Connect with us

Published

on

SACRAMENTO, Calif. A federal judge has found top California prison officials in civil contempt for failing to hire enough mental health professionals to adequately treat tens of thousands of incarcerated people with serious mental disorders.

Chief U.S. District Judge Kimberly Mueller on June 25 ordered the state to pay $112 million in fines at a time when the state is trying to close a multibillion-dollar budget deficit. The fines have been accumulating since April 2023, after Mueller said she was fed up with the state prison systems inadequate staffing despite years of court orders demanding that the state address the issue. Use Our Content

It can be republished for free.

The sanctions imposed here are necessary to sharpen that focus and magnify defendants sense of urgency to finally achieve a lasting remedy for chronic mental health understaffing in the states prison system, Mueller said in her order in the long-running class-action lawsuit.

The ongoing harm caused by these high vacancy rates is as clear today as it was thirty years ago and the harm persists despite multiple court orders requiring defendants to reduce those rates, she added.

Mueller ordered the state to pay the fines within 30 days and said they will be used exclusively for steps necessary to come into compliance with the courts staffing orders. She ordered California to keep paying additional fines for each month the state remains in violation of court orders.

The ruling was unwelcome news for Gov. Gavin Newsom, who is struggling with a budget deficit thats forcing reductions in numerous state programs. Email Sign-Up

Subscribe to KFF Health News' free Morning Briefing. Your Email Address Sign Up

The contempt finding is deeply flawed, and it does not reflect reality, said Diana Crofts-Pelayo, a Newsom spokesperson. Amid a nationwide shortage of mental health therapists, the administration has led massive and unprecedented efforts to expand care and recruit and retain mental health care professionals.

California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation spokesperson Terri Hardy said the state will appeal Muellers order. Prisoners often have greater access to mental health care in custody than what presently exists for people outside because of the states extraordinary steps to expand access to mental health care, Hardy said.

Muellers contempt finding comes as Newsom, a Democrat, has prioritized improving mental health treatment statewide, partly to combat Californias seemingly intractable homelessness crisis. His administration has argued that Mueller is setting impossible standards for improving treatment for about 34,000 imprisoned people with serious mental illnesses more than a third of Californias prison population.

Attorneys representing prisoners with mental illness vehemently disagree.

“It’s very unfortunate that the state officials have allowed this situation to get so bad and to stay so bad for so long, said Ernest Galvan, one of the prisoners attorneys in the long-running litigation. And I hope that this order, which the judge reserved as an absolute last resort, refocuses officials’ attention where it needs to be: bringing lifesaving care into the prisons, where it’s urgently needed.”

As part of her tentative contempt ruling in March, Mueller ordered Newsom personally, along with five of his top state officials, to read testimony by prison mental health employees describing the ongoing problem during a trial last fall.  

The other five were the directors of his departments of Corrections and Rehabilitation, State Hospitals, and Finance; the corrections departments undersecretary for health care services; and the deputy director in charge of its statewide mental health program.

Mueller limited her formal contempt finding to Corrections Secretary Jeff Macomber and two aides, Undersecretary Diana Toche and Deputy Director Amar Mehta.

Fundamentally, the overall record reflects defendants are following a business as usual approach to hiring, recruitment and retention that does very little if anything to transform the bureaucracy within which the hiring practices are carried out, Mueller wrote.

Mueller had ordered state officials to calculate each month what they owe in fines for each unfilled position exceeding a 10% vacancy rate among required prison mental health professionals. The fines are calculated based on the maximum annual salary for each job, including some that approach or exceed $300,000.

The 10% vacancy limit dates to a court order by Muellers predecessor more than 20 years ago, in 2002, in the class-action case filed in 1990 over poor treatment of prisoners with mental disorders.

The $112 million in pending fines for understaffing is one of three sets of fines Mueller imposed.

She imposed $1,000-a-day fines in 2017 for a backlog in sending imprisoned people to state mental health facilities. But that money, which now tops $4.2 million, has never been collected, and Mueller postponed a planned hearing on the fines after prisoners attorneys said the state was making improvements.

In April 2023, Mueller also began assessing $1,000-a-day fines for the states failure to implement court-ordered suicide prevention measures. A court-appointed expert said his latest inspection of prisons showed the state was still not in full compliance.

