Action

Fans are hailing the film as a ‘masterpiece’ and calling it their favourite movie of the year

A gripping thriller based on a popular novel has finally landed on streaming and viewers are calling it a ‘masterpiece’.

The action-packed movie, adapted from a novel by Stephen King, hit cinemas last year and is tailor-made for fans of nail-biting franchises such as Mission: Impossible or Fast and Furious.

Its IMDb synopsis reads: “A man joins a game show in which contestants, allowed to flee anywhere in the world, are pursued by ‘hunters’ hired to kill them.”

The film was helmed by legendary director Edgar Wright, celebrated for cult favourites such as Shaun of the Dead, Hot Fuzz and Baby Driver.

The Running Man is the most recent 2025 adaptation of King’s iconic novel, with Glen Powell taking on the lead role of Ben Richards – a part previously made famous by Arnold Schwarzenegger in the 1987 original.

The supporting cast boasts an impressive line-up including Josh Brolin, Colman Domingo, Lee Pace, Michael Cera, Emilia Jones and Martin Herlihy, reports the Express.

The film currently holds a 61% fresh score on Rotten Tomatoes alongside a 6.4 rating on IMDb, with legions of fans applauding this fresh take on the dystopian tale.

Now available on Paramount Plus, the streaming platform has teased: “The Running Man is a fun, unhinged deadly game show where contestants must survive 30 days while being hunted by professional assassins, with every move broadcast to a bloodthirsty public and each day bringing a greater cash reward.”

Over on IMDb, one enthusiast awarded the film a perfect 10/10, declaring: “Let me put it this way. I saw it at a matinee this afternoon and now I’m going back with my husband. I’m not a Glen Powell fan but I do live Edgar Wright movies and this one delivers. Don’t go see it if you want to relax!

“I read the Stephen King novel years and years ago and saw the Arnold Schwarzenegger movie years ago as well, so i can’t tell you how it compares, but this one stands on its own as the best action movie of the year… and maybe the decade…so far.”

A second viewer hailed the film as a ‘masterpiece of literary adaptation’, remarking: “Hands down the best adaptation of King’s work. You can literally watch the movie and turn pages. Powell’s Richards jumps out of the book.

“The ending got the Hollywood treatment, but still accomplished the same goal. I waited 34 years for a faithful version of this, and now we have it. The casting feels like they all read the novel.”

Get Paramount+ free for a week

This article contains affiliate links, we will receive a commission on any sales we generate from it. Learn more

£4.99

£0

Amazon/Paramount+

Get Paramount+ here

Telly fans can get seven days of free access to Paramount+ shows like Tulsa King and Dexter: Original Sin by signing up for a free trial via Amazon Prime’s Paramount+ channel.

Another cinema-goer commented: “One of the best movies of the year. After being trailer after trailer at the cinema for what seems the whole year, I was fearing this would be a total flop.

“I need not have worried because this is an action packed, well scripted remake of the original. Everyone is cast perfectly and all performances are great. It keeps you guessing throughout the movie and the twists and turns keep it going. Thoroughly enjoyed it. Well worth a visit.”

One further viewer chipped in: “It was perfect. Edgar Wright nailed I.T. on this expensive movie. The action, everything. A lot better than the 1987. It follows the book. Glen Powell did a great Job on playing the character Ben Richards.”

They even drew comparisons to other beloved action franchises, adding: “This film feels like a big mix of Fast and Furious and Mission: Impossible. I love the chase scenes.”

Over on Rotten Tomatoes, one enthusiastic viewer gushed: “Excellent film! Glen Powell did great with his character, Ben Richards.”

“Fresh! Intensely gripping all the way through. Great acting on all parts,” another remarked, while a further viewer noted: “Loved this. Im 100% certain that Stephen King will be so happy with this version of his brilliant book. Great all round really enjoyable watch.”

Not everybody was won over, however, with one person writing: “A real disappointment, falling flat both as social commentary and as an action movie.”

Another disgruntled viewer complained: “The first one was way better. Loved the satire and Richard Dawson, who was a game show host in real life, as the host in the original. Tired of remakes with all the social commentary without improving the whole movie.”

The Running Man is available to stream on Paramount Plus now.

Iran has said it remains committed to implementing the MoU signed with the United States. However, Tehran warned that it would take reciprocal measures if Washington fails to honour its obligations under the agreement.

Tests confirm a migratory brown skua found in ‌Western ‌Australia had the virus.

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese says Australia will do “whatever we can” to curb H5N1 bird flu after the first mainland case was confirmed in a seabird, which means the virus has now spread to every continent.

Tests confirmed a migratory brown skua found in ‌Western ‌Australia’s Cape Le Grand National Park had the deadly virus, authorities said on Saturday, and a giant petrel found in the same area was also suspected to be infected.

“This is concerning,” Albanese told reporters in Sydney, adding his government would do “whatever we can to restrict any spread”.

Previously, Australia had been the only continent without a confirmed mainland case, although the virus was detected in late 2025 on Heard Island, a sub-Antarctic territory about 4,100km (2,550 miles) from the mainland.

Agriculture Minister Julie Collins said the virus had not yet been detected in Australia’s poultry or agriculture sector.

“We all knew we couldn’t be bird flu-free forever,” she said.

Human infections remain rare, but the highly pathogenic avian influenza has led to the culling of hundreds of millions of birds globally in recent years, disrupting food supplies and driving up prices.

WASHINGTON — Most Americans continue to disapprove of how President Trump is handling Iran, while his overall presidential approval holds steady, according to a new AP-NORC poll that was conducted as he suggested a deal with Iran had been reached.

The poll points to just how unpopular the war, which began Feb. 28, has been with Americans even as the Republican president turned abruptly from threatening Iran to reopening negotiations. Support for his handling of the war remains lopsidedly partisan. About two-thirds, 65%, of U.S. adults disapprove of how Trump is handling issues with Iran. But while the vast majority of Democrats and independents view Trump’s actions negatively, only 28% of Republicans are unhappy.

Americans’ views on how the president is handling Iran are roughly in line with his overall job approval, which stands at 37%, unchanged from an Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research poll conducted in May.

The new survey was conducted June 11-17, just after Trump called off threats to escalate the war with Iran. The poll was fielded as Trump announced a deal with Iran and authorized an end to the U.S. naval blockade in the Strait of Hormuz, concluding just before the deal was signed Wednesday.

Approval of Trump’s actions on Iran has been low over the past few months. But in interviews, some Republicans also weren’t pleased with the outcome of this week’s agreement, which gives Iran an immediate benefit, allowing it to sell its oil freely again.

The deal also reopens the strait without tolls for two months, restarts talks between the U.S. and Iran over Tehran’s nuclear program and calls for Tehran to dilute its stockpile of highly enriched uranium.

David Farrington, a 79-year-old Republican-leaning independent in Fort Worth, Texas, “doesn’t have any love lost” for Iran, but he’s frustrated the agreement focused on the strait and didn’t deliver more on the country’s nuclear weapons program.

“Any agreement regarding the strait is hardly what I would consider a recognizable concession on the part of Iran,” Farrington said. “So, I consider that some fluff that attempts to make this agreement look better when it’s not.”

Trump’s approval on Iran remains flat

Only about one-third of U.S. adults approve of how Trump is handling Iran in the new poll, in line with May.

Donald McBride, a 28-year-old independent in Plano, Texas, is frustrated that Trump has not maintained his campaign promise to keep America out of foreign wars. McBride voted for Trump but he opposed going to war with Iran.

“I would like the war to end,” he said. “The original objective of the war was to end the Iranian regime, and that’s just not possible. I don’t really know why we’d continue fighting.”

The poll suggests most Americans want action in Iran to wrap up. Even with an agreement on the horizon, 53% of U.S. adults said American military action against Iran had “gone too far,” only a slight decline from 59% in March.

About 4 in 10 Republicans, though, said in the latest poll that action has been “about right,” and 37% said it had not gone far enough.

Joan Jones, a 64-year-old independent in northwest Florida, believes the United States’ actions in Iran have been necessary to address the threat Iran posed.

