bans

The incident is the latest in a pattern of Israeli measures in the occupied territory since the Gaza genocide began.

Israel has barred the grand mufti of Jerusalem and Palestine from entering the Al-Aqsa Mosque compound for one week.

The Jerusalem Governorate said in a post on Facebook that Sheikh Muhammad Hussein was detained by Israeli forces after delivering his Friday sermon at Al-Aqsa Mosque. Later, the governorate confirmed that Hussein had been released, but was temporarily banned by Israeli authorities from entering Islam’s third-holiest site in occupied East Jerusalem for one week, with the possibility of the ban being renewed.

According to the Quds News Network, Hussein was arrested for the contents of his sermon, during which he prayed for mercy for Palestinians killed by Israel and relief for those held in Israeli prisons.

In a message to Al Jazeera, the Jerusalem Governorate said “the arrest was carried out in order to serve him [Hussein] with an order banning him from entering Al-Aqsa Mosque for one week, with the possibility of renewal. This is not the first time such a measure has been taken against him.”

Israel has not commented on Hussein’s brief arrest or banning.

The incident is the latest in a pattern of escalating Israeli measures in occupied Palestinian territory since the start of the genocide in Gaza in October 2023.

More than 1,100 Palestinians have been killed in the occupied West Bank since then, including at least 243 children, amid what rights groups say is an intensifying campaign of military raids, settler violence and expanding Israeli control.

On Friday, six Palestinians, including children, were reportedly injured during an attack by settlers in Huwara, Nablus.

Local sources said settlers set upon a Palestinian family, including an elderly man, using pepper spray and physically beating them.

The attack took place on land belonging to the family. Israeli forces were reportedly present and protected the settlers during the attack.

Israeli forces then allegedly assaulted residents and arrested three members of the family, including 80-year-old Ibrahim Ismail al-Jabour.

The incident comes amid growing international concern over violence in the occupied West Bank. Last month, Amnesty International released a report accusing the Israeli government of carrying out a campaign of ethnic cleansing in the territory. The report concluded that the campaign was state-led and not the result of rogue settlers or far-right ministers.

CHEYENNE, Wyo. — She refused to ban books, many of them about racism and the experiences of LGBTQ+ people. And for that, Suzette Baker was fired as a library director in a rural county in central Texas.

“I’m kind of persona non grata around here,” said Baker, who had headed the Kingsland, Texas, library system until she refused to take down a prominent display of several books people had sought to ban over the years.

Now, Baker is fighting back. She and two other librarians who were similarly fired have filed workplace discrimination claims with the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. And as culture war battles to keep certain books from children and teens put public and school libraries increasingly under pressure, their goal is redemption and, where possible, eventual reinstatement.

So far, it’s a wait-and-see whether the claims will succeed — and set new precedent — in the struggle between teachers and librarians around the country who oppose book bans and conservative activists who say some books are inappropriate for young minds.

The fight has involved a record number of book-banning efforts, some libraries cutting ties with the American Library Assn. — which opposes book bans — and even attempts to prosecute librarians for allowing children to access books some consider too graphic.

At least one terminated librarian has gained a measure of success.

Brooky Parks, who was fired for defending programs on anti-racism and LGBTQ+ stories she organized for teens at the Erie Community Library north of Denver, won a $250,000 settlement in September. Reached through the Colorado Civil Rights Division, the settlement requires her former employer to give librarians more say in decisions involving library programs.

Parks’ settlement with the High Plains Library District capped a stressful eight-month period without work, when community donations helped her avoid losing her home. And it will probably resolve Parks’ claim with the EEOC, said attorney Iris Halpern, who represents Parks and the other two librarians.

“I just wasn’t going to back down from it. It was just the right thing to do,” said Parks, now a librarian at the University of Denver.

After her firing in 2022, Baker filed an EEOC claim against her employer, the Llano County Library System in Kingsland. And in September 2023, Terri Lesley filed a claim over her firing last summer as executive director of the Campbell County Public Library System in Gillette, Wyo.

Halpern, with the Denver firm Rathod Mohamedbhai, compared the wrongful-termination claims to civil rights-era legal battles.

“It is honestly sad that we’ve gotten to this point. But history is a constant struggle, and we have to learn from our past,” she said.

The 1964 Civil Rights Act established the EEOC to enforce laws against workplace discrimination. One legal expert thinks the librarians might be able to prevail on the grounds that, under those laws, employees may not be discriminated against for associating with certain classes of people.

“With any case, the devil can be in the details in terms of how the facts come out and what they can present. But these are definitely actionable claims,” said Rutgers University law professor David Lopez, a former EEOC general counsel.

An EEOC investigation can take more than a year. After that, the EEOC may attempt to reach a settlement with the employer out of court, sue on the employee’s behalf or issue a letter saying the employee has grounds to sue on their own.

The librarians haven’t yet received an EEOC response and none is expected before the end of next year.

“I would love to be optimistic,” Baker said. “I know there are a lot of people in this community who are just absolutely behind the library being open and free and equal for all. And there’s a lot of people who aren’t. So it’s a hard, hard situation.”

EEOC spokesperson Victor Chen declined to comment on specific filings, saying, “We can’t even confirm or deny we have these complaints.”

The county attorney offices and other representatives of the government officials who fired Parks, Baker and Lesley did not return phone and email messages seeking comment, or declined to comment.

At her Texas library, Baker displayed several books that have been targeted in recent book bans and a sign that read: “We put the ‘lit’ in literature” — a reference to a Tennessee pastor’s recent burning of books.

Baker was fired after refusing to take down the display and signs — considered the last straw after she resisted book banning in her library.

In March, a federal judge ordered 17 books returned to Kingsland library shelves while a citizen lawsuit against book banning proceeded. The works ranged from children’s books to award-winning nonfiction, including “They Called Themselves the K.K.K: The Birth of an American Terrorist Group,” by Susan Campbell Bartoletti; and “It’s Perfectly Normal: Changing Bodies, Growing Up, Sex, and Sexual Health,” by Robie Harris.

“Content-based restrictions on speech are presumptively unconstitutional and subject to strict scrutiny,” Texas U.S. District Judge Robert Pitman wrote in his March 30 ruling. He cited a 2015 U.S. Supreme Court ruling that barred communities from banning signs because of what they say.

The Llano County Commissioners Court decided against closing the county’s three libraries in response to the ruling. Closing the libraries would have echoed the history across the U.S. of closing swimming pools rather than desegregating them, Halpern said.

Like Baker, Lesley had trouble finding work after being fired from the library system she directed in Gillette, Wyo. Her dismissal followed two years of turmoil over challenges to the books available and library programs.

Some of the same county officials who opposed a transgender magician’s plans to perform at the library went on to join local residents in seeking to ban books, according to Lesley’s EEOC filing.

Baker and Lesley both were fired after local officials appointed new library board members willing to be more aggressive about pulling books.

