Month: June 2026

Demonstrators mark the second anniversary of a 2024 protest where 60 people were killed by security forces.

Kenyan police have dispersed protesters in the capital and detained others who took to the streets in memory of the demonstrators who were killed in anti-government rallies against tax rises two years ago.

Interior Minister Kipchumba Murkomen said on Thursday that a total of 355 people were arrested in various parts of the country. He called those detained “criminals” and apologised for the use of barricades and other security measures aimed at containing the protests.

“We regret the inconveniences occasioned by these measures, and at the same time appreciate their effectiveness in securing the city and other parts of the country,” Murkomen told reporters.

A correspondent for the Reuters news agency also saw police fire tear gas to disperse people who were gathering peacefully outside of Nairobi’s police station after forces detained six people outside parliament, where they had laid flowers.

According to the Kenya National Commission on Human Rights, organisers had planned to mark the second anniversary of the demonstrations that had left at least 60 people dead after protesters had breached parliament grounds in 2024.

But in Nairobi, shops and restaurants in the central business district remained closed as police set up roadblocks with water-cannon trucks.

Reporting from Nairobi, Al Jazeera’s Malcom Webb explained that the heavy police response to the protest was due to the government’s desire to avoid a repeat of the events two years ago.

“This comes following a series of different protests in recent weeks, some led by [President William] Ruto’s political opponents, others by transport unions over increases in fuel prices and a state of simmering discontent that hasn’t really recovered since that day two years ago when dozens of people were killed,” he said.

Opposition leaders joined the victims of alleged police brutality and families of protesters who were killed in the crackdown before they headed to parliament.

“As parents, we sought permission just to come here … to mourn and lay flowers for our children. But when we arrived, we were shocked because the police blocked us,” said Edith Wanjiku, whose 19-year-old son Ibrahim Kamau was killed in 2024.

“That is very shameful,” she continued.

“And one thing I would ask of President Ruto: those police officers who killed the children – because they are known – I am only asking for justice for those children and also compensation,” she added.

Protest organisers have said that they want a credible investigation into past police conduct and guarantees against the use of excessive force.

While Ruto has acknowledged what he called “instances of excessive and extrajudicial actions by members of the security services” and said last week that two billion Kenyan shillings ($15.5 million) had been set aside for victims of protest-related abuses, some activists have said it was not enough.

Veteran broadcast journalist Katie Couric has leveled sharp criticism at CBS’ “60 Minutes,” detailing a culture of systemic sexism and marginalization she says she experienced during her tenure at the prestigious newsmagazine.

On this week’s episode of the “Call Her Daddy” podcast, Couric, 69, described incidents during her time at “60 Minutes” when her story ideas were reassigned to her male counterparts. She described the circumstances as “really tough situations.”

The Emmy-winning journalist said she suspected early on that Jeff Fager, the “60 Minutes” executive producer at the time, didn’t take a liking to her.

“I think maybe because he wasn’t really consulted about bringing me over,” said Couric. “I was sort of seen as somebody from a different network coming in and sort of muddying the waters. I hadn’t come up in the CBS system. So I don’t know, he just didn’t like me.”

Couric started her run at the newsmagazine as a correspondent and as an anchor at CBS News in 2006, after spending 15 years co-hosting NBC’s “Today” show. Her role at CBS made her the first female solo anchor of a national weeknight news broadcast. She stayed with the network for five years before taking on a new role as special correspondent for ABC News.

Fager remained at “60 Minutes” from 2004 to 2018. He also served as the chairman of CBS News. He was eventually fired for allegedly sending a “harsh” message to a CBS reporter. At the time, he was also facing accusations of ignoring inappropriate behavior at “60 Minutes.” He previously denied the claims. CBS could not be reached for comment.

Trouble first came to a head when Couric pitched a profile of the rising pop star Lady Gaga. Fager had initially turned down the idea until he decided to pursue the story a year later, as Gaga had gained more notoriety.

Couric said she had proposed a fresh angle on Gaga’s Catholic school upbringing, but when she arrived for the interview, she discovered her name had been replaced with Anderson Cooper’s. His interview with Gaga aired in February 2011.

“It made me crazy,” Couric said.

A similar situation occurred once again when Couric was set to interview then–Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. The confusion began when the State Department reached out to Couric, wondering why fellow correspondent Scott Pelley’s team was inquiring about Clinton.

“So I go to Jeff Fager, and I say, ‘I thought you wanted me to do Hillary. You told me explicitly that you wanted to assign that story to me,’” Couric said. “And he said, ‘Yeah, we decided to change things up.’”

Couric said she was frustrated with Fager, for repeatedly going “behind [her] back.”

“Like, without even the decency to call me and say, ‘Guess what? We decided to reassign the story, and this is why,’” she said. “Talk about getting gaslit. I mean to me, that is the definition of it.”

Couric isn’t the only former “60 Minutes” to call out sexism at the newsmagazine. Meredith Vieira, who worked as a correspondent in the late 1980s and early 1990s, said in 2018, that she’d experienced sexism at CBS.

In the last few months, “60 Minutes” has undergone a massive upheaval. Under CBS News editor-in-chief, Bari Weiss, several correspondents, including Scott Pelley, and the program’s top producers were fired. Anderson Cooper also recently resigned from his post at the newsmagazine. With the upcoming season slated to begin in September, the program is currently under pressure to replenish its ranks.

WASHINGTON — Asylum seekers may be turned away without a hearing at the southern border, the Supreme Court ruled Thursday in a historic retreat from the promise of relief for those who say they are fleeing persecution.

The justices split over whether this was a simple dispute over legal wording or a moral question involving desperate families.

Siding with the Trump administration, the court’s conservatives said the Refugee Act of 1980 offers a right to seek asylum to migrants who “arrive in the United States” but not those who are turned back when they approach a border crossing or a port of entry.

“This case presents a straightforward question” that turns on the word “in,” said Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. “In ordinary speech, no one would say that a person ‘arrives in’ a place — for example, a house, a city, or a country — before the person enters that place.”

The liberal dissenters agreed with immigration rights lawyers who saw this as a nonsensical reading of the law.

Justice Sonia Sotomayor said the asylum law arose from the “international moral reckoning that followed the Holocaust and World War II.”

She cited the infamous voyage of the MS St. Louis in 1939. More than 900 Jewish refugees attempted to flee persecution in Nazi Germany by setting sail aboard the ship, which was turned away from Cuba and the United States.

Most of the passengers were returned to Europe, and several hundred died in the Holocaust, she said.

“Congress passed the Refugee Act in 1980 because it did not want this country to repeat the mistakes of its past. Yet if the refugees on the M.S. St. Louis were to walk up to a port of entry on our southern border today, the majority’s interpretation would allow immigration officers to refuse even to consider their asylum applications by physically blocking them from stepping foot onto U. S. soil,” Sotomayor wrote.

Justices Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson agreed.

The decision upholds a turn-back policy that began in 2016 as an emergency response to a surge of Haitian immigrants at the San Ysidro border crossing.

The Department of Homeland Security said these asylum seekers must wait on the Mexican side of the border until they could return for a scheduled interview. The policy was extended to other border crossings, but it was challenged as illegal in federal court in San Diego.

Last year, a divided 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that those restrictions were illegal if they prevented migrants from applying for asylum.

“To ‘arrive’ means ‘to reach a destination,’” wrote Judge Michelle Friedland. “A person who presents herself to an official at the border has ‘arrived.’”

She said the “government’s reading would reflect a radical reconstruction of the right to apply for asylum because it would give the executive branch vast discretion to prevent people from applying by blocking them at the border.”

The 2-1 decision upheld a federal judge in San Diego who ruled for migrants who had filed a class-action suit and said they were wrongly denied an asylum hearing.

But Solicitor Gen. D. John Sauer urged the Supreme Court to review and reverse the appellate ruling, noting 15 judges of the 9th Circuit joined dissents that called the decision “radical” and “clearly wrong.”

The administration argued federal immigration law “does not grant aliens throughout the world a right to enter the United States so that they can seek asylum.”

From abroad, they may “seek admission as refugees,” Sauer said, but the government may enforce its laws by “blocking illegal immigrants from stepping on U.S. soil.”

Defenders of the asylum system denounced the decision.

“We believe that today’s ruling violates international law, as well as the express intent of Congress,” said Erika Pinheiro, executive director of the migrant support organization Al Otro Lado, which led the legal fight. “For decades, the United States has allowed individuals and families who are fleeing persecution, torture and death to ask for protection at U.S. borders.”

“Cruelty is not a substitute for real solutions. Blocking people from seeking asylum at official ports of entry will do nothing to fix our broken immigration system, said Rebecca Cassler, senior litigation attorney at the American Immigration Council. “It only makes things more chaotic and dangerous for vulnerable families.”

The Federation for American Immigration Reform applauded the decision.

“Our immigration laws are written to be pro-enforcement, not-anti-enforcement,” said Christopher J. Hajec, deputy general counsel of FAIR. “Because of this, courts that hamstring enforcement are often forced to violate basic logic, as the 9th Circuit did here. We are pleased the Supreme Court saw that the lower court’s reading would make immigration law incoherent, and reversed.”

I rose from my living room couch before Mexico’s World Cup match against Czechia when the Telemundo announcer stated it was time for the Mexican national anthem.

