ban

After an outcry from immigrant and civil rights advocates over plans to equip immigration officers with gloves capable of delivering electric shocks, California lawmakers on Thursday unveiled a bill that would ban the use of shock gloves by any law enforcement agent in the state.

The gloves deliver can an electrical shock strong enough to drop a strong man to his knees in an instant, and proponents say the gloves provide a fast and non-lethal way to subdue a person.

Two weeks ago, the Associated Press reported that the Department of Homeland security planned to use $10 million to $20 million to procure the gloves from Compliant Technologies of Lexington, Ky., for Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents. The department defended its decision, saying it was “made with careful consideration” and that other law enforcement agencies in the country already use the technology.

Civil rights organizations including the American Civil Liberties Union accused the department of attempting to intimidate the public by arming agents with another use-of-force option. They noted that ICE already is contending with criticism for multiple deaths in custody and during arrests.

Assembly Bill 2760, authored by state Assemblymember LaShea Sharp-Collins (D-San Diego), would prohibit local, state and federal agencies from possessing, using or procuring electric taser gloves in the state or with state funds.

“We cannot spend state money or tax dollars on technology that is not to better our state,” Sharp-Collins said during a news conference with other lawmakers in Sacramento. “It cannot be used on our children, it cannot be used on our teachers, our business owners, it cannot be used on anyone.”

The CTG-5 G.L.O.V.E — standing for Generated Low Output Voltage Emitter — resembles a thick work glove and can be activated to emit a 380-volt shock upon contact with a body. Compliant Technologies has maintained that the gloves are weaker than traditional tasers, but critics say they can be life-threatening in the hands of ICE.

“Many people try to say weapons like this are about de-escalation, but I don’t know how many people have put hands on someone and said that’s de-escalation,” state Assemblymember Alex Lee (D-Alameda) said. “There’s already a spectrum of non-lethal, less-than-violent weapons out there that exists… ICE and law enforcement don’t need another tool.”

The gloves have been adopted in detention centers, law enforcement agencies and jails across the country, though apparently none in California. Last week, AP reported that Omaha police agreed to stop using the shock gloves after parents realized they’d been adopted by departments that monitored schools.

Sharp-Collins said she prepared the legislation in consultation with the state attorney general’s office and legislative council to ensure it would withstand a challenge from the Trump administration if it became law.

The Senate voted 30-9 on Monday to approve a rule change that would allow for the bill to pass quickly before the end of the legislative session on Aug. 31.

Dolly Parton may be gone, but her spirit of self-expression is still making waves — this time in a Texas federal court.

U.S. District Judge David Hittner on Tuesday cited the late artist in his decision to strike down Senate Bill 12, a 2023 law that sought to restrict drag shows. His decision, which blocks the Texas attorney general from enforcing the law, noted that the prohibition was “an unconstitutional restriction on speech.”

Just as many people “chastised Dolly Parton as a voluptuous sex symbol because of her big hair, flamboyant clothes and breast exposure … there are erotic elements in countless popular performances that could be subject to both civil and criminal penalties under S.B. 12,” Hittner wrote in his decision.

And because the law doesn’t specify who determines whether a performance “appeals to the prurient interest” or that the work be considered as a whole, a single sexual or erotic moment in a performance could result in penalties, he wrote. Those penalties include civil fines of up to $10,000 for businesses and a misdemeanor charge that carries up to a year in jail for participating individuals.

Hittner’s decision came down on the same day Parton, the 80-year-old legendary songwriter, actor and businesswoman, died following a brief battle with cancer.

Parton was referenced several times in court records associated with the case. One of the plaintiffs, Brigitte Bandit, a drag queen and longtime activist, frequently performs as the Grammy-winning artist.

In an Instagram post on Tuesday, Bandit wrote that Parton had been a “huge influence” on her life and her drag performances. She even brought a children’s book about Parton to testify at the Texas Capitol, which eventually got back to the country music star, who then gifted Bandit a signed rhinestone-covered guitar.

“Dolly has shaped much of my life as a drag artist,” Bandit wrote on Instagram, calling her a “queen who has changed the world with her love, artistry, and GLAM! my diva forever.”

After the 2016 mass shooting at Pulse, a gay nightclub in Orlando, Fla., Parton called herself a “patron saint” of the gay community in an interview with Billboard.

“All those drag queens, sometimes I see some of them look more like me than I do,” said the star, who famously lost a Dolly Parton lookalike contest.

Tuesday’s ruling wasn’t the first time the law, widely touted as a “drag ban,” has been deemed unconstitutional by the courts.

Hittner initially struck down the law in September 2023, just a few months after the Texas Legislature passed it. In November 2025, a three-judge panel of the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals vacated the lower court’s injunction and returned the case to district court with instructions on how to reconsider it.

In the end, the high court’s directions did not change Hittner’s determination that the law violates the 1st and 14th amendments.

Hittner wrapped up his decision with a suggestion for those who oppose or are offended by the performances: “[T]he solution is relatively simple … just don’t go.”

Dutch group Christians for Israel is taking the government to court in the Netherlands over its plans to introduce a ban on importing goods from illegal Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank and Golan Heights.

The ban, which was announced in July, is due to take effect on September 22 and will run for three years. It bars importing, buying and selling goods produced in Israeli settlements, as well as intermediary services and any attempt to circumvent the rules.

But the Israel Product Centre (IPC), part of Christians for Israel (CvI), a Dutch evangelical organisation which a recent study found has donated about $300,000 to illegal settlements in the occupied West Bank, has responded by filing summary proceedings against the state, with the hearing due today.

Here’s what we know about this case.

What is the case about?

The IPC has issued summary proceedings against the Dutch state, seeking to block the July decree.

The IPC argues the measure is “one-sided” and that the window it now has to clear its existing stock – some 20,000 bottles of wine – is too short.

It is also arguing that a national ban conflicts with the European Union’s principle of free movement of goods.

A verdict is not expected for about two weeks.

How has this case come about?

EU rules have long required goods from illegal settlements in the occupied West Bank to be labelled by their origin – Palestine – rather than as “product of Israel”, but the bloc has not placed an outright ban on trading with Israeli settlements. That remains up to individual countries.

In February 2020, the Dutch advocacy group DocP urged consumers to file complaints with the Dutch food safety authority, NVWA, if they found wine and Dead Sea cosmetics had been mislabelled.

