Protesters gather during a rally in front of the U.S. Supreme Court to oppose voter roll purges as the Supreme Court hears oral arguments in the Husted v. A Philip Randolph Institute, a challenge to Ohio's voter roll purges on January 10, 2018.; Credit: Win McNamee/Getty Images

The Supreme Court ruled Monday that states can clean up their voting rolls by targeting people who haven't cast ballots in a while, a case that has drawn attention amid stark partisan divisions and the approach of the 2018 elections.

By a 5-4 vote that split the conservative and liberal justices, the court rejected arguments in a case from Ohio that the practice violates a federal law intended to increase the ranks of registered voters. A handful of other states also use voters' inactivity to trigger a process that could lead to their removal from the voting rolls.

Justice Samuel Alito said for the court that Ohio is complying with the 1993 National Voter Registration Act. He was joined by his four conservative colleagues.

The four liberal justices dissented.

Partisan fights over ballot access are being fought across the country. Democrats have accused Republicans of trying to suppress votes from minorities and poorer people who tend to vote for Democrats. Republicans have argued that they are trying to promote ballot integrity and prevent voter fraud.

Under Ohio rules, registered voters who fail to vote in a two-year period are targeted for eventual removal from registration rolls, even if they haven't moved and remain eligible. The state said it only uses the disputed process after first comparing its voter lists with a U.S. postal service list of people who have reported a change of address. But not everyone who moves notifies the post office, the state said.

So the state asks people who haven't voted in two years to confirm their eligibility. If they do, or if they show up to vote over the next four years, voters remain registered. If they do nothing, their names eventually fall off the list of registered voters.

With files from The Associated Press. 

Guests:

Rick Hasen, chancellor’s professor of law and political science at the University of California, Irvine who specializes in election law; and writes the Election Law Blog; author of the book “The Justice of Contradictions: Antonin Scalia and the Politics of Disruption” (Yale University Press, 2018); he tweets @rickhasen

Derek Muller, associate professor at Pepperdine School of Law, where his focus includes election law, and the role of states in elections; he tweets @derektmuller

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

US President Donald Trump speaks to reporters on June 9, 2018, during the G7 Summit in La Malbaie, Quebec, Canada.; Credit: SAUL LOEB/AFP/Getty Images

AirTalk's weekly political roundtable covers the headlines you might have missed over the weekend and previews what to watch for this week in national politics.

The summit in Singapore between President Donald Trump and North Korean leader Kim Jong Un is grabbing most of the headlines so far, and we’ll have an analysis on that, but we’re also watching a few other stories this week as well.

• Recap of Friday’s G7 summit highlights and relationship with G-7 countries moving forward after tense weekend (Trump’s call for Russia to be reinstated into G-7 and trading barbs with Macron and Trudeau before the summit, Trump admin blasting Trudeau after end of summit, planned EU retaliation to tariffs)

• North Korea summit preview

• President Trump says he’d support federal legislation to legalize marijuana

• DOJ says it won’t defend ACA in lawsuits brought by states

• More Manafort indictments

• Mitt Romney looks to reposition himself as establishment GOP leader in Senate

• David Koch retires due to poor health -- what does this mean for GOP

• Dems look to force examining Trump’s pardon power 

Guests:

Lanhee Chen, research fellow at the Hoover Institution at Stanford University; he was an adviser for Marco Rubio’s 2016 presidential campaign and served as policy director for the Romney-Ryan 2012 presidential campaign; he tweets @lanheechen

John Iadarola, creator and host of the YouTube TV political talk show 'The Damage Report' on The Young Turks Network and a co-host of The Young Turks weekly live show; he tweets @johniadarola

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

Illustration of an employee looking ahead. ; Credit: turbodesign777/Getty Images/iStockphoto

Despite the rise of Uber and Lyft, a new survey from the Bureau of Labor Statistics shows that the full-time gig economy isn’t actually growing.

As reported by the Washington Post, rideshare drivers may be changing the face of the transportation industry, but not the gig economy as a whole. U.S. workers in flexible jobs were down to 6.9 percent in 2017 from 7.4 percent in 2005. Traditional jobs are still the bread and butter of the economy, but that doesn’t mean people are shying away from the side hustle.

But the report didn’t count subcontracting and other gigs outside of the conventional work day. And companies are continuing to outsource jobs like janitorial work, computer programming and other positions in order to mitigate costs.

So why aren’t more people ditching the 9 to 5 to be their own bosses? Larry speaks to economists today to break down the numbers. We also want to hear from you. Did you ditch your office job to cobble together full-time “gig” work? Are you working outside your eight-hour day to make ends meet?