The public address system at Azteca Stadium in Mexico City played a short string intro. My back straightened. I pressed my right hand against my chest horizontally in the traditional gesture that accompanies the tune. And then I recited the opening lyrics to a song I’ve heard all my life but that I only began committing to memory this month:

Mexicanos al grito de guerra/El acero aprestad y bridón/Y retiemble en sus centros la tierra/Al sonoro rugir del cañon

Those florid 19th century words — “Mexicans, at the cry of war/Ready the steel and the bridle/and may the Earth tremble to its core/at the cannon’s resounding roar” — make “The Star-Spangled Banner” seem as anti-war as “Give Peace a Chance.” My kumbaya heart nevertheless jumped as the anthem continued.

Goosebumps blossomed on my skin as Mexico’s head coach Javier Aguirre, he of a stern face and gray haircut worthy of a drill sergeant, beamed while singing. My eyes watered as the camera panned over his arm-in-arm players as they shouted the line, “Think, o beloved homeland! That heaven/gave you a soldier in each son.”

Millions of Mexican Americans like myself have stumbled through the himno nacional during this World Cup, whereas in previous years, we might have just hummed some bars or stayed silent. It’s a boisterous way to connect with one half of our hyphenated lives and get in the right mindset to root for El Tri, but otherwise something we don’t really have to know all the way through given we’re in the U.S.

Yet seeing stadiums and bars packed with Latinos wearing the jerseys of their ancestral homes and warbling their national anthems during this World Cup has been a jolt of inspiration I wasn’t expecting. Those few minutes before each match have become a reminder of what we’re up against at this moment in the Western Hemisphere, as President Trump thirsts to smash Latin America into submission while persecuting too many of us stateside.

In downtown Santa Ana earlier this week, Alicia Rojas quietly recited Colombia’s national anthem word for word before a game against the Democratic Republic of the Congo, even though she was just one of a handful of Colombian fans at Chapter One: The Modern Bistro.

“It reconnects me to my roots, my family and the memories of home,” said Rojas, who was born in Bogotá and moved to the U.S. at age 12. The artist has helped to organize against federal immigration raids in Orange County and volunteers for local political races. “Those few minutes remind me that beyond our differences, we share a history, a culture and a love for the land that made us who we are.”

Latinos are a famously divided bunch, to the point that we don’t even like a catch-all label for “us.” A 2024 Pew Research Center survey found that 52% of Latinos prefer to refer to themselves by their family’s country of origin, while only 30% identify as Hispanic or Latino and just 17% use plain ol’ American.

One thing that can unite us all — and all lovers of liberty, for that matter — is those Latin American national anthems. Many were written in the aftermath of wars for independence. Most are bright, rousing listens, even if you don’t understand Spanish, because their chords reflect the Romantic classical music popular at the time of their composition in the 19th century. All call for their countrymen to fight against tyranny.

Fans cheer after Lionel Messi scores a goal against Algeria during a World Cup watch party at Mercado Buenos Aires on Tuesday, June 16 in Van Nuys.

(Ronaldo Bolaños/Los Angeles Times)

Cue up this soundtrack for your summer:

Paraguay’s national anthem starts by stating that the people of the Americas were “oppressed for three centuries” until they rebelled. Ecuador’s recalls how its founding fathers “cried out a holy voice to the heavens/that noble voice of a unbreakable pledge/to defeat that [Spanish] monster of blood.” Colombia’s similarly doesn’t shy away from how violent its fight for independence was, but takes solace that “in furrows of pain/good now germinates.”

On and on, these songs stir the soul. Argentina: “Hear the sound of broken chains/See noble equality enthroned.” Uruguay: “Tyrants: Tremble!/We shall cry out ‘Liberty’ in battle!” — a boast backed by flutes and violins that make it sound like a Rossini overture. I especially like how Panama’s national anthem concludes by urging “shovel and pick/to work without delay” — a reminder that the job of creating a better society is never done.

Conservatives have, unsurprisingly, long railed at the very idea of singing the national anthems of other countries on American soil. But that just reinforces Samuel Johnson’s adage that patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel.

There’s nothing wrong with taking inspiration from the clarion calls of other countries. “O Canada” is as soaring as “God Save the King,” while revolutionaries across the world have chanted “La Marseillaise” for centuries. And yes: I sing “The Star-Spangled Banner” with all my heart as well — and I definitely know the words to it.

But the message of the U.S. national anthem isn’t enough for Latinos right now. Hailing survival against an invading force is important, but it’s a mindset too many of us have resigned ourselves to under Trump.

The theme of Latin America’s national anthems is the demand that we stand against despotism and push for a better world through sacrifice and valor. They should be a wake-up call, especially for Latinos, to lead the electoral charge against Trump this November. We helped put him in the Oval Office in 2024, and we have the power to take Congress away from his GOP vassals.

Alas, all those paeans to freedom have played out better in song than in real life. Latin America is swinging rightward again, electing presidents who promise to channel the strongmen of yore and rule the region through might, not right.

On the same night that Rojas was cheering on Colombia, she was bemoaning that her homeland had elected Abelardo de la Espriella, a millionaire criminal defense lawyer and political novice who earned Trump’s endorsement for his “tremendous accomplishments in life” — which include claiming that female voters would pick him because of the supposed size of his genitals.

We must channel the hopes and dreams of Simón Bolívar, Emiliano, Zapata, José Martí and other heroes of the Americas who fought for freedom for their countrymen, sought to cast off the long reach of colonialism and imperialism and urged pan-American alliances over forever wars.

Nothing like the World Cup’s unofficial pre-game soundtrack to reinforce this eternal, universal message.

Mexico dominated Czechia 3-0 and finished first in its group. When El Tri plays again on Tuesday in the first round of the knockout stage, I will stand at a packed Chapter One with other fans and so many more across the U.S. and sing again Mexico’s national anthem.

I will hope to have it all memorized by then instead of reading off my smartphone — the thing is hard! The Spanish is archaic, the intonations are complicated, and the words tumble over themselves like a hard charge toward the goal posts.

But I will do it — a little victory in the long battle for freedom that never ends.

Doha, Qatar – Gulf states have welcomed a breakthrough agreement between the United States and Iran to end a war they never wanted.

Six countries – Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates (UAE), Qatar, Kuwait, Bahrain and Oman – form the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC), which was created in 1981 following fears of the perceived expansionist ambitions of the new Iranian government.

Since the 1979 Islamic revolution, Israel has attempted to isolate Iran and its wide network of regional proxy groups. But in a twist of irony, Israeli aggression in this pursuit has pushed some Gulf states closer to Tehran.

When Israel and the US launched strikes on Iran on February 28 – and Tehran responded by attacking Gulf states – they were again forced to reassess their relationship with their neighbour.

Gulf relations with Iran, at present, appear more shaped by realism than reconciliation, but this approach could help them navigate the uncertain road ahead.

“The ongoing conflict … compelled the Gulf states to pursue a more pragmatic relationship with Tehran, one that will include enhanced dialogue to deter conflict,” Farah al-Qawasmi, a researcher at the Gulf Studies Center at Qatar University, told Al Jazeera.

Embracing de-escalation – not Iran

All six GCC member states have welcomed a memorandum of understanding (MoU) signed by Iran and the US last week. But this is shaped more by the Gulf states wanting the war to end rather than a newfound trust of Iran.

“An agreement between the two parties is being [highly] advocated by the Gulf states in [an] attempt to prevent and contain regional conflicts,” al-Qawasmi said.

Shortly after the US and Iran agreed in 2015 to the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) – putting guardrails on Tehran’s nuclear programme – Gulf states remained sceptical about their neighbour.

The current war has only heightened these suspicions, but it has also seen regional states seek diplomacy with Tehran rather than military confrontation, despite Iran directly attacking Gulf cities.

“The Gulf states still feel like diplomacy is better than using force to get a deal … to change Iran’s behaviour and to insulate them from Iran’s destabilising actions,” Rob Geist Pinfold, a lecturer on security studies at King’s College London, told Al Jazeera.

Pinfold points out that Iran closed the Strait of Hormuz via drones and missiles, not nuclear weapons, making dealing with that threat a priority for Gulf states rather than Tehran’s nuclear programme.

Gulf states will want a more comprehensive agreement between Iran and the US, rather than the nuclear-focused JCPOA, said Pinfold.

“If you talk to people in Gulf capitals, they will tell you that the nuclear programme is a tomorrow problem for them,” he said.

“The today problem is Iran’s use of drones and proxies to destabilise and undermine the sovereignty of Gulf states, but also states throughout the region.”

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio’s three-day tour of the Gulf, which ends Thursday, is seen as a way of allaying these fears and assuring the GCC that Tehran will not be strengthened by the agreement.

Seat at the table

Mehran Haghirian, the director of research and programmes at the Bourse & Bazaar Foundation, believes Gulf states are in a better position to guide the outcome of the current US-Iran talks than in 2015.

“They are at the heart of the negotiations,” Haghirian said regarding the Gulf states’ role in the current talks.

In its role as a co-mediator, Qatar is essentially representing the GCC and their interests during the talks, while articles five and six of the Iran-US MoU place Gulf states at the centre of the agreement.

Among the biggest concerns for the GCC are the future of the Strait of Hormuz, with Tehran demanding tolls on shipping, and calls for the creation of a regional investment fund for Iran.

“There really cannot be any new Hormuz authority by Iran that would not include other GCC countries,” Haghirian told Al Jazeera.

