Just weeks after Justin Bieber’s well-received Coachella headline gig, the singer played a small private event for tech, entertainment and defense industry moguls. Executives at controversial firms, such as surveillance tech giant Palantir, were also on the bill.
Bieber was a headliner at WNDR, entertainment executive Jeffrey Katzenberg’s invitation-only confab at the Rosewood Miramar in Montecito last week. The programming for the event was first reported by Puck.
The ultra A-list talks and guests included director James Cameron and former Disney CEO Bob Iger, YouTube CEO Neal Mohan, FIFA President Gianni Infantino, Oprah Winfrey and Julia Roberts, comedians Chris Rock and Trevor Noah and artist Jeff Koons on a panel discussion with LACMA chief Michael Govan.
Bieber, meanwhile, performed a Wednesday poolside set for attendees at the Rosewood. The “Swag” singer reportedly became the highest-paid headliner in Coachella history last month, and its most lucrative merch seller.
Representatives for Bieber did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
While there was lighter programming (like a karaoke party with pop producers StarGate and a talk about snacks with chef Nancy Silverton), the bill included talks and cameos from major weapons and surveillance technology firms noted for their support for — or deep engagement with — the Trump administration.
One panel featured Anduril Industries’ Palmer Luckey, who recently welcomed Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth to its Southern California headquarters. “We are rebuilding the Arsenal of Freedom,” Hegseth said after the Anduril visit.
Palantir Chief Executive Alex Karp led another talk. Palantir’s AI-driven defense and surveillance software has faced scrutiny around how tech like its Maven Smart System may have been used to target civilians in the Iran war.
Karp also published a recent book, “The Technological Republic,” where he wrote that “We must resist the shallow temptation of a vacant and hollow pluralism. We, in America and more broadly the West, have for the past half century resisted defining national cultures in the name of inclusivity. But inclusion into what?”
epa11846878 British Airways aircraft at Gatwick Airport in London, Britain, 23 January 2025. The British government is considering airport expansions in London. Plans for a third runway at Heathrow and a second runway at Gatwick are under review by the Treasury in an effort to boost growth. Transport Secretary Heidi Alexander has a deadline of 27 February to decide whether to permit Gatwick to bring its existing emergency northern runway into routine use. EPA/ANDY RAINCredit: EPA
BRITISH Airways passengers face higher fares after its parent company warned rising oil prices will add about £1.72billion to its fuel bill this year.
International Airlines Group (IAG), which also owns Iberia and Aer Lingus, said it expects to pass on part of the extra cost through ticket prices, with business class and other premium long-haul passengers among those most likely to be affected.
Sign up for the Travel newsletter
Thank you!
IAG warned the crisis could deepen if the strait remains blocked, with global jet fuel supplies potentially restrictedCredit: Getty
Chief executive Luis Gallego said airlines need to increase fares to help offset fuel costs, which make up about a quarter of their spending.
The rise follows disruption linked to the Middle East conflict and the closure of the Strait of Hormuz, which normally carries about a fifth of the world’s oil and gas shipments.
IAG warned the crisis could deepen if the strait remains blocked, with global jet fuel supplies potentially restricted.
However, the group said it does not expect any disruption to summer fuel supplies.
Mr Gallego said there is less jet fuel coming from the Middle East, but there are “other places with record supply” such as the US.
He said IAG has been “planning for situations like this for many years”, and has invested in its own jet fuel supply at its “main hubs”.
The company recorded a pre-tax profit of £365million during the three months to the end of March.
That was a 76.6% increase from £207million a year earlier.
The group now expects its annual fuel bill to reach £7.78billion.
Mr Gallego attributed the firm’s “strong first quarter” to “continued strong demand for our networks and airline brands”.
He added: “IAG is uniquely positioned to navigate the current headwinds created by the Middle East conflict thanks to our leading positions across diverse markets, strong brands, structurally high margins and strong balance sheet, as well as a strong track record of execution.”
IAG said about 3% of its capacity was “exposed to the Gulf region” at the start of the war on February 28, mostly with British Airways flights.
A large part of this has been redeployed, including boosting capacity at destinations where there are now fewer flights by Middle East carriers such as Bangkok, Singapore and the Maldives.
British Airways has also announced additional flights this summer on routes with higher demand for direct flights, such as India and Nairobi.
National Assembly Speaker Woo Won-shik announces his decision not to put a constitutional amendment bill to a vote during a plenary session in Seoul on Friday. Photo by Yonhap
The ruling Democratic Party’s (DP) push to put a constitutional change to a national vote in the upcoming local elections fell through Friday as the main opposition People Power Party (PPP) continued to boycott a parliamentary vote on the proposal.
Shortly after Friday’s plenary session opened, National Assembly Speaker Woo Won-shik announced that he will not put the amendment bill to a vote as the PPP warned it would launch a filibuster to block the proposal.
“I convened the plenary session again today in an effort to prevent the first constitutional amendment vote in 39 years from falling through,” Woo said. “But I believe further proceedings would be meaningless, seeing the (PPP) responding with a filibuster.”
The PPP boycotted a vote on the bill Thursday, leaving the unicameral parliament short of a quorum.
Cheong Wa Dae expressed regret over the National Assembly’s failure to pass the bill due to opposition from PPP lawmakers.
“The public will find it difficult to understand why they opposed even minimal constitutional changes aimed at safeguarding national security and democracy,” presidential spokesperson Kang Yu-jung said in a written briefing, noting that there had been broad public consensus on the need to “reflect the lessons” of former President Yoon Suk Yeol’s Dec. 3, 2024, martial law attempt in the Constitution.
“We urge the National Assembly to continue the discussions on the constitutional amendment with a greater sense of responsibility during the second half and to keep the promise it made to the people,” she added.
President Lee Jae Myung earlier highlighted the need to amend the constitution in “phases” if necessary, saying the Constitution, which has remained unchanged for nearly 40 years since 1987, may now be outdated.
The proposed bill aimed to tighten the rules for declaring martial law, requiring the president to obtain parliamentary approval without delay and stipulating that if the National Assembly rejects the declaration or fails to approve it within 48 hours, the martial law will be immediately nullified.
It also sought to include the 1980 pro-democracy uprising in Gwangju and the 1979 Busan-Masan pro-democracy protests in the preamble. It currently states that the country inherits the spirit of the April 19 revolution in 1960, which overthrew South Korea’s first president, Rhee Syng-man, over election fraud.
The bill was jointly proposed by 187 lawmakers from the DP and five minor parties.
A constitutional amendment requires two thirds of votes from sitting lawmakers to be put to a national referendum for final approval by a majority of ballots cast.
South Korea is set to hold its quadrennial local elections on June 3.
Copyright (c) Yonhap News Agency prohibits its content from being redistributed or reprinted without consent, and forbids the content from being learned and used by artificial intelligence systems.
WASHINGTON — Senate Republicans have added $1 billion in White House security upgrades to legislation that would fund immigration enforcement agencies, a proposed boost for President Trump’s ballroom project after a man was charged with trying to assassinate him at the White House Correspondents’ Assn. dinner last week.
The GOP bill released late Monday would designate the money for the U.S. Secret Service for “security adjustments and upgrades” related to the ballroom project, which Trump and Republicans have been pushing since Cole Tomas Allen allegedly stormed the April 25 media dinner at the Washington Hilton with guns and knives. The legislation says the money would support enhancements to the ballroom project, “including above-ground and below-ground security features,” but also specifies that the money may not be used for non-security elements.
