commissioner

The Sparks’ defensive struggles continued on Wednesday during a 99-83 loss to the first-place Minnesota Lynx at Crypto.com Arena.

The Sparks (7-7) had trouble containing Lynx rookie Olivia Miles, who set a WNBA rookie record with 24 first-half points and finished with a career-high 31. Miles helped the Lynx (11-3) make a strong push for a spot in the Commissioner’s Cup championship, but the Las Vegas Aces snatched the final spot against the New York Liberty with a victory over Phoenix on Wednesday night.

Sparks guard Kelsey Plum, the WNBA’s leading scorer, missed the game with a lower leg injury. The team also played without forward Cameron Brink, who sprained her ankle on Monday.

Rae Burrell led the Sparks in scoring with 19 points, while Jihyun Park added 13 off the bench. Dearica Hamby was limited to 12 points and nine rebounds, while Nneka Ogwumike added 10 points and eight boards.

“I thought [Jihyun] was a bright spot. She is really smart out there and knows what she is doing,” Sparks coach Lynne Roberts said. “That’s what you need to do when you get those moments — you take advantage of it, and that’s what she did.”

With Plum and Brink out, Roberts said pregame that it would take a team effort to beat Minnesota, but it was a tough climb for four quarters.

The Sparks were nearly perfect in the first quarter before committing their first turnover with under five minutes to play. The turnover swung the momentum in Minnesota’s favor.

The Lynx erased the Sparks’ 7-3 lead — fueled by quick starts from Burrell and Hamby. Burrell scored 10 points by being aggressive in all areas and Hamby scored 10 of her 12 points in the first half.

Miles took a few minutes to get her feet wet. Once her shots started to fall, the Sparks struggled to contain her.

“She is good,” Roberts said about Miles’ performance. “She is talented. Like I said pregame, she is super skilled, and we were trying to mix things up. We didn’t execute exactly how we’d hoped to all the time, but you just have to tip your cap to her. She is a great player with a lot of skill.”

Lynx took their first lead with a jumper from Natasha Howard with 5:04 left in the first quarter. The lead changed frequently early, but the Lynx opened the second quarter with a 27-21 advantage.

The Sparks’ scoring trouble flared up in the second quarter just as Miles got hot. The Sparks were outscored 29-18 during the quarter and entered halftime down 52-37.

After trailing by as many as 20 points in the third quarter, the Sparks cut the margin to 10. Erica Wheeler sank two free throws to cut the deficit to 61-51 with 4:32 remaining in the third quarter.

The Sparks held Miles to five points during the third quarter, but the Lynx got 20 points from Nia Coffey and 15 points from Howard.

Fouls and turnovers crushed the Sparks’ rally. After Minnesota built a big lead, both teams cleared their benches late in the fourth quarter.

The Sparks haven’t beaten the Lynx at home since Aug. 21, 2018. L.A. is riding a two-game losing streak and will face Eastern Conference leader New York Liberty on Sunday at Crypto.com Arena. The game will feature a celebration of the WNBA’s 30th anniversary.

“We are going through adversity right now,” Roberts said. “We just got to get healthy.”

SACRAMENTO — The Democratic-led state Senate has voted to reconfirm five commissioners to the California Board of Parole Hearings, a move that drew outcry from Republicans who argued the board recently made several egregious decisions.

“The current board is clearly not doing a good job protecting children and should be replaced,” said Sen. Steven Choi (R-Irvine), speaking June 1 on the Senate floor.

The parole board consists of 21 commissioners who are appointed by the governor and confirmed by the Senate for three-year terms. Five current commissioners — William Muniz, Michael Ruff, Rosalind Sargent-Burns, Mary Thornton and Jack Weiss — were reconfirmed June 1 in votes that fell along party lines.

Senate Republicans spoke out from the floor, expressing anger over the board’s recent decisions to grant parole to serial sex offenders David Allen Funston, Gregory Lee Vogelsang and Roberto Antonio Detrinidad. (The vote of individual commissioners was not made public.)

Democrats defended the board, saying it was following a landmark 2008 ruling from the California Supreme Court that declared denying parole must be supported by evidence that the person poses a current risk.

“Parole decisions must be based on current safety risks not on the seriousness of the original offense,” said Sen. Eloise Gómez Reyes (D-Colton). “Evidence based risk assessment exists for this exact purpose.”

California’s elderly parole program allows inmates 50 and older to qualify for a parole suitability hearing if they have been incarcerated for at least 20 continuous years. The individual can then be released if commissioners determine they do not pose a public safety risk.

Republicans, however, questioned the board’s judgment.

Sen. Shannon Grove (R-Bakersfield) said a transcript of Funston’s initial parole hearing showed he acknowledged still being attracted to children and said he would splash cold water on his face to deter his urges.

