crackdown

In the latest salvo in the war between the Trump administration and California, Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy jr. said Tuesday that his agency withheld $867.5 million in Medicaid payments to the state over concerns about fraud.

Kennedy also said his agency defered $199 million in Medicaid payments to Minnesota over similar concerns.

“If Gov. Gavin Newsom or Gov. Tim Walz wants this funding released, all they have to do is provide basic documentation showing that these services are legitimate and not fraudulent,” Kennedy said at a news conference.

Just under half of the funds withheld from California were in connection with in-home health services.

Dr. Mehmet Oz, the administrator for the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, said California’s spending on in-home health services went up by more than double the national average over the last two fiscal years.

“That doesn’t make sense,” he said.

About a quarter of the funds withheld involved care provided to individuals with “unsatisfactory immigration status,” whose eligibility to be in the country and receive these services is in question, which Oz characterized as an “ongoing massive problem for California.”

The announcement by Kennedy and Oz on Tuesday comes two months after Vice President JD Vance announced that the administration would be deferring $1.3 billion in Medicaid payments over fraud concerns, largely connected to hospice services and in-home healthcare.

Newsom’s office, in a social media post, called the announcement a “recycled political stunt.”

“California isn’t being targeted because Trump has evidence of fraud,” the post said. “We are being targeted for political reasons — and because Dr. Oz doesn’t understand that we are *SAVING* taxpayers money by keeping seniors and people with disabilities out of far more expensive nursing homes!”

Newsom’s office also said that the state stands “ready to collaborate” with the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services “in good faith efforts to combat fraud.”

The office of California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta said it is reviewing the deferral of payments and allegations of fraud.

“We have not hesitated to challenge unlawful actions by the Trump administration, and we will continue to act whenever Californians’ rights or access to critical services are threatened,” Bonta’s office said.

Despite Newsom’s claims that the accusations are political, the California state auditor has repeatedly flagged Medi-Cal eligibility discrepancies that have exposed the state to billions of dollars in questionable payments.

California Department of Healthcare Services spokesperson Anthony Cava noted, however, that a 2020 state audit of in-home care found “no program integrity concerns” and encouraged expansion of the program to reduce spending on institutional care.

Cava also pointed out that the federal government had previously approved California’s approach to in-home care.

Newsom and Oz have clashed before.

Newsom filed a civil rights complaint in January against Oz, after Oz posted a video to social media from Van Nuys in which he accused the “Russian Armenian mafia” of being a leading driver of $3.5 billion in fraud in hospice and home-care services.

Newsom said that Oz’s claims were “baseless and racist.”

The announcement by Kennedy and Oz on Tuesday is the latest effort by the Trump administration to crack down on suspected Medicaid fraud in numerous states across the country.

BEACHGOERS could be slapped with a £1,000 fine for breaking this little-known seaside rule.

The law is in place to try and protect UK beaches, but is a hindrance for those that like to collect a coastal memento.

On a visit to the coast, many of us like to nab a little souvenir of the seaside in the form of a pebble or a shell.

But this action could land you with a fine of up to £1,000.

Cumberland Council is reminding tourists to leave beach materials on the shore or risk paying the fine.

The rule is implemented in The Coastal Protection Act, and is in place to protect the British coast “against erosion and encroachment by the sea”.

SMOKE AND MIRRORS

Brits heading on European summer holidays could face fines of up to £433

OF-FENCE

You can be FINED if your kid kicks their football over neighbour’s garden fence

Under this act, it is against the law to take natural materials from the UK seafronts.

This includes materials such as sand, shells and pebbles.

The law can in turn be enforced by the local council and lead to a fine of up to £1,000.

While popping a pebble in your pocket on a beach stroll may feel harmless, mass numbers of materials disappearing from the beach can worsen the effects of coastal erosion.

This occurs when land located near the sea is worn away by the water.

The coast is better protected when there are more pebbles on the shore, which is why beach-goers are discouraged from taking home a memento.

Natural materials found on the beach also provide habitats for wildlife and protect the area from flooding.

Cumberland Councillor Bob Kelly, who is the executive member for Cumberland Policy and Regulatory Services, said: “I understand people’s reluctance to follow this guidance, as I have been a collector of shells myself.

“But taking a pebble or a shell from a beach can in fact damage the environment.

“Pebbles and other natural matter act as a natural sea defence against coastal erosion, natural flood defences and wildlife habitats, which many experts warn has become even more of an issue due to climate change.

