block

June 5 (Asia Today) — Protesters who had blocked a polling station in Seoul’s Songpa district for two nights and three days moved Friday to a vote-counting center, demanding a new election after ballot shortages disrupted voting in the June 3 local elections.

The ballot boxes from the No. 2 polling station in Jamsil 7-dong were transferred and counted after about 1,000 police officers were deployed. But protesters said they could not accept the result and effectively occupied the entrance area of the counting center, calling for a revote.

About 300 people, including citizens and conservative YouTubers, gathered near the entrance of the Olympic Park handball arena, according to an unofficial police estimate.

Even after the counting was completed, protesters chanted slogans including “revote” and “invalidate the vote.” Some protesters have alleged election fraud, but election authorities have attributed the disruption to a shortage of ballot papers during voting.

The atmosphere grew tense as access for election workers and arena employees was effectively blocked. Some arena employees who tried to leave were reportedly stopped by protesters and remained inside.

Police continued to guard the area around the arena after the vote count ended. Officials at the scene were considering sending election commission workers home first and removing vote-counting materials separately.

The protest followed a broader ballot shortage controversy in South Korea’s local elections. The National Election Commission said ballot shortages occurred at 50 polling stations nationwide and temporarily halted voting at 22 sites. The disruption drew public criticism and led the commission’s chairman, Roh Tae-ak, to announce his resignation Friday.

Earlier, protesters blocked the removal of ballot boxes from Jamsil 7-dong’s No. 2 polling station after a ballot shortage left voters waiting for hours. Police later escorted officials to retrieve the remaining ballot boxes, and the final count ended Friday afternoon.

— Reported by Asia Today; translated by UPI

© Asia Today. Unauthorized reproduction or redistribution prohibited.

Original Korean report: https://www.asiatoday.co.kr/kn/view.php?key=20260605010001909

The state of California is leading an effort to prepare a possible lawsuit that could thwart Paramount Skydance Corp.’s planned acquisition of Warner Bros. Discovery, a potential obstacle for the $111 billion deal.

The lawsuit, which could be filed as early as this month, would likely involve multiple states, according to a source familiar with the deliberations who was not authorized to comment publicly.

The litigation would seek to challenge the proposed merger on antitrust grounds, arguing it would thwart competition, lower wages and lead to widespread job losses.

“The Paramount acquisition of Warner Brothers remains an active investigation, and we do not have any updates to share at this time,” said California Atty. General Rob Bonta’s office in a statement.

In a statement, Paramount said it “will continue to fight against any attempt to derail a deal that plainly benefits consumers, creators and the industry as whole.”

“Opposing this deal means opposing expanded consumer choice, new opportunities for creators and workers, and greater competition throughout the creative ecosystem — the opposite of what antitrust law is meant to achieve,” the company added.

Warner Bros. Discovery shareholders in April approved the sale of the company to Paramount after Netflix dropped out of the auction.

Under Paramount Chairman David Ellison’s proposal, Warner investors would receive $31 a share, nearly four times the price of the company’s stock in April 2025. He also said he will keep both studios’ release schedules of 15 movies a year for a total of 30 films a year.

Nonetheless, Ellison and his team have vowed to make $6 billion in cuts following the merger, which requires regulatory approval. The combined company would have to contend with $79 billion in deal debt.

The prospect of substantial job cuts during a period of downsizing in Hollywood has ignited widespread opposition to the sale.

Thousands of people who work in the TV and film industry, including actor Joaquin Phoenix and director-writer-producer JJ Abrams signed an open letter opposing Paramount’s planned acquisition of WBD, saying it would lead to fewer production jobs and fewer choices for consumers. Others have also raised concerns about the impact it could have on content.

“The consequences would be felt nationwide, from destroying CNN the way that Ellisons have devastated CBS to entertainment industry job losses and consumers losing access to independent voices and a competitive market,” said Norm Eisen, executive chair of Democracy Defenders Fund, one of the groups that organized the open letter. “State attorneys general have both the authority and the responsibility to act when a transaction of this scale directly threatens the public’s interest, and I hope states across the country will join any effort to challenge this deal,” Eisen said in a statement.

The potential lawsuit, first reported by Bloomberg and Reuters, is being considered by other states, including New York and Colorado.

“Paramount and Warner Bros. haven’t cleared regulatory scrutiny,” Bonta told The Times in March. “My office has an open investigation into [the deal] and we intend to be vigorous in our review.”

Despite the potential obstacle, Raymond James equity analysts said in a note on Thursday that they “still believe the deal is likely to close.”

Last month, Paramount hired antitrust attorney Jeffrey Kessler to defend its planned acquisition of Warner Bros. Discovery. Kessler recently led a case for state attorney generals against concert promoter and ticketing firm Live Nation, resulting in a win for states, including California.

“We also think there are win/win solutions to be had particularly in California given exodus of production from CA in recent years and efforts to bring production back to Hollywood,” the analyst said in their note.

A congressional panel in the United States has rejected an effort to revoke a provision from the defence budget that would further integrate the US and Israeli militaries.

An amendment to sink the pro-Israel measure, introduced by Democratic Congressman Ro Khanna, failed in a voice call on Thursday in the House Armed Services Committee.

That defeat paves the way for the proposal to advance to the floor of the House of Representatives.

Khanna had argued that the provision in the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), formally called Section 224, rewards Benjamin Netanyahu at a time when the Israeli prime minister is trying to dictate US policy in the Middle East.

The progressive Democrat cited recent reports that President Donald Trump is angry at Netanyahu over Israel’s escalation in Lebanon.

“Everyone in America — whether you’re a Republican, an independent or a Democrat — says that we need to tell Netanyahu that America calls the shots, not the prime minister of any other country,” Khanna said.

“They want less cooperation and blank checks to Israel, not more. Only the United States Congress would dream up at this moment, ‘Let’s actually do more for Israel.’”

The vote on the amendment was taken by calling on committee members to say aloud either “yes” and “no”, and the “nays” clearly were more numerous. It was not recorded as a roll-call vote, which would require each member’s preference to be logged.

Section 224 would require the Pentagon chief “to designate an executive agent responsible for synchronising cooperative efforts between the United States and Israel”.

That official would be in charge of overseeing several joint initiatives, “including bilateral defence technology research, development, testing, evaluation, integration, and industrial cooperation”, the NDAA reads.

Netanyahu’s endorsement

Critics have raised concern that Section 224 may make US military aid to Israel more opaque, concealing the assistance as cooperation rather than a separate expense.

The measure also risks tethering the US military to its Israeli counterpart technologically at a time when the American public is rapidly turning against Israel, according to recent public opinion polls.

“As political pressure builds to reduce US military assistance to Israel, Section 224 provides the framework for continuing — and expanding — US-Israel military ties by entrenching Israeli technology within the US defense supply chain in a way that would shield it from the annual appropriations process,” the nonprofit lobbying group A New Policy said in a brief last week.

“The use of must-pass legislation as the NDAA as a mechanism of integration speaks to the plummeting popularity of continuing unconditional support to Israel.”

The measure comes as Netanyahu pushes to transform US aid to Israel from direct assistance to military “cooperation”.

The Israeli prime minister wrote a letter to Republican Congressman Marlin Stutzman endorsing a bill facilitating that transition.

In the letter, Netanyahu said, “The time has now arrived for us to move from aid recipient to partner.”

He added he supported Stutzman’s plan for a “new framework of joint defense cooperation, codevelopment, coproduction and mutual investment in areas including advanced missile defense, artificial intelligence … and next generation military platforms”.

Referencing the letter on Thursday, Khanna argued that Section 224 “directly” follows Netanyahu’s language.

“I am for Team America. I am for the interests of this country, and I believe that when Donald Trump ran, he ran ‘America First’,” the Democrat said.

“That includes American interests against any foreign country. We should have American sovereignty and make it clear that we strike 224. If we want to give aid to Israel, if we want to sell them weapons, that should be a vote for the entire Congress.”

But both Democrats and Republicans pushed back against his argument, saying that the provision aims to streamline existing cooperative programmes that benefit the US.

Key Democrat backs Section 224

Congressman Adam Smith, the top Democrat on the panel, said he was “very sympathetic” to Khanna’s frustration with Netanyahu.

“Mr Netanyahu insisted on this war with Iran that has strengthened Iran and weakened our position. I do not like his leadership of Israel or where he is going,” Smith said.

But he added that it is in the US’s interests to have deep military ties with Israel, a country accused by leading rights groups and United Nations investigators of committing genocide in Gaza.

“The reason that we have these partnerships with Israel, where we may not have as many developed partnerships with other NATO countries, is because Israel has actually been having to fight,” Smith said.

“They have faced drone attacks and missile attacks. They have had to develop new technologies, technologies that we’ve benefitted from.”

Rights advocates often decry the promotion of Israel’s weapons as “battle-tested” — because they have been tested on the Palestinian and Lebanese communities that they devastated, killing tens of thousands of people along the way.

Earlier on Thursday, Palestinian rights advocates warned against approving Section 224 during a news conference on Capitol Hill.

“It is unfathomable that this is the American response to a country that has, over the past two and a half years, carried out a genocide against Palestinians and started wars in both Iran and Lebanon,” said Margaret DeReus, the executive director at the Institute for Middle East Understanding (IMEU).

