cases

The Cameroonian government has urgently called for strong legal action against perpetrators of gender-based violence and child abuse, citing a significant increase in femicide and sexual assault nationwide.

According to official data released by the government on June 1, the sharp rise in domestic and gender-based killings is disturbing. In 2023, 50 women were documented murdered in Cameroon. That figure rose to 67 cases in 2024, and surged to 77 in 2025. Officials noted that data collected in the first half of 2026 suggests the tragic upward trend is continuing unabated.

During a recent joint press conference in Yaoundé, the capital of Cameroon, the Minister of Communication, alongside the Ministers of Women’s Empowerment, Social Affairs, and Public Health, called for immediate collective action to halt the escalating crisis. The officials emphasised that a vast majority of these femicides are not random acts of violence and are perpetrated by individuals close to the victims, including spouses, family members, neighbours, and acquaintances.

The major increase in femicide cases is further aggravated by an alarming increase in violent crimes against minors, including rape, murder, and severe physical abuse. High-profile cases currently under investigation include the tragic incidents involving three-year-old Bissong Omgba Joyce, who suffered sexual abuse; 11-year-old Divine Mbarga, who was raped and murdered; and the Nkolbisson tragedy in which a mother killed her three children before taking her own life. Also, in March 2026, an 11-month-old infant was murdered by a family member in Douala, and another 11-year-old boy, Karl Ethan, was killed in Minkan.

In response to the ongoing issue of gender-based violence, several women’s rights organisations have come together to deliver a strong message. They stressed that no woman should lose her life because of her gender, and no child should be raised in an environment filled with fear, violence, or abuse. The women also expressed grave concerns about the situation in Cameroon, describing it as critical and calling for nationwide mobilisation and warned against the trivialisation of gender-based crimes.

“Behind these statistics are broken lives, bereaved families and profoundly shocked communities. Women, mothers, girls and housewives have lost their lives under circumstances linked to gender-based violence,” said Lizzy Claude, a women’s rights activist.

“This is a reality which is more and more disquieting to the civil society and defenders of human rights, especially within a context marked by a spike in sexual violence and abuses inflicted on children,” Lizzy added.

Los Angeles County prosecutors are reviewing two sex assault cases against Sean “Diddy” Combs that stem from allegations made by a Florida music producer last year, law enforcement officials and the alleged victim said Wednesday.

Investigators from the Los Angeles Police Department and the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department presented the cases to prosecutors in January 2026, according to a statement from the district attorney’s office.

A spokesman for the district attorney’s office declined to say when the alleged incidents occurred or explain why it has taken nearly nine months to make a charging decision.

Combs — who rose to fame as a hip-hop mogul in the 1990s as the face of Bad Boy Records — has gone through a years-long public downfall following myriad allegations of domestic violence and sex abuse. In July, a New York jury convicted him of transporting prostitutes across state lines for drug-fueled bacchanals referred to as “freak offs.”

He was sentenced to four years in federal prison and remains incarcerated at a minimum-security prison in New Jersey.

Combs’ reputation and business began to publicly unravel in 2023 after federal authorities raided his homes, and a leaked video showed him beating his ex-girlfriend, Casandra “Cassie” Ventura, at a Los Angeles hotel.

TMZ first reported on the D.A.’s office’s decision to review the L.A. allegations. A spokesman for Combs declined to comment.

In November, The Times reported that the Sheriff’s Department was investigating Combs on suspicion of a sex assault that happened in East L.A.

Jonathan Hay — a Florida-based music producer who was working with Combs on a project to remix songs written by deceased rap legend Notorious B.I.G., also known as Christopher Wallace — said Wednesday that he is the alleged victim in the cases under review by the district attorney.

Hay told several media outlets in 2025 that he was the “John Doe” from a civil lawsuit filed last July that accused Combs of sex assault in 2020 and 2021. Hay first reported the assaults to police in Largo, Fla., he has said.

According to the suit, Hay, Combs and others were at a Los Angeles warehouse that stored some of Wallace’s possessions in 2020 when Combs “provided drugs to everyone present” and subsequently began masturbating in front of Hay.

