Latest news with #TheChronicle
Yahoo
18-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Former Michelin-Starred 'One Market Restaurant' Is Closing
One Market Restaurant, which used to have a famed Michelin star, is shutting its doors after three decades. According to The San Francisco Chronicle, the 'acclaimed' restaurant is closing on June 11, 2025. It was open for 32 years, The Chronicle reported, and announced its closure on May 16, 2025. The owners were hoping to sell the business, but The Chronicle was 'unable to find that deal." The owners said the closure decision was 'inevitable and bittersweet,' the newspaper reported, adding that the restaurant struggled 'to recover from the pandemic.' "Created by Chef Bradley Ogden and restaurateur, and still Managing Partner, Michael Dellar in 1993, One Market Restaurant has become a standard for sophisticated dining in San Francisco," a timeline on the restaurant's website says. "For the past 20 years, One Market has offered the award-winning farm-to-table cuisine of Chef/Partner Mark Dommen. The restaurant sports views of the Ferry Building, F-Line Trolley and Bay Bridge. Featured are an open exhibition kitchen with a special 'Chef's Table,' a wood-fired grill and rotisserie, several private dining rooms, a vibrant bar with a stellar cocktail program, and caring professional service directed by Front of House-Bar Manager Oscar Davila," the website continues. "One Market also boasts one of the city's most impressive wine lists curated by Sommelier and Wine Director Tonya Pitts, named the 2023 Sommelier of the Year by Wine Enthusiast," it says. The restaurant shares photos of some of its dishes on its Instagram page. According to a statement on Elite Traveler, "The appointment of head chef Mark Dommen has led to the restaurant receiving a Michelin star for the fourth consecutive year. Dommen has created a menu that takes contemporary American fare and gives it a modern twist."
San Francisco Chronicle
17-05-2025
- San Francisco Chronicle
What Californians need to know about traveling outside the U.S. with a green card or visa
Travelers returning to the U.S. from abroad are facing heightened scrutiny at airports amid a nationwide immigration crackdown, stirring confusion among visa holders and lawful permanent residents as they navigate summer travel plans. U.S. Customs and Border Protection agents are pulling aside noncitizens for extra questioning with greater frequency, according to immigration attorneys, and green card holders have reportedly been arrested at airports upon returning from international trips. Chris Beckerson, a San Francisco immigration lawyer who counsels foreign workers and students, said his firm has been fielding more travel-related questions, including from companies seeking to develop policies surrounding employee travel. 'I think anxiety has been running pretty high among lots of my clients,' Beckerson said. Legal experts urged caution for visa and green card holders as they weigh new risks associated with international travel under the Trump administration. While lawyers are particularly concerned for people with criminal records, they recommend widespread precautions for any noncitizen leaving American soil, such as scheduling a consultation with an immigration attorney and safeguarding their digital security ahead of a trip. The Chronicle compiled guidance for travelers below, though attorneys urged people to seek individual legal counsel to assess their personal risk before departing the country. What are the risks when traveling outside the U.S. with a green card? Lawful permanent residents are free to travel outside the country, according to U.S. Citizen and Immigration Services, although even those with appropriate documents are not guaranteed admission back into the country. On its website, the agency cautioned green card holders that travel outside the U.S. 'may have severe immigration-related consequences.' For now, many immigration lawyers are urging green card holders with criminal infractions to avoid leaving the country. Recent arrests at U.S. airports appeared to target lawful permanent residents with prior criminal infractions, including people with years-old cases that have been resolved, said Jacqueline Brown, the director of an immigration clinic at the University of San Francisco School of Law. Last month, authorities arrested Cliona Ward, a 54-year-old green card holder from Ireland, when she returned to San Francisco International Airport from a trip to her home country. Ward, a longtime Santa Cruz resident who had an expunged criminal conviction from her youth, was released last week but remains traumatized by the two-week detention, her sister wrote on a GoFundMe page. In March, authorities arrested a green card holder from Germany at the Boston airport, detaining him for two months in federal custody. At the Seattle airport in February, agents arrested a woman from the Philippines with lawful permanent residency, according to NBC News. Hilton Beckham, assistant commissioner of public affairs at CBP, said the Trump administration was enforcing immigration laws, 'something the previous administration failed to do.' 'Green card holders who have not broken any U.S. laws, committed application fraud, or failed to apply for a reentry permit after a long period of travel have nothing to fear about entering and exiting the country,' Beckham said in a statement. In light of the recent arrests, Brown said green card holders with a prior criminal conviction or even an arrest should 'be cautious against traveling,' and they should consult with an immigration attorney about their specific circumstances before heading overseas. 'A lot of times, the answer would just be no,' Brown said. 'I wouldn't travel if you've had any arrest without getting some more information.' Brown said she knows green card holders who are steering clear of international travel to avoid the potential hassle or trauma connected with prolonged questioning at the airport. 