Following complaints, the IPC changed its labelling to “product uit een Israelisch dorp in Judea & Samaria [product from an Israeli village in Judea and Samaria],” which it argued accurately reflected the exact geographical and administrative reality of the origins of the products without deceiving the buyer. Judea and Samaria is the biblical name used by the Israeli government to refer to the West Bank. DocP argued this fell short of the requirement to label products correctly, and continued its campaign.

In 2021, the NVWA agreed and fined the IPC 2,100 euros (about $2,500) for mislabelling goods.

Then, in July 2024, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) issued an advisory opinion that Israel’s presence in the occupied Palestinian territory is unlawful and must end “as rapidly as possible”.

This shifted the legal argument beyond mere consumer labelling, with the court saying countries should take steps to prevent trade or investment relations which help to maintain the unlawful presence of Israeli settlers in the Palestinian territories.

The lower house of the Dutch parliament acted on that in September 2025, proposing an import ban.

The national decree against importing goods from Israeli settlements was made in July this year.

Does Christians for Israel describe the West Bank as ‘Israel’?

CvI describes the West Bank as a “disputed territory” rather than accepting the international legal description of it as “occupied Palestinian territory”.

It says it believes that Israel has strong claims to sovereignty there and that Jews have a right to live there.

The vocabulary matters in a legal sense, as “disputed territory” is not the same as “annexed territory”, therefore, the legal apparatus which would make settlement trade unlawful doesn’t straightforwardly apply.

The group’s stated reasons for funding projects there, it says on its website, are rooted in the Bible; it cites Ezekiel 47:21-23: “Peace for the Jewish people and resident foreigners inheriting alongside the tribes of Israel.”

However, the ICJ’s July 2024 advisory opinion is clear that the Fourth Geneva Convention’s Article 49(6) and successive Security Council resolutions treat the territories as occupied and the settlements as unlawful.

How have other Christian organisations in the West responded to trade with settlements?

Western churches are split on the issue, with CvI sitting at one end of the spectrum.

Mainline Protestants, including the Presbyterian Church in the United States, have divested shareholdings in Caterpillar, HP and Motorola Solutions as early as 2014, and from Israeli bonds in 2024. The United Methodist Church has opposed Israeli settlements since 1996 and sold its Israeli bond holdings last August.

The World Council of Churches called for sanctions against illegal Israeli settlements in 2025, divestment and an arms embargo.

The Vatican calls settlements an obstacle to peace but has avoided divestment so far.

Christian Zionist bodies, however, including Christians United for Israel (CUFI) and the International Christian Embassy Jerusalem, send funding for settlements and fight against boycotts.

How significant is this ban?

It is significant considering that the Netherlands is one of only four EU countries currently imposing a ban on trade with illegal Israeli settlements.

Trade from illegal settlements to the EU is estimated to be worth up to $400m per year.

The Netherlands is also a big market for the illegal settlements; a recent investigation by legal advocacy group Global Echo, which analysed thousands of shipments from Israeli settlements between 2017 and 2026, shows that within the EU, the Dutch market is the largest importer of goods from illegal settlements, with about 30 percent destined for or passing through the country.

Which European countries have banned products from West Bank settlements?

Spain has banned all imports of products from illegal Israeli settlements in the occupied Palestinian territory, including the West Bank, East Jerusalem and the Golan Heights, since September 2025. The decree also enforces an embargo on defence exports and dual-use technology to Israel, bans ships carrying military fuel for Israel from Spanish ports, and restricts advertising for services or goods linked to Israeli settlements.

Ireland’s parliament approved the text of its Israeli Settlements (Prohibition of Importation of Goods) Bill in May and the bill was signed into law in July. It covers all goods produced in Israeli settlements, but excludes services.

Belgium’s federal government approved a draft royal decree in July introducing a specific regime for goods from Israeli settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem. The precise details of the new law will be determined by the government in due course.

Slovenia imposed restrictions on imports from Israeli settlements under its previous government, but the new conservative government reversed them in June 2026.

The EU as a bloc remains deadlocked over whether a ban counts as foreign policy requiring unanimity or trade policy needing only a qualified majority, with ministers not meeting again in a decision-making format until October.

Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Saar last year described the push by some European governments to implement the ICJ advisory opinion as “shameful”.

Which European countries still allow trade with West Bank settlements?

Nearly all of them.

Outside the three European Union states which still have bans in place, settlement goods can be sold legally everywhere, including in most of the EU.

At a July 2026 meeting of EU foreign ministers in Brussels, which addressed trade from Israeli settlements in Palestinian territories, Germany, Austria, Czechia and Hungary were opposed to an EU-wide ban.

Beyond the EU, the United Kingdom does not forbid trade with illegal Israeli settlements, although new Prime Minister Andy Burnham is reportedly considering a ban. In a recent parliamentary briefing, Amnesty International called on the UK government to implement a ban.

It said: “The argument for a UK ban on trade with settlements is clear. The UK government itself accepts it should take stronger action in response to settlement expansion and annexation. The International Court of Justice has directed states not to trade with Israel in relation to the Occupied Palestinian Territory; and there is precedent in UK law and policy to not trade with illegally occupied lands, ie Crimea and other illegally occupied parts of Ukraine.”

Aug. 26 (UPI) — A U.S. district court has blocked Texas from banning drag performances as unconstitutional, ruling that the solution to the problem is for those who find such events offensive to just not attend.

Texas Gov. Greg Abbott signed Senate Bill 12 into law in June 2023 to ban “sexually oriented performances” via civil penalties on businesses that host them and criminal penalties on performers.

It has been debated in the courts since, with a court ruling it unconstitutional in 2023 and an appeals court in February allowing it to take effect while sending the case back to the district court for review.

On Tuesday, U.S. District Judge David Hittner, a Reagan appointee who issued the 2023 ruling, declared Senate Bill 12 an unconstitutional restriction on speech and ordered that the state be permanently enjoined from enforcing it.

“Finally, for those who find such activities as described in this case offensive, the solution is relatively simple … just don’t go,” Hittner said.

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, who is running for the U.S. Senate with President Donald Trump‘s endorsement, called the ruling in a statement “flawed,” arguing without proof that it will endanger children while being “an affront to Texas values.”

“I will appeal this decision immediately and continue to fight to protect our kids,” he said online.

Meanwhile, civil rights and LGBTQ advocates celebrated the ruling.