Funston used candy and toys to lure children playing outside in the Sacramento suburbs into his vehicle in 1995 and 1996, prosecutors said. He was convicted of 16 counts of kidnapping and child molestation.

“There is not a single person in this chamber who would want this man to be alone with their children or grandchildren or any of our constituents,” Grove said. “But this board voted to let him out of prison.”

Sen. Rosilicie Ochoa Bogh (R-Yucaipa) criticized the board for not releasing the specific voting records of individual commissioners. She said she had asked the five commissioners to reveal their records, which California allows but does not require.

“They all refused,” Bogh said. “If you are not willing to publicly own how you voted to release a serial child molester or repeat rapist, you will not receive my vote.”

After the votes, Senate Minority Leader Brian W. Jones (R-Santee) criticized Democrats in a statement for “rubber-stamping” the reappointments and said the board had lost all credibility with the public.

A spokesperson for the board said commissioners follow California law and prioritize public safety.

“The Board’s standard is stringent, involves numerous steps and use of validated risk assessment tools, including evaluation by forensic psychologists,” spokesperson Emily Humpal wrote in an email. “Over 97% of parolees successfully transition into their communities without a new conviction within three years.”

Some prosecutors and victims recently expressed outrage over the board’s decisions. One victim, who was kidnapped by Funston at age 4 and sexually assaulted with a knife to her throat, previously told The Times that he should remain in prison.

Jones and Sen. Roger Niello (R-Fair Oaks) this year introduced Senate Bill 1278, which would have blocked those convicted of “rape, sodomy, lewd and lascivious acts, and habitual sex offenders” from the elderly parole program. Some offenders already are barred, including those convicted of first-degree murder of a law enforcement officer.

The bill ultimately died in the Senate Public Safety Committee in April.

Other legislation from Assemblymember Stephanie Nguyen (D-Elk Grove) would raise the minimum parole age for sex offenders convicted of rape, sodomy, or the aggravated sexual assault of a child to 65. Assembly Bill 2727 is advancing through the Legislature with bipartisan support.

If signed into law, the measure would amend legislation from former Assemblymember Phil Ting (D-San Francisco), which was signed into law in 2020 and lowered the minimum age requirement for elderly parole consideration from 60 to 50 years old.

SEOUL, May 13 (UPI) — United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights Volker Turk on Wednesday called for an “all hands on deck” response to North Korea’s human rights crisis, saying efforts to address peace and security on the Korean Peninsula “need to be anchored in human rights.”

“The situation in the DPRK is a human rights crisis and it is high time the international community treats it as such,” Turk said at a press conference in Seoul, using the official acronym for North Korea.

“My office has continued to document patterns of ongoing gross human rights violations, some of which may amount to crimes against humanity,” he said.

Turk is on a three-day trip to South Korea, where he is meeting with civil society groups, North Korean escapees and senior government officials. It is the first visit by a U.N. human rights chief since 2015.

A 2014 U.N. Commission of Inquiry report found North Korea’s abuses to be “without parallel in the contemporary world” and recommended referring the country’s leadership to the International Criminal Court.

A follow-up assessment released last year by the U.N. human rights office said conditions in North Korea “have not improved over the past decade and, in many instances, have degraded,” citing worsening food shortages, forced labor and severe restrictions on movement and expression.

“It is clear that there needs to be accountability in all its forms, including non-judicial forms, for the grave violations that have plagued the DPRK for decades,” Turk said.

“It is equally clear that we need all hands on deck to craft fresh solutions for the way forward,” he added. “Peace and security on the Korean peninsula need to be anchored in human rights.”

Turk’s trip comes as South Korean President Lee Jae Myung pursues improved ties with Pyongyang through confidence-building measures such as restricting activist groups from sending anti-North Korean propaganda leaflets across the border.

Lee’s administration has also taken a cautious approach to North Korean rights concerns, including dissolving a Unification Ministry office focused on the issue and suspending publication of an annual rights report. Advocacy groups have criticized the moves as a “troubling shift away from support for the victims of North Korean government repression.”

Turk pushed back against the notion that dialogue with Pyongyang requires softening criticism of its rights record.

“There is no paradox in engaging while addressing human rights issues,” he said. “Engagement cannot come at the expense of human rights. That was obviously a very important part of my dialogue with the authorities here.”

In March, South Korea joined 49 other countries in co-sponsoring a U.N. Human Rights Council resolution condemning North Korea’s abuses, despite speculation Seoul might withhold support.

Turk also addressed the case of two North Korean prisoners of war captured by Ukrainian forces in January 2025 after being deployed to support Russia’s war effort.

The soldiers have expressed a desire to go to South Korea rather than return to the North, where rights groups say they could face severe punishment.