'Everybody has their own circumstances, and I would say it's just how much of a risk you're willing to take,' she said. Can I travel internationally on a student or worker visa? For people with valid visas, including students and certain categories of workers, Brown said she would advise them to avoid international travel 'unless it's really necessary,' since the immigration policy landscape can rapidly change with no notice. Last month, for example, the Trump administration abruptly revoked visas and terminated legal status for hundreds of international students, many of whom had a brush with law enforcement on their record. The government then reversed the decision just as quickly, restoring status after weeks of chaos at universities and mounting legal pressure. Beckerson, who counsels people with H-1B and F-1 visas, said his firm is advising clients with a criminal conviction in their past to avoid international travel. For clients with no prior brushes with law enforcement or negative immigration encounters, however, Beckerson said he is 'not concerned with them traveling right now.' 'People seem to be coming through fine for now,' he said. But 'it's only been four months of this administration, so we're bracing for more.' UC Berkeley issued a travel advisory in April noting that international travel 'may be high risk for all clients due to strict vetting and enforcement,' urging students to be cautious when considering leaving the country for personal or professional reasons 'as U.S. immigration policy remains unpredictable and subject to rapid change.' What should I expect at the airport? Travelers with green cards and visas can anticipate CBP officers spending more time asking questions about their travel, their right to enter the U.S. and their background, as well as a higher likelihood of being placed in another room at the airport for a secondary inspection, which can take hours, Brown said. People should also prepare for the possibility that officers may look through their phones and laptops, including reviewing personal social media accounts, she said. Brown said green card holders will likely face additional scrutiny and questions if they remain outside the country for six months or longer, which can indicate an intent to abandon their permanent residency status. Customs agents may use tactics to pressure people to sign a form relinquishing their lawful status during airport interrogations, but they cannot legally take away a green card, Brown said. Only an immigration judge can initiate deportation proceedings. Additionally, noncitizens returning from trips to countries in the Middle East should also expect more questions and potential problems at customs, Brown said. Travelers should stay calm, respectful and honest during interactions with border agents, according to the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a privacy nonprofit. People should never provide false information to CBP officers, the organization said, because doing so is a crime. Immigration officers have broad discretion when deciding whether to wave a person through customs or pull them aside for additional inspection, adding a 'wild card' factor to the equation, Beckerson said. One of his clients was recently held for questioning for 'quite a lengthy period,' he said. 'It was a really upsetting experience for the person,' he said. 'Whether or not that officer is having a good day sometimes seems to make the difference between a bad experience and a good experience.' Does it matter what airport I travel through? Although the laws are consistent across the country, Brown said it was typically safer for noncitizens to travel through SFO or other California airports rather than states that tend to be more politically conservative. Similarly, UC Berkeley told international students it recommends they travel through SFO when entering the country, although the university did not provide an explanation for the suggestion. More than 10,000 people have been processed by CBP officers at SFO this year through April, slightly more than numbers over the same time last year, according to CBP data. How can I protect my digital privacy when traveling internationally? It is legal for CBP officers to search digital devices that belong to both citizens and noncitizens, according to the American Civil Liberties Union. That's because people have fewer rights and less privacy at U.S. border crossings compared to inside the country, according to the Electronic Frontier Foundation. Border agents can search phones, laptops and other electronic devices without a search warrant or suspicion that the person has committed a crime. Brown recommended that people disable Face ID on their phone before an international trip. CBP agents can use Face ID to open a phone even when a traveler refuses to provide their password, she said. But failing to provide a password could have consequences, especially for noncitizens. Visa holders could be turned away at the border if they refuse to cooperate with a phone search, according to the ACLU. While the government cannot deny entry to citizens who refuse to unlock their phone, agents can detain them for hours and seize their device, sometimes for weeks or months, the ACLU said. For citizens and noncitizens alike, the ACLU recommends that people travel with as little data and as few devices as possible, such as carrying a travel-only smartphone with no private or sensitive information. The Berkeley International Office recommended that students review social media accounts ahead of travel for content that 'may appear to show you engaged in activities that violate U.S. laws, your visa status, or academic integrity.' This month, the Department of Homeland Security announced it would immediately start considering 'antisemitic activity on social media' as grounds for denying immigration benefits, noting that the policy applies to foreign students and people applying for green cards.