Republican Congressman Thomas Massie has promised to introduce an amendment to revoke Section 224 when the NDAA goes to a full House vote.

This is the moment the Republican-led US House of Representatives passed a resolution to reign in President Donald Trump’s ability to keep attacking Iran, unless Congress declares war or approves the use of military force. But it’s unlikely to become law as Trump can veto it even if it passes the Senate.

Members of Congress are looking to block the U.S. Navy from starting construction of the first nuclear-powered Trump class battleship until the service provides assurances that key weapon systems are “sufficiently mature.” The battleships are to be armed with railguns, high-power laser directed energy weapons, and other advanced weapons that have yet to be fully proven out. Legislators are also looking to compel the Navy to devise a strategy for future subvariants of the FF(X) frigate, including the potential for a version with a built-in Vertical Launch System (VLS). TWZ was first to confirm that the initial FF(X) design would lack a VLS, a decision that has prompted questions and criticism.

The battleship and frigate provisions are included in an early draft of the annual defense policy bill, or National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), for the 2027 Fiscal Year, which the House Armed Services Committee released late yesterday. The Trump class battleship and FF(X) are set to be some of the Navy’s top shipbuilding priorities in the coming years.

Tying the battleship construction timeline to weapon system progress

The section in the proposed legislation regarding the Trump class battleship is brief, reading as follows:

“The Secretary of the Navy may not enter into a contract or other agreement that includes a scope of work for the construction of the lead ship of the Battleship program until the date on which the Secretary certifies to the congressional defense committees that the weapon systems planned for inclusion in such lead ship are at a sufficiently mature technology readiness level.”

The provision does not name any particular weapon systems or define what level of “technology readiness” would be accepted as “sufficiently mature.”

The Navy currently plans to arm the 35,000-ton-displacement Trump class battleships with a mixture of nuclear and conventional missiles, an electromagnetic railgun, a pair of traditional 5-inch naval guns, various laser directed energy weapons, and additional weapon systems for close-in defense. The missiles, which will include hypersonic types, are to be loaded inside very large VLS arrays.

In terms of technological maturity, the railgun presents particular questions. Between 2005 and 2021, the Navy had an active railgun program. Despite promising developments, plans for an at-sea test were repeatedly pushed back before the entire effort was shelved. Major technical hurdles were cited as a key factor in that decision. The railgun itself was effectively placed in storage at White Sands Missile Range (WSMR) in New Mexico.

However, it emerged earlier this year that the Navy had conducted a new round of testing of the railgun at WSMR in February 2025. Whether the Navy has any plans to pick up where it left off with this prototype design, which was developed by BAE Systems, or pursue a new one remains unclear. General Atomics, which previously supported U.S. Army railgun efforts, has publicly expressed interest in being involved in arming the Trump class.

While the Navy has been very active in developing and fielding laser directed energy weapons, this is another area where the service has faced continued challenges in expanding their operational use. The plans for the Trump class specifically call for a 300-kilowatt-class laser, which is far more powerful than any of the designs the Navy has integrated on its warships to date. The service currently has eight Arleigh Burke class destroyers with the Optical Dazzling Interdictor, Navy (ODIN), as well as another one of those warships with the High Energy Laser with Integrated Optical-dazzler and Surveillance (HELIOS). HELIOS is a 60-kilowatt-class design, though there has been talk about scaling up its power rating to 150 kilowatts. ODIN’s power rating does not appear to be officially confirmed, but it is understood to be significantly lower than that of HELIOS. You can read more about all of this here.

The Intermediate Range Conventional Prompt Strike (IRCPS) hypersonic missile, another key component of the future Trump class arsenal, is also still in development. The first test launch from a warship, the stealth destroyer USS Zumwalt, is expected to come next year. IRCPS is the Navy half of a joint program with the U.S. Army, which is working to field a land-based version of the same missile. The Army refers to its complete weapon system as the Dark Eagle. The Army had suffered significant setbacks in the past with the Dark Eagle, but the service had blamed those issues on the launcher rather than the missile.

More context about what planned weapons systems for the Trump class may have prompted the House Armed Services Committee to include this section in the draft NDAA are likely to emerge as the proposed bill is refined. Nuclear propulsion and other planned aspects of the ship could present their own challenges during development and production. The U.S. Navy has not procured a nuclear-powered surface combatant of any kind since the Cold War.

For its part, the Navy has said it will leverage significant prior work on weapons and other systems to help reduce risk and ensure the battleship program remains on schedule.

“We intend to, with all we can do, use pull-through technologies, [including] things from that we’ve worked on with DDG(X),” Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Daryl Caudle said at a hearing earlier this month. “It will have the SPY-6 radar. It will have the Baseline 10 Aegis combat system. It will pull through, of course, the A1B Ford class reactor plant and all the design that goes with that. The only thing inherently new to it will be the actual hull itself, and so most of the fixtures in it. And I would say the directed energy [weapons] and up gunning, that will also be new.”

One of the “mistakes that we’ve done before, quite frankly,” is “we’ve started to build before the design is mature enough,” the CNO also said at a roundtable on the sidelines of the Navy League’s Sea Air Space 2026 in April. “And we want to make sure that we’re at [sic] least a very, very high level – I won’t try to give a percentage, but you can think like 80% or more design – before the first weld is done.”

The Navy is understood to still be in the very early phases of laying out the Trump class design.

The provision in the draft NDAA could easily delay the start of work on the first of these battleships, which could set back the entire schedule for the program. As it stands now, the Navy is looking to order the lead ship, set to be named the USS Defiant, in Fiscal Year 2028. With an estimated price tag of $17 billion, this ship would cost more than each of the next three Ford class aircraft carriers, and is not expected to enter service in 2036. The Navy also currently plans to buy 14 more battleships between Fiscal Years 2029 and 2055. As TWZ has previously explored in detail, many significant questions remain about the future of the Trump class, including whether the program will ultimately come to fruition at all.

Plans for future FF(X) frigate subvariants

In its current form, the draft NDAA would also require the Secretary of the Navy to “submit to the congressional defense committees a strategy for the iterative development of the FF(X) class frigate” within 180 days of the bill becoming law. The Secretary would also be compelled to provide a briefing to update legislators on their progress in devising this strategy within 90 days.

The strategy would have to include the following:

• “Information on the estimated timeline for each planned variant (commonly known as a ‘‘Flight’’) of the FF(X) class frigate”
• “Details on the integration of additional capabilities for future Flights of the frigate, such as vertical launch systems or improved sensors, and implications for the space, weight, power, and cost of the hull form.”
• Any additional mission sets or combat functions that may be added to the concept of operation for FF(X) class frigates.”

The Navy has already confirmed that the FF(X) design will based on that of the Legend class cutter currently in service with the U.S. Coast Guard. As mentioned, the fact that the first of these frigates, at least, will lack a VLS array has raised significant questions about this program.

The FF(X) configuration that has been shown so far will have essentially the same integrated armament as the Navy’s much-maligned Littoral Combat Ships (LCS). The limitations of both subclasses of LCS explicitly led the Navy to pursue the Constellation class frigate. Despite the Constellation class being based on the established Franco-Italian Fregate Europea Multi-Missione (FREMM; European Multi-Mission Frigate in English), repeated design changes turned the program into a boondoggle. It was finally cancelled last November.

The Constellation class would have featured a 32-cell Mk 41 VLS array. There had already been a debate about whether this was sufficient VLS capacity to meet operational requirements, something TWZ previously explored in detail.

The Navy’s current stated vision for the Flight I FF(X) configuration is to utilize containerized weapons and other systems to make up for gaps in integrated capabilities. The frigates are also expected to act as motherships for future fleets of uncrewed surface vessels, which could provide additional distributed weapons and sensor capabilities and capacity.

“While Flight I of the FF(X) Class (currently planned as at least the first 2 ships) does not incorporate a traditional fixed VLS battery, it retains the capability to deploy VLS-equivalent payloads through modular, mission-tailored configurations,” according to the Navy’s 2027 Fiscal Year budget request. “This approach provides an inherent growth path for VLS and other capabilities through containerized solutions in early flights, reinforcing the platform’s adaptability while mitigating cost, schedule, and integration risks associated with fixed VLS installation.”

A containerized VLS, in particular, would be far more limited in capacity than a traditional built-in Mk 41 and Mk 57 array.

At the same time, the Navy’s budget documents make clear that there are already plans for “studies for future flights [that] will consider expanded capabilities including Vertical Launch Systems, and Anti-Submarine Warfare systems.”

Huntington Ingalls Industries (HII), the shipbuilder behind the Legend class design on which the FF(X) will be based, has shown multiple concepts for derivatives with integrated VLS arrays and other additional capabilities in the past, as seen in the video below.

Patrol Frigate Variants – Information Video

When it comes to the battleship and FF(X) provisions in the draft NDAA, it is also important to remember that this legislation is not yet finalized and could easily change in the weeks and months ahead. The House’s version of the bill will also need to be reconciled with what the Senate puts forward, a process often marked by lengthy negotiations. The House and Senate will both need to pass the finalized version, and then the President has to sign it into law.

