By Miriam Raftery
March 10, 2025 (San Diego) -- As President Donald Trump rolls out hefty tariffs on imported goods from America’s biggest trading partners—Mexico, Canada, and China, American businesses and consumers are bearing the brunt, with higher prices on everything from steel and lumber to food and consumer products.
The action has drawn opposition even from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, normally a staunch Republican ally. In a press release, the Chamber warns, “Tariffs on Canada and Mexico will have a real, devastating impact on thousands of small businesses across the nation — and on all Americans in the form of higher prices.”
While the U.S. Chamber shares concerns about border security and the scourge of fentanyl, unfair trading practices, tariffs on Canada and Mexico won't solve those problems and instead would lead to higher prices for Americans, the business organization states.
Chamber President and CEO Suzanne Clark, in her annual State of American Business, said pointedly. “"The bottom line is this: tariffs are a tax paid by Americans and their broad and indiscriminate use would stifle growth at the worst possible time.” She stressed that to boost economic growth, America must participate in the global economy. That includes seizing opportunities to increase trade.
Trump has justified the tariffs as intended to encourage production of goods made in America and ultimately boost the economy.
He signed an executive order on February 1st to impose 25% tariffs on imports from Canada and Mexico, and 10% on Chinese imports. He did so by declaring a national emergency over undocumented immigration and drug trafficking. Trump later paused the Mexican and Canadian tariffs by 30 days and extended an exemption for the auto industry.
China meanwhile countered by announcing hefty new duty charges on numerous American goods ranging from cars and agricultural machinery to crude oil, coal and liquified natural gas.
Next up in mid-February, Trump announced a whopping 25% tariff on steel and aluminum imports, metals that are used in many consumer products from vehicles to cookware. He also called for reciprocal tariffs on any goods that other countries tax, a move that economists warn could create chaos for the global business community.
He’s also pledged to soon add tariffs on products from other countries, including a 25% tariff on some goods from our allies in Europe as well as tariffs on imports from India.
On March 4th, Trump doubled the tariff on Chinese imports to 20%.
After Trump doubled the Chinese tariffs, China imposed tariffs of up to 15% on numerous American farm exports and levied export controls on some two dozen American companies, Associated Press reports.
Canada slapped tariffs on over $100 billion worth of American goods over just 21 days. One Canadian province removed all U.S.-made alcoholic beverages from store shelves, replacing them with Canadian liquor. Canadian travelers have begun cancelling visits to the U.S., harming the American tourism industry.
Mexico’s President Claudia Sheibaum has said her country will also impose retaliatory tariffs but has not yet provided details.
In early March, Trump postponed the 25% tariffs on some Mexican and Canadian imports for a month, crediting Mexico’s president with working to reduce drug smuggling and illegal border crossings, though the U.S. has also ramped up border security under the Trump administration.
The impacts have sent the stock market tumbling, fueling fears of a recession. Trump has said he doesn’t know if a recession can be avoided.
The effects of the Trump tariffs are also being felt locally.
Brent Schertzer, managing director of apartment developer Holland Partner Group, told the San Diego Union Tribune that tariffs on steel and other building materials could add millions of dollars to large construction projects. He said that material suppliers will have no choice but to charge more for steel, or risk going out of business.
Alan Gin, a professor of economics at the University of San Diego, told KUSI Fox 5 that some of the biggest cost hikes for Americans will include vehicles, oil and gas, electronics, and groceries — further fueling the inflation that have already caused hardships for many U.S. households.
East County News Service
March 10, 2025 (San Diego's East County) -- Shane Capezio, 22, has been arrested after allegedly kidnapping a ride-share driver in East County. The Lyft driver texted 9-1-1 and told the dispatcher that she was being held against her will by a passenger she picked up in Spring Valley, who told the driver that he had a gun, says Sergeant Kenneth Seel with the San Diego County Sheriff’s department.
Capezio reportedly told the driver to take him to a dispensary located in the 3500 block of Harris Street in Lemon Grove. Deputies from the Lemon Grove Sheriff's Substation and Rancho San Diego Sheriff's Station arrived at the dispensary's parking lot, where they "found a struggle taking place inside the car between Capezio and the driver," says Sgt. Seel.
Deputies quickly intervened and detained Capezio. The driver was not seriously injured.
