Missing Legal Context in the Los Angeles Times Provides a Misleading Portrait of Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass

A reminder of why I write Off-Script

One of the reasons I have started writing frequently on Substack is to present important legal analysis currently missing in much of today’s news media. In many cases where the public needs deep and fairly presented legal analysis, it is often non-existent. Journalists often fail to present key constitutional or legal details that are often critical for the public to understand the full story.

Missing legal context in news stories is often harmful to the public. Because missing legal context to a story can unfairly shape public opinion. A lawmaker can be portrayed as refusing to take action on an issue when in reality, they are following the law as they are duty bound to do.¹

A lack of relevant legal context can shift public perception in many controversial areas of political debate. However, it can have impacts in far smaller ways where it can unfairly shift public opinion even in what are small public interest stories.

A recent story in the Los Angeles Times regarding Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass demonstrates this point.²

The LA Times recently reported that Mayor Bass attended a swanky party in honor of the 2023 Milken Institute Global Conference co-hosted by Kris Jenner. According to the LA Times, party guests received a party favor gift from Kim Kardashian of personal swag. The party gifts for guests were extremely generous, worth at least $600. Apparently, Mayor Bass took a party gift with her but then inexplicably returned it.

As written in the LA Times: “According to a gift list tweeted Friday by Ben Welsh of Reuters, formerly of The Times, as promised, the mayor declined the Kardashian family’s $600 gift, which included Skims products, a messenger, some liquor, a bottle of hot sauce, makeup and a face light. Bass’ reason for taking a pass on the pricey goods is unclear — her spokesperson did not respond to The Times’ request for comment.”

However, the LA Times floated its own theory for why Mayor Bass returned the gift bag. “That said, in May 2022, Kardashian endorsed Rick Caruso, Bass’ opponent in the mayoral race. The beauty mogul said in an Instagram Story that she felt the developer could “help with the crime in our city, which is such a big issue and super scary.”

A reader among the general public might draw one or more of the following conclusions about Mayor Bass from reading this LA Times article:

1. Mayor Bass is rude and completely lacks all social manners (“Who just takes a party favor gift and then gives it back? If she didn’t like it, why didn’t she just re-gift it?”)

2. Mayor Bass is an ingrate (“Why wouldn’t someone appreciate being given an expensive and nice party favor that someone went out of their way to give?”)

3. Mayor Bass is selfish (“If she didn’t like the gift, why didn’t she just give it to someone else who would have appreciated it?”)

4. Mayor Bass is a diva (“Is a $600 party favor not expensive enough for her tastes? What kind of obnoxious snob so spoiled that she’d reject a nice gift?”)

5. Mayor Bass is petty in the extreme, holding grudges against anyone who fails to back her politically (“Is she still hung up on Kim Kardashian not endorsing her for Mayor? She won. Why doesn’t she get over it?”)

6. Mayor Bass personally dislikes Kim Kardashian (“If she’d reject such a generous gift just because it’s from Kim Kardashian, she must really hate her”).

7. Mayor Bass is generally unpleasant (“She can’t just pretend to like the gift?”)

As it turns out, Mayor Bass is none of these things.³ And the missing legal context is actually rather key to understanding why that is the case.

Under the Political Reform Act of 1974, “[a state or local elected official in California] shall not accept gifts from any single source in any calendar year with a total value of more than [five hundred and ninety dollars ($590)].”⁴ The Mayor of Los Angeles is covered by this gift limit.⁵ “A gift is both ‘received’ and ‘accepted’ when the public official, or the official’s immediate family member, knowingly takes actual possession of the gift, is provided the benefit of the gift, or takes any action exercising direction or control of the gift.”⁶

What is a gift?

A “gift” is “any payment that confers a personal benefit on the recipient, to the extent that consideration of equal or greater value is not received and includes a rebate or discount in the price of anything of value unless the rebate or discount is made in the regular course of business to members of the public without regard to official status.”⁷ A “payment” is “a payment, distribution, transfer, loan, advance, deposit, gift or other rendering of money, property, services or anything else of value, whether tangible or intangible.”⁸

Thus, it is quite straightforward. Mayor Bass received an extremely nice party favor gift from Kim Kardashian. She learned the price of the gift, worth at least $600, exceeded the annual gift limit that she could accept under state law ($590). A good public servant who dutifully follows the law, she properly returned the gift.

There’s nothing more to this story.

For those who are wondering, did Mayor Bass’s mere acceptance of the $600 gift violate campaign finance law?

No. As long as the gift is returned (unused) within thirty (30) days of receipt, there is no legal violation.⁹

While this was small and likely not intentional, the missing legal context within this article is something that can unfairly color the public perception. Without the legal context, one is likely to view her negatively. With the proper legal context, most will view the story and Mayor Bass differently.

Granted, whether Karen Bass took home an expensive party favor gift from Kim Kardashian is a tabloid interest level story. However, in more newsworthy items, missing legal context can have a far greater impact on the public. It can shape public perception in a way where citizens draw a conclusion based upon a newspaper article failing to give them full context but where these same citizens would have likely arrived at a different conclusion had they known the actual state of the law.

Hopefully, in its own small way, Off Script can help to fill that void.

On a side note, I published an initial response to the LA Times article and defending Mayor Bass on Substack Notes, and would love for you to join me there!

Notes is a new space on Substack for us to share links, short posts, quotes, photos, and more. I plan to use it for things that don’t fit in the newsletter, like work-in-progress or quick questions.

---

How to join

Head to substack.com/notes or find the “Notes” tab in the Substack app. As a subscriber to Off Script: The Liberal Dissenter, you’ll automatically see my notes. Feel free to like, reply, or share them around!

You can also share notes of your own. I hope this becomes a space where every reader of Off Script: The Liberal Dissenter can share thoughts, ideas, and interesting quotes from the things we're reading on Substack and beyond.

---

If you encounter any issues, you can always refer to the Notes FAQ for assistance. Looking forward to seeing you there!

Finally, as I continue to build and expand this publication, please let me know what kind of content you’d like to see. More legal posts? More political analysis posts? More responses to critical feedback? Podcast videos? Additional writers? Feedback is always welcome!

1. The author of this article is an attorney licensed to practice in the State of California and the District of Columbia. This article and all of the works on this Substack page are statements of the opinions of the author, only, and do not constitute legal advice; they are not intended to be relied upon by any individual or entity in any transaction or other legal matter, past, pending, or future. A paid subscription to this Substack page supports the author's scholarship and provides access to research that the author has compiled, but does not establish an attorney-client relationship. The author does not accept unsolicited requests for legal advice or representation, and this Substack page is not intended as legal advertising. The opinions expressed on this Substack page reflect the personal views of the author only.

2. https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-arts/story/2023-05-26/kim-kardashian-gift-skims-mayor-karen-bass-los-angeles?fbclid=IwAR3u7UpT_7aSXayCykEe0ujUhjHn3Hc_w-8QkAauKXeAXvNSoZ5KCn-5KAk

3. Full disclosure. I voted for Karen Bass for Mayor in both the 2022 Primary Election and 2022 General Election and I have been a long time supporter. But I’m giving an honest assessment here and citing to the law for anyone who doesn’t believe me.