US Vice President JD Vance claimed last week that the investment fund would be financed by the Gulf coalition, but Rubio said this week that regional allies would not be asked to contribute to any reconstruction fund for Iran.

Qatar’s Prime Minister Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman bin Jassim Al Thani has described the reported $300bn figure as “aspirational” in an interview with the Financial Times, while no Gulf state has yet said if it will contribute to the fund.

‘Maximum pressure era’

The analysts stress that the GCC is not a monolith – with Gulf states having contrasting and changing approaches towards Iran.

Oman, Qatar and Kuwait were broadly supportive of the JCPOA. Saudi Arabia, the UAE and Bahrain were more sceptical, but even these states publicly backed the agreement, said Haghirian.

When Trump pulled the US out of the JCPOA in 2018, Saudi Arabia, the UAE and Bahrain believed they had “found a partner in DC”.

That led to a “maximum pressure era” that brought a period of brinkmanship in the region, said Haghirian.

Suspected Iran-linked attacks on Saudi Arabia’s Abqaiq-Khurais oil facilities and vessels off the coast of Fujairah in 2019 were “the initial reaction by the Iranians to that maximum pressure” campaign, he added, but paradoxically, this also triggered a recalibration of relations.

The UAE and Iran restored ties in 2022, and a China-brokered Saudi-Iran agreement took place in 2023.

“That was enough of a reason for Saudi Arabia [and] the UAE, particularly, to basically restructure their approach towards Iran,” Haghirian said.

The war and accelerated pragmatic rapprochement

While Israel has used war to attempt to increase its presence in the Gulf region – reportedly sending an Iron Dome battery to the UAE – other Gulf states view both Iran and Israel as unsettling forces in the region.

“Israel started the war, which was a destabilising act, and then Iran escalated by targeting the Gulf states, which was in turn a destabilising act,” Pinfold said.

Despite this, the Gulf states targeted by Iran still demonstrated patience and pragmatism in dealing with their neighbour.

Qatar, for example, has played a leading role in mediating between the US and Iran, even after being on the receiving end of Iranian drone and missile attacks.

“All six got attacked, and that’s really a level of foreign policy decision-making that is very difficult for any state to be able to really undertake, considering the fact that it was a military attack,” Haghirian said.

“But again, this pragmatism came out within this context to engage Iran and to actually speak for themselves at these negotiations. This war has really initiated a complete rebalancing of the entire region.”

FIFA’s inaugural U-15 World Cup in October has been opened to all of its member associates, paving way for Russia’s return.

A ‌Russian team may be allowed to participate ⁠in ⁠a FIFA event for the first time since Moscow’s 2022 invasion of Ukraine after ⁠football’s global authority said its inaugural U-15 World Cup and Festival, set to be ⁠held in Azerbaijan in October, is open to all FIFA member associations.

FIFA banned Russia from international competition in February 2022 after it invaded ‌Ukraine, but it lifted the suspension from the country’s U-17 boys’ and girls’ teams the next year.

However, Russian teams have remained absent from U-17 tournaments organised by FIFA and UEFA as several European countries, including Ukraine ⁠and England, continue to boycott ⁠Russia over its ongoing invasion of its neighbour.

“The first edition will be open to boys’ teams from all FIFA ⁠member associations, the second instalment in 2027 will feature girls’ ⁠teams only,” FIFA said on ⁠Wednesday about the U-15 World Cup and Festival.

“From 2028 onwards, all member associations will be invited to participate with ‌both their boys’ and girls’ U-15 teams in two separate competitions.”

The U-15 event will kick ‌off ‌on October 22 and conclude nine days later.

The One Show presenters Alex Jones and Roman Kemp addressed an expletive on the programme.

The One Show presenter Roman Kemp issued an apology after a guest swore live on air.

The programme returned on Thursday, June 25, with Roman joining Alex Jones on the sofa.

They welcomed guests Kate Humble, Ben Fogle and Martin Clunes to the show, before it was thrown into chaos.

The Doc Martin star had been talking about the US version of the beloved programme emerging, starring Josh Charles in the leading role.

As a preview clip of it aired, Martin was asked about Josh’s spin on playing the grumpy doctor.

He replied: “He’s completely done his own thing, much nicer than me, less awkward and abrasive… he’s warm and better-looking.”

Martin then responded to a moment he just saw from the preview, adding: “I was just looking at that bit… they wouldn’t let me call the dog the son of a b***h, which I thought was funny.”

As the studio erupted into laughter, Roman rushed to apologise, saying: “I have to apologise quickly.”

Alex jokingly chastised Martin, adding: “You’ve been on a hundred times!”

Martin then turned to Ben, arguing: “He’s a vet… it’s a female dog!”

Continuing about the programme, Martin went on to address the future of the show, saying: “They’re going again, they’re doing another series.”

The Good Wife actor Josh will be starring in Best Medicine, with Sky previously teasing: “A US remake of UK television favourite Doc Martin, Best Medicine is a heartwarming new comedy-drama about a physician who moves to a small coastal town in the hopes of a quiet life.

“Dr Martin Best packs up his surgical career in Boston, Massachusetts and heads to start a new life as a physician in the coastal fishing town of Port Wenn in Maine. His aunt, a local lobster merchant, is nearby, and his new private practice is perfect for a simple life. Or so he thinks.

“Soon he’s introduced to Port Wenn’s community, filled with quirky but loving characters with no end of ailments for him to figure out and diagnose. However, as someone who is quite introverted and likes to keep himself to himself, he struggles with the adjustment.

“He’s also got a huge blood phobia – which doesn’t help his abilities as a doctor who may need to tend to wounds from time to time.

“But behind his brusque attitude and no-nonsense approach to a bedside manner, Dr Martin hides his own personal pain that he is hiding from the world which explains why he is the way he is. Will this little town bring him out of his shell?”

The One Show airs weeknights from 7pm on BBC One and iPlayer.

WASHINGTON — A Democratic U.S. senator warns the Trump administration is getting ready to round up 500 immigrant children in a hasty effort to remove them from the country, bypassing legal protections. It would be their second attempt after a federal court intervened last year in an overnight plan to fly out hundreds of children on Labor Day weekend.

Sen. Ron Wyden of Oregon wrote in a letter Wednesday to U.S. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., which oversees the Office of Refugee Resettlement caring for unaccompanied migrant children, that he had “credible information” that the Trump administration had a list of more than 500 migrant children it was targeting for a fast-track removal process and that the department was racing to act in days. He warned that the administration was abdicating “core humanitarian and child welfare mandates” and demanded an immediate halt to any plans to remove the children.

Wyden, who is the ranking member and senior Democrat of the Senate Finance Committee, which has jurisdiction over ORR, did not detail how he came by his information. His office declined to provide further details. ORR falls under the Department of Health and Human Services.

An HHS spokesperson denied any such plans.

“The new information I obtained leads me to believe that the Department is laying the groundwork for another lawless deportation effort, this time on a greater scale, across more countries of origin,” Wyden wrote.

“You have been entrusted with the care and safety of the children placed within the ORR network. Proceeding with this plan knowingly endangers their lives and violates your duty to these vulnerable children.”

Wyden also issued an early warning last August ahead of what eventually became a chaotic weekend of efforts by the Trump administration to remove Guatemalan children in its care and send them home.

HHS spokesperson Emily Hilliard said in “there are no plans to target these children,” calling Wyden’s claims ”irresponsible fearmongering.”

“The Trump Administration is working to identify the parents or legal guardians of unaccompanied alien children in our care because ensuring every child is placed with a properly vetted sponsor is our top priority,” she said.

Over the Labor Day weekend, dozens of migrant children either staying in government-supervised shelters or with foster families were taken from their homes and bused to airfields in Texas bound for Guatemala. A federal judge woken up in the middle of the night eventually stopped the planes. Lawyers for the children — many who had fled violence at home to come to the U.S. — later described how traumatic the middle-of-the-night removal effort was for them.

The administration insisted it was reuniting the Guatemalan children — at the Central American nation’s request — with parents or guardians who sought their return. Lawyers for at least some of the children said that wasn’t true and argued that in any event, authorities still would have to follow a legal process that they did not.

Migrant children traveling alone are usually entrusted to U.S. government care, and there are various legal protections designed to protect them once they’re in the U.S. and navigating the immigration system.

The Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2008 is one of the key pieces of legislation designed to protect them. With some limited exceptions, it requires that children be placed in the “least restrictive setting possible,” which generally means that they can be released to a sponsor such as a relative in the U.S. while their immigration proceedings play out.

The children can apply for a specially protected status if they can’t return to their home country because of abuse or neglect and they can also apply for asylum.

The Trump administration has made it increasingly difficult for those children to be released to sponsors though. The administration says that they are doing due diligence to make sure that sponsors are thoroughly vetted and that in the past, children were released into dangerous situations.

But advocates say that the result has been children lingering for months in government shelters.

This time, Wyden said the children at risk of being removed come from various countries, potentially including Guatemala, Honduras, El Salvador, and Afghanistan, and have been in U.S. custody — mainly in foster care — for at least 180 days. He said they were described as not having any “viable sponsor” who could come forward and take care of them in the U.S.

Not having an identified sponsor could mean the child’s parents are in their home countries, are deceased or are too afraid to claim their children after ICE started arresting some parents who are not in the country legally during their reunification efforts.

Gonzalez and Santana write for the Associated Press.