“Our county commissioners appointed board members who were sympathetic to the people who wanted to remove the books. And it was a long dance to try to get it there. And in the end they had to fire me, I think, in order to be able to meet their goal,” Lesley said.

The Campbell County Commission skirted a deputy county attorney’s recommendation not to appoint past applicants for the board without reinterviewing them along with new candidates, according to Lesley’s EEOC claim.

“I saw this as a well-executed attack on the library by a group of citizens and elected officials. It was an attack on the LGBTQ+ community as well,” she said. “And it was an attack on the books.”

Salzburg has begun enforcing a summer ban on visitors driving into its historic centre, picking up a policy modelled by other car-choked European cities plagued by overtourism.

Authorities in Austria’s fourth largest municipal area said they hoped the “less traffic, more city” restrictions in July and August would reduce the number of vehicle entries by 1,000 a day.

As part of the campaign against gridlock, park-and-ride facilities are offering a day ticket including travel on local public transport for five people for €7.50 (£6.45).

“We don’t want chaotic traffic situations like we saw last year,” said the mayor, Bernhard Auinger, when he announced the measure in May. “It is aimed at day trippers who travel by car from farther afield. It is important to me that residents of the central Salzburg area and business-related traffic are not affected by this.”

Auinger said tourists themselves, drawn to attractions such as Mozart’s birthplace and the baroque-style 17th-century cathedral, would also benefit from the policy. “It’s certainly much better than spending hours stuck in traffic. And it also makes life a lot easier for the people who live and work in the city of Salzburg.”

The mayor said mounting complaints by residents about traffic during the summer months had prompted the city to take action. “We basically allowed tourists to drive into our sitting room,” he told the news website Salzburg24.

Patrolling police officers will impose fines of up to €80 on any drivers with numberplates from outside the Salzburg region entering the old town in the radius around the Staatsbrücke (state bridge) spanning the Salzach River.

Exceptions will be granted to commuters, delivery vehicles, taxis and rental cars, as well as disabled visitors and hotel guests with a reservation confirmation in the restricted zone. German motorists from the neighbouring Bavarian areas of Berchtesgaden and Bad Reichenhall are also exempted.

Heidi Strobl, of the local tourism board, said Salzburg’s policy, approved by the city council in May, had taken a page from the zona a traffico limitato (limited traffic zones) in Italian cities such as Rome, Florence and Pisa as well as a ban in Dubrovnik, Croatia, after they had become inundated with tourist vehicles during the summer months.

Salzburg, whose historic centre is a Unesco world heritage site, has just over 158,000 residents but records more than 3m overnight stays each year. Last year’s celebrations of the 60th anniversary of The Sound of Music, the classic movie filmed in the Salzburg region, spurred an extra tourist boom.

June 30 (UPI) — The U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday announced that it will decide if states and cities can bar people from owning semiautomatic weapons, including AR-15-style rifles.

The court had previously declined to hear this challenge in 2025 and other times previously, CNN reported. It includes an appeal from two Illinois residents who want to buy AR-15 rifles but cannot because of a county ordinance making it illegal to buy or possess some assault weapon types. The case will be combined with one involving Connecticut residents who challenged the state’s ban on the weapons.

The high court’s current 6-3 conservative majority often backs gun rights, NBC News reported. When the court declined to hear a similar case last year, conservative Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote in an opinion that the court “should and presumably will address the AR-15 issue soon,” CNN reported. He said most states do not ban the weapons and those that do are “something of an outlier.”

Fifteen states and the District of Columbia ban the weapons.

People have used assault weapons such as AR-15 rifles and other semiautomatic rifles in multiple mass shootings, including the 2012 shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Connecticut. Twenty children and six adults died in that shooting, leading to the change in Connecticut’s laws to ban the weapons. Nineteen children and two adults died in a similar shooting involving semiautomatic weapons in 2022 at an elementary school in Uvalde, Texas.

The court will hear the challenge in its next term, which starts in October.

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court announced Tuesday that it will hear a 2nd Amendment challenge to the gun laws in Connecticut and Cook County, Ill., that ban most semiautomatic assault weapons.

Before leaving for the summer recess, the justices issued orders on new cases that will be heard in the fall. The new 2nd Amendment case figures to be a major test of what kinds of firearms and ammunition are off-limits to state or federal regulation.

The outcome will affect California and all the states led by Democrats that strictly regulate or prohibit semiautomatic rifles, such as the AR-15.

Gun-rights advocates say these are among the most common and popular weapons in the country, and they should not banned in some states.

In response, Connecticut state attorneys said only about 2% of Americans own assault weapons, and they rarely use them for self-defense.

Since 1989, California has prohibited the sale and possession of most semiautomatic rifles and pistols that can fire more than 10 shots before reloading. Nine other states led by Democrats have similar laws.

State lawmakers said these rapid-fire guns are not needed for self-defense but can be a weapon of mass murder. All of the blue-state bans could be struck down next year if the court’s conservatives rule in favor of the 2nd Amendment claim.

Gun-rights advocates say firearms in “common use” by law-abiding owners cannot be prohibited by the government.

Four of the court’s conservatives have said in past dissents they believe the state bans on assault weapons run afoul of the 2nd Amendment. They are Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel A. Alito, Neil M. Gorsuch and Brett M. Kavanaugh.

That suggests the fate of those state laws depends on Chief Justice John G. Roberts and Justice Amy Coney Barrett.

Joining in support of the gun-rights challenge were the state attorneys for Montana, Idaho and 25 other Republican-led states.

They urged the court to prevent liberal judges and states led by Democrats from “rewriting the 2nd Amendment … to allow hostile jurisdictions to continue infringing on their citizens’ core constitutional right to keep and bear arms.”

In 2016, California’s voters approved a ballot measure that makes possession of large-capacity magazines illegal. At least 10 states have similar laws, but they apply only to the manufacture and sale of large-capacity magazines.

Gun-rights advocates sued in San Diego, leading to nearly a decade of back-and-forth litigation. A federal judge struck down these restrictions under the 2nd Amendment, but the state appealed. They were eventually upheld by the 9th Circuit Court in an en banc ruling.

Meanwhile, the 7th Circuit Court in Chicago has upheld an Illinois law and the Cook County ordinance prohibiting semiautomatic rifles and pistols. Its opinion said rapid-fire guns do not differ significantly “from machine guns and military-grade weaponry,” which can be banned under the 2nd Amendment.

Before Tuesday, the justices had repeatedly refused to weigh in on whether the 2nd Amendment’s right to “keep and bear arms” includes the right to semiautomatic “assault weapons” and large-capacity magazines.

Since 2015, the court has turned down gun-rights appeals from blue states like Illinois and Maryland over their bans on “assault weapons,” despite dissents from Justices Thomas, Alito and Gorsuch.

