Spencer Pratt Slaps Los Angeles Times With Legal Action Over Eyebrow-Raising Article: ‘If You Come After The Future Mayor, You’d Best Not Miss’

Spencer Pratt is so PISSED At the Los Angeles Times!

The Hills alum’s legal team sent a letter to the publication’s owner and executive chairman, Dr. Patrick Soon-Shiong, on Friday, demanding a retraction and an apology by 9:00 a.m. on April 13!

Whoa!

Why? Spencer accused journalists Noah Goldberg and Richard Winton of “willfully and maliciously publishing false information” in an article about his run for Los Angeles mayor, and so much more!

Related: Lauren Conrad Gets Caught Up In Awkward Spencer Pratt Convo!

The Los Angeles Times published a piece titled “Spencer Pratt’s move to Santa Barbara County after his Palisades house burned raises eligibility questions in L.A. mayor’s race” on April 6. In it, experts cast doubt on whether Spencer is eligible to run for office in the upcoming primary election on June 2 because he’s currently staying in Santa Barbara County, not Los Angeles.

The MTV personality addressed the issue on Monday, saying he only has been living at his dad’s rental home in the area because he and his wife, Heidi Montag, lost their home in the Palisades fire last year. But according to Spencer, his burned-down lot in the Palisades is still his legal residence. Watch the clip (below):

Creepy LA Times “journalist” has been phone-stalking & harassing my sister, my wife, my MOM, and even my favorite burrito restaurant trying to dox where my kids sleep and go to school, all because I pulled ahead of Nithya Raman in the polls, and she sent her lapdog to do her… pic.twitter.com/cwWdMqtFKX

— Spencer Pratt (@spencerpratt) April 6, 2026

However, the LA Times claimed both Spencer and Heidi listed a Santa Barbara County address linked to Pratt’s parents on their voter registrations. The city clerk’s office also alleged to the publication that candidates must be registered to vote in El Lay and be residents there by January 3 to be eligible to run for city office. Because of all that, Jessica Levinson, a professor of law at Loyola Marymount University, noted:

“I think this brings up the question as to whether Spencer Pratt can satisfy the residency requirement required under the charter to be elected mayor.”

Read the entire article HERE.

But, look, Spencer is not putting up with what he claims are lies! He’s a fighter AND a victim of one of Los Angeles’ most devastating tragedies. So now he’s clapping back and requesting a retraction, correction, and apology from the Los Angeles Times. And he made sure everyone saw exactly what he said! Over on Instagram, the 42-year-old reality star slammed Goldberg in a caption that read:

“Nithya Raman’s lap dog, Noah Goldberg, stalked my family, doxxed where my kids sleep, and maliciously misled the public to try and sabotage my campaign. He failed. Now he’s getting BTFO’d. Here’s the letter he and the El Segundo Times just got served from my lawyer. It’s a dooooozy… I’m a fighter, and I play to win. If you come after the future mayor, you’d best not miss.”

(For those unaware, Nithya Raman is also running for Los Angeles mayor.)

And yes, he included the letter for his followers to read! In the note, Spencer’s team alleged that Goldberg “spent days digitally harassing” The Princes of Malibu alum’s family and staff instead of making the “effort to research the domicile rules concerning displaced fire victims running for office” in Los Angeles. He further accused both writers of making “defamatory comparisons” to a “criminal politician,” former Los Angeles City Councilmember Richard Alarcon, who was convicted of perjury and voter fraud for representing a district in the San Fernando Valley that he didn’t live in. The candidate continued:

“It is clear that Goldberg and Winton acted recklessly and maliciously in order to provoke a negative response surrounding Mr. Pratt’s campaign for Mayor. They are supposed to be news writers, not opinion shapers; and they presented the Article as a news piece, not an opinion piece. There must be consequences for their reckless disregard for the truth.”

But what about his eligibility? What’s the verdict on that? Spencer’s team said they spoke “directly” with the City Clerk’s Office, and while the LA Times claimed the office wouldn’t release the document certifying his eligibility to run for mayor “because it was confidential,” the social media star insisted “that conclusion is incorrect.”

Spencer said there are already public records online to prove he’s a certified candidate, and the LA Times’ request to the City Clerk’s Office for his eligibility documents is similar to “demanding that someone with a passport prove their citizenship by demanding a letter from the State Department validating their social security number.” He added:

“The fact that the State Department issued a passport is sufficient proof that someone is a citizen; and the fact that the Los Angeles City Clerk listed his name on their public roster of certified candidates for the office of Mayor should be sufficient proof that Mr. Pratt’s eligibility to run for that office was verified. Los Angeles residency is a pre-requisite to certification, so the certification in and of itself is proof of residency. Writing an article to the contrary is reckless and untrue.”

Continuing to call out the journalists, Spencer blasted the duo for not taking a moment to send a simple email to the Los Angeles City Clerk to determine their article was “inaccurate and should not be published.” He even took it upon himself to reach out to them himself, including the email proof of his eligibility in the letter! Per that message, the clerk made it clear Spencer COULD run because of the rules about wildfire displacement:

“Fire victims, like Spencer Pratt, are able to maintain their vacant burned lot as their primary residence, and are indeed eligible to both vote and run for city office while rebuilding, even if they’ve been temporarily displaced outside the city during the recovery. … Spencer Pratt’s eligibility for LA City Mayor has been validated by the city, and any member of the press can confirm this through publicly-available information.”

Yikes! Not a good look for the LA Times! See the post (below):

Will Spence get his wishes? We’ll wait and see how the paper responds! Spencer likely won’t give up until they give in, though!

Thoughts, Perezcious readers? Tell us in the comments (below)!

[Image via Fox Business/YouTube, MEGA/WENN]