This story, reported by Adam Echelman and Mikhail Zinchteyn, was originally published by CalMatters. Sign up for their newsletters.

###

In summary

The Trump administration is suing California, asking the state to end its policies allowing students without legal status to access in-state tuition and financial aid. But the administration’s legal argument is weak, according to top legal experts.

###

Hours after the Trump administration sued California last week, threatening to end key benefits for students without legal status, Michelle was scrolling social media when she saw a video that made her panic.

The Trump administration is challenging California’s policy of providing in-state tuition, scholarships and subsidized loans to immigrants without legal status — including Michelle, an immigrant who is a community college student in San Mateo County. CalMatters has agreed to withhold her full name because she fears drawing attention to her legal status.

On TikTok, rumors swirled. Michelle saw a video of a young man, around her age, asking if the Free Application for Federal Student Aid, or FAFSA, is gone. In reality, FAFSA is still around, and while the new lawsuit could affect some students’ financial aid, some top legal experts say the Trump administration is unlikely to win. Regardless, the court process may take weeks or much longer to resolve the government’s claims against California.

In the lawsuit, the U.S. Department of Justice alleges that California’s policy of granting in-state tuition and financial aid for some students without legal status is unconstitutional. Federal lawyers also argue that California’s policies violate a 1996 federal law, which bars states from providing benefits to residents without legal status that aren’t also available to U.S. citizens who live anywhere in the U.S. The Justice Department is arguing that California either needs to drop the policy or let all U.S. citizens, including those who are out-of-state, pay the same rate.

In California, over 100,000 college students lack legal status, according to one estimate by an alliance of university leaders who advocate for immigrants. Federal assistance, such as Pell grants and federal student loans, are off-limits to anyone who isn’t a U.S. citizen or does not have permanent legal status. California has its own money for college financial aid, which it distributes according to state law.

As long as individuals meet certain requirements, such as attending three years of high school in California, they’re eligible for in-state tuition, saving as much as $39,000 of dollars each year compared to their out-of-state peers. Once they meet those requirements, students without legal status can also qualify for the state’s cornerstone financial aid program, known as Cal Grant, though only a small fraction of these students actually apply for and receive it.

To Kevin Johnson, a law professor at UC Davis, Trump’s actions may be more about political wins than legal ones. “The Trump administration is engaged in a full-court press on undocumented immigrants and so-called sanctuary jurisdictions, and California and Governor Newsom in particular,” Johnson said. That the U.S. Department of Justice named the suit “United States of America v. Newsom” is another indication that this is political, he added.

Others noted that states have already invested in students without legal status and denying them an affordable path toward a college education is a waste of resources. Economists have pointed out that immigrants without status also are integral to the U.S. workforce and aren’t easily replaceable.

‘We didn’t expect them to go this low’

Even weak lawsuits or outright misinformation can make students nervous during November, when college and financial aid application season is in full swing.

On TikTok, videos of students panicking about the financial aid system surfaced last winter, after the Biden administration delayed and botched the rollout of the new FAFSA. Among its many glitches, the new form prevented students whose parents lacked a Social Security number from submitting their information.

After Trump was elected last November, fears about the total demise of federal financial aid swirled again on TikTok. Over the course of this year, as his administration targets universities and continues to dismantle the U.S. Department of Education, those fears have persisted.

In California, Trump seeks to impose a $1 billion penalty on UCLA for alleged civil rights abuses, though a federal judge recently handed the White House a temporary loss on that front. His administration is also suing California colleges and universities for alleged antisemitism violations and has sought to freeze or curtail billions of dollars in federal research funding.

Much of those freezes have been blocked or reversed by federal judges, but hundreds of millions of dollars still remain cut off to campuses. Much, if not all, of those friction points between California and Trump could be resolved through settlements and negotiations, which are political in nature, said UCLA law professor Hiroshi Motomura in an interview.

Before Trump was elected, state leaders, including Assemblymember David Alvarez, a Chula Vista Democrat, pushed for California to offer additional benefits to students without legal status, such as the opportunity to work campus jobs.

Now, with access to financial aid programs at risk for these students, Alvarez said the focus is shifting. “We didn’t expect it would go this low as to go after students that the president had previously said should be welcomed here.” In 2024, Trump told a podcast host that students should “automatically” receive “a Green Card,” otherwise known as permanent residency, when they get their college diploma.