Combs “started watching porn on his cell phone, grabbed one of Biggie’s shirts off a rack, and began to masturbate with it in front of the plaintiff,” the suit alleges. In a separate incident in March 2021, Hay alleged Combs forced him to perform oral sex, according to the suit.

“I have an overwhelming feeling of hope as we are knocking on the door of criminal justice,” Hay wrote in an email to The Times on Wednesday. “I am beyond grateful that both the LASD and LAPD investigated this case thoroughly for many months and submitted it to the District Attorney.”

Combs’ civil attorney Jonathan Davis has previously denied Hay’s allegations.

“Let me make it absolutely clear, Mr. Combs categorically denies as false and defamatory all claims that he sexually abused anyone,” Davis said in a statement last year. “He looks forward to vindicating himself in court, where such matters are decided — and not in the media — based on admissible, material evidence, not rank speculation and unsubstantiated allegations.”

Times staff writer Richard Winton contributed to this report.

Athens, Greece – Bashir is a Syrian Muslim who has lived in Greece since 2014. He married a fellow Syrian in the country, and three months ago, they had a son. After years of picking olives and oranges, learning Greek and a trade in metalwork, and finally buying his own equipment to start work as an independent trader, Bashir felt his life was finally coming together.

Two months ago, the authorities handed him a piece of paper asking him to restate his reasons for coming to Greece and why he should now return to Syria.

Bashir, who requested to withhold his surname, had been granted asylum in Greece in 2015 because of the civil war then raging in Syria. The war ended in December 2024, and Bashir became one of 1,200 Syrians whose asylum cases were reopened in February.

“It’s a catastrophe,” he told Al Jazeera. “I don’t understand how this can happen. If they decide I should leave the country, should my family stay here?”

Bashir’s lawyer said only men are currently receiving such notices – and not just from Syria but Afghanistan, another country whose civil war is deemed to have ended, with the Taliban’s sweeping victory in August 2021.

But neither Syria nor Afghanistan is necessarily safe to return to, said the lawyer, Angeliki Theodoropoulou.

“We believe this has to do with the European Union’s stance towards Syria and Afghanistan, and with the fact that there are quite a few voluntary returns, which encourages authorities to say, ‘Let’s see if these people can return’,” Theodoropoulou told Al Jazeera.

She said the entire regime of international protection was being tightened for these two nationalities. “We’re also seeing asylum being given in very few cases, and a lot of rejections,” she said.

“We don’t understand on what criteria they decided Syria is safe,” Bashir said.

Earlier this year, renewed clashes erupted between the Syrian government and the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), while Israel has continued attacks on the country sporadically.

Bilal said he feels uncomfortable about the idea of living in Syria for cultural and political reasons, having spent 15 years away.

“Many of the refugees here are like me,” he said.

Jihad, who requested to withhold his surname, has similar concerns but for the opposite reason. He has lived in Greece legally since 2001 and runs a small clothes shop. When the regime of Bashar al-Assad fell, the rest of his family also fled, because he and his family were Assad supporters.

He fears that he would be mistreated in Syria over his views.

“If they just look at my Facebook page or look at things I wrote in the past, they will send me to jail for sure,” Jihad said. “I’m afraid even to go to the embassy. I have never held a gun, I have never killed anyone, I just have an opinion.”

Both men have clean criminal records, pay taxes and social security contributions, and have nurtured families in Greece. Both say they would flee to another country rather than return to Syria. So why is Greece considering their eviction?

Greece’s turn to exclusion

Greek Migration Minister Thanos Plevris announced in February that he had ordered a reopening of any asylum cases that could be revoked. As a temporary status, it can be.

Last year, Greece revoked the asylum of almost 200 people, compared with 400 in the previous decade. Dozens more cases are under review this year. And there appears to be a religious element to the policy.

Greece suspended asylum applications for mainly Muslim asylum seekers arriving from Libya for three months last year. Most of the people whose asylum is being revoked are from majority-Muslim countries.

At a recent parliamentary committee hearing, Plevris stated clearly that Greece prefers non-Muslim migrant workers.