White House spokesperson Davis Ingle praised Republicans for including the money for the “long overdue” project, saying it would “provide the United States Secret Service with the resources they need to fully and completely harden the White House complex, in addition to the many other critical missions for the USSS.”
The money is part of a larger bill to pay for Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Border Patrol, as Democrats have been blocking funds for both agencies since mid-February. Congress passed bipartisan legislation to fund the rest of the Homeland Security Department on April 30 after a record-long shutdown, but Republicans are using a partisan budget maneuver to push through the ICE and Border Patrol dollars on their own. The House has not released its bill yet, but the Senate is expected to start voting on its version of the legislation next week.
It is unclear exactly how the $1 billion would be used, and the amount far exceeds the proposed $400 million for construction of the ballroom. The White House has said in court documents that the East Wing project would be “heavily fortified,” including bomb shelters, military installations and a medical facility underneath the ballroom. Trump has said it should include bulletproof glass and be able to repel drone attacks.
The National Trust for Historic Preservation has sued to block construction of the project, but a federal appeals court said last month that it can continue in the meantime.
The White House has said that private money would pay for the construction but public money would be used for security measures. Some Republicans have suggested that public money pay for all of it, arguing the security breach at the dinner shows the president needs a secure place to host events.
“It would be insane” to hold the dinner at a hotel again, said Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, who introduced a bill to pay for the ballroom’s construction with Sen. Katie Britt, R-Ala.
Democrats have said they will oppose any efforts to pay for the ballroom.
“While Americans are struggling to make ends meet as a result of President Trump’s failed policies, Republicans are focused on providing tens of billions of dollars for the President’s vanity ballroom project and cruel mass deportation campaign,” said Illinois Sen. Dick Durbin, the top Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee, which oversees the U.S. Secret Service.
Jalonick writes for the Associated Press. AP writer Darlene Superville contributed to this report.
BATON ROUGE, La. — Louisiana Republicans eliminated an elected position days before an exonerated man who overwhelmingly won the New Orleans-based clerk seat was set to take office.
Republican Gov. Jeff Landry on Thursday quietly signed into law legislation abolishing the long-standing Orleans Parish clerk of criminal court position, according to Louisiana Secretary of State spokesperson Trey Williams.
Republicans say wiping away the office is a consolidation effort meant to make the local judicial system more efficient and cut costs. But Democrats condemn the change as government overreach, arguing that it infringes on a predominantly Black parish’s decision at the polls.
Calvin Duncan, who spent nearly 30 years behind bars for a crime he did not commit, easily won election to the criminal court clerk position in November, beating the incumbent and earning more than two-thirds of the vote. He had been set to take office Monday and has asked a federal judge to allow him to take office as scheduled.
“It’s a sad thing to see the state government repeating what happened to Black public officials during Reconstruction,” Duncan said. “They will do what they do, and I will do whatever I have to do to vindicate the voters of New Orleans and make sure that what happened to me never happens to anybody else.”
Landry did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
Duncan, a Democrat whose murder conviction was vacated in 2021 after evidence emerged that police officers lied in court, has vowed to help fix the system that once failed him.
Duncan, 63, and his supporters say he is being targeted by the most powerful Republicans in the state, including those who have denied his innocence, even though Duncan’s name is listed on the National Registry of Exonerations.
“We’re doing something because powerful people don’t like him,” Rep. Mandie Landry, a New Orleans Democrat, told lawmakers during a legislative committee hearing in April. Landry, who is not related to the governor, described the Republican efforts as “atrocious” and worries what they could mean for other elected positions in the state.
Law consolidates two court clerk positions
Republicans say the legislation consolidates the civil and criminal court clerks’ offices in Orleans Parish, putting it in line with all other parishes in the state, which have a single clerk’s office. The civil clerk position would remain and absorb the criminal clerk’s role.
Eliminating the clerk position saves the state about $27,000 and the city $233,000, according to the office of the legislative auditor, which added that the long-term costs of consolidation are “unknown.” The legislation also shifts about $1.17 million in state expenditures to the parish. The civil and criminal court clerks have separate physical offices and different case management systems.
The governor told the Associated Press that eliminating Duncan’s elected office was about improving government efficiency and “cleaning up a system in Orleans Parish that has been plagued by dysfunction and corruption for years.”
The consolidation is part of a broader GOP effort during the ongoing legislative session to overhaul the judiciary in New Orleans — including bills that propose abolishing several other elected judicial positions in the parish. However, those jobs would be eliminated further down the line, allowing officials to serve out their terms.
The bill’s Republican author, Sen. Jay Morris, who represents a district several hours from New Orleans, said the goal was to implement the clerk consolidation before Duncan takes office, preventing him from starting a four-year term. Morris acknowledged that he expects lawsuits to be filed because of this law but believes the change to be constitutional.
“It’s unfortunate for Mr. Duncan, I concede that,” Morris told lawmakers in April. “He seems very nice, but we don’t make policy around here for just one person.”
Concerns of disenfranchisement
Although conversations have revolved around Duncan, many also raise concerns about how the change potentially could disenfranchise voters — a heightened worry in a deeply red state that has been central to efforts to weaken the Voting Rights Act, including the case at issue in a landmark Supreme Court ruling last week. Orleans Parish is a Democratic hub with a predominantly Black electorate.
“Mr. Duncan was elected by 68% of the vote in a city that’s majority African American. This is the will of the people, and what your bill attempts to do is usurp the will of the people,” Rep. Edmond Jordan, a Democrat, told Morris.
Well before the legislation reached the governor’s desk, Duncan said he could see the writing on the wall. Ahead of the outcome, Duncan’s advocates held a ceremonial swearing-in for him. Hundreds of people gathered on the steps of the Orleans Parish criminal courthouse to support him.
Duncan told lawmakers that along the campaign trail last year, he spoke with many people who told him they typically abstain from voting in elections. “Now, this bill tells people exactly what they had believed — that their vote doesn’t count,” he said.
Cline and Brook write for the Associated Press and reported from Baton Rouge, La., and New Orleans, respectively.
WASHINGTON — House Speaker Mike Johnson has lamented he would like to preside over a “normal Congress,” but the chamber the Republican is leading is anything but.
All-night sessions. Hours of dead zones with no action on the floor. Legislation being written on the fly, behind closed doors. Sudden votes scheduled. Spectacular failures. And, as happened this week, stunning turnarounds in which the House actually passes bills.
“Sometimes it’s an ugly process, sometimes it’s a long process,” Johnson said after House passage of a bipartisan bill to fund much of the Department of Homeland Security, ending the longest agency shutdown in history. “But we got it done.”
Republicans, who face an uphill climb this election year to keep hold of their paper-thin House majority, appear at times as if they are still learning on the job, years after having returned to power in 2022, while they are also about to ask voters in November to rehire them for another term.
This week’s starts and stops — for example, five hours of delay as Johnson huddled behind closed doors to salvage his agenda, then a sudden vote tally near 11 p.m. — would typically have been the kind of situation that shocked the political and procedural senses. Now, it’s just another Wednesday.
Or two weeks ago, when a routine House Rules Committee hearing ended up becoming a midnight forum to debut a just-produced 14-page bill to revise a surveillance bill, known as the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, or FISA, before it was rushed to the floor for a 2 a.m. vote. It failed.
“House Republicans have shown again that they can’t govern,” said Rep. Ted Lieu of California, part of Democratic leadership.
“They routinely pass bills to the Senate that are way too extreme, then it ends up that we have all these floor session days where we’re just doing nothing,” he said.
