Los Angeles voters rejected George Gascón's progressive prosecution experiment in 2024. Now, a City Attorney candidate is advancing many of the same ideological priorities. Has Los Angeles learned anything from the experience?
Los Angeles voters delivered an unmistakable political verdict in November 2024. They removed District Attorney George Gascón from office by nearly 20 percentage points, replacing him with Nathan Hochman after four years of controversy over criminal prosecution, victims' rights, and public safety.
Yet just two years later, Marissa Roy, a candidate for Los Angeles City Attorney, is campaigning on a platform bearing striking similarities to the progressive prosecution philosophy voters rejected.
Different candidate. Different office. Much of the same ideology.
The question is whether Los Angeles is being asked to embrace another version of the same prosecutorial philosophy, this time from the office responsible for prosecuting most misdemeanors within the City.
The Gascón Experiment: A Warning Los Angeles Should Remember
Gascón entered office in December 2020 promising to transform criminal justice. His agenda emphasized reducing incarceration, limiting sentencing enhancements, declining prosecution of certain offenses, and replacing traditional criminal penalties with diversion and rehabilitation.
During his administration, misdemeanor prosecution rates fell sharply. Tens of thousands of cases were rejected, raising questions about whether individuals whose cases were declined actually received the treatment or rehabilitation intended to replace prosecution.
By November 2024, Nathan Hochman defeated Gascón with approximately 60% of the vote.
His defeat does not establish that every reform failed or that every increase in crime resulted from his policies. But it demonstrates the political consequences of a prosecution philosophy that failed to convince a substantial majority of voters that it delivered sufficient accountability and public safety.
Marissa Roy: A Familiar Ideological Agenda
Roy's campaign emphasizes expanding diversion, reducing incarceration, reforming cash bail, and addressing homelessness, mental illness, and addiction through social services rather than repeated criminal prosecution.
Like Gascón, Roy advocates using traditional prosecution more selectively, particularly for lower-level offenses.
But the City Attorney's Office handles violations that directly affect the quality of life in neighborhoods: petty theft, vandalism, trespassing, public disturbances, and other misdemeanors.
These policies have real consequences for residents and businesses.
The 100-Day Misdemeanor Moratorium Controversy
Perhaps the most revealing controversy surrounding Roy involves a proposed 100-day moratorium on new misdemeanor prosecutions associated with Faisal Gill's 2022 City Attorney campaign.
Published reporting connected Roy to discussions surrounding the proposal, which contemplated temporarily suspending new misdemeanor filings while prosecution policies were reviewed.
The proposal drew criticism, including opposition from Karen Bass, who withdrew her endorsement of Gill.
Roy has since denied personally supporting a blanket prosecution moratorium. Participation in discussions does not necessarily establish endorsement.
Nevertheless, voters deserve an explanation of her precise role in a proposal that contemplated temporarily suspending misdemeanor prosecutions.
Section 41.18: Does Roy Understand the Office She Wants to Lead?
Perhaps more troubling is Roy's public characterization of the City Attorney's authority to enforce Los Angeles Municipal Code Section 41.18, which restricts encampments and obstruction in designated public spaces.
In a September 2026 interview with Caló News, Roy stated:
“I think a very common misconception people have is that the city attorney has a role in enforcing the city's Section 41.18 ordinance.”
Yet Section 41.18 provides for enforcement through infractions, administrative citations, and other specified penalties. The City Attorney's Office prosecutes municipal offenses and participates in the City's administrative citation program.
In an April 30, 2026 statement to the City Council, the City Attorney's Office acknowledged its responsibility for determining whether Municipal Code violations should be prosecuted as misdemeanors, infractions, or citations.
The City Attorney may not personally direct LAPD officers to remove encampments. But that is different from suggesting the office has no enforcement role.
The inconsistency is striking. Roy promises aggressive enforcement of municipal tenant-protection laws, yet appears to minimize the office's authority concerning Section 41.18.
Apparently, the City Attorney's enforcement authority is expansive when the subject is landlords, but becomes a supposed misconception when the subject is Section 41.18.
If Roy opposes prosecuting certain violations, such as those under Section 41.18, she should say so rather than obscure a policy preference behind a questionable description of the office's responsibilities.
A Deputy City Attorney—or a Volunteer Intern?
In a 2022 professional publication, Roy was identified as a “2017–18 Deputy City Attorney & Justice Catalyst Fellow” with the Los Angeles City Attorney's Office.
According to California City News, citing an investigation by Westside Current, the City Attorney's Office confirmed that Roy was never employed as a Deputy City Attorney. Instead, she served as a volunteer intern.
A Deputy City Attorney holds an official government legal position. A volunteer internship, however valuable, does not automatically confer the same title or authority.
Roy deserves an opportunity to explain the discrepancy. But voters deserve a straightforward answer:
Was she officially appointed as a Deputy City Attorney, or was she a volunteer intern? If the latter, why was she publicly identified by the former title?
No Demonstrated Management Experience, Yet Seeking to Lead 550 Attorneys
At just 34 years old, Roy is seeking to lead one of the nation's largest municipal law offices, employing more than 550 attorneys and over 1,000 legal professionals.
Yet her publicly documented career reveals no demonstrated experience supervising a substantial legal team or managing an organization of comparable complexity.
The City Attorney is not merely a prosecutor. The office advises the Mayor, City Council, and City departments, defends the City in litigation, and oversees contracts, land-use matters, and countless legal responsibilities.
Under Sections 271 and 272 of the Los Angeles City Charter, the City Attorney's civil client is the City itself—not individual residents.
Yet Roy campaigns on becoming the “people's attorney,” promising to pursue predatory landlords, businesses, and corporations.
Consumer protection is a legitimate responsibility. But who would supervise the hundreds of attorneys responsible for protecting the City's legal interests?
Before seeking control of this enormous institution, Roy must demonstrate the management experience and institutional understanding necessary to lead it.
Compassion Without Accountability Is Not a Public Safety Strategy
The problem with progressive prosecution is not its recognition that addiction, poverty, and mental illness can contribute to criminal behavior.
Treatment and rehabilitation can be valuable.
The problem arises when reducing prosecution becomes an achievement in itself, while the effectiveness of alternatives remains uncertain.
What happens when repeat offenders continue committing theft or vandalism? When defendants refuse treatment or repeatedly violate diversion agreements?
Would Roy establish meaningful limits on diversion, monitor program completion, and publicly report repeat offenses?
Would prosecutors retain discretion to pursue criminal charges when rehabilitation fails?
These are practical questions about accountability, not merely ideological disagreements.
Los Angeles Cannot Afford to Ignore the Lessons of 2024
Roy and Gascón are not identical candidates, and their offices have different responsibilities. Roy has rejected the idea of a blanket misdemeanor prosecution freeze.
Nevertheless, both emphasize reducing incarceration, expanding diversion, limiting cash bail, and addressing criminal conduct through social interventions.
Los Angeles has already experienced the consequences of prosecutorial reforms that failed to secure broad public confidence.
Roy may argue that her policies would be better designed and more effective. If so, she should explain how, with measurable standards rather than campaign slogans.
Los Angeles needs a City Attorney who understands that compassion and accountability are not mutually exclusive.
Marissa Roy may be a different face from George Gascón. But until she explains how her approach would avoid the controversies of his administration, voters have every reason to question whether they are being offered a different outcome—or simply the same ideology under a new name.
(Sheida Ashley is the President and Land-Use Chair of the Century Glen Neighborhood Association, the Charter Reform representative for the Westside Neighborhood Council, and a Region 11 Neighborhood Council Budget Advocate.)