“Those attacks are ultimately to protect us from nuclear attacks,” Jones said. “I think we have to go through that … and eliminate that worry so we don’t have that hovering over us.”

Few approve of Trump’s approach on Israel

About one-third, 34%, of U.S. adults approve of how Trump is handling Israel.

Tensions have been rising between Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Trump as the president criticizes recent Israeli attacks in Lebanon, which jeopardized negotiations between Washington and Tehran.

James Huffman, a 69-year-old Republican in Medway, Ohio, thinks Trump is taking the wrong strategy when it comes to Netanyahu.

“Netanyahu is not going to do everything Trump wants. He’s going to do what he wants,” Huffman said. “I just don’t think it’s effective.”

Only about one-third approve on the economy

About one-third of U.S. adults approve of Trump’s approach to the economy. That’s in line with last month, and continues a challenging stretch for Trump on the issue.

Jones, the Florida independent, is more optimistic than most. She said she can hardly leave the house some hours without getting stuck in the traffic of tourists headed to the beach on vacation. She also spots lines around the block for Starbucks, McDonalds and Chick-fil-A in her community — all signs to her that the economy is doing well overall.

“I think President Trump’s policies are contributing to a better economy,” Jones said.

Other Republicans are more skeptical, a troubling sign for a president who prides himself on his business acumen. Only 69% of Republicans approve of how he’s handling the economy, slightly lower than the 78% who approve of how he’s handling the presidency overall.

Patricia Bailey, a 42-year-old Republican in Parkersburg, West Virginia, sees an economy where prices have gotten out of control. “I just said the other night, ordering pizza is for rich people,” she said. Bailey voted for Trump but added, “He’s kind of let me down a little bit.”

Even if high prices preceded Trump, Bailey doesn’t think he’s lived up to his pledge to improve the economy.

“I think he got so distracted with the war that he forgot some old promises,” she said.

Sanders and Thomson-Deveaux write for the Associated Press.

The AP-NORC poll of 3,040 adults was conducted June 11-17 using a sample drawn from NORC’s probability-based AmeriSpeak Panel, which is designed to be representative of the U.S. population. The margin of sampling error for adults overall is plus or minus 2.8 percentage points.

June 15 (UPI) — The British Court of Appeals ruled Monday that the ban on the pro-Palestine organization Palestine Action is lawful and upheld its designation as a terrorist organization.

The five judges on the Court of Appeals ruled that the ban on the organization under the Terrorism Act is “justified and proportionate.” The proscription of Palestine Action as a terrorist organization makes supporting the group punishable by up to 14 years in prison.

More than 2,500 members of the group have been arrested.

Huda Ammori, the co-founder of Palestine Action who originally challenged the ban in court, said she plans to appeal the ruling in the British Supreme Court.

“We will fight this all the way,” Ammori said. “We will seek permission to appeal to the Supreme Court and, if need be, take this to the European Court of Human Rights.”

Palestine Action has remained banned since February, despite the High Court in London ruling that it is disproportionate and an unlawful violation of free speech rights.

“The future threats and risks posed to third-party individuals and property by Palestine Action are perhaps the most important factors to weigh in the balance,” Sue Carr, chief justice, read from the appeals court’s ruling. “In that connection, it is important to understand that the home secretary is in the best position to assess those future threats and risks. She is advised by experts on anti-terrorism.”

Carr acknowledged that the ruling may chill free speech and may deter people from lawfully assembling to protest Israel’s actions in Gaza or show support for Palestinians.

Non-government organizations, including Liberty, Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International UK and Greenpeace, said Monday’s ruling is a misuse of counter-terrorism authority.

The United Kingdom’s Court of Appeal has ruled that the British government was right to proscribe the Palestine Action activist group as a “terrorist” organisation last year.

Palestine Action is a British protest group which was founded six years ago and describes itself as a movement “committed to ending global participation in Israel’s genocidal and apartheid regime”.

On Monday, police made more arrests of protesters demonstrating in support of Palestine Action outside the Court of Appeal in London.

Since the group’s proscription, which also bans support for proscribed groups, about 3,000 people have been arrested.

The Metropolitan Police welcomed the ruling and said it would continue to arrest those who protest in support of the group.

Here is what we know about the ruling:

What has the Court of Appeal ruled?

The judgement released on Monday states: “The proscription of an organisation like Palestine Action is highly controversial. But it is a fundamental mistake to overlook the fact that Palestine Action overtly promotes unlawful violence amounting to terrorism”.

The ruling was made by a five-strong panel, including the two most senior judges in England and Wales.

Palestine Action, which was formally proscribed by the UK last July, is a British protest group founded six years ago. It says it uses “disruptive tactics” to target “corporate enablers” and companies involved in the manufacture of weapons for Israel, such as Israeli group Elbit Systems, Italian aerospace company Leonardo, French multinational Thales and Teledyne from the United States. The group has targeted British facilities linked to those companies.

In all, British police say action by the group has resulted in millions of pounds of criminal damage.

A court in London ruled on June 12 that four Palestine Action members convicted of criminal damage at a British facility owned by Israeli weapons group Elbit Systems near Bristol, west England, would be sentenced on the basis that their actions had a “terrorist connection”.

Why was this case brought?

Following the proscription of Palestine Action last year, the group’s co-founder, Huda Ammori, challenged the decision in the High Court. In February, the High Court ruled that the government’s “terror group” ban was unlawful and disproportionate.

The government immediately said it would appeal. “I am disappointed by ⁠the court’s decision ⁠and disagree with the notion that banning ⁠this terrorist organisation ⁠is disproportionate,” ⁠Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood ⁠said.

The judgement on Monday agreed with her. Its ruling states: “The Home Secretary had the institutional competence and the democratic accountability to make the decision. The Proscription Decision was consistent with the Home Secretary’s Proscription Policy and was proportionate. It was not unlawful.”

Why did the UK proscribe Palestine Action?

On June 20, 2025, Palestine Action activists broke into the Royal Air Force base at Brize Norton in Oxfordshire and sprayed two military aircraft with red paint.

Days after the Brize Norton attack, members of parliament voted in favour of proscribing the group. That classified Palestine Action as a “terrorist” organisation, bringing it into the same category as armed groups such as al-Qaeda and ISIL (ISIS).

Critics decried the vote, arguing that while members of the group have caused damage to property, they have not committed violent acts that amount to terrorism. More than 130 high-profile public figures have spoken out against the proscription.

Other previous actions the group has taken include:

• In 2021, members protested for six days on the roof of Elbit Systems’ subsidiary, UAV Tactical Systems in Leicester, until some were arrested by police.
• In 2022, the group broke into a Thales equipment factory in Glasgow, causing damage to weapons worth more than a million pounds ($1.3m).
• In 2024, 10 months into Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza, Palestine Action activists broke into an Elbit Systems UK facility near Bristol in southwest England, causing another million pounds of damage.

How has Palestine Action responded to the ruling?

In a statement read by a representative following the ruling, Palestine Action’s Ammori said the group will challenge the judgement in the UK’s Supreme Court.

“We will fight this all the way. We will seek permission to appeal to the Supreme Court and, if need be, take this to the European Court of Human Rights,” Ammori said.

The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR), established by the Council of Europe, allows individuals to hold member states accountable for rights violations through a dedicated court. When the ECHR finds a violation, its judgements are legally binding on the state concerned under the European Convention on Human Rights.

“We will not stop fighting to overturn one of the most extreme attacks on free speech and the right to protest in modern British history,” Ammori added.

“This unprecedented abuse of power has devastated the lives of thousands of people while silencing dissent over Israel’s slaughter of the Palestinian people during the genocide, when that dissent could not be more urgent.”

How have others reacted to the ruling?

Anas Mustapha, Head of Public Advocacy at CAGE International, said: “This ruling tells us exactly what these powers are for. They are not safeguards against violence, they are authoritarian tools for crushing dissent.”

Mustapha added: “No ruling from any court is going to convince people that their conscience is wrong, and no amount of legislation will make support for Palestine disappear. The only sustainable outcome is the abolition of these laws in their entirety.”