As the name makes clear, the battleship program is of particular significance to President Donald Trump, which will be an important factor in these processes. Even before his first term, Trump had expressed interest in returning battleships to the Navy’s combat fleets, but there had been no indications of any formal moves to pursue this ship before last year. With the schedule the Navy has laid out now, major decisions about how to proceed in the production of these ships, if at all, will fall to the next administration. There are already massive competing priorities, and some members of Congress have already questioned whether the battleship effort is the best use of available resources.

It’s also worth noting here that Trump has long been very outspoken when it comes to Navy shipbuilding design decisions, especially from an aesthetic perspective.

The House Armed Services Committee has at least taken steps now toward putting a hold on production of the first Trump class battleship until it is confident that key weapon systems are mature, as well as pushing the Navy to lay a formal plan for future versions of the FF(X) frigate.

Contact the author: joe@twz.com

A federal judge has declined to halt President Trump’s executive order creating a federal voter list and limiting mail voting, clearing the way for potential sweeping changes in how American elections are run shortly before this year’s midterm elections.

U.S. District Judge Carl Nichols, a Trump appointee in Washington, late Wednesday rejected the request by Democrats and civil rights groups that had argued Trump’s order would likely be found unconstitutional because the states and Congress, not the president, have the power to set election rules. Nichols agreed with the Republican Trump administration’s contention that it was too early to block the order because it has yet to be implemented.

Nichols’ ruling leaves the door open for further challenges when the Trump administration moves to implement the president’s directive. A separate lawsuit seeking to block the executive order is underway in Boston. No matter how rapidly the administration acts, no voting changes are expected during primary elections, which continue into next month.

“The Court recognizes that the Postal Service may ultimately issue a final rule that directly affects Plaintiffs or their members, or that the Government may develop State Citizenship Lists that omit specific individuals due to particularized flaws,” Nichols wrote. “Plaintiffs may, of course, renew their motions if and when those future actions occur. Until then, however, Plaintiffs cannot show that preliminary injunctive relief is warranted.”

The Trump administration has yet to formally issue lists of eligible voters, and those who filed the initial request for a temporary halt said they’d be back if the administration moves in that direction.

“We are ready to resume the fight if and when the administration takes those next steps,” said Juan Proaño, chief executive officer of the League of United Latin American Citizens, one of the organizations that sought the stay from Nichols.

Trump issued the order in March after a bill he supported to overhaul voting stalled in Congress. The order would have had the federal government create a list of eligible voters and then directed the U.S. Postal Service to deliver mail ballots only to those on the list. Election officials argued it was ripe for abuse and could cause chaos, and the postal union has objected to the idea of mail carriers policing ballots.

Since his 2020 presidential election loss to Democrat Joe Biden, Trump has groundlessly claimed mail voting is rife with fraud and has launched a federal investigation into that year’s vote, even though repeated audits and investigations, including ones run by Republicans, found it was free of widespread fraud. Trump also has said he wants to “take over” election administration in Democratic areas.

Democrats and civil rights groups argued it was urgent that Nichols issue a restraining order in the midst of primary season and with states already gearing up for the fall midterm elections.

This was Trump’s second executive order seeking to overhaul elections and voting. His initial election executive order, issued just months after he took office in his second term, has been blocked by multiplefederal judges. That order sought to require documentary proof of citizenship to register to vote, among other changes.

Riccardi writes for the Associated Press.

It was a familiar sight: Caitlin Clark stepped to her left, paused and lofted a right-handed layup.

But looming tall, Cameron Brink smacked it out of bounds, caught on camera yelling a couple of curse words before chest-bumping teammate Erica Wheeler so hard she tumbled backward.

That’s the Brink that the Sparks were hoping for this season, and the version of the third-year center they fully expect to shine.

“That was quite the highlight,” coach Lynne Roberts said last week. “That’s what we see in practice, she’s been like that. I was just smiling. … I’m so proud of her.”

After the first game of the season, a 105-78 loss to Las Vegas, Roberts was asked about Brink playing only eight minutes, when she was a minus-19.

“We need Cam to produce,” Roberts said. “We need Cam to bring that defensive energy. We have so much confidence and belief in her. She’s got to get out on the floor with some confidence and do what she’s capable of doing.”

After the next game, when Brink contributed 11 points with five rebounds in that 87-78 loss to Indiana, Roberts wanted to end “the narrative” that the 24-year-old was off to a slow start. Then she netted 10 points in 16 minutes during a defeat of the Toronto Tempo.

The Sparks are in win-now mode but are yet to prove this version of the team can do that. Brink would be a cornerstone player for almost any team in the league, yet she’s coming off the bench with high expectations for her to be one of the team’s most important players.

“My teammates aren’t gonna trust me if I don’t believe in myself,” said Brink, who is averaging 8.0 points and 4.6 rebounds per game. “Coaches, same thing. So, you know, I’ve had a slow start, but I’m putting in the work with the coaches. They work with me every day. We watch film, shoot a little extra.”

The Sparks need Brink this season. In her first two seasons, she had moments. With Dearica Hamby starting and the addition of Nneka Ogwumike, she is coming off the bench again after doing so last year for the first time since her freshman season at Stanford.

Roberts has said she wants at least two of them on the court at all times. Through the first four games, Brink has played 16.2 minutes per game and the Sparks are minus-29 points when she is on the court.

“Coming into the league, it’s interesting because a lot of times people feel like they have to do something different or more,” Ogwumike said. “But I think one thing that she’s done is she’s really leaned into who she is, and that that level of self assurance is something that I think really plays out when she’s on the court as well.”

In 38 career games, she is already 10th all-time in blocks in Sparks history. Brink dealt with a 13-month layoff after tearing her ACL and meniscus just 15 games into her rookie season, and was slowly re-integrated last season in 19 games.

Sparks forward Cameron Brink tries to power her way past a Tempo defender during agame May 15.

(Jeff Lewis / Asociated Press)

What could really separate the Sparks from the rest of the league, though, would be if Brink plays to her full potential as a sixth player. There are few players in that role who can take over a game the way she can.

“I definitely feel like I have an understanding for just the speed of the game, the nuances and what we’re doing,” Brink said. “The playbook this year is much easier because it was the same as last year.”

The Sparks rebuild started last season with the addition of Kelsey Plum, where they gave up the No. 2 pick to Seattle that would become Dominique Malonga. Then, this offseason they added Ogwumike, Ariel Atkins and Wheeler while trading away their other young star, Rickea Jackson.

The Sparks still gave up 90-plus points in three of their first four games. Brink has the second worst plus-minus rating on the team, but has also made some of their important defensive plays and has 1.8 blocks per game.

“She erases a lot of mistakes out there,” Ogwumike said. “Being able to be out there and know that she has my back, and we’re looking for each other to be in good spots to do well, yeah, I’m just, I’m just happy that we’re rebuilding our chemistry early and fast.”

Brink was a star at Stanford but became known for her fouling habits. As a pro, getting one extra foul to work with, has helped considerably. She’s averaged seven fouls per 36 minutes in her first two seasons.

But the new officiating mandate to allow more freedom of movement is another hurdle. The path to being an elite pro has not been easy for one of the most dynamic college players of the past half-decade, but this season seems essential for Brink and the Sparks to find themselves, together.

Moments like that block of Clark‘s shot are signs the player they need is in there.

“It’s one of those things where you’re in awe,” Ogwumike said. “But also, you know she can do that. I always tell her, go out there and release everything and be yourself. That was very much a Cam Brink play.”

Hotel rooms in Los Angeles and other FIFA World Cup host cities could sit empty, despite high expectations that the global sporting event would be a boon to the city.

The soccer tournament, which has sold more than 5 million tickets so far, has historically triggered a surge of international and domestic tourism and infused host cities with an economic boost.

This year, however, 80% of hotels surveyed by the American Hotel and Lodging Assn. said bookings are lagging behind initial forecasts. The hotel association partly blames FIFA for the slowdown, saying the organization overbooked blocks of hotel rooms that did not reflect true demand.

Travel also is being hampered by higher airfares and gas prices due to the conflict in Iran. Visa barriers and broader geopolitical concerns are suppressing international travel demand, the report said.

“With just two months until kickoff, indicators suggest the anticipated economic lift may fall short of expectations,” the report said. The number of tickets sold for the tournament “has not yet translated into strong hotel bookings.”

In L.A., where World Cup games will be played next month at SoFi stadium, more than 65% of hotel respondents said room bookings were below estimated demand.

Many respondents said bookings were even lagging behind that of a typical summer.

Hotels in Los Angeles cited visa complications and long distances from the venue as obstacles to bookings. According to the report, FIFA booked thousands of rooms in downtown Los Angeles that it canceled.

Ahead of all World Cup tournaments, FIFA places large blocks of rooms on hold across various properties for FIFA staff, mediaand other stakeholders. As the tournament draws closer, FIFA will adjust its plans based on demand.

“All room releases were conducted in line with contractually agreed timelines with hotel partners, a standard practice for an event of this scale,” a FIFA spokesperson said in a statement. “Throughout the planning process, FIFA’s Accommodations team maintained consistent discussions with hotel stakeholders.”

The spokesperson added that global demand for the 2026 World Cup is unprecedented.

“FIFA room block over-commitment created an artificial early demand signal that has since unraveled,” the hotel association report said. “Many hotels indicate that early booking signals overstated true demand.”

