Ever since the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe vs. Wade two years ago, California’s Democratic leaders have sought to make the state a haven for abortion rights. They persuaded voters to enshrine the right to an abortion in the state constitution, approved a bill package to shore up reproductive rights and passed a law in May to allow Arizona doctors to temporarily provide abortion services for their patients in California.

So even though the high court’s ruling Thursday preserves access to the abortion pill mifepristone, writes CalMatters health reporter Kristen Hwang, Gov. Gavin Newsom and others cautioned that the fight isn’t over and that reproductive rights could still be under threat — even in California. 

• Newsom, on social media: “While a sigh of relief, SCOTUS’ decision today was decided on standing — not merits. … Make no mistake: radical anti-abortion activists will stop at nothing to deny women their rights to access reproductive care.”

Former Senate President Pro Tem Toni Atkins echoed the sentiment, saying in a statement that continued access to medical abortions “is the bare minimum.” She added that the ruling will only force anti-abortion groups “to change their plan of attack.”

The case will now be sent back through the lower courts, as Alliance Defending Freedom, the anti-abortion group representing the plaintiffs, said it would continue the legal fight. Idaho, Missouri and Kansas have been authorized to join the case as plaintiffs. Because states provide access to health care services, this could potentially sidestep Thursday's ruling that the alliance alone didn't have standing to sue because it wasn't directly affected by the Food and Drug Administration’s expansion of mifepristone access.

• Erin Hawley, senior counsel for Alliance Defending Freedom Senior, in a statement: “We are disappointed that the Supreme Court did not reach the merits of the FDA's lawless removal of commonsense safety standards for abortion drugs. … And we are grateful that three states stand ready to hold the FDA accountable for jeopardizing the health and safety of women and girls across this country.”

In anticipation of the court battles to come, Attorney General Rob Bonta issued a statement reiterating the justice department’s stance: “No matter how many lawsuits they file or challenges they bring … we remain unwavering in our commitment to ensure that our state continues to be a safe haven” for reproductive health care.

Thursday’s decision marked the first time the high court ruled on an abortion challenge since overturning Roe v. Wade. Since then, local resistance to expanding abortion services has also cropped up, notably in Beverly Hills and the Inland Empire where officials have halted the opening of new abortion clinics.

Learn more about the abortion pill case in Kristen’s story.

Two days before its deadline, the Legislature on Thursday passed a state budget, largely along party lines. But with negotiations with Gov. Newsom still ongoing, the final spending plan approved by the start of the fiscal year on July 1 will almost certainly look far different. 

• Senate President Pro Tem Mike McGuire of Santa Rosa, in a statement: “Our budget … protects services and programs for the most vulnerable Californians and families, and upholds our commitment to ensuring that we’re meeting the challenges of homelessness, climate change, affordable housing, combating crime and making our communities more wildfire safe.”

Republicans, meanwhile, were quick to blast the spending plan as inadequate and reckless.

• Senate GOP leader Brian Jones of San Diego, in a statement: “This so-called budget is little more than a shell game meant to hide the bleak truth of our financial situation. Legislative Democrats continue to spend money we don’t have, on things we don’t need or want…”

As CalMatters Capitol reporter Alexei Koseff explains, budget negotiations between the governor and legislative leaders transpire largely out of public view. What we do know is that Thursday’s “placeholder” budget differs from Newsom’s proposal in key ways: It calls for more cuts to prison funding, while keeping intact or reducing proposed cuts to public health programs, subsidized child care slots, housing development and others. For that reason, advocacy groups for those causes are backing the Legislature’s plan.

The Legislature’s budget also rejects Newsom’s proposal to slash $13 million from the Small Business Technical Assistance Program, writes CalMatters economy reporter Levi Sumagaysay, retaining its full annual funding of $23 million.

Established in 2018, the program helps small businesses in low-income, rural and disaster-affected communities, as well as businesses owned by women, people of color and veterans. If the program’s funding is cut by more than half, one small business advocate says, 75,000 small businesses could be impacted annually.

To learn more about the Legislature’s budget plan and the small business program, read Alexei and Levi’s stories.

In other Capitol news, from CalMatters tech reporter Khari Johnson: For the first time in two years, California has a cybersecurity commander. Gov. Newsom appointed Edward Bómbita to head the state Cybersecurity Integration Center on Thursday. Bómbita, who will be paid $167,460 a year, now lives in Hawaii and previously held cybersecurity management positions for the U.S. Army, U.S. Navy and California National Guard. 

The cybersecurity commander is in charge of protecting California’s infrastructure and economy, communicating threats to public and private partners, and assisting law enforcement agencies with investigations. State leaders say the vacancy did not hamper security, but sources told CalMatters this year that “the state has struggled to recruit and retain cybersecurity specialists” and that an acting commander was spread thin.

Like every other poll, it’s only a snapshot in time. But California Democrats can find reason for optimism about the November election in the Public Policy Institute of California survey released Thursday night:

• In 10 competitive U.S. House districts (3, 9, 13, 22, 27, 40, 41, 45, 47, and 49), 59% favor the Democrat and 39% the Republican candidate. For Congress generally, Democrats lead Republicans 62% to 36%. In 2022, California races helped give Republicans control of the U.S. House, and could determine control again this year.

• In the U.S. Senate race, Democratic Rep. Adam Schiff leads Republican Steve Garvey 62% to 37%. And suggesting that the outcome may be baked in, Schiff’s margin is unchanged from April, soon after the March 5 primary — and only 20% of likely voters are even interested in seeing the two debate each other.

• Also, 63% (including 55% of Republicans) say they would vote against a ballot measure that would make it more difficult to raise local and state taxes. Democrats are urging the state Supreme Court to remove the measure from the Nov. 5 ballot.

• And President Joe Biden leads former President Donald Trump 55% to 31%, but 13% said they would vote for a third candidate — a possible opening for Robert F. Kennedy Jr. While Trump has the state GOP’s enthusiastic support, he lost to Biden in 2020 by a 63% to 34% margin. 

But there are also some bad results for certain interest groups. While there are ongoing negotiations about climate, housing and school bond issues for November, 64% of those surveyed said it’s a bad time for the state to borrow more.

The poll, conducted from May 23 to June 2, is based on responses from 1,677 California adults. Among the 1,098 likely voters, the margin of error is plus or minus 3.7 percentage points.

Maternity wards have been closing across California, including in Los Angeles County. CalMatters health care reporters Ana B. Ibarra and Kristen Hwang — with photojournalist Jules Hotz and producer Robert Meeks — have video versions of their story about why the closures are happening and how one hospital is still delivering babies. Watch one here and the other here.

The segments are part of SoCalMatters, which airs at 5:58 p.m. weekdays on PBS SoCal and is available on YouTube.

California Voices

CalMatters columnist Dan Walters: The state Supreme Court’s ruling on a Berkeley housing project could have a broader impact on California’s key environmental law.

Despite Gov. Newsom's plans to close prison housing blocks to save money, costs will continue to rise without better rehabilitation programs, writes Steve Brooks, an incarcerated journalist at San Quentin State Prison.