Thomas Bell, acting UK Director of Human Rights Watch, said: “This disastrous decision further cements the UK’s place among countries that are backsliding on human rights by classifying acts of protest as terrorism.”

“When Palestine Action members have committed criminal damage, that should be dealt with under normal criminal laws, not by misusing overbroad and poorly defined terrorism powers. Defining a protest group as terrorists has created an absurd situation where thousands of people peacefully holding up signs have been arrested,” Bell added.

A UK court has sentenced four pro-Palestine activists to jail for a raid on an Israeli arms factory near Bristol in 2024. Palestine Action says their aim was to ‘dismantle drones and weaponry’ they believed would be used to kill people in Gaza.

Four activists from the Palestine Action group face sentencing in the United Kingdom as “terrorists” on Friday, despite only being convicted by a jury of other criminal charges.

Palestine Action was formally proscribed as a “terrorist” organisation in the UK last July.

Last month, four of six activists on trial were convicted at Woolwich Crown Court in London of criminal damage during a 2024 raid on a factory in Filton, Bristol, operated by Israeli defence firm Elbit. One of the defendants was also found guilty of striking a police officer with a sledgehammer.

The possibility that the judge will rule that the offences have a “terrorist connection” for sentencing purposes has prompted protests.

What is Palestine Action?

The protest group Palestine Action, launched in July 2020, describes itself as a movement “committed to ending global participation in Israel’s genocidal and apartheid regime”.

It seeks to use “disruptive tactics” to target “corporate enablers” and companies involved in the manufacture of weapons for Israel, such as Israel-based Elbit Systems, Italian aerospace company Leonardo, French multinational Thales and Teledyne from the United States. The group has targeted British facilities linked to those companies.

The UK parliament voted in favour of proscribing the group on July 2, 2025, classifying it as a “terrorist” organisation, and bringing it into the same category as armed groups such as al-Qaeda and ISIL (ISIS). The proscription came days after its activists sneaked into an air force base in southern England.

Critics decried the move by MPs, arguing that while members of the group have caused damage to property, they have not committed violent acts that amount to terrorism.

What were they convicted of?

In August 2024, Palestine Action activists raided a factory in Filton near Bristol in southwest England, operated by Israeli arms manufacturer Elbit Systems. They entered the site and caused extensive damage in an attempt to disrupt the production of weapons and drone components they say would be used by Israel in Gaza.

The raid, which prosecutors said caused about one million pounds ($1.36m) of damage, happened 10 months into Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza that began in October 2023.

Last month, jurors at Woolwich Crown Court convicted Charlotte Head, 30, Samuel Corner, 23, Leona Kamio, 30, and Fatema Zainab Rajwani, 21, of criminal damage. The four activists have become known as “the Filton 4”.

Corner was also found guilty of striking a police officer with a sledgehammer and convicted of inflicting grievous bodily harm.

Two other Palestine Action activists, Zoe Rogers, 22, and Jordan Devlin, 31, were found not guilty.

The verdict followed an earlier trial, at which all six defendants were acquitted of aggravated burglary, while the jury was unable to reach verdicts for the criminal damage charges.

Each of the defendants gave evidence, admitting that they damaged Israeli military drones and equipment inside Elbit’s research and development facility in Filton – in order to “save lives in Palestine”, according to a statement by their lawyers.

What would a terrorism sentencing mean?

The jury was not told that, if they convicted, the four could be sentenced under terrorism laws. Criminal damage is not usually a terrorism offence, but in England and Wales judges can decide to treat an offence as having a “terrorist connection” at sentencing, even when the charge itself is not a terrorism offence.

If the court decides there was a terrorism connection, the activists would have to serve their entire sentences in prison, unless they have already completed at least two‑thirds of the sentence and a parole board decides they can be released.

Conversely, non-terrorist prisoners usually serve about 40 percent of their sentence in custody and are released early, but under conditions and supervision, sometimes called licence conditions. If they break those conditions, they can be sent back to prison to finish their sentence.

Additionally, if the activists are sentenced in this way, they can be recorded as “terrorists” for the rest of their lives, would be required to register new mobile devices, email addresses and bank accounts with the police for their lifetime, and face being returned to prison if they breach their licence conditions or reoffend.

What has the reaction to all this been?

On Wednesday, a group of more than 50 lawyers and law professors published an open letter denouncing plans to sentence the four Palestine Action members as terrorists.

The letter highlights that damage to property has been a recurring feature of protest campaigns from the Suffragettes who fought for women to have the right to vote, to environmental protest group Extinction Rebellion.

“It has never previously even been suggested that those taking such action should be treated as terrorists. Blurring the distinction between principled direct action and terrorism is the hallmark of authoritarian regimes,” the open letter stated.

The letter has been signed by law professors from universities in the UK, the Netherlands, Norway and Canada as well as by dozens of practising barristers and solicitors.

According to local news reports, a protest is expected at Woolwich Crown Court on Friday against the potential judgement.

June 11 (UPI) — The United States and Iran traded attacks Wednesday night for a second straight day with American forces hitting multiple military, surveillance and radar installations in southern Iran and Iran hitting back at its Persian Gulf neighbors.

U.S. Marine Corps, Air Force, and Navy assets deployed precision munitions against Iranian “military surveillance capabilities, communication systems, and air defense sites across Iran” posing a threat to U.S. forces and international commercial ships transiting regional waters,” U.S. Central Command said in a statement on X.

Tomahawk missiles were fired from the guided-missile destroyer USS Michael Murphy.

“The strikes are in response to Iran’s unwarranted and continued aggression,” added CENTCOM.

Bahrain’s Interior Ministry reported a second night of airborne attacks and condemned what it called “sinful Iranian aggression” after an 11-year-old girl was injured.

“Vehicles caught fire and houses were damaged in Hamad Town and Manama due to falling debris of drones interception. Civil Defense and National Ambulance have taken necessary measures,” the ministry said Thursday morning in an online post accompanied by photos of burnt-out cars, blast damage and firefighters tackling blazes.

In a post on X in the early hours of Thursday, the Kuwait Army said its air defense systems were “currently intercepting hostile aerial targets.”

Royal Jordanian Air Force warplanes intercepted and downed 20 Iranian missiles headed toward the Azraq region in Zarqa Governorate, east of the capital, Amman.

In a statement issued Thursday via the National Center for Security Crises and Management, the General Command of the Jordan Armed Forces-Arab Army said debris from downed missiles fell in multiple locations but that there were no injuries or damage.

Meanwhile, the Indian government confirmed the deaths of three Indian crew members missing from the Palau-flagged oil tanker, M/T Settebello, a day after it was struck by the U.S. military in the Gulf of Oman, through which vessels transiting the Hormuz Strait must transit.

“Sadly, three Indian seafarers initially reported missing are now confirmed dead after bodies have been located and identified. This is a profound loss to our maritime family. The Modi government stands firmly with the bereaved during this difficult hour and is fully committed to supporting the next of kin,” Ports, Shipping & Waterways Minister Sarbananda Sonowal wrote on X.

“I have directed officials to ensure immediate repatriation of the rescued crew members and swift return of the mortal remains of the deceased for their final rites.”

CENTCOM said a U.S. aircraft fired precision munitions into the vessel’s engine room Wednesday after the vessel, which it said was violating the United States’ blockade by attempting to ship oil from Iran, failed to comply with instructions from U.S. forces.

WhatsApp disrupted phishing attempts linked to NSO, blacklisted by the US for security concerns.

Meta has said it is ⁠filing a federal US ⁠court contempt order against Israeli spyware firm NSO Group for violating a permanent injunction that barred it from ever ⁠targeting WhatsApp and its users.

The company said on Monday that its WhatsApp messaging service disrupted new spear phishing attempts linked to NSO, an ⁠entity blacklisted by the United States government for engaging in activities that are contrary to national security or foreign policy interests.

These attempts were similar to previous “1-click phishing campaigns”, aimed to trick users into clicking ‌malicious links and direct them to external websites, Meta said in a blogpost.

