bid

WASHINGTON — For the third time this month, the Supreme Court has rejected Missouri’s bid for one more Republican-leaning congressional district.

With no dissents, the justices upheld a state court order requiring the use of a 2022 election map, which favors Republicans in six of the eight districts.

“At this late date, ordering reversion to the 2025 map in the midst of an ongoing election would usher in electoral chaos,” the justices wrote.

The GOP, with the backing of conservative federal judges, wanted to use a new 2025 election map that redrew the district in Kansas City that had elected a Black Democrat.

That would have given Republicans a 7-1 advantage, but the Supreme Court stood in the way.

“As a matter of state law, the 2022 map — not the 2025 map — must be used in the 2026 congressional election,” the justices said in an unsigned opinion. “This Court has repeatedly cautioned that lower federal courts should not ‘alter the election rules of a state on the eve of an election.”

Each side in this messy dispute accused the other of seeking to change the voting districts on the eve of the election.

On Tuesday, the opponents of the newly drawn GOP-friendly map appealed to the Supreme Court for the third time. They said it is too late to switch the districts because ballots had gone out based on the existing map.

They said the Republicans “demand a new map after votes have already been cast. Ballots using the 2022 map have been printed and mailed, and absentee voting, both by mail and in-person, began today.”

But the state’s Republican attorneys said the primary elections took place under the new 2025 map, and that argues for keeping those districts in place for the general election in November.

Last September, the Missouri General Assembly, following President Trump’s lead, voted to redraw its eight congressional districts. In recent years, the state had sent six Republicans and two Democrats to Congress.

The Legislature’s goal was to flip one more seat in favor of Republicans. The new map would do that by breaking up the Kansas City district that had elected Rep. Emanuel Cleaver, a Black Democrat, with a new district that favored a Republican.

But a group called People Not Politicians and its executive director, Richard von Glahn, gathered more than 300,000 signatures for a referendum to challenge the new law before it took effect.

After waiting nine months to respond, Missouri Secretary of State Denny Hoskins, a Republican, denied the referendum in early August on the same day the primary elections got underway.

Von Glahn and his group of voters sued and won a unanimous decision from the Missouri Supreme Court on Sept. 3. Its judges said the state Constitution authorizes such a referendum and a new election map cannot take effect until the voters have spoken.

Hoskins filed an emergency appeal at the Supreme Court and cited the “chaotic fallout” from the state court “irresponsible decision.”

Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh, who oversees appeals from the 8th Circuit Court based in St. Louis, denied the appeal without comment on Sept. 8.

But shortly after his decision was issued, U.S. District Judge Stephen R. Clark, a Trump appointee, issued a temporary restraining order that prohibited the state from using the any voting map other than the new one.

People not Politicians appealed that decision to the Supreme Court.

On Sept. 10, Kavanaugh and the full court granted the appeal and blocked the judge’s order from taking effect.

The justices did not explain their reasoning, but the meaning of the order was clear. The state Supreme Court ruling meant the new map could not be used for this year’s election.

But that did not stop the 8th Circuit Court from ruling the state must use the new map.

Siding with several Republican candidates, a 2-1 majority said the use of 2022 map was unconstitutional because the primary elections were held under the new map. Its decision ordered the elections to be held using the new map.

This was a surprising ruling, since the Supreme Court’s order on Sept. 10 barred judges in Missouri from intervening further in the dispute over the voting maps.

But after a third trip to the court, the justices said the state must use the 2022 map.

In April 2022, Moore tested positive for nandrolone and boldenone at a WTA 250 event in Bogota, with an independent tribunal ruling in December 2023 that contaminated meat was the source.

Moore, who was Britain’s leading women’s doubles player at the time of the failed test, was found to bear “no fault or negligence”, but the International Tennis Integrity Agency (ITIA) appealed against the decision.

Last year, the Court of Arbitration for Sport (Cas) ruled in favour of the ITIA and Moore was banned until 2028.

Moore then initiated proceedings with the American Arbitration Association, in which she claimed the WTA’s “failure to warn against eating meat in Colombia was a direct cause of her positive test result and the harm that followed”.

The arbitrator supported the ruling made by Cas and dismissed the case against the WTA.

In response, Moore filed a motion against the decision at the United States District Court in New York.

Moore, who was ranked a career-high 77th in the world in 2022, claimed she was denied a fair hearing by the arbitrator.

The motion detailed how Moore was seeking “no less than $20m in compensatory damages” after claiming the WTA “stayed silent in the face of a known and specific danger and then shifted the blame for its own negligence” to the player.

On Friday, United States district judge Andrew Carter found Moore’s challenge was “not justified” on a legal basis.

The WTA and ITIA have been approached for comment.

East Asia is facing a demographic reckoning, with societies in Japan, South Korea and Taiwan ageing rapidly.

With a drastic shortage of burial space, a lucrative new market is emerging.

From AI avatars to DNA gems, technology is bringing loved ones back to life – in digital forms – raising questions about whether it will help heal or hinder the grieving process.