Turk said international human rights law was “very clear” on the issue.

“The obligation not to send them back to areas where they could end up being harmed” applies in their case, he said.

Turk said his office continues to seek opportunities for dialogue with North Korean officials and called next week’s visit by a North Korean women’s soccer team to South Korea “encouraging.”

“Urgent steps are needed to find ways to exchange letters, resume family contacts and reunions, and release information clarifying the whereabouts and fate of disappeared and abducted people,” he said.

On Thursday, Turk is scheduled to travel to Gwangju to deliver a keynote address at the World Human Rights Cities Forum.

Walt Disney Co. has picked up a vocal ally in its fight against the Federal Communications Commission: one of the panel’s three commissioners.

FCC Commissioner Anna Gomez — the panel’s lone Democrat — took a rare step of sending a letter to Disney Chief Executive Officer Josh D’Amaro Monday to describe what she sees as a pressure campaign to weaken not just Disney’s ABC network — but all media outlets that provide critical coverage of President Trump.

“What Disney and ABC are facing is not a series of coincidental regulatory actions but a sustained, coordinated campaign of censorship and control, carried out through the weaponization of the FCC’s authority as a federal regulator,” Gomez wrote.

The FCC’s efforts were all about “pressuring a free and independent press and all media into submission,” Gomez wrote in the four-page missive to D’Amaro — Disney’s recently installed chief executive.

Her outreach comes after the FCC, in a highly unusual move, initiated an early review of the broadcast licenses for ABC stations that Disney owns, including KABC-TV Channel 7 in Los Angeles. Disney owns eight stations and its licenses were not set to expire for another two to five years.

The FCC also demanded that Disney’s Houston television station explain why the ABC daytime show, “The View,” should be entitled to an exemption from providing equal time rules for politicians whose opponent appears on a program.

Disney has said “The View” was granted an exemption — which is widely used among news programs — in 2002. Last Thursday, Disney sent a blistering letter to the FCC, challenging its inquiry on “The View.”

Gomez has been outspoken about the tactics of her colleague — FCC Chairman Brendan Carr, a Trump appointee — and the dangers she said that certain FCC actions represent to 1st Amendment freedoms. Monday’s letter escalated her criticism and gives Disney potent ammunition to use in its legal battle against the FCC.

Disney and the FCC did not immediately comment.

Gomez, a telecommunications attorney, listed four key events, which began when Disney decided to settle a defamation lawsuit brought by Trump one month after he was reelected for a second-term. Some free speech experts felt Disney had a chance to win that case, based on erroneous statements made by ABC News anchor George Stephanopoulos.

However, Disney agreed to pay $15 million in late 2024 to make the case go away.

“Whatever the legal calculations behind that decision, its effect was immediate and unmistakable,” Gomez wrote. “It told this administration that pressure works. It told every other company watching that capitulation was an option. And it opened the door to every action that has followed.”

Gomez said the administration’s goal has not been to bring challenges that the FCC would have to defend in court, but rather, to prompt TV networks to self-censor and tone down their news coverage as a way to avoid getting pulled into fights with the president and Carr.

“Most [FCC investigations] are destined never to be brought to any enforcement conclusion that could face judicial review,” Gomez wrote. “That is because the threat is the point.”

One member calls for a Presidential Medal of Freedom for a baker who refused to create a wedding cake for a same-sex couple.

Another calls for court interventions by the Department of Justice on behalf of Amish parents fighting New York vaccine requirements and Catholic nuns challenging that state’s requirement that they accommodate hospice patients’ gender identities.

And the chair of the Religious Liberty Commission is calling for a federal hotline with this automated recording: “There is no separation of church and state.”

These are just some of the recommendations that members of the advisory panel formed by President Trump last year want to see included in the commission’s final report.

That report is still in the works, but commissioners had an opportunity to describe their wish lists during their most recent meeting in April. There was little dissent as the commissioners, most drawn from Trump’s base of conservative Christian supporters, covered the items they want in the report.

Their ideas reflect the prevailing perspectives on the definition of religious liberty among many conservative Catholic and evangelical activists: increasing avenues for religious expression in public schools, expanding opportunities for faith-based organizations to receive public money, and allowing for religious-based exemptions in areas ranging from labor law to classroom lessons to healthcare mandates.

Such views have also been reflected in Supreme Court decisions issued in recent years by its conservative majority.

Commission’s views criticized

Critics of the commission say it embodies a one-sided perspective of Trump’s supporters and is threatening a well-established constitutional separation of church and state.

A lawsuit by a progressive interreligious coalition argues that the commission fails to comply with federal law requiring advisory panels to feature diverse members and viewpoints.