“Today’s decision confirms that the legislature’s attempt to ban drag performances was unconstitutional from start to finish,” Brian Klosterboer, senior staff attorney at the American Civil Liberties Union of Texas, which filed the original lawsuit in August 2023, said in a statement.

“This law stifled free expression across our state and made people afraid to engage in or attend drag shows and other performances. But all Texans — no matter our gender or background — are guaranteed the right to free expression.”

Brigitte Bandit, a drag performer and a plaintiff in the case, said the ruling was “a relief.”

“As a lifelong Texan, I’m sick of this state trying to censor art and stoke hatred and violence against drag artists and the LGBTQIA+ community. No one should be punished for performing drag, and I wish lawmakers would take steps to protect kids from real dangers in our state instead of trying to divide and marginalize us.”

UCLA is proceeding as though it landed a massive gift this week, with 2025 Sun Belt Player of the Year Trent Hendrick joining the Bruins for practices Monday and Tuesday.

Hendrick is among 16 players who sought a Louisiana temporary restraining order allowing them to return to college after entering the NFL draft pool, arguing they would not have left had they know NCAA rules would change granting them an extra year of eligibility.

The temporary restraining order was granted last week, but the Big Ten voted on Tuesday to pass a new rule that prohibited football players who have signed a professional contract, were on a professional roster at any point or declared for the NFL draft as an underclassman without withdrawing, from maintaining eligibility for athletic competition.

Hendrick, however, did not sign a contract, never earned a spot on a roster and didn’t declare for the draft as an underclassman.

Linebacker Trent Hendrick participates in a drill during the Cleveland Browns’ rookie minicamp on May 8. Hendrick is now poised to play for UCLA.

(Sue Ogrocki / Associated Press)

“We support the Big Ten’s adoption of the new professional football players rule and understand the importance of having clear and consistent eligibility standards across the conference,” UCLA athletic director Martin Jarmond said in a statement on Tuesday. “We have been in communication with the Big Ten throughout this process, and our student-athletes are eligible under the guidelines adopted today. We are excited to turn our full attention to the upcoming season and our opener [versus] California on Sept. 5.”

It is unclear whether anyone will contest the Louisiana temporary restraining order.

For now, Hendrick is quickly getting up to speed in a system he learned while competing under head coach Bob Chesney and defensive coordinator Colin Hitschler last season at James Madison.

Chesney was excited on Monday to welcome Hendrick to Westwood. Hitschler told reporters Tuesday he, too, was pleased to see Hendrick on the UCLA roster.

James Madison’s Trent Hendrick tackles Washington State’s Maxwell Woods during a game on Nov. 22.

(Brien Aho / Getty Images)

“We had a lot of fun together last year and I think he did a great job where he was,” Hitschler said. “I’m glad he got the opportunity for himself to hopefully continue to play college football here. What a special opportunity for him and let’s make the most of it.”

Both coaches said they faced competition to land Hendrick after last week’s restraining order was granted.

“He’s a really good player,” Hitschler said. “He made a lot of plays for us last year and he loves the game. … Awesome kid, loves the game, loves the work, loves the grind, you know, and he’s talented.”

Can a player who joined a roster less than two weeks before the season opener be ready to play immediately? Hitschler thinks so.

“Trent’s a kid that stays ready,” Hitschler said. “He was begging for an opportunity to get a tryout in the league. Just another opportunity to maybe get it. So he was working out, he was in great shape. He’s a kid that lives, eats and sleeps football and God blessed him with an opportunity here, let’s see what he can make of it.”

The Big Ten is holding schools accountable for compliance with its rule and told the Associated Press restrictions in other sports such as basketball could follow.

A head football coach who plays a former pro will be suspended 50% of the season and his school will be fined, the Big Ten confirmed to the AP on Tuesday.

The topic is a hot one around college athletics. Wake Forest athletic director John Currie, chairman of the Atlantic Coast Conference athletic directors group for the upcoming season, said his colleagues planned to discuss the issue Wednesday.

“I don’t think anybody in our league likes the idea of taking away opportunities from existing college students and graduating high school players, which is exactly what is happening when a school signs a player out of an NFL camp to their team,” Currie wrote in a text message to the AP.

Duke coach Manny Diaz said the Power Four conferences need to present a unified front. The Big 12 and Southeastern Conference have not announced steps, though the SEC ripped the potential for pros back in college in a statement late Monday.

“I think you’ll see more leagues start to govern themselves since we’re having such a hard time finding it at a national level,” Diaz said. “I think everyone understands it’s absolutely absurd. We can enjoy the fact that the players can benefit financially from playing in college now. At the same time, recognize the ultimate truth that we’re not a professional sports franchise. We are a collegiate, scholastic school activity, and we’ve got to rein that in.”

Agent Drew Rosenhaus told the AP on Monday that former Mississippi tight end Dae’Quan Wright had been waived by the Cleveland Browns and, if he clears waivers, will join Lane Kiffin’s roster at Louisiana State. Wright played two seasons for Kiffin at Ole Miss.

Wright was among a group of players who sued in a Louisiana court, saying the new NCAA rule granting five years of eligibility to most athletes should apply to him and others who were not “grandfathered” into the rule, which did not include the high school Class of 2022.

“Over 100 athletes in multiple sports were cleared and said you could go play. That’s a court order,” Kiffin said Tuesday on “The Pat McAfee Show” on ESPN. “If you think back on all the different court orders of great players that were granted — whether that’s Diego Pavia or, now, Trinidad [Chambliss] that were allowed to play a sixth year, we followed all court orders. I think you get into a really interesting situation as a conference if you’re now saying, ‘Well, we’re not going to follow this court order.’ These kids that a court says can go anywhere, we’re going to say, ‘No you can’t.’”

The situation has drawn sharp criticism among coaches in college and the NFL. Rams coach Sean McVay said reversing the college football-to-NFL pipeline was mind-boggling.

“I don’t know enough about it, other than the fact guys that can be in NFL camps, if it doesn’t go down for them, they can go back to college,” McVay said. “I mean, I feel like I took a freaking gummy. I don’t even understand it. It’s true. I mean, looking at this stuff, I’m like, surely that’s not real. But I just try to stay in my lane. But I would say it’s very unique and it’s very different.”

Correspondent Jordan Puente and the Associated Press contributed to this report.

A PRETTY Italian city has banned riding bikes in certain areas – after the mayor was hit by one.