“There are countries with which we don’t have common values, and that’s mainly because of religion, let’s be clear, it’s because of hardcore Islam,” Plevris said. “So, you have to pick countries that are religiously neutral or Christian. We’re talking to Georgia, the Philippines, Armenia, India.”

Greece has been tightening its migration policy in other ways as well.

In September 2025, it adopted what Plevris described as “the strictest returns policy in the whole EU”, empowering the government to imprison people who refuse to be deported. Rejected asylum applicants can be fitted with ankle monitors and given just two weeks to remove themselves voluntarily. If they don’t, they face a 5,000-euro fine ($5,870) and two to five years’ confinement in closed camps.

In February, the governing conservative New Democracy party passed a law stipulating that if any aid worker is charged with helping to smuggle asylum seekers into Greece, their entire aid organisation can be delisted from the ministry’s registry. That means they could lose their funding and access to refugee camps, and could shut down.

The broader context

Europe is undergoing a transition as it prepares to put into force an Asylum and Migration Pact next month. The pact demands a hard-border policy and a returns policy for rejected asylum seekers, both of which each member state must manage itself.

“We’re at a pivotal point in time. We’re about to see the implementation of the European pact. This will fundamentally change the way that migration works,” Kristin Fabbe, chair in Business and Comparative Politics at the European University Institute, recently told a Delphi Economic Forum event in Athens.

The largest bottleneck, she said, “is that Europe has not yet figured out how to do returns at scale … in order to reform asylum and reform migration, you have to execute returns at scale, and the data show that that has been impossible”.

Greece, an EU front-line state, already has 938,000 legally resident migrants in a population of 10.3 million, a relatively high number. Of these, more than 137,000 are recipients of asylum or international protection.

As the Middle East and North Africa region remains unstable, the government is worried about the potential scale of future refugee flows.

More than a million asylum seekers crossed the Greek borders in 2015. In the years that followed, certain EU members took on thousands of asylum cases from Greece and Italy in a show of solidarity, and tens of thousands more asylum recipients in Greece moved to other EU states. Those states have agreed to keep them, but that would not necessarily happen again under the pact.

Observers say this explains Greece’s hardline attitude.

Commenting on the political mood in Europe, Fabbe said, “The legality, the sanctity of the [returns] solutions is being challenged, but I think we’re going to see the proliferation of those solutions and new institutional mechanisms.”

WASHINGTON  — The Supreme Court heads into the final month of its yearly term facing decisions on birthright citizenship, gun rights, transgender athletes and President Trump’s power over independent agencies.

Unlike in years past, the term’s most significant rulings were not left for the last week in June.

The court dealt Trump a major defeat in February by striking down his sweeping worldwide tariffs. The president is likely to suffer a second defeat when the justices reject his plan to revise the citizenship laws via an executive order.

Republicans won when the court struck down a Louisiana congressional district that favored a Black Democrat.

That decision has already shifted several congressional districts toward the GOP, but its greatest impact will be seen in 2028 and 2030.

Republicans are likely to prevail in two other pending cases.

One would free party committees to raise and spend more money to support their candidates. A second would change state laws to bar counting of mail ballots that arrive after election day.

The justices have 26 cases waiting to be decided before they go on a summer recess. Here are the major cases due for decision:

Trump and birthright citizenship

Does the 14th Amendment of 1868 mean what it says about who is a citizen?

It declares: “All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof are citizens of the United States.”

The Supreme Court upheld that understanding in 1898, ruling that Wong Kim Ark, who was born to Chinese parents in San Francisco, was a U.S. citizen at birth. Congress adopted birthright citizenship in the Immigration and Nationality Acts of 1940 and 1952.

But on his first day back in the White House, Trump issued an executive order to deny citizenship to the newborns of parents who in the country unlawfully or temporarily on a student, work or tourist visa.

Judges blocked the order from taking effect, and in April, the justices gave a skeptical hearing to Trump’s lawyers as the president sat in the gallery.