House GOP’s slim majority makes leader’s job challenging
Johnson, who took over for the ousted Kevin McCarthy more than two years ago, is presiding over one of the slimmest House majorities in modern times, leaving him no room to spare if he’s trying to pass legislation on party-line votes, without Democrats.
The speaker is juggling not only President Trump’s priorities but also those of the various factions that make up his majority, from the conservative House Freedom Caucus to what remains of the GOP’s more pragmatic conservatives.
And Johnson’s own future is always in question, after Republicans chased other speakers, including McCarthy, John Boehner and Newt Gingrich, to early exits.
Last year Johnson, of Louisiana, led passage of the party’s signature achievement, a big bill of tax breaks and safety net cuts, which Trump signed into law. At the time, he quipped about the difficulty of getting it over the finish line.
“I do so deeply desire to have just a normal Congress,” the speaker said in July.
“But it doesn’t happen anymore,” he said. “Our way is to plow through and get it done.”
What’s ahead as House GOP tries to stay in power
Ahead of the fall elections, Johnson and other Republican lawmakers have discussed an agenda that includes the promise of another GOP-only budget package like the tax cuts bill that they could push through the House and the Senate, without Democratic votes.
Budget Chairman Jodey Arrington (R-Texas) said Thursday that he expects “the centerpiece” of that package “will be supporting our troops” with more than $100 billion in funding for the war against Iran as well as money to replenish defense munitions and other Pentagon-related needs.
Despite the turbulent week in the House, Arrington said what they’re calling “Budget reconciliation 3.0” should be the “next order of business.”
Yet GOP lawmakers may decide it’s better to skip the hard work of legislating, and the dramatic upheavals that tend to come with it, and hit the campaign trail to win over voters instead.
Rep. Richard Hudson (R-N.C.), the chairman of the House GOP’s campaign arm, the National Republican Congressional Committee, acknowledged that trying to pass legislation with such a tight majority “can be rough. It’s ugly.”
“I’d be fine with letting us go home and campaign,” Hudson said. “But we’ve got a lot of important work still to do.”
Some of Johnson’s most ardent sparring partners, those most conservative Republican lawmakers, turned their blame for the messy process not on Johnson’s leadership but on their own GOP allies across the Capitol in the Senate, who often dismiss the House’s work.
“Yeah, sometimes, it gets a little tense,” said Republican Rep. Chip Roy of Texas. “But we’re still getting stuff done. We’re sending it over to the Senate. So we look forward to them doing their job.”
WASHINGTON — After weeks of delay, the House voted Thursday to fund much of the Department of Homeland Security, but not its immigration enforcement operations, and send the bipartisan package to President Trump to sign, ending the longest agency shutdown in history.
The White House had warned that temporary funding Trump had tapped to pay Transportation Security Administration and other agency personnel would “soon run out,” and that sparked new threats of airport disruptions.
DHS has been without routine funds since Feb. 14, causing hardship for workers, though much of Trump’s immigration agenda that is central to the dispute is being funded separately.
“It is about damn time,” said Rep. Rosa DeLauro of Connecticut, the top Democrat on the House Appropriations Committee, who proposed the bill more than 70 days ago.
The House swiftly voted by voice, without a formal roll call, to pass the measure.
The House’s narrow Republican majority has repeatedly stalled out under House Speaker Mike Johnson, with his own party tangled in internal disputes on a range of pending issues, including the homeland security funding. While the Senate unanimously approved the bipartisan package a month ago, the bill languished in the House.
Democrats refused to fund U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and the Border Patrol without changes to those operations after the fatal shootings of two U.S. citizens by federal agents during protests against an immigration crackdown in Minneapolis. Republicans would no go along with a plan pushed by Democrats to fund TSA and the other parts of DHS without the money for ICE and Border Patrol.
To break the impasse, Republicans in both the House and Senate decided to tackle the immigration enforcement funding on their own through what is called budget reconciliation, a cumbersome weekslong process ahead.
By beginning that budget process Johnson, R-La., was able to unlock a broader bipartisan bill for TSA agents and the rest of DHS. House Republicans late Wednesday adopted budget resolution on a largely party-line vote, 215-211, that is focused on eventually providing $70 billion for immigration enforcement and deportations for the remainder of Trump’s time in office and ensure Democrats can no longer block funding. Trump’s term ends in January 2029.
One key Republican, Rep. Chip Roy of Texas, said isolating the immigration-related money on a separate track is “offensive to the men and women who serve in ICE and Border Patrol, and are serving this country every single day.”
Maine Gov. Janet Mills on Friday vetoed a bill that would have paused construction of artificial intelligence data centers in the state because lawmakers in the Maine legislature refused a carve-out to the pause for an already in progress project there. File Photo CJ Gunther/EPA
April 24 (UPI) — Maine Gov. Janet Mills on Friday vetoed a bill that would have paused artificial intelligence data center construction in the state for 18 months.
Mills said she decided to veto it because it would have potentially harmed a permitted and in progress data center expected to create hundreds of jobs, both for construction and once the center opens.
The project, a $550 million data center in Jay, Maine, is a multi-year effort to redevelop the former Androscoggin Mill, which was damaged in a 2020 boiler explosion and then closed in 2023, took with it hundreds of jobs and 22% of the town’s tax revenue.
The bill would have been the first in the country restricting or slowing the spread of large-scale data centers required for power-hungry AI systems, which have driven up the cost of both electricity and water for residents living near them, NBC News and Politico reported.
“A moratorium is appropriate given the impacts of massive data centers in other states on the environment and electricity rates,” Mills said in a press release.
“But the final version of this bill fails to allow for a specific project in the Town of Jay that enjoys strong local support from its host community and region,” she said.
There are more than 5,000 data centers in the United States — more than any country in the world — and that number has grown significantly in the last four years as artificial intelligence has become a focus the tech industry.
While many state and local leaders have started to respond to concerns among residents about the huge amounts of electricity needed to power AI data centers and the huge amounts of water needed to keep them cool, as have some members of Congress.
As states have contemplated increased regulation and scrutiny from tech and AI companies, President Donald Trump at the same time has worked to keep the cuffs of tech companies because they “must be free to innovate without cumbersome regulation,” he said in December.
“Excessive state regulation thwarts this imperative,” Trump said in an executive order meant to prevent states from creating new regulations.
Mills said she worked with Maine’s legislature to carve out an exemption for the data center in Jay but was unsuccessful, so she vetoed the law.
The development in Jay, she said, is under contract and permitted, and is expected to create 800 construction jobs, more than 100 high-paying permanent jobs and “substantial tax revenue” for the Town of Jay.
In a letter informing the legislature that she planned to veto the bill, Mills said she plans to issue an executive order to establish a council to study the impacts — real and potential — of data centers in Maine.
“I believe it necessary and important to examine and plan for the potential impacts of large-scale data centers in Maine, as the use of artificial intelligence becomes more widespread,” Mills said.
“Given the serious conversations about data centers here and around the country, I believe this work should commence without delay,” she told legislators.
President Donald Trump speaks during a Health Care Affordability event in the Oval Office at the White House on Thursday. Trump announced announced a new drug price deal with Regeneron. Photo by Will Oliver/UPI | License Photo
Members of the non-profit Dignity in Dying campaign group protest outside Parliament in London on Friday where the House the Lords was holding its final debate on an assisted-dying bill before it runs out the clock in the legislative timetable of the current session of parliament, which is due to end next week. Photo by Andy Rain/EPA
April 24 (UPI) — A bill to legalize assisted-dying in England and Wales was Friday set to run out of time to complete all the necessary stages for it to become law in the current session of parliament, 10 months after MPs passed the legislation.
The Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill has been stalled in its committee stage in the House of Lords since June but with Friday set to be the final debate in the upper chamber before the 2024-2026 session ends in early May, it has run out of road.
“Detailed line-by-line scrutiny of the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill continues,” The Lords said Friday in its order of business for the day.
Members have used up all 14 committee-stage days allotted for the bill as they attempted to grapple with more than 1,000 amendments covering everything from blocking overseas patients from accessing the treatment and the inclusion of people injured serving in the military or in industrial accidents to making patients aware of non-lethal treatment options.
Only around halfway through the stages required before it can receive “Royal Assent” from King Charles and finally become law, the bill can no longer proceed and cannot be carried over to the 2026-2027 session.
Supporters vowed not to give up on the bill, which would give terminally ill adults with less than six months to live the legal right to end their lives with the help of medical professionals, saying they would try to reintroduce it when the new parliament convenes on May 13.
The bill’s sponsor, Labour MP Kim Leadbeater, said she had a group of backers who had agreed to try to bring back the bill immediately following the state opening of parliament.
To do so, they need to prevail in a ballot in which MPs compete for 25 slots to introduce legislation they have authored to the House of Commons, so-called private members’ bills.
The next private members’ bill ballot is scheduled for May 21.
Leadbeater said she was disappointed, upset and angry at the outcome.
She said that terminally ill patients and their families she had been speaking with felt “a real sense of feeling let down by our democratic system.”
“This is not over. The issue is not going to go away just because of an undemocratic filibuster in the Lords. We will keep pushing for a safer, more compassionate law until parliament reaches a final decision.”
Opponents were concerned over the watering down of key safeguards in the original bill introduced in the House of Commons in November 2024, including dropping the requirement for a High Court judge to review every case.
“If we’re going to do this, we have to have safeguards and I really don’t think there are anywhere near enough safeguards in it,” said Baroness Grey-Thompson, adding that it was the job of peers to go through every line in legislation.
She told the BBC that when bills failed it because it was usually because they were poorly drafted, rather than because of the number of amendments tabled.
“It was written in haste and there are so many gaps in it that a number of peers are really uncomfortable with this particular bill, even though they may be in favor of the principle,” she said.
Leadbeater said she hoped the Commons would pass the bill again and an accommodation could be agreed with members of the upper house over amendments.
She did not rule out invoking a very rarely used procedural maneuver, a theoretical nuclear option that dates back more than a century in which the Lords is rendered powerless to stop a bill that the House of Commons has passed more than once from becoming law — but said she hoped that would not be necessary.
Children race to push colored eggs across the grass during the annual Easter Egg Roll event on the South Lawn of the White House in Washington on April 21, 2025. Easter this year takes place on April 5. Photo by Samuel Corum/UPI | License Photo
Reporting from Sacramento — Gov. Jerry Brown on Wednesday vetoed a bill that would have barred medical marijuana dispensaries within 600 feet of homes, saying it stepped on the powers of cities and counties that already have authority to regulate pot shops.
The governor also signed 28 measures into law, making it easier for California firms to sell wine over the Internet and allowing bars to infuse alcohol with fruits and vegetables for use in cocktails.
Brown has until Oct. 9 to act on nearly 600 bills sent to him by the Legislature this year and has already wielded his veto pen several times, complaining about the state imposing too many standards on communities and families.
On the medical marijuana issue, the governor noted that he had previously signed a measure giving cities and counties clearer authority to regulate the location and operation of dispensaries.
“Decisions of this kind are best made in cities and counties, not the State Capitol,” Brown wrote in his veto message.
The bill was SB 847, by state Sen. Lou Correa (D-Santa Ana), who said he wanted to allow cities to chose their own regulations and to protect children living near such facilities from second-hand smoke.
The governor signed a bill Wednesday allowing wine merchants without stores to obtain a special state license to sell to customers over the Internet or by telephone or direct mail. Assemblyman Das Williams (D-Santa Barbara) introduced AB 623 because current law provides for an alcohol wholesaler’s license but requires holders to periodically sell to other retailers, even if they only want to sell directly to customers on the Internet.
The governor also signed a measure eliminating a state prohibition against bars and restaurants providing infused alcoholic beverages, with fruits, vegetables, herbs and spices added to spirits for flavor.
Sen. Mark Leno (D-San Francisco), author of SB 32, said the restrictions were decades old and were intended to address health concerns about the infusion process. Modern methods make the practice safe, he said.
On another measure, Brown exercised his veto pen and took a swipe at its author in the process.
With budget cuts forcing many state parks to close or reduce operations, Sen. Tom Harman (R-Huntington Beach) proposed that the state post details of potential park closures on a website and respond to any efforts from the private sector to help keep them open.
Brown said the idea in Harman’s bill, SB 386, was good but didn’t require a state law.
“What parks do need is sufficient funding to stay open — something I feel compelled to note the author and his colleagues refused to let the people vote on,” Brown wrote in his veto message, referring to Republican opposition to putting tax extensions on the ballot.
Bruno Mars tickets running for $2,000 and ones for SZA costing $600 caught California lawmakers’ attention. They’re advancing two bills targeting the resale market.
Earlier this year, tickets to see SZA perform at the Crypto Arena in Los Angeles were selling for $600 the day before they officially went on sale at $35 a piece.
In San Francisco, tickets to see Sam Smith at the newly renovated Castro Theater went on sale for $120, only to be quickly snatched up by scalpers and resold for upwards of $600.
Those are some of the stories that California lawmakers are citing as they advance two plans to change the ticketing landscape. One caps the extent to which resellers can mark up the original ticket price while the other prohibits resellers from selling tickets they don’t yet own.
Democratic Assemblymembers Issac Bryan of Culver City and Matt Haney of San Francisco are each carrying bills that they say would protect consumers from fraudulent and deceptive ticket sales.
Both measures are backed by the ticket market’s dominant seller, Beverly Hills-based Live Nation, which owns Ticketmaster. Its support has some worried that the bills will help the company crush its competitors and jack up prices.
A federal jury in New York this week found that the company illegally acted as a monopoly in a victory for, among others, California Attorney General Rob Bonta, who with colleagues in other states sued the company two years ago and kept going after federal prosecutors settled. Live Nation is now awaiting penalties.
Despite these headwinds, the ticket bills are sailing through the Legislature.
Supporters say the legislation has nothing to do with the antitrust case against Live Nation and helps consumers. Opponents disagree.
“The state Legislature should really be standing up for consumers instead of advancing bills that are there to help a monopoly that has been caught on record calling its fans stupid and has bragged about robbing them blind,” said Jose Barrera, national vice president for the far west region at the League of United Latin American Citizens, a civil rights advocacy group.
Ticketmaster’s competitors in the online resale market are lobbying against the measures, a sign that they view the proposals as a threat to their business.
Jack Sterne, StubHub’s head of policy communications, wrote to CalMatters, stating, “Passing laws that hand the Ticketmaster monopoly more power and don’t actually make tickets more affordable is the last thing California’s leaders should do.”
But Stephen Parker, executive director of the National Independent Venue Association, which is co-sponsoring the bills, argues that they will regulate the marketplace to better protect fans by limiting price gouging and encouraging the face value — or below face value — exchange of tickets.