Guests:

Heidi Shierholz, economist and director of policy at the Economic Policy Institute, a Washington D.C.-based, liberal policy think-tank; she is also a former chief economist at the U.S. Department of Labor (2014 to 2016)

Will Rinehart,  director of technology and innovation policy at the American Action Forum, a Washington D.C.-based, conservative policy think-tank

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

This combination of pictures shows an AT&T cellphone store in Springfield, Virginia and the Time Warner company logo on the front of the headquarters building in New York. ; Credit: SAUL LOEB/AFP/Getty Images

The fate of the AT&T-Time Warner merger, a massive media deal opposed by the government that could shape how much consumers pay for streaming TV and movies, rests in the hands of a federal judge.

U.S. District Judge Richard Leon is expected to announce in court Tuesday his decision in the biggest antitrust trial in years. The Trump Justice Department sued to block the $85 billion merger, arguing that it would hurt competition in pay TV and cost consumers hundreds of millions of dollars more to stream TV and movies.

The decision is expected at around 1:00pm Pacific today. Larry speaks with Reuter’s media columnist Jennifer Saba on the potential outcome, and how it might impact the mega media takeover of 21st Century Fox.

With files from the Associated Press 

Guest:

Jennifer Saba, New York-based business and media columnist with Reuters Breakingviews, the op-ed arm of Reuters; she’s been following the merger

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

North Korea's leader Kim Jong Un (L) shakes hands with US President Donald Trump (R) after taking part in a signing ceremony at the end of their historic US-North Korea summit, at the Capella Hotel on Sentosa island in Singapore on June 12, 2018.; Credit: ANTHONY WALLACE/AFP/Getty Images

History was made with a handshake on Tuesday morning Singapore time as President Trump and North Korea’s Kim Jong-Un met and signed an agreement last night at the conclusion of their historic summit.

The agreement calls for a denuclearized Korean peninsula in exchange for security assurances from the U.S. government, which also agreed to suspend joint military exercises with South Korea. But the agreement does not get into much detail as to what exactly “denuclearization” means for North Korea or any timetable for how long that might take.

Perhaps more notable than the non-specific agreement, was the sight of both men behaving so cordially to each other after the bellicose back and forth. The man with the bigger nuclear button and so-called “Rocket Man” were seemingly fast friends.

What’s the immediate result of the summit? What should our expectations be moving forward? And what actually goes into the process of denuclearizing a country?

Guests:

Sung-Yoon Lee, an expert on the Koreas and professor in Korean Studies at the Fletcher School at Tufts University

Abraham Denmark, Asia program director at the Wilson Center in D.C.; former deputy assistant secretary of Defense for East Asia (2015-2017), where he worked with the Secretary of Defense and other U.S. leaders in developing North Korea national security strategies

Celeste Arrington, political science and international affairs professor at George Washington University in D.C., where her speciality is on the Koreas and Japan

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

A man poses holding a smartphone showing the App for ride-sharing cab service Uber in London on October 28, 2016. ; Credit: DANIEL SORABJI/AFP/Getty Images

Among the many upsides of using rideshare services like Uber and Lyft  is the ability to call yourself a car when you find yourself in a situation where driving would earn you a DUI... The $20 cost of a rideshare is a small price to pay when you compare it to the tens of thousands of dollars it often costs to deal with a DUI charge.

But what if the app where you order your car could tell if you’ve been drinking and tailor its response accordingly?

In a patent filed in 2016 and published last week, Uber says it’s exploring how to develop AI technology that could determine whether someone using the app to order a car is under the influence of alcohol. The feature would rely on an algorithm that would look for things like how long it takes a user to navigate the app and request a ride, walking speed, precision when pressing buttons, and even typos. The app could then decide to, for example, send a driver who is experienced with intoxicated riders or has indicated a willingness to drive them, or to simply not send a driver at all.

If you’re a driver or rider for a rideshare service, what do you think of this idea? Do you think there should be incentives for drivers to pick up intoxicated riders? As a driver, how much of a strain is driving intoxicated passengers?

AirTalk contacted Uber and invited them to participate in our discussion. They declined our invitation but a spokeswoman for Uber sent us the following statement: “We are always exploring ways that our technology can help improve the Uber experience for riders and drivers. We file patent applications on many ideas, but not all of them actually become products or features.”