About half of hotel respondents reported cancellations or releases of previously booked blocks of rooms, the report said.

The staggering price of World Cup tickets this year could also be keeping away fans, said journalist and author Simon Kuper, who writes about soccer economics. Face values for tickets have climbed as high as $7,875.

“All the ticket prices in this World Cup are inconceivable for previous World Cups,” Kuper said. “It’s very much a new phenomenon.”

FIFA is projecting revenue between $11 billion and $13 billion for the four-year World Cup cycle, which ends when the tournament does.

Nonetheless, L.A. is expecting a major jump in tourism for the World Cup in June and the 2028 Olympic Games.

That would be welcome for an industry that is coming off some tough times.

Last year, tourist spending in L.A. fell for the first time since the pandemic began as wildfires, raids by Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents and trade tensions discouraged people from visiting, including tourists from Canada who traditionally flock to Palm Springs and other cities in Southern California during the winter months.

International air arrivals to L.A. County fell more than 30% from August to November of 2025. In Los Angeles, current international arrivals are fewer than in previous months, though the state saw an overall 3% increase last year.

The L.A. market “faces several challenges that are tempering hotel performance expectations,” said Ralph Posner, chief communications officer for the American Hotel and Lodging Assn.

“L.A.’s purported hotel underperformance is compounded by a unique combination of early FIFA block over-commitment creating artificial demand, concerns about visa barriers and operating costs,” he said. “The market was positioned as a flagship host city but is now absorbing a gap between expectation and reality.”

Surging hotel room costs in host cities are also a deterrent. For example, the Renaissance Hotel in Seattle, within walking distance of Lumen Field, is renting a King guest room for less than $300 the weekend before the World Cup. For the weekend of the U.S. game there, the rate is more than $1,000 for the same room.

To save costs, some fans are choosing to stay farther from the venues or opting for alternative lodgings such as Airbnbs. Airbnb’s chief financial officer said the World Cup is expected to be the largest event in the company’s history.

The hotel association said that even though initial indications are bad, things could still get better.

“We are hopeful that momentum will build over the next few weeks in the lead up to the games,” Posner said.

Times staff writer Kevin Baxter contributed to this report.

WASHINGTON — Two police officers who helped defend the U.S. Capitol from an attack by a mob of President Trump’s supporters sued on Wednesday to block anyone — including Jan. 6, 2021, rioters — from receiving payouts from a new $1.776-billion settlement fund for people who claim to be victims of politically motivated prosecutions.

The officers’ attorneys filed the federal lawsuit a day after acting Atty. Gen. Todd Blanche defended the fund’s creation during a congressional hearing. Blanche, a personal attorney for Trump before joining the Justice Department, wouldn’t rule out the possibility that rioters who assaulted police on Jan. 6 would be eligible for fund payouts.

The lawsuit claims the government’s “Anti-Weaponization Fund” is an illegal slush fund that Trump will use to “finance the insurrectionists and paramilitary groups that commit violence in his name.” It describes the fund’s creation as “the most brazen act of presidential corruption this century” and calls for dissolving it.

“No statute authorizes its creation, the settlement on which it is premised is a corrupt sham, and its design violates the Constitution and federal law,” the suit says.

The fund stems from a settlement of Trump’s $10-billion lawsuit against the IRS over the leak of his tax returns. It’s designed to compensate those who believe they were mistreated by prior administrations’ Justice Department. Decisions on payouts will be made by a five-member commission appointed by the attorney general.

More than 100 police officers were injured during the Capitol riot. Nearly 1,600 people were charged with Jan. 6-related crimes, but Trump used his pardon powers to erase all of those cases in a sweeping act of clemency last year.

The plaintiffs suing Trump over the fund are Metropolitan Police Department officer Daniel Hodges and former U.S. Capitol Police officer Harry Dunn, who is running in Maryland for a seat in Congress. Hodges and Dunn both testified before Congress about their harrowing experiences on Jan. 6. Videos captured a rioter ripping a mask off Hodges as he was pinned against a door during a fight for control of a tunnel entrance.

The officers claim the fund “encourages those who enacted violence in the President’s name to continue to do so.”

“Dunn and Hodges already face credible threats of death and violence on regular basis; the Fund substantially increases the danger,” the suit alleges.

On Tuesday, members of Congress peppered Blanche with questions about the fund. He described it as “unusual” but not unprecedented. Blanche failed to acknowledge that Trump’s Justice Department has investigated and prosecuted some of the Republican president’s political enemies, including former FBI Director James Comey and New York Atty. Gen. Letitia James.

Blanche and Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent also are named as defendants in the officers’ lawsuit. Spokespeople for the Justice and Treasury departments didn’t immediately respond to requests for comment on the suit.

One of the attorneys for the officers is Brendan Ballou, a former Justice Department prosecutor who handled Jan. 6 cases.

Kunzelman writes for the Associated Press.

Hall of Famer Lisa Leslie didn’t expect to ever get a statue outside Crypto.com Arena. After all, it had been 15 years since her jersey retirement and no other Sparks player was featured among the Lakers and Kings heroes outside the area.

After years of hearing from fans that she deserve to be immortalized, Leslie learned she would join Sue Bird in Seattle as the second WNBA player to be honored with a statue at a franchise’s home arena.

“One thing I never had on my bucket list was a statue,” Leslie told The Times on Thursday. “I grew up seeing the statues of some of the amazing Lakers, so I’m just really grateful to be alive and to be one of the first, especially in the WNBA for L.A. Sparks. It means a lot to me, and I’m really hoping that our community will really rally around it.”

The Sparks announced Thursday morning that Leslie will receive a statue to be unveiled during a ceremony on Sept. 20 before a game against the Portland Fire.

During her 12-year career with the Sparks, Leslie won three WNBA titles and league MVP honors. She also won four Olympic gold medals. She was the first player in WNBA history to dunk in a game and her No. 9 jersey was retired in 2010.

She was one of the Sparks’ original players in 1997 and is the franchise’s career leader in points, rebounds, blocks, field goals, free throws, offensive rebounds, defensive rebounds, minutes and games played, and is third in the WNBA in blocks and double-doubles.

“I’ve known Lisa for nearly three decades and believe that she is beyond deserving of this incredible honor,” fellow statue honoree and Lakers great Magic Johnson said in a news release. “She was the driving force behind bringing back-to-back championships to the Los Angeles Sparks franchise in 2000 and 2001, and Lisa’s hard work and commitment has made her one of the best to ever play the game.”

Johnson, who is part the Sparks ownership group, accepted responsibility for the team’s skid two years ago and promised to do more. The Sparks owners, who also own the Dodgers and Lakers, have responded to losing at a boom time in the WNBA by executing a coaching change, breaking ground on a new practice facility and installing the first Sparks statue outside Crypto.com Arena.

“Lisa’s legacy isn’t just measured by championships and accolades, though; it’s defined by the doors she opened and the standard she set for generations to come,” Johnson said in the news release. “More than an athlete, she is a pioneer, a cultural icon and a force who elevated women’s basketball to new heights. This statue celebrates her excellence, her leadership and the future she helped create, and it ensures her impact will forever be part of the fabric of this city.”

Leslie said that she noticed fans lobbying for her to get a statue beginning in 2019, and the timing for her and the Sparks felt right during the 30th anniversary season.

“It couldn’t be better with the new [practice] facility coming, the new CBA, everything is aligning so properly,” she said. “It’s more perfect than it would have been a few years before.”

The statue was created by sculptors Julie Rotblatt Amrany and Omri Amrany and will join 15 others outside of Crypto.com Arena, including Johnson, Wayne Gretzky, Oscar De La Hoya, Chick Hearn, Jerry West, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, Luc Robitaille, Shaquille O’Neal, Bob Miller, Elgin Baylor, Dustin Brown, Kobe Bryant (2), Gigi Bryant and Pat Riley.

“I hope she looks good,” Leslie said of the statue. “People don’t realize how hard it is to make a statue look good. … They helped me to be super specific about every little thing down to my earlobe and fingernail tip. So I’m excited about all the little details that have been added that people can kind of find on their own as well.”

Monte Carlo Liquors & Steak House is a lone brick island in a large asphalt lot that sits just over 100 feet from the Central Avenue Bridge that stretches over the Rio Grande in Albuquerque.

Stories, photos and travel recommendations from America’s Mother Road

The business’ name says everything: The front of the building lodges a liquor store selling the basic brands of spirits and beer. Around back, an arrow, painted garnet against an otherwise beige facade, points toward a red door sheltered by a small, domed awning. The words “steakhouse entrance” have been stenciled above in letters big enough to be seen two blocks away.

The 56-year-old throwback is often my first stop after landing in New Mexico. I have been traveling to the state regularly since the summer of 1999, when I attended my first of many writing retreats led by Natalie Goldberg, author of “Writing Down the Bones” and many other books. Its northern topography — the enormous sense of space, the way the light moves and colors shift against the mountains and desertscapes — keep me returning.

The 56-year-old throwback Monte Carlo Liquors & Steak House is often my first stop after landing in New Mexico.

Albuquerque, home to the state’s largest airport, is a gateway. It’s also the city with the longest continuous urban stretch of Route 66, named Central Avenue and running nearly 18 miles through its core. Two of my very favorite restaurants in New Mexico reside along this zagging sweep, both quirky and atmospheric and also grounding in their sense of place.

