On Thursday, tensions escalated between California and the Trump administration as the U.S. Education Department challenged a state law protecting transgender students and revoked federal waivers permitting undocumented students in federal aid programs. The Justice Department initiated investigations into affirmative action practices at Stanford and the University of California, while HHS looked into discrimination claims at a major medical school. California officials criticized the federal actions as politically motivated, with Attorney General Rob Bonta stating a potential increase in lawsuits against the administration. Political experts noted a pattern of targeting Democratic states, especially California, to energize Trump’s base amid bipartisan dissent over his policies.
In the ongoing saga of animosity between California and the Trump administration, Thursday may have set a new benchmark.
Early in the morning on the West Coast, the U.S. Education Department declared its intent to contest a significant state law that safeguards transgender students. Just a couple of hours later, federal waivers were revoked, which previously allowed California colleges to enroll undocumented students in specific federally funded programs.
The afternoon saw a surge of investigations into perceived affirmative action practices in California’s higher education: The Justice Department announced it would probe whether Stanford University and three University of California campuses were contravening a Supreme Court ruling that prohibited the consideration of race in admissions. Simultaneously, the Health and Human Services Department revealed it was investigating allegations of similar discrimination at “a major medical school in California.”
By evening, the Agriculture Department had sent a letter to Governor Gavin Newsom indicating it would reassess its education-related funding in California in light of transgender protections. Additionally, the Justice Department revealed that the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department was under scrutiny for purportedly delaying approval for concealed-carry permit applications.
Neither California nor President Trump has ever claimed there was any warmth between them. Over Trump’s initial term, the Democratic-led state mounted over 120 lawsuits against his administration. Californians overwhelmingly rejected him during the 2020 and 2024 elections — claims of voter fraud made by Mr. Trump, without evidence, followed these outcomes.
The reason behind this week’s sudden focus on California remains uncertain, leaving many to question if it was an orchestrated move or merely coincidental. The White House had yet to respond to a request for comment as of Friday.
Governor Newsom also refrained from commenting, with his spokesman, Izzy Gardon, stating that the governor was “focused on Los Angeles’s recovery.”
Senator Adam B. Schiff, a Democrat who spearheaded Trump’s first impeachment, accused the president of harboring a “partisan vendetta against California” and claimed he was “continuing to weaponize the federal government against one in ten Americans” living in the state of over 39 million.
California’s Trump supporters praised these actions.
“Extreme policies and unchecked one-party rule have lowered the quality of life across our state,” stated Representative Kevin Kiley, a Republican from California. “All Californians will benefit from greater accountability. We require balance and common sense.”
Meanwhile, various California officials and legal experts noted that the investigations seemed legally dubious and motivated by political agendas.
“His understanding of the law and adherence to it is at best inconsistent,” remarked California Attorney General Rob Bonta, a Democrat, referring to Mr. Trump. He noted the state is on course to litigate against the Trump administration almost double the amount it did during the president’s first term, potentially over 200 times in the forthcoming four years. So far, he reported, California had filed lawsuits against the administration eight times in eight weeks.
Since Mr. Trump assumed office this year, he has consistently targeted Democratic strongholds.
Last month, he criticized Maine’s governor regarding state protections for transgender athletes and initiated probes into the educational system there. This week, he enacted an executive order launching a “D.C. Safe and Beautiful Task Force,” aimed at increasing police presence in Washington, enhancing immigration enforcement, fast-tracking concealed-carry licenses, and cracking down on fare evasion in subways. Local officials countered his assertions, highlighting that crime rates in the district were decreasing.
“There is certainly a pattern of investigations that indicates targeting of ‘blue’ states, particularly California,” noted Erwin Chemerinsky, dean of the law school at the University of California, Berkeley, one of the schools subjected to “compliance review investigations” by Attorney General Pam Bondi.
“Some of it is likely attributable to differences in policies and values,” Mr. Chemerinsky explained. “However, some is likely retaliatory and aimed at energizing his political base.”
Political analysts expressed surprise that it took the Trump administration this long to unleash its campaign against California. For months, state Democrats had anticipated an aggressive Republican response to their significant policies regarding D.E.I., gun regulations, immigration, equity in college admissions, and L.G.B.T.Q. rights.
Numerous public affairs analysts speculated that the administration intended to showcase California as an example immediately after Trump’s inauguration but hesitated following devastating fires in Los Angeles on January 7, just days before the inauguration. Mr. Trump falsely asserted in his inaugural speech that state authorities had allowed wildfires to ravage Los Angeles “without a token of defense,” though he refrained from addressing other, more contentious cultural issues.
After Mr. Newsom’s press office contradicted Mr. Trump on social media with images depicting firefighters battling flames and rescuing distressed victims, the president shifted to inaccurately claiming that protections for endangered fish had reduced available water for firefighting efforts. Later, in January, the administration noticeably released a large amount of federal irrigation water nearly 200 miles north of Los Angeles while the president asserted on social media that if California had heeded his advice years earlier, “there would have been no fire!”
The released water had no direct link to the infrastructure supplying Los Angeles County, leading to over a billion gallons ending up in a low-lying area of the Central Valley, where farmers—many of whom had supported Mr. Trump—complained about possible repercussions on summer irrigation.
As fire victims in the Los Angeles area have shifted focus towards rebuilding efforts, criticism directed at the state has appeared politically safer.
Jason Elliott, a Democratic political consultant and former advisor to Newsom, framed Thursday’s attack on California as a familiar tactic for Mr. Trump to re-engage his support base and divert attention from bipartisan discontent regarding tariffs, his relationship with Elon Musk, and the controversy surrounding discussions of war plans on Signal.
“Clearly someone realized that culture wars are their only viable strategy,” Mr. Elliott remarked. “They reverted to the only strategy they know how to execute.”