The lawsuit echoes criticism that most commissioners are conservative Christian clerics and commentators; one is an Orthodox Jewish rabbi. The coalition says members have asserted that America is specifically a Judeo-Christian or Christian nation and notes that most commission meetings took place at the Museum of the Bible in Washington, an institution with Christian leadership.

The Republican administration is asking a federal court to dismiss the lawsuit. The government is citing legal technicalities and contending that the law does not define how a commission should be fairly balanced or whose viewpoints should be represented.

Another entity created by Trump — the Task Force to Eradicate Anti-Christian Bias — issued a report saying Christians faced discrimination under the administration of President Biden in areas such as education, tax law and prosecution of antiabortion protesters. Progressive groups said that report failed to document systemic discrimination, focused on causes favored by conservative Christians and amounted to advocacy rather than an investigation.

In a further interlocking of Trump-related initiatives, several members of the Religious Liberty Commission are scheduled to take part in a May 17 prayer event marking the country’s upcoming 250th birthday. Several also participated in a recent Bible-reading marathon staged largely at the Museum of the Bible.

Harmony and tension

The commission has mostly featured agreement among members, with one dramatic exception. One commissioner, Carrie Prejean Boller, was ousted in February after a contentious hearing on antisemitism.

Commission Chair Dan Patrick said Prejean Boller sought to “hijack” the hearing, in which she had sharp exchanges with witnesses about the definition of antisemitism and defended commentator Candace Owens, denying her record of antisemitic statements. Prejean Boller, a Catholic, contended that she was wrongly ousted for expressing her beliefs.

In other hearings, witnesses described how they defied workplace regulations that they said conflicted with their conservative religious values on gender, abortion, COVID-19 vaccines and more. Some said they were prevented, at least temporarily, from displaying a religious symbol at work or trying to sing a Christian song at a school talent show.

At the hearing devoted to antisemitism, Jewish witnesses spoke of being harassed and threatened at campus pro-Palestinian protests against Israel. The commission has also heard from Hindu, Muslim, Sikh and other witnesses.

Even so, critics said the commission mostly focused on conservative Christian and right-leaning political grievances.

The Rev. Paul Brandeis Raushenbush, president of the progressive Interfaith Alliance, one of the groups suing over the commission’s composition, said the panel’s omissions are as significant as what it focuses on.

He said the commission has failed adequately to address such issues as anti-Muslim efforts in Texas and elsewhere, and also the rise of antisemitism on the right, not just the left.

Separation of church and state

Raushenbush said he is especially worried about the commission chair’s challenging the very notion of church-state separation.

Patrick, a Republican who is the Texas lieutenant governor, repeatedly denounced a concept that is embedded in Supreme Court precedent.

“We need to say there is no separation of church and state,” Patrick said at the April meeting. “That’s a lie.” He suggested printing “a million bumper stickers” to that effect.

No one at the commission meeting disagreed.

Trump made similar comments at a prayer event at the White House in 2025. “They say separation between church and state,” he said. “I said, all right, let’s forget about that for one time.”

While the phrase “separation of church and state” does not appear in the Constitution, 20th century decisions by the Supreme Court cited Thomas Jefferson’s description of the 1st Amendment as creating “a wall of separation between church and state.” The court applied the 1st Amendment’s prohibition of any church “establishment” to the states in addition to the federal government, citing the 14th Amendment’s ban on states denying citizens’ rights.

Courts have since wrestled with how to balance freedom of religion and freedom from government-sponsored religion.

Schools, vaccines and workplaces

Patrick has advocated for prayer and Ten Commandments postings in public schools.

“I don’t have any malice towards anyone that doesn’t believe in any type of faith,” Patrick told fellow commissioners. “That’s fine. That’s what America is about. But these organizations that are pushed by some ideology and pushed by someone’s bank account who wants to remove God from our country? We need to push back.”

On other issues, various commissioners called for requiring schools and workplaces to post notices of the rights of religious expression and exemptions.

Some called for restoring full pay and pension benefits for military service members who were discharged for refusing COVID-19 vaccines.

Bishop Robert Barron of the Catholic Diocese of Winona-Rochester, Minn., called for allowing religious groups such as Catholic Charities to receive federal money without compromising on traditional church teachings about the family.

He also said Catholic immigrants in detention should have humane treatment and access to sacraments and that immigration agents should not disrupt worship services in enforcement actions. The administration last year eliminated a policy against immigration enforcement in sanctuaries, which other religious leaders said should not occur at any time.

Kelly Shackelford, president and chief executive officer of the legal organization First Liberty Institute, called for new requirements that governments pay all legal bills if they lose a religious liberty case. He said many individuals lack the money to challenge the government in court.

“That would be a huge shifting of power in favor of citizens,” he said.

Smith writes for the Associated Press.