As an appeals court judge in Washington, D.C., Kavanaugh voted to strike down the city’s ban on assault weapons.

Three years after John Roberts became chief justice, the court ruled for the first time in 2008 that the 2nd Amendment protected individual gun rights, not just state militias. But the 5-4 decision simply struck down a city’s ban on having a hand gun at home for self-defense.

Justice Antonin Scalia’s opinion in District of Columbia vs. Heller said the Constitution gives law-abiding persons a right to have weapons in “common use” for self-defense, but not “dangerous and unusual weapons.”

Ever since, advocates for gun rights and gun control have been arguing over whether semiautomatic guns with large-capacity magazines can be regulated because they are uniquely dangerous or are protected because they are very common.

In the past two years, the Supreme Court has a mixed record on gun regulation.

Last year, the justices in a 6-3 decision struck down a federal regulation that banned “bump stocks,” which allow rapid-fire shooting with a semiautomatic rifle.

That regulation was adopted in the first Trump administration in response to the mass shooting at an outdoor concert in Las Vegas where a lone gunman fired as many as 1,000 shots from a hotel window.

The conservative majority ruled the bump stock devices did not fit the definition of a prohibited machine gun.

Earlier this year, however, the court in a 7-2 decision upheld a regulation prohibiting unregistered “ghost guns” that were made by parts kits.

The US Supreme Court has ruled that states can ban transgender women from competing in female school and college sports.

The court considered cases from students in two different states who had challenged bans on participation. The two states, Idaho and West Virginia, enacted laws that required public school and college sports teams to compete in accordance with their sex recorded at birth.

One of the two challenges said the ban violates equal rights protections in the US Constitution. The other said it contradicts civil rights laws.

More than two dozen states have enacted bans since Idaho did so in 2020.

Under those state bans, a transgender woman – a biological male who identifies as a woman – is not permitted to compete in female sports at schools and colleges.

All nine justices on the court decided the state bans do not violate a civil rights law called Title IX which prohibits sex-based discrimination in schools.

But the judges were split along ideological lines on whether the bans contravene the constitution’s 14th Amendment guarantee of equal protection under the law.

The six conservative justices said it did not violate the constitution but the three liberal justices disagreed.

“The Constitution and Title IX do not require an overhaul of women’s and girls’ sports throughout America,” wrote Justice Brett Kavanaugh who authored the ruling.

In her partial dissent, Justice Sonia Sotomayor said the majority opinion had applied “a diminished view of equal protection” to sports.

The challenge launched in Idaho came from a transgender woman, Lindsay Hecox, a long distance runner, who lodged it shortly after the law was enacted. She was later granted an injunction by both a district court and an appeals court.

State lawmaker Barbara Ehardt, who introduced the law, said at the time of its passing that it would ensure “boys and men will not be able to take the place of girls and women in sports because it’s not fair”.

But in the appeals ruling, a panel of three judges found that the Idaho law violated constitutional rights. They said the state had failed to provide evidence that its ban protects “sex equality and opportunity for women athletes”.

President Donald Trump made the issue of transgender athletes in women’s sports a regular focus of his 2024 election campaign. Last year, he signed an executive order that aimed to ban transgender women from competing on female sports teams in schools and colleges.

Following that decision, the NCAA, the governing body for US college sports, banned transgender women from competing in women’s sports.

Supporters of the bans argued that transgender women had a biological advantage over athletes who were recorded female at birth.

When the International Olympic Committee (IOC) announced in March it was going to limit the women’s category of Olympic sports to biological females, it said its working group reviewed the latest scientific evidence over the previous 18 months and had concluded there was a “clear consensus”, external that “male sex provides a performance advantage in all sports and events that rely on strength, power and resistance” .

Those who opposed the bans argue that they unfairly discriminated against transgender students and dispute whether there is a scientific consensus that transgender women and girls have an inherent advantage.

June 26 (UPI) — Authorities in Paris implemented restrictions on drinking in public and takeout alcohol sales on Friday for the second time in five days, amid one of the most severe June heat waves on record.

In an effort to reduce stress on the capital’s hospitals, public consumption of alcohol will be banned from noon through 7 a.m. Saturday, local time, and from noon on Saturday through 7 a.m. on Sunday, and can only be sold in bars and restaurants between 6 p.m. and 7 a.m on both days.

Prime Minister Sebastien Lecornu said the health alert level was being raised to its highest, to boost hospital staffing and protect the vulnerable while Paris police chief Patrice Faure said the the capacity of hospitals to cope was “reaching a saturation point.”

“As you know, drinking alcohol with the sun beating down can have a devastating effect,” said Faure.

The bans coincided with a France-Norway game at the FIFA World Cup in Boston, due to kick off in the early hours of Saturday, local time.

Paris Pride, which was due to run Thursday through Sunday, was moved to September, and the Solidays music festival, scheduled to be held over the same period, was canceled because police felt going ahead with either amid the searing temperatures posed a major public health risk.

On Thursday, a three-year-old child died in a hot car in Saint-Gratien in the northern Paris suburbs.

As Paris baked in record temperatures that peaked at 40.9 degrees Celsius earlier in the week, Health Minister Stephanie Rist warned the health impacts of the heat were not restricted to the elderly, infants and other vulnerable groups.

“Even if you are young and in good health with no underlying medical issues, this heat will affect you too. Young people are also suffering from cardiac arrests,” she said, explaining that the Paris ambulance responded to a four-fold jump in cardiac arrests, compared with normal, during a 24-hour period.

Paris mayor Emmanuel Gregoire said the mortality rate was on the increase and urged people, especially the young, to suspend normal physical activity such as jogging.

“We must not believe we are invulnerable. It’s fine to take a couple of days off from exercising,” he said.

June 23 (UPI) — A federal judge has ruled that the Trump administration cannot allow states to bar federal food assistance recipients from using their benefits to buy soft drinks, snacks and candy, finding the Agriculture Department lacked the authority to approves such restrictions.

About 42.1 million low-income individuals across the nation receive federal food assistance through the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, better known as SNAP, which allows recipients to use the benefits to purchase most foods, excluding alcohol, tobacco and hot prepared foods.

Amid soaring obesity rates across the United States, 22 states received waivers from the Trump administration to exempt certain foods and beverages from the federal definition of food to ban SNAP recipients from using the benefit to purchase these items. Though the waivers vary by state, they all target high-calorie, sugary foods, such as soft drinks, energy drinks, candy and others.

In March, five SNAP recipients in Colorado, Iowa, West Virginia, Tennessee and Nebraska sued the Trump administration over its approval of waivers, saying the restrictions were vague, complicated and counterintuitive, causing significant confusion for both them and retailers, while harming SNAP recipients who rely on sugary beverages to manage chronic health conditions, such as diabetes.

