California Dems rally around Newsom

Welcome back to Capitol Confidential!

We’re sending this issue to you a bit earlier this week, in advance of Friday’s Juneteenth holiday. After the last few weeks of harried budget negotiations, I’m sure many of my Capitol friends are looking forward to a three-day weekend to recharge. 

But just because Monday’s midnight budget deadline came and went doesn’t mean the California political news cycle is due for a rest. 

Gov. Gavin Newsom announced Monday that the FBI is investigating him and first partner Jennifer Siebel Newson, calling it another effort by President Donald Trump to weaponize the Department of Justice against his political rivals.

The White House declined to answer the Chronicle’s questions about Newsom’s statements and deferred to the Department of Justice, which also declined to comment. As the Chronicle’s Sophia Bollag and Joe Garafoli reported, a source familiar with the matter not authorized to speak on the record said federal authorities are involved in multiple investigations. One relates to Siebel Newsom’s taxes, the source said, and another relates to Dana Williamson, Newsom’s former chief of staff. Williamson pleaded guilty to three federal charges last month.

State legislators on both sides of the aisle have so far remained largely mum on the bombshell allegations, with a few exceptions. 

In a statement to the Chronicle, Senate President Pro Tem Monique Limón, D-Santa Barbara, cast the alleged investigations as part of the ongoing clash between deep blue California and the second Trump administration.

“This is the latest in a string of intimidation attempts from the federal administration against California,” Limón said in an email. “The California voters have elected Governor Newsom to two terms, defended him against a recall and stood by the Governor to fight federal overreach with Prop 50. Californians are clear where they stand.”

Several other Democratic leaders have also started to weigh in. On X, California Attorney General Rob Bonta slammed the DOJ, calling the agency’s investigations into the president’s political opponents “divisive, unethical, and morally wrong.”

Former Vice President Kamala Harris said during a panel discussion in Austria on Tuesday that she is “not surprised” Trump may be using the DOJ to go after political enemies… and also appeared to leave the door open for a possible 2028 presidential run. 

For Newsom and supporters, including another prominent Trump antagonizer who has befell federal investigation under the Trump administration, the specter of 2028 looms large.

In an interview with MS Now Monday night, California Sen. Adam Schiff said Newsom is “just the latest” person on Trump’s “enemies list.” 

Schiff and New York Attorney General Letitia James, both Democrats, have been the subject of mortgage fraud investigations launched by Trump’s DOJ.

“You can’t tell me this is a pure coincidence, that they decide to go after a Democratic candidate –  likely candidate – for president, and his family,” Schiff said. 

Semafor and Axios have reported on a messaging memo circulated by Newsom’s team, urging congressional Democrats to frame the investigation as part of a campaign of political retribution. Among the talking points is a reference to Williamson, noting her charges pertain to actions taken before she began working for the governor. 

Assembly Member Carl DeMaio, R-San Diego, an outspoken Newsom critic, is not one to let an opportunity to bash the governor go to waste. He said Newsom’s disgraced chief of staff is proof that the governor is himself guilty of something. 

“Hey Gavin Newsom: if this whole criminal investigation into you and your wife is nothing but a Trump hit job against you...why did your own Chief of Staff just plead GUILTY?” DeMaio wrote on X.

Newsom placed Williamson on leave in 2024 after she informed him she was under federal investigation, according to the governor’s office, and her indictment did not implicate Newsom.

As the governor grapples with the Trump administration and Department of Justice, a different federal decision on Monday is also making waves in California. 

As the Chronicle’s Bob Egelko writes, the U.S. Supreme Court rejected a challenge to a state law allowing lawsuits against firearms manufacturers and distributors for failing to take reasonable actions to keep their products out of the hands of criminals.

It’s a rare decision against the gun lobby, and clears the way for Californians to sue firearms manufacturers.

The justices on Monday unanimously denied an appeal by gunmakers and advocates, after a lower court upheld a New York law that allows victims to sue makers and wholesale dealers of weapons that harmed them, Egelko writes. 

California’s version is AB1594, signed into law by Newsom in July 2022. The law allows individuals, local governments and the attorney general to sue gun manufacturers and sellers for providing weapons if they cause a person harm in California. 

More than a half-dozen other states have similar laws to California’s, and legislation is pending in additional states.

Alameda County’s supervisors routinely give thousands of dollars in public funds to their favored nonprofits and community organizations, without any competitive process.

A bill by state Sen. Aisha Wahab, D-Hayward, takes aim at these discretionary payments, which have surpassed $50 million over the last seven years, the Chronicle’s Kate Talerico explains.

Within the Bay Area, other counties have ways to allocate limited amounts of funding to nonprofits without competitive processes — but Alameda County is unique in that supervisors can allocate funds throughout the year, rather than during the annual budget process — which Wahab says has fostered a “pay-to-play” culture between the board and nonprofits. 

Wahab’s bill, SB1193, would bar Alameda County supervisors from giving out the payments within 90 days of an election, require public reports on how the dollars are spent and limit payments to organizations that have a public purpose, such as health, education and homelessness.

Alameda’s supervisors have pushed back strongly against the bill, voting unanimously to oppose it, and saying it unfairly targets Alameda County. 

“We are the ones on the front line that know our communities very well,” Supervisor David Haubert said at a recent meeting. “The state should stay in its lane.”

The bill passed the Senate 37-0 in May, and is set to be heard in the Assembly later this month.