I return to Monte Carlo for two reasons: the honky-tonk atmosphere and the green chile cheeseburger.

Beyond the red door lies the platonic ideal of a Midcentury dive. The windowless dining room remains perpetually dim. Crimson pleather booths line the walls, which are covered with vintage beer signs and framed portraits of Elvis Presley and Marilyn Monroe … and Guy Fieri, who visited in 2008. A collection of model cars sits behind glass in one corner. It is easy to imagine a near past when cigarette smoke hovered like low cloud cover.

I cannot report on the fried appetizers or char-broiled steaks that comprise much of the menu. Occasionally I order a Greek appetizer — a nod to the heritage of Michael Katsaros, whose family still runs the place — which includes a block of feta sprinkled with oregano, olives, a single rolled grape leaf, slices of tomato and cucumber and, uniquely, thick blocks of salami.

Here’s why I return to Monte Carlo: the honky-tonk atmosphere and the green chile cheeseburger.

Chasing green chile cheeseburgers through New Mexico is sport for food obsessives. Cheryl Jamison, a longtime food writer who lives in Santa Fe, steered me to Monte Carlo years ago.

The staff grounds the beef sirloin daily, a crucial step. Seeds are visible among the chopped roasted chiles, smoky and vegetal and bringing some heat, overlaid with a single square of American cheese melted into place. The sting of a dry gin martini is exactly right between bites.

Is this the best green chile cheeseburger in Albuquerque? Impossible for me to say, but it is an excellent gauge from which to begin a survey.

The dining room is perpetually dim, and crimson pleather booths line the walls, covered with vintage beer signs and framed portraits.

The chile cheeseburger at Monte Carlo.

Wherever you’re headed from Monte Carlo, it’s worth a quick stop to admire the twin Route 66 Rio Grande markers that stand on either side of the nearby bridge. Their adobe color blends so seamlessly into the landscape that you could speed by them without much notice. They were installed in the early 2000s as part of the city’s public art programs. Their tiered form nods to the cloud terrace motif that appears repeatedly in New Mexico’s indigenous Pueblo art and architecture. It’s easiest at night to spy their subtle Route 66 logos lit up in red and green neon.

Red and green are the unofficial state colors of New Mexico, as you’ll see again and again on plates delivered by servers at Duran Central Pharmacy, the finest destination along Central Avenue for immersion into regional cooking.

Indigenous ingredients (corn, beans, squash, game meats, berries and piñon among them) and heavy Spanish colonial influences (chiles were said to have been brought to the area as early as the late 1500s) help define New Mexican cuisine.

Modern restaurant menus, with the familiar enchiladas and tamales and hard-shell tacos, can resemble Tex-Mex, but never say that to a New Mexican local. The chiles delineate culinary borders. “Red or green?” customers will be asked repeatedly. Meaning: Do you want your dish smothered in sauce made from roasted green chiles, or a simmered counterpart fashioned from dried red chile pods?

The combination plate, Christmas style, at Duran’s.

If you want both, as many of us do, the answer is “Christmas.”

At “Duran’s,” as locals call it, see and taste the distinctions on Duran’s combination plate, which includes one beef or chicken taco, one pork tamale and one rolled cheese enchilada with a side of pinto beans. Green has a toothier texture and fresher flavor; red is saucier with dusky, earthen undertones. Try the duo over a hefty knife-and-fork breakfast burrito filled with chorizo, chilaquiles, a bowl of chili or, a special on Wednesdays and Fridays, sopaipillas (pillows of fried dough) blanketed in cheese.

Founded in 1942, Duran originally had a soda fountain that converted to a sit-down restaurant in the 1960s. Touches of Midcentury Modern kitsch, especially a starburst clock on the restaurant’s roadside sign, marks its place along Route 66.

Touches of Midcentury Modern kitsch include a starburst clock on the restaurant’s roadside sign, marking its place along Route 66.

And yes, this building also pulls double duty as a thriving pharmacy. On return visits when I’m feeling too excited about jumping back into New Mexican foodways, I start at Monte Carlo for a cheeseburger and martinis before a second lunch of sopaipillas, “Christmas-style,” at Duran, knowing I can pick up ibuprofen and calcium carbonate for dessert.

Monte Carlo Liquors & Steak House is located at 3916 Central Ave. SW, Albuquerque, (505) 836-9886, monte-carlo-liquors.hub.biz

Duran Central Pharmacy: 1815 Central Ave. NW, Albuquerque, (505) 247-4141, duransrx.com

WASHINGTON  — Louisiana’s state attorneys on Thursday urged the Supreme Court to stand aside for now and to uphold an appeals court ruling that would stop the mailing of abortion pills nationwide.

They blamed former President Biden for undermining the state’s strict bans on abortion and the Trump administration for slow-walking a study on the federal regulations that permit sending the pills through the mail.

The justices are likely to act soon on emergency appeals filed by two makers of mifepristone. They argued the pills have been shown to be safe and effective for ending an early pregnancy.

But last week, the conservative 5th Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans ruled for Louisiana and revived an earlier regulation that would require women to obtain the pills in person from a doctor.

The three-judge panel also took the unusual step for putting its order into effect immediately. On Monday, Justice Samuel A. Alito, who oversees the 5th Circuit, issued an administrative stay that will keep the case on hold through Monday.

The justices have to decide whether Louisiana had standing to sue over the federal drug regulations, and if so, whether judges have the authority to overrule the Food and Drug Administration.

Two years ago, the Supreme Court by a 9-0 vote dismissed a similar challenge to the abortion pills that came from the 5th Circuit. And Chief Justice John G. Roberts has said in the past that judges should usually defer to the federal agency that is responsible fo regulating drugs.

In response to anti-abortion advocates, Trump’s Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. agreed to have the FDA review the safety record of mifepristone.

It was approved in 2000 as safe and effective for ending early pregnancies. And in the past decade, the agency had relaxed earlier restrictions, including a requirement that pregnant women visit a doctor’s office to obtain the pills.

But the FDA said last month its review is far from complete.

In October, Louisiana Atty. Gen. Liz Murrill decided to bypass the FDA review and went to federal court seeking a ruling that would prevent the pills being sent by mail.

A federal judge refused to decide on the issue while the FDA was undertaking its review. But the 5th Circuit chose to act now. The Louisiana state attorney put the focus on the Biden administration.

When the Supreme Court was considering the Dobbs case, which overruled Roe vs. Wade and the right to abortion, “the Biden Administration was preparing a plan that predictably would undermine that decision,” she wrote in Thursday’s response.

“Although Louisiana law generally prohibits abortion and the dispensing of mifepristone to pregnant women, out-of-state prescribers—freed from the in-person dispensing requirement — are causing approximately 1,000 illegal abortions in Louisiana each month by mailing FDA-approved mifepristone into the state,” she said.

The Trump administration has yet to tell the court of its views on this case.

Fighters attack ‘Africa’s Alcatraz’, which detains high-value prisoners, and disrupt crucial supply chains to the capital.

In a new wave of attacks in Mali, an al-Qaeda-linked group has stormed a main prison housing fighters from the armed group and set fire to trucks with food supplies heading to the capital Bamako.

Fighters from the Jama’at Nusrat al-Islam wal-Muslimin (JNIM) group stormed the Kenieroba Central Prison, a recently built complex dubbed “Africa’s Alcatraz”, located about 60km (37 miles) southwest of Bamako, Al Jazeera’s Nicolas Haque reported on Wednesday.

The detention centre houses 2,500 prisoners, including at least 72 inmates considered “high value” by the Malian state, Haque said, adding that Malian armed forces were repelling the attack.

Among the prisoners are JNIM fighters and a number of people arrested following large-scale attacks last month by the group’s fighters and Tuareg separatists, the Azawad Liberation Front (FLA).

The fighters attacked several military bases across multiple cities, including areas where senior government officials live, and took control of the northern city of Kidal in a coordinated offensive on April 25 and April 26, which struck at the heart of the West African country’s military government.

One of those attacks killed Malian Defence Minister Sadio Camara and his family in their home in Kati, a garrison town near the capital. On Monday, the leader of the country’s military government, Assimi Goita, took on the role of defence minister. At least 23 others were also killed in the attacks.

Since then, “there has been a wave of arrests of former and current military officers, members of civil society, lawyers, members of the political opposition – all accused of colluding with al-Qaeda fighters,” said Haque, who has been reporting for years on and in Mali. He added that fighters linked to the armed group were also arrested.

Security sources told AFP news agency that opposition figures Mountaga Tall, Youssouf Daba Diawara, and Moussa Djire are among those “abducted”.

According to family members and security sources who spoke to the agency, Tall, a lawyer, was taken on May 2 in Bamako by hooded men on charges of plotting with opposition figures in the Senegalese capital, Dakar, to overthrow the military government. Since his arrest, Tall has been questioned at least once for “attempted destabilisation”.

The security sources said Diawara and Djire were suspected of links with, respectively, the influential imam Mahmoud Dicko and Oumar Mariko, two opposition figures in exile. At least two other civilians who are close to Mariko were also arrested following the attacks, a judicial source told AFP, without giving further details.