“Ultimately, that is what these bills will do, in addition to making sure that the tickets are actually real,” he said. “That is a good thing for California consumers. It’s a good thing for artists and it’s a good thing for these small businesses and nonprofits that make up the independent stages across the state.”
A Live Nation spokesperson said in a statement to CalMatters, “The resale lobby constantly tries to change the subject by pointing fingers at Ticketmaster, even though it has less than 25% of the resale market. This has nothing to do with anyone’s monopoly, but rather is about protecting fans from scalpers and the resale sites that cater to them.”
The company has spent roughly $165,000 on lobbying efforts this legislative session, including to support Bryan’s bill.
‘Unlikely allies’
Bryan’s Assembly Bill 1349 would ban the sale of speculative tickets — or tickets that are not in the possession or ownership of the people who list them online. In an April hearing, Bryan said the bill protects consumers from predatory mark ups.
“This bill is so important that, after our introduction, it brought unlikely allies together,” Bryan said, according to the CalMatters Digital Democracy database. “In fact, this bill brought the Giants and the Dodgers together, brought the National Independent Venue Association and Live Nation together. It brought Kendrick Lamar and Kid Rock together. It brought Isaac Bryan and Donald Trump together.”
Several secondary ticket sellers are fighting the measure, including StubHub, SeatGeek and Vivid Seats. The three companies have spent roughly $1.1 million dollars on lobbying efforts this legislative session, which included opposition to Bryan’s bill.
People watch fireworks during Bad Bunny’s halftime show from a parking garage outside Super Bowl LX at Levi’s Stadium in Santa Clara on Feb. 8, 2026. Photo by Jungho Kim for CalMatters
Opponents including Robert Herrell, executive director for the Consumer Federation of California, argue that the bill strengthens Live Nation Ticketmaster’s grip on the ticketing and live entertainment industry. According to them, the measure would give Live Nation complete control over the ticket even after it has been purchased — meaning, for example, that consumers could lose the ability to sell it or give it away.
“There’s no consumer choice in the matter,” said Herrell. “They can keep people out of shows if they want to. There have been situations where, if you bought a ticket on the secondary market, you’ve been denied entry into a show.” Proponents say Herrell and other opponents are mistaken. They say they are not trying to prevent transferability but rather, they want to protect fans from speculative costs.
“We want those rooms full,” said Ron Gubitz, executive director of Music Artists Coalition, which is co-sponsoring both bills. “So you have to be able to transfer a ticket. We just want it to be in a way that’s safe, trustworthy and not creating this run on the market that exists now.”
Gubitz pointed to a recent Bruno Mars concert, where tickets were on StubHub for $400 to $2,000 before they were on sale through Ticketmaster.
“That’s crazy,” he said. “That’s a speculative ticket that Bryan’s bill is trying to stop. That shouldn’t happen. It’s not fair to anybody, except for the secondary (market). It seems great for them.”
Price caps in a free market
Haney’s Assembly Bill 1720, also known as the California Fans First Act, would put a 10% cap on resale event ticket markups, inclusive of the ticket fees. In other words, a reseller could not charge more than 10% higher than the original ticket price.
In an interview with CalMatters, Haney said artists, independent venues and downtowns are currently being “screwed over and exploited” by scalpers and brokers.
“We can’t allow the status quo to continue if we want to ensure Californians have access to affordable tickets to see their favorite artists or if we want independent venues or the broader landscape of musicians and artists to thrive in our state,” he said.
Haney rejected the idea that his bill would strengthen the Live Nation Ticketmaster monopoly, saying that the company is one of the biggest operators and profiteers of the secondary ticket market and would therefore be subject to the same restrictions as any other platform or broker.
“I don’t think it’s a free market to allow folks to come in and buy up all these tickets and then create scarcity and then you’re now required to buy your ticket at a much higher price from someone who had nothing to do with the event,” he said. “This is not something we would ever allow for airplane tickets or even dinner reservations.”
The bill has been criticized by opponents like Diana Moss, vice president and director of competition policy at Progressive Policy Institute, who said price caps notoriously distort the market, describing them as “anti-consumer, anti-competitive and anti-artist.”
“If you shut down the resale market with price caps then guess what? Ticket buyers have no place to go but right back to Ticketmaster,” said Moss. “If (Live Nation) succeed(s) in decimating the resale market, then they steer millions and millions of fans back to their own ticketing platform where they charge monopoly ticket fees and where fans are hostage to their glitchy online platform and all of their data, privacy and security concerns that we always hear about in the news.”
Those concerns didn’t stop the bill from passing out of the Assembly Committee on Arts, Entertainment, Sports and Tourism last week with a 6-1 vote. The bill also passed out of the Assembly Committee on Privacy & Consumer Protection on Thursday with a 9-4 vote.
Mihalovich is a California Local News fellow for CalMatters.
The Legislature voted in Boston to overturn Gov. Mitt Romney’s veto and approved a bill designed to propel the state to the forefront of embryonic stem cell research.
The bill immediately became law over Romney’s objections, after both chambers exceeded the two-thirds vote needed to override a veto. The vote was 112-42 in the House and 35-2 in the Senate.
The Republican governor vetoed the bill last week because it allowed the cloning of human embryos for use in stem cell experiments — a practice Romney said amounted to creating life in order to destroy it.
WASHINGTON — In a rare bipartisan moment, the House passed legislation Thursday that would extend temporary protections for Haitian immigrants, a long-shot effort fighting back against President Trump’s attempts to end the program.
The bill, pushed forward by House Democrats with a group of Republicans over the objections of the GOP leadership, would require a three-year extension of temporary protected status for Haitians by the Trump administration. That would allow hundreds of thousands of qualifying immigrants to remain in the United States without fear of deportation.
The vote was 224-204, drawing applause in the chamber. But it faces uncertainty in the Senate, and the Republican president would almost certainly seek to veto it.
“I know firsthand how important our Haitian neighbors are to our communities, to our civic life, to our culture, to our workforce, to our economy,” said Democratic Rep. Ayanna Pressley of Massachusetts, who is co-chair of the House Haiti Caucus and represents one of the largest Haitian communities in the country.
During the debate, she recounted the number of Haitian immigrants working in healthcare, housing construction and other industries. Haitians with temporary legal status “are not the problem, quite the contrary, they are part of the solution,” she said.
Pressley has said deporting Haitians back to the troubled Caribbean country would be a “death sentence,” given the effects of natural disasters and gang violence. “Congress can do the right thing,” she said.
Ten Republicans, many from districts with large numbers of Haitian residents, joined all Democrats and one independent in voting for passage.
Congress tries to act before the Supreme Court does
The effort to help 350,000 Haitians living lawfully in the United States comes as the administration is working to end the temporary legal status for several groups, exposing them to deportation.
In less than two weeks, the Supreme Court is prepared to consider a fast-track case that would end the protected status for Haitian and Syrian immigrants in a challenge widely seen as threatening the broader program. The administration filed emergency appeals after lower courts stopped the immediate end of the program.
It is part of the administration’s efforts to strip certain immigrant groups of legal status as the White House works to fulfill Trump’s campaign promise of conducting the largest mass deportation operation in history. Some 1.3 million people fleeing countries around the world have been granted temporary protected status in the U.S.
The protections for Haiti, first approved after a devastating 2010 earthquake, have been extended multiple times. The State Department warns Americans not to travel to Haiti “due to kidnapping, crime, terrorist activity, civil unrest.”