In her ruling Monday, U.S. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson found the Agriculture Department’s waivers violated the Administrative Procedure Act, stating the department acted in excess of its authority and without following public input noticed procedures as required by law.

“The secretary purports to waive not just a mere administrative or technical obstacle, but the very definition of ‘food’ as it was laid down by Congress,” the President Barack Obama appointee wrote in her 68-page ruling.

“Neither the USDA nor the states can force this square peg into a round hole to avoid the plain language of the statute and the requirement of 2026(k),” which requires SNAP projects to be consistent with the program’s food-assistance purpose.

The National Center for Law and Economic Justice, which filed the lawsuit, celebrated Monday’s ruling as “a major step in restoring essential food assistance to the millions of families that rely on SNAP nationwide.”

“This decision makes clear that the USDA cannot bypass the legal guardrails that establish how SNAP must operate across the country,” Katie Deabler, senior attorney at the NCLEJ, said in a statement.

“It affirms that families deserve a program that works without confusion.”

June 21 (UPI) — French police issued a ban on certain alcoholic drinks Sunday amid unusually high temperatures coinciding with one Paris’ largest street parties.

The order banned people from consuming certain high-alcohol content drinks after 8 a.m. Sunday along areas of Canal Saint-Martin and along riverside zones along the Seine.

Businesses were also banned from selling takeaway drinks after 1 p.m., with exemptions for restaurants and bars, Politico reported.

Paris hosts the Fête de la Musique (World Music Day) one of its largest street festivals, Sunday. Free concerts are held throughout the city, and residents are encouraged to play music outside in public spaces and neighborhoods.

This year’s festival is taking place during a heatwave that could see temperatures break 100 degree Fahrenheit in the coming week. The country issued Level 1 and Level 2 heat alerts Sunday for an area encompassing about 75% of its population.

“Very high temperatures are setting in for the long term,” the national meteorological service, Météo-France said, as cited by The Guardian. The agency said the heat would be of “exceptional severity and duration” and will likely break records.

Officials also put wildfire crews on alert in case of fire, and canceled some outdoor events. Some locations in France canceled concerts scheduled to take place before 7 p.m.

Begona Gomez is accused of using her position as the prime minister’s wife ⁠to secure work contracts.

The wife of Spain’s Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez has been barred from travelling abroad as she prepares to face trial on corruption charges.

Investigating judge Juan Carlos Peinado issued the ruling on Saturday, ordering Sanchez’s wife, Begona Gomez, to hand in her passport and appear in front of court twice per month until a verdict is issued. She is charged with embezzlement, influence peddling, corruption in business dealings and misappropriation of funds.

Gomez has consistently denied any wrongdoing in the case, which stems from a complaint filed by an anticorruption group with far-right ties. It focuses on the creation and management of a chair at Madrid’s Complutense University that was co-directed by Gomez, as well as the alleged use of public resources and personal connections to advance private interests.

Sanchez has dismissed the allegations against his wife as an attempt by the right wing to undermine his government. Sanchez’s Socialist Party has said Gomez is innocent and subject to a years-long campaign of political persecution

No date has yet been set for the politically explosive trial.

The case is one of several corruption investigations involving Sanchez’s allies that are approaching trial or already before the courts, increasing pressure on the prime minister.

Several close allies, including the Socialist Party’s number three ⁠and Sanchez’s former transport minister, are under investigation in cases involving alleged ⁠kickbacks linked to public works, oil ⁠and gas contracts, and the procurement of masks during the pandemic. They deny wrongdoing.

Separately, Spain’s High Court said it was investigating former ‌Prime Minister Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero over allegations he led a network that profited from lobbying public authorities ‌on ‌behalf of third parties, including airline Plus Ultra. He denies the claims.

Sanchez, who has not been named in any of the cases, has rejected opposition calls to step down and call early elections.

IT’S NO lie that Brits love a European break but behaving badly could turn your trip into a holiday nightmare.

Across Europe, countries have their own rules relating to tourists – from banned beach items to strict curfews.

And if you want to avoid a hefty fine this summer, you’ll want to know what the rules are for each country.

France

A number of major cities in France and holiday hotspots ban drinking alcohol between 4pm and 8pm, including along the Paris riverbanks and the French Riviera.

When it comes to heading to the beach, make sure to not take any of it home with you as a souvenir.

Taking shells for example, is considered environmental theft and you could be fined €250 (£216.60) for doing this.

Read more on travel inspo

STAYCAY

Our travel experts’ best-kept-secret UK holiday spots for summer – from £37 a night

CHEAP BREAKS

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

Swimming is always a fun activity, but men heading to the pool need to make sure you leave the swimming shorts at home.

Due to health and hygiene laws in the country, men in France must wear Speedos.

Spain

Most cities in Spain have banned drinking alcohol on the streets, such as Madrid, Barcelona and Valencia.

Also don’t jump from your hotel balcony into a pool – you can get kicked out of the hotel and fined.

Across Spain, make sure to not smoke or vape on the terraces of bars or restaurants or at pools.

But in Barcelona and popular Balearic and Canary Islands spots, smoking and vaping are banned across all beaches.

Fines for this range from €30 (£25.99) to €2,000 (£1,732.79).

In Barcelona, Malaga and Majorca, make sure not to walk through the streets in a bikini or swimming trunks. If you do, you could face a fine of up to €300 (£259.92).

Also when you are at the beach in Cullera, Calpe or Tenerife, don’t reserve a spot with a towel as you could have your belongings confiscated and be fined up to €3,000 (£2,599.18)

Portugal

In Portugal, there are some rules to be aware of when visiting.

Portable speakers are not allowed to be loud on beaches or you could be fined or it could be confiscated from you.

Fines vary between €200 (£173.28) and €4,000 (£3,465.58) for this.

Also in Albufeira, a Code of Conduct introduced last year is still in place for tourists this year.

The rules basically reinforce that visitors must act respectfully, with public nudity and drinking alcohol on the street banned.

Italy

There are a number of different rules across Italy you’ll need to follow.

In Florence, there are a number of streets where you can’t sit and eat outdoors.

The rule has been introduced to ease congestion.

Also in Florence, e-scooters are banned in the city centre.

In Liguria, Portofino, over the summer, travellers who walk the cobbled streets either barefoot, in swimwear or topless can be fined.

You could also get fined between €50 (£43.32) to €2,500 (£2,165.99) if you are caught hiking Cinque Terre in flip flops.

Drinking alcohol in the streets is also banned with fines up to £2,568.

And make sure not to sit or lie down on a path, wall or park as this can also get you fined. Fines range from £22 to £433.

Over in Milan, you cannot smoke outdoors unless you are 10 metres away from other people. If caught breaking the rule, you could be fined between €40 (£34.66) to €240 (£207.93).

In Rome, you cannot drink out of a glass bottle on the streets after 10pm and all outdoor drinking is banned after midnight.