“We are asking people to leave the pebbles, shells and sand as we all want to ensure that our beaches remain vibrant and intact for future generations.”

New Delhi, India – Blood spots on the walls, overturned barricades, shattered mirrors and sandals strewn across the road. A scarf here, broken glasses and a torn shirt there lie as remnants of the chaos that took over the Indian capital.

The heart of New Delhi – Parliament Street and Connaught Place, a colonial-era square – bears the imprint of Monday’s police crackdown on thousands of protesters, most of them students, who had shut down the capital, demanding that Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan resign.

A swarm of protesters reached parliament’s doorstep before retreating as the police tear-gassed them. More than 100 students were injured.

“I still cannot believe my eyes that I’m in Delhi,” said Anshul Dev, an 18-year-old who grew up in the capital. “Part of it is because tear gas still stings,” he added, bursting into laughter with his group of friends. One of them had both legs bandaged.

“This government, whom our elders voted to power, is treating us like terrorists and criminals,” Dev said. “This is our country, and we are reclaiming it from their hateful politics. We are here to break the spell.”

Anger among India’s youth, the world’s largest Gen Z cohort, has been simmering for the past two months over a string of compromised entrance exams that affected millions of students. In some cases, exam papers were leaked; in others, students who sought copies of their answer scripts found that they had been wrongly graded. More than 20 students died by suicide, many citing the paper leaks.

Prime Minister Narendra Modi has not addressed the protests, even as he appeared smiling on Monday in parliament, barely metres away from demonstrators at one point.

Analysts said the student protests face formidable obstacles before they can extract concessions from Modi’s government. Yet the protests, the government’s refusal to hold any of its own accountable and the crackdown have also embellished a charge that the prime minister has long faced from critics and opposition parties – that although he is elected democratically, he behaves like an autocrat.

‘Protests will continue’

After dark on Monday, Abhijeet Dipke – the leader of the Cockroach Janta Party (CJP), a political pressure group that called the march – returned to a torn-down stage at the CJP’s main protest site near Jantar Mantar, an 18th-century observatory that is now an important location for protests.

“This barbaric Delhi police has beaten up our students and comrades. We are heartbroken,” he said, addressing about 2,000 protesters who stayed back after the crackdown. “We will continue to resist and demand accountability from the government. We will not back down until Dharmendra Pradhan resigns.”

Dipke told the protesters that the Delhi police “brutally cracked down to crush our hopes” that Pradhan would resign. “It was only our first call to march,” he said. “There will be more. Do not lose hope.”

Volunteers began to pick up rubbish, tie a tent together and sweep the road at the Jantar Mantar site. This is where more than 100 protesters from student unions have been sleeping for nearly a month to join Sonam Wangchuk, a prominent activist, on a hunger strike to seek the minister’s resignation.

The police also rampaged through these student unions’ tarpaulin tents and belongings on Monday.

The movement gained momentum last week after the police forcibly removed Wangchuk from the protest site and restricted him to a government-run hospital, where he remains. His family and the CJP have called it “illegal detention”, but the Delhi High Court has refused immediate relief.

Wangchuk, 59, broke his hunger strike before the march on Monday; however, later he said he would be at it again after “seeing the brutality” against “peacefully protesting students”.

The Delhi police have filed at least five criminal cases against protesters related to violence, stone-throwing and vandalism during the march.

Meeting with government a ‘waste of time’

Before the march, CJP leaders said the government reached out for talks.

As thousands of demonstrators assembled in New Delhi, two CJP spokespeople met JP Nadda, India’s health minister, to convey the movement’s three demands: Pradhan’s immediate resignation, Wangchuk’s discharge from hospital and compensation of nearly $105,000 for the families of those students who died by suicide.

However, they were disillusioned by sunset. “It was a waste of our time,” said Ashutosh Ranka, a CJP spokesperson. “We were made to wait for four hours, and the minister met us for 10 minutes.”

Nadda said he met with the spokespeople “in a cordial atmosphere”, adding that he “requested all the protesters to end their sit-in and assist the administration in restoring normalcy”.

Some students have been calling for the decentralisation of the protests, so they could move beyond the CJP to demand accountability from the government.

And political analysts who spoke with Al Jazeera said maintaining the credibility of the CJP’s leadership remains one of the biggest immediate hurdles for the movement in the face of an unprecedented crowd turnout for the march.

