Press groups sue Los Angeles police over use of force against journalists during protests
LOS ANGELES — A coalition of press rights organizations is seeking a court order to stop the 'continuing abuse' of journalists by the Los Angeles Police Department during protests over President Trump's immigration crackdown.
The federal lawsuit, filed Monday by the Los Angeles Press Club and investigative reporting network Status Coup, seeks to 'force the LAPD to respect the constitutional and statutory rights of journalists engaged in reporting on these protests and inevitable protests to come.'
The suit cites multiple instances of officers firing foam projectiles at members of the media and otherwise flouting state laws that restrict the use of so-called less-lethal weapons in crowd control situations and protect journalists covering the unrest. Those measures were passed in the wake of the 2020 protests over the killing of George Floyd by police in Minneapolis when journalists were detained and injured by the LAPD while covering the unrest.
The recent suit filed in the Central District of California describes journalists being shot with less-lethal police rounds, tear-gassed and detained without cause.
Carol Sobel, a longtime civil rights attorney who represents the plaintiffs, said LAPD officers have also been blocking journalists from areas where they had a right to be, in violation of the department's own rules and Senate Bill 98, a state law that prohibits law enforcement from interfering with or obstructing journalists from covering such events.
'You have people holding up their press credentials saying, 'I'm press,' and they still got shot,' she said. 'The Legislature spent all this time limiting how use of force can occur in a crowd control situation, and they just all ignored it.
Apart from journalists, scores of protesters allege LAPD projectiles left them with severe bruises, lacerations and serious injuries.
The Police Department said Monday that it doesn't comment on pending litigation. A message for the Los Angeles city attorney's office, which represents the LAPD in most civil suits, went unreturned.
Sobel filed a similar action in the wake of the LAPD's response to the 2020 protests on behalf of Black Lives Matter-L.A. and others who contended that LAPD caused scores of injuries by firing hard-foam projectiles. A federal judge later issued an injunction restricting the department's use of 40-millimeter and 37-millimeter hard-foam projectile launchers to officers who are properly trained to use them.
Under the restrictions, which remain in place with the court case pending, police can target individuals with 40-millimeter rounds 'only when the officer reasonably believes that a suspect is violently resisting arrest or poses an immediate threat of violence or physical harm.' Officers are also barred from targeting people in the head, torso and groin areas.
The city has paid out millions of dollars in settlements and jury awards related to lawsuits brought by reporters and demonstrators in 2020 who were injured.
On Monday, the LAPD announced an internal review of a June 10 incident in which a 30-year-old man suffered a broken finger during a confrontation with officers of the vaunted Metropolitan Division.
According to the department's account, the Metro officers had been deployed to contend with an 'unruly' crowd on Alameda Street and Temple Street and said that Daniel Robert Bill and several other demonstrators refused to leave the area and instead challenged officers. During a confrontation, several officers swung their batons and fired less-lethal munitions at Bill 'to no effect' and then 'used a team takedown' before arresting him.
After his arrest, Bill was taken to an area hospital, where he underwent surgery to repair a broken finger on his left hand.
The department's Force Investigation Division will review the case, as it does all incidents in which someone is seriously injured or killed while in policy custody.
Department leaders have in the past argued that officers need less-lethal weapons to restore order, particularly when faced with large crowds with individuals throwing bottles and rocks.
The department's handling of the recent protests is expected to be addressed at Tuesday's meeting of the LAPD Police Commission, the department's civilian policy-making body. The body reviewed complaints of excessive force against the department stemming from the 2020 protests but has not staked a public position about the continued use of the 40-millimeter projectiles and other crowd control measures.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Times
14 minutes ago
- New York Times
The Senate Wants Billions More in Medicaid Cuts, Pinching States and Infuriating Hospitals
The Senate policy bill released Monday would cut billions of dollars more from Medicaid than the earlier, House-passed legislation — in large part by cracking down on a budgeting maneuver used by 49 states that congressional Republicans have called a scam or gimmick. It does this by limiting Medicaid provider taxes, a loophole that states use to collect more federal matching funds for Medicaid, an insurance program for the poor that covers roughly 70 million Americans. For decades, taxing providers like hospitals has been a major part of how states pay Medicaid bills, but this tactic has come under scrutiny in Congress this year as Republicans look for ways to help pay for President Trump's tax cuts. Cutting provider taxes would probably mean funding shortfalls of hundreds of billions of dollars for states over the next decade, leaving them with budget holes to fill. To offset the losses, states would most likely need to explore cutting other services or raising other taxes. In scaling back Medicaid provider taxes, Senate Republicans are pursuing cuts that their House colleagues were hesitant to