Guerline Jozef, executive director of the Haitian Bridge Alliance, an advocacy organization, fought back tears as she described the fear of deportations coursing through the community.
“We are asking, where will you be? On the right side of history?” she said at a news conference outside the Capitol. “Or continuing to cause trauma to people who are asking for nothing other than safety and protection?”
Trump has described migrants from poorer countries in vulgar terms, and he has falsely accused Haitian migrants in Ohio of eating their neighbors’ cats and dogs.
The conservative majority court has allowed the end of temporary legal status for a total of 600,000 people from Venezuela while lawsuits play out, leaving them to face potential deportation.
Lawmakers debate whether to help Haitians or stick with Trump
Rep. Laura Gillen (D-N.Y.) whose district includes Long Island’s Haitian community, said she promised constituents she would work to protect their status. She introduced the legislation with Republican Rep. Mike Lawler of New York as soon as she took office last year.
“It’s cruel to expect Haitians to be forced to return to these deadly, dangerous conditions,” she said at a news conference. “Human lives are at risk.”
Lawler said there are differences of opinion on immigration policy, but that Haitian immigrants have become vital to his community and forcing them out would be unjust and unwise.
“They are small business owners, they are nurses, they are caregivers, they participate in our economy and take care of American citizens,” he said. “Congress has a responsibility to act.”
But Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) decried the number of immigrants, including Haitians, who have entered the U.S., and cited Democratic efforts to halt funding for enforcement and deportation efforts.
“Make temporary permanent,” he said, “that’s their plan.”
Rep. Brandon Gill (R-Texas) said the program was “backdoor amnesty” for foreigners.
To Rep. Tom McClintock (R-Calif.), the temporary status first granted under the Obama administration has become “an open-ended invitation” for immigrants to enter the country, including some illegally, and remain.
“The Trump administration has heeded the cries of the American people,” he said.
Using a discharge petition to force votes
The vote was the latest effort by House Democrats to maneuver past the Republican majority using a discharge petition — once a rare tool, but now used increasingly to form bipartisan coalitions.
The discharge petition process forces the bill to the House floor for consideration, powering past House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) and GOP leaders. It was used to help pass legislation that required the Justice Department to release the files of the sex trafficking investigation of Jeffrey Epstein.
Republicans hold a slim majority in the House and are typically able to swat back such efforts from Democrats. But Democrats and Republicans have formed bipartisan alliances to reach the majority needed on the discharge petitions.
Pressley’s effort to discharge the bill won support from four Republicans on the initial petition, and several more once it came to the floor vote.
President Trump has signed a bill restoring federal funding to tech startups in California and elsewhere, money that had been held up for more than six months.
The Small Business Administration money, a key source of capital for new aerospace and defense firms in the Los Angeles region, ran out in October after a Congressional impasse.
They provide more than $4 billion in seed funding to commercial startups that provide valuable services to the government and public, stimulate the economy and help maintain the country’s competitive edge.
The money is awarded by multiple agencies, including the Health and Human Services and Energy departments and NASA, with the military distributing the largest portion.
Sen. Joni Ernst (R-Iowa), chair of the Senate Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship, held up reauthorization over concerns some startups had become reliant on the money instead of developing commercial businesses. She proposed a bill with a $75-million lifetime funding cap for individual companies.
Sen. Ed Markey of Massachusetts, the committee’s ranking Democrat, contended the bill would crimp innovation and hurt companies.
The reauthorization includes no lifetime caps but requires departments to set limits on how many times companies can apply each year for the SBA funding, prioritizing startups .
The bill also establishes a Strategic Breakthrough Allocation program that awards up to $30 million in SBA funding to a single company provided it can bring in matching funding.
The new program is intended to assist startups to become commercially viable after they run through their SBIR or STTR funding, which are intended to fund feasibility studies and prototypes. STTR requires a partnership with a research institution.
Other provisions in the bill include new due diligence standards to prevent any tech developed by the startups from falling into the hands of adversaries such as China .
“With a bipartisan, five-year reauthorization signed into law, small businesses are once again empowered to create these innovative technologies and tackle our nation’s most pressing challenges head-on,” Markey said in a statement.
SACRAMENTO — Legislation to move the California presidential primary from early June to early March, in an effort to make the state a more important player in presidential politics, passed the Assembly on Wednesday.
The bill was sent to the Senate on a 43-22 vote. If approved there, it will go to Gov. Pete Wilson, who has said he favors moving up the primary date.
A March date would make California the first large-population state to hold a presidential primary or a caucus.
Assemblyman Jim Costa (D-Fresno), the measure’s author, said Californians have been “no more than onlookers” as presidential candidates have been selected in recent years. Costa said the California vote last affected the outcome of a Democratic primary in 1972, while the state has not played a major role in a Republican selection since the 1964 contest between Barry Goldwater and Nelson Rockefeller.
Assemblyman Richard Katz (D-Sylmar) said California “has been treated like a 24-hour ATM machine,” with candidates raising large amounts of money in this state but spending it on primaries and caucuses elsewhere.
Assemblyman Pat Nolan (R-Glendale) denounced the proposal as an “expensive boondoggle to allow people in this building to become kingmakers.” Nolan also said moving up the primary date would make it difficult for the Legislature or the courts to arrive at a reapportionment plan well in advance of the primary.
But Costa said a March primary would cost no more than an election in June and that “modern computers can draw reapportionment lines quickly.”
Forty Democrats were joined by three Republicans–Assemblymen Gerald N. Felando of San Pedro, David G. Kelley of Hemet and Charles W. Quackenbush of Saratoga–in supporting the bill. All 22 no votes were cast by Republicans.
Coachella is never cheap, much less this year’s sold-out edition with the long-awaited live return of Justin Bieber. But if you’re looking to score a last-minute pass, you likely lost your swag when you saw the resale prices on secondary sites like StubHub.
As of Friday afternoon, you’ll pay between $4,000 and $5,000 for a sold-out weekend one GA pass on StubHub. (Prices are lower for weekend two on Coachella’s official resale site. Weekend one tickets originally retailed for $649).
“That’s insane,” said California Assemblymember Matt Haney (D-San Francisco), who has introduced AB 1720, the California Fans First Act, to combat extortionate ticket re-selling. Haney’s bill would ban reselling tickets at more than 10% above face value in California.
“We’ve allowed live events including Coachella to be dominated by speculators who aren’t fans, but who simply want to profit off these events,” he continued. “They didn’t contribute to Coachella, they don’t play an instrument. They’re using events as a way to screw over fans and jack up prices. The result is that people who are Justin Bieber fans pay eight or nine times over the face value of a ticket.”
The proposal comes as the U.S. Department of Justice recently announced a settlement with Live Nation in a federal suit that will allow it to keep control of Ticketmaster. Many states, including California, are looking at options to pursue their own legal action and legislation to fix a ticket market fans have come to see as deeply broken.
Coachella, produced by Goldenvoice and AEG, isn’t affiliated with Live Nation or Ticketmaster. But eye-watering secondary market prices are an example of how desirable concerts have become a hot commodity for predatory resellers.
“We’ve got to break up [Live Nation’s] monopoly, but there is a problem with the secondary market and the ways we’ve allowed scalpers to crowd out fans. That exists on all platforms,” Haney said. “We’ve got to address monopolies and ridiculous fees in direct ticket sales, but we also can’t allow scalpers to buy up tickets to profit off the art of others. I have no doubt that if we didn’t allow gambling on ticket prices, there would still be Coachella tickets available for fans.”