A preliminary investigation by deputies found that Capezio did not have a gun. He was arrested on numerous charges, including kidnapping, robbery, false imprisonment, dissuading a victim and preventing a victim from calling 9-1-1. Capezio was booked into the San Diego Central Jail.
Text to 9-1-1 is available in San Diego County. This includes the San Diego County Sheriff's Office, as well as all police and fire/Emergency Medical Services (EMS) agencies.
To watch a video about how Text to 9-1-1 works, click here.
Calling is still the fastest way to reach 9-1-1. However, there are situations when texting may be the better option, if:
• You're deaf, hard of hearing, non-verbal or have difficulty speaking
• You're in a situation where it's not safe to call 9-1-1 for help
• You're having a medical emergency and cannot speak on the phone
How does Text to 9-1-1 work?
• Enter the numbers 911 in the "To" field
• Give the location and nature of your emergency
• Send the text message
• Respond to dispatcher questions and follow instructions.
By Karen Pearlman
March 6, 2025 (La Mesa) -- The five-member Grossmont Healthcare District Board of Directors has decided not to renew the contract of CEO Christian Wallis.
Wallis, who was hired by the district in 2021 for a two-year contract at $215,000 per year, was given a two-year extension and a cost of living raise in 2023 to $247,424 annually. He succeeded Barry Jantz, who retired after 16 years of service.
GHD's board made the decision during its Tuesday morning board meeting on March 4 in closed session, after which the district’s legal counsel reported out with a public statement that the board voted 4-1 to not renew Wallis's contract.
GHD released a statement about Wallis's departure on Thursday evening, March 6:
"The Grossmont Healthcare District Board of Directors, in a 4-1 vote, has decided not to extend the CEO’s employment agreement beyond its current term, which expires on May 17, 2025. Additionally, the Board majority determined that a leadership transition was in the best interest of the organization, effective March 4, 2025. The Board also voted unanimously (5-0) to offer the CEO a severance agreement.
"We appreciate Christian Wallis’s service and contributions to Grossmont Healthcare District and thank him for his leadership. The Board remains focused on ensuring continuity and stability as we move forward and will provide further updates regarding interim leadership and next steps in the coming weeks.
"At this time, our priority is maintaining the organization’s mission and operations. We will not be commenting further on personnel matters."
A Navy veteran, when Wallis was hired, he had more than 27 years of leadership experience in the healthcare field in the private sector, the federal government and international healthcare settings.
He was previously regional/state vice president of Health Information Technology Support Services for Advocate Aurora Health in Illinois. He also served as the VP of operations for Advocate Condell Medical Center in Libertyville, Ill.
The GHD website notes that a FY22-23 CEO evaluation took place in closed session on Nov. 18, 2022 during its Board of Directors meeting.
The board will have a discussion about replacing Wallis at a later time, possibly as soon as the week of March 10. The district's next meeting is 9 a.m. on Thursday, March 20.
Council fields questions and concerns regarding County’s project planned on Caltrans property
Story and photos by Karen Pearlman
March 6, 2025 (Lemon Grove) – The controversy and concerns surrounding a planned interim housing project at Troy Street and Sweetwater Road continues to drive a wedge between residents and members of the Lemon Grove City Council -- and looks to be headed for discussion in a future closed session.
San Diego County-spearheaded the temporary housing project, an $11.1 million plan to build up to 70 tiny homes for people experiencing homelessness on Caltrans-owned property in Lemon Grove. The project was the subject of a special Lemon Grove City Council meeting held March 4 at the Roberto Alvarez Auditorium.
The cabins are expected to start construction this year and be finished sometime in 2026.
The meeting included a presentation by four county staff members and brought out nearly 200 residents plus other interested individuals packing the auditorium. Some said they have been asking for the City Council to listen to their concerns and act on their behalf since last July.
First-term Lemon Grove Mayor Alysson Snow and veteran City Councilmember Jennifer Mendoza were candid about the need for housing in the city.
Mayor Snow (photo, right, with Councilmember Mendoza) said, “I understand that there is a population of people here in Lemon Grove who don’t want these cabins. There’s also a population of people who absolutely, desperately need these cabins... a population who really need help, and this is a big help to that.”
Mendoza said she has long been part of the Interfaith Shelter Network that advocates for those individuals who are homeless, and said there is a dire need for Lemon Grove to step up for those living on the street or in their vehicles.