It’s crunch time at the 2026 FIFA World Cup with teams throughout the 48-strong field looking to stay in contention for the knockout stage or improve their placing in the round of 32.

The U.S., Mexico, Argentina, Germany, Brazil and Switzerland have already clinched spots in the round of 32 by winning their respective groups. France, Norway, Canada, Colombia, Morocco, Bosnia-Herzegovina and South Africa also are advancing. Haiti, Tunisia, Turkey, Jordan, Uzbekistan, Panama and Czechia, however, have been eliminated from knockout-round contention.

Here’s everything you need to know about World Cup matches being played Thursday and Friday across the U.S., Mexico and Canada (all times Pacific).

Thursday’s Group D matchups:

U.S. vs. Turkey

U.S. coach Mauricio Pochettino instructs his players during a 4-1 win over Paraguay at SoFi Stadium on June 12.

(Robert Gauthier / Los Angeles Times)

Where: SoFi Stadium, Inglewood
Time: 7 p.m.
TV: Fox, Telemundo

The buzz: There’s not much at stake since the U.S. has won the group and Turkey has been eliminated. Expect the U.S. to rest many of its regulars, especially those with yellow cards, while Turkey will be chasing its first World Cup win since 2002, when it finished third.

Paraguay vs. Australia

Paraguay midfielder Matias Galarza controls the ball against Turkey on June 19.

(David M. Barreda / Los Angeles Times)

Where: Levi’s Stadium, Santa Clara, Calif.
Time: 7 p.m.
TV: FS1, Universo

The buzz: The winner finishes second in the group and will go through to the elimination rounds. Australia, with an edge in goal differential, would get the second spot in the event of a draw. It’s not a do-or-die game for either team since three points could be enough to advance.

Thursday’s Group E matchups:

Ecuador vs. Germany

Germany’s Nadiem Amiri celebrates a goal against Ivory Coast on June 20.

(Michael Reaves / Getty Images)

Where: MetLife Stadium, East Rutherford, N.J.
Time: 1 p.m.
TV: Fox, Telemundo

The buzz: Germany is already through to the knockout stages while Ecuador could finish second and clinch a spot in the round of 32 with a win coupled with an Ivory Coast loss or draw. However, that would require Ivory Coast losing or drawing. A victory could send Ecuador on as a third-place team no matter what Ivory Coast does, but that path is less certain.

Curaçao vs. Ivory Coast

Curaçao’s Livano Comenencia shoots against Germany on June 14.

(Eric Gay / Associated Press)

Where: Lincoln Financial Field, Philadelphia
Time: 1 p.m.
TV: FS1, Universo

The buzz: Ivory Coast is all but through to the knockout round, at least as a third-place team. But a draw would give it the No. 2 spot in the group and an easier route through the knockout stages. Curaçao still has a chance of advancing despite having been outscored 7-1, and it could finish second with a win and an Ecuador loss.

Thursday’s Group F matchups:

Tunisia vs. Netherlands

Netherlands’ Crysencio Summerville celebrates after scoring against Sweden on June 20.

(Ashley Landis / Associated Press)

Where: Arrowhead Stadium, Kansas City, Mo.
Time: 4 p.m.
TV: FS1, Telemundo

The buzz: Tunisia has lost two games under two coaches — getting outscored 9-1 in the process — and can’t advance. But there’s much at stake for the Dutch, who can finish anywhere from first to third depending on the results of the final group-stage games. The Netherlands and Japan are tied on points, wins and goal differential and played to a draw in their head-to-head match, so whoever does better on the final day wins the group.

Japan vs. Sweden

Japan’s Ayase Ueda celebrates after scoring against Tunisia on June 20.

(Sofia Yaker / Associated Press)

Where: AT&T Stadium, Arlington, Texas
Time: 4 p.m.
TV: Fox, Universo

The buzz: Both teams are assured of a top-three finish and a likely spot in the next round, but a win could secure first in the group. Although Japan and the Netherlands are the favorites to win the group, Sweden could overtake both with a win, provided the Dutch do no better than a draw.

Friday’s Group G matchups:

New Zealand vs. Belgium

Belgium midfielder Kevin De Bruyne (7), left, kicks the ball in front of Iran defender Hossein Kanaanizadegan on June 21 at SoFi Stadium.

(Robert Gauthier / Los Angeles Times)

Where: BC Place, Vancouver
Time: 8 p.m.
TV: FS1, NBC Univserso

The buzz: If New Zealand earns its first-ever World Cup win, it’s mathematically possible the Kiwis could win the group. The same scenario holds for winless Belgium, however, it is still looking for its first goal of the tournament.

Iran vs. Egypt

Iran forward Alireza Jahanbakhsh, left, battles Belgium defender Maxim De Cuyper for the ball during a World Cup match at SoFi Stadium on June 21.

(Ronaldo Bolaños / Los Angeles Times)

Where: Lumen Field, Seattle
Time: 8 p.m.
TV: Fox, Telemundo

The buzz: Egypt entered the final day of group play atop the group and with a firm hold on a spot in the round of 32. It would win the group with a victory, although a draw could also be enough, depending on the score of the Belgium-New Zealand match. Unbeaten Iran can also win the group with a victory; a draw probably will get it to the knockout stage.

Friday’s Group H matchups:

Cape Verde vs. Saudi Arabia

Cape Verde’s Helio Varela celebrates after scoring against Uruguay at the World Cup on June 21.

(Marta Lavandier / Associated Press)

Where: NRG Stadium, Houston
Time: 5 p.m.
TV: FS1, Universo

The buzz: With a win here, Cape Verde would not only go through to the knockout stage, but it could win the group depending on the result of the Spain-Uruguay game. The island nation of about 530,000 people, the third-smallest country to qualify for a World Cup, is unbeaten after draws with Spain and Uruguay. Saudi Arabia is looking for its first World Cup win since upsetting eventual champion Argentina in its 2022 opener.

Uruguay vs. Spain

Spain’s Mikel Oyarzabal celebrates after a goal against Saudi Arabia in the World Cup on June 21.

(Justin Setterfield / Getty Images)

Where: Akron Stadium, Zapopan, Mexico
Time: 4 p.m.
TV: Fox, Telemundo

The buzz: Spain will take the group with a win or draw, provided it maintains its goal-differential advantage over Cape Verde. Uruguay, however, needs a victory to finish atop the table. A third straight draw, which would leave it unbeaten, would probably be enough to see it through to the next round, but a loss will likely send Uruguay home.

Friday’s Group I matchups:

Norway vs. France

France’s Kylian Mbappé controls the ball during a win over Iraq at the World Cup on June 22.

(Derik Hamilton / Associated Press)

Where: Gillette Stadium, Foxborough, Mass.
Time: Noon
TV: Fox, Telemundo

The buzz: This game will not only decide the group winner but it could affect who wins the Golden Boot as the tournament’s top scorer. Both teams won their first two games and are on to the round of 32, and Norway’s Erling Haaland and France’s Kylian Mbappé each have scored four goals. Mbappe, whose eight goals led the tournament four years ago, already has 16 World Cup goals for his career, tied for second all-time.

Senegal vs. Iraq

Senegal’s Sadio Mane play against France in a World Cup match on June 16.

(Steve Luciano / Associated Press)

Where: BMO Field, Toronto
Time: Noon
TV: FS1, Universo

The buzz: Senegal and Iraq, both losers in their first two games, have a chance of advancing as a third-place team, but they need a win to make that happen. For Iraq, a victory would be its first in World Cup competition while Senegal, a quarterfinalist in 2002, would like to get a win for Sadio Mane, one of Africa’s most iconic players, who may be playing in his final World Cup.

I was explaining the location of my broken-down car in Angeles National Forest to the tow truck dispatcher when I suddenly found myself shouting.

“Bear!” I yelled.

A black bear ambled across the road and into Red Box Picnic Area. I hollered at the bear, as did another person in the lot.

The bear ignored us both, focused on where it would find its dinner that night: a bear-proof trash can.

In this edition of The Wild, our weekly outdoors newsletter, I will share the three bear encounters I had last week with black bears in Angeles National Forest. They were my first, second and third times to experience bruins in the San Gabriels. The third time, when a bear slapped my backpacking tent, was the most memorable moment. We’ll get to that later.

For anyone feeling rusty on the best course of action when you see a black bear in our local mountains, here’s a quick refresher on the tips I got previously from a conservation biologist.

• 🙅🏃Don’t run. You will look like prey.
• 🗣️ Let bears know you’re there. Say something loudly and calmly — don’t shriek! — like “Hey, bear!” in a deep voice.
• 💪 Make yourself big. Put your hands up and out — don’t shake them around — and try to get the bear’s attention without indicating that you’re scared or that you’re a threat to that bear.
• 👀👀👀 Keep your eye on the bear. But don’t look it in the eye. That can be perceived as threatening or like you’re trying to be dominant.
• 🤔 Observe its behavior and react accordingly. To learn more about this portion of my tips, check out No. 4 on my list.
• 🏔️ Carry bear spray. Bear spray is legal to carry in Angeles National Forest and generally on national forest land unless otherwise posted. It is prohibited in Yosemite National Park and other California national parks.

A black bear wanders along Canyon Road in March 2020 in Arcadia.

(Irfan Khan / Los Angeles Times)

Anyone who hikes in Angeles National Forest is likely familiar with Red Box Picnic Area. It’s where adventurers park to hike up to Strawberry Peak or other nearby trails, like the Gabrielino Trail, which I wrote about last week. That’s how I found myself briefly stranded in the forest.