A “1-click” is a type of cyberattack where a single click on a malicious link or attachment is sufficient to compromise a victim’s device or account, without requiring them to enter their credentials.

Meta said WhatsApp took down test accounts ⁠and groups created by NSO on its platform. ⁠NSO did not immediately respond to a Reuters request for comment.

Last year, a US court ordered NSO to stop targeting Meta’s WhatsApp, a development the spyware ⁠company warned could put it out of business.

While the ruling significantly reduced the punitive damages NSO ⁠owed Meta to $4m from an ⁠initial $167m, the injunction itself was seen as a substantial challenge for the company, which faces ongoing accusations of enabling human rights abuses through its Pegasus hacking tool.

Meta ‌said on Monday that last month it was joined by 12 prominent civil rights organisations, a coalition of security researchers, privacy advocates ‌and ‌digital rights experts, who filed their amicus briefs to fight NSO’s appeal against the permanent injunction.

BOSTON — A federal judge on Friday struck down a Trump administration policy enacted after the shooting of two National Guard members that made it harder for immigrants from dozens of countries to stay and enter the U.S.

In a ruling harshly criticizing the administration, U.S. District Chief Judge John McConnell Jr. said the policy “threw the lives of countless immigrants living in the United States into indeterminate legal limbo,” and he accused the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services of ignoring the law.

“In enacting its latest immigration policies, USCIS: claims statutory and regulatory authority that it does not possess; makes decisions without the reasoned explanations that it must provide; acts without regard for the reliance interests of applicants that it must consider; and justifies its actions with pretextual concerns of ‘national security’ that mask anti-immigrant sentiments that it is forbidden from letting influence its decision-making,” he wrote. “In legal terms that means USCIS’s actions are contrary to law and arbitrary and capricious.”

A spokesperson for the Department of Homeland Security did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

The policies enacted after the National Guard shooting last year meant that immigrants from 39 African, Asian, Latin American and Middle Eastern countries have been “categorically barred” from receiving final decisions on, among other things, their asylum, work permit, green card and citizenship applications.

“This ruling reaffirms a basic principle: the federal government cannot shut down lawful immigration pathways or discriminate against people based on where they come from,” said Skye Perryman, president and CEO of Democracy Forward, which represented the plaintiffs in the case. “These unlawful policies caused enormous harm to families, workers, asylum-seekers, and communities across the country who were left in limbo, unable to work, access protections, or move forward with their lives.”

The policies apply to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, which approves applications for immigrants to work and become citizens. The agency, which is within the Homeland Security Department, often grants asylum, but only for those already in the United States when they apply. Immigration judges grant asylum to those who are stopped at the border; the ruling does not affect them, and neither do the policies that sparked the lawsuit.

It is part of an ongoing effort by the administration to tighten U.S. entry standards for travel and immigration, in what critics say unfairly prevents travel for people from a broad range of countries. The administration suggested it would expand the restrictions after the arrest of an Afghan national suspect in the shooting of two National Guard troops over Thanksgiving weekend.

In its motion to dismiss, which the court denied, the government argued that Congress gave the executive branch broad authority over immigration policy, including “the entry of aliens into the United States as well as discretion within the statutory scheme to confer as well as withdraw various discretionary benefits.”

“This case rests on a remarkable premise: that a federal court should prevent an agency from issuing the very policy guidance that provides government personnel with the guardrails necessary to ensure consistent, non-arbitrary, and individualized decisionmaking consistent with federal law,” the government wrote in its brief.

Immigration groups celebrated the ruling.

“This ruling sets a powerful precedent that the administration cannot ignore the law as laid down by Congress and cannot arbitrarily bar immigration benefits on the basis of national origin by fiat,” said Jamal Abdi, president at the National Iranian American Council. “Fortunately, this is still a nation of laws, and those who uphold America’s values have recourse to challenge and push back on such discriminatory, arbitrary policies.”

Shawn VanDiver, a Navy veteran who heads a coalition that supports Afghan resettlement efforts called #AfghanEvac, said the ruling was a “significant victory for the rule of law and for thousands of Afghan allies and other immigrants who followed every requirement asked of them.”

“Just this week in Dallas and Fort Worth, we met people who feared losing jobs because delayed work permit renewals threatened their livelihoods, families who postponed education, travel, and homeownership because they did not know when their cases would be resolved, and future Americans who had expected to become citizens only to see their applications stall without explanation,” VanDiver said.

Casey writes for the Associated Press.

Enrique Riquelme held up a Real Madrid shirt bearing Erling Haaland’s name, while campaigning for club presidency.

Manchester City is considering legal action after Real Madrid presidential ⁠candidate Enrique Riquelme ⁠said he would sign the Premier League club’s Norwegian striker Erling Haaland if elected.

Riquelme, a renewable energy entrepreneur challenging incumbent Florentino ⁠Perez, made the pledge during an appearance on Spanish television on Wednesday, where he held up a Real Madrid shirt bearing Haaland’s name.

“The stories which ⁠have emerged from Spain regarding the future of Erling Haaland are untrue,” a City spokesperson said on Thursday.

“There is no chance of this happening, and there is no contractual clause to enable it. We are considering legal action for ‌the use of our player’s image in this context.”

Riquelme said Haaland, who scored 38 goals in all competitions last season, had a release clause and wanted to move to the Spanish club, adding that he would make the transfer a priority if he wins Sunday’s election.

A joint statement from the 25-year-old footballer’s father, Alfie Haaland, and his agent, Rafaela Pimenta, swiftly ⁠rejected the suggestion, describing it as “not true”.

Riquelme added he ⁠would try to sign City’s Spain midfielder Rodri, saying he had spoken to the player’s agent and would “do everything possible” to bring the Ballon d’Or winner to Madrid.

The remarks come against ⁠the backdrop of Real’s presidential election, the first in two decades in which Perez is not running unopposed, ⁠after the club’s two seasons without a major ⁠trophy.

Voting is scheduled for Sunday, with some 100,000 club members eligible to take part.

Haaland had the option to join Real in 2022, when he left Borussia Dortmund. But he chose City, where ‌his father played.

While the striker, who won the Premier League Golden Boot for the third time in four seasons, said he would like to play ‌for ‌Real one day, there has been no suggestion he is unhappy at City. He signed a new nine-and-a-half-year contract in January 2025.

Perez announced on Wednesday that, should he be elected, he would bring Benfica manager Jose Mourinho back to Real Madrid for a second term at the helm of Los Blancos.

The Portuguese former manager of Manchester United, Chelsea and Inter Milan previously won the La Liga title during a three-year spell in Madrid.

L.A. will soon explode in color as Angelenos and tourists alike don jerseys and wave flags representing their favorite soccer teams playing in the 2026 FIFA World Cup, with some of the matches taking place at Inglewood’s SoFi Stadium.

The action kicks off with Mexico vs. South Africa on June 11 and will continue through July 19, with later matches determined by which teams advance. Forty-eight countries are represented in the tournament, including heavyweights like Brazil and Argentina with multiple titles under their belts, and hopeful underdogs like Haiti, whose men’s team qualified for the competition for the first time in 52 years.

Local restaurants, sports bars, coffee shops and breweries are getting in on the action with World Cup viewing parties, complete with big-screen TVs, extended hours, food and drink specials, games, giveaways and live performances. Some require tickets or a reservation, but many are free, family-friendly and open to all.

Some spots are committed to screening every game throughout the tournament, while others are focused on championing the countries their cuisines hail from, including an Argentinian bistro in South L.A. offering discounted empanadas, a German beer garden in Eagle Rock serving vegan sausages and schnitzel and a Panamanian restaurant in Long Beach where you can watch the Central American team play while you sip soursop lemonade alongside jerk mac and cheese.

From Hawthorne to Sherman Oaks, here are 31 restaurants and bars screening World Cup matches this summer:

Manchester City are contemplating taking legal action over a promise to sign striker Erling Haaland by a candidate in Real Madrid’s presidential election.

Enrique Riquelme – a renewable energy magnate who is challenging current president Florentino Perez for the position – unveiled a Real Madrid shirt bearing Haaland’s name while on television on Wednesday, saying: “He has a release clause and would like to join Real Madrid.”