This article was produced by KFF Health News, which publishes California Healthline, an editorially independent service of the California Health Care Foundation. Related Topics California Courts Mental Health Public Health States Prison Health Care Contact Us Submit a Story Tip

Continue Reading

Business

Hollywood is dying – but insiders fear Trump’s tariff threat may hasten demise

Published

on

By

Hollywood is struggling, but some fear Trump's foreign film tariffs might do more harm than good

At Sony Production studios in Culver City, an area of Los Angeles steeped in the movie business, a steady stream of cars and lorries comes and goes through the security gate.

It occupies the MGM lot which dates back to 1924. Gone With the Wind, The Wizard of Oz and Citizen Kane were shot here and, more recently, Interstellar and The Dark Knight Rises. But this is no longer the beating heart of movie making.

In Tinsel Town the bright lights of the film industry have been fading for some time. Production in Hollywood has fallen by 40% in the last decade, sometimes moving to other states like New Mexico, New York and Georgia, but more often outside the US entirely.

Ask Martha a question about this story

A recent survey of film and TV executives indicates that Britain, Australia and Canada are now favoured locations over California when it comes to making movies.

San Andreas, a blockbuster film about a California earthquake, was shot in Australia. In America, a film about an Irish family settling in New York, was shot in Canada.

Although about a California disaster, San Andreas was actually shot in Australia. Pic: Jasin Boland/THA/Shutterstock
Image:
Although about a California disaster, San Andreas was actually shot in Australia. Pic: Jasin Boland/THA/Shutterstock

Trump’s movie tariff could deal knock-out blow to UK film industry, union says

More on Tariffs

The exodus of the film industry from Hollywood is mostly owing to economic reasons, with other countries boasting lower labour costs and more expansive tax incentives. But as productions have moved overseas, studios across Los Angeles are frequently empty and those who work behind the scenes are often out of work.

President Trump has approached this problem with a familiar reaction – sweeping tariffs, a 100% tariff on all foreign made films coming into the USA.

‘It’s a different kind of situation than producing cars overseas’

Justine Bateman is a filmmaker and sister of actor Jason Bateman. She is glad Trump is looking for solutions but does not understand how the tariffs will work. “I will say, I’m very glad to hear that President Trump is interested in helping the film business. But part of the problem is we just don’t have very much detail, do we?” she says.

“He’s made this big announcement, but we don’t have the detail to really mull over. He doesn’t even say whether it’s going to be films that are shown in the cinema or streaming movies, for example.

“Tariffs can be a profitable situation for when we’re just talking about hard goods, but something like a film and, particularly if you’ve got an American film that takes place in the south of France, you want to be in a particular location.

“So it’s a different kind of situation than producing cars overseas and bringing them back here.”

👉 Follow Trump100 on your podcast app 👈

At the Hand Prop Room in Los Angeles, they supply props for TV and film. The warehouse is brimful of virtually any prop you could imagine, from portraits of former presidents, to replica handguns to African artefacts and 18th century teapots. The walls are decorated with posters from some of the productions they’ve supplied, including Babylon, Oppenheimer and Ghostbusters.

Reynaldo Castillo believes the tariffs could be harmful to Hollywood unless properly thought through
Image:
Reynaldo Castillo believes the tariffs could be harmful to Hollywood unless properly thought through

‘It needs to be thought through’

In the past five years, the prop shop has been impacted by the COVID pandemic, by both the writers’ and actors’ strikes and the globalisation of the film industry. Business is at an all time low.

“It’s not helping when so many productions are not just leaving the state, but also leaving the country,” says Reynaldo Castillo, the general manager of the Hand Prop Room. “It’s Hollywood, we have the infrastructure that nobody else has and I think maybe to a certain point we took it for granted.

“I think we can all agree that we want more filming to stay in the country to help promote jobs. But you also don’t want to do something to hurt it.

“How does it work? Are there exceptions for X, Y, and Z? What about independent movies that have small budgets that are shot somewhere else that would destroy their ability to make something? It needs to be thought through and make sure it’s implemented the right way.”

Continue Reading

Politics

US Senate crypto bills stall amid Trump ties and ethics concerns

Published

on

By

US Senate crypto bills stall amid Trump ties and ethics concerns

US Senate crypto bills stall amid Trump ties and ethics concerns

Efforts to pass crypto legislation in the US Senate face mounting resistance amid growing ethical concerns around US President Donald Trump’s ties to crypto.

In a May 5 letter to the Office of Government Ethics, Senators Elizabeth Warren and Jeff Merkley said that Trump and his family stand to personally profit from an investment involving UAE state-backed firm MGX, crypto exchange Binance and World Liberty Financial (WLFI).

The senators called for an urgent probe, warning the deal may violate the US Constitution’s Emoluments Clause and federal bribery statutes.