I had spent the day hiking past gorgeous wildflowers and splashing around in the Arroyo Seco. I got back to my car around 7:30 p.m., discovered my car’s battery was dead and, after realizing I had cellphone reception, called for help.

As I waited, I chatted with a good Samaritan, an outdoors woman reading a book in her car who decided she’d wait with me until a service technician arrived.

The bear arrived in the lot around 8:30 p.m. As the sun dipped lower into the horizon, we watched the hungry fluffball knock over the brown metal trash can that was specifically designed to keep its species out.

A bear with its head inside a bear-proof trash can.

(Jaclyn Cosgrove / Los Angeles Times)

After knocking the trash can down, the bear easily shoved its arms inside. Over the next several minutes, it repeatedly shook the can toward its (adorable) face. It was kind of like watching a human shake a potato chip bag toward their mouth to get the very last bits of delicious fried starch.

My new friend and I agreed, in all our travels throughout California, we hadn’t seen anything like this. I contacted the California Department of Fish and Wildlife to ask them: How normal is it for a bear to deftly navigate the mechanisms of a trash can built to resist it?

“It’s pretty uncommon that the bears actually break in,” agency spokesman Cort Klopping said. “When I was talking to our biologist about it yesterday and a couple people in the office, the reactions were all kind of like, ‘Wow.’ Either somebody didn’t secure that thing or that bear was an absolute hulk of a bear to get into a bear-proof or bear-resistant trash can. … I was joking with the biologist that I think I’ve actually had trouble opening those.

“You were witness to what I would refer to as a pretty rare sight,” Klopping added.

I’d known there was a bear in the area when I started my hike earlier that day. At Switzer Picnic Area, I read signs posted around the picnic tables warning visitors, “Active Bear Area: Do not feed bears or leave food unattended.” The flier featured an image of a bear standing on a picnic table, eating through some family’s meal.

A sign posted at the Switzer Picnic Area in Angeles National Forest.

(Jaclyn Cosgrove / Los Angeles Times)

Angeles National Forest spokesperson Keila Vizcarra said in an email that since last August, forest officials have received at least four reports from the public and staff about two bears active in the Switzer area.

Earlier this month, recreation staff spotted two bears at the Switzer Picnic Area eating food left unattended at a picnic table. They notified state wildlife officials.

“The animals may be the same bears seen last year, but it is difficult to confirm because tag numbers are not always visible or provided; in this case, one of the bears did not appear to be tagged,” Vizcarra said.

Forest staff use various hazing methods to discourage bears and other wildlife from eating human food, like making loud noises, securing or repairing trash cans and educating visitors about how to keep their food safe from animals, she said.

“A major contributing factor continues to be unsecured or unattended food, which attracts bears from long distances,” Vizcarra said.

The bear at Red Box finished its trash-inspired tasting menu and then walked past our cars. We both honked, but it was so unfazed, I wondered aloud whether it was deaf. (It wasn’t.)

It then headed south from the parking lot, and we didn’t see it again. I had already planned to write this week’s newsletter about that experience.

Then I went backpacking as a little treat to myself.

On Friday afternoon, my dog, Maggie May, and I headed out from near Pasadena down the Gabrielino Trail with a plan to camp overnight at the Gould Mesa Trail Camp. Despite loving the outdoors, I’d never been backpacking, but after my parents bought me a tent and sleep pad for my birthday in late May, I was itching to go. Gould Mesa is close to a city. It’s next to the Arroyo Seco with water to filter and reachable by a short two-mile mostly flat hike. It felt like the perfect first trip.

About a mile in, a mountain biker warned us of a “big bear, really big bear” at the campground before he sped off. A female hiker told me the bear was average, probably 5 feet on its haunches. Others hadn’t seen it.

I was talking to another mountain biker, who was telling me the bear had been active in the area for about a month, when a man came racing down the trail, shouting about how the bear was aggressive and dangerous. The man said he’d lunged at the bear, trying to protect his food, and proceeded to make several choices that would likely be found on a “What not to do when you encounter a bear” list. Maggie and I continued onward.

We arrived at the campground around 4:30 p.m. and didn’t see anything. I asked a mother and son set up at the site next to mine about the bear, and they pointed to a large coast live oak where a small, young bear laid over a thick branch, its small feet dangling down, right above the trail. One reason hikers hadn’t seen the bear was that they’d walked right under it.

A young bear lies on the branch of a large coast live oak above the Gabrielino Trail near Pasadena.

(Jaclyn Cosgrove / Los Angeles Times)

The bear had entered the campground from near the river, and without the mother-son duo realizing that the bear was approaching them, it grabbed their food right off their picnic table. The mom told me that she considered trying to pull the food back, but the bear made noises suggesting that it preferred she didn’t. It then left the campground, and presumably after eating the meal that her son told me had “a lot of protein” in it, the bear climbed into the tree and took a nap.

I’d camped in areas with bears before, including in Kings Canyon National Park where bears came into the campground every night. This bear wasn’t being aggressive. Instead, it seemed young and like it was testing out how easy it was to get food from these weird animals — we humans — in its backyard.

I decided to stay, especially after the bear left around 7:30 p.m., and none of us saw it again. The campground was full, and two of us, myself included, had bear spray.

Maggie and I got into the tent around 9 p.m. and soon fell asleep to the sweet serenade of frogs and toads singing their nightly songs.

Then, at 2:39 a.m., I woke up to the sound of something slapping the corner of my tent next to my head.

“What the f—?” I screamed.

I lay there, heart racing, listening.

I had put my tent’s rain fly on, so I couldn’t see outside, but I could hear the bear as it left. A large whoosh-whoosh sound headed away from my tent.

For the next 20 minutes, I listened intently to every single sound the forest made. Then, after checking that my bear spray and satellite communicator were close by, I fell back asleep. In the morning, I found a small cut in my rain fly that the bear’s paw had left. My dad later suggested that I date the hole with a marker.

A small cut left after a bear swiped the rain fly of Wild writer Jaclyn Cosgrove’s backpacking tent.

(Jaclyn Cosgrove / Los Angeles Times)

Maggie and I left around 10:30 a.m. to beat the day’s heat. Once at my car and with strong cellphone reception, I must admit that I opened ChatGPT. I don’t have a bear biologist on speed dial — yet! — and I wanted to talk to someone about why the bear hit my tent.

I explained that there wasn’t any food or toiletries in my tent. I had packed everything inside a bear canister that I then placed inside the bear vault in the campground. The chatbot and I soon agreed: This bear was likely making its rounds for a late-night snack, hoping someone had dropped a marshmallow or hot dog, when it encountered my tent. Maybe my tent was in its way. Maybe it looked weird.

Later, I called Klopping with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife again.

When we’d spoke earlier in the week about the trash-can bear, I’d asked him whether that bruin was at risk of euthanasia.

I told him that Goldie, a mama bear euthanized by the state earlier this year after swiping at and injuring two people, was top of mind for me, along with Victor, a beloved bear in Mammoth who was euthanized in 2024.

Goldie was the first California black bear to be euthanized in 2026, Times staff writer Clara Harter reported. “There were two bears euthanized in 2025, three bears in 2024 and five  bears in 2023, according to Fish and Wildlife,” Harter wrote.

Klopping said the trash-can bear was just out for an easy meal and would be classified as a “no harm, no foul bear,” defined by the agency as “a bear that has strayed into an area where an incident could occur, has not engaged in nuisance activity or caused property damage, and may require assistance to return to nearby suitable habitat.”

He said it was unlikely, based on what I reported, that the bear would be moved since it was already in a forest far from any neighborhood. Instead, the only action would probably be that someone secure the bear-proof trash can so it actually functions properly. (Sorry, bear.)

“As much as I don’t want to say it, this bear is doing bear things,” Klopping said. “This is a natural thing for a bear to do. It’s searching out calories to sustain itself — they’re there, readily available. This bear knows how to get to them.”

When I called Klopping back to talk about the bear (or bears) at the campground, I was more worried. I reported the incident through the agency’s website because I know its biologists use the data for several reasons, including discerning when to implement bear-resistant measures in an area or relocate a bear. But again, I worried about what would happen to the bear or bears.

A black bear peeks its head around the vault toilets in the Red Box Picnic Area in Angeles National Forest.

(Jaclyn Cosgrove / Los Angeles Times)

Klopping had told me it was rare for the agency to euthanize a bear: California Department of Fish and Wildlife received 2,735 calls and reports regarding black bears in 2025, including some duplicates where multiple people were reporting the same incident, compared with the two bear euthanizations that same year.

During our second call, he told me that a biologist would review the report I made and might call me to get additional information, but again, this wasn’t “aggressive” behavior, he said.

When bear yearlings separate from their mothers at around 18 months old — which often happens in June — Klopping said the agency will get reports of these adolescent bears wandering closer to populated areas.

“You would use the term ‘testing boundaries’ — that may have been exactly what happened here,” he said. “Odds are pretty good you probably scared it just as much as it scared you.”

I hope the bears I encountered soon return to foraging for forest delicacies that don’t come in fast-food wrappers.

As interesting as last week was, I really hope the only bears I see the rest of the summer are at the pride festivals I attend. They’re absolutely welcome to go camping with me!

3 things to do

Cyclists ride down an open street at a previous CicLAvia event.