A swift denial was issued in a joint statement by Haaland’s father and agent, before City rubbished the suggestion.

“The stories which have emerged from Spain regarding the future of Erling Haaland are untrue,” the statement read. “There is no chance of this happening and there is no contractual clause to enable it.

“We are considering legal action for the use of our player image in this context.”

More to follow.

WASHINGTON — The House approved a war powers resolution Wednesday that would halt the U.S. military action against Iran, defying President Trump as a handful of Republicans joined with Democrats to end the three-month-long war that has reordered politics at home and abroad.

House Speaker Mike Johnson had tried to prevent an outcome that would show the mounting opposition to the war, abruptly shutting down floor action two weeks ago when the war powers resolution was on the verge of approval. But displeasure has only grown as the conflict drags on and as Trump struggles to negotiate a quick resolution.

The roll call Wednesday was 215-208, and cheers erupted in the House chamber.

“This reckless and costly war of choice needs to end today,” House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries of New York said earlier in the week.

“All we need are a handful of Republicans to join us and we can end this reckless and costly war of choice — a war that has cost the American taxpayer over $100 billion — that’s extraordinary — and left our country in a weaker position relative to Iran.”

Opposition to war grows

It’s the fourth time the House has tried to curb the U.S. war against Iran, and the first time the House was able to pass the measure. The Senate advanced its own war powers resolution last month when a handful of GOP senators broke ranks with the Republican president in a rare show of political pushback from his party.

Each time Democrats have pushed forward the war powers resolution, the vote tallies have inched higher as political unease with the U.S. war swells. Trump had campaigned for the White House on a promise to end U.S. entanglements abroad and focus more on domestic issues, but the war has shifted attention back to the Middle East.

Johnson insisted Trump is “laser focused” on the domestic front, particularly ahead of the midterm elections that will determine control of Congress.

The speaker said he spent three hours at the White House with the president this week as Trump is calling on allies to help reopen the Strait of Hormuz for commerce, especially the flow of oil.

Since the U.S. joined Israel in launching the Feb. 28 strikes on Iran, Americans have seen gas prices spike at the pumps, adding to inflationary pressure on consumer spending.

Iran has been able to interrupt shipping through the Strait of Hormuz, a vital channel for a large segment of the world’s oil, natural gas and related products such as fertilizer.

“We’re working on that final piece,” said Johnson, R-La. “The entire world has an interest in the Strait of Hormuz being reopen for commerce. That what he’s working on.”

While a ceasefire in the conflict was declared in April, it remains uneasy and uncertain. Talks for a more durable end to the fighting have dragged, increasingly complicated by Israel’s broadening war with Iran-backed Hezbollah militants in Lebanon. Meanwhile, military strikes between the U.S and Iran continue to flare.

Congress exerts its war powers authority

The war powers resolution from the House would not immediately stop the war, but it would provide a symbolic if not legal step against further military action.

If approved, it would then go to the Senate, where four Republican senators last month joined Democrats in advancing a similar measure to curtail the U.S. campaign against Iran. The Senate has yet to take a final vote to approve or reject its own war powers resolution.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio warned Wednesday testifying at a House Foreign Affairs Committee hearing that the Iranians would think that the administration’s “hands are going to be tied” if Congress approved a war powers resolution. He said they would think ”we won’t be able to do anything to them, so why make a deal?”

It’s not the only action Congress is taking in the national security arena as Democrats, in the minority, work to peel off Republican support for measures beyond the war against Iran.

The House is also voting Wednesday on another Democratic-led effort that would authorize U.S. support for Ukraine’s military operations as it battles Russia and to help reconstruct the war-torn country. The House this week is also expected to consider a war powers resolution to block U.S. action in Lebanon.

While Congress has the authority under the Constitution to declare war, the president also has power as the commander in chief to engage in military action, creating a legal dispute over which branch of government has ultimate say in matters of war and peace.

Under the war powers act, the White House has a 60-day window to seek approval from Congress for military action. The administration, however, has indicated that because a ceasefire has been declared in the current conflict in Iran, the hostilities have ceased.

Mascaro writes for the Associated Press.

STRIKES across Portugal are set to go ahead tomorrow causing widespread disruption across the country.

Rail workers, cabin crew and public transport staff are all staging a walkout.

At its airports in Portugal, strike action is predicted to affect hundreds of flights with 500 at risk of being cancelled and delayed.

Over half of these flights are operated by TAP Air Portugal, as well as other Portugália and SATA services.

On social media, TAP Air Portugal said it would still operate a minimum of 79, it is also rebooking travel options for affected passengers.

The airline Air Europa has cancelled all of its flights between Madrid and Lisbon and Porto.

BUDGET BREAKS

The stunning Europe beach resorts you can fly to for £15.99 – plus £34 hotels

SPLASH OUT

Top UK waterparks mapped with spas, private cabanas & rollercoasters – from £5pp

The union added that easyJet and Ryanair flights are also expected to be impacted.

easyJet told Sun Travel: “Due to a national strike in Portugal on 3 June, like all airlines operating to and from the country we can expect some disruption to our flying programme. 

“We will be doing all we can to minimise the impact of the strike action and will contact customers directly with their options if their flights are affected.

“While this is outside of our control we are sorry for any inconvenience this strike action may cause.”

Ryanair however told The Independent that it did not expect any disruption and would operate as normal.

Away from airports, staff working for FECTRANS are expected to walkout.

This is expected to limit service on the Lisbon Metro and will disrupt those with travel plans across the city.

Union members include those working on the Porto Metro, so Porto is another city set to be majorly affected by the strike action.

Due to the sheer volume of staff strikes, it’s thought that the delays could impact travel on the following days, too.

Flight compensation rules

A look at your rights if a flight is delayed or cancelled, when your entitled to compensation and if your travel insurance can cover the costs.

What are my rights if my flight is cancelled or delayed?

Under UK law, airlines have to provide compensation if your flight arrives at its destination more than three hours late.

If you’re flying to or from the UK, your airline must let you choose a refund or an alternative flight.

You will be able to get your money back for the part of your ticket that you haven’t used yet.

So if you booked a return flight and the outbound leg is cancelled, you can get the full cost of the return ticket refunded.

But if travelling is essential, then your airline has to find you an alternative flight. This could even be with another airline.

When am I not entitled to compensation?

The airline doesn’t have to give you a refund if the flight was cancelled due to reasons beyond their control, such as extreme weather.

Disruptions caused by things like extreme weather, airport or air traffic control employee strikes or other ‘extraordinary circumstances’ are not eligible for compensation.

Some airlines may stretch the definition of “extraordinary circumstances” but you can challenge them through the aviation regulator the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA).

Will my insurance cover me if my flight is cancelled?

If you can’t claim compensation directly through the airline, your travel insurance may refund you.

Policies vary so you should check the small print, but a delay of eight to 12 hours will normally mean you qualify for some money from your insurer.

Remember to get written confirmation of your delay from the airport as your insurer will need proof.

If your flight is cancelled entirely, you’re unlikely to be covered by your insurance.

WASHINGTON — Shrey Parikh felt the pressure of arriving at the Scripps National Spelling Bee as a favorite, but his confidence showed every time he got a word he knew. And when the bee came down to a lightning-round tiebreaker against Ishaan Gupta, Shrey left no doubt.

Shrey turned a tense, high-quality final into a blowout Thursday night, racing through the 90-second “spell-off” and getting 32 words right to be crowned the best young speller in the English language. Ishaan spelled 25 words correctly in the tiebreaker.

A 14-year-old from Rancho Cucamonga, Shrey finished third in 2024 but lost his school bee last year when he was battling a fever. He has dominated the bee circuit since, winning several highly competitive online competitions against many of the same kids he outlasted this week in the nation’s capital.

Ishaan, a 12-year-old seventh-grader from Jersey City, N.J., was a semifinalist this year, outperformed some veteran spellers in the finals, and has another year of eligibility left.

Sarv Dharavane, a 12-year-old sixth-grader from Dunwoody, Ga., finished third for the second consecutive year and has two more years to improve that placement.

