, arguing the hundreds of millions of dollars in Medicaid cuts will be detrimental to their communities. 'The narrative that these cuts are necessary to eliminate 'fraud and abuse' is both misleading and dangerous,' the letter continues, 'These families are not abusing the system—they are surviving because of it.' TODAY'S CULTURE RECS Sly Stone tributes — Considered one of the 1960s' most groundbreaking musicians, Sly Stone, born Sylvester Stewart and the leader of the band Sly and the Family Stone, which blended rock, R&B and soul music, died Monday. He was 82. Read about him here, and check out this listicle featuring the group's essential hits. Stephen A. Smith and Jon Stewart chop it up — Sports broadcaster Stephen A. Smith, who is said to be flirting with a presidential run, sat down for an extended segment Monday night on 'The Daily Show.' 'Hamilton' is celebrated at the Tony Awards — Check out the OG cast reuniting for a rocking performance. Misty Copeland retires — The barrier-breaking ballet dancer is ready for her next chapter. She reflects on her storied career with the AP.
Associated Press
2 hours ago
- Associated Press
LA protests far different from '92 Rodney King riots
The images of cars set ablaze, protesters tossing rocks at police and officers firing nonlethal rounds and tear gas at protesters hearkens back to the last time a president sent the National Guard to respond to violence on Los Angeles streets. But the unrest during several days of protests over immigration enforcement is far different in scale from the 1992 riots that followed the acquittal of white police officers who were videotaped beating Black motorist Rodney King. President George H.W. Bush used the Insurrection Act to call in the National Guard after requests from Mayor Tom Bradley and Gov. Pete Wilson. After the current protests began Friday over Immigration and Customs Enforcement raids, President Donald Trump ordered the deployment of 4,100 National Guard troops and 700 Marines despite strident opposition from Mayor Karen Bass and Gov. Gavin Newsom. Trump cited a legal provision to mobilize federal service members when there is 'a rebellion or danger of a rebellion against the authority of the Government of the United States.' California Attorney General Rob Bonta filed a lawsuit Monday saying Trump had overstepped his authority. Outrage over the verdicts on April 29, 1992 led to nearly a week of widespread violence that was one of the deadliest riots in American history. Hundreds of businesses were looted. Entire blocks of homes and stores were torched. More than 60 people died in shootings and other violence, mostly in South Los Angeles, an area with a heavily Black population at the time. Unlike the 1992 riots, protests have mainly been peaceful and been confined to a roughly five-block stretch of downtown LA, a tiny patch in the sprawling city of nearly 4 million people. No one has died. There's been vandalism and some cars set on fire but no homes or buildings have burned. At least 50 people have been arrested for everything from failing to follow orders to leave to looting, assault on a police officer and attempted murder for tossing a Molotov cocktail. Several officers have had minor injuries and protesters and some journalists have been struck by some of the more than 600 rubber bullets and other 'less-lethal' munitions fired by police. The 1992 uprising took many by surprise, including the Los Angeles Police Department, but the King verdict was a catalyst for racial tensions that had been building in the city for years. In addition to frustration with their treatment by police, some directed their anger at Korean merchants who owned many of the local stores. Black residents felt the owners treated them more like shoplifters than shoppers. As looting and fires spread toward Koreatown, some merchants protected their stores with shotguns and rifles.