Guest:

Harry Campbell, Los Angeles-based Uber and Lyft driver, founder of the rideshare blog and podcast ‘The Rideshare Guy,’ and author of the book “The Rideshare Guide: Everything You Need to Know about Driving for Uber, Lyft and Other Ridesharing Companies” (Skyhorse, April 2018); he tweets @TheRideshareGuy

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

Attorney General Jeff Sessions delivers remarks at the Justice Department's Executive Officer for Immigration Review (EOIR) Annual Legal Training Program on Monday in Tysons, Va. Sessions spoke about his plan to limit reasons for people to claim asylum in the U.S.; Credit: Alex Wong/Getty Images

Immigration judges generally cannot consider domestic and gang violence as grounds for asylum, U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions said Monday in a ruling that could affect large numbers of Central Americans who have increasingly turned to the United States for protection.

"Generally, claims by aliens pertaining to domestic violence or gang violence perpetrated by non-government actors will not qualify for asylum," Sessions wrote in 31-page decision. "The mere fact that a country may have problems effectively policing certain crimes - such as domestic violence or gang violence - or that certain populations are more likely to be victims of crime, cannot itself establish an asylum claim."

The widely expected move overruled a Board of Immigration Appeals decision in 2016 that gave asylum status to a woman from El Salvador who fled her husband. Sessions reopened the case for his review in March as the administration stepped up criticism of asylum practices. Sessions took aim at one of five categories to qualify for asylum - persecution for membership in a social group - calling it "inherently ambiguous."

The other categories are for race, religion, nationality and political affiliation. Domestic violence is a "particularly difficult crime to prevent and prosecute, even in the United States," Sessions wrote, but its prevalence in El Salvador doesn't mean that its government was unwilling or unable to protect victims any less so than the United States. Sessions said the woman obtained restraining orders against her husband and had him arrested at least once. "No country provides its citizens with complete security from private criminal activity, and perfect protection is not required," he wrote.

The government does not say how many asylum claims are for domestic or gang violence but their advocates said there could be tens of thousands of domestic violence cases in the current immigration court backlog.

So what do you think, should the government drop asylum protections for victims of domestic violence?

With files from the Associated Press

Guests:

Jessica Vaughan, director of Policy Studies at the Center for Immigration Studies, a Washington, D.C.-based nonprofit research organization; she tweets @JessicaV_CIS

Bill Hing, immigration law expert; professor of law and director of the Immigration and Deportation Defense Clinic, a program at University of San Francisco School of Law that represents unaccompanied immigrant children and women with children who arrive at the southern border

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

High School Graduation; Credit: Crystal Marie Lopez/Flickr

The LAUSD school board is voting today on a plan that would set goals to improve school performance, graduation rates and college and career readiness.

The resolution is called “Realizing the Promise for All: Close the Gap by 2023,” and goals include that all eighth-graders should pass math and English with at least a C grade and that every graduating student be eligible for a four year public university.

The plan has been criticized for being too pie-in-the-sky– for setting too many 100 percent goals and thereby setting up schools for failure.

What would this plan actually achieve? Would it have a counterproductive effect? If you’re a teacher or parent, what do you think of the resolution?

Guests:

Kyle Stokes, K-12 education reporter for KPCC; he tweets @kystokes

Elise Buik, president and CEO of United Way of Greater Los Angeles; United Way is part of Communities for Los Angeles Student Success (CLASS), the coalition which is a sponsor of the “Close the Gap” resolution; she tweets from @EliseBuik

Alex Caputo-Pearl, president of UTLA, the union representing 34,000 educators and health and human service professionals

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

A section of the California seal hangs on the front of the State of California Earl Warren building in San Francisco, California. ; Credit: Justin Sullivan/Getty Images

An initiative that seeks to split California into three states is projected to qualify for the state's November ballot. California Secretary of State Alex Padilla said late Tuesday the initiative needed 365,880 valid petition signatures to qualify and random sampling projects a number of valid signatures greater than 110 percent of the requirement.

The latest proposal for splitting up the Golden State is promoted by Silicon Valley venture capitalist Timothy Draper. It would create the states of Northern California, Southern California and a narrow central coast strip retaining the name California. The plan proposes a central state made up of Los Angeles, Ventura, Santa Barbara, San Luis Obispo, Monterey and San Benito counties; a southern state consisting of Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, San Diego, Imperial, Kern, Kings, Fresno, Tulare, Inyo, Madera and Mono counties; and the remaining 40 counties would be part of a northern state.