San Francisco Chronicle
13-05-2025
- Entertainment
- San Francisco Chronicle
Meta pulls fake AI ad featuring Jamie Lee Curtis after actor called out Zuckerberg
Jamie Lee Curtis leveraged her 6.1 million Instagram followers to urge Mark Zuckerberg to pull a false AI-generated advertisement, and it worked. Less than two hours after the Oscar-winning actor took to the social media platform with an open letter to Zuckerberg asking him to remove a fake commercial using her likeness, its parent company, Meta, did just that. 'It worked! Yay internet! Shame has it's [sic] value,' she wrote in the comment section of her original Instagram post less than two hours after it went up on Monday, May 12. 'Thanks all who chimed in and helped rectify!' The Chronicle has reached out to the Menlo Park-based Meta for comment. Curtis' initial post aimed to catch the attention of Meta's billionaire founder, who she said she hoped would encourage his team to address her concerns and remove the advertisement. 'It's come to this @zuck,' Curtis wrote. 'Hi. We have never met. My name is Jamie Lee Curtis and I have gone through every proper channel to ask you and your team to take down this totally AI fake commercial for some bulls— that I didn't authorize, agree to or endorse.' She shared a screenshot of Zuckerberg's Instagram profile and a photo of the advertisement in question along with her words. The post was set to Aretha Franklin's 1985 song 'Integrity.' 'I tried to DM you and slide on in, but you don't follow me so I've had to take to the public instaverse to try to reach you,' she explained. 'This (MIS)use of my images (taken from an interview I did with @stephruhle during the fires) with new, fake words put in my mouth, diminishes my opportunities to actually speak my truth.' Curtis mentioned in her post this morning that she was advised to ask Zuckerberg directly for help with this matter, and that she 'long ago deleted Twitter' and didn't know any other way of reaching him. The Academy Award winner deactivated her X account last November in protest of its owner, Elon Musk.
San Francisco Chronicle
08-05-2025
- Politics
- San Francisco Chronicle
Plan to use Travis base as immigrant detention center criticized by California Dems
Two Bay Area Democratic House members blasted U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth for plans to use Travis Air Force Base in Fairfield as an immigrant detention center, calling it 'a dangerous militarization of immigration enforcement' that will 'unnecessarily degrade military readiness,' according to a letter to Hegseth obtained by The Chronicle. Homeland Security and Defense Department officials discussed efforts to evaluate military installations for potential immigration detention and removal operations in early April, including at the Solano County base, KQED first reported last week. Trump has pledged to deport one million immigrants this year. Through March, the Pentagon has spent $376 million this year on border operations involving immigration. The Trump administration plans to detain immigrants at military bases around the country, including Fort Bliss near El Paso, Texas, Army Secretary Daniel Driscoll told reporters in March. Federal officials have been looking for months for detention facilities in northern California and other Western states that could house between 850 to 950 detention beds. Activists and union organizers are concerned that ICE is also considering opening a detention center in a shuttered federal prison in Dublin. Reps. John Garamendi, D-Fairfield, a member of the House Armed Services Committee, and Mike Thompson, D-Napa, told Hegseth in a May 5 letter that they were 'deeply frustrated' and 'gravely concerned' about using Travis as a migrant detention center. 'Utilizing a military installation for civilian law enforcement and detention operations raises significant concerns about the misuse of military resources, operational readiness, and national security. The decision to use Travis AFB as a migrant detention center would both constitute a dangerous militarization of immigration enforcement and unnecessarily degrade military readiness,' the Democrats wrote. The Democrats say the use of a military facility for domestic law enforcement violates the federal Posse Comitatus Act of 1878, which forbids active duty military personnel from participating in civilian law enforcement except when expressly authorized by law, according to the Brennan Center for Justice. They want the Pentagon to explain how building a detention center would affect Travis' water and energy infrastructure and its future operations. The Democrats also want Hegseth to explain how many migrants would be detained there, how the Department would ensure that military personnel would not be performing law enforcement activities and to reveal how much in already appropriated federal funding is being diverted to build and maintain the detention facility. The Department of Defense declined to comment on the letter to The Chronicle. 'As with all Congressional correspondence, the Department will respond directly to the author,' the Pentagon responded Wednesday in an email. This isn't the first time that Garamendi has expressed concerns to the Pentagon about using Travis for deportation-related issues. In January, The Chronicle f irst reported