The best outcome for Trump would be a ruling that rejects his executive order based on U.S. immigration law alone. Although a defeat, that could in theory permit Congress to revise the law and deny citizenship to the newborns of so-called “birth tourists.” (Trump vs. Barbara)

Guns and drugs

Can the government make it a crime for “habitual users of unlawful drugs” to have a gun, or does that violate 2nd Amendment rights?

Since 1968, federal law has prohibited gun possession by anyone who is an “unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance.”

The 5th Circuit Court of Appeals in a Texas case struck down this provision as unconstitutional, except for someone who is “under an impairing influence” of drugs at the time of his arrest.

The Trump administration appealed and urged the Supreme Court to uphold the law against “habitual users of unlawful drugs,” including regular users of marijuana. (U.S. vs. Hemani)

In a second gun rights case, the court will decide whether Hawaii, California and three other states led by Democrats may forbid licensed gun owners from carrying a firearm into stores or private businesses open to the public unless they have the “express authorization” of the owners. (Wolford vs. Lopez)

Transgender athletes and school sports

Can states maintain separate sports teams for boys and girls “based on biological sex determined at birth” or does excluding transgender girls violate the Title IX law or the Constitution’s guarantee of equal protection?

The justices heard appeals from West Virginia and Idaho after lower courts ruled they had discriminated against transgender girls, and most of them sounded ready to rule for the states.

The only question was whether the court will rule narrowly to uphold laws in the red states or go further to decide how Title IX applies nationwide. (West Virginia vs. B.P.J. and Little vs. Hecox)

Trump and independent agencies

Can the president fire the leaders of special agencies who were given a fixed term by Congress?

For most of American history, Congress created new boards or commissions with a specific mission, such as regulating railroad rates in the 1880s or nuclear power in the 1970s. By law, these agencies are led by a bipartisan board of experts who had a fixed term and could be fired only for cause.

But Trump and the court’s conservatives believe the president has the executive authority to control the government and to fire agency officials — but with one exception. The majority wants to preserve the independence of the Federal Reserve Board. (Trump vs. Slaughter)

Separately, the court will rule on whether Trump had the power to fire Fed Governor Lisa Cook for cause. He alleged she engaged in mortgage fraud and dismissed her in a social media post. The justices blocked her removal and sounded ready to rule she deserved due process of law and a full hearing to contest the allegations. (Trump vs. Cook)

Temporary Protected Status

Can the Trump administration cancel legal protection for more than 300,000 Haitians and Syrians who are living and working in this country?

In 1990, Congress created this protected status for foreign nationals who could not return home safely because of armed conflicts or natural disasters.

The Obama administration extended protection to Haitians and Syrians. Last year, Trump’s then-Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem sought to terminate it, but judges blocked her orders because it was still dangerous and unsafe in those countries.

Before the Supreme Court, Trump’s lawyers argued the law forbids “judicial review” of these executive decisions. (Mullin vs. Doe)

Campaign funds and political parties

Do the 50-year-old limits on how much political party committees can raise and spend to directly support their candidates violate the 1st Amendment?

During the Watergate era, Congress adopted limits on money in political campaigns, but the court has struck down the spending limits on free speech grounds. Left standing were the limits on direct contributions to candidates, including from political parties.

Republicans led by then-Sen. JD Vance sued, arguing the party limits were outdated and unwise in an era when super PACs are free to spend huge sums on campaigns. (National Republican Senatorial Committee vs. FEC)

The court also will rule on the GOP’s bid to strike down laws in California and most states that allow for counting mail ballots that were postmarked by election day but arrive a few days later. (Watson vs. Republican National Committee)

SAN FRANCISCO — There are no immigrants waiting for rulings anymore at San Francisco’s main immigration court, no lawyers making arguments.

The court, which had 21 judges when President Trump was sworn in last year, had only two left when it closed May 1. The rest had been fired, retired or resigned amid a White House purge of federal immigration judges.

The closing is one more reflection of the turmoil that has upended the immigration court system as the administration looks for ways to churn through its massive backlog of 3.8 million asylum cases and deport as many people as possible.