101 East investigates how new technology is transforming the way we bid farewell to those we love.

Schools in England are to get around £500 million in extra funding towards the teachers’ pay award this school year, reducing the risk of a strike ballot by the largest education union.

Schools had been expected to fund some of the 3.5% teachers pay increase for the current school year out of their existing budgets, which National Education Union (NEU) leaders had strongly objected to.

Daniel Kebede, the General Secretary of the NEU, said the offer of more funding was a “significant” step in negotiations.

In a letter to the union on Wednesday, which has been seen by the BBC, the government said the increase would be funded by savings in employers’ contributions to the local government pension scheme.

The letter said the 4.9 percentage point drop in what employers are expected to contribute will deliver “significant savings” on the pay bill for support staff, which will not be clawed back by central government.

The National Education Union said it expected the extra money to be around £500m, which schools can now use towards teachers pay this year.

In July, ministers accepted the recommendation of the independent pay review body for teachers and agreed a 3.5% increase from September 2026 would be followed by 3% the following year.

The pay increase had been partly funded by an additional £700m for 2026-27 and £1.1bn for the following year.

Independent economists at the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) said that left schools facing a shortfall of around 1% between rising costs and funding this year.

Luke Sibieta, IFS research fellow, said the extra money would mean the pay increase this year was fully funded – and on top of other funding increases, schools would be £1.6bn better off by next year than they had expected this summer.

The additional money could potentially bring the uplift for this year into line with next year.

Kebede said schools has been “running on empty” and the funding signalled “a welcome return to reality, and a message of hope for the entire school community”.

Paul Whiteman, General Secretary of the National Association of Headteachers, said the decision is “certainly welcome”, putting schools in a “better position”.

He said his union would look carefully at the detail “to determine whether this means the pay uplift is genuinely fully funded” for schools.

Pepe Di’Iasio, General Secretary of the Association of School and College Leaders, said he was “pleased” at the announcement of additional funding but “the wider pressure on school and college budgets remains intense”.

Similarly, the NASUWT union welcomed the news. General Secretary Matt Wrack added schools needed “a sustainable, long-term injection of extra funding” to meet the needs of young people.

In an indicative ballot by the NEU in April, 90% of teachers who voted said they would be prepared to take industrial action over funding and pay, on a turnout of 48%.

A formal ballot was due to begin on 3 October and close 15 December, raising the prospects of teachers pay strikes early in 2027.

The national executive of the NEU will meet on 24 September to consider whether to call that off following the additional funding on offer from the government.

A spokesperson for Education Secretary Lucy Powell said the government was “confident schools can now meet the costs of the award at a national level”.

“The Secretary of State has been clear from day one that supporting teacher recruitment, retention and wellbeing, and rebuilding the relationship with the profession, are among her top priorities.”

In one corner is bnb-side, a six-room bed and breakfast on the Isle of Portland – a tiny wedge of limestone tied by a narrow ribbon of shingle to the Dorset coast – that was created to help secure the future of the rock’s much-loved arts festival, b-side.

On the other is Airbnb, the San Francisco-based booking colossus. The battle between them is over the three little letters they share.

b-side says the “bnb” in bnb-side means what it has always meant: bed and breakfast. But lawyers for the Silicon Valley titan say the name of the guesthouse, perched on an outcrop just 4 miles long by 1.5 miles wide, threatens the global brand of the $100bn heavyweight.

“We thought the name was both really obvious and really cool,” said Rocca Holly-Nambi, director of b-side. “b-side was founded almost 20 years ago, so when we set up our BnB in 2024 to raise money for the festival, we just popped the ‘bn’ in front because it’s a universally recognised description of what we’re offering.”

Airbnb doesn’t agree. In May, it sent the first of three legal letters to the tiny social enterprise to demand it cease its attempt to register the B&B using the name it had used since it opened its doors.

“They won’t let us compromise by using a different case, an ampersand or an ‘and’,” said Holly-Nambi. “According to Airbnb, we can’t describe our BnB as a BnB at all.”

For bnb-side, losing the argument could mean more than abandoning a clever name. It would mean replacing signage and rewriting websites, social media and all other material referencing and advertising the B&B.

“That’s not just a huge waste of money – of which we don’t have much – and of the equally valuable time of our volunteers, but it would throw b-side’s core income stream into chaos,” said Holly-Nambi. “We’d have to painstakingly build our reputation and brand back up from scratch all over again.”

Raina Summerson, chair of b-side, is fuming and incredulous. “We opened bnb-side because we were completely dependent on public funding and wanted to be more financially secure,” she said. “bnb-side now generates almost half the festival’s annual £250,000 turnover. If it loses its name, we risk having to establish it all over again.”

Airbnb has opposed the name on three separate legal grounds: that consumers will confuse the two brands, that bnb-side could benefit from or damage Airbnb’s reputation, and that bnb-side will financially profit by misrepresenting itself as an official Airbnb service.

b-side is asking the Intellectual Property Office to reject Airbnb’s opposition in full, with costs awarded in their favour. The case is still under way, with no ruling having yet been made.