The issue of high concert prices is multifaceted, and artists and promoters play more of a role than many fans want to believe. The technology exists for many tours to do what Haney’s bill proposes — cap resale prices — on their own. Fans clearly are willing to pay extremely high prices for in-demand performances like Coachella.
“If people are willing to pay a lot to see a performance,” Haney said, “Those dollars should go to the artist, to folks who work at the event. If demand is high, tickets may be expensive, but we shouldn’t allow scalpers to create scarcity and higher prices.”
If the California Fans First Act were to pass (it’s still working through the Assembly) it would bring the state‘s ticket market more in line with many European countries that already ban exorbitant resale practices. Other states like New York are considering similar legislation, and in the absence of federal action to address issues in the ticket market, state legislation may be the next best option.
Haney hopes California — a state whose cultural identity and economy is deeply tied to live music — can lead on that front.
“There is no California without creators and culture and music,” he said. “It’s the heart and soul of who we are, it’s a massive part of our economy and part of our culture. We have to make sure creators can receive the support for their art, and that fans have the opportunity to experience it. Right now, we’re losing on both fronts. There’s an urgency for this legislation here more than anywhere because of how central it is to who we are.”
Survivors of the devastating Eaton fire called on state lawmakers on Wednesday to pass a bill requiring audits of spending by Southern California Edison and the state’s two other big for-profit electric companies on wildfire prevention.
The survivors pointed to an investigation by The Times that found that Edison had not spent hundreds of millions of dollars that it told regulators before the fire was needed to keep its transmission system safe. Edison had begun charging customers for the costs.
“Californians funded the wildfire prevention,” Joy Chen, executive director of Every Fire Survivor’s Network, told members of the Assembly Utilities and Energy Commission on Wednesday. ”And we survivors paid the price when that work was not done.”
While the government’s investigation into the fire has not yet been released, Edison has said it believes that a century-old transmission line, which had not carried power since 1971, may have briefly re-energized on the night of Jan. 7, 2025, to ignite the fire. The inferno killed 19 people and destroyed thousands of homes and other structures in Altadena.
Chen’s wildfire survivors group and Consumer Watchdog sponsored the bill, known as Assembly Bill 1744. It would require the wildfire safety spending by Edison, Pacific Gas & Electric and San Diego Gas & Electric to be audited by an independent accounting firm.
The state Public Utilities Commission would have to consider the audits’ findings before agreeing to raise customer rates to cover even more wildfire spending.
“Had Edison known it would be accountable for those funds, that wildfire may not have started,” Jamie Court of Consumer Watchdog told the committee, referring to the Eaton fire.
All three utilities said at the hearing they opposed the bill.
A lobbyist for San Diego Gas & Electric said he believed the audits were unnecessary because the commission was already reviewing the spending.
“We think it creates a duplicative process,” he said.
At the committee hearing, Edison’s lobbyist did not say why the company was opposed to the bill.
The company has previously said that safety is its top priority and that it does not believe maintenance on its transmission lines suffered before the Eaton fire.
Also voicing support for the bill at the hearing were survivors of other deadly wildfires in the state, including the 2018 Camp fire, which killed 85 people and destroyed much of the town of Paradise. Investigators found that the fire was ignited when equipment failed on a decades-old PG&E transmission line.
The bill’s author, Assemblywoman Tasha Boerner, an Encinitas Democrat, pointed to how independent audits of the three companies’ wildfire spending from 2019 to 2020 found that $2.5 billion could not be accounted for.
Those were the last independent audits of the three companies’ wildfire spending.
Despite the findings, the commission did not require the companies to return any of the questioned amounts to electric customers. Instead, the commission agreed the companies could spend billions of dollars more, Boerner said.
“This is frankly unacceptable,” she said.
Asked for a response to those audits, the lobbyist from San Diego Gas & Electric told the committee he wasn’t familiar with the findings.
California electric rates are the nation’s second highest after Hawaii.
In 2024, wildfire expenses amounted to 17% to 27% of the costs the three companies charge to consumers, according to a legislative analysis of Boerner’s bill. The average residential customer pays $250 to $490 a year for that spending.
A tourist in Tenerife bought a meal abroad for a family of seven, but people were left floored by the bill. Gemma Loveden was taken aback when she saw the cost
07:49, 09 Apr 2026Updated 07:49, 09 Apr 2026
The tourist in Tenerife was left floored by the bill (stock image)(Image: Getty Images/iStockphoto)
Lots of people visit Tenerife to soak up the sun and enjoy a much needed break abroad, but the cost of food has left some a little floored. Mum Gemma Loveden previously took her family of seven for a meal out in the Canary Islands hotspot, and the cost was quite unexpected.
When visiting Tenerife, the family opted to sample treats from steak to pizza, and they washed their food down with drinks when they soaked up the holiday atmosphere. Despite the prices likely being on the menu, the family were left gobsmacked by how reasonable the bill was when it was presented to them at the restaurant.
She shared a clip, stating: “Evening meal this evening cost €54.84 (around £45)”. She wasn’t the only person who was impressed by the value either.
Content cannot be displayed without consent
After the clip was shared, several people commented to share their thoughts. People were stunned by how cheap it was.
One user admitted: “That would be £150 easy in Turkey.” Another wrote: “How? That’s amazing!”
A third commenter added: “Good price. We normally pay roughly €50 to €60 for three people.” Meanwhile, a fourth exclaimed: “Amazing value, and your kids seem very well behaved too. That’s amazing.”
Others were also impressed with her children’s table manners. One noted: “Love their table etiquette. Great parenting.”
Someone else also replied: “That’s amazing. I live in Cyprus. It would be much more than that.”
While it’s no secret that the cost of a lot of things has increased lately, food is generally considered reasonably priced in Tenerife. When compared to the rest of Europe, it’s believed to be one of the most affordable places to eat.
Obviously, holidays can be as cheap or expensive as you choose to make them though. Despite this, you can bag some budget meals when you’re out and about.
Dining out is popular with tourists, with budget meals reported to range from €6 to €15 and mid-range meals averaging €20 to €40 per person. This is considered to be excellent value when compared to other major European cities.
If you’ve never been to Tenerife, it’s a popular destination due to its “eternal spring” climate. The island offers year-round sunshine and warmth and it’s just a few hours’ flight from mainland Europe.
Many people love it as it homes a diverse mix of affordable beach resorts, volcanic landscapes (including Mount Teide), vibrant nightlife and family-friendly attractions. It’s popular with those who enjoy a spot of winter sun too.
1 of 2 | Bill Gates, co-founder of Microsoft, attends a dinner hosted by President Donald Trump with U.S. tech leaders at the White House in Washington D.C., on September 4. Gates agreed to an interview with the House Oversight Committee related to its Jeffrey Epstein investigation. File Photo by Will Oliver/UPI | License Photo
April 7 (UPI) —Bill Gates is expected to give testimony to the House Oversight Committee in its investigation of convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, the Microsoft co-founder’s representative said Tuesday.
Gates will appear for a transcribed interview June 10, unnamed sources familiar with the arrangement told Politico, CNBC and CBS News.
A representative for Gates told Politico he “welcomes” the testimony.
“While he never witnessed or participated in any of Epstein’s illegal conduct, he is looking forward to answering all the committee’s questions to support their important work,” the representative said.
Gates’ relationship with the late Epstein has drawn scrutiny after documents released by the Justice Department included email drafts by Epstein implicating Gates. In the drafts, Epstein claims he arranged sexual encounters for Gates.