Legal scholars doubt Trump’s lawsuit will win

The lawsuit against California is the Trump administration’s sixth against states with policies allowing in-state tuition for students without legal status. The White House went after Texas first, in June. Underscoring how much of a bipartisan issue in-state tuition is, Texan lawmakers were the first in the U.S. to enshrine the policy in 2001. In all, more than 20 states passed some in-state tuition policy benefiting some residents without legal status.Trump’s legal attacks on the policy this year prompted leaders in Kentucky, Oklahoma and Texas to side with the White House to terminate the benefit in those respective states. Some legal groups that want to continue in-state tuition for students lacking legal status are challenging those states’ moves.Trump has also sued Minnesota and Illinois, states with Democrats as governors and attorneys general who are challenging Trump’s lawsuits.

The U.S. Department of Justice says that the federal law in question bars students without legal status from receiving in-state tuition and financial aid benefits based on their living in the state. This, the federal lawyers argue, violates federal law since public campuses in California require U.S. citizens from other states to pay higher tuition rates. However, California’s law, Assembly Bill 540, doesn’t extend in-state tuition based on where students live, scholars and a previous court ruling say. Instead, students generally need to prove that they attended three years of high school or community college in California; they also need to earn in California a high school diploma or obtain enough community college credits to be eligible for transfer into a public university.The Department of Justice says those three-year high school or community college requirements are tantamount to an in-state residency criteria and therefore violate the 1996 federal law.But the California Supreme Court in 2010 already struck down that interpretation. The high court observed that some students living in areas bordering California are permitted to study at California high schools. High school students from out of state enrolled in private boarding schools also satisfy the requirement; they don’t count as residents of California either. And students who were residents of California during high school but moved to a different state could still enroll in California colleges or universities paying in-state tuition.

All of these scenarios require a student to complete the same AB 540 application as students who lack legal status. The only difference is that students without status must also complete an affidavit that they’ll pursue legal residency as soon as they can.

In fact, the University of California enrolled more students under AB 540 who were legal U.S. residents than those who weren’t, the state high court said then.

“If Congress had intended to prohibit states entirely from making unlawful aliens eligible for in-state tuition, it could easily have done so,” the state Supreme Court wrote in 2010. But Congress didn’t do that, the court noted.Lawmakers in California who passed AB 540 in 2001 knew what the federal law restricted, said Motomura, and they crafted a state law that wouldn’t contravene what Congress intended. “It was drafted to avoid the residency test, and it was drafted to avoid the exclusion of U.S. citizens,” he said.

What’s likely next

California has already signaled that it will fight the lawsuit. “The Trump Administration has once again missed the mark with its latest attack on California, and we look forward to proving it in court,” wrote Nina Sheridan, a spokesperson for the California Department of Justice.

Both the UC and the community college system said their tuition and financial aid policies have always been legally compliant. The Cal State University system did not respond to a request for comment.The Trump administration may also seek a preliminary injunction to halt California’s in-state tuition law for nonresidents, which would again expose Californians to a seesaw of temporary court orders, sometimes contradictory in nature, while the full legal merits of the case play out slowly in court.Thomas A. Saenz, president and general counsel for the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund, or MALDEF, thinks the U.S. Supreme Court will likely side with California despite its conservative orientation if the case goes that far.A major legal question underscoring the case against California is when and how federal rules preempt or supersede state laws. The Trump White House is arguing California’s in-state policies are preempted by federal law. But the legal concept of preemption is a pillar in jurisprudence. Liberal and conservative interests benefit similarly from a consistent application of preemption as a legal concept, Saenz said. For example, businesses rely on preemption rules in situations where a state law is more progressive or consumer-friendly than a federal rule and want courts to defend them from following the more demanding state rules.The U.S. Supreme Court is “going to be very wary of making bad law in the realm of preemption, because it could then come back to bite the right wing in protecting businesses,” Saenz said.

For Michelle and other students without legal status navigating their own financial aid applications — and the misinformation online — a series of temporary court orders could create more panic. Financial aid is top of mind, said Michelle, but she doesn’t have time to track the legal back-and-forth of her eligibility.