Newly elected Lemon Grove councilmembers Jessyka Heredia and Steve Faiai as well as newly appointed councilmember Yadira Altamirano -- who previously served on the council in 2019-20 -- peppered the county staff with questions and concerns about who would be living in the homes, how they would be chosen and why their presence could impede the safety of residents.
All three said they understand the need to house those who are living on the street, but expressed interest in making unhoused Lemon Grove residents the top priority when considering who should live in the cabins—not homeless people from other areas.
Photo, left: tiny homes in El Cajon, courtesy of Meridian Baptist Church in El Cajon
A majority of the approximately three dozen speakers shared concerns, including the close proximity of the planned cabins to a school, potentially reduced property values, a liquor store across the street and the exorbitant cost, which will also include annual charges of $3 million for ongoing operations needs.
A contingent of those opposed to the plan to house a mixture of unsheltered veterans, senior citizens, transitional aged youths and adults held little back at the nearly four-hour meeting.
Former Lemon Grove City Council member Liana LeBaron called out Snow, who defeated LeBaron in the race for mayor last year, and called the project “a money grab.”
“County officials’ intentions are to put people who are suffering from drug and alcohol addiction and severe mental health issues right next to a preschool,” LeBaron said.
LeBaron encouraged the Council to meet in closed session to take legal action against the county about the cabins “and plan a strong legal fight against the project,” and told them to “stand up for us.”
Larry Bonamo, who said he is a longtime resident of the city and who owns a Spring Valley business directly across the street from the site, said while “we all want to help the homeless,” those individuals experiencing homelessness who have mental illness and drug problems “don’t want to live by rules and regulations” and should not be in the area.
He said Spring Valley, which “turned down the project”, will be impacted the most.
Initially, the project was supposed to bring 150 sleeping cabins to Spring Valley. Objections from Spring Valley residents to the San Diego County Board of Supervisors about the location of the cabins near residences and protected sites led to the county’s decision to move the project to Lemon Grove, but with less than half the number of cabins originally planned.
Last July, Supervisors voted 4-0 to move forward on the project, with then-chair Nora Vargas absent, a vote that came two days before a previously planned community forum in Lemon Grove about the project.
Bonamo said the project “doesn’t do anything for the homeless in Spring Valley or Lemon Grove.”
“We don’t need another 70 to 140 people,” he added. “We already have enough problems here at this location. We the business people and the citizens have to deal with shopping carts, trash, fights, property they’re using as a toilet, bothering our customers, breaking into homes, breaking into cars.”
While county staff told those at the meeting that coordinated referrals and intakes into the program would be led by the county’s Office of Homeless Solutions and would exclude those with certain criminal backgrounds such as registered sex offenders, arsonists or active felony warrants, many in attendance said they didn’t believe that.
Amy Reichert, who lost a 2023 bid for county supervisor in District 4 (which encompasses Lemon Grove) to Monica Montgomery Steppe, said that residents of the city had been lied to when Snow told residents that the project would house working families and seniors.
“Cabins only accommodate two people,” Reichert said. “These... are not habitable for a family of four.”
Four people who have been homeless or currently are experiencing homelessness spoke in favor of the cabins, including Rachel Hayes (photo, left), who said she has been “homeless for over 10 years, including in Lemon Grove and probably in every city in San Diego... and in almost every shelter in San Diego.”
Hayes said she found housing through Alpha Project about 1½ years ago in permanent, supportive housing.
She credited the nonprofit’s wraparound services as being crucial to her ability to feel safe, then shared the importance of being able to have a home with a door that shuts.
"Not everybody out there are drug addicts or mentally ill,” Hayes said. “I support these cabins and you (elected officials) are brave to go ahead and do this. If I were on the streets, that’s where I would want to be, in one of your cabins. Because you have a door that you can close and with that door comes peace, serenity and dignity.”
A few city councilmembers and former elected officials from other jurisdictions also attended, with two speaking out about the need for compassionate care for those who are unhoused.
El Cajon City Councilman Steve Goble (photo, right) shared that he is proud of the success of his city’s tiny homes project, on the grounds of Meridian Baptist Church on Third Street since 2022.
“Forty-two women have gone through those cabins, and 78 percent have gone on to permanent housing,” said Goble, who helped hammer nails to build those cabins.
Snow acknowledged that Lemon Grove is without shelter and without resources, and that the City needs to step up.
“We send our people who are unhoused out to (other) communities to get services,” she said.