For the first time in the bee’s history, second- and third-place finishers from the same year have gone on to win. Faizan Zaki won last year, and two years ago he was the runner-up, just ahead of Shrey.

Sporting a business-casual look with a dark, long-sleeve collared shirt, khakis and sneakers, the lanky Shrey strode to the microphone with a dour, apprehensive expression that instantly vanished when he heard his word from pronouncer Jacques Bailly and nodded vigorously — his tell that, yes, he knew it.

Upon hearing the announcement confirming his victory in the spell-off, Shrey turned and shook his competitor’s hand.

He can credit his victory to intense preparation. Shrey’s coaching team included Sam Evans, who has tutored each of the past three champions, and Sohum Sukhatankar, a co-champion himself in 2019. He competed nonstop against other top spellers, pored through advanced study guides and tried to eliminate the variables that had led to the few unexpected exits of his long spelling career.

Former spellers, coaches and other observers described this group of finalists as unusually strong, and they showed off their skills early by going 18 for 18 to start, breezing through the first spelling and vocabulary rounds. Aiden Meng of Orinda, Calif., ended that streak when he was tripped up by “catometope” to start the second spelling round.

Then the crowd gasped when the bell rung on two thought to be capable of winning it all: Oliver Halkett for “Faesulae” and Zwe Spacetime for “vaesite,” words with tricky combinations of origins and vowel sounds.

The bee’s move to Constitution Hall, a point of contention for spellers and their families because of the inconveniences it caused, helped imbue the event with a lively atmosphere, with more intimate seating and better sight lines bringing the crowd closer to the action.

New television host Mina Kimes of ESPN narrated the action smoothly alongside longtime bee analyst Paul Loeffler.

Nuckols writes for the Associated Press.

SACRAMENTO — Gov. Gavin Newsom has threatened to tax 100% of the money Californians receive from President Trump’s “anti-weaponization” fund for his political allies.

Trump’s Justice Department had announced last week that it would establish a $1.776-billion fund to compensate allies of the president who claim they have “suffered weaponization and lawfare” under the Biden administration’s Justice Department.

“Anyone from California that receives any of those funds, we want to tax 100% of those proceeds,” the governor told reporters Thursday.

“That’s an action the state of California can take …[and] it’s an action we look forward to taking.”

Just how Newsom would do so remains unclear. He indicated that he would need action from the Democratic-led California Legislature to impose the new tax. If adopted, the measure would likely face legal challenge.

The fund has prompted outrage from Democrats and some Republicans — including Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), who said in a statement that the “slush fund,” which would “pay people who assault cops,” was “utterly stupid.”

Newsom’s remarks about Trump’s settlement fund came on Thursday as he signed a bill designed to prevent election interference ahead of Tuesday’s primary.

The bill, Senate Bill 73, restricts law enforcement agencies and officers — including those from federal agencies — from interfering with state and local election officials, such as confiscating ballots, voter rolls or voting machines without a warrant.

The governor said the bill is meant to address “legitimate anxiety” over threats to election integrity after Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco’s decision to seize ballots from the county’s voter registrar as part of a fraud probe. Bianco, a long-time Trump supporter, is one of the top Republicans running to succeed Newsom after the end of his second and final term as governor.

Newsom also pointed to ICE and Border Patrol’s decision last November to stage an event near Dodger Stadium, calling it a “show of force designed to intimidate free expression and free speech.”

“That’s why we have to step up and we have to draw the line,” Newsom said. “We have to clarify the rules of engagement… there are fines associated with this, criminal fines and jail time of three years, so that’s a warning [to] the folks out there that think they can do the bidding of the Trump administration.”

Newsom said he expects Trump to interfere with the upcoming election — noting that the president has falsely claimed that he “won” California in the last election.

“Every single thing that Donald Trump is saying only suggests that he will do more, not less, to intimidate and to impact the outcome of this election,” Newsom said. “I absolutely expect the worst again, because we’ve been on the receiving end of it.”

Baltimore, United States – Muslim Americans are grieving after two gunmen last week opened fire at the Islamic Center of San Diego, killing three people.

But at the annual conference for the Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA) in Baltimore, community leaders stressed the urgency of turning the sorrow into action.

Nearly 25,000 people turned out for the annual event, held on Saturday and Sunday. Speakers addressed the recent shooting, pointing to the courage of the three victims as examples for the broader community in a time of heightened Islamophobia.

“We owe them more than condolences. We owe them resolve,” said Lena Masri, a lawyer at the Council of American-Islamic Relations (CAIR).

She explained how the victims — a security officer, a caretaker and a neighbour — sacrificed their lives to save others. The security officer, Amin Abdullah, exchanged fire with the shooters, while the other two victims, Mansour Kaziha and Nadir Awad, rushed to help and called for emergency services.

“They protected the physical space of our community: the masjid [mosque], the school, the children, the teachers, the worshippers,” Masri explained.

“Our responsibility is to protect the civic space of our community: the right to worship, the right to speak, the right to organise, the right to defend Palestine, the right to build institutions.”

That was the recurring theme of the conference: that the Muslim American community cannot afford to be passive and must draw on its strength to push back against bigotry and hate.

Speakers emphasised voting, organising and donating to community institutions and candidates who align with Muslim Americans. They also underscored the need to hold officials accountable and push for an end to Israel’s atrocities in Palestine.

“We owe Gaza more than grief. We owe Gaza advocacy that cannot be intimidated into silence,” Masri said.

Islamophobia and Palestinians’ dehumanisation

Symbols of Palestine could be seen everywhere at the conference, from bags emblazoned with watermelons and flags to keffiyeh-patterned scarves, shirts and water bottles.

At a bazaar featuring dozens of vendors, conference-goers left messages of solidarity on a tent that will be sent to Gaza by the charity Life for Relief and Development (LIFE).

In speeches and on panels, advocates drew a link between anti-Muslim bigotry in the United States and Israel’s abuses in Gaza, the occupied West Bank and Lebanon.

Some of the loudest promoters of Islamophobia in the US are also staunch Israel supporters, among them right-wing commentator Laura Loomer and Congressman Randy Fine.

Both Loomer and Fine are allies of US President Donald Trump, whose administration has unleashed a crackdown to deport critics of Israel who live in the US but are not citizens.

Altaf Husain, a professor at the Howard University School of Social Work, said anti-Palestinian voices are trying to “scare” Muslims as a means of silencing criticism of Israel.

“They want to shut this down, so it’s a direct connection,” Husain told Al Jazeera.

He said the large turnout at the ICNA conference shows that the community is not intimidated and will not back down.

In the response to the shooting in San Diego, Husain pointed out that the community raised more than $3.5m for the victims’ families and moved to bolster security around Muslim institutions.

Layers of security

Saad Kazmi, the president of ICNA, said the organisation relied on three layers of protection to secure this weekend’s event: its own security guards, an outside firm and local law enforcement agencies in Baltimore.

While there is anxiety in the community over the rise of Islamophobia and Trump’s immigration crackdown, he said Muslim Americans must take matters into their own hands and work with “sensible” people across the political spectrum to defeat hate.

“We are very thankful that we live in a country that is ruled by the Constitution and law,” Kazmi told Al Jazeera.

Kazmi added that the shooting in San Diego only added to the community’s determination to assert and protect its rights. The Islamic centre in the city, he noted, did not shut down after the attack.

“If anything came out of this, it is that there are more attendees to the masjid, more people who believe that the way forward is to strengthen ourselves, strengthen our community and march on,” Kazmi said.

After the shooting, Loomer doubled down on her anti-Muslim rhetoric, calling on immigration authorities to target the Islamic Center of San Diego.

She also called for the deportation of all Muslims from the US, describing them as an “invasive species”. But few Republicans disavowed Loomer, who maintains close ties to the White House.

Rather, more than 60 Congress members have joined the Sharia-Free America Caucus since it was established in December. CAIR has designated the caucus a hate group.

At the state level, governors and local legislators have disparaged Islam while also pushing to penalise Palestinian rights activism.