Confronting a ‘strong man’

Since the police forcibly removed Wangchuk from the protest site, the movement and demonstrators have called on Modi to resign. Slogans targeting the prime minister reverberated through central New Delhi on Monday.

The large number of protesters “is itself a big challenge to the prime minister”, said Nilanjan Mukhopadhyay, an author and Modi biographer.

As of now, he told Al Jazeera, “Modi has decided to continue with his instinctive response of not giving any concessions to protesters and continuing to project himself as a strong man with completely unshakeable will.”

The biographer added that the prime minister, who has been in power since 2014, “does not care before crushing a protest or using brute force until it cuts through his voting constituencies”.

“They will go by their gut response of a crackdown. Modi would not want to emerge from this with a bloody nose,” he added, “despite a lot of anger among youth, which shows the undercurrent of anti-incumbency.”

The simmering anger found a vent as Gen Z rallied behind a joke, the Cockroach Janta Party, after India’s chief justice equated government critics and unemployed youth to “cockroaches” and “parasites”.

Memes, online rants and students taking photos in front of police have flooded the internet in India, where they expressed anguish and took digs at the police crackdown.

Meghnad S, a YouTuber, was among the crowd of thousands in front of the Indian Parliament on Monday.

“It was insanity, and the crowd was really riled up due to police actions. It was cruel,” he told Al Jazeera from the protest site on Monday night. “But movements are always messy. This is very difficult to control. We are all cockroaches, after all. And we are still swarming here.”

By Tuesday morning, the crowd had packed the site yet again. The cockroaches had returned.

The government of Daniel Ortega and Rosario Murillo has been accused of human rights abuses against critics.

Nicaragua’s government has stripped masses of lawyers of their licences to practise, in what critics see as yet another attack on the country’s critics.

On Friday, a United Nations expert called the government’s actions a “purge of the legal profession”, aimed at eroding the country’s final shreds of democratic checks and balances.

Nicaragua’s husband-wife co-presidents, Daniel Ortega and Rosario Murillo, have led a government that has increasingly carried out an all-out crackdown on dissent.

That effort intensified after mass social protests in 2018 that the government violently repressed.

Since then, the government has imprisoned adversaries, religious leaders, journalists and others, forcing thousands to flee the country. It has also stripped hundreds of their Nicaraguan citizenship and possessions.

Since 2018, it has also shut down more than 5,000 nongovernmental organisations, largely religious groups, but also local rotary clubs and scouting organisations.

In recent days, lawyers noticed that their licences to practise law in Nicaragua were removed without explanation from the Supreme Court of Justice’s registry, according to Reed Brody, an American human rights lawyer and member of a UN panel of experts on the Central American country.

Other lawyers also confirmed their certifications were revoked.

There was no official notification by the government, and Nicaragua’s government did not respond to a request for comment by The Associated Press news agency.

Brody said the full scope of the revocation was not immediately clear, but it “would certainly appear to be at least hundreds, if not thousands of lawyers” who were affected.

“This follows the pattern that we’ve been seeing for years. First, they closed the NGOs, the universities, the independent media. You know, they’ve gone after the churches, and now it seems the legal profession,” Brody said. “Anyone who might stand between the government and citizens.”

Brody said he knew of at least 20 lawyers who had been affected.

Juan Diego Barberena, a lawyer and human rights defender exiled in Costa Rica since 2022, was among those stripped of his official certification and said he knew of at least 25 more colleagues like him.

On Thursday, Barberena tried to access his legal accreditation on the government’s database and said his name and licence number were wiped clean from the system.

“This is a means of exercising totalitarian control over the legal profession,” Barberena said. “This means that the dictatorship can decide who gets to practise and who doesn’t.”

The move echoes other steps the government has taken in recent years.

Many Nicaraguan exiles who were stripped of their citizenship and rendered “stateless” have reported similar stories. They or their family members would search for their birth certificates and other legal documents in official databases, only to be told they do not exist.

But Barberena and Brody said the move this week by authorities went a step further, noting that those erased from the system were not just dissenters. Some were simply Nicaraguans living abroad.

Others practised criminal or family law that didn’t touch on politics, while some were government sympathisers, Barberena said.

Brody framed it as a move to whittle away at any last remaining shred of independence in a judicial system already firmly under control of Ortega and Murillo.