Even if voters approve the initiative an actual split would still require the approval of the state Legislature and Congress. Certification that the initiative has qualified for the ballot will come on June 28. What do you think, should California be split into three states? Call us at 866-893-5722 and let us know. 

With files from the Associated Press

Guest:

Loren Kaye, president of California Foundation of Commerce and Education, a public policy research think tank affiliated with the California Chamber of Commerce; he tweets @KayeLoren

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

The Amazon logo ; Credit: Emmanuel Dunand/AFP/Getty Images

A tax on large companies such as Amazon that was meant to fight a growing homelessness crisis got rolled back during a raucous Seattle City Council meeting that exposed divisions over how much companies that have fueled booming economies should help pay to alleviate the downsides of success.

A divided crowd chanted, jeered and booed at the meeting, drowning out city leaders as they cast a 7-2 vote Tuesday. People shouted, "Stop the repeal," as others unfurled a large red banner that read, "Tax Amazon." An opposing group held "No tax on jobs" signs.

The vote showed Amazon's ability to aggressively push back on government taxes, especially in its affluent hometown where it's the largest employer with more than 45,000 workers and where it has been criticized for contributing to a widening income gap.

It remains to be seen whether Seattle's retreat will have a chilling effect on other cities considering taxes on big tech companies to help mitigate the effects of growth.

The City Council in Mountain View, California, where Google is based, will vote June 26 on whether to put a similar measure before voters in November. The "Google tax," which has unanimous support from the council, aims to alleviate transportation woes and high housing costs in the Silicon Valley city south of San Francisco.

Mountain View Mayor Lenny Siegel said Seattle's about-face hasn't changed his support for the tax, the details of which the council and city administrators have been working on for several months.

AirTalk looks at whether the Seattle vote will impact other cities considering a similar measure.

With files from the Associated Press

Guests:

Karen Weise, Seattle-based reporter with Bloomberg Tech who’s been following the story; she tweets @KYWeise

Lenny Siegel, mayor of the City of Mountain View, who has proposed the so-called “Google tax” in his city

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

Soccer player walks with the ball during a Berlin vs Bayern Munich match at the Olympic stadium in Berlin.; Credit: ODD ANDERSEN/AFP/Getty Images

The first game of the 2018 World Cup kicks off on Thursday with Russia, playing on home turf, against Saudi Arabia.

The event will span June 14 to July 15, 2018 and will involve 32 different teams, narrowed down to a final that will take place in Moscow. Some of the favorites for the win include France, Germany, Brazil and Spain.

The choice of Russia as the host country has garnered some backlash, especially with Russia’s history of discrimination against people who are LGBT and incidents of racism.

Plus, a combined bid by the Canada, the U.S. and Mexico has secured the hosting spot for the 2026 World Cup, with the final to be potentially held at the MetLife Stadium in New Jersey. This is the first time the men’s World Cup returns to North America since 1994.

We discuss what this portends for North America, including Los Angeles, in 2026. Plus, we preview the 2018 World Cup, with Avi Creditor of SportsIllustrated.com and Kevin Baxter from the L.A. Times.

Guests:

Kevin Baxter, sports writer who covers baseball, soccer and other sports for the Los Angeles Times; he tweets @kbaxter11

Avi Creditor, soccer editor for SportsIllustrated.com; he tweets @AviCreditor

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

DNA testing in a lab.; Credit: freakpower/KPCC

DNA testing has become popular in recent years. More and more consumers are excited to learn about their heritage. But is the science behind it accurate?

Some experts say consumers should not see ethnic analysis as a hard science. Ancestry, for example, which has become the world’s largest DNA testing conglomerate, make ethnicity estimates by comparing people's DNA to "reference populations." Ancestry says it has developed a reference panel made up of DNA samples worldwide. After customers submit their DNA, the company examines 700,000 markers in that sample and compares it to its reference panel. Then the company comes up with “statistically plausible distribution of where your ancestors come from," according to the company’s chief scientific officer.

But the list is far from being comprehensive. China, for instance, has restrictions on taking DNA out of the country. Still, many consumers enjoy the charts they receive that break down their probable ethnic backgrounds. But some scientists, however, say these tests are as accurate as looking at yourself in the mirror.

Ancestry.com sent us this statement: 

“We’re confident in the science and the results that we give to customers. The consumer genomics industry is in its early stages but is growing fast with continuous innovation. We tell customers throughout the experience that their results are as accurate as possible for where the science is today and that it may evolve over time as the resolution of DNA estimates improve.”  