(CicLAvia Los Angeles)

1. Frolic through the streets in South L.A.
CicLAvia will host a free car-free open streets event from 9 a.m. to 4 p.m. Sunday through the Leimert and Exposition Park neighborhoods. The 3.6-mile pop-up park includes a short segment of Crenshaw Boulevard and mostly stretches along Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard from Crenshaw to Figueroa Street. Visitors are welcome to walk, skate, bike, play and explore along the route. For more details, visit ciclavia.org.

2. Celebrate Pride along the river in Long Beach
Friends of the L.A. River will co-host an LGBTQ Pride nature walk from 10 a.m. to noon Saturday through the Dominguez Gap Wetlands with the California Native Plant Society South Coast Chapter. Plant enthusiast Tory Jaimez will guide the walk, teaching participants about local ecology. Register at support.folar.org.

3. Listen to the birds in Huntington Beach
We Explore Earth, a local outdoors community group, will co-host with Save Orange Hills and Friends of Shipley Nature Center a peaceful bird walk from 8:30 a.m. to 11:30 a.m. Saturday at Shipley Nature Center in Huntington Beach. Guides will help participants learn about local bird species and ecosystems. Register at eventbrite.com.

The must-read

Perched atop a tall pine tree, resident bald eagles Jackie, left, and Shadow protect their latest offspring in their 5-foot-wide nest. The nest is viewable via a live feed from the nest cam.

(Gina Ferazzi / Los Angeles Times)

Friends of Big Bear Valley, the nonprofit behind a popular eagle nest camera, is rushing to raise $10 million by July 31 to buy land that could become a lakeside gated community, leading to the destruction of crucial habitat that celebrity birds Jackie and Shadow use for foraging, along with other wildlife who call it home. Times staff writer Lila Seidman wrote that if the nonprofit can raise the money, then the San Bernardino Mountains Land Trust would conserve the roughly 63 acres and might transfer it to the U.S. Forest Service (a common practice of land conservancies). That’s if they meet the July deadline. “Failure is not an option,” said Jenny Voisard, media and website manager for Friends of Big Bear Valley. “We’re not going to let them build on it.”

Happy adventuring,

P.S.

After Goldie the bear was euthanized, lawmakers listened to the public’s demand for a more transparent process of when the California Department of Fish and Wildlife plans to kill a bear that the agency has deemed a threat to public safety. That includes Senate Bill 1135 by state Sen. Catherine Blakespear (D-Encinitas) that would “create the Wildlife Coexistence Program, which would provide public education, offer technical assistance and maintain a statewide incident reporting system. It would help communities deploy nonlethal devices to deter predators, like barriers or noise and light machines,” former Times staff writer Katie King wrote. The bill is set to have a hearing before the state Assembly’s Committee on Water, Parks and Wildlife on Tuesday at the state Capitol. Although the deadline to submit a letter to the committee has passed, residents can still attend the hearing, where they’re allowed to give their name, organization (if with one) and their position on the bill. You can still also contact your Assembly member or the committee.

For more insider tips on Southern California’s beaches, trails and parks, check out past editions of The Wild. And to view this newsletter in your browser, click here.

June 25 (UPI) — New York prosecutors will not retry disgraced film producer and convicted sex offender Harvey Weinstein on an unresolved rape charge related to actress Jessica Mann.

Prosecutors dropped the charges Thursday, more than six years after Mann, 40, first testified that Weinstein, 74, raped her in a Manhattan hotel room in 2013. Weinstein’s initial conviction for the charge was overturned in 2024, followed by two mistrials.

The D.A.’s office said Mann did not wish to go through a fourth trial.

“To be clear, we believe Ms. Mann’s account and her credibility as a witness,” Manhattan D.A. Alvin Bragg said in a statement. “This has been an extraordinarily taxing ordeal for her, and she has never wavered while testifying in front of two grand juries and three trial juries over the course of eight years. We thank her for her honesty and her tremendous bravery.”

In a statement to the court, Mann said it became clear to her during the latest trial, held this spring, that she “could no longer endure going through this any longer.”

“In my fight to see justice, it has nearly stolen a decade of my life and put me through more harm than good,” she added. “Justice now has moved away from the courts, solely into the hands of God.”

Weinstein is still awaiting sentencing after being convicted in 2025 of sexually assaulting former Project Runway production assistant Miriam Haley.

He has served less than half of his 16-year sentence in California for separate charges of rape and sexual assault. More than 100 women have accused Weinstein of sexual misconduct since 2017.

The United States Supreme Court has sided with the maker of Roundup weedkiller in a ruling expected to block thousands of lawsuits alleging it failed to warn people the product could cause cancer.

The ruling on Thursday was tied to a case that came before the justices after a tidal wave of litigation that included some multibillion-dollar verdicts against the global agrochemical manufacturer Bayer, a Germany-based company that acquired Roundup when it bought its original producer Monsanto in 2018.

The decision is a victory for US President Donald Trump’s administration, but one that could be tricky politically since allies in the “Make America Healthy Again” movement want to rein in pesticide use.

The high court, in a 7-2 ruling, found that the company cannot face failure-to-warn lawsuits in state courts because federal regulations have found a cancer link unlikely and do not require a warning label.

The justices overturned a jury verdict in Missouri awarding $1.25m to a man named John Durnell who said he was diagnosed with non-Hodgkin lymphoma after years of exposure to glyphosate in Roundup. The Supreme Court agreed with Bayer that a US law that governs pesticides precludes failure-to-warn claims that are brought under state law from moving forward in court.

Bayer shares jumped nearly 18 percent following the ruling.

Trump’s administration had backed Bayer in the case.

Conservative Justice Brett Kavanaugh, who authored the ruling, said the US Environmental Protection Agency, or EPA, has concluded glyphosate does not cause cancer and has not required a cancer warning on Roundup.

The law preempts Durnell’s claim because it “would require Monsanto to add a cancer warning to Roundup’s label even though federal law requires Monsanto to use the EPA-approved label without a cancer warning”, Kavanaugh wrote.

Liberal Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, in a dissent joined by conservative Justice Neil Gorsuch, said that Durnell’s claim would impose equivalent labelling requirements on Monsanto that the federal law requires and so should not be preempted.

Jackson called the ruling “remarkable and regrettable, for it unjustifiably closes the courthouse doors to state tort plaintiffs like Durnell”.

Bayer acquired Roundup as part of its $63bn purchase of agrochemical company Monsanto in 2018. More than 100,000 plaintiffs have filed cases in US state and federal courts alleging a cancer link, and the German drugmaking and crop science company had said that the lawsuits could threaten its ability to supply the herbicide to farmers.

The torrent of litigation already prompted Bayer to remove glyphosate from its consumer version of Roundup. Bayer said before the Supreme Court ruled that a decision in its favour could largely end the Roundup litigation.

“The US Supreme Court decision is good for science, farmers, and industries that depend on regulatory clarity for innovation. It should help significantly contain the Roundup litigation after nearly a decade of legal battles. The ruling should result in the dismissal of current warning-based claims and bar future failure-to-warn claims,” Bayer spokesperson Tino Andresen said in a statement.

The company emphasised throughout the litigation that the EPA repeatedly found that glyphosate does not cause cancer and approved its product labels without a warning.

Facing billions of dollars in potential liability, Bayer announced in February a proposed $7.25bn settlement to resolve tens of thousands of current and future lawsuits. The settlement would not affect claims that stem from pending appeals or that fall outside the deal, according to the company. Those amount to nearly $1bn, it said.

‘Disaster for public health’

Environmental activists and others criticised the court’s ruling on Thursday.

“Once again, the Supreme Court has sided with big business over people and the environment. Today’s ruling is a disaster for public health,” said Tarah Heinzen, legal director at the advocacy group Food and Water Watch.

“The harm from this decision will perpetuate our cancer, infertility and general chronic disease epidemic for generations to come,” said Kelly Ryerson, co-executive director of advocacy group American Regeneration and a Make America Healthy Again activist who posts on social media under the moniker “The Glyphosate Girl”.

The sprawling dispute centres on a US law called the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act, or FIFRA, that governs the sale and labelling of pesticides and bars states from imposing differing or additional requirements.

The measure prohibits pesticides that are “misbranded” with labels that lack an adequate warning to protect health and the environment.

Bayer has argued that Durnell’s claims are preempted by this law. The EPA has repeatedly approved labels without such a cancer warning, demonstrating that these products are not misbranded, the company said, adding that labels cannot be substantially changed without the agency’s approval.

Durnell’s lawyers said that despite the EPA’s registration of Roundup, the label may still be challenged as misbranded. They also said Durnell’s claims are not preempted because Missouri state law that requires products to adequately warn of dangers imposes the same requirements as FIFRA’s prohibition on misbranding.

‘A new era’

Union Investment fund manager Markus Manns called Thursday’s ruling a significant milestone for Bayer, adding that a decade after the Monsanto acquisition, the company is “entering a new era”.

“While future lawsuits are not entirely off the table, they will become considerably more difficult. A final breakthrough would come if the settlement is accepted by the plaintiffs and approved by the competent court in July. This would bring Bayer’s glyphosate litigation chapter to a definitive close, allowing management to fully refocus on operational and strategic matters,” Manns said.

Durnell sued Monsanto in Missouri state court in 2019, claiming it failed to warn users of the dangers associated with Roundup and glyphosate.