Gates has denied that Epstein arranged such encounters and said he interacted with Epstein only on philanthropic discussions. He said he also never traveled to Epstein’s island, Little St. James, and “never met any women.”
Lisa Phillips, a survivor of Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell, speaks out during a rally with other survivors on Capitol Hill in Washington on September 3, 2025. Photo by Anna Rose Layden/UPI | License Photo
April 7 (UPI) — Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis has signed legislation authorizing state officials to designate certain groups as domestic or foreign terrorist organizations, creating a mechanism to punish those blacklisted in the Sunshine State.
The legislation creates a mechanism for Florida to sever funding, contracting and other ties to blacklisted groups. If a corporation is named, the state may pursue proceedings to dissolve it.
“We must defend our institutions from those who would harm us — especially terrorist organizations that seek to infiltrate and subvert our education system,” DeSantis said in a statement.
The bill specifically authorizes Florida’s chief of domestic security to designate groups as domestic or foreign terrorist organizations, subject to approval from the governor and Cabinet, if certain conditions are met.
Once designated, state agencies, political subdivisions and public school districts are barred from working with, supporting or taking money from them.
If the designated entity is a corporation, then the state may begin proceedings to dissolve it. It also creates criminal consequences for actions involving designated domestic terrorist organizations, including receiving military-type training from them, providing them with material support or resources and willfully becoming a member.
It also imposes consequences for schools, including secondary education, for promoting designated organizations and requires the immediate expulsion of students determined to have promoted them.
The bill also prohibits Florida courts or other adjudicatory bodies from enforcing any provision of what it calls “religious or foreign law” if it is inconsistent with federal or state law. The legislation specifically states Sharia law, the religious legal system of Islam.
“This legislation reinforces that the U.S. Constitution and Florida law remain the supreme authority in our court systems, preventing any foreign or religious legal code from overriding fundamental rights,” State Rep. Hillary Cassel, the bill’s sponsor, said in a statement after her legislation was signed into law.
The Florida chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations issued a statement of concern on Monday over the potential misuse of the designation power, highlighting DeSantis’ previous attempt to designate it as a terrorist organization via executive order. before a judge blocked the blacklisting.
“This is not just about CAIR. This expanded and deeply flawed framework can attack any organization that dares to dissent,” CAIR-Florida Executive Director Hiba Rahim said in a statement.
“As Floridians, together, we’ll watch how this unprecedented law is enforced, and whether it is used or abused.”
A California state senator alleges that police officers fabricated evidence to falsely accuse her of driving under the influence after she was T-boned at an intersection near the state Capitol.
Their motive, she claims, was discriminatory bias and a piece of legislation she wrote that law enforcement agencies did not like.
Now, she is suing the city of Sacramento alleging “a deliberate and unlawful campaign to falsely accuse, arrest, and discredit her.”
On Monday, state Sen. Sabrina Cervantes (D-Riverside) filed a federal lawsuit against the city as well as the police officers who cited her for driving under the influence in May. The Sacramento district attorney’s office declined to file charges after a blood test showed there were no traces of drugs or alcohol in her system.
Cervantes accuses officers of pushing forward with an arrest despite lacking probable cause and building a case against her based on false statements. She said officers submitted false information to the DMV, forcing her to retain a lawyer to stop her license from being suspended or revoked, according to the complaint.
The Riverside County legislator alleges that this conduct was in retaliation for a bill she authored seeking to restrict how law enforcement agencies store and use data from automatic license plate readers. She claims that officers discriminated against her as an LGBTQ Latina woman and provided more respectful treatment to the white woman who was at fault in the crash.
Cervantes further alleges that unknown parties within the Sacramento Police Department leaked news of her arrest to the press in a deliberate attempt to tarnish her reputation. Representatives for both the city and the Police Department said Monday that they were unable to comment on pending litigation.
“This case is about the abuse of power,” Cervantes’ attorney James Quadra said in a statement Monday. “Officers ignored the facts, fabricated evidence, and tried to turn a victim into a criminal.”
In September, Cervantes filed a government claim against the city, a necessary precursor to taking further legal action. Her lawsuit, filed in the District Court for the Eastern District of California, seeks damages for violations of federal civil rights and state law, including false arrest, unlawful search and seizure, and defamation.
The crash took place at 12:55 p.m. on May 19, 2025, when Cervantes’ car was hit by a driver who failed to yield to the right of way at an intersection in downtown Sacramento. The state senator was transported to a nearby hospital for treatment where officers met and interviewed her for hours, according to the complaint.
The complaint alleges that “despite clear damage to the vehicles showing that the other driver, a young white woman, had t-boned Senator Cervantes’ vehicle” the responding officer “treated the at-fault driver with a deference and respect which was not accorded to Senator Cervantes.”
At the hospital, one of the officers requested that Cervantes submit to a “subjective sobriety test” that included measuring her eye’s response to stimuli, according to the complaint. Cervantes said she was troubled by this request given that she broke no traffic laws and was the victim of a dangerous driver.
In order to obtain a warrant to obtain a blood draw, the officer “falsely claimed that Senator Cervantes had an unsteady gait, slurred speech, and an appearance of drowsiness,” the complaint alleges.
After news of the crash became public, a spokesperson for the Sacramento Police Department told reporters that “based on the objective signs, officers believed that Cervantes was under the influence of a central nervous system depressant.” Redacted test results Cervantes chose to share with the media showed she had a near-zero blood alcohol level, and the district attorney declined to file charges later that month.
Her lawsuit accuses parties within the Police Department of falsely telling the media she was driving under the influence “with the intent to harm Senator Cervantes because of her sponsorship of SB Bill 274 and her status as a Latina member of the LGBTQ+ community.”
The bill sought to restrict law enforcement’s use of automatic license plate readers, following concerns that the technology was being used to violate driver’s privacy and that data was being unlawfully shared with agencies outside of the state.
Civil liberty groups such as the ACLU have demanded that California police stop sharing automatic license plate reader data with out-of-state agencies that could use it to prosecute women traveling to seek abortion care.
In June, an investigation by Calmatters found that law enforcement agencies across Southern California, including the Los Angeles Police Department, violated state law by sharing information from automated license plate readers with Border Patrol and Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents.
Senate Bill 274 passed the state Senate and Assembly but was vetoed in October by Gov. Gavin Newsom, who sided with law enforcement agencies that expressed concerns over how the bill could hinder their ability to solve crimes.
The bill would have limited the lists agencies could use to monitor for certain cars, required enhanced data security and privacy training for officers and mandated that certain data be deleted after 60 days.
In a letter explaining his veto, Newsom wrote that the bill “failed to strike the delicate balance between protecting individual privacy and ensuring public safety.” He noted that, in instances such as cold cases, license plate data are needed to solve crimes beyond a 60-day window.
White is the latest festival alum added to the bill for a surprise slot in recent years, joining the likes of Weezer and Ed Sheeran in 2025, Blink-182 in 2023 and Arcade Fire in 2022.
The sold-out festival is topped by Sabrina Carpenter on Friday, Justin Bieber on Saturday and Karol G on Sunday. Carpenter has the earliest headlining spot of the three, with a set scheduled for 9:05 to 10:35 p.m. Following Carpenter on opening night is electronic artist Anyma, who is debuting a production called “Æden” at midnight on the Coachella stage.
It’s free to see, but there’s a reservation system for a time slot. People who can’t make a reservation will be admitted on a first-come, first-served basis.
On the Coachella website, it describes the Bunker as being located near the Sahara Tent.