Since 2022, the County has been exploring emergency housing options as part of the Compassionate Emergency Solutions and Pathways to Housing Implementation Plan.
The plan outlines community desire for non-congregate shelters such as sleeping cabins, safe parking and RV parking options.
The Troy Street site can host up to 70 sleeping cabins, restrooms, laundry, and onsite services, county staff said at the meeting.
Onsite services would include case management, housing navigation to permanent housing options, access to behavioral health services for those who have the needs, access to public benefits, employment or support with disability benefits, credit repair and other supportive services.
By Miriam Raftery
Photo, left: photos of some items stolen Feb. 23 from Hatfield Creek Winery’s owner
March 6, 2025 (Ramona) – The Sheriff’s department seeks public help to find robbers who stole nearly $15,000 worth of jewelry and collectible coins from the owner’s home at Hatfield Creek Vineyard and Winery on State Route 78 in Ramona.
Crimestoppers is offering a $1,000 reward for information leading to the arrest of the thieves, who may have targeted two other Ramona wineries on the same day, February 23.
The suspects are described as two heavy-set, possibly Hispanic men, says Sergeant Daniel Sloppye. The men are believed to have committed the crime at Hatfield Creek Winery around 4 p.m.
Between 3:45 and 5 p.m., two other wineries nearby, Barrel 1 Winery and Correcaminos Vineyard and Winery, both reported suspicious persons,
The San Diego Union-Tribune reports that the owner of the Barrel 1 Winery says two men in their 20s or 30s knocked on the door of her home that afternoon. They asked where the tasting room, then drove off without visiting it. She described their vehicle as an older black four-door Mercedes Benz. The owner of Correcaminos said her husband went into their home to feed their two dogs and found two young men inside who ran off when the dogs barked, then drove away in a black sedan.
Sgt, Sloppye says no crime reports were filed, because no thefts took place at the other two wineries. “As a precaution, deputies are conducting extra patrols at wineries in the Ramona area,” he says.
Photo, right, by Miriam Raftery: Hatfield Creek Vineyards Owner Elaine Lyttleton
Hatfield Creek Vineyards and Winery owner Elaine Lyttleton told the Union-Tribune that the stolen jewelry includes an antique ring given to her mother by her godmother in 1925. “That was my wedding band that can never be replaced with anything,” she said. Other pieces were gifts bequeathed to Lyttleton by her best friend.
Anyone with information about the home burglary or the stolen items is asked to call the San Diego County Sheriff's Office at (858) 868-3200. You can also call the Crime Stoppers anonymous tip line at (888) 580-8477. Crime Stoppers is offering up to a $1,000 reward to anyone with information that leads to an arrest in this case.
Visit www.sdcrimestoppers.org for information on how to send web or mobile app tips.
By Miriam Raftery
March 5, 2025 (San Diego’s East County) – A major storm system will bring strong winds and rain across our region, with heavy snow forecast starting tonight in East County mountains. Mount Laguna could receive up to a foot of snow, with up to eight inches on Palomar Mountain and three inches in Julian by Friday morning. Heavy snow will make it difficult to travel above 4,000 feet in elevation.
In urban areas, flooding is possible. El Cajon, La Mesa, and other areas are expected to receive up to an inch and a half of rain, the National Weather Service predicts.
Along the coast, a small craft advisory is in effect through Friday morning due to expected high surf and high seas.
Clear weather is forecast for the weekend, but another storm system may bring more rain, snow, and strong winds starting Monday and Tuesday.
By Chris Jennewein, Times of San Diego, a member of the San Diego Online News Association
Photo: President Donald Trump addresses Congress. Screenshot from C-SPAN
March 5, 2025 (Washington, D.C.) - President Donald Trump told Congress Tuesday that “the American dream is surging bigger and better than ever before” and promised that new tariffs on Mexico — despite worrying San Diego businesses — will help achieve that goal.
He said tariffs are “about protecting the soul of our country,” though acknowledged they would cause “a little disturbance” to consumers, businesses and farmers.
It wasn’t an official State of the Union message — that happens in the second, third and fourth years of a presidency — but came with all the trappings. He spoke for a record one hour and 39 minutes, with Republicans repeatedly clapping and Democrats largely silent.
Trump ordered 25% tariffs on Mexico and Canada earlier Tuesday, causing the stock market to swoon, erasing all of the gains since Trump was elected.