At the center of the controversy is WLFI’s USD1 stablecoin, reportedly chosen for a $2 billion investment MGX plans to make into Binance.

The senators said the transaction amounts to a potential backdoor for foreign influence and self-enrichment, with Trump’s allies allegedly set to receive hundreds of millions of dollars:

“This deal raises the troubling prospect that the Trump and Witkoff families could expand the use of their stablecoin as an avenue to profit from foreign corruption.”

Further complicating ethics concerns, Trump hosted a $1.5 million-per-plate dinner on May 5 at his golf club in Sterling, Virginia. The event came just days after hosting a $1 million-per-plate fundraiser for the MAGA super PAC.

He also plans to hold a gala dinner with major Official Trump (TRUMP) memecoin holders on May 22, despite multiple US lawmakers expressing concerns.

US Senate crypto bills stall amid Trump ties and ethics concerns
Source: Elizabeth Warren

Related: America’s crypto renaissance is already failing; but we can fix it

GENIUS Act faces roadblocks

The Trump family’s controversial $2 billion crypto deal comes as the Senate prepares to vote on the Guiding and Establishing National Innovation for US Stablecoins (GENIUS) Act and other crypto-related bills.

The fallout is already being felt in Congress. Some Democratic lawmakers are pushing for additional hearings before advancing any legislation, while others question whether Trump’s personal stake in digital assets is undermining bipartisan support for crypto regulation.

On May 5, Senate Majority Leader John Thune signaled a willingness to amend the GOP-backed stablecoin legislation to pass the bill in the coming weeks.

Speaking to reporters, Thune said changes can be made on the floor and that he is waiting to hear what Democrats are asking for, per a report from Politico.

Internal GOP challenges also remain, with Senator Rand Paul expressing uncertainty about backing the bill, according to the report.

The stalling isn’t limited to the Senate. House Financial Services Committee ranking member Representative Maxine Waters plans to block a Republican-led event discussing digital assets on May 6.

The hearing, “American Innovation and the Future of Digital Assets,” will discuss a new crypto markets draft discussion paper pitched by the House agricultural and financial services committee chairs, Representatives Glenn Thompson and French Hill, respectively.

Related: Elizabeth Warren joins call for probe of Trump over crypto tokens

Crypto community slams political pushback

Prominent crypto figures are speaking out as political resistance threatens to derail stablecoin legislation in the Senate.

“Elizabeth Warren and Chuck Schumer haven’t learned their lesson,” Tyler Winklevoss, co-founder of Gemini, posted on X.

“If they want Democrats to continue losing elections, they will continue standing in front of crypto legislation like the stablecoin bill which they are stalling out in the Senate.”

US Senate crypto bills stall amid Trump ties and ethics concerns
Source: Tyler Winklevoss

Magazine: Trump’s crypto ventures raise conflict of interest, insider trading questions

Continue Reading

Technology

DoorDash to buy British food delivery firm Deliveroo for $3.9 billion in overseas push

Published

on

By

DoorDash to buy British food delivery firm Deliveroo for .9 billion in overseas push

A Deliveroo rider near Victoria station in London, England, on March 31, 2021.

Dan Kitwood | Getty Images

LONDON — British food delivery firm Deliveroo on Monday said it has agreed to a takeover offer from American rival DoorDash that values the company at £2.9 billion ($3.9 billion).

Deliveroo, which lets users order hot meals and groceries via an app, said its board agreed to an offer from DoorDash to acquire all issued and to be issued shares in the company for 180 pence a share.

That marks a 44% premium to Deliveroo’s closing price on April 4, the last business day prior to DoorDash’s initial offer letter.

Deliveroo shares jumped to a three-year high last week after the company confirmed it had received a takeover offer from DoorDash.

The transaction values Deliveroo at £2.9 billion on a fully diluted basis, the company said.

DoorDash said that the financial terms of the acquisition were final and would not be increased unless a third party steps in with a rival bid.

“I could not be more excited by the prospect of what DoorDash and Deliveroo will be able to accomplish together. We’ll cover more than 40 countries with a combined population of more than 1 billion people, enabling us to provide more local businesses with the tools and technology they need to thrive,” said Tony Xu, CEO and Co-founder of DoorDash.

International expansion

The acquisition deal marks an end to Deliveroo’s tumultuous ride as a public company.

Once viewed as a British tech darling, Deliveroo saw its shares tank 30% in 2021 in one of the worst trading debuts on the London Stock Exchange. Shares have continued to fall from that point and are down more than 50% from the firm’s £3.90 IPO price.

Continue Reading

Trending