Como is known for its historic city centre with a Gothic-Renaissance cathedral and alpine backdrop.

But many use bikes to get around the city and now the Mayor of Como, Alessandro Rapinese, is introducing a bike ban in parts of the city after he was hit by an electric bike.

From September, bikes will be banned across around 30 streets.

The bike ban applies to both electric and push bikes.

According to Italian media Ansa, the Mayor said: “People act based on their own experiences and I know what it’s like to be hit by one of these beasts.”

Read more on travel inspo

GO ON

All the little-known websites for cheap or FREE tickets to gigs, theatre & festivals

CHEAP BREAKS

UK’s best 100 cheap stays – our pick of the top hotels, holiday parks and pubs

He added: “In this case, I didn’t even end up in the hospital.

“I was hit by a bike. I gathered information, and that’s where the measure came from.”

The new bike rules are part of a wider traffic plan which will create a Limited Traffic Zone (ZTL) to manage tourists better as well as implement stricter rules on vehicles in the city.

Other rules introduced include some vehicles requiring an annual permit and a €3 (£2.60) permit for daily entry to the city.

And tourists staying in hotels can only drive in the city centre if their accommodation has parking.

Deliveries can also only occur between 6am and 11pm.

Locals are outraged with the decision and have pledged to organise a protest on September 12.

Como isn’t the only Italian spot to place restrictions on bikes – Palermo has also restricted bikes in some areas since 2023.

The mayor of Como has banned riding bicycles in certain areas of the historic Italian city after he was hit by an electric one.

Alessandro Rapinese said the ban was necessary to improve public safety. It means from September, cyclists will have to dismount through an area of around 30 streets.

He told Italian news agency Ansa: “People act based on their own experiences and I know what it’s like to be hit by one of these beasts.”

Several other local authorities around Europe, including in the UK, have restricted where and how e-bikes and other single-person vehicles can be used.

The measure put forward by Rapinese is part of a package of new traffic regulations, establishing a Limited Traffic Zone (ZTL) to manage tourist growth, and which impose stricter rules on cars and vans in the city centre.

Many of the roads covered by the ban are the widest in the old town and are popular with delivery drivers.

The measure applies to both electric and push bikes, as the Italian highway code does not distinguish between models.

Rapinese explained his decision in a video as part of a series of online videos he produces himself, known as RapiNews24.

He recounted an incident in which he had been leaving city hall in July and collided with an e-bike shortly after his administration had discussed traffic restrictions in the city centre.

The cyclist involved in the collision has not been identified.

“In this case, I didn’t even end up in the hospital,” Rapinese said. “I was hit by a bike. I gathered information, and that’s where the measure came from.”

THEY say the grass isn’t always greener on the other side, but it appears it is when you look over the fence of Mark Wright’s Essex mansion.

The former Towie star has come under fire from fans for his very healthy looking lawn – despite the region’s new hosepipe ban after multiple heatwaves.

Essex and Suffolk Water introduced a hosepipe ban earlier this month as a result of a lack of rain this summer.

Under a temporary use ban, customers cannot use a hosepipe, sprinkler, or pressure washer for various activities, such as watering plants or filling up hot tubs.

However, Mark took to Instagram earlier this week to share a video of himself relaxing in his outdoor pool, with his green garden grass seen behind him.

As he sipped on cocktails in the clip, Mark was sharing his at-home drinks recipe with fans.

top cook

Romeo Beckham shows off pizza making skills – as fans mock Brooklyn’s ‘grim’ pasta

‘CAN’T BEAR IT’

Vogue Williams savages Katie Price’s hubby Lee & rants ‘he’s taking p**s’

However, fans were more confused over his garden than his homemade mojito.

One user commented below the video: “Amazing grass considering a huge hose pipe ban and much of Essex not have basic water access ATM. Man of the people I see”.

“The grass is looking nice and green 😂,” said a second.

A third wrote: “FYI everyone else has a hosepipe ban?! ?”

“Picture of your house with luscious green grass going around social media while every surrounding bit of land is dead?

“Let all the farmers put their cattle on your land and eat the grass!! They are struggling,” slammed another.

Mark and his wife Michelle moved into their £3.5 million mansion in 2022, after spending years building it into their dream home.

At the top of the Times is the news that ex-Cambridge professor Jason Arday, who has been at the centre of a row in-part focused on accusations of plagiarism, has been found dead. The police have said his death is being treated as “unexpected, but is not believed to be suspicious”. Also on the front page, “Burnham calls up the military to tackle fires”.

The decisions mark both a victory and a setback for President Emmanuel Macron, who had championed both policies.

France’s Constitutional Council has upheld a law passed by parliament to legalise assisted dying in specific circumstances, while striking down a separate bill that sought to ban under-15s from using social media.

The council, France’s highest constitutional authority, issued its rulings on Friday. The decisions mark both a victory and a setback for President Emmanuel Macron, who had championed both policies.

France is set to join several European countries that have already legalised assisted dying, including Belgium, Germany and Luxembourg, among others.

“This decision marks the culmination of a long democratic and parliamentary effort, conducted with listening, respect, and rigour,” Elisabeth Borne, MP and former French prime minister, said in a post on X about the assisted-dying decision.

“I welcome this definitive validation of a text that guarantees everyone the freedom to choose, within a strict and protective framework.”

The council upheld the law in its entirety while clarifying three provisions, including the so-called conscience clause, under which pharmacists may refuse to assist a patient in ending their life.

Private treatment centres can also refuse to participate in the procedure if it goes against their mission, and other centres can serve local needs. Lastly, in the case of protected patients, the opinion of the person responsible for their welfare must be taken into account.

French citizens and legal residents can request medical support in ending their lives under strict conditions. The legislation stipulates that the patient must be “suffering from an incurable, life-threatening illness in an advanced or terminal phase”, and that the illness must cause “constant physical or psychological suffering that is untreatable or unbearable”. Lastly, the patient must exercise free and informed consent.

The French National Assembly passed the bill last month by a majority of 50, with 291 voting in favour and 241 against.

Meanwhile, the Constitutional Court struck down legislation banning under-15s from social media, citing freedom of expression.

“By prohibiting minors under the age of fifteen from accessing certain online services, the law inherently requires every person, even an adult, to prove their age before accessing them,” the court said in its decision.