The president said that in addition to the tariffs on America’s closest neighbors, he would impose reciprocal tariffs on all countries April 2.
“We’re been ripped off for decades by nearly every country on earth,” said Trump.
“Whatever they tax us, we will tax them. … We will take in trillions and trillions of dollars.”
Tariffs are taxes on American companies that import products. So much of that money would actually come from American consumers if the tariffs continue.
Before the address, the San Diego Regional Chamber of Commerce issued a statement opposing tariffs because of the potential economic damage to the San Diego region.
“Hardworking business owners in our region and across the country invest in their communities, create jobs, and drive innovation,” said Kenia Zamarripa, the chamber’s Vice President of International and Public Affair. “Using tariffs as a negotiation tactic on our North American trading partners is a threat to this very foundation.”
“It is a threat that is felt very acutely here in San Diego where our region’s economy is deeply tied to cross-border commerce,” Zamarripa said. “We are already seeing the strain these tariffs place on local businesses, from manufacturers to retailers.”
Rep. Mike Levin, a Democrat who represents north coastal San Diego and south Orange counties, criticized the impact of the tariffs on American consumers.
“Every time Trump talks about tariffs tonight, ask this: How does this lower the cost of eggs? How does this help you afford a home? It does not — it raises prices on cars, food, and supplies,” said Levin, who after the speech accused the President of issuing a “blizzard of lies.”
San Diego Democrat Sara Jacobs’ criticism went beyond Trump’s proposals and extended to his entire party.
“Wild cheers for tax cuts for the 1% and corporations,” she posted on X. “Meanwhile, YOUR costs for groceries, gas, and housing are going up. Meet the Republican Party.”
Rep. Scott Peters, another Democrat representing San Diego, said on BlueSky: “I debated attending the President’s speech tonight given his blatant disrespect for Congress. I decided to attend to send a message from SD that his DOGE cuts are devastating critical research like that of my guest, @ucsdhealthsci.bsky.social Alzheimer’s researcher, Dr. Jim Brewer.”
And Democratic Rep. Juan Vargas, representing San Diego’s border district, said on X: “I joined more than 200 House Democrats to send a clear message to Speaker Johnson and Republicans: No cuts to Social Security. No cuts to Medicare. No cuts to Medicaid. Hands off these vital programs!”
Republican Rep. Darrell Issa of East County cheered Trump’s revelation that a plotter of the Abbey Gate attack that killed 13 American troops during the chaotic withdrawal from Afghanistan 3 1/2 years ago had been apprehended and was “right now on his way here to face the swift sword of American justice.”
“Best news of the night,” Issa said on X. He’s been among the most forceful members of Congress advocating for families of the dead service members.
Trump also vowed to boost America’s defense industrial base.
“We are also going to resurrect the American shipbuilding industry, including commercial shipbuilding and military shipbuilding,” he said in the longest such presidential address to a joint session of Congress.
He announced plans to create a new Office of Shipbuilding in the White House “that offers special tax incentives to bring this industry home to America where it belongs.”
That would be good news for San Diego Bay shipbuilder General Dynamics NASSCO, which calls itself the “only full-service shipyard on the West Coast.”
But Trump also asserted without basis: “We used it to make so many ships. We don’t make them anymore very much, but we’re going to make them very fast, very soon. It will have a huge impact.”
In fact, NASSCO says on its website: “Since the early 1960s, NASSCO has designed and built upwards of 70 large, ocean-going vessels for the Navy,” including combat logistics support ships, amphibious ships, destroyer tenders, hospital ships and a “variety of strategic sealift and other support ships.”
Local Assemblyman working to minimize surveillance pricing, while new FTC chairman blocks public comments
By G. A. McNeeley
March 5, 2025 (San Diego) -- Most people might not know that companies with an online presence are using personal information about customer’s buying habits to charge them a higher price for products, if they think you’re likely to pay it. This is a practice known as “surveillance pricing.”
This practice has spread in recent years, according to consumer and privacy watchdogs, and it’s become increasingly difficult to escape, no matter how often we clear our cookies or tighten our privacy settings.
But with the new Federal Trade Commission (FTC) Chairman blocking consumer comments and not taking action at a national level, state legislators are stepping up to the plate.