Asylum denial rates have soared as the administration has fired almost 100 judges deemed to be too liberal, and approved using hundreds of military lawyers to replace them. Immigrants have been arrested when they arrive at courthouses or government offices for scheduled appearances.

But amid the nationwide upheaval, San Francisco is the first major city to be left without a primary immigration court, leaving chaos and dysfunction in a region long known for its friendliness to asylum seekers. The two remaining judges will work from another federal building in the city but will be part of an immigration court across the bay.

That reputation, court insiders say, might have led to its downfall.

“It was a vibrant legal scene and so I think if you were looking to target a court you would have to look at what San Francisco stands for,” said Jeremiah Johnson, an immigration judge in the city until he was fired in November. He is now executive vice president of the National Assn. of Immigration Judges.

Most of the court’s 117,000 immigration cases have been moved to a courthouse in Concord, a city about 30 miles away that opened two years ago to help with San Francisco’s backlog of cases. But turmoil has also reached that city. A courthouse that had 11 judges at the start of 2025 is down to five after a series of firings. It had a caseload of 60,000 cases even before the San Francisco cases were shifted over.

San Francisco’s immigration court, which had the third-highest number of asylum cases in the nation, was long considered one of the most favorable to people seeking asylum. From 2019 to 2024, almost 75% of petitioners received some form of relief, compared with 43% nationwide, according to data compiled by the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse, a nonprofit data research center based at Syracuse University.

That’s partly because San Francisco, with its vast network of pro-immigrant organizations and pro bono or low-cost legal services, had one of the country’s highest rates of legal representation for immigrants.

The Executive Office of Immigration Review, the Department of Justice branch that oversees immigration courts, announced in March that it would close the San Francisco courthouse in 2027 as a cost-saving measure and move its cases to Concord. But the end came early after nearly all the San Francisco judges left or were fired. The Executive Office provided no detailed explanation for the changes, saying in a statement only that it had decided not to renew its lease for the court, and doesn’t comment on personnel matters.

Tight security in Concord courts

Security is tight at the Concord courthouse, perhaps because of the new influx of cases. Armed security guards ask every person if they are carrying weapons or explosives, and they watch as each person turns off their cellphone. Even coffee is not allowed in. Only water is acceptable, and then only if it’s in a transparent bottle.

Judah Lakin, an immigration attorney based in Oakland who also teaches at UC Berkeley School of Law, said the closure of the San Francisco court has made cases more time-consuming since it’s harder for his clients, who often travel from hours away, to reach Concord on public transportation.

One recent 10-minute hearing in Concord took him more than two hours of travel, he said.

But beyond logistics, Lakin said the chaos in immigration courts under the Trump administration has created a fraught court atmosphere. Mass firings have led to last-minute hearing cancellations, cases have been reset with little notice, and clients are often left in prolonged legal limbo, leaving them vulnerable to deportation.

One of his clients, he said, was provisionally granted asylum by a judge, who was then fired before signing the decision. The case was transferred to a second judge, who was also fired. Now on their third judge, his client is still waiting.

“The ground is constantly shifting underneath your feet, whether it’s judges being fired and hearings getting canceled, whether it’s your clients getting arrested, whether it’s getting denials on things that used to be standard and routine,” Lakin said.

“I think that’s on purpose. That’s by design. It’s part of the strategy,” he added.

‘Heartbreaking’

San Francisco’s immigration court was one of the first in the nation to hire judges with non-prosecutorial backgrounds, with many having previous experience working with immigrants at nonprofits or defending them in court.

To see the court close is “heartbreaking,” said Dana Leigh Marks, a former San Francisco immigration judge who retired in 2021 after 35 years on the bench and who was among the first judges in the nation to be hired from private practice.

She sees the Trump administration’s decision to close the largest immigration court in Northern California as part of an effort to undermine due process and eventually dismantle the path to asylum.

“It’s all a part of big ways and little ways that the Trump administration is trying to get noncitizens out of the country,” she said.

Johnson, the fired San Francisco judge, was appointed during the first Trump administration. He believes he was targeted because he granted asylum in 89% of the cases he heard.