While in the city it is also worth being aware that when you visit the famous Spanish Steps, not to sit, eat or drink on them.

This is to protect the 18th century marble from damage and stains and if you are caught doing this, you could get a fine between €250 (£216.60) and €400 (£346.56).

And if you are visiting the Italian island of Sardinia, make sure you don’t dig a hole, build a sandcastle or take sand or shells from the beach as you could be fined up to €3,000 (£2,599.18).

Heading to Venice? Make sure you don’t feed the pigeons – it is illegal and you can be fined between €25 and €500.

Greece

In Greece, there are some different rules compared to other countries.

For example, at archaeological sites like the Acropolis and the Parthenon you cannot wear high heels.

If you are caught with high heels, you could be fined up to £760.

Drinking on the streets is also not allowed.

And if you are caught topless in public you could face a fine of up to £250.

Even though it may be tempting, make sure you don’t take pebbles from Greek beaches either as you could be slapped with a £771 fine.

It is also worth knowing that across Greece, sunbeds and umbrellas have been banned on 251 beaches and the beaches that do have sunbeds allowed, at least 70 per cent of the sand must be without sunbeds.

Malaysia has introduced new regulations preventing children under the age of 16 from registering accounts on social media platforms as part of a broader effort to improve online safety and protect minors from harmful digital content.

Under the new rules, major social media companies including Meta Platforms, TikTok, and Alphabet will be required to verify users’ ages using government issued records before allowing new account registrations.

The policy took effect on Monday and is being enforced by the Malaysian Communications and Multimedia Commission. Companies that fail to comply could face fines of up to 10 million ringgit, equivalent to approximately 2.5 million dollars.

Authorities emphasized that the measure is not intended to block children from using the internet entirely, but rather to ensure greater responsibility among technology companies, parents, and guardians in protecting young users online.

How the New Rules Will Work

The new framework requires social media platforms to implement age verification systems that cross check user information against official government records.

While the restrictions immediately apply to new account registrations, existing users will also be subject to age verification measures during a six month implementation period.

The move places greater responsibility on technology companies to ensure that underage users are not able to bypass age requirements through inaccurate information during the registration process.

Growing Concerns Over Children’s Online Safety

Malaysia’s decision reflects increasing global concern about the impact of social media on children and teenagers.

Governments around the world have raised alarms over issues including exposure to harmful content, cyberbullying, online exploitation, misinformation, and the effects of excessive social media use on mental health.

Policymakers argue that stronger safeguards are needed as digital platforms become a central part of daily life for younger generations.

Malaysia’s Wider Crackdown on Online Content

The age restrictions are part of a broader effort by Malaysian authorities to regulate online platforms more aggressively.

Officials have reported a significant increase in harmful online content in recent years and have intensified monitoring of material that could inflame racial or religious tensions. Authorities have also targeted content viewed as insulting or critical of the country’s monarchy.

The government says social media companies must play a more active role in preventing harmful content from reaching vulnerable audiences.

Why It Matters

Malaysia’s decision places it among a growing group of countries seeking stricter regulation of social media platforms and greater protections for children online.

The policy could become a model for other governments considering similar measures, particularly as concerns over digital safety continue to grow worldwide. It also increases pressure on technology companies to develop more reliable age verification systems while balancing privacy concerns and user accessibility.

The move highlights the growing debate over who should bear responsibility for protecting children online, governments, technology firms, or parents.

Key Stakeholders

Children and Teenagers

Young users will face stricter age verification requirements before being allowed to create social media accounts.

Parents and Guardians

Families are expected to play a larger role in monitoring children’s online activities and ensuring compliance with age restrictions.

Social Media Companies

Major technology platforms must implement and maintain age verification systems while ensuring compliance with Malaysian regulations.

Malaysian Government

Authorities aim to reduce children’s exposure to harmful content and strengthen oversight of online platforms.

Digital Rights and Privacy Advocates

Advocacy groups will closely monitor how age verification systems are implemented and whether they affect privacy and data protection standards.

What Happens Next

Social media companies now have six months to complete age verification checks for existing users and fully integrate compliance systems for new registrations.

Regulators are expected to monitor implementation closely and may impose penalties on platforms that fail to meet requirements. The effectiveness of the policy will likely be assessed based on whether it reduces underage access and limits exposure to harmful content.

Other countries in the region may also watch Malaysia’s experience as they consider similar online safety measures.

Analysis

Malaysia’s new restrictions reflect a broader global shift toward stronger regulation of digital platforms, particularly where children are concerned. Governments are increasingly moving away from voluntary industry guidelines and toward legally enforceable requirements that place direct responsibility on technology companies.

The success of the policy will depend largely on the effectiveness of age verification systems. If implementation is weak, underage users may still find ways to access platforms. If verification measures are too strict, however, concerns about privacy, data security, and accessibility could emerge.

The regulation also signals a growing willingness among governments to intervene in how social media platforms operate. As concerns about online safety continue to rise, Malaysia’s approach may become an important test case for balancing child protection, digital rights, and platform accountability in the years ahead.

With information from Reuters.

The Spanish destination has banned all new holiday rental properties — including houses and villas — as local authorities move to protect struggling residents from being pushed out of their own neighbourhoods

A beloved holiday destination popular with British tourists is cracking down on new holiday rental properties, after they were found to be forcing local residents out of their own communities.

Local politicians in Palma de Majorca are poised to bring in the measure to boost housing availability for hard-pressed residents. New licensed apartment holiday lets have already been prohibited there for several years, and now local politicians are moving forward with a ban on houses and villas.

Local councillor Óscar Fidalgo insisted the move was one that simply had to be made. He described it as proportionate and fair, adding that it should have been implemented sooner in order to protect those living on the island from spiking property prices.

He was openly critical of holiday rentals growing ‘like never before’, and warned that they were causing integration issues between tourists and locals.

According to Majorca Daily Bulletin, Fidalgo said: “The expansion of tourist accommodation reduces the available residential supply and makes it harder to access housing. The current model presents problems of legal certainty and complicates inspections, which allows for fraud. More inspection capacity is needed.

“There are also urban sustainability reasons. It affects neighbourhood coexistence. We must protect neighbourhoods and prevent the displacement of residents.”

A town hall technical report concluded that the Spanish holiday hotspot is unsuitable for the opening of new holiday rental properties.

In April this year, more than 8,000 illegal Airbnb listings in Majorca were removed from the website, totaling a withdrawal of more than 40,000 illegal tourist beds.

The move was part of a coordinated effort between Airbnb and the Spanish authorities to reduce the number of active rental properties.

The fines for running an unlicensed holiday let in Palma de Majorca are steep. Landlords face fines of up to €40,000 (£34,700) and the government has employed a group of inspectors to ensure compliance. There is also an online reporting system for the public to report suspected rule-breakers to the authorities.