“However, by failing to specify the conditions and limits under which such proof must be provided, the legislature has not established the legal safeguards necessary to ensure compliance with these requirements,” it added. The court also said that the law fails to safeguard people’s privacy.

The bill was one of Macron’s flagship policies and was passed by parliament last month.

It stipulated that everyone in France would have to verify their age to access social media sites, and it was supposed to come into effect in January 2027. Macron was eager for the bill to be passed before the presidential election next year.

After Friday’s ruling, Macron asked Prime Minister Sebastien Lecornu to work on a new “legally robust draft” of the legislation.

Last month, Amnesty International responded to the French parliament’s decision to impose the social media ban on teens, urging lawmakers to focus their efforts on forcing companies to redesign their apps, including what it described as “addictive features”.

“There is no doubt that regulating platforms to protect children is an imperative of our time. We commend states for taking social media harms seriously but rather than pursuing blanket bans, efforts should be on forcing platforms to abandon their reckless pursuit of profit to the detriment of human rights,” Secretary General Agnes Callamard said.

“Building safe platforms requires a robust response. To ensure platforms are spaces where children can access community, connection and knowledge in a healthy and safe way, governments should first focus on banning the features that drive harm, including engagement-based algorithms that Amnesty International’s research has shown can draw children into rabbit holes of depressive and suicidal content.”

SACRAMENTO — Proposed legislation to protect animals from “Frankenstein”-like medical experimentation died in the state Senate on Thursday, and supporters blame election year politics for its demise.

Assembly Bill 1382 by Assemblymember Leticia Castillo (R-Home Gardens) would have banned the sale of genetically modified animals in California, such as glow-in-the-dark rabbits and horned “unicorn” horses.

While the business of cosmetically modified, futuristic-looking pets remains in its infancy, animal rights groups worry that eventually the creatures will be created, sold and later discarded in crowded municipal shelters.

Castillo’s bill passed unanimously in the Assembly earlier this year and sailed through the Senate Judiciary Committee in June with bipartisan support.

On Thursday, the legislation died in the Senate Appropriations Committee. The chair of that powerful committee is Sen. Sabrina Cervantes (D-Riverside) whose sister, Clarissa Cervantes, is challenging Castillo in the Nov. 3 election.

Cervantes never brought up the bill during Thursday’s hearing, which effectively kills it. Cervantes’ office didn’t respond to requests about why the legislation died.

Judie Mancuso, the founder of Social Compassion in Legislation, the bill’s sponsor, called the outcome “ludicrous.”

“When you’ve worked in the Capitol as long as I have, you understand that good bills can become political assets or political liabilities during an election cycle,” said Mancuso.

Castillo pledged Thursday to continue her focus on animals and cosmetic genetic engineering.

“This bill was never about politics — it was about protecting animals from being turned into novelty products,” Castillo said in a statement. “I’m disappointed AB 1382 did not move forward, but I am not done fighting for these animals. The technology that makes ‘designer pets’ possible isn’t going away, and neither am I.”

A 2025 Wired article entitled “Your Next Pet Could Be a Glowing Rabbit” profiled a Texas company seeking to create gene-edited pets. Josie Zayner, the founder of the company, told the Times in July that she opposed Castillo’s bill.

Castillo, at a hearing earlier this year, said she understands the concept of gene-editing animals for health reasons, but doesn’t want to see the alterations for cosmetic reasons.

Glow-in-the dark fish were exempt from her bill, which proposed civil penalties of at least $5,000.

Though the Judicial Council of California, the policy-making body for the courts, reviewed the legislation and didn’t have any fiscal concerns about it, the Senate Appropriations Committee analysis warned of “potentially significant workload cost pressures to the state funded trial court system” to resolve any civil cases related to the bill.

“The fiscal impact of this bill to the courts will depend on many unknowns, including the number of cases filed and the factors unique to each case,” the analysis stated.

The Democratic-controlled legislature uses appropriations committees to cull through hundreds of bills placed on what is referred to as the “suspense file.”

Officially, the suspense file is a tool for legislative leaders to evaluate costly bills by weighing them against one another and deciding what to advance to a vote by the Senate and Assembly. Unofficially, it’s used as a way for Democrats who control the Legislature to kill controversial bills out of the public eye.

California Democrats are making an aggressive push to unseat Castillo from the Assembly in the November election, Politico reported.

Castillo defeated Clarissa Cervantes in 2024 by nearly 600 votes to represent parts of Riverside County and San Bernardino County. Castillo lost to then-Assemblymember Sabrina Cervantes in 2022.

After the bill was moved to the Senate Appropriations Committee earlier this year, animal advocates reached out to state Senate Pro Tempore Monique Limón’s office to question the move.

“It’s my belief that there is some kind of political game going on,” Michelle Kelly, chief executive of the nonprofit welfare organization Los Angeles Rabbit Foundation, told the Times last month.

“Why would anyone not want to move forward with this bill?” Kelly said.

A representative for Limón declined to comment.

American middle-distance runner Jonah Koech has been banned from the sport for three years for blood doping.

The US Anti-Doping Agency (USADA) said Koech’s doping violation was identified after “highly atypical blood values in his athlete biological passport (ABP)”.

An ABP tracks an athlete’s blood values over time to identify signs of doping even without a positive drug test.

Koech had emerged as the surprise winner in men’s 1500m at the US Outdoor Championships last year, finishing ahead of Ethan Strand and 2024 Olympic gold medallist Cole Hocker in a meet record three minutes 30.17 seconds.

His title has now been stripped after the 29-year-old accepted the ban “for the use of a prohibited substance and/or method”, USADA said.

DIANA Vickers has been branded “unreal” by adoring fans as she stripped to a bright red bikini.

The X Factor alum, who recently revealed to The Sun the impact of celibacy on her life, was seen soaking up the sunshine on a beach holiday to Portugal.

She flashed a smile as she crouched down on the sands in her two-piece, with her blonde locks blowing in the sea breeze.

Diana, 35, went make-up free for the sizzling snaps, which captured her toned figure and glowing holiday tan.

She added a simple red Emoji love heart for her caption, though fans were quick to comment.

One wrote: “Hahahaa yes babe,” as a second simply put: “Unreal”.

DIANA VICKERS

I swore off casual sex after dating disaster but rule transformed my libido

Di & Di

Diana Vickers reveals invite to ‘party’ at Leo DiCaprio’s home & his dating system

A fan then added: “You’re so fit,” as another gushed: “Looking amazing and so gorgeous”.