“On one hand, it’s an arbitrary measure to punish political dissent,” Barberena said. “On the other, it’s the dictatorship looking medium-term and wanting to prevent lawyers, experts and academics from participating in the future of the country’s institutions.”

For more than two decades, corruption has been a serious issue in Iraq.

The oil-rich nation has consistently been ranked as one of the most corrupt in the world.

But this week, its new government has embarked on an unprecedented anti-corruption crackdown.

It’s targeting many high-profile politicians and other senior figures accused of making illicit wealth and abuse of office.

Iraqis have repeatedly protested against what they say is rampant corruption in their nation.

Now, they hope the new government keeps this promise to eradicate what they call a ‘pandemic of fraudulent activities’ at the highest echelons of power.

But what are the challenges ahead in this battle?

Presenter: Imran Khan

Guests:

Ahmed Rushdi – President of the think-tank, House of Iraqi Expertise Foundation.

Renad Mansour – Deputy Director of the Middle East and North Africa Programme at Chatham House.

Manuel Pirino – Regional Advisor for Middle East and North Africa at Transparency International.

Elite security personnel carry out a large-scale operation at dawn in the Green Zone and several neighbourhoods in Baghdad, security source says.

Several Iraqi politicians, lawmakers and officials have been arrested on corruption charges, Iraqi state-run media report.

Several people, including members of parliament “whose immunity had been lifted and officials whose names appeared in … confessions”, were arrested early on Sunday in the capital, Baghdad, the Iraqi News Agency reported, quoting a security source.

It was not immediately clear who had been arrested. There was no immediate official statement on the arrests from the Iraqi government or security forces.

A security source told Al Jazeera that elite Iraqi security forces carried out a large-scale arrest operation at dawn in the fortified International Zone (Green Zone) and several neighbourhoods in Baghdad.

The source said the arrests were carried out by the Counter Terrorism Service and were based on statements provided by Adnan al-Jumaili, deputy oil minister, after his arrest last month on corruption charges.

Iraq’s new prime minister, Ali al-Zaidi, has pledged to fight corruption and mismanagement that have plagued Iraq for decades.

Authorities seized about $86m in cash this month that was allegedly part of the corruption case against al-Jumaili.

The Associated Press news agency reported that seven people were arrested on Sunday, including five members of parliament. It cited a security agency report it obtained. The AP said some of those arrested were from the political bloc of former Prime Minister Mohammed Shia al-Sudani.

During November’s parliamentary elections, al-Sudani’s bloc won the largest share of seats, but he did not return as prime minister. He stepped aside amid a deadlock in the Coordination Framework, a group of Shia parties allied with Iran that brought al-Sudani to power. They disagreed for months over their preferred candidate for the post.

Amid the first days of grief after Alex Vesia and his wife lost their newborn daughter last fall, Vesia noticed something as he watched the World Series on television. He paused the broadcast, then checked the video, then texted another player to make sure.

51.

Dodgers teammates wore his number on their caps. So did players from the Toronto Blue Jays.

“It was awesome,” Vesia said. “It was a very heartwarming moment.”

Moving.

Touching.

And, under baseball’s rules, illegal.

Who knew, really, until this week? Three pitchers from the San Francisco Giants wrote the name of a Bible verse on their Pride Night caps and, amid an uproar, Major League Baseball said it had warned the players that “writing of any kind, with any message” on any playing apparel is not permitted. The issue, the league said in a statement, was not what they wrote on their caps but simply that they wrote on them at all.

Said MLB in the statement: “We have given the same warning numerous times in the past to players for messages such as ‘Dad’, ‘Happy Mother’s Day, I Love Mom’ and names of family members.”

To its credit, the league did not enforce the rule when Vesia’s number started appearing on caps in the World Series. But, if you’re going to draw a line on enforcement, where should you draw it?

In San Francisco, the actions of the Giants’ pitchers were widely condemned.

“They were in for a rude awakening with the response, and it wasn’t just from the gay community,” Giants broadcaster and former pitcher Mike Krukow told KNBR, the team’s flagship radio station. “It was from the Northern California community that supports the gay community.”

In response to media inquiries, and as first reported by Outsports, MLB confirmed it had warned the three players. I asked the league whether warnings had been issued in two other instances in which players had written on their caps, including Clayton Kershaw last year writing the same Bible verse on his Pride Night cap that the Giants’ pitchers wrote this year. MLB declined to comment.