The military prosecutor’s office said on May 1 that it had “solid evidence” of the “complicity” of certain military personnel, accusing them of helping with the “planning, coordination and execution” of the attacks.

In a report published on Tuesday, the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) said there have also been “gravely concerning reports of extrajudicial killings and abductions, allegedly carried out by members of the security forces” following the attacks.

The violence has set off fighting across Mali’s vast desert north, raising the prospect of significant gains by armed groups that have shown an increasing willingness to strike neighbouring countries.

JNIM has called on Malians to rise up against the government and transition to Islamic law. The group has also pledged to besiege Bamako, and on Friday, it had reportedly set up checkpoints around the city of four million.

Haque said the blockade has the potential to cause a humanitarian disaster.

“These are al-Qaeda fighters that have pointed 12.7mm machine guns on their motorbikes, stopping any outgoing or incoming traffic,” the correspondent said. “We have seen on social media these fighters stopping food trucks trying to enter the area. This blockade is not just affecting people living in Bamako; it’s affecting people throughout Mali.”

On May 3, the mayor of Diafarabe village, in the Mopti region, called on the authorities to act before people started dying of hunger, as the village had run out of food.

Public workers blocked the streets of El Alto, Bolivia with buses, cars, and trucks during a national transportation strike. Union leaders are demanding the government guarantee clean fuel, end long lines at petrol stations, repair roads, and compensate drivers for repeated engine repairs.

Welcome back to the Lakers newsletter, where, against all odds, we’re still kicking.

The Lakers defied expectations by winning their first-round series against the Houston Rockets. Most didn’t give them any chance. It felt dicey after a deflating Game 5 loss at home. But the Lakers pulled it off with a headlining performance from their 22-time All-Star and award-worthy supporting performances from the ensemble cast.

Against the league-leading Oklahoma City Thunder, even fewer people are giving the Lakers a chance for an encore performance. But as Kevin Garnett once said: “Anything is possible!”

Set the tone

Marcus Smart rotated over to the baseline. He came face to face with Houston’s Tari Eason as the 6-foot-8 Rockets forward leapt toward the basket. The 6-3 guard jumped right along with him.

Smart is used to taking on big challenges.

The Lakers brought Smart in for this moment. It’s not just the defensive tenacity to block a forward five inches taller and eight years younger than him, but when the postseason inevitably challenged the Lakers in unforeseen ways, they needed Smart’s leadership. He proves it every time he steps up to take a charge, gets a deflection or just pulls a teammate aside for a quick word.

“Marcus is a true leader,” center Deandre Ayton said. “Besides [Le]Bron [James], Luka [Doncic] and AR [Austin Reaves], Marcus is the other guy with the grit where [if you feel] discombobulated, he tries to be that guy that puts his arm around you and some of the younger guys. Whether it’s coming down to his competitiveness, keeping that same, consistent edge, Marcus tries to keep that level of intensity pretty high and it’s contagious, too.”

With Doncic (hamstring) still sidelined to begin the Western Conference semifinals against the top-seeded Thunder, the Lakers are counting on their supporting players for major performances. Smart’s role will be one of the most taxing; he’ll be the top defender for a team trying to slow down the NBA’s reigning most valuable player.

On his long list of elite matchups, Smart ranked Shai Gilgeous-Alexander at the top.

“I think we all know that, right?” the former defensive player of the year said. “He does a really good job of getting to the free-throw line. He’s mastered it. … It’s tough, but it can be done, it’s just going to take a lot of effort from everybody and we gotta stay together.”

Gilgeous-Alexander is a front-runner for his second consecutive most valuable player and led the Thunder to a sweep over the Phoenix Suns in the first round. The Thunder easily carved up Phoenix’s ninth-ranked defense, scoring 126.9 points per 100 possessions. Their offensive efficiency was five points better than the next best team in the first round.

The Lakers are coming off their own defensive masterpiece against Houston, holding the Rockets to less than 100 points in four of the six first-round games. Their 78 points allowed in the series-clinching Game 6 were the fewest in a playoff game by a Lakers opponent since May 16, 2012.

The anchors of the defensive performance are two major offseason additions acquired to help the Lakers bounce back from their disappointing first-round series loss to Minnesota last year. Smart and Ayton are quietly starring this postseason.

Ayton’s 11 points per game didn’t accurately reflect the influence he made against the Rockets. His 10.8 rebounds per game, including four games in which he had 10 or more rebounds despite being ejected in the third quarter of Game 4, were even more impressive against a team that dominated the rebounding battle at a historic rate.

A strong performance from Ayton lifts the ceiling on the team more than anyone else, Lakers coach JJ Redick said. An underrated and unexpected part of Smart’s value is his ability to unlock the team’s most important piece.

“I’m just somebody who he respects,” Smart said. “He sees [me] go out there and not only preaching, I’m actually doing what I’m preaching.”

Smart and Ayton barely knew each other before this season. But their paths are parallel: Former postseason mainstays who, in Ayton’s words, “disappeared.” The center who helped Phoenix to the NBA Finals trudged through Portland for two seasons; Smart, the former Boston Celtics stalwart, bounced between Memphis and Washington.

They’re now soaking up the spotlight in L.A.

“We’re both here, we’re both trying to get our names back into the good graces of the basketball gods,” Smart said, “and just show what we still can do.”

Priority No. 1

The Lakers had two keys for their first-round series against the Rockets: boxing out and taking care of the ball.

Now against what Redick estimated was “one of the greatest teams ever in NBA history,” that list has narrowed to one big thing.

Turnovers.

The Lakers, who got swept in the four-game regular-season series by an average of 29.3 points per game, averaged 17.5 turnovers per game against the Thunder during the regular season, three more than their regular-season average. Turnovers nearly undid the Lakers’ first-round series: they averaged 17.7 against the Rockets and gave up 19 points off turnovers per game.

The Thunder are an especially dangerous matchup for a team that can’t take care of the ball; Oklahoma City led the league in points off turnovers with 22 per game during the regular season.

“Whatever moments we felt Houston pressuring, like the maximum amount of pressure they put on us, that’s OKC’s baseline,” Redick said.

The Thunder, even playing without star two-way wing Jalen Williams for much of the season, were the NBA’s most disruptive defense. They’re league-leading defensive rating came with the third-most steals (9.7), sixth-most blocks (5.5) and the second-most turnovers forced (16.7) per game.

“They somehow do all of that without fouling,” Redick said with a hint of sarcasm in his voice, “which is one of the most remarkable things, I think, in NBA history.”

The Lakers, who attempted the second-most free throws in the league behind Doncic’s top-ranked 10.1 attempts, committed fewer fouls than the Thunder this season: 18.5 fouls per game compared to Oklahoma City’s 19.

On tap

Tuesday at Oklahoma City, 5:30 p.m. PDT (Game 1)

Two of the Lakers’ worst losses of the year were in Oklahoma City. If November’s 29-point loss wasn’t painful enough, the injury-plagued disaster on April 2 could be enough for the Lakers to want to sage the whole arena.

Thursday at Oklahoma City, 6:30 p.m. PDT (Game 2)

The Thunder have had the league’s best home record for each of the last two seasons, including a 34-7 mark this season, but still had two home playoff losses last year. Oklahoma City dropped Game 1 of the Western Conference semifinals and the NBA Finals last year, needing to win both series in seven games en route to the championship.

Saturday vs. Oklahoma City, 5:30 p.m. (Game 3)

The Thunder lost Game 3 in three of their four playoff series last year. The only exception was their first-round sweep over Memphis.

Monday vs. Oklahoma City, 7:30 p.m. (Game 4)

Could this be the final Lakers game of the year?

Status report

Luka Doncic (left hamstring)

After missing the first round, the Lakers’ superstar guard is still sidelined with a Grade 2 hamstring strain. He is not expected to return for the start of the series and has yet to progress to live on-court workouts.

Jalen Williams (left hamstring)

The Thunder’s All-NBA wing will miss at least Game 1 after he suffered a Grade 1 left hamstring strain on April 22, which kept him out of the Thunder’s last two games. After last year’s breakout season, Williams was plagued by injuries to his wrist and right hamstring that limited him to just 33 regular-season games.

(Second) favorite thing I ate this week

Because I did not take a picture of it, the only evidence I have from my No. 1 meal from Houston is a lingering sweet and spicy tang on my tongue from Rodeo Goat’s Billy F Gibbons burger. It was delicious: candied bacon, caramelized onions, gouda, mango pico, cream cheese and habanero sauce.

Street taco plate from Luchi & Joey’s in Houston.

(Thuc Nhi Nguyen / Los Angeles Times)

A close second was the street taco plate from Luchi & Joey’s, a food stall in downtown Houston’s underground tunnels. The five-taco spread hit the spot while I was hiding from the heavy storm moving through Houston on the day of Game 6. The six-mile tunnel system is lined with restaurants and shops that came in handy during torrential rain. I was safe from the elements while I hunted for lunch then only had to make a one-block scramble through the rain back to my hotel.

In case you missed it

‘Changes our ceiling’: Why Deandre Ayton is key to Lakers upset vs. Thunder

‘You can’t fear them’: Upset-minded Lakers refuse to be intimidated by Thunder

How the Lakers and Thunder match up entering their playoff series

‘There’s no quit.’ Lakers’ leadership, resilience shines through in series-clinching win

Ex-Lakers assistant admits role in gambling schemes, could face years in prison

Until next time…

As always, pass along your thoughts to me at thucnhi.nguyen@latimes.com, and please consider subscribing if you like our work!