Nearly a third of tourists visiting Spain opt to stay in short-term rentals. The number of homes listed for holiday rentals in May dropped 6% from the previous summer to 1.43 million, after regulations were tightened to ease the housing crisis, data from the National Statistics Institute showed.

According to campaign group Affordable Majorca, since 2013, rents in Palma have increased by a whopping 40%.

Approximately 2.3 to 3.6 million British tourists visit Mallorca each year. The UK consistently ranks as the second-largest source of international visitors to the island, making up about 20% to 26% of all tourist traffic, trailing just behind Germany, according to Road Genius.

The decision in Palma de Majorca comes as another holiday island has also cracked down on beach regulations, banning nearly 700 loungers. Authorities imposed the ban on Formentera in the Balearics, effective immediately until 2029. A further 339 parasols have also been ordered to be removed from beaches.

GREECE has slapped a sunbed ban on 251 of its beaches meaning tourists will have to ditch the loungers for a simple towel.

The rule aims to limit overtourism on the beaches as well as tourist developments, such as hotels and sunbeds for hire, to keep the beaches in their natural state.

So for tourists heading to the 251 beaches on the list, they’ll need to stick to either a towel or just sitting on the sand.

And some spots have even stricter rules – on beaches that are part of the Natura 2000 programme, you won’t see hotels cordoning off areas as a ‘private beach’ section, instead they will be open to everyone.

There will also be no changes to how the beach looks, so no concrete piers, sea walls or paved paths.

Essentially, anything that messes with the natural state of the beach, is not allowed.

Read more on travel inspo

GO ON

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

HOLLA

Never pay full price for hols again… 25 apps, sites & clubs for huge discounts

So, if you want a beach bar and to rent an umbrella, you’ll need to head elsewhere.

A release from the Greek Environment Ministry stated that the ban “seeks to effectively protect beaches that have particular aesthetic, geomorphological or ecological value, as well as to preserve the types of habitats and the species of flora and fauna found on these beaches”.

The Ministry added: “In particular, the number of shorelines and beaches within areas included in the National List of Areas of the European Ecological Network Natura 2000 is increasing and in which the granting of simple use, as well as any other action that may endanger their morphology and their integrity in terms of their ecological functions, is now prohibited.”

The ban follows Greek authorities dealing with a number of incidents in recent months on the protected beaches.

According to local reports, riot police recently took down a number of shacks on the island of Gavdos, just south of Crete.

One of the beaches included on the list is Elafonissi Beach found on the southwest coast of Greece as it is a protected Natura 2000 nature reserve.

Its not the easiest to get to – visitors must head across a shallow lagoon.

It was named the second best beach in the world by TripAdvisor‘s Travellers‘ Choice Awards Best of the Best 2026 and also 15th best in Europe in the World’s Best Beaches 2025 awards.

The beach is known for its pink sand, which gets its colour from crushed seashells – though removing any of the shells or sand is forbidden.

One recent visitor said: “One of the most beautiful natural paradises in the world.”

Other beaches include Kalamaki Beach near Athens, Tobruk Beach near Heraklion and several beaches on the island of Samos.

If you are heading to Greece and are not sure what beaches the ban applies to, download the Gov.gr MyCoast app, where you can see a map of all the 251 beaches.

If you are thinking of going on holiday to Greece, there’s one city that’s better in spring with funiculars, sunset rooftops and wine tastings.

Plus, there’s a stunning Greek island that will pay you to move there and give you a house.

Prestianni suspended ​for homophobic discriminatory conduct in Champions League match ‌against ​Real Madrid in February.

Benfica’s ‌Gianluca Prestianni has been handed a six-match suspension for discriminatory conduct ⁠that was deemed ⁠homophobic in a Champions League match against Real Madrid, UEFA announced.

Prestianni will be banned for two ⁠more matches after UEFA said on Friday that a further three-match suspension would be “subject to a probationary period of two years, starting from the date ⁠of the present decision”. He has already served a one-match provisional suspension.

The Argentinian winger was accused of directing a racist slur at Real Madrid forward Vinicius Jr during the Spanish side’s 1-0 Champions League playoff first-leg win ‌in February.

The first leg was suspended for 11 minutes shortly after Vinicius gave Real the lead early in the second half.

Television footage showed Prestianni covering his mouth with his shirt repeatedly before making comments that Vinicius and nearby teammates interpreted as a racial slur against the 25-year-old.

Prestianni had denied the accusation that he had made ⁠a racist comment, saying Vinicius had misheard him. Real’s ⁠Aurelien Tchouameni said the Argentinian told him he did not call Vinicius a “monkey” but directed a homophobic comment at him.

UEFA also said they would request FIFA to extend the ⁠suspension worldwide.

The suspension includes the one-match provisional suspension Prestianni served during the second leg of ⁠their knockout playoff on February 25, which ⁠Real Madrid won 2-1 to advance.

Benfica said they had been notified about the sanction imposed on Prestianni.

“Of the three-match effective ban, one has already been served and the remaining two ‌must be served in UEFA matches or Argentina national team matches in a FIFA context,” Benfica said.

Prestianni has played for Argentina only once, ‌making ‌his debut as a late substitute in a friendly game against Angola in November.

Some of our finest contemporary writers got their laurels Friday night at the 46th Los Angeles Times Book Prizes ceremony at USC’s Bovard Auditorium.

At the awards ceremony, which opens the annual L.A. Times Festival of Books weekend, Oakland-born writer Amy Tan and literary nonprofit We Need Diverse Books received achievement honors, and finalists in 13 other categories became prize winners.

The presenters and awardees who took the stage balanced a spirit of playfulness — Times senior editor Sophia Kercher called the weekend’s festival “my personal Coachella” and Times columnist LZ Granderson saluted his fellow “booktroverts” — and one of reverence as they celebrated writing as an instrument for advocacy, imagination and history-keeping.

As Bench Ansfield virtually accepted his award in the history category for “Born in Flames: The Business of Arson and the Remaking of the American City,” which exposes a pattern of landlords setting residential fires to collect insurance payouts, he said, “It’s a scary time to be a historian in the United States.”

“Our field, like so many other fields, is under attack,” Ansfield said. “To understand the crises in front of us, we have to understand our history.”

Among the crises highlighted was AI encroachment, the subject of science and technology category winner Karen Hao’s “Empire of AI: Dreams and Nightmares in Sam Altman’s OpenAI.” The AI expert and investigative journalist’s book is a critical investigation into the rise of OpenAI and its impact on society.

In Hao’s acceptance speech, read by presenter Jia-Rui Cook in her absence, the author said she “can’t help but be disturbed by how the themes of this book have grown more relevant by the day.”

“That said, I have never been more hopeful of our chance to advance a different future,” the author said, adding that L.A.’s history of resistance movements — including the recent Hollywood strikes — made it an apt place to accept her award.