San Diego Assemblyman Introduces Bill To Prohibit Surveillance Pricing
Assemblymember Chris Ward (D-78) from San Diego told KPBS, “What we have found is a growing body of evidence where companies are being encouraged to use surveillance pricing, using your own personal data from your cell phone, from the IP address attached to your home computer, to modulate the pricing on goods and services that you pay.”
“That runs completely afoul to what we believe should be a direct, very basic consumer interest that you should pay the same price for the same product, regardless of who you are,” Ward adds.
Ward has introduced AB-446 (2025-2026 Legislative Session), to prohibit surveillance pricing in California.
“At a time when prices for basic necessities are rising across the board, it is more critical than ever to ensure that people are not being unfairly charged higher prices due to their actual or perceived characteristics,” said Ward, in a press release. “The right to fair pricing should not be a privilege for the few but a fundamental protection for all. One product, one price.”
Ward pointed out that price discrimination can prey on people in poorer neighborhoods.
“If they are farther away from some stores and it’s a lot harder to get certain products, companies know this and they are increasing the prices for some products at those very stores because you don’t have as many options,” Ward told KPBS.
Ward’s staff said his assembly bill, AB-446, will soon be heard by the California Assembly’s privacy committee.
Other California Lawmakers Are In Agreement
In many cases, surveillance pricing is legal, but some California lawmakers want to change that.
“You walk into a grocery store, you’re surveilled,” Kristin Heidelbach told KQED. Heidelbach is the Legislative Director for United Food & Commercial Workers Western States Council, which is backing AB-446, which “would prohibit a person from setting a price offered to a consumer-based, in whole or in part, upon personally identifiable information, as defined, gathered through an electronic surveillance technology, as defined, including electronic shelving labels.”
“They have all the tools they need to track you from the time you walk inside the grocery store,” Heidelbach added. “Then retailers take those data points, and they will adjust the price… while you’re standing in a store. They can track on your phone how many times you’ve looked up something. You go to pick up a gallon of milk, and it’s one price, and then by the time you get up to the front, the price has already fluctuated.”
California already has some protections in place in the form of The California Consumer Privacy Act, which limits the amount of information that businesses can collect and use to make decisions about consumers. “But, more can be done,” Maureen Mahoney, Deputy Director of Policy & Legislation for the California Privacy Protection Agency, wrote in an email to KQED.
“Consumers shouldn’t have to worry that where they live or how they browse a store will be used to determine how much they pay for important purchases,” Mahoney added, in her email.
State Senator Aisha Wahab has introduced a couple of bills (SB-384 and SB-259) that would restrict companies from using algorithms for dynamic pricing. She said she expects pushback from a variety of industries, and not just in Silicon Valley, as dynamic pricing has become a big money maker.
“But I have always seen my job as a policymaker is to put safeguards there to protect the average person,” Wahab told KQED.
With an established history of leading in the consumer privacy space, California lawmakers are joining those in other states like Colorado, Georgia, and Illinois to pick up where federal regulators are expected to leave off.
FTC Publishes Surveillance Pricing Report
The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) issued its preliminary “surveillance pricing” report, which examined the hidden techniques companies can use when determining how much to charge particular individuals.
The FTC found that retailers use data such as scrolling habits, purchase history, and location in charging people different prices for the same product. Even how long we take to respond and engage with emails is tracked and incorporated into pricing.
The variables used by companies include, “where the consumer is, who the consumer is, what the consumer is doing, and prior actions a consumer has taken, such as clicking on a specific button or element on webpage, watching a video, or adding a particular item to their cart or wish list,” said the FTC study.
According to the report, companies could collect “real-time information about a person’s browsing and transaction history,” and then decide whether to offer coupons based on assumptions derived from that data.
The FTC’s report also cited how corporate consultants have been pushing for surveillance pricing. “Personalized pricing strategies, once considered a futuristic concept, have become a cornerstone of modern business strategy,” said the Cortado Group.
The FTC study is only preliminary, and doesn’t state whether the pricing is illegal or not.
New FTC Chairman Cancels Request For Public Comments
When the FTC initially published the report, it sought input from consumers and businesses about how surveillance pricing had affected them. After President Donald Trump took office, new FTC chairman Andrew Ferguson canceled the agency’s request for public comments to continue the inquiry.
Ferguson and Commissioner Melissa Holyoak dissented from the decision to release the report, arguing that it was premature.
“The Commission should allow staff to do its work and issue a final, fact-based report, rather than rush to meet a nakedly political deadline to present something, anything, to the public,” they stated last week.