Airbnb’s claim has hit a nerve on the proud, windswept outcrop. Cat Wightman, manager of bnb-side, said: “It’s pretty bitter. We’ve watched other small, local hospitality businesses go under, and local people unable to afford homes here, who have been negatively affected by the force with which the Airbnb market has conquered Portland. One person owns eight properties on the island, all of which are rented out on Airbnb.”

b-side obtained pro bono advice and is working with the law firm Stevens Hewlett & Perkins to defend them, but the process is still intimidating. “It’s terrifying but we’re not going to back down,” said Holly-Nambi. “We do things differently here in Portland.”

Craig Beaumont, a trademark attorney and senior associate at Barker Brettell, a law firm that specialises in intellectual property, said that for all Airbnb’s might, this would not be an easy or straightforward win for them.

“This feels like an uphill battle they’re embarking on,” he said. “BnB has long been widely understood as shorthand for a descriptive phrase, and descriptive phrases are available for the public to use.”

bnb-side are not the only company who agree with Beaumont: Companies House records show that in the past decade 14 accommodation companies with “bnb” in their name successfully registered their businesses.

Darren Meale, a partner and trademark litigation specialist at Simmons & Simmons, said it was no surprise the term was used so often. “It’s quite punchy of Airbnb to say they’re so well-known that they can monopolise a term that they only incorporated into their name in the first place because it was a descriptive one that everyone immediately understood, and then say that someone else using the term is going to confuse customers and damage them.”

Lee Curtis, a partner and chartered trademark attorney at IP law firm HGF, agreed that Airbnb “may be testing the limits” of the law. But he pointed to another risk for the lodging colossus.

“There’s a public relations angle to take into account,” he said. “Some companies may welcome getting a reputation for aggressive enforcement but that can backfire when the target is a community organisation, like this one.”

Airbnb has been approached for comment.

One of the more remarkable streaks in the history of this nearly century-old racetrack is still alive.

It’s just not the one most people expected.

Gold Phoenix’s bid to join Kelso as the only horses to win the same major stakes race in North America in five straight years ended Saturday evening when the 8-year-old gelding finished fourth behind Test Score and two others in the $300,000 Del Mar Handicap.

“Got beat, I think less than a length, and got stopped there at the top of the lane,” trainer Phil D’Amato said. “That’s grass racing.”

More specifically, it’s grass racing at Del Mar against Graham Motion, the East Coast trainer who in recent years has been more successful here than a margarita concession stand.

Test Score was the eighth horse Motion has sent to Del Mar for a summer stakes race since 2022 — and the eighth to win.

“It’s crazy,” said assistant trainer Alice Clapham, who accompanied Test Score on his trip west. “It’s one of those things you just pinch yourself. You know it’s going to stop at some point but you just go along for the ride.”

Gold Phoenix’s owners know the feeling.

They never expected their gelding to win this race four straight times, an unprecedented feat at Del Mar, but each year since 2022 he found a way, prevailing three times by less than half a length and once by 1¼ lengths.

This time the 11-10 favorite found himself on the wrong side of a five-horse photo finish. He nosed out Mondego but was a head behind Atomic Age, who was half a length behind Atitlan, who was a neck behind Test Score. The winner, a son of Lookin at Lucky who is half Gold Phoenix’s age, paid $7.20 as the 13-5 second choice.

While disappointed, Gold Phoenix’s connections weren’t about to ask for condolences.

“We’re so grateful for everything that he has done, for all of us and the partners,” said Gary Fenton, managing partner of Little Red Feather Racing Stable. “He’s just a really, really special horse and today changes nothing.”

Said Billy Koch, Little Red Feather’s other managing partner: “It just didn’t work out the way we needed it to work out. He tries, though, every time. Can’t say anything but be proud of him.”

Koch said he had a feeling during the race that another win could be problematic. Gold Phoenix was near the back of the pack in the field of 11 until the far turn, when jockey Hector Berrios began urging him. The jockey had to hold him up just a bit as they came around the corner, though he had a clear run once he shifted toward the rail.

Test Score also rallied from behind but had a little smoother journey under Juan Hernandez and outdid the other closers.

“[Berrios] took a chance to go up in there,” D’Amato said. “It got a little tight but once he got through, he battled and we just got outrun.”

The final time of 2 minutes 14.76 seconds for 1-3/8 miles was the fastest since Gold Phoenix’s initial win (2:14.51). As part of the Breeders’ Cup Challenge Series, Test Score earned a fees-paid berth in the $5-million Breeders’ Cup Turf on Oct. 31 at Keeneland.

Fenton said the plan is to give Gold Phoenix another shot in that race, in which he’s finished fourth twice, fifth and 10th and earned $640,000 — about 25% of his career earnings of $2.6 million.

He won’t be the only Little Red Feather horse at Keeneland. Just a half-hour before Gold Phoenix’s race, Iron Man Cal pulled off an 8-1 upset in another Grade 2 race, the $250,000 Pat O’Brien. That win, in 1:22.02 for seven furlongs under Joel Rosario, guaranteed the 4-year-old gelding a berth in the Breeders’ Cup Dirt Mile.