In addition to being a full-time student, Michelle works four days a week at a restaurant, saving up money not only to support herself but also her family. She’s the oldest of four kids and said she sends $500 to her parents each month.

College is “an opportunity for me to be someone in life, to make my parents proud,” she said. Asked about the lawsuit at the cafeteria of her college, Michelle made a choking gesture with her hand, as though the threat of losing financial aid next year could kill her. “Trump is taking that opportunity away because he doesn’t like immigrants.”

The deadline to submit financial aid applications for community college is Sept. 2, but Michelle is already working on her application, just in case.

Press release from the City of Eureka:

The City of Eureka is alerting residents and businesses about a fraudulent email scam impersonating the City’s Planning and Development Services Department. This email, sent from planning.eurekaca@usa.com, is not associated with the City of Eureka. 

Details of the Scam 

The scam involves a fraudulent invoice attached to the email, requesting a wire transfer payment. The invoice falsely uses the City of Eureka logo and includes incorrect contact information. These fraudulent emails are designed to appear official but are not affiliated with the City of Eureka. 

What to Do 

• Do not respond to the email or provide payment.
• Verify invoices of communications by contacting City of Eureka directly or the Development Services Department at 707-441-4160.
• If you have sent money or feel you have been a victim of a scam, contact the City of Eureka Police Department at 707-441-4044. 

How to Identify Legitimate City Communications and Invoices 

• All official City of Eureka emails end with @eurekaca.gov or @ci.eureka.ca.gov. Be cautious of any communication claiming to be from the City that does not follow this format.
• If you receive a suspicious email about payment for a planning or building application or have doubts about an email’s authenticity, please contact the Development Services Department immediately at 707-441-4160. 

Thank you for your vigilance in helping to protect our community safe from scams. 

Contact for Questions

For questions regarding the fraudulent Development Services emails and invoices, contact Miles Slattery, City Manager, phone: (707) 441-4184, email: mslattery@eurekaca.gov.

###

The Crisp Lounge and cannabis dispensary, which coupled weed sales and indoor consumption with everything from live music and comedy to pool tournaments, karaoke and “paranormal open mic” nights, is going out of business.

The owners announced the pending closure on social media this week, saying the smoking lounge’s last day of operations will be this Saturday while the dispensary at the other end of the building — a former used appliance store on Broadway, painted black with neon stoner graffiti — will remain open through the end of the year, or until its stock sells out. 

That marks two Eureka dispensary closure announcements in the past few days, with this one coming on the heels of one from the Gold Rush/Green Rush drive-through just half a mile down the road. 

Dean Crisp, the owner and founder of Crisp Lounge, said it’s a simple matter of supply and demand, with the city’s supply of weed shops far exceeding consumer demand in this depressed economy.

“There’s too many here,” Crisp said when we caught up with him at the lounge earlier today. “Why would I stay open when they’re gonna open four more here any day?” (There are, in fact, at least two more dispensaries expected to open on Broadway in the coming months.)

A Virginia native with a laid-back drawl, Crisp rode the rise and fall of Humboldt County’s green rush over the past 15-plus years. After building houses for a few years in Costa Rica, in 2009 he came to Humboldt (like many others) to trim weed and (like many others) wound up sticking around.

Crisp said he helped one guy build an indoor growing facility, which later burned to the ground. He then helped operate a farm for about a year before he and a friend “got our shit together” and started their own farming operation. Eventually, he was operating three farms off of Forest Service Route 1 in Southern Humboldt. 

“We had a good run for a while,” he said. “We created a lot of jobs and paid a lot of taxes.”

But legalization didn’t work out the way he (like many others) had hoped.

“We spent a fucking million dollars going legal — put in ponds and roads, you know, all the bullshit we had to do — and we didn’t make a fucking dime after doing all that shit,” Crisp said. “I used to pay over a hundred grand a year in taxes before I ever got a fucking plant in the ground.”

Still, he was optimistic when he sold his farms to launch Crisp Lounge. He began renovating the building right before the COVID pandemic but didn’t open until April of 2023 due mostly to permitting delays, he said. 

###

“I thought it would be a huge hit here because it’s a cool thing,” Crisp said. “Where can you go anywhere and consume cannabis, let alone inside, right? A lot of people like to come here because they don’t want to go to a bar. They don’t want to be around a bunch of alcoholics. So they come in here and they hang out and they burn one or they get a cup of coffee and they chill.”