Ferguson, the new Trump appointed FTC chairman, is a Big Law alumni who defended large companies from antitrust cases and opposed consumer gains such as the commission’s non-compete ban. He opposed releasing the pricing study, and one of the first things he did as chairman was to shut down public comments for it. So it looks like this might be the end of the FTC looking into surveillance pricing.
Commissioner Alvaro Bedoya called attention in a statement to Ferguson's move, writing that one of his first acts as agency head was “to quietly remove the opportunity for the public to comment” on surveillance pricing.
It’s too early in California’s legislative session to determine which prospective measures will succeed in making it to Governor Gavin Newsom’s desk. It’s common practice for lawmakers to change a measure’s language substantially as it moves through committees with the help of other lawmakers, lobbyists, and privacy and consumer advocates.
But the study said there is much more work to do. This means it is up to states like California to continue the work the FTC started, in the form of legislation, advocacy and legal action, as the study only presents a sliver of information the FTC hopes to acquire. As the study says, there is a lot they still don’t know about how surveillance pricing works.
Sources:
https://www.kqed.org/news/12028137/california-lawmakers-take-on-predatory-surveillance-pricing
https://consumerwatchdog.org/privacy/surveillance-pricing-is-up-to-us-now/
https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/ftc_gov/pdf/bedoya-statement-emergency-motion.pdf
By Miriam Raftery
March 3, 2025 (Washington D.C.) – Threats issued by President Donald Trump targeting colleges, universities and student protesters are illegal and unconstitutional, according to legal and civil liberties experts.
Today, Trump posted on his social media account, “All Federal Funding will STOP for any College, School, or University that allows illegal protests. Agitators will be imprisoned/or permanently sent back to the country from which they came. American students will be permanently expelled or depending on on the crime, arrested.NO MASKS!”
The post comes on the heels of two executive orders issued by Trump which seek to pressure higher education officials to target immigrant students and staff for exercising First Amendment freedom of spech rights, including pro-Palestinian protesterrs or students critical of the U.S. government, culture, institutions or founding principals. Today's Truth Social post goes further, demanding that even students who are U.S. citizens be expelled and imprisoned for participating in campus protests if deemed "illegal.".
The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) have both issued statements criticizing Trump’s actions for pressuring colleges and universities to engage in conduct that would violate the U.S. Constitution and other laws. While violence and/or intimidation of individuals based on religious views, such as anti-Semitism, or national origin are already illegal and should not be tolerated on campuses, freedom to express controversial ideas is a core principal of higher education—and the ability to criticize governments and their policies is a critical component of our democracy, the civil rights legal experts make clear.
Below are their statements, both issued today.
Foundation for Individual Rights
Statement on President Trump’s Truth Social post threatening funding cuts for ‘illegal protests’
President Trump posted a message on Truth Social this morning that put social media and college campuses on high alert. ...
Colleges can and should respond to unlawful conduct, but the president does not have unilateral authority to revoke federal funds, even for colleges that allow “illegal” protests.
If a college runs afoul of anti-discrimination laws like Title VI or Title IX, the government may ultimately deny the institution federal funding by taking it to federal court, or via notice to Congress and an administrative hearing. It is not simply a discretionary decision that the president can make.
President Trump also lacks the authority to expel individual students, who are entitled to due process on public college campuses and, almost universally, on private campuses as well.
Today’s message will cast an impermissible chill on student protests about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Paired with President Trump’s 2019 executive order adopting an unconstitutional definition of anti-Semitism, and his January order threatening to deport international students for engaging in protected expression, students will rationally fear punishment for wholly protected political speech.
As FIRE knows too well from our work defending student and faculty rights under the Obama and Biden administrations, threatening schools with the loss of federal funding will result in a crackdown on lawful speech. Schools will censor first and ask questions later.
Even the most controversial political speech is protected by the First Amendment. As the Supreme Court reminds us, in America, we don’t use the law to punish those with whom we disagree. Instead, “[a]s a Nation we have chosen a different course—to protect even hurtful speech on public issues to ensure that we do not stifle public debate.”
Misconduct or criminality — like true threats, vandalism, or discriminatory harassment, properly defined — is not protected by the First Amendment. In fact, discouraging and punishing such behavior is often vital to ensuring that others are able to peacefully make their voices heard.
