Gov. Gavin Newsom is pressing for direct action, nearly a month after the U.S. Supreme Court gave cities the green light to clear homeless encampments and arrest or fine unhoused people for sleeping in public spaces.

As CalMatters homelessness reporter Marisa Kendall explains, the governor on Thursday issued an executive order directing state agencies to adopt policies to sweep encampments on state property, and urged local governments to do the same.

• Newsom, in a video statement: “We have now no excuse with the Supreme Court decision. This executive order is about pushing that paradigm further and getting the sense of urgency that’s required of local government to do their job.”

Per Newsom’s order, state agencies should give residents at least 48-hour notice before clearing a camp, and provide storage for their belongings for at least 60 days. Agencies also should request services from local organizations for displaced residents. But encampments that pose an “imminent threat” to life, health, safety or infrastructure can be removed immediately. 

Business groups and some big-city mayors welcomed the move. In a statement, San Diego Mayor Todd Gloria said local officials, state leaders and community members “must be united in acting,” while San Francisco Mayor London Breed said the city “is already doing what the Governor is calling for.”

But not all praised Newsom’s directive. Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass, who publicly condemned the high court’s June ruling, said in a statement that without providing housing, “strategies that just move people along from one neighborhood to the next or give citations … do not work.” 

Some advocacy groups also criticized the governor: “It begs the question of where people will go,” said the director of the University of Southern California’s Center for Homelessness, Housing and Health Equity Research.

Meanwhile, Senate Republicans blasted Newsom for taking too long to address the issue, and pushed for follow through.

• Senate GOP leader Brian Jones of San Diego: “It’s about damn time! … While I am cautiously optimistic that the governor has finally taken note of the urgency of this problem, albeit many years later than needed, Californians deserve government for the people, not the PR hits.”

Read more about Newsom’s executive order in Marisa’s story.

Speaking of courts determining California policy: Gig workers at Uber, Lyft, DoorDash and similar companies won’t get full employee rights after a state Supreme Court ruling on Thursday. Instead, they will remain classified as independent contractors, writes CalMatters economy reporter Levi Sumagaysay.

The ruling upholds Proposition 22, the industry-funded ballot measure that voters passed in 2020 to give app-based gig workers some employee benefits, including health care stipends and accidental death insurance. But employers do not have to provide full worker protections such as comprehensive health care coverage, paid sick leave and workers’ compensation.

Labor groups and some legislators slammed the ruling. Lorena Gonzalez, president of the California Federation of Labor Unions, said gig companies are “forcing workers and the public to take on the inherent risk created by this work, while they profit.” And Assemblymember Liz Ortega, a Hayward Democrat and chairperson of the labor committee, said the ruling put “profits over people.”

Learn more about what the ruling means for gig workers in Levi’s story.

This will likely become a common occurrence leading up to Nov. 5, but former President Donald Trump tried to use the governor’s action on homelessness to attack “Gavin Newscum” and presumptive Democratic presidential nominee “Lyin’ Kamala Harris.” Trump said the order happened “because she comes from California, and looks terrible.”

• Trump, on his social media platform: “Right after the ELECTION, it will go back to SLUM LIKE condition, unless we WIN.” 

But no matter how much he trashes California, Trump doesn’t have any qualms about taking campaign money from California.

As CalMatters politics reporter Yue Stella Yu explains, with its super-wealthy circles in Hollywood and Silicon Valley, California has been a fundraising wellspring for Democrats and Republicans running for president alike. 

For Harris, she will inherit a warchest from President Joe Biden of almost $54 million from Californians who each contributed more than $200 between Jan. 1, 2023 to June 30. Hollywood’s embrace of Harris (following the industry’s initial support for, and then, uncertainty about Biden) will also help keep her coffers filled. 

As for Trump, he has landed endorsements from a handful of influential Silicon Valley moguls, including Tesla CEO Elon Musk. And Trump’s running mate, U.S. Sen. JD Vance of Ohio, worked in Silicon Valley for years, building personal relationships with tech executives and crypto investors.

Because of this bounty of donors, raising money is one of the main reasons candidates of both parties visit the Golden State, says Republican consultant Jon Fleischman.

• Fleischman: “The term that I prefer to use is performing a ‘cash-ectomy,’ which is really what it is. It’s the surgical removal of cash from everybody’s pocket.”

Read more about how the Harris and Trump campaigns are trying to milk California in Stella’s story.

California ballot: In case there was any doubt, Secretary of State Shirley Weber issued a statement Thursday that the switch from Biden to Harris at the top of the Democratic nominee doesn’t affect the state’s ballot. The deadline for the parties to submit their nominees is Aug. 22 — after Harris will be officially nominated at the convention in Chicago.

Gaza war protests rocked California campuses this spring as students camped out to air their anger over the plight of Palestinians. That included UCLA, where in the early hours of May 2, California Highway Patrol officers fired their less-lethal weapons to disperse protestors.

Video footage show officers aiming their weapons at eye level and firing into throngs of protestors. The practice goes against training guidelines and state law, which makes exceptions when there is a “threat to life or serious bodily injury.” 

But the one-page report released Thursday by the California Highway Patrol concluded that its officers acted properly, writes CalMatters investigative reporter Sergio Olmos.

The report asserts that officers were met with “assaultive resistance,” and had frozen water bottles, plywood and bottles full of “urine and other unknown fluids” thrown at them. A CHP spokesperson also said that officers did face a threat from protesters.

But Jeff Wenninger, a former Los Angeles Police lieutenant who oversaw use of force investigations, says the report lacks proof that officers’ lives were in danger.

• Wenninger: “This doesn’t build public trust. Where is the evidence? They’re sharing their opinion on what happened but not explaining the rationale of how they got there.”

Read more about CHP’s report on the Gaza war protest in Sergio’s story.

The state’s energy commission approved a plan for massive offshore wind projects along the coast. CalMatters environmental reporter Julie Cart and producer Robert Meeks have a video segment on Julie’s story on California’s ambitions to harness wind power as part of our partnership with PBS SoCal. Watch it here.

SoCalMatters airs at 5:58 p.m. weekdays on PBS SoCal.

California Voices

CalMatters columnist Dan Walters: California is no stranger to developers creating new towns from scratch, but the chances for California Forever are slim.

A new state law banning “junk fees” excludes credit card companies that take advantage of many Californians, writes Rodney Williams, co-founder and president of SoLo Funds, a community lending platform in L.A.