But expenses — including “crazy” monthly rent and $7,000 in annual permitting fees from the City of Eureka — are high. And as the region’s economy has tanked, his competition seems only to increase. There are now more than a dozen dispensaries in Eureka alone. 

He’s a bit jaded about the local government’s regulatory approach. 

“Here’s how I feel about it: They know what’s going to happen to people here,” he said, referring to Eureka officials. “They know that if you put $200,000 into a building here for cannabis, you’re not gonna make a fucking dime, dude. But they’re gonna get their $5,000 to get their fuckin’ cut.” 

He sighed. “Maybe I’m wrong, but … all we got here is thrift stores, head shops and dispensaries.”

He later acknowledged that he put all of his eggs into this one basket and wound up losing it all — all except for the knowledge he’s gained. Crisp said he loves Humboldt and doesn’t want to leave, but there are opportunities for him in Florida. He’s confident that he can use what he’s learned here to advise aspiring weed entrepreneurs on the East Coast. 

Crisp hopes to liquidate his inventory by the middle of December and move to Florida sometime in the next five months. 

He took one more dig at how the city and county have regulated the industry, saying they “killed it” and drove everybody out of business. But then he added, “It would have happened anyway. I don’t think it would have happened as fast, to be honest with you. But it was inevitable. The gold rush is over for cannabis.”

He still believes in the concept of an Amsterdam-style consumption lounge, a place where you can smoke weed, sip espresso or kombucha and hang out with your friends. But he said the surrounding economy will have to be better for such an operation to succeed.

Still, Crisp has maintained the laid-back equanimity of a true Humboldt local. Looking back on his cannabis experiences here, he said, “It was a good run, bro.”

###

For decades, St. Vincent de Paul’s dining facility in Eureka has provided free home-cooked meals to food-insecure residents with the help of a core group of volunteers. But in the years following the COVID pandemic, the nonprofit has struggled to maintain its base as longtime volunteers retire and fewer people step up to replace them. 

Bob Santilli

“It’s a universal problem for any small-budget nonprofit organization,” Bob Santilli, board president for the St. Vincent de Paul Society - Redwood Region, told the Outpost. “The whole industry relies on an older clientele — typically retirees — who have the available time, and they are aging and dying off. … We recently lost a couple of long-term volunteers who were in their 90s — one passed away, and the other is in assisted care now. Right before our eyes, our core volunteer base is leaving us.”

Santilli believes the answer to the organization’s volunteer woes is getting more young people involved in the community service sector. 

For the last two years, Patti Dutton and Laura Middlemiss, leading members of Soroptimist International of Humboldt Bay, have helped connect the dining facility with local students through “S” Clubs, or service clubs, at Eureka High School and St. Bernard’s Academy that encourage girls and young women to help the community. The partnerships have brought dozens of first-time volunteers into the fold.

“Every Monday, I usually bring four girls to come down and spend two hours serving lunch to help out St. Vincent’s dining room,” Dutton told the Outpost while volunteering during a bustling lunch service on Monday. “They’re always a little hesitant at first, but then they come and do it and everyone, every time on the trip back to school says, ‘I want to come back, I want to do it again.’”

“I already have a sign-up list that goes through next spring, almost to the end of the school year,” she added. “That many kids are excited about coming to volunteer here.”

For St. Bernard’s student Alawna Hall, the two-year volunteer experience has helped her step out of her comfort zone and deepen her compassion for other people.

“I think [volunteering] helps you to get a better perspective and understanding that everyone walks different paths in life, and that you should be able to see them all and not judge, and just be there to help,” Hall said while taking a quick break from assembling lunch trays. “I think volunteering when you’re younger really helps you to develop and set up a better mindset for when you’re older. If you can put yourself in a situation to work with people who need help, and just be judge-free and there to help with nothing else benefiting you, I think it sets you up to succeed better in your own life.”

Scarlett Zerlang, another St. Bernard’s student, acknowledged that a lot of her peers get into volunteer work to satisfy community service requirements for school or scholarship applications, “but once you start doing it, you realize how fulfilling it is,” she said.

