ZERO PROOF: It is Day 11, and California remains un-Trump-proofed. Democrats in the California Assembly were expected to send a $50 million package to the governor today to pay for legal defenses against President Donald Trump’s administration. Instead, they punted. Officially, the speaker’s office blamed the Trump administration’s funding freeze for the delay, saying lawmakers wanted to be sure the bills were “airtight and protect all Californians” before they could vote. But the decision also comes amid concerns about who would be able to access $25 million in legal aid to avoid deportation. Democrats — newly sensitive to perceptions of being soft on crime — this week faced criticism from Republicans who noted that the legislation doesn't explicitly prohibit nonprofits from using the money to help undocumented immigrants with criminal histories. And then there’s the Laken Riley Act. The federal law Trump signed Wednesday requires DHS officers to detain and deport undocumented immigrants charged with low-level crimes like shoplifting. As a result, there is heightened awareness of the possibility that people facing criminal charges — and held in detention centers when they previously might have been released, pending court proceedings — may benefit from the legal aid fund. Gov. Gavin Newsom is staying out of the fray publicly. His office wouldn’t comment on potential amendments, saying only that “The Governor will take action on these measures when they reach his desk.” Even the chattiest members were keeping quiet on what happened in the 45-minute closed door meeting that happened today, or why they decided against a vote. But it isn’t hard to read between the lines. At a committee hearing earlier this week, Republican Assemblymember Bill Essayli pressed Newsom administration officials for assurances that none of the funds would go to defending “criminal illegal immigrants facing deportations” — to which Erika Li from the Department of Finance would only say the “intent is for civil proceedings.” “It was pretty bad. You should be able to answer that question clearly,” Assembly Republican leader James Gallagher told Playbook. Republicans, who have opposed the package from the start, had prepared to introduce a hostile amendment that would have blocked legal aid for undocumented migrants with prior felony convictions — a strategic move designed to embarrass Democrats over a likely political liability. Now, they’re celebrating the fact the vote didn’t happen at all. Shiu-Ming Cheer, deputy director of Immigrant and Racial Justice at the California Immigrant Policy Center, told Playbook she was extremely concerned that the Assembly might try to restrict these funds. “Whether it's based on convictions or charges, I think, for us, doesn't matter. The fundamental issue is that we want to support immigrants” in having access to representation, she said. “People have very complicated lives. It's not either or that somebody has a conviction and therefore they're disposable.” The Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights is reviewing the implications of proposed changes, said Jeannette Zanipatin, the group's policy and advocacy director. “We are clear-eyed that California must protect as many Californians as possible and defend against the continuous expansion of attacks by the Trump Administration on California families,” she said. — With help from Nicole Norman IT’S THURSDAY AFTERNOON. This is California Playbook PM, a POLITICO newsletter that serves as an afternoon temperature check on California politics and a look at what our policy reporters are watching. Got tips or suggestions? Shoot an email to rbluth@politico.com.
| 