Texas and Florida, for example, have labelled CAIR a “terrorist” group, while implementing measures against “Sharia law” that critics consider anti-Muslim dog whistles.

Rights under attack

In March, after CAIR sued Florida Governor Ron DeSantis over its “terrorist” designation, a federal court blocked the label from being imposed.

In his ruling, Judge Mark Walker wrote that DeSantis’s executive order (EO) targets the Muslim community as a whole.

“It should be lost on no one that Defendant’s EO targets one of America’s largest Muslim civil rights organizations for indirect suppression of speech. But, as we all know, it is easy for those in power to target minority groups with little pushback,” Walker wrote.

“Sadly, history teaches that it is often minority religious groups who find themselves in the crosshairs.”

On Saturday, several panels praised the US legal system and the laws that protect freedom of religion and speech. But the panellists argued that human rights do not defend themselves; people must step up to protect them.

“You’ve got to imagine rights are a territory, and you have to occupy that territory. If you do not actively occupy that territory, that territory will be taken from you. And that is exactly what has been happening,” Tom Facchine, an imam from New Jersey, said.

Last year, Palestinian immigrant Leqaa Kordia found her rights in jeopardy when immigration agents knocked on her door and detained her over her activism against Israel’s genocidal war in Gaza.

Kordia spent more than a year in Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) detention before an immigration judge ordered her to be released in March.

But Kordia — who is still fighting deportation — told ICNA conference attendees on Saturday that she has no regrets, encouraging them to remain politically active and engaged.

“Speaking up, it comes with a cost … It cost me my health, my life, literally my freedom, and I’m living in uncertainty that tomorrow I’m going to be here, or I’m going to be deported,” she said.

“It comes with a cost, but it’s worth it. It’s worth it because silence, it costs even way more than speaking.”

Secretary of State Marco Rubio says Cuba poses a national security threat to the US.

United States President Donald Trump and Secretary of State Marco Rubio have issued new threats of military action against Cuba.

Rubio told reporters late on Thursday that Cuba has been a national security threat for years because of its ties to US adversaries Russia and China, while Trump said he is likely to be the president to finally take action.

The Trump administration, with Cuban-American Rubio at the forefront, has been raising the pressure on the communist-led island in an apparent bid to institute “regime change,” including a fuel blockade that has put the Cuban economy on the edge of collapse.

The push has accelerated in recent days, with the US indicting Cuba’s former President Raul Castro and gathering military forces in the Caribbean.

Rejecting suggestions of “nation building,” Rubio told reporters the issue is one of “national security”. He added that while a negotiated agreement is the US “preference”, the path of diplomacy with Cuba is “not high”.

“Their economic system doesn’t work. It’s broken, and you can’t fix it with the current political system that’s in place,” Rubio said.

Over the years, Cuba has gotten used to “buying time and waiting us out,” Rubio said. “They’re not going to be able to wait us out or buy time. We’re very serious, we’re very focused.”

Separately, President Donald Trump told reporters that US presidents have considered intervening in Cuba for decades, but that it looks like he will be “the one that does it”, adding that he would be “happy” to do so.

In response, Cuban Foreign Minister Bruno Rodriguez lambasted Rubio for falsely labelling Cuba a threat.

“The US secretary of state lies once again to instigate a military aggression that would provoke the shedding of Cuban and American blood,” Rodriguez said.

Raised tension

Since returning to office, Trump has slapped Cuba with numerous sanctions, implemented a fuel blockade and overseen a military build-up in the region.

The renewed threats on Thursday came amid rising tensions between the countries.

The US indicted Cuba’s former President Raul Castro on Wednesday, in connection with the 1996 downing of a plane.

On Thursday, Adys Lastres Morera – sister of a high-ranking executive of the Grupo de Administracion Empresarial SA (GAESA) conglomerate, which is controlled by Cuba’s military and controls large swaths of the economy – was arrested.

More sanctions were imposed on the Cuban government in the past week. The US military announced that several navy ships, including an aircraft carrier, had arrived in the Caribbean on Wednesday to take part in maritime exercises with partners in Latin America.

Rubio has noted that Cuba had earlier tentatively accepted an offer of $100m in aid in return for reforms. But he said it was unclear if the US would accept Cuba’s terms, as Washington insists on circumventing the military-backed conglomerate GAESA.

Analysts caution that Trump and Rubio are eyeing a similar course of action in Cuba to the regime change manufactured in Venezuela. Left-wing President Nicolas Maduro and his wife were kidnapped in a military operation in January. They were taken to the US, where Maduro was charged with “narcoterrorism”.

Rubio insists that Cuba poses a serious national security threat to the US because of its security and intelligence ties with China and Russia.

Both countries have criticised the US pressure on the island.

China said on Friday it “firmly supports” Cuba and urged the US to de-escalate tensions and “stop threatening force”.

Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov said: “We believe that under no circumstances should such methods – which border on violence – be used against either former or current heads of state.”

Disneyland’s Millennium Falcon: Smugglers Run has always been a fully realized “Star Wars” toy, an intimate, interactive attraction that focuses on arcade-style joy. A new upgrade opening Friday makes it decidedly slicker, giving the ride enhanced visuals, increased participatory actions and even an injection of cuteness.

Smugglers Run, which opened in 2019, puts six players in the cockpit of the Millennium Falcon, the ship made famous by Harrison Ford’s Han Solo in the original “Star Wars” trilogy. There’s still no Solo, but there is now Din Djarin, often referred to as simply the Mandalorian, and Grogu, the latter colloquially known as “Baby Yoda.” And although tied to the opening of the new film “The Mandalorian and Grogu,” Smugglers Run version 2.0 smooths out and improves upon many of the attraction’s quirks.

Blessedly, this is one marketing-driven decision that doesn’t feel like a gimmick, bringing unpredictability, humor and even more video game-like zaniness to the ride. Walt Disney Imagineering, the relatively secret division of the company focused on theme park attractions, has clearly listened to guest feedback and zeroed in on ways to not only improve the ride but also make it feel fresh, all while giving players more agency.

“This is an inherently collaborative adventure,” says Asa Kalama, a creative executive with Imagineering. On the ride, groups of six are teamed up to take on various tasks within the Falcon. Kalama says Imagineering was focused on how the various positions of pilot, gunner or engineer interact with one another.

“We took all of those learnings and applied them to enhancements for each and every one of those roles,” Kalama says.

I was a fan of the initial version of the attraction, writing when it opened that it was a heavily detailed blast, especially if one was seated in a pilot’s role (one guest controls the vertical motion of the ship while another focuses on the horizontal). But over time some of the less-than-endearing traits of Smugglers Run started to nag, namely that the two guests assigned to an engineering position had little to do and its storyline was essentially a glorified errand in which we retrieved goods for Hondo Ohnaka, a scoundrel-smuggler who sets the ride in motion.

Concept art of the sci-fi-like planet of Coruscant, a new location in Millennium Falcon: Smugglers Run.

(Disney Parks)

Smugglers Run has always been a technical marvel, but it was a feat of engineering rather than one that forged an emotional connection. The tweaks should fix much of what has long ailed it. Now, instead of a singular fixed mission, guests will have the ability to visit one of three “Star Wars” locations: a planet such as the urban Coruscant, the gas realm of Bespin or the wreckage of the second Death Star near Endor. This decision is made by one of the engineers and levels up the attraction’s ability to surprise.

Using the latest version of Epic’s Unreal Engine, each Smugglers Run locale is heavily detailed, putting us in more of a dogfight as the Mandalorian chases down pirates and ex-Imperial officers. No matter the route, it feels more active and lighthearted. Those who have ridden it before know Smugglers Run has always been responsive, perhaps too much so as inexperienced gamers could spend the entire attraction crashing the ship. Those flight controllers have been softened a bit, meaning guests will still steer but now do so with something of an invisible guided hand.

“We’ve tuned it in such a special way that no matter how skilled or unskilled you might be, you’re always guaranteed to have a flight that feels really cinematic,” says Kalama. In the past, particularly bad fliers could spend the entirety of the attraction being berated by the character of Ohnaka. That element has essentially been removed, with Kalama joking that guests shouldn’t feel as if they are being “chastised.”