“It’s fun to serve people and to see their smiles,” Zerlang continued. “Everyone’s so kind here, and it’s just nice to do something outside of yourself, right? … I think that when we introduce that to kids during high school, hopefully they can carry that feeling on and continue to serve their community outside of high school.”

Earlier this year, Natalie Heckman, student support counselor at East High School in Fortuna, started bringing in another group of students to lend a hand with meal prep and clean up on Tuesdays. The volunteer work helps students check off some of the service hours needed to graduate and gives them an opportunity to give back to their community.

“I think it’s super important — especially as a school counselor — because all I want is [for] my kids to be passionate about something and to learn from people who are helping our community,” Heckman said. “For some of my students, it’s been a full-circle moment because they came here and they ate as young children with their families … and now they’re volunteering and giving back. It’s been eye-opening.”

The extra hands in the kitchen are welcome additions for Mary Price, the 20-year head cook at St. Vinny’s dining hall. Like Santilli, she’s seen the organization’s volunteer base wane over the years, putting additional strain on regular support staff. The surge in new volunteers “frees [staff] up to do other things, and gives them self-fulfillment.”

“[Volunteering] shows them that things aren’t always what you see on TV. This is the real world; this is about as real as it gets,” Price said, gesturing to the dining hall. “Some of their parents were really wary when they first started volunteering … but now we have a lot of parents that come back and volunteer [with them].”

St. Vinny’s staff is always on the lookout for volunteers of all ages, but Santilli wants to keep working with local schools to keep the students in the mix. 

“You get to talking with these youngsters, and they’re very upbeat when they’re here, very self-reliant and they quickly learn whatever tasks are presented to them,” he said. “And now, there’s some talkin’ like, ‘I’d like to go into sociology when I go to college’ or ‘I want to volunteer on my own time.’

Those interested in volunteering can contact St. Vincent de Paul’s dining hall at (707) 445-9588. Additional information can be found here.

Humboldt County Sheriff’s Office press release:

On July 26, 2025, a deputy involved shooting occurred in the Glendale area. When we have a critical incident, we want to release as much information as possible as soon as the investigation allows. Today we are able to share with our community a critical incident video which includes an overview of the July 26th incident and corresponding video.

The below linked video contains graphic images and explicit language that may be disturbing to some viewers. This video is not suitable for children. Viewer discretion advised.

PREVIOUSLY:

• Wanted Felon Shot Dead Near Blue Lake in Standoff With Humboldt County Sheriff’s Deputies, Agency Reports
• Sheriff’s Office Identifies Man Shot by Deputies in Glendale Saturday

###

Press release from the Eureka Police Department:

On Monday, November 24, 2025 at approximately 12:28 p.m., Eureka Police Department Patrol and CSET officers were dispatched to a report of a physical altercation involving security personnel at a Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) building in the 900 block of Koster Street. Prior to officers’ arrival, the involved parties had separated.

During the subsequent investigation, which included interviews with multiple witnesses, officers learned that 53-year-old Henry Robert James, of Loleta, entered the facility and, after exiting the restroom, engaged in a verbal altercation with a security officer. During this encounter, James reportedly directed racial slurs toward another security officer regarding the officer’s ethnicity and immigration status. When told to leave, James reportedly struck a security officer with his hand and raised a clenched fist in a threatening manner. The security officer pushed James to the ground in response.

While on the ground, James allegedly scratched and attempted to bite the security officer, used a pen to stab at the officer, and made derogatory statements regarding the officer’s sexual orientation. The security officer sustained visible injuries.

As the struggle continued, additional security officers responded to assist. James allegedly attempted to pull responding officers to the ground and attempted to spit on one of them. During the incident, 21-year-old Kylie Renee James, also of Loleta, attempted to push past security officers and reportedly used racial slurs referencing another security officer’s ethnicity and immigration status.

City Ambulance personnel responded and transported Henry James to a local hospital.

Based on witness statements and evidence, officers developed probable cause to believe Henry James committed felony assault involving a hate crime. Because he was unable to be medically cleared for booking at the Humboldt County Correctional Facility, the Eureka Police Department will coordinate with the Humboldt County District Attorney’s Office to obtain a warrant for his arrest.

Kylie Renee James was arrested and booked into the Humboldt County Correctional Facility for assault and battery involving a hate crime. This case remains under active investigation. Anyone with additional information is asked to contact the Eureka Police Department Criminal Investigations Unit at 707-441-4300.