“I got chastised by the league when I put Charlie [Kirk]’s name on my hat last year, because a man was murdered in cold blood,” Dodgers pitcher Blake Treinen told me, “and now these gentlemen who are relievers in San Francisco are getting chastised by the league for putting a Bible verse on their hat. It’s crazy to me.”

Treinen said league officials had told him the rule is strictly enforced.

“I straight up asked Clayton last year, ‘Did they call you when you put that on your hat?’” Treinen said. “He said, ‘No.’”

The Pride caps feature team logos decorated in the colors of the rainbow, a symbol long associated with the gay community. In the Bible verse cited by the pitchers (Genesis 9:12-16), the rainbow represents “the everlasting covenant between God and all living creatures.”

That the league would warn players against writing a Bible verse on their caps ignited a wave of conservative outrage, from Vice President JD Vance to Texas Gov. Greg Abbott.

Missouri Sen. Josh Hawley fired off a letter to MLB commissioner Rob Manfred, alleging apparent discrimination “against baseball players who profess their Christian faith” and threatening the league’s antitrust exemption. Assistant U.S. Atty. Gen. Harmeet Dhillon said on national television that players might be able to file a claim for employment discrimination.

That is complete nonsense. This is what you want: When employees raise an issue to their employer, the employer listens and addresses their concerns.

In 2023, the year after five Tampa Bay Rays players declined to wear rainbow logos for Pride Night, Manfred said the league would no longer compel players to do so.

“We have told teams, in terms of actual uniforms, hats, bases that we don’t think putting logos on them is a good idea just because of the desire to protect players: not putting them in a position of doing something that may make them uncomfortable because of their personal views,” Manfred said then.

Teammates congratulate Freddie Freeman after his walk-off home run gave the Dodgers a 1-0 win on June 5, when the Dodgers held their annual Pride Night. Blake Treinen, the winning pitcher that night, elected to wear his regular Dodgers cap instead of the Pride version.

(Katelyn Mulcahy / Getty Images)

Manfred said the Pride Night celebrations could go on, however a team wished to stage them — or not, in the case of the Texas Rangers, the only one of the 30 MLB teams that declines to hold a Pride Night. And the league still sells Pride gear on its website for all teams, including the Rangers.

In the cases of the Giants and Dodgers, MLB grandfathered each team’s long-running use of a rainbow logo on the cap, with this accommodation to players: If you don’t feel comfortable wearing the Pride cap, just wear your regular cap.

That is what Treinen and outfielder Alex Call did when the Dodgers celebrated Pride Night. That is also what a fourth Giants pitcher did.

“My job is to abide by the rules,” Treinen said. “Ultimately, the only rule we have is to wear our team-issued uniform. So that’s what I chose to do.”

To Treinen, the decision over whether to wear a Pride cap is not about passing judgment on anyone else but about what he sees as the push “to force something on people that you know that is controversial to their faith — and, in fact, straight up against their faith.”

He expressed his support for the Giants pitchers.

“Kudos to those men over there who are standing strong in their faith,” he said. “It’s a sad thing to corner someone and try to make them feel bad about their convictions.”

I respect Treinen for explaining his viewpoint. To me, wearing a Pride cap for one night does not diminish your faith at all. It might sharpen your convictions. More important, it signals a welcome to everyone in the community that buys the tickets and broadcast subscriptions that help pay your salary.

“I think a few people made it about themselves and not about the community,” San Francisco Mayor Daniel Lurie told the Bay Area Reporter.

We always proclaim the life lessons of sports. One of them: Sometimes you have to put the team’s interests ahead of your own.

Federal prosecutors announced charges Tuesday against 15 people who are accused of impeding federal agents during the Trump administration’s massive immigration surge in Minnesota earlier this year.

The investigation targeted two “Minneapolis-based antifa groups” whose members were trained in “surveillance, operational planning and rapid mobilization against law enforcement,” Minnesota U.S. Atty. Daniel N. Rosen said at a press conference.

The charges come as the Trump administration has escalated its attacks on “antifa,” an umbrella term for a diffuse movement of militant left-wing activists, which President Trump has described as a domestic terror group.

Rosen said some of those arrested identified as “antifa” while deploying a range of tactics to disrupt the immigration crackdown, such as “stalking” federal agents and using blocks of ice to slow their convoys. He declined to say whether any federal agents were injured as a result of their actions.