“You don’t fire judges if you disagree with the way they’re handling a case; that’s not how courts work. If you disagree, you appeal that decision,” he said.

Johnson, who is the executive vice president of the National Assn. of Immigration Judges, defended his judicial record, pointing out that over eight years, only about 10 of his cases were appealed by the Department of Homeland Security, and very few were sent back for further hearings by the Board of Immigration Appeals.

Unlike federal courts, where there are strict rules of procedure and judges have lifetime tenure, the Justice Department runs immigration courts, and the attorney general can fire the judges with fewer constraints.

There were 754 immigration judges across the country at the start of Trump’s second term. Now, there are about 600, including some temporary judges, according to data collected by the judges’ union. Widespread courthouse arrests of immigrants have caused hundreds of people not to even show up for hearings, leading to deportation orders in absentia.

Nidaa Pervaiz came to the Concord court on a recent day to represent a client from Nepal. She prefers the new courthouse in some ways, since it’s closer to her home.

But, she said, she and her clients are already feeling the impact of the changes. Fewer judges leads to fewer hearings. That means more delays for her clients, whose paperwork can expire even before they can appear before a judge.

“Their whole lives are at stake, and they are coming to make a plea for their future” she said.

Rodriguez writes for the Associated Press.

The new cases in Uganda include a driver who transported the country’s first ⁠confirmed patient and a ​health worker.

Uganda has confirmed three new ⁠cases of Ebola, bringing ⁠the total number of infections in the country in this outbreak to five, as authorities stepped up contact tracing to try to contain the spread.

The update from Uganda’s Ministry of Health on Saturday came a day after World Health Organization Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus announced the risk assessment for the Bundibugyo strain of Ebola was being revised to “very high at the national level, high at the regional level, and low at global level”.

Nearly 750 suspected cases and 177 suspected deaths ‌have been recorded in Uganda’s neighbouring country, Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), the centre of the outbreak.

First responders in the DRC say they lack basic supplies, which some have attributed to foreign aid cuts by major international donors, particularly the United States.

The WHO has said late detection, the absence of a vaccine or virus-specific therapeutics, widespread armed violence and high mobility among the population make the DRC especially vulnerable.

Uganda suspended all public transport to the DRC on Thursday after confirming two cases of Ebola – one infection and one death – involving Congolese nationals who crossed the border.

The new cases in Uganda reported on Saturday include a driver who transported the country’s first ⁠confirmed patient and a health worker ⁠exposed while caring for that patient.

Both are receiving treatment and were identified among known contacts, the Health Ministry said in a statement.

The third case is a woman ⁠from DRC who entered Uganda with mild abdominal symptoms and later travelled from Arua, close ⁠to the border, to Entebbe before seeking ⁠care at a private hospital in the capital, Kampala.

The patient initially improved and returned to DRC but later tested positive for Ebola after a follow-up prompted ‌by a tip-off from a pilot involved in transporting her.

All identified contacts linked to the confirmed cases are being closely monitored, ‌the ‌ministry said, urging the public to remain vigilant and report suspected symptoms.

“At this critical moment in the outbreak response, it is vital that authorities maintain high vigilance to control expansion of the virus,” Tedros said on Saturday.

“The WHO is working side by side with Africa Centres for Disease Control and Prevention, and partners in the DRC and Uganda, to contain the outbreak, support affected people, and bolster a coordinated response.”

The Democratic Republic of Congo has faced repeated Ebola outbreaks, but insecurity in the eastern part of the country is making this most recent outbreak difficult to control.

Neighbouring countries have already reported some cases, and the World Health Organization has said the outbreak’s real impact is yet to be seen.
The Democratic Republic of Congo has faced repeated Ebola outbreaks, but insecurity in the eastern part of the country is making this most recent outbreak difficult to control.

Neighbouring countries have already reported some cases, and the World Health Organization has said the outbreak’s real impact is yet to be seen.
Al Jazeera’s Hamza Mohamed explains.

May 15 (UPI) — The World Health Organization said Friday there have been 10 hantavirus cases reported from the MV Hondius cruise ship and three people have died.