Lakers center Deandre Ayton bounced across the court after practice Monday wearing all black, his chains swaying, his mood jovial as he approached the media to talk about his role in the Western Conference semifinals.

His spirits were high for what lies ahead for the Lakers as they prepared to face the best team in the NBA, the defending champion Oklahoma City Thunder.

Lakers coach JJ Redick said the play of his center “changes our ceiling the most.”

Simply put, Ayton’s high-level of play will be paramount for the Lakers when they begin the best-of-seven series Tuesday night in Oklahoma City.

“Everything has been pretty solid, just staying in my role and just doing more in my role,” Ayton said. “This is the playoffs, so everybody can do more, everybody has another level. And this is the second round coming in, so I think we all deserve that little bit of increase of confidence from what we’ve done so far and the outcome from the adversity we’ve faced.

“I feel like that’s where we are right now and I think that’s what’s motivating me, as well, coming into these games. Just seeing, listening and being dialed in and seeing the results of it.”

There were times Ayton was a force against the Houston Rockets in the first round. He had double figures in rebounds in four of the six games and had three double-doubles in the series. He averaged 11.8 points and his 10.8 rebounds are third-best in the postseason.

“DA’s had a great season,” Redick said. “He was instrumental in us getting past Houston. I think his baseline of who he is every day for the last two, two-and-a-half months has been awesome. And I know his teammates, certainly the staff, we’ve all embraced him all season long. Again, he’s the person that changes our ceiling the most.”

Both Ayton and Marcus Smart came to the Lakers last summer, giving them a much-needed center and a defensive-minded guard. Smart said he didn’t know Ayton before they became teammates, but the two of them have bonded.

Lakers teammates Marcus Smart, left, and Deandre Ayton celebrate during Game 6 against the Houston Rockets on May 1.

(Kenneth Richmond / Getty Images)

They sit next to each other in the locker room and Smart is the first to always encourage Ayton, to push him, to expect more out of him.

“Not his big brother, but I’m just somebody who he respects,” Smart said. “He sees [me] go out there and not only preaching, I’m actually doing what I’m preaching. I’m not just preaching, I’m out there with him, in the midst of it, battling with him, going through adversity with him, right? I think that drives a lot of respect for one another in that aspect, when you’re going to battle with somebody. You’re struggling while they’re struggling right there with you, trying to help you get through yours.”

The 7-foot Ayton will be going up against 7-1 Chet Holmgren and 7-foot Isaiah Hartenstein. Holmgren averaged 17.3 points, 8.5 rebounds and 2.0 blocks in the first round and Hartenstein averaged 11.0 points, 8.3 rebounds and 1.0 blocks.

Ayton will have to hold his own against them and still be the force the Lakers have leaned on in the postseason.

“Playing bigger. … Just being relentless on the glass, you know, protecting the rim as much as possible and not letting them in my paint,” Ayton said. “It’s gonna be big with me protecting that paint in this series. They really generate and touch the paint. … Them having 50-plus points in the paint, you know they’re a really unstoppable team. So, I’m really just looking forward to protecting the paint as best as I can and staying on the floor as long as possible. That’s about it.”

Being on the road and in a hostile environment is something that Ayton also is looking forward to. He knows the crowd in Oklahoma City is like a college atmosphere and that he and the Lakers can’t get rattled.

“Yeah, you can’t hear yourself,” Ayton said. “It’s definitely the ‘Thunder’ for a reason, you know? Their fans are thunderous. You know, you can hear the floor shaking, the bleachers, you can’t even hear a play call. And you gotta be super dialed in.

“They’re the defending champs and you know their fans have been in atmospheres and hype games and you know they’re ready for their team to do their thing. So, we just gotta come in super prepared and just dial out all the noise and just come in and play together.”

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court took a first step on Monday to consider anti-abortion challenges to medication that has been commonly used to end early pregnancies for 25 years.

The justices moved quickly to put on hold an appeals court ruling that would block the mailing of abortion pills nationwide. Justice Samuel A. Alito issued a temporary “administrative stay” until May 11.

Three years ago, the court blocked a similar challenge to abortion pills, ruling that anti-abortion doctors had no grounds to sue over medication they did not use or prescribe.

Last year, Louisiana’s state lawyers sued and argued their state ban on abortions is thwarted if women can receive abortion pills through the mail after consulting a doctor online.

They questioned the federal regulation that permits doctors to prescribe the medication without seeing patients in person.

On Friday evening, the conservative U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans jolted abortion rights advocates, first by ruling this claim is likely to succeed and then by putting their order into effect immediately.

Judge Kyle Duncan, a President Trump appointee, said the Food and Drug Administration had “failed to adequately study whether remotely prescribing mifepristone is safe.”

Moreover, women may suffer “irreparable harm” if these mail-order prescriptions are allowed to continue, he said.

If upheld, the order would go far beyond Louisiana and make it illegal for women in California and other states to obtain the pills through a pharmacy or by mail if they did not see a doctor first.

The legal dispute may put the Trump administration in an uncomfortable spot. In response to the abortion critics, the FDA agreed to review the safety of prescribing these commonly used pills without a required trip to a doctor’s office.

Its review is not likely to be completed until after the November elections.

The 5th Circuit judges said they were not prepared to wait for the outcome of that review.

On Saturday, two makers of mifepristone — Danco Laboratories and GenBioPro — filed emergency appeals asking the justices to block the 5th Circuit’s order.

“Never before has a federal court” rejected a long-standing drug approval by the FDA, they said, and restricted its distribution based on claims the agency had rejected.

The justices asked for a response from Louisiana by Thursday.

Mifepristone was approved in 2000 as a safe and effective way to an early pregnancy. It is typically used in combination with a second drug — misoprostol — which is not affected by the court’s decision.

If mifepristone becomes unavailable, women may use misoprostol alone, abortion rights advocates say.

In recent years, the majority of abortions in this country result from the use of medication.

Alito is responsible for emergency appeals from the 5th Circuit, and Monday’s order does not signal what the court will decide.

“This ruling is not final — keep watching,” said Nancy Northup, president of the Center for Reproductive Rights. “Getting abortion pills through telehealth has been a lifeline for women since Roe v. Wade was overturned. Louisiana’s attempt to restrict access is political and not based in science or medicine. Americans deserve access to this critical drug that has been FDA approved for 25 years.”

Carol Tobias, president of National Right to Life, agreed the court’s order did not resolve anything.

“It is a temporary procedural step that leaves unresolved the very real concerns about the safety of these drugs and the decision under the Biden administration’s FDA to recklessly remove longstanding safeguards,” she said.

California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta joined with 21 other state attorneys in urging the court to block the 5th Circuit’s decision.

“Telehealth has made it easier for women — especially in rural, low-income, and underserved communities — to access mifepristone and obtain reproductive health care,” he said. “We should be guided by science, not politics. The in-person dispensing requirement was eliminated because it was medically unnecessary, and there is still no basis for reinstating it.”

A group of five consumers have filed a lawsuit against Paramount Skydance seeking to block its acquisition of Warner Bros. Discovery and unwind the earlier merger that joined the storied Melrose Avenue studio with David Ellison’s Skydance Media, alleging that both deals reduce marketplace competition.

The lawsuit, filed Thursday in U.S. District Court in the Northern District of California, alleges the Paramount-Warner deal will lead to increased prices, fewer consumer choices and reduce production of film and TV since a major rival in the entertainment business will be eliminated.

The suit also alleges that the Paramount-Skydance merger, which was finalized last year, led to higher prices for the Paramount+ streaming service.

The plaintiffs — Pamela Faust, Len Marazzo, Lisa McCarthy, Deborah Rubinsohn and Gary Talewsky — are either Paramount+ subscribers, pay for cable bundles that include Paramount-owned TV channels or are moviegoers who watch films in theaters.

The deal activity for Paramount is part of a growing list of recent media mergers, including Walt Disney Co.’s 2019 acquisition of much of 21st Century Fox and Amazon’s purchase of MGM in 2021.

“These acquisitions show an industry moving by successive combinations toward fewer independent rivals, exactly the consolidation backdrop that heightens the competitive threat posed by the next merger, even if the combined firm remains smaller than the largest platforms,” the lawsuit states.

Paramount is aware of the lawsuit and “confident that it is without merit,” a company spokesperson said.

“The combination of Paramount and [Warner Bros. Discovery] will create a stronger competitor that is well positioned to serve as a champion for creative talent and consumer choice,” the spokesperson said in a statement.

The Paramount-Warner deal is currently winding its way through regulatory approvals. While that process is underway, Paramount has asked the Federal Communications Commission for permission to exceed a cap on foreign ownership for U.S. media companies.

Paramount expects to receive $24 billion in funds from three Middle Eastern royal families, who will become part owners of the combined company. Those total funds will represent about 49% of equity in that new company, exceeding the current foreign ownership cap of 25%.

Paramount has said the Ellison family and RedBird Capital Partners “collectively hold the largest equity stake in the combined company and continue to be the sole owners of Class A Common Stock, representing 100% of the voting shares.”