“Whether or not they actually, at the end of the day, cause bodily harm is not the measure of whether or not they committed a serious federal crime,” Rosen told reporters.

Twelve people were arrested Tuesday, two remain at large and one is already in custody, Rosen added. The names and specific charges of those arrested were not immediately available.

The charges come months after the administration’s “Operation Metro Surge” brought thousands of federal agents to the Twin Cities, setting off mass protests and leading to the fatal shooting of two U.S. citizens.

During the surge, convoys of agents in unmarked SUVs traveled through neighborhoods, at times banging down doors, waiting outside schools and demanding residents produce proof of citizenship.

Primarily organized through anonymous neighborhood messaging threads, a sprawling network of outraged Minnesotans quickly formed, with ordinary citizens and activists using whistles and car horns to call attention to the masked, heavily armed agents.

At the time, border czar Tom Homan indicated that federal authorities were probing “the organization and funding of the attacks on ICE.”

“They’ll be held accountable,” Homan said. “Justice is coming.”

Last September, Trump signed an order classifying antifa as a domestic terror organization and directing federal agencies to “investigate, disrupt, and dismantle” its affiliates and funders.

Democrats and several First Amendment groups have raised issue with the designation. While the federal government may designate foreign terror groups, there is no formal mechanism to apply the same label to domestic groups.

Trump has long invoked the term against a range of political opponents, including peaceful protesters without anarchist leanings.

Offenhartz writes for The Associated Press.

BRITISH holidaymakers going to France may be forced to cover their bare chests or risk being slapped with a £130 (€150) fine.

Men have been banned from walking around shirtless in several seaside resort towns – with one mayor citing concerns over hygiene and decency.

Topless sunbathing is still legal in France – but around 20 towns are clamping down on locals and tourists from baring their chests in city centres.

The glamorous resort of Deauville has hiked up its token fine of £15 (€17) to a heftier £130 (€150).

And in the southern French city of Narbonne – which last year saw blistering highs of 43 degrees – men are barred from going shirtless all summer.

The ban came into force on Monday and will end only at the end of September.

NICE TO SEE YOU

Elegant French resort of Nice is just ideal for a short break away

WAVE BYE

Greece BANS sunbeds & umbrellas across 250 beaches

The mayor of the resort town claimed it was common sense for a tourist hotspot to crack down on bare-chests.

“It’s about hygiene and avoiding exhibitionism,” he said.

One Narbonne restaurant owner hailed the crackdown as “a very good thing”, saying that “this isn’t something the staff of our café can easily police on their own without getting into arguments with customers”.

“Having bare-chested guys on the terrace can put off other customers”, added Anthony Hill, 53, who runs Le 89 cafe in the city centre.

But as a heatwave swept across the holiday hotspot – hitting highs of 34 degrees – not everyone welcomed the ban.

“This excessive puritanism is disturbing. Let people live a little. A bare chest never killed anyone”, complained one user named Gabriel on X.

Another seaside port – La Grande‑Motte – has imposed the same restriction and local resident Marie welcomed the change with open arms.

“If I’m out with my kids in the town centre I really don’t want to see guys without shirts. It’s a matter of decency — and there’s also the smell when they walk past you”, the 37-year-old told French TV.

But one holidaymaker, 55, questioned whether the £130 (€150) was “a bit steep” – though he added that he found rule logical.

French law forbids women from going topless – but there is no nationwide ban on men’s shirtlessness.

If a woman walks around bare-chested anywhere other than on a beach she risks being arrested for “sexual exhibitionism” and thrown in jail.

She may also be charged a fine of around £13,000 (€15,000).

In 2020 a row erupted across the nation after cops asked three topless women sunbathing on a southern French beach to cover up.

A family had complained that the women’s bare breasts had upset their children – but when police took action they were blasted for betraying the “French way of life”.

WNBA games are being officiated differently this season and it’s been a struggle for the Sparks to adapt.

After complaints about the league being too physical last season, the WNBA created a task force of coaches and general managers to develop more consistent officiating.

Foul calls have been up so far this season, with officials focused on freedom of movement or letting offensive players move without being knocked away from the ball.

“It’s hard, especially when you’ve been playing for a certain way for a long time and then having to switch it up more often, in my opinion, as a defender, but it just is what it is,” Sparks guard Ariel Atkins said. “So, yeah, you just have to adjust.”