However, students who engage in misconduct must still receive due process — whether through a campus or criminal tribunal. This requires fair, consistent application of existing law or policy, in a manner that respects students’ rights.
President Trump needs to stand by his past promise to be a champion for free expression. That means doing so for all views — including those his administration dislikes.
American Civil Liberties Union
After Trump Admin Threats, ACLU Sends Letter of Support to Universities, Urging Them to Protect Campus Speech
ACLU makes clear the government cannot threaten funding to universities for fostering an environment of free speech and free inquiry
The American Civil Liberties Union today published an open letter to colleges and universities nationwide urging them to reject any federal pressure to surveil or punish international students and faculty based on constitutionally protected speech. This letter is prompted by two executive orders — Executive Order 14161, titled “Protecting the United States from Foreign Terrorists and other National Security and Public Safety Threats” signed on Jan. 20, 2025, and Executive Order 14188, titled “Additional Measures to Combat Anti-Semitism,” signed on Jan. 29, 2025 — and related communications from the White House.
The guidance is especially timely after an early morning Truth Social post from President Trump threatening to stop federal funding for “any College, School, or University that allows illegal protests,” and proposing that “agitators will be imprisoned/or permanently sent back to the country from which they came.”
“It is disturbing to see the White House threatening freedom of speech and academic freedom on U.S. college campuses so blatantly. We stand in solidarity with university leaders in their commitment to free speech, open debate, and peaceful dissent on campus,” said Cecillia Wang, legal director of the ACLU and co-author of the letter. “Trump’s latest coercion campaign, attempting to turn university administrators against their own students and faculty, harkens back to the McCarthy era and is at odds with American constitutional values and the basic mission of universities.”
According to the ACLU, the White House is attempting to pressure university officials to target immigrant and international students, faculty, and staff, including holders of non-immigrant visas and lawful permanent residents or others on a path to U.S. citizenship, for exercising their First Amendment rights. The letter outlines four key principles universities should adhere to when addressing campus speech:
- Colleges and universities should encourage robust discussion and exploration of ideas by students, faculty, and staff, regardless of their nationality or immigration status.
- Nothing obligates universities to act as deputies in immigration law enforcement — to the contrary, universities do not and should not veer so far from their core mission for good reasons.
- Schools must protect the privacy of all students, including immigrant and international students.
- Schools must abide by the 14th Amendment and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act.
“The federal government cannot mandate expulsion of students or threaten funding cuts to punish constitutionally protected speech on campus,” said Esha Bhandari, deputy director of the ACLU’s Speech, Privacy, and Technology Project. “While the administration can enforce Title VI to ensure a learning environment free from harassment, it cannot force universities into adopting restrictive speech codes that silence the viewpoints the government disfavors.”
This is the fourth set of guidance from the ACLU to universities since 2023. Dozens of ACLU affiliates have taken legal action, conducted know your rights trainings, or issued additional guidance related to protest on campuses.
Related Documents
East County News Service
March 4, 2025 (Jacumba Hot Springs) -- A man is facing assault with a deadly weapon and other serious charges after a search of his property in Jacumba uncovered firearms, explosives and booby traps, says Lieutenant Jeff Ford with the San Diego County Sheriff’s department.
On March 3,just before 6:00 a.m., the Sheriff's Special Enforcement Detail (SED/SWAT) and deputies assigned to Sheriff's Rural Enforcement served a search warrant in the 42000 block of Old Highway 80. The search warrant was related to an investigation of an assault with a deadly weapon incident that happened on February 22. 
During the service of the warrant, 40-year-old Ross Warren was found concealed inside a wall as he attempted to hide from deputies. A firearm, pellet gun and imitation firearm were located inside the wall with Warren.
During the search, deputies also found multiple fabricated explosives inside the home, as well as multiple improvised booby traps scattered around the exterior of the home.
The Sheriff's Bomb/Arson Unit responded to the scene for further investigation. A firearm, pellet guns, imitation firearms, ammunition, explosive devices, manufactured booby traps and other evidence related to the originating investigation were also found inside the home.
Warren was placed under arrest for assault with a deadly weapon, child endangerment, possessing/deploying booby traps and multiple counts of possessing/manufacturing destructive devices. He was transported and booked into the San Diego Central Jail.
Warren's live-in girlfriend, Brenda Beltran, 38, was also arrested for obstructing/delaying a peace officer. She was cited and released.