Concept art of the Death Star wreckage above Endor, one of the new locales of Millennium Falcon: Smugglers Run.

(Disney Parks)

Narratively, after some quick training on the desert-like planet of Tatooine, we join the Mandalorian in an effort to break up a deal between the pirates and the ex-Imperial officers. That’s enough of a setup to inspire some space fights and chase scenes through fantastical locations.

I rode it three times to visit each vista once, and each has a different tone and look. The neon, sci-fi area of Coruscant, for instance, contrasts with the darkened, industrial Death Star wreckage. At various times, I watched the Mandalorian chase down his targets, get the Falcon caught in a tractor beam or careen through magnetic-like fences. Those seated in the gunner or engineer positions will also be treated to additional clips of Grogu via their adjacent flight panels, the young alien here portrayed as something of a playful pet of a child who is exaggeratedly chill during the commotion.

“I think what we were very deliberate about is that actually each of these different planetary locations that you go to has a different vibe,” Kalama says. “If you go to Endor, you’re in the derelict wreckage of the old Death Star 2. The feel of it is really spooky. It’s dark. It’s mysterious. It’s smokey. The music is almost ominous. In contrast to something like Coruscant, which feels very bustling, vibrant and colorful. The goal was not only are you going to a different location from a geographic perspective but to feel emotionally like you’re going on a different adventure.”

Concept art of Tatooine, where the new mission of Millennium Falcon: Smugglers Run begins.

(Disney Parks)

By emphasizing a chase being driven by the Mandalorian, the tone of the ride feels faster. While it’s the same length of around five minutes, rushing the Falcon through the reddish, fiery atmosphere of Bespin, for instance, where riders will encounter mountainous natural wonders and floating, bulbous structures, gives guests plenty to admire. Smugglers Run has always been full of distractions, as the screen — in front and somewhat above guests — pulls viewers away from the seat-adjacent wall controls. I minded less having my attention ping-ponged around the cockpit with the enhancements, as taking the Falcon into a brief battle creates a more pleasurably hectic tone.

Ultimately, with more choices to make, from which location to visit or whether to focus on Grogu’s antics or the action ahead, Smugglers Run feels more dynamic. “What’s even really kind of extra cool is that in addition to choosing the planets, there are different paths you can take within each location,” says Matt Martin, a senior creative executive with Lucasfilm. “You can choose to go left or choose to go right. And you’re going to see and experience different things.”

The tweaks to Smugglers Run follow big changes to Galaxy’s Edge, as Disney recently expanded the land’s timeline to feature classic, fan-favorite characters such as Darth Vader, Han, Luke and Leia. The character additions bring added life to the area but do take the land away from its original intent as a mythical world where actions unfolded in real time. The dream, however, of a fully interactive theme park experience lives on with Smugglers Run.

Tell us your stories. Ask us your questions.

Have a theme park tale to share? Whether it was a good day or less-than-perfect day, I would love to hear about it. Have a question? A tip? A fun photo from the parks to share? Email me at todd.martens@latimes.com. I may feature your note in an upcoming newsletter.

Ride on,

Todd Martens

P.S.

Mr. Todd’s Wild Ride comes out every Tuesday, but we occasionally publish special editions (like this one!) when we have breaking theme park news. Make sure you’ve signed up to be the first to know.

It’s entirely possible — as hard as it may be to conceive in these deeply tribal, us-vs.-them times — for two competing notions to be true.

Tina Peters personally enriched herself and betrayed the public trust by perpetrating a harebrained scheme to “prove” the 2020 election in Mesa County, Colo., was rigged against President Trump. The former county clerk and MAGA warrior deserved to go to jail.

But the nine-year sentence she received was unduly harsh and, according to an appeals court decision, improperly meted out as punishment for the false and reckless public statements Peters made, a clear violation of her 1st Amendment rights. The court kicked the case back for resentencing.

That’s when Colorado’s Democratic governor, Jared Polis, stepped in.

And stepped in it.

Over the strenuous objection of fellow Democrats and many Republicans — including Peters’ prosecutor and a majority of Colorado’s election clerks — Polis commuted her sentence, clearing the way for Peters’ parole on June 1 after less than two years in prison.

Which just goes to show three wrongs don’t make a right.

Peters, 70, was convicted on multiple criminal counts, four of them felonies, for conspiring to let an unauthorized person access supposedly compromised voting equipment. She then lied to cover up her actions.

Trump carried Mesa County, a conservative stronghold, by nearly 30 percentage points, making Peters’ actions — apart from illegal — unaccountably stupid. But her conniving made her a belle of Mar-a-Lago and a celebrity on the election-denial circuit, jetting around the country and spewing cockamamie conspiracy theories.

Trump loudly agitated for her release.

His corrupted Justice Department sought to get Peters sprung from Colorado prison, presumably to set her loose from a federal facility. The president issued a symbolic “pardon,” though Peters’ conviction on state charges put her beyond his crooked reach. Trump insulted and belittled Polis, suggesting, among other things, he “rot in hell.” More significantly, the vengeful president waged economic war against Colorado.

Among the retributive acts, Trump slashed federal funds earmarked for the state, closed a climate research center in Boulder and moved the U.S. Space Command headquarters from Colorado Springs to Alabama.

Polis, who has a broad libertarian streak, insisted his freeing of Peters was not a capitulation to Trump, but rather a matter of principle, which seems plausible to the extent the governor could have anticipated the unshirted hell he’s gotten from fellow Democrats.

Among the great many infuriated by Polis’ decision are Colorado’s two U.S. senators, as well as other vocal critics up and down the ballot. (One of those indignant senators is Michael Bennet, who is running to replace Polis.) There have been calls, within his own party, to investigate and impeach the governor, who had been spoken of as a potential presidential candidate in 2028.

“He was aiming for a national profile,” said Floyd Ciruli, a pollster who’s been taking soundings of Colorado voters for decades. “This makes it much more difficult.”

Given Democrats’ molten outrage, that seems like an understatement.

The judge who sentenced Peters in October 2024 was unsparing.

“You’re as defiant … a defendant as this court has ever seen,” District Judge Matthew Barrett scolded her. “You are as privileged as they come and you used that privilege to obtain power, a following and fame. You are no hero…. You’re a charlatan who used and is still using your prior position in office to peddle a snake oil that’s been proven to be junk time and time again.”

Amen.

The problem, according to the Colorado Court of Appeals, was that Barrett wrongly punished Peters not just for her illegal actions but for speaking out about alleged election fraud.

“Her offense was not her belief, however misguided the trial court deemed it to be, in the existence of such election fraud,” the three-judge panel wrote in a unanimous April decision. “It was her deceitful actions in her attempt to gather evidence of such fraud.”

The judges — all Democratic appointees — upheld Peters’ conviction and denied her request to transfer the case from Barrett. They ordered him to come up with a new sentence.

And that’s where Polis, who placed Barrett on the bench, should have let things alone.

Instead, the governor interceded and essentially cut Peters’ sentence in half.

“The crimes you were convicted of are very serious and you deserve to spend time in prison,” Polis wrote in his commutation letter. “However, this is an extremely unusual and lengthy sentence for a first time offender who committed nonviolent crimes.”

In response, Peters thanked Polis, apologized and expressed contrition.

“I made mistakes, and for those I am sorry,” Peters wrote in a statement addressed to the governor. “I have learned and grown during my time in prison and going forward I will make sure that my actions always follow the law, and I will avoid the mistakes of the past.”

We’ll see about that. If Peters clambers back aboard Mike Lindell’s crazy plane — he of MyPillow and election denial fame — we’ll know Polis was duped.

It’s easy to see his actions as surrendering to Trump. If so, Polis’ cave-in was pointless. The president is a bully to his core, always demanding more.

But if you take the governor at his word, and his actions weren’t meant as appeasement, what he did was bad nonetheless. He emulated one of Trump’s worst habits, short-circuiting a well-established, independent process by substituting his own headstrong judgment.

Pride, the saying goes, comes before a fall. In Polis’ case, so does arrogance.