###

This story was originally published by CalMatters. Sign up for their newsletters.

###

In summary

California utilities regulators are bringing down “return on equity” payments to power company shareholders. It’s the lowest profit margin in 20 years for PG&E and Southern California Edison, but will be hard to notice in your payments.

With California electric rates stuck at nearly the highest in the nation, the state’s utility regulator is poised to lower the payout shareholders can receive from California’s three large investor-owned power companies.

In a proposed decision, the California Public Utilities Commission recommended dropping the “return on equity” by 0.35% each for Pacific Gas & Electric, Southern California Edison and San Diego Gas & Electric. If approved, shareholders of all three companies would see a potential return next year of just under 10%. Such returns for PG&E and Edison haven’t dipped below double digits in at least 20 years.

Utilities said the decline would affect their ability to bring in needed investment for their work. Critics of the decision said that the decline is too small to meaningfully impact ratepayers’ bills, even if it’s a step in the right direction.

“California and other [public utility commissions] authorize rates of return that are far in excess of the statutory requirement,” said Mark Ellis, former chief economist at Sempra, which owns San Diego Gas & Electric.

The California Public Utility Commission is expected to vote on the decision in December.

Californians pay the second-highest electric rates in the U.S. after Hawaii, according to the most recent figures from the U.S. Energy Information Administration. A number of factors go into those rates, including wildfire mitigation costs. PG&E in particular has attracted the ire of California customers for its frequent rate hikes within the last year.

Baked into those bills is the return on equity, money meant to compensate shareholders for the risk of doing business. These shareholder return rates are set by each state’s utility regulators and hover nationally around 10%. If approved, PG&E’s rate would be 9.93% (down from 10.28%), Edison would be 9.98% (down from 10.33%), and San Diego Gas & Electric would be 9.88% (down from 10.23%). These rates are not automatically guaranteed – utilities can fall short of this return if they don’t keep down costs, such as project overruns or unexpected lawsuit fees.

A small change in this rate can be a difference of millions of dollars for ratepayers. The return is a percentage of the rate base, the total value of a utility’s assets it can earn a return on; this includes projects such as building a new power plant, for example. The rate bases for California’s three large investor-owned utilities have steadily grown each year as they add new customers and projects, increasing the amount that shareholders can receive.

PG&E, for example, had a 10% shareholder return in 2023, a possible return of about $125 million. Had it been 1% lower, the potential return would have been $12.5 million less.

“The proposed cost of capital decision needs refinement to better reflect California’s unique risks and market realities,” said Edison spokesperson Jeff Monford. “Making those refinements in the final decision will enhance SCE’s ability to finance essential infrastructure projects for a more reliable, resilient and ready electric grid.”

PG&E spokesperson Jennifer Robison echoed this sentiment, saying the decision “fails to acknowledge current elevated risks to help attract the needed investment for California’s energy systems.”

Anthony Wagner, spokesperson at San Diego Gas & Electric, said, “A decision that accurately reflects these realities is essential to enabling investments that reduce wildfire risk, strengthen reliability, replace aging infrastructure and advance California’s clean energy transition for the benefit of the communities we serve.”

Utilities routinely request these rates be pushed higher because they are a key part of what goes into utilities’ credit rating, affecting the interest they pay on loans for infrastructure investments. But in recent years, experts and consumer advocates point to a mismatch – the utility industry is typically considered low-risk, but critics say the shareholder return rates don’t reflect that. Rates for U.S. 10-year treasury bonds, which are considered the benchmark for a risk-free investment, are about half of the national average for approved utility shareholder return rates. And it’s costing utility ratepayers across the country as much as $7 billion annually, according to academics.

Ellis, the former Sempra economist, said there is a way to lower shareholder returns while keeping customer bills in check and maintaining credit ratings that the commission has not yet explored – changing the balance of debt and equity each utility has.

“You really need to understand credit,” he said. “This is where they’re going to get you.”

The commission is allowed to set the debt-equity balance when it determines shareholder returns, but it left this unchanged for all three utilities in its proposed decision for 2026. Keeping shareholder return rates high as the main means for keeping credit ratings up, Ellis said, unnecessarily burdens ratepayers.