One follower then put: “Always flawless”.

Recently, The Sun exclusively reported how she celebrated her 12 months of celibacy by having sex with a colleague.

Opening up about her sex journey, Diana – who has appeared in BBC sitcoms Josh and Not Going Out – says she swore off sex to concentrate on her career and social life.

“I went celibate for a year just to see what would happen and I really thrived,” she says.

“I had such a great year with work and got every job I went up for.

“And then it got to the year mark, which I wanted to reach and I celebrated it by sleeping with someone I worked with.

“I was like (mimes pointing): ‘You! You have won the competition.’ And it was great.

“It was a really lovely experience with a really lovely guy, who I’ve stayed friends with since”.

Israel’s highest court heard a constitutional challenge to legislation banning UNRWA’s operations in Israel. Supporters said the laws are necessary for national security, while rights advocates argued they jeopardise access to aid and basic services for millions of Palestinians.

A new study by Australia’s internet regulator has revealed that more than eight in 10 young Australian teens and preteens are continuing to use social media platforms despite the government’s prohibition for children under 16.

The ban came into effect in December last year.

Here is what we know about how it’s going.

What did the latest report find?

Australia’s internet regulator, eSafety, said it had found that more than eight in 10 Australian under-16s are continuing to use social media despite being banned from doing so.

The report also found that most of those children aged 10 to 15 were using social media just as frequently in March as they had been before the ban came into force on December 10 last year.

“Most under-16s who had social media accounts before commencement were able to either retain them or create new ones at the three-month ⁠mark, with social media platforms’ failure to implement effective age assurance measures cited as the main reason,” eSafety said in a statement.

About half the children who retained their accounts said platforms had not checked their age, the most common reason they were able to stay on the services. Others said that their accounts listed them as aged 16 or older or ‌that age-checking ⁠systems had incorrectly determined they were older.

Prior to the ban, nearly 86 percent of children surveyed reported using at least one age-restricted platform. Three months later, that figure remained above 81 percent, the eSafety report said.

Around 58 percent of teenagers reported using social media daily, the report found. Before the ban, the number was roughly 60 percent.

The report showed minimal change in “sports and physical activity, arts and music, spending time with friends and family, and attendance at community events”.

At the time the new rule was introduced, experts warned that enforcing it would be extremely difficult.

Joanna Orlando, a researcher in digital wellbeing and the author of Generation Connected: How to Parent in a Digital World, told Al Jazeera in December last year: “Tech-savvy teens simply use VPNs, fake birth photos for face scans, or migrate to less regulated platforms like Lemon8, or to platforms not part of the ban like video games. Enforcement is proving to be difficult in the days leading up to the ban.”

In December 2025, Australia prohibited children under 16 from using social media platforms, becoming the world’s first country to do so. Video game platforms are not included in the ban.

The government said this was prompted by increasing concerns about the effects of cyberbullying, sexual exploitation and self-harm content on the mental and physical health of children and young people.

Research commissioned by the Australian government in 2023 found four out of five children aged eight to 16 use social media, often beginning between the ages of 10 and 12. That report was led by former National Australia Bank CEO Andrew Thorburn, who recommended age restrictions.

Under the law, 10 of the biggest social media platforms face $33m in fines if they fail to take “reasonable steps” to block Australian-based users younger than 16. Such steps include using age-verification tools to determine how old users are.

As of January 16, social media companies had revoked access to about 4.7 million accounts identified as belonging to children in Australia, according to officials.

“We stared down everybody who said it couldn’t be done, some of the most powerful and rich companies in the world and their supporters,” Australian Communications Minister Anika Wells told reporters in January.

However, several months later, it now appears that youngsters have been able to open new accounts with relative ease.

Days after Australia’s ban took effect, Reddit, one of the 10 platforms required to block minors, lodged a challenge to the ban in the High Court, while still complying with it. The case is still ongoing.

How has the Australian government responded to the latest findings?

On Saturday, Andrew Leigh, Australia’s assistant minister for productivity, competition, charities and treasury, defended the new law, arguing that the social media ban has already reshaped the “national debate” about the use of social media by children.

The ban has been “an important game changer in the conversation among parents”, Leigh said in televised remarks.

“We’ve had millions of accounts shut down,” he said.

“We never expected that this would have 100 percent compliance. We don’t get 100 percent compliance out of minimum drinking age laws, but it’s still appropriate that we have that law on the books.”

While social media has long provided easy access to unregulated and often harmful content, misinformation and hate speech, the recent explosion of AI‑generated material poses new risks to the wellbeing of children and young people, experts say.

The American Psychological Association published an advisory last year warning that generative artificial intelligence (AI) systems can amplify harmful content such as violent or sexual videos.

It also added that adolescents are less likely than adults to question the accuracy of AI-generated content. “They may also be unaware of the persuasive intent underlying an AI system’s advice or bias,” the advisory stated.

AI can also amplify pre-existing societal prejudices, according to Ayo Tometi, co-creator of the US-based antiracist movement Black Lives Matter.

Children worldwide are also worried about the misuse of AI for online child sexual exploitation and “deepfakes”, according to research by the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) on children’s perspectives and AI, which it published in October 2025.

Following the introduction of Australia’s landmark law, some other countries are contemplating similar bans.

In the United Kingdom, the government has announced that it also plans to introduce a ban on social media platforms such as TikTok, Snapchat and Instagram from spring 2027 onward. 

Messaging platforms such as WhatsApp and Signal, educational tools, and e-commerce and music streaming will be excluded.

The government will announce the new regulations by the end of this year.

In November 2025, Denmark’s government said it also plans to prohibit social media platforms for children under 15, saying it had secured majority support in parliament. The ban is due to come into effect later this year.

Around the same time, Malaysia said it would ban social media accounts for people under 16 from this year.

In April, Greek Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis formally announced plans to prohibit social media access for children under 15 from January 1, 2027, subject to parliamentary approval.

July 31 (UPI) — A federal judge on Friday turned down a request by Elon Musk’s artificial intelligence company, xAI, to block a Minnesota law banning nudification technology.

Minnesota in May became the first state in the nation to pass legislation banning the practice of using AI to digitally remove clothing from a pictured individual.

xAI, which develops the chatbot and image generator Grok, filed the suit over the ban Tuesday.