Across the league, teams are averaging 20.9 fouls per game. Last season, it was 17.5 per game. The Sparks are fouling 22.0 times per contest, the fifth most in the WNBA.

The Connecticut Sun led the WNBA last season with 19.6 fouls per contest. In 2026, 10 of the 15 teams are averaging more than 20 fouls against them per contest.

“I’m cool with it, as long as it’s called the same for 40 minutes, like both ways,” Sparks coach Lynne Roberts said. “I think the officials have been given a tough task that’s hard, but I think they’ve done a decent job of being pretty consistent with it. Players, coaches, you just have to adjust, and I think the one thing that I’d like to see us get better at is just [being] not so reactive, just have a little more toughness, in terms of not responding. That’s how they’re going to call it — we got to move on to the next play.”

The increase in calls seems to have given teams more room to score, as intended, despite more starts and stops to game flow.

Entering Sunday, four teams had offensive ratings more than 110 after Minnesota’s 109.5 was the best in the league in 2025. Indiana leads the league in pace at 99.50 after the Sparks led the league last season at 96.84. Five teams are working at a pace of 97 or higher, which would have placed last year’s Sparks at sixth.

One of the Sparks’ offseason priorities was improving their league-worst defense, but that’s been more difficult than ever with how the game is being called.

Sparks forward Cameron Brink blocks a shot from Toronto’s Laura Juskaite during a game on May 15.

(Jeff Lewis / Associated Press)

“Getting used to it as a player, kind of understanding the flow of the game, that’s probably the toughest part for me,” Atkins said. “There’s no real flow or like rhythm to it, right? I’m hoping that the corner turns or we both adjust on both sides.”

The Sparks’ pace is on track to be similar to last season at 97.67 — fifth in the WNBA — through nine games. Their offensive rating of 107.9 is eighth in the WNBA, but they’ve played half of their games without league-leading scorer Kelsey Plum.

Defensively, though, they haven’t made much of an adjustment. They have a league-worst 114.1 defensive rating.

Cameron Brink’s 4.0 fouls per game are the fifth most in the WNBA, and Atkins’ 3.6 also ranks among the bottom 10 players in the league. Plum is at 3.1 just below Atkins, Dearica Hamby isn’t far behind at 3.1 and Erica Wheeler is at 2.9, giving the Sparks the most players in the league in the bottom 30 on a single team.

“It’s hard, I think, on a defensive end, especially when you’re somebody that enjoys the physicality and you like to lean into it,” Hamby said.

The Sparks already had an uphill climb to improve on the league’s worst defense, but as they continue to adjust to the way games are being officiated, it’s all the more difficult.

Add it to the list of things the 4-6 squad needs to work on to climb back near the top of the WNBA.

“I try to not center officiating as a part of my experience,” Nneka Ogwumike said. “I know it’s part of the game, and something we can’t control, but I do think we can do better in our response to it.”

MINNEAPOLIS — A federal immigration officer wanted for shooting a Venezuelan man during the Trump administration’s Minnesota crackdown was arrested Friday in Texas, authorities said.

Christian Castro, of the Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency, was taken into custody 11 days after Minneapolis prosecutors charged him with assault and falsely reporting a crime in the Jan. 14 nonfatal shooting of Julio Cesar Sosa-Celis.

Hennepin County, Minnesota prosecutors said the state’s Bureau of Criminal Apprehension located Castro, 52, in Texas and worked with agents from the Department of Homeland Security’s Inspector General’s Office and the Texas Rangers to arrest him.

“Today’s arrest is a critical step forward in our prosecution of Mr. Castro,” Hennepin County Attorney Mary Moriarty said.

Online court records do not list an attorney for Castro and it wasn’t immediately clear if he has one. Messages seeking comment were left with ICE, the Homeland Security Inspector General’s Office and the Texas Rangers.

Castro is the second federal agent to be charged over their conduct during the Minnesota crackdown, which was known as Operation Metro Surge. He is one of two agents that ICE Director Todd Lyons said lied about the circumstances of the incident.

Hennepin County attorney Mary Moriarty holds up a document containing charges against ICE agent Christian Castro during a news conference at the Hennepin County Government Center in Minneapolis, on Monday, May 18, 2026.