Guest:

Scott Woodward, molecular and microbiologist who specializes in genetic genealogy and ancient DNA studies; former executive director of genomic study at Ancestry.com from from 2012-2015 where he helped build the company's database of ethnic markers; lecturer in biology at the Utah Valley University (UVU), the largest public university in Utah

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

Stuyvesant High School, one of the locations where the Tribeca Film Festival will be held April 18, 2005 in New York City. ; Credit: Peter Kramer/Getty Images

A plan to diversify New York City’s most elite public high schools is drawing fire from the minority group that has come to dominate the schools in recent years: Asian-Americans.

Mayor Bill de Blasio announced last weekend that he wants to scrap the test that governs admission to eight specialized high schools including Stuyvesant High School and the Bronx High School of Science, calling the test “a roadblock to justice, progress and academic excellence.” Fewer than 10 percent of students who score well enough to gain admission to the schools are black or Latino, despite the fact that those two groups make up two-thirds of the city’s 1 million public school students. “It’s not fair. It’s not inclusive. It’s not open to all,” de Blasio said.

But such a change might mean fewer seats for Asian-American students, who now make up 62 percent of the pupils. “This policy causes chaos in the Asian-American community and we’re here to reject this policy,” John Chan, head of the Coalition of Asian-Americans for Civil Rights, said. Opponents of the proposed change accused the mayor of pitting minority groups against each other.

With files from the Associated Press.

Guests:

David Kirkland, associate professor of English and urban education and executive director of the Metropolitan Center for Research on Equity and the Transformation of Schools at New York University

Diane Schachterle, vice president of the American Civil Rights Institute, a national civil rights organization that aims to advocate for non-discrimination by opposing racial and gender preferences, founded by former UC Regent Ward Connerly

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

House Speaker Paul Ryan ; Credit: Allison Shelley/Getty Images

House Republicans are considering next steps on two immigration bills after GOP leaders persuaded moderate Republicans to drop their effort to force votes on legislation that would have protected young "Dreamer" immigrants with a path to citizenship.

Instead, leaders reached a deal with moderates and conservatives that will allow two votes on other bills, starting as soon as next week.

Moderates were promised a vote on a compromise immigration plan, which remains a work in progress but will likely include a citizenship pathway for the young immigrants who have been living in the country illegally since they were children. Conservatives were guaranteed a vote on their favored approach, which provides a path to legal status but not citizenship.

AirTalk looks at the two bills coming up for a vote in the House, and their chances of passage.

With files from the Associated Press

Guest:

Eliza Collins, Congressional reporter for USA Today; she joins us from the Capitol; she tweets @elizacollins1

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

Morning traffic fills the SR2 freeway on April 25, 2013 in Los Angeles, California. ; Credit: David McNew/Getty Images

If you’ve ever honked in support of a political protest, you’re technically breaking California law – a law the ACLU is fighting to get struck down as unconstitutional.

Technically, under the California Vehicle Code, horns can only be honked for reasons of safety or as part of a car’s alarm system. But the ACLU of San Diego and Imperial Counties says that honking in support of a protest is a form of speech, protected under the First Amendment and the California Constitution.

The suit was filed in San Diego federal court earlier this week on behalf of Susan Porter, who got a ticket for beeping in support of a protest outside of one of the offices of U.S. Representative Darrell Issa.

Does honking a horn in support of a fundraiser or protest qualify under freedom of speech? What are legitimate versus illegitimate uses of car honking?

We know you Angelenos have some car-honking stories to tell. Call us at 866-893-5722.

Guest:

David Loy, legal director of the ACLU Foundation of San Diego and Imperial Counties, which filed the lawsuit on behalf of Susan Porter

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

Hundreds of Marshmallow Peeps, on a layer of blue sugar, move down the conveyor belt.; Credit: DON EMMERT/AFP/Getty Images

The marshmallow test is considered one of the most famous studies on delayed gratification.

It was a series of tests lead by psychologist Walter Mischel in the 1960s, which offered a child a choice between one marshmallow immediately, or two marshmallows if they waited about 15 minutes. An experiment in patience, the research followed less than 90 preschool children, who were enrolled in Stanford’s campus preschool. It also followed the participants to see how they did later in life. The findings pointed to the participants becoming higher achievers, including a correlation with better SAT scores.

But a new group of researchers are trying the marshmallow test again. This time, they’ve tracked data from kids of different races, ethnicities and parents’ education, and have pooled information from a group of more than 900 participants.