He was diagnosed with a rare and often aggressive form of non-Hodgkin lymphoma, a cancer that starts in the white blood cells, and attributed the disease to his exposure to Roundup starting in 1996. For about 20 years, he was the “spray guy” for a neighborhood association in St Louis, killing weeds at local parks without protective equipment, according to court papers.

A jury sided with Durnell in 2023, and in 2025, a state appeals court upheld that verdict.

AN ICONIC music festival will host its final line-up this summer – after more than 18 years of hosting performers.

This marks a blow for residents as the county’s biggest festival comes to an end.

Nottingham’s Splendour festival will run for a final weekend next month, as the festival is set to be closed permanently.

The decision comes after organisers said they faced challenges within the current festival market, and have struggled to manage “the cost of staging events”.

Launched in 2008, Nottinghamshire’s biggest festival hosted a number of well-known performers throughout its run, including the likes of Noel Gallagher and Calvin Harris.

It regularly drew in crowds of up to 25,000, and had expanded into a two-day event in 2022.

BACK WITH A BANG

X Factor winner in epic music comeback 17 YEARS after winning hit ITV show

MEDICAL SCARE

Hall & Oates rocker, 79, undergoes emergency kidney transplant

Now, the final show will take place from July 18 to 19 in Wollaton Park, with The Wombats, Primal Scream and Snow Patrol performing as headline acts.

George Akins, DHP Family managing director, said: “Like many independent festivals, Splendour has had to navigate a very different landscape in recent years, with the cost of staging events rising sharply at the same time as household budgets have come under pressure and the festival market has become much more crowded.

“After a lot of careful thought, we feel the right thing to do is to make this year a proper celebration of everything Splendour has meant to Nottingham and give it the send-off it deserves.”

Local artists, including Nottingham act Jake Bugg, had often used Splendour as a springboard for their careers.

To mark the final edition, organisers launched a two-for-one ticket offer on general admission day tickets.

Akins added: “Thanks to everyone for your loyalty and support over the years, we couldn’t have done it without you.”

WASHINGTON — Senate Republicans who were berated by President Trump over opposition to his war in Iran held a late-night vote Wednesday to try to appease him, rejecting a war powers resolution a day after a similar measure passed.

Trump harangued GOP senators face to face earlier in the day for allowing a vote to block his war in Iran on Tuesday, further escalating a feud that has diverted GOP efforts to focus on election-year affordability issues and brought much of the chamber’s business to a halt. He exchanged particularly harsh words with Louisiana Sen. Bill Cassidy, one of four Republicans who had voted with Democrats on the measure.

Hours later, though, Cassidy was invited to receive a personal briefing on the war at the White House from Vice President JD Vance and envoy Steve Witkoff. Cassidy then returned to the Capitol to vote against a separate but nearly identical war powers resolution.

“I want to thank Vice President Vance and Special Envoy Witkoff for the thorough briefing this afternoon on Iran. I appreciate the quick invitation to the White House to address many of my concerns,” said Cassidy, who lost reelection last month after Trump endorsed his opponent, in a post on X.

Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul, a Republican who has repeatedly voted with Democrats to halt the war, voted present this time “to give the President more space and leverage to negotiate a lasting peace,” he said on X. The measure failed 47-50-1 just before midnight on Wednesday, and the Senate then left town for a two-week recess.

It’s unclear whether the move will be enough to appease Trump, who had called the Republicans “losers” for voting against his war and had called Cassidy a “lunatic” at the lunch after their tense exchange. But the vote was a clear signal to the president from Republican senators who still want to placate him, despite increasing tensions in recent weeks and his decision Wednesday morning to reverse himself and delay signing a housing bill that received overwhelming bipartisan support.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., and a small group of his Senate GOP colleagues called Trump after the vote. Thune told reporters that the president was “pleased with the outcome.”

Trump later thanked Thune in a social media post and noted that Cassidy and Paul had switched their votes. “This vote puts Iran on notice!” he wrote.

The war powers measure blocked by the Senate on Wednesday was on a separate track from the nearly identical resolution adopted on Tuesday, which had also been passed by the House. Both votes were largely symbolic, and the measures do not carry the full force of law.

Cassidy had sharp words for Trump

Invited by Florida Sen. Rick Scott to speak at a GOP luncheon in the Capitol, Trump had signaled ahead of time that he would use the closed-door meeting to push senators to pass his proof-of-citizenship voting bill. But the conversation was more focused on Tuesday’s vote on war powers.

Most Republicans stayed quiet. But Cassidy stood up and defended his vote.

“I stood and said, ‘You have not told the American people what’s going on,’” Cassidy told reporters after the meeting. “This was supposed to last four weeks, it’s lasted four months. Our original objectives have not been achieved.”

The two men “went back and forth,” Cassidy said, and he “matched his tone and volume.” Cassidy said that he eventually de-escalated, but he did not want to be bullied.

“I am voting for war powers until I get a briefing,” he said afterward.

Trump repeatedly told Cassidy to sit down, according to a person familiar with the private meeting who was not authorized to discuss it. At one point, the president called the senator a “lunatic.”

Publicly, Trump said afterward that they had “a really great meeting.” But he hinted at the discord.

“We like everyone in the room,” Trump told reporters on his way out. “I don’t like a few people, but that’s OK.”

The luncheon capped weeks of friction between Trump and Senate Republicans and added a new layer of frustration as Tuesday’s vote was the first time the Senate had adopted a war powers resolution on the Iran war. Trump made clear he was in no mood to compromise before it even started, calling off a scheduled signing ceremony on a housing bill that passed both chambers overwhelmingly this week and that GOP lawmakers were touting as an election-year achievement.

Trump reverses on housing bill

Republican senators were eager for a conciliatory meeting with the president after escalating tensions in recent weeks. But Trump upended their plans when he declared on social media just beforehand that he wouldn’t sign the legislation until they send him the SAVE America Act, his bill to require proof of citizenship for all voters.

North Carolina Sen. Thom Tillis said he doesn’t know why Trump is holding the housing bill “hostage” for the voting bill that “will never pass in this Congress.”

“It makes no sense to me,” Tillis said as he walked into the luncheon.

Thune said the housing legislation, which aims to lower costs, is “an affordability issue,” and that ”eventually I hope he finds a way to sign it.”

It’s unclear if Trump might veto the legislation or if the late Wednesday night vote will change his outlook. But by rejecting a public bill signing, Republicans worry that Trump is indicating a level of indifference to voters’ affordability concerns heading into November’s midterm elections.

Trump and Senate Republicans have been at odds

Trump’s move on the housing bill is his latest reversal after weeks of being at odds with Senate Republicans.

Trump has blocked the Senate from confirming one of his own nominees, asked them to fund parts of his White House ballroom project despite opposition and forced them to defend the Iran war even as they question the strategy and endgame.

Trump has also helped whittle down his own support in the Senate after endorsing primary challengers to two GOP incumbents who were previously reliable votes for his agenda — Cassidy and Texas Sen. John Cornyn. Both men have become more critical of Trump since losing reelection.

“If we’re going to win the midterm elections, we need to get on the same page,” Cornyn said ahead of the meeting. “We’re not on the same page now, and that I think is dangerous.”

Trump pushes Thune on SAVE America Act

Trump has pressed Republicans for months to kill the Senate filibuster and focus on the proof-of-citizenship voting bill, even though Thune has repeatedly told him that neither has the votes.

While Thune remains popular in his conference and cordial with the president, he has spent much of his time lately telling Trump what he doesn’t want to hear. Thune said Tuesday that while Trump and some in their conference want to see the voting bill pass, “it’s just not realistic.”

Thune devoted weeks of floor time to the voting bill earlier this year and has said he supports it. But he has repeatedly said there aren’t enough votes to scrap the filibuster that triggers a 60-vote threshold to pass most bills in the 53-47 Senate. And Democrats are uniformly opposed to the bill.

“I think people at some point have to come to grips with that,” Thune said.

Jalonick, Sloan, Cappelletti and Mascaro write for the Associated Press. AP writers Josh Boak and Kevin Freking contributed to this report.

Questions surely will follow Dusty May as he leaps to the Dallas Mavericks after coaching Michigan to the NCAA national championship.

Can he provide blessed amnesia to the Mavericks faithful? Can he help them forget Luka Doncic and Nico Harrison and Anthony Davis and Jason Kidd? Can he allow them to peer into a future anchored by budding superstar Cooper Flagg without constantly checking the rearview mirror?

May, 49, was hired Tuesday as the Mavericks’ head coach,. He led Michigan to the pinnacle of March Madness last season and posted a 64-13 record in two years. He also coached Florida Atlantic to the 2023 Final Four and a 60-13 record in the last two of his six seasons there.

“We set out to find a leader who embodies the values we want to define our organization,” Mavericks president Masai Ujiri said in a statement. “Dusty has won at every stage of his career because of his ability to build. He develops players, creates accountability, and brings people together around a shared standard of excellence. His work ethic is extraordinary, and his teams consistently reflect his values.”

The list of high-profile college coaches who struggled to replicate their success in the NBA is daunting: Rick Pitino, John Calipari, John Beilein, Lon Kruger, Tim Floyd and Mike Montgomery immediately leap to mind.

Not only did May not coach or play in the NBA, he barely played in college. He was a 5-foot-10 point guard at NAIA Oakland City for one season before transferring to Indiana and serving as team manager under coach Bobby Knight.