“The court respectfully denies the request for a temporary restraining order before tomorrow,” U.S. District Judge Donovan Frank ruled on Friday. “xAI filed the motion on July 29, 2026, nearly three months after the law was signed, and only three days before the law is set to take effect.

“Such a delay in bringing the action and the motion suggests that harm is not immediate.”

The federal judge set a hearing on Aug. 19 to evaluate the lawsuit.

“See you in court, creep,” Gov. Tim Walz said in a statement on X, referring to Musk.

In its lawsuit, xAI argues that the Minnesota law “imposes an overbroad, content-based ban on free speech and the tools of visual expression in a clumsy attempt to prohibit ‘nudification.'”

“xAI accordingly does not contest Minnesota’s interest in prohibiting the dissemination of artificially generated nude images of real people without their consent,” the company wrote in court documents. “But the statute Minnesota enacted extends far beyond that goal, exposing a wide array of protected speech to civil liability and government sanctions.”

Minnesota’s law would apply fines of $500,000 to websites and apps providing nudification technology.

Musk’s company has faced intense scrutiny since a version of Grok, released in December, began generating thousands of sexualized images, including some that appeared to be of minors.

The company in January changed its policies, but Grok continued to generate sexualized images as late as April.

SACRAMENTO — California lawmakers rejected legislation that would have banned pesticides with so-called “forever” chemicals from use on California’s farms, a restriction strongly opposed by the state’s billion-dollar agriculture community.

Assembly Bill 1603 by Assemblymember Nick Schultz (D-Burbank) would have phased out the use of pesticides that contain perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances, known as PFAS chemicals, a family of compounds that can be lasting and harmful to humans.

Representatives for agricultural groups argued at committee hearings last month that banning the chemicals was an overreach that would result in higher numbers of imports of food from other states and stifle innovation in developing new pesticides.

The latest version of the bill, which will be considered when the state legislature resumes its session next month, requires the state to list pesticides with PFAS in its public database.

“I’m disappointed,” Schultz said in an interview with the Times, adding that he intends to still push to phase out PFAS chemicals.

The bill marks the latest back-and-forth over PFAS, chemicals that are found in many different consumer, commercial and industrial products and are known as forever chemicals because some of their components don’t easily break down.

State regulators and environmental groups disagree on the definition of the chemicals, making it difficult to find a consensus on regulations or health risks.

Gov. Gavin Newsom last year vetoed a bill that would have prohibited the sale and distribution of popular consumer products, including cookware, dental floss and cleaning products, that contain PFAS chemicals.

The governor, in his veto message, cited affordability concerns. At the same time, the state has passed various laws intended to protect people from PFAS, including banning them in food packaging and firefighting foam.

Studies show that exposure to certain levels of PFAS may lead to decreased fertility and developmental delays in children and increase the risk of cancers, according to the Environmental Protection Agency, and the vast majority of PFAS chemicals have not been tested for human health effects.

The Environmental Working Group, or EWG, an advocacy group based in Washington, D.C., released a study in March that found that nearly 40% of California’s conventionally grown fruits and vegetables tested contained PFAS residues, including 90% of peaches and nectarines.

The EWG, one of the bill’s supporters, uses a broader criteria to define PFAS than the state and federal authorities.

A spokesperson for California’s Dept. of Pesticide Regulation, which oversees pesticide use, said the EWG report looked at detections of the PFAS, but the state “looks at how the detections compare to federal tolerance levels.”

At a June Senate committee hearing on Schultz’s bill, EWG’s chief science officer, David Andrews, said that PFAS pesticides “fall into a regulatory blind spot.” He also said regulators, including the state, have “been inadequate with respect to evaluating immune system harm or the cumulative impacts of these very small PFAS.”

A spokesperson for the Dept. of Pesticide Regulation declined to comment on Schultz’s bill.

Taylor Triffo, a representative for a coalition of California agricultural associations, said at a different Senate hearing in June that the bill’s original language to ban new PFAS chemicals “would deny California farmers access to [the] next generation of crop protection tools that are safer, more targeted, require lower use rates and help address emerging pests and diseases.”

Representatives for agriculture groups said at hearings last month that they don’t object to the state flagging PFAS chemicals in the state database.

Nearly half of the country’s vegetables and more than three-quarters of its fruits and nuts come from California, according to the state.

Sen. Anna Caballero (D-Merced), chair of the Senate Committee on Agriculture, called pesticide use a “balance” at the June hearing before voting for the amended version.

“Part of the challenge agriculture is facing right now is pest invasion from other countries where the critters have moved on plants and in soil and have come into the state,” she said. “We’ve got to do everything, I think, we can to maintain our agricultural production, because we produce products that are produced almost nowhere else in the country.”

Isabella Quinonez, assistant director of Public Affairs at the California Farm Bureau, said her group objected to the original bill because it would have restricted products based on their chemical class rather than on a pesticide’s scientific evaluation of risk.

“We’re confident in the Department of Pesticide Regulation’s rigorous, science-based regulatory process, which includes residue studies, groundwater monitoring, and ongoing reevaluations,” Quinonez said.

Schultz told The Times he hopes to work with the Dept. of Pesticide Regulation on oversight in the coming years. He rejected any premise that there is “absolutely nothing to worry about, nothing off [with PFAS], because that’s just inconsistent with the science.”

Times staff writer Susanne Rust contributed to this report.

Iran rejected US President Donald Trump’s claim that ships damaged by Iran in the Gulf would be compensated from frozen Iranian funds. IRGC spokesperson Ebrahim Zolfaghari warned that any vessel taking such money will be banned from transiting the Strait of Hormuz.

July 25 (UPI) — The Department of Agriculture on Friday lifted a ban on cattle imports from Mexico that had been in place to contain the spread of a parasite threatening U.S. livestock.

USDA Secretary Brooke Rollins said Douglas, Ariz., would be the first port of entry to be open on Aug. 24.

All cattle imports from Mexico were halted by the Biden administration in November 2024, when the first cases of the flesh-eating New World screwworm were detected in the south of the country.

“The closure of the Southern ports of entry for the last year has been a tough but necessary action to control the spread of NWS in Mexico and protect the American livestock industry,” Rollins said in a statement.

But closing the border came at a cost, Rollins said, causing “a significant economic challenge to various sectors of our industries in Texas.”

“There is no doubt that closing the ports last May caused higher prices in beef,” the agriculture secretary told reporters last month. “We’re obviously very focused on affordability, but the president agreed when we briefed him that we had to keep our livestock producers as safe as possible with this outbreak moving through Mexico.”