“Gatherings like this are one of many radical acts of resistance against the imperial project that seeks to strip us of our meaning and our humanity,” Hao said. “Let us continue to resist defiantly together and let us remember lessons in history: When people rise, empires always fall.”

Tan echoed Hao’s sentiments as she accepted the Robert Kirsch Award, which celebrates literature with regional and thematic connections to the Western United States, for her acclaimed portfolio of writing exploring identity and cultural inheritance — often through the lens of the immigrant experience.

In her speech, “The Joy Luck Club” writer said that while she never particularly considered herself a “political writer,” her stance on that has changed as government actions have made her think critically about her own identities.

“My birthright and that of millions of others is now being argued before the Supreme Court, and no matter what the outcome is, it’s been a kick in the gut to know that those in the highest echelons of government and those who support them believe that we don’t belong.”

As an author, Tan said, “I imagine the lives of the people I write about,” and that act of compassion, for writers, inherently “reflects our politics and our beliefs. And so yes, I am a political writer.”

Later, Caroline Richmond, executive director of We Need Diverse Books, celebrated the work of her nonprofit — the recipient of this year’s Innovator’s Award — which has made it so her daughter “has never really had to look that far to find herself on the page.”

Still, she said ongoing book bans are threatening those strides toward a more diverse literary marketplace.

“The work is very much far from over,” Richmond said, “but I have to remind myself that the people banning books are never the good guys in history, and it’s up to us in this room and beyond — as readers, as book lovers — to fight back because diverse books, we really need them now more than ever.”

As the ceremony wore on, the room was as charged with celebration as it was with resistance.

When writer-editor and former child actor Adam Ross accepted the Christopher Isherwood Prize for “Playworld,” a semi-autobiographical novel about a teen growing up in 1980s New York, he gleamed with joy about his second novel being out in the world and finding readers.

“When it became clear to me that I was writing something that was going to be a lot bigger and take a lot longer than I planned, I promised myself I would use all of my ability to capture my experience of a particular era in an enduringly magical city, and to hopefully express it in such a way that any reader willing to embark on a journey with me, but upon finishing close the book and say, ‘Yes, I know exactly what that was like,’” Ross said in his acceptance speech.

“Winning this award makes me feel like I succeeded in that endeavor,” the author said.

Other winners included Ekow Eshun, who topped the biography category for “The Strangers: Five Extraordinary Black Men and the Worlds That Made Them,” which parses Black masculinity as embodied by various civil rights activists, philosophers and other visionaries, and Bryan Washington, who accepted the fiction award for “Palaver,” which details the tense reunion of a Jamaican-born mother and her queer son, who are navigating years of estrangement in Tokyo.

The 31st annual L.A. Times Festival of Books will host 500-plus authors and celebrities and 300-plus exhibitors across more than 200 events including panels, book signings and cooking demonstrations. Top-billed guests include musician-memoirist Lionel Richie, veteran actor and recent Golden Globe Carol Burnett Award honoree Sarah Jessica Parker, and the mastermind behind “Curb Your Enthusiasm,” Larry David.

The schedule for the Saturday-Sunday event can be found here.

Here’s the full list of finalists and winners for the Book Prizes.

Robert Kirsch Award

Amy Tan

Innovator’s Award

We Need Diverse Books

The Christopher Isherwood Prize for Autobiographical Prose

Adam Ross, “Playworld: A Novel”

The Art Seidenbaum Award for First Fiction

Andy Anderegg, “Plum”

Krystelle Bamford, “Idle Grounds: A Novel”

Addie E. Citchens, “Dominion: A Novel”

Justin Haynes, “Ibis: A Novel” | WINNER

Saou Ichikawa translated by Polly Barton, “Hunchback: A Novel”

Achievement in Audiobook Production, presented by Audible

Molly Jong-Fast (narrator), Matie Argiropoulos (producer); “How to Lose Your Mother”

Jason Mott, Ronald Peet, and JD Jackson (narrators), Diane McKiernan (producer); “People Like Us: A Novel”

James Aaron Oh (narrator), Linda Korn (producer); “The Emperor of Gladness: A Novel”

Imani Perry (narrator), Suzanne Mitchell (producer); “Black in Blues”

Maggi-Meg Reed, Jane Oppenheimer, Carly Robins, Jeff Ebner, David Pittu, Chris Andrew Ciulla, Mark Bramhall, Petrea Burchard, Robert Petkoff, Kimberly Farr, Cerris Morgan-Moyer, Peter Ganim, Jade Wheeler, Steve West, and Jim Seybert (narrators), Kelly Gildea (producer); “The Correspondent: A Novel” | WINNER

Biography

Joe Dunthorne, “Children of Radium: A Buried Inheritance”

Ekow Eshun, “The Strangers: Five Extraordinary Black Men and the Worlds That Made Them” | WINNER

Ruth Franklin, “The Many Lives of Anne Frank”

Beth Macy, “Paper Girl: A Memoir of Home and Family in a Fractured America”

Amanda Vaill, “Pride and Pleasure: The Schuyler Sisters in an Age of Revolution”

Current Interest

Jeanne Carstensen, “A Greek Tragedy: One Day, a Deadly Shipwreck, and the Human Cost of the Refugee Crisis”

Stefan Fatsis, “Unabridged: The Thrill of (and Threat to) the Modern Dictionary”

Brian Goldstone, “There Is No Place for Us: Working and Homeless in America” | WINNER

Gardiner Harris, “No More Tears: The Dark Secrets of Johnson & Johnson”

Jordan Thomas, “When It All Burns: Fighting Fire in a Transformed World”

Fiction

Tod Goldberg, “Only Way Out: A Novel”

Stephen Graham Jones, “The Buffalo Hunter Hunter”

Mia McKenzie, “These Heathens: A Novel”

Andrés Felipe Solano translated by Will Vanderhyden, “Gloria: A Novel”

Bryan Washington, “Palaver: A Novel” | WINNER

Graphic Novel/Comics

Eagle Valiant Brosi, “Black Cohosh”

Jaime Hernandez, “Life Drawing: A Love and Rockets Collection” | WINNER

Michael D. Kennedy, “Milk White Steed”

Lee Lai, “Cannon”

Carol Tyler, “The Ephemerata: Shaping the Exquisite Nature of Grief”

History

Char Adams, “Black-Owned: The Revolutionary Life of the Black Bookstore”

Bench Ansfield, “Born in Flames: The Business of Arson and the Remaking of the American City” | WINNER

Jennifer Clapp, “Titans of Industrial Agriculture: How a Few Giant Corporations Came to Dominate the Farm Sector and Why It Matters”

Eli Erlick, “Before Gender: Lost Stories from Trans History, 1850-1950”

Aaron G. Fountain Jr., “High School Students Unite!: Teen Activism, Education Reform, and FBI Surveillance in Postwar America”