The new study found that there may be parallels between instant gratification and a child’s socio-economic background. Sociologist Jessica McCrory Calarco wrote in The Atlantic that “daily life holds fewer guarantees... And even if their parents promise to buy more of a certain food, sometimes that promise gets broken out of financial necessity.”

Larry speaks to Calarco and the new study’s lead author today, to learn more about the findings.

Guests:

Tyler Watts, research assistant professor at New York University and lead author of the study, “Revisiting the Marshmallow Test: A Conceptual Replication Investigating Links Between Early Delay of Gratification and Later Outcomes”; he tweets @tw_watts

Jessica Calarco, rhymes with Marco>, assistant professor of sociology at Indiana University; she wrote the recent article for The Atlantic, “Why Rich Kids Are So Good at the Marshmallow Test”

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

The Mayor of Los Angeles Eric Garcetti speaks to fans and media during the ribbon cutting ceremony for the new home of the Los Angeles FC at Banc of California Stadium on April 18, 2018 in Los Angeles, California. ; Credit: Jayne Kamin-Oncea/Getty Images

Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti unveiled his yearly budget in April where he promised major progress in the reconstruction of the city’s worst roads.

The Mayor proposed a spending plan that calls for the city to collect $70.7 million in street damage restoration fees in 2018-19. But that is not the only challenge the city is facing. Garcetti signed an executive directive last month to speed up a program to place temporary homeless shelters across the city to address an increasingly pressing homeless crisis.

Larry sits down with Mayor Garcetti to discuss the challenges with placing such shelters along with a range of other topics, from housing for lower income residents and pension fund obligations to how the Mayor picked up new LAPD Chief Michel Moore.

Guest:

Eric Garcetti, mayor of Los Angeles

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

A Comcast sign is seen as the U.S. media group submitted a $30.7 billion bid for Sky on April 25, 2018 in Miami, Florida.; Credit: Joe Raedle/Getty Images

Competing bids from Comcast and Disney for the bulk of Twenty-First Century Fox come as the media landscape changes and companies get more involved in both creating and distributing content.

X-Men and other movies from Fox's studios would help beef up Disney's upcoming streaming service. Comcast, already a major cable operator, would get a larger portfolio of cable channels including FX and National Geographic. Comcast's $65 billion cash bid Wednesday is higher than what many analysts were expecting and tops Disney's all-stock offer, valued at $52.5 billion when it was made in December.

Disney is expected to make a counter offer. Each bid raises different regulatory concerns, though this week's approval of AT&T's takeover of Time Warner signals that regulators might have a hard time stopping mega-mergers.  

With files from the Associated Press.

Guest:

Edmund Lee, corporate media reporter for the New York Times, covering media, tech and telecom who has been reporting on Comcast’s bid to acquire 21st Century Fox

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

USCIS Processes Immigrant Applications For U.S. Citizenship; Credit: John Moore/Getty Images

The U.S. government agency that oversees immigration applications is launching an office that will focus on identifying Americans who are suspected of cheating to get their citizenship and seek to strip them of it.

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services Director L. Francis Cissna told The Associated Press in an interview that his agency is hiring several dozen lawyers and immigration officers to review cases of immigrants who were ordered deported and are suspected of using fake identities to later get green cards and citizenship through naturalization.

Cissna said the cases would be referred to the Department of Justice, whose attorneys could then seek to remove the immigrants’ citizenship in civil court proceedings. In some cases, government attorneys could bring criminal charges related to fraud.

Until now, the agency has pursued cases as they arose but not through a coordinated effort, Cissna said. He said he hopes the agency’s new office in Los Angeles will be running by next year but added that investigating and referring cases for prosecution will likely take longer.

Proponents say this program will remove citizenship from people who intentionally falsified records and shouldn’t have become citizens in the first place. But some immigration attorneys fear that immigrants who made mistakes on their papers will be swept by this process and won’t have the finances to fight back through the justice system.

We contextualize the program and weigh the pros and cons.

With files from the Associated Press.

Guests:

Matthew Hoppock, immigrant attorney who has been tracking data on denaturalization 

Jessica Vaughan, director of policy studies at Center for Immigration Studies

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

The California State flag flies outside City Hall, in Los Angeles.; Credit: Mark Ralston/AFP/Getty Images

It’s been nearly a century since the last grizzly bear sighting in California was reported.

This segment is being updated.

Guest:

Noah Greenwald, endangered species program director at the Center for Biological Diversity; he tweets @Noah_Ark_757

Casey Schreiner, Los Angeles-based creator and editor-in-chief of the site, www.modernhiker.com; he tweets @dropdeadsuit

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.