The WHO held a press conference to share an update on the hantavirus outbreak Friday, days after passengers of the cruise ship disembarked to return to their home countries under quarantine. It previously reported 11 cases but that number was revised down to 10.

One American who recently had an inconclusive test has tested negative, said Dr. Maria Van Kerkhove, director of the WHO’s Department of Epidemic and Pandemic Management.

“As of today a total of 10 cases, including three deaths, have been reported to WHO, including eight people who were laboratory confirmed for Andes virus infection and two probable,” Dr. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, WHO director-general, said during Friday’s press conference.

Forty-one people are being monitored for the hantavirus in the United States. Most U.S. passengers were transported from the ship to the University of Nebraska Medical Center, where they were being monitored in a specially designed medical facility.

Stephen Kornfeld is the only American to test positive for hantavirus. He had flu-like symptoms while aboard the cruise ship and was admitted to the facility in Nebraska. He has since tested negative and has been moved into the facility’s quarantine unit.

“I physically feel great. I have felt great for many, many days,” he told ABC News.

On Thursday, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention held a press briefing on its response to the hantavirus. Dr. David Fitter, incident manager for CDC’s hantavirus response, said the risk to the general public is “low.”

“Testing is recommended only for those with symptoms, and decisions are guided by the best available evidence,” Fitter said.

Fitter said the monitoring period for the U.S. passengers is 42 days. He noted that there were passengers who left the ship and returned home before the outbreak and they have been identified.

“Some of these people are at home monitoring their health in close coordination with their state and local health departments, with CDC supporting those efforts,” Fitter said.

WASHINGTON — Amid growing national security concerns, the FBI said Tuesday that it has launched a broad investigation in the deaths or disappearances of at least 10 scientists and staff connected to highly sensitive research, including four from the Los Angeles area.

“The FBI is spearheading the effort to look for connections into the missing and deceased scientists. We are working with the Department of Energy, Department of War, and with our state and state and local law enforcement partners to find answers,” the agency said in a statement.

The FBI’s announcement comes after the House Oversight Committee announced that it would investigate reports of the disappearance and deaths of the scientists, sending letters seeking information from the agencies involved in the federal inquiry as well as NASA, which owns the Jet Propulsion Laboratory in La Cañada Flintridge, where three of the missing or dead scientists worked.

“If the reports are accurate, these deaths and disappearances may represent a grave threat to U.S. national security and to U.S. personnel with access to scientific secrets,” Reps. James Comer (R-Ky.), chairman of the committee, and Eric Burlison (R-Mo.) wrote in the letters.

President Trump told reporters last week that he had been briefed on the missing and dead scientists, which he described as “pretty serious stuff.” He said at the time that he expected answers on whether the deaths were connected “in the next week and a half.”

Michael David Hicks, who studied comets and asteroids at JPL, was the first of the scientists who disappeared or died. He died on July 30, 2023, at the age of 59. No cause of death was disclosed.

A year later, JPL physicist Frank Maiwald died at 61, with no cause of death disclosed.

Two other Los Angeles scientists are part of the string of deaths and disappearances.

On June 22, 2025, Monica Jacinto Reza, a materials scientist at JPL, disappeared while on a hike near Mt. Waterman in the San Gabriel Mountains.

On Feb. 16, Caltech astrophysicist Carl Grillmair was fatally shot on the porch of his Llano home. The Los Angeles County Sheriff’s department arrested Freddy Snyder, 29, in connection with the shooting. Snyder had been arrested in December on suspicion of trespassing on Grillmair’s property.

Snyder has been charged with murder.

There is no evidence at this point that the deaths and disappearances, which occurred over a span of four years, are connected.

A spokesperson for NASA, which owns JPL, said in a statement on X that the agency is “coordinating and cooperating with the relevant agencies in relation to the missing scientists.

“At this time, nothing related to NASA indicates a national security threat,” agency spokesperson Bethany Stevens wrote. “The agency is committed to transparency and will provide more information as able.”

Representatives from Caltech did not immediately respond to a request for comment.