Mystery/Thriller

Megan Abbott, “El Dorado Drive” | WINNER

Ace Atkins, “Everybody Wants to Rule the World: A Novel”

Lou Berney, “Crooks: A Novel About Crime and Family”

Michael Connelly, “The Proving Ground: A Lincoln Lawyer Novel”

S.A. Cosby, “King of Ashes: A Novel”

Poetry

Gabrielle Calvocoressi, “The New Economy”

Chet’la Sebree, “Blue Opening: Poems”

Richard Siken, “I Do Know Some Things”

Devon Walker-Figueroa, “Lazarus Species: Poems”

Allison Benis White, “A Magnificent Loneliness” | WINNER

Science Fiction, Fantasy & Speculative Fiction

Stephen Graham Jones, “The Buffalo Hunter Hunter”

Jordan Kurella, “The Death of Mountains”

Nnedi Okorafor, “Death of the Author: A Novel”

Adam Oyebanji, “Esperance”

Silvia Park, “Luminous: A Novel” | WINNER

Science & Technology

Mariah Blake, “They Poisoned the World: Life and Death in the Age of Forever Chemicals”

Peter Brannen, “The Story of CO2 Is the Story of Everything: How Carbon Dioxide Made Our World”

Karen Hao, “Empire of AI: Dreams and Nightmares in Sam Altman’s OpenAI” | WINNER

Laura Poppick, “Strata: Stories from Deep Time”

Jordan Thomas, “When It All Burns: Fighting Fire in a Transformed World”

Young Adult Literature

K. Ancrum, “The Corruption of Hollis Brown”

Idris Goodwin, “King of the Neuro Verse”

Jamie Jo Hoang, “My Mother, the Mermaid Chaser”

Trung Le Nguyen, “Angelica and the Bear Prince” | WINNER

Hannah V. Sawyerr, “Truth Is: A Novel in Verse”

Reporting from Sacramento — California cities and counties won’t be allowed to tax soda for the next 12 years after Gov. Jerry Brown signed fast-moving legislation Thursday.

The bill, which was first unveiled Saturday evening, prohibits local governments from imposing new taxes on soda until 2031. It comes after a deal was struck between legislators and business and labor interests who agreed to remove an initiative from the Nov. 6 statewide ballot that would have restricted cities and counties from raising any taxes without a supermajority vote of local citizens.

In a signing statement, Brown said soda taxes “combat the dangerous and ill effects of too much sugar in the diets of children.” But he added that mayors across the state called him to support the deal because they were alarmed by the tax initiative.

Brown also reacted strongly to another part of the initiative, which would have restricted the state’s ability to raise certain fees without a two-thirds vote of the Legislature.

“This would be an abomination,” Brown wrote.

Many lawmakers shared Brown’s mixed emotions toward the soda tax ban.

During debate on the legislation, Assembly Bill 1838, legislators said they reluctantly voted to impose the moratorium because the ballot measure, for which signatures were gathered by a political campaign financed by more than $7 million from the beverage industry, would have been worse for state and local government coffers.

Assemblyman Kevin McCarty (D-Sacramento) said he was against both the soda tax ban and how the beverage industry used the threat of an initiative to force the Legislature’s hand, but ultimately supported it.

“I think this is a terrible decision that we’re making,” McCarty said during a state Capitol hearing on the bill Thursday morning.

Sen. Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco) voted against the deal, but said he understood the choice his colleagues were making.

The beverage “industry is aiming basically a nuclear weapon at governing in California and saying if you don’t do what we want, we’re going to pull the trigger and you are not going to be able to fund basic government services,” Wiener said. “This is a pick-your-poison kind of situation, a Sophie’s choice. What the Legislature is doing is perfectly reasonable.”

Coverage of California politics »

Minutes after Brown signed the soda tax ban, proponents formally withdrew their initiative from the statewide ballot. The deadline to do so was Thursday.

The initiative wouldn’t have banned local soda or other tax increases. But it would have made them much harder to pass. It would have required all local tax hikes to pass by a two-thirds supermajority vote, making it significantly more difficult for cities and counties to raise revenue for a variety of projects.

Currently, any local sales, hotel-room or other tax increase needs a simple majority of local ballots that are cast — provided that the money goes to a city’s day-to-day operating budget. Roughly half of the local tax measures approved by voters since 2012 — raising hundreds of millions of dollars annually — did not receive supermajority approval, according to the state’s nonpartisan Legislative Analyst’s Office.

Public health advocates have been pushing for soda taxes across the United States for years, saying that higher prices would reduce consumption amid growing rates of obesity and diabetes while also generating more revenue for local governments. By contrast, the beverage industry has argued such taxes make it harder for low-income residents to buy groceries and unfairly single out soda as the cause of health problems.

Thirty cities and states attempted to pass soda taxes before Berkeley became the first to succeed in November 2014, charging a penny-per-ounce tax. Since then, three other Bay Area cities — San Francisco, Oakland and Albany — have passed soda taxes. The soda tax ban leaves those measures intact, but prohibits others that would have taken effect this year. Earlier this week, Santa Cruz city officials voted to put a 1.5-cent-per-ounce soda tax on the November ballot, an effort that will be blocked under the new state legislation.

California Legislature nears deal to temporarily ban soda taxes »

Activists were stunned by the quick action on the soda tax ban. Carter Headrick, director of state and local obesity policy initiatives at the American Heart Assn., said using a ballot initiative to leverage lawmakers to prohibit soda taxes in communities across California was “blackmail.”

“I don’t think the [beverage industry] ought to be forcing legislators to be taking away the rights of people to vote,” Headrick said.

Some lawmakers attacked the deal because they supported the initiative. Sen. Jeff Stone (R-Temecula) said that Thursday’s decision subverted the will of Californians who wanted to keep their taxes low.

“This bill tells 1 million people that signed this petition to make it harder to raise their taxes that their voices don’t matter,” Stone said.

The American Beverage Assn., which represents soda companies and other nonalcoholic drink manufacturers, contributed 85% of the initial $8.3 million raised by backers of the ballot measure.

A spokesman for the association said that the legislation would keep grocery prices lower and that the industry was working to find alternatives to reduce sugar consumption.

“We believe the legislation approved today will allow us to work toward these goals,” association spokesman William M. Dermody Jr. said in a statement.

Labor interests added momentum to the eleventh-hour soda tax ban legislation, saying the initiative would be far more damaging to the state.

“A temporary pause on further local soda taxes gives California the opportunity to work on a statewide approach to the public health crisis of diabetes,” Alma Hernandez, executive director of SEIU California, said in a statement.

liam.dillon@latimes.com

Twitter: @dillonliam

UPDATES:

6:30 p.m.: This article was updated with comments from a beverage industry spokesman.

3:55 p.m.: This article was updated with Gov. Jerry Brown approving the soda tax ban and details about the withdrawal of a local tax ballot initiative.

This article was originally published at 12:45 p.m.