Despite border closures, there have been multiple cases of New World screwworm detected in the United States.

Paralympic medallist Daphne Schrager insists she has “never cheated” after being given a two-year ban following an “unintentional” positive test for a banned substance.

Schrager, who won a silver medal at Paris 2024, tested positive for the banned substance Ligandrol, which selectively builds muscle and bone mass.

However, the ban has been backdated to start when she was initially suspended on 2 June 2025.

It will end on 1 June 2027, meaning Schrager could still compete at the 2028 Paralympic Games in Los Angeles. However, she has been left out of the England squad for the Commonwealth Games, currently taking place in Glasgow.

The substance was found after the 25-year-old completed an out-of-competition test last year.

UK Anti-Doping (UKAD) said Schrager argued that she had been exposed to environmental contamination with two possible scenarios.

She said she may have been contaminated at a gym that she had attended to receive a massage, or at a shared home address.

However, a UKAD tribunal found that while Schrager had not intentionally used a banned substance, she had not proved that it was an inadvertent environmental contamination.

In a lengthy statement on Instagram, external, Schrager said she had paid for hair and nail analysis as part of her attempts to prove her innocence – but because the exact source of contamination could not be proven, she had been banned.

“In June last year, I received news that turned my world upside down,” she said. “I had tested positive in an anti-doping test for a trace amount of Ligandrol, detected at 0.0006ng, resulting in my suspension from cycling since that time.

“I want to be very clear: I have never cheated, nor have I ever knowingly taken any banned substance. Facing the possibility of a four-year ban unless I could prove that the result was unintentional has been incredibly distressing.”

Schrager said the panel had confirmed she did not intentionally use or ingest Ligandrol, and she had proved that inadvertent environmental contamination from a minute trace of Ligandrol was to blame for the positive test.

She said the trace of Ligandrol would have provided her with no performance advantage. As a result, none of her results have been disqualified.

“In cases like mine, by the time an athlete is informed of their positive test, too much time has passed to identify the exact source of contamination with the certainty that the rules demand,” Schrager added. “That is not a failure of honesty or effort, it is simply too much of a burden to be met in every case.”

“This is one of the most difficult periods of my life. Losing my contract, my team and the structure that had long shaped my purpose and identity left me facing a level of uncertainty I had never known.”

Schrager, who has cerebral palsy, said the impact on her mental health has been “significant and at times overwhelming” – but vowed she would return to action in 2027.

She won Team GB’s first medal of the 2024 Paralympics with silver in the women’s C1-3 3000m individual pursuit.

She went on to win two gold medals at the Para-cycling Road World Cup in May 2025 in the C2 class – before being suspended a month later.

July 22 (UPI) — The House of Representatives voted Wednesday to pass a bill that adds new limits on congressional stock trading, though it does not quite enact a complete ban.

House Republicans also attached a section requiring people to provide photo identification in order to vote, a provision from the controversial SAVE America Act, The Hill reported.

Lawmakers voted 232-198 to pass the bill, which would still need to pass the Senate. Thirteen Democrats joined Republicans in voting for it.

The bill would restrict active members of Congress, their spouses and any dependent children from buying new stocks of any publicly traded company. It would allow them to keep stocks they already own. Lawmakers would also have to file a public notice with the House clerk at least seven days before they sell a stock.

Rep. Bryan Steil, R-Wisc., chairman of the House Administration Committee, led the bill and said it is “critical to restoring public trust in this institution.”

“I believe it is time we just stop allowing members to buy new stock,” he said. “Doing so removes the appearance of impropriety altogether.”

Many Democrats said the bill doesn’t go far enough — it doesn’t apply to the executive branch — and opposed the addition of changes to voting measures.

“House Republicans are pushing (a) voter suppression bill that will upend mail-in voting and throw the elections into chaos, and are trying to trick members into supporting it by linking it to a partial stock trading ban that falls short of the full congressional stock trading ban the American people want,” Rep. Seth Magaziner, D-R.I., told CNN.

Magaziner previously co-led a stalled bipartisan bill to ban stock trading.

If lawmakers violate the new rules, they would have to pay a fee of $2,000 or 10% of the value of the transaction, whichever is greater, and forfeit any profit.

Rangers manager Derek McInnes has been given a four-game touchline ban, with one suspended, for calling the decision to award Celtic a late penalty at Motherwell “disgusting”.

The comments, made at the end of last season when McInnes was in charge of Hearts, related to a stoppage-time spot-kick given for handball that was converted by Kelechi Iheanacho.

Celtic’s 2-1 victory at Fir Park kept them one point behind Hearts, who they beat to the title a few days later in a final-day decider.

Speaking to Sky Sports after a win against Falkirk at Tynecastle, McInnes said: “When you heard Celtic got a 96th minute penalty that was going to VAR and they were checking it, you just assume what’s happened is they get the penalty.

“Having seen it again, it’s disgusting. It is.

“I don’t think it’s a penalty kick.

“But we’re up against it. We’re up against everybody.”

Following the late drama at Fir Park, referee John Beaton’s contact details were posted online, with police keeping his home under surveillance. A teenager was then charged “in connection with a data protection offence”.

SFA head of referees Willie Collum backed the call, citing “clear evidence” with Sam Nicholson’s hand and arm “in an unnatural position” and the resulting contact “a punishable handball”.

Motherwell and their former midfielder Elliott Watt have already been sanctioned over social media posts on the matter.

Watt, who has since joined Turkish club Samsunspor, received a four-match suspension, having described it as “the worst VAR decision in history”.

Motherwell were fined £5,000 for releasing a video with the caption: “As the world of football mocks our game, we simply have to draw a line in the sand and shift the focus.”

The Scottish FA compliance officer issued complaints to all three parties under disciplinary rule 72 stating that: ‘No recognised football body, club, official, team official or other member of team staff, player or other person under the jurisdiction of the SFA, shall in an interview, a ‘blog’ on the internet, on a social networking or micro-blogging site, or in any other manner calculated or likely to lead to publicity (i) criticise the decision(s) and/or performance(s) of any or all match official(s) in such a way as to indicate bias or incompetence on the part of such match official; or (ii) make remarks about such match official(s) which impinge on his character.”

The suspended ban for McInnes will be applicable if he is in breach of rule 72 again before the end of the 2026-27 season.