Yahoo
06-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Trump Wants to Turn Alcatraz Into a Working Prison—but Here's Why It'll Remain a National Landmark
President Trump has proposed turning Alcatraz Federal Penitentiary back into a working prison. The island prison off the coast of San Francisco was shuttered in 1963 and eventually converted to a popular national park and tourist destination. Experts say the idea of transforming Alcatraz from a tourist site back into a working prison is not feasible or realistic. President Donald Trump had a busy Sunday evening on social media, announcing various plans he had for the country. One of his most discussed announcements was his intent to reopen and expand Alcatraz Federal Penitentiary. This was obviously a surprising statement—partly because the prison is now an incredibly popular tourist destination. The island, located less than two miles off the coast of San Francisco, receives more than 1.4 million visitors each year, according to the Golden Gate National Parks Conservancy. The history of Alcatraz is long: it was a military fort, then military prison, before being converted into a federal prison between 1934 and 1963. During that time, famous inmates like Al Capone, Whitey Bulger, and Machine Gun Kelly were all incarcerated at the facility. In the years since its closure, it was placed on the National Register of Historic Places in 1976. Now, it is part of the Golden Gate National Recreation Area, which offers daily guided tours and exhibits for tourists. But the site's popularity isn't the only reason Alcatraz won't likely be turned back into a functioning prison any time soon, if ever. Alcatraz history expert and former park ranger John Marti told The San Francisco Chronicle that it would be basically impossible to turn the current structure into an operable prison, given its lack of water, sewage, and electricity. 'If the discussion is to rebuild the prison building to hold people, I don't think that would be feasible,' Martin told The Chronicle. 'It would have to be torn down and rebuilt.' Not only would it require an entire pricey overhaul, but it would be very expensive to run the penitentiary once it is opened. Former National Park Service director Jon Jarvis told Politico that 'it would be ridiculously expensive to operate as a prison.' One of the main reasons the prison was closed in 1963 was that the operating costs for Alcatraz were three times more expensive than other prisons to run, according to USA Today. Then there's the matter of the legal protections Alcatraz Island now has given its status as a National Landmark. It would be a long process that would involve Congress to alter Alcatraz's status before any construction or renovations could occur. In addition to the logistic and legal challenges of such a move, and Alcatraz's ongoing popularity with tourists, there is also political opposition. State Senator Scott Wiener, a Democrat who represents San Francisco, was one of several politicians to speak out. 'In addition to being deeply unhinged, this is an attack on the rule of law,' Wiener said in a post on Instagram. 'Putting aside that Alcatraz is a museum & tourist attraction, this is both nuts & terrifying.' Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi echoed that sentiment, writing on X: 'Alcatraz closed as a federal penitentiary more than sixty years ago. It is now a very popular national park and major tourist attraction. The President's proposal is not a serious one.' Right now, Trump's plans are a far, far stretch from becoming reality. If you plan on visiting Alcatraz, that's still entirely possible. In fact, you should plan on booking your tickets in advance, as they tend to sell out. You can book tickets for the ferry ride to the island plus options for day, night, or behind the scenes tours, starting at around $50. Everything else you need to know about the island can be found on the park service website at Read the original article on Travel & Leisure