propose. House members had landed on freezing provider tax rates at current levels instead of reducing them. If the Senate passes its plan for provider taxes, the House and the Senate will have to reconcile their differences. The basic way Medicaid payments work A state pays a hospital $1,000 for a patient's medical expenses. The federal government reimburses the state a share of the amount, in this case 60 percent. $1,000 payment $600 reimbursement State government $400 paid on net Federal government Local hospital How states use provider taxes A state pays a hospital a higher amount, but charges some of it back in taxes, in this case $30. The federal government calculates its share based on the original payment. The state can keep the extra money. $1,030 payment $618 reimbursement $30 tax State government $382 paid on net The tax generates an additional $18 for the state. Federal government Local hospital The basic way Medicaid payments work How states use provider taxes A state pays a hospital $1,000 for a patient's medical expenses. The federal government reimburses the state a share of the amount, in this case 60 percent. A state pays a hospital a higher amount, but charges some of it back in taxes, in this case $30. The federal government calculates its share based on the original payment. The state can keep the extra money. $1,030 payment $1,000 payment $600 reimbursement $618 reimbursement $30 tax State government State government $400 paid on net $382 paid on net The tax generates an additional $18 for the state. Federal government Local hospital Federal government Local hospital The basic way Medicaid payments work A state pays a hospital $1,000 for a patient's medical expenses. The federal government reimburses the state a share of the amount, in this case 60 percent. $1,000 payment $600 reimbursement State government $400 paid on net Federal government Local hospital How states use provider taxes A state pays a hospital a higher amount, but charges some of it back in taxes, in this case $30. The federal government calculates its share based on the original payment. The state can keep the extra money. $1,030 payment $618 reimbursement $30 tax State government $382 paid on net The tax generates an additional $18 for the state. Federal government Local hospital Note: States pay different shares of Medicaid costs. This example illustrates when a state pays 40 percent, a common scenario. The New York Times Estimated share of federal Medicaid funding from hospital and nursing home taxes 0% 10% 20% 30% Wash. Maine Mont. N.D. Minn. Vt. Ore. N.H. Idaho Wis. N.Y. S.D. Mich. Wyo. Conn. Pa. Iowa N.J. Neb. Nev. Ohio Md. Ill. Ind. Utah Colo. Calif. Va. Kan. Mo. Ky. N.C. Tenn. Okla. Ariz. Ark. S.C. N.M. Ala. Ga. Miss. La. Texas Alaska Fla. Hawaii Estimated share of federal Medicaid funding from hospital and nursing home taxes 0% 10% 20% 30% Wash. Maine Mont. N.D. Minn. Vt. Ore. N.H. Idaho Wis. S.D. N.Y. Mass. R.I. Conn. Mich. Wyo. Pa. N.J. Iowa Neb. Nev. Ohio Del. Md. Ill. Ind. Utah Colo. Va. Calif. Mo. Kan. Ky. N.C. Tenn. Okla. Ariz. Ark. N.M. S.C. Ga. Ala. Miss. La. Texas Alaska Fla. Hawaii Source: The Hilltop Institute This map underestimates the effect of provider taxes in the Dakotas, which tax other health care providers, and North Carolina, which recently made major policy changes. The New York Times Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
Yahoo
14 minutes ago
- Yahoo
DHS ends temporary protections for 530K immigrants from these countries
WASHINGTON – The Department of Homeland Security revoked temporary work and residency authorizations for more than 530,000 immigrants under a program the Supreme Court allowed the Trump administration to end in a late May ruling. The program protected immigrants from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua and Venezuela from deportation and provided them work permits. The program is often referred to as CHNV, an acronym that references the immigrants' countries of origin. Tricia McLaughlin, an assistant secretary at DHS, said immigrants were 'poorly vetted' through 'disastrous' programs that allowed them to compete for jobs against American workers. 'Ending the CHNV parole programs, as well as the paroles of those who exploited it, will be a necessary return to common-sense policies, a return to public safety, and a return to America First,' McLaughlin said. The program is one way the Trump administration is restricting entry into the United States. Other strategies include suspending asylum applications, hardening barriers along the southern border, deporting undocumented immigrants and restricting travel from 12 countries. The Biden administration created the program in 2022. But DHS Secretary Kristi Noem announced in March she was canceling the program because of concerns the immigrants would compete for government services and jobs, and because, she said, some of them were criminals. At least three lawsuits challenged Noem's decision. But the Supreme Court ruled May 30 that Noem could end the program. The impact of the decision is uncertain because immigrants could apply for legal status under other programs. DHS is notifying immigrants known as parolees, because their status is temporary, that if they no longer have a lawful status to remain, they must leave the country immediately. If they get stopped, they could be deported. The department has offered undocumented immigrants $1,000 to leave voluntarily through the CBP Home Mobile App. This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: DHS ends temporary Biden-era protections for Cubans, Venezuelans
Bloomberg
14 minutes ago
- Bloomberg
Trump Plays Down Iran-Israel Truce as He Leaves G-7 Early
Donald Trump abruptly exited the G-7 summit in Canada, deepening questions about the US president's promise to bring peace. Stephanie Lai explains. (Source: Bloomberg)