But on Friday, Rep. Sam Liccardo (D- San Jose) urged the FCC to deny Paramount’s petition on the foreign ownership aspect of the deal.

“Congress did not entrust the public airwaves to this agency so that it could auction off America to Riyadh, Abu Dhabi and Doha,” he wrote in a statement. “This will not stand.”

May 2 (UPI) — A company that makes the abortion drug mifepristone on Saturday asked the U.S. Supreme Court to immediately pause a ruling that prevents doctors from prescribing it during telehealth visits.

Late Friday, a three judge panel on the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals unanimously ruled in favor of the state of Louisiana in a case asking the court to block doctors from prescribing the drug in telehealth visits.

Louisiana in the last four years has moved to prevent women in the state from obtaining abortion care legislators there were among the first to ban abortion after the repeal of Roe v. Wade, and later blocked doctors from prescribing the medical abortion pill in virtual telehealth visits.

The company, which is not the only drugmaker planning to file an appeal, said that patients will be stuck in limbo because of the lack of clarity it leaves for legal use of the drug, NBC News and Politico reported.

Roughly half of all abortions in the United States are performed using medications.

“Danco has been free to rely on procedures set by the FDA to distribute its product,” lawyers for the company said in a filing with the court.

“The Fifth Circuit’s decision immediately ends that,” the lawyers said. “A stay should issue to prevent the disruption and confusion that will result if the decision below were to remain operative.”

In addition to Danco, Politico reported that GenBioPro, which also manufactures the drug, has indicated that it will also file an appeal with the court.

Mifepristone was approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration in 2000 for medical termination of pregnancy and, until the COVID-19 pandemic, could only be prescribed during in-person appointments.

Early in the pandemic and the country locked down in an effort to stem the spread of the virus, doctors sued the FDA to allow them to prescribe mifepristone during telehealth visits.

The FDA temporarily changed the rule, but in 2023 adopted it permanently as some states started to restrict access to abortion and abortion services after the Supreme Court struck down Roe v. Wade.

Pharmaceutical companies and patient advocates warned that the restriction circumvents the FDA’s regulatory authority, which is based on evidence and data, and that it may offer a path for people to challenge other medications based on personal interest or opinion.

In the case of Danco, it also immediately filed the appeal because it is the only product it makes and “without a valid legal framework for distributing that product, Danco will lose its only source of revenue and may be unable to continue operating.”

RICHMOND, Va. — Virginia Supreme Court justices on Monday questioned whether the state’s Democrat-led legislature complied with constitutional requirements when it sent a congressional redistricting plan to voters, in a case that could help decide the balance of power in the U.S. House.

The new districts, which could net Democrats four additional seats, won narrow voter approval last week. But a Republican legal challenge contends the General Assembly violated procedural rules by placing the constitutional amendment before voters to authorize the mid-decade redistricting. If the court agrees that lawmakers broke the rules, it could invalidate the amendment and render last week’s statewide vote meaningless.

The Virginia court proceedings mark the latest twist in a national redistricting battle between Republicans and Democrats seeking an advantage in a November midterm election that will determine whether Republicans maintain their narrow majority in the U.S. House.

President Trump kicked off a tit-for-tat round of gerrymandering last summer when he urged Texas Republicans to redraw districts to their favor in an attempt to win several additional House seats. That set off a chain reaction of similar moves in other states, leading to the voter approval last week of Virginia’s new map.

Next up is Florida, where Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis has included congressional redistricting on the agenda for a special session of the GOP-controlled Legislature beginning Tuesday.

Virginia arguments focus on what counts as an `election’

During Monday’s arguments, the Virginia Supreme Court focused on whether the new congressional districts should be invalidated because of the process used by lawmakers. The justices issued no immediate ruling.

Because the state’s redistricting commission was established by a voter-approved constitutional amendment, lawmakers had to propose an amendment to redraw the districts. That required approval of a resolution in separate legislative sessions, with a state election sandwiched in between, to place the amendment on the ballot.

The legislature’s first vote occurred in October — while early voting was underway but before it concluded on the day of the general election. Judicial questioning focused on whether that was too late, because early voting already had begun.

Attorney Matthew Seligman, who defended the legislature, argued that the “election” should be defined narrowly to mean the Tuesday of the general election. In that case, the legislature’s first vote on the redistricting amendment occurred before the election and was constitutional, he told judges.

But an attorney arguing for the plaintiffs, Thomas McCarthy, said “election” means the entire period during which people can cast ballots, which lasts several weeks in Virginia. If that’s the case, then the legislature’s initial endorsement of the redistricting amendment came too late to comply with the state constitution, he said.

Attorneys argue over the rights of voters

The purpose of Virginia’s two-step amendment process, with an intervening election, is so voters can know whether legislative candidates support or oppose a proposed constitutional amendment, McCarthy said.

He pointed to the case of Democratic voter Camilla Simon, one of the plaintiffs in the lawsuit alongside Republican state lawmakers, who cast an early vote last fall for Democratic Del. Rodney Willett. After she voted, Willett sponsored the Democratic redistricting amendment, and Simon wished she could have undone her vote, McCarthy said.

“None of these voters had any idea this was coming, and that’s not how this process is supposed to work,” McCarthy told the justices.

Those defending the Democratic redistricting plan also contend that the voters’ will should be respected.

The people voted to ratify the constitutional amendment, “and the challengers are asking to overturn that democratic result,” Seligman told reporters after the arguments.

Nationwide redistricting battle has no clear winner so far

So far, the two major parties have battled to a near draw in the states that have redrawn their congressional maps for this year’s midterms.

Republicans think they could win up to nine more seats under revised districts in Texas, Missouri, North Carolina and Ohio. Democrats think they could win as many as 10 additional seats under new districts in California, Utah and Virginia. But legal challenges remain in both Virginia and Missouri.

Virginia currently is represented in the U.S. House by six Democrats and five Republicans who were elected from districts imposed by a court after a bipartisan redistricting commission failed to agree on a map after the 2020 census. The new districts, which narrowly won voter approval on April 21, could give Democrats an improved chance to win 10 districts.

Some candidates already have begun campaigning based on the new districts in advance of the state’s Aug. 4 primary election.

More court battles could remain in Virginia

In January, a judge in rural Tazewell County, in southwestern Virginia, ruled that lawmakers failed to follow their own rules for adding the redistricting amendment to a special session last fall. Circuit Judge Jack Hurley Jr. also ruled that lawmakers failed to initially approve the amendment before the public began voting in last year’s general election and that the state had failed to publish the amendment three months before the election, as required by law. As a result, he said, the amendment is invalid and void.

The Virginia Supreme Court placed Hurley’s order on hold and allowed the redistricting vote to proceed before hearing arguments on the case.

During Monday’s arguments, justices also raised questions about the ability of lawmakers to expand the agenda for their special session and whether the three-month public notice requirement was important enough to thwart a voter-approved amendment.

Republicans have filed at least two additional legal challenges, which also are winding their way through the courts.

Robertson and Lieb write for the Associated Press. Lieb reported from Jefferson City, Mo. AP writers Allen G. Breed in Richmond and Nicholas Riccardi in Denver contributed to this report.

Bejing tightens scrutiny of artificial intelligence industry amid intensifying geopolitical rivalry with the US over the technology.

China has said it is blocking tech giant Meta from an acquisition of artificial intelligence (AI) startup Manus, tightening scrutiny of investment in domestic startups developing frontier technologies from the United States.

China’s National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC) said on Monday that it was prohibiting the foreign acquisition of Manus, without specifically naming Meta.

The move highlights Beijing’s increased concern over US acquisitions of Chinese AI talent and intellectual property, as Washington tries to limit Chinese tech firms’ access to advanced US chips.

It was not immediately clear on what grounds China was seeking the annulment of a deal involving a Singapore-based company and how, if at all, a completed acquisition transaction would be unwound.

Manus, which has Chinese roots but is based in Singapore, provides general-purpose AI agents designed to carry out complex tasks with minimal human intervention.

The call to annul the deal was made by the commission in accordance with Chinese laws and regulations, the NDRC’s statement said.

California-based Meta said in response to the statement: “The transaction complied fully with applicable law. We anticipate an appropriate resolution to the inquiry.”

A White House spokesperson said in a statement that the Trump administration “will continue defending America’s leading and innovative technology sector against undue foreign interference of any sort”.

Meta announced in December that it was acquiring Manus. It is a rare case of a major US tech group buying an AI company with strong links to China. The deal was forecasted to help expand AI offerings across Meta’s platforms.

Meta had said there would be “no continuing Chinese ownership interests in Manus” and that Manus would discontinue its services and operations in China.

But China said in January that it would investigate whether the acquisition would be consistent with its laws and regulations.

After a $75m fundraising round led by US venture firm Benchmark in May 2025, Manus shut its China offices, laying off dozens of employees. It then moved its operations to Singapore.

This enabled Manus’s parent company, Butterfly Effect, to reincorporate ⁠in Singapore and bypass US investment restrictions on Chinese AI firms, as well as Chinese rules limiting domestic AI firms’ ability to transfer their IP and capital overseas.

The Chinese bid to block the deal comes weeks before a planned mid-May summit between US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping in Beijing.