But his arrival will divert attention from the past, from the hugely unpopular and disastrous trade of Doncic to the Lakers for Davis and spare parts on Feb. 1, 2025.

Mavericks fans staged a faux funeral complete with a casket a day later in front of the Dirk Nowitzki statue outside American Airlines Center. They booed Harrison — the general manager who engineered the deal — at every home game and chanted “Fire Nico.”

When Doncic returned as an opponent, Mavericks fans chanted “MVP” when the Laker shot free throws.

Harrison admitted to underestimating the backlash from fans but defended the trade, initially saying he had “no regrets.” By November, he was fired and updated his social media profile to “unemployed.”

Next to go was Kidd, a Hall of Fame point guard who helped the Mavericks to their only NBA title as a player and to the NBA Finals as a coach. At the time, it wasn’t clear whether Kidd was an advocate of the Doncic deal or a victim of a front-office blunder. But Mark Cuban, the Mavericks’ former majority owner who currently owns 27% of the team, indicated March 31 during a podcast that Kidd was complicit.

“I think there was animosity between [Harrison] and some people on Luka’s team — his agent and some of the people around them,” Cuban said. “I don’t think they got along. I think there were issues.

“J-Kidd had coached Anthony Davis and was close to him, and Nico was close to AD since he was like 13 years old. So I think there was some confirmation bias as well. But that doesn’t justify our coach and our general manager to stand up and trade our best player.”

Doncic, 26, flourished in his first season in Los Angeles despite a late-season injury that kept him out of the playoffs. The shooting guard led the NBA with 33.5 points per game and he will be a franchise cornerstone. Davis played only 20 games with Dallas because of injuries and in February was traded to the Washington Wizards.

The makeover began when the Mavericks secured the first pick in the 2025 NBA draft despite having only a 1.8% chance of obtaining it through the lottery. They took Flagg, a forward from Duke who went on to lead Dallas with 21 points per game and was named rookie of the year.

Next, they hired respected former Raptors executive Ujiri as team president. And now they have added May as coach. This week they will add two more promising players via the first round of the draft.

“I am honored to join the Dallas Mavericks organization,” May said in a statement. “This is one of the most respected franchises in professional sports, with passionate fans, a talented roster, and a clear commitment to building a championship organization.”

The franchise is trying to eliminate reminders while attempting to instill hope for the future.

“When you study [May’s] journey, you see someone who has earned every opportunity through preparation, discipline, humility, and an unwavering commitment to improvement,” Ujiri said. “We believe those qualities make him the right leader for the Dallas Mavericks.”

Meanwhile at Michigan, a loaded roster will report to interim coach Mike Boynton Jr., May’s top assistant and the head coach at Oklahoma State from 2019 to 2024. Players are allowed to enter the transfer portal for 15 days following a coaching change, so job one for Boynton will be to keep them from fleeing.

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio said all Gulf countries oppose a toll in the Strait of Hormuz during a tour of the region following US-Iran talks. Rubio added, “There isn’t a nation on Earth that supports having to pay money to go through the straits”.

Reporting from Caracas for Al Jazeera, Noris Soto says authorities appear to lack a clear response plan in the aftermath of two powerful earthquakes. The recovery is being hampered by severe damage to communication systems, as displaced residents are housed in hotels.

LIONEL Richie has been reportedly taken to hospital after he took a funny turn on stage and was forced to end the concert.

The 77-year-old was performing at the Grand Casino Arena in Minnesota when his ill spell happened and had to take a moment to sit down.

TMZ reports that the star halted his gig and was attended to paramedics backstage where he was subsequently sent packing to hospital.

Sources told the publication that the hospital trip was part of a precautionary measure.

The Sun has contacted representatives for Richie for comment.

In a video from the gig shared online, the music icon is seen attempting to finish performing his hit Dancing On The Ceiling while sat on the steps leading up to the live band.

GARBAGE!

American Idol fans livid after Katy, Lionel and Luke eliminate ‘Garbage Man’ Doug

FRENCH FANCY

Samir Nasri snapped out and about again with Lionel Ritchie’s teenage daughter Sofia in Hollywood

While he got back to his feet to carry on, he was forced to sit down again amid a second dizzy spell.

He is seen in the footage catching his breath, perched on the edge of the stage, while trying to continue with the song.

As explained in the post shared to X, Lionel managed to perform one more song, sat at the piano.

After departing the stage, Lionel’s saxophonist Dino Soldo told the crowd that the hitmaker wasn’t feeling well and wouldn’t be returning to the stage, ending the show.

Lionel was appearing with Earth, Wind & Fire as part of their joint tour hitting 26 venues across the States.

The Easy musician is next expected to appear for a gig in Chicago on Friday night.

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court sided with the maker of the Roundup weedkiller Thursday in a ruling expected to block thousands of lawsuits alleging it failed to warn people the product could cause cancer.

The case came before the justices after a tidal wave of litigation that included some multibillion-dollar verdicts against the global agrochemical manufacturer Bayer, which acquired Roundup when it bought its original manufacturer Monsanto in 2018.

The decision is a victory for the Trump administration, but one that could be tricky politically since allies in the Make America Healthy Again movement want to rein in pesticide use.

The high court, in a 7-2 ruling, found that the company can’t be sued in state courts because federal regulations have found a cancer link unlikely and do not require a warning label.

The decision “is good for science, farmers, and industries that depend on regulatory clarity for innovation,” Bayer said in a statement. “It should help significantly contain the Roundup litigation after nearly a decade of legal battles.”

Though Bayer said the ruling should result in the dismissal of pending lawsuits containing failure-to-warn allegations, the company said it plans to proceed with a proposed $7.25 billion class-action settlement intended to resolve many of the remaining claims.

Lawyers for some residents pursuing Roundup litigation criticized the court’s decision.

“This Supreme Court ruling wrongly slams the courthouse door on Americans sickened by pesticides,” said attorney Christopher Seeger, who is proposed as a claimants’ representative in the settlement. But he said a settlement still would allow some people to receive compensation.

The case before the Supreme Court was filed by Missouri resident John Durnell. He developed a cancer called non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma after more than 20 years of serving as the neighborhood association’s “spray guy,” using Roundup on parks in his historic St. Louis community.

A jury agreed that the company failed to warn him about possible cancer dangers and awarded him $1.25 million. It’s one of thousands of similar cases, including some multibillion-dollar damage awards.

There’s still fierce debate about cancer and Roundup’s key ingredient, glyphosate. The World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer classified the chemical as “probably carcinogenic” in 2015. The Environmental Protection Agency has determined that it’s not likely to cause cancer in humans when used as directed.

The agency approved a label without a cancer warning, and Bayer argues that it’s required to follow those federal standards — not the state laws that Durnell and others have sued under. The ruling still could allow other suits alleging problems with the way the product was designed, his attorney Ashley Keller has said.

Bayer disputes the cancer claims but previously set aside $16 billion to settle cases, and earlier this year proposed a $7.25 billion class-action settlement. A federal judge recently ruled that the proposed settlement will be heard in a Missouri state court, where many of the lawsuits have been filed. At the same time, the company has tried to persuade states to pass laws shielding it from liability in failure-to-warn lawsuits, and three states have agreed.

About 200,000 Roundup-related claims have been made against Bayer, mostly from home users. It has stopped using glyphosate in Roundup sold in the U.S. residential lawn and garden market.

The company has said it might have to consider pulling glyphosate from U.S. agricultural markets if it keeps getting sued. Agricultural industry group say could have a devastating effect on the food supply.

But pesticides have also created a rift between the Trump administration and members of Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy’s MAHA movement, adding to their frustration with an executive order aimed at boosting glyphosate’s production.

Kennedy himself has said repeatedly that glyphosate causes cancer, even as he says he recognizes the executive order was necessary for food supply and national security reasons.

Whitehurst writes for the Associated Press. AP writer David A. Lieb in Jefferson City, Mo., contributed to this report.

Two misdemeanor drug charges against U.S. alpine skiing great Bode Miller are set to be dropped, according to his attorney.

“No drugs were found on Bode’s person,” attorney Jeromy Stafford said in a statement emailed to The Times on Thursday morning. “After speaking with the Prosecuting Attorney for Fremont County Idaho, Lindsey Blake, she has agreed to dismiss all charges against Bode Miller.”

Blake has not announced the move and did not immediately respond to a message from The Times.

Miller was arrested June 6 in Fremont County. According to a probable cause statement by Sheriff’s Deputy Jacob Hurt, the six-time Olympic medalist was in possession of a white dispensary bag containing 4.1 grams of psilocybin mushrooms.

Hurt said in his statement that Miller “knew that the Psilocybin mushrooms were illegal.” The 48-year-old former athlete was taken into custody and released the same day after posting a $5,000 bond. On June 11, Miller pleaded not guilty to possession of a controlled substance and possession of drug paraphernalia.

In a statement posted to Instagram on Tuesday, Miller gave a different account of what led to his arrest.

“I was pulled over for accelerating while passing another vehicle on a highway in Idaho,” Miller said. “My friend, who was traveling with me, had a small amount of cannabis and a cannabis pipe in his possession which I was unaware of. We fully cooperated with the officer. I am hopeful the misdemeanor charges will be dropped once the facts are reviewed.”

Online court records show the status of Miller’s case as “Active – Pending.” A pretrial hearing remains scheduled for July 29.