(Renée Jones Schneider/Minnesota Star Tribune Via Associated Press)

According to prosecutors, Castro fired through a home’s front door and shot Sosa-Celis in the thigh after Castro and another officer chased a different man, Alfredo Alejandro Aljorna, to the Minneapolis apartment duplex where he and Sosa-Celis lived. Sosa-Celis and Aljorna were legally in the U.S., Moriarty said.

Federal authorities initially accused Sosa-Celis and Aljorna of beating an officer with a broom handle and a snow shovel. A federal judge later dismissed the charges, and ICE and the Justice Department opened an investigation into whether officers lied about what happened.

In a statement after the charges were announced, ICE said the U.S. attorney’s office was investigating statements made by officers, who could face disciplinary action including being fired and prosecuted. ICE called the Hennepin County attorney’s action “unlawful and nothing more than a political stunt.” DHS’s Inspector General’s Office, which Moriarty credited with assisting in the arrest, is separate from ICE and is meant to serve as a watchdog for DHS agencies, including ICE.

Minneapolis last month released video showing the moments before Sosa-Celis’s shooting, captured from a distance by a city-owned security camera.

The video appears to show a person standing with a snow shovel outside the house, near the street, then retreating toward the house and tossing the shovel into the yard. This happens as a person being chased by another person runs up from the street, falls on the sidewalk, gets up, and keeps heading toward the house.

The three appear to scuffle near the front steps for about 10 seconds. The exact moment when Sosa-Celis is shot isn’t clear. A car with flashing lights pulls up, and another person walks up.

The Trump administration sent thousands of officers to the Minneapolis and St. Paul area as part of President Trump’s national deportation campaign and considered Operation Metro Surge a success.

But tensions mounted during the weekslong campaign, and the shooting deaths of U.S. citizens Renee Good and Alex Pretti by federal officers sparked mass unrest and raised questions about officers’ conduct.

Minnesota leaders and the Trump administration have clashed over who has the authority to investigate and prosecute federal officers for on-duty conduct.

Moriarty’s office last month charged immigration agent Gregory Donnell Morgan Jr. with assault for allegedly pointing his gun at people in a car on a highway. He turned himself in last week and his lawyer disputes the charges.

The county is also investigating Good’s and Pretti’s killings and sued the Trump administration in March to gain access to evidence in those cases and the Sosa-Celis shooting.

The Spanish destination has banned all new holiday rental properties — including houses and villas — as local authorities move to protect struggling residents from being pushed out of their own neighbourhoods

A beloved holiday destination popular with British tourists is cracking down on new holiday rental properties, after they were found to be forcing local residents out of their own communities.

Local politicians in Palma de Majorca are poised to bring in the measure to boost housing availability for hard-pressed residents. New licensed apartment holiday lets have already been prohibited there for several years, and now local politicians are moving forward with a ban on houses and villas.

Local councillor Óscar Fidalgo insisted the move was one that simply had to be made. He described it as proportionate and fair, adding that it should have been implemented sooner in order to protect those living on the island from spiking property prices.

He was openly critical of holiday rentals growing ‘like never before’, and warned that they were causing integration issues between tourists and locals.

According to Majorca Daily Bulletin, Fidalgo said: “The expansion of tourist accommodation reduces the available residential supply and makes it harder to access housing. The current model presents problems of legal certainty and complicates inspections, which allows for fraud. More inspection capacity is needed.

“There are also urban sustainability reasons. It affects neighbourhood coexistence. We must protect neighbourhoods and prevent the displacement of residents.”

A town hall technical report concluded that the Spanish holiday hotspot is unsuitable for the opening of new holiday rental properties.

In April this year, more than 8,000 illegal Airbnb listings in Majorca were removed from the website, totaling a withdrawal of more than 40,000 illegal tourist beds.

The move was part of a coordinated effort between Airbnb and the Spanish authorities to reduce the number of active rental properties.

The fines for running an unlicensed holiday let in Palma de Majorca are steep. Landlords face fines of up to €40,000 (£34,700) and the government has employed a group of inspectors to ensure compliance. There is also an online reporting system for the public to report suspected rule-breakers to the authorities.

Nearly a third of tourists visiting Spain opt to stay in short-term rentals. The number of homes listed for holiday rentals in May dropped 6% from the previous summer to 1.43 million, after regulations were tightened to ease the housing crisis, data from the National Statistics Institute showed.

According to campaign group Affordable Majorca, since 2013, rents in Palma have increased by a whopping 40%.

Approximately 2.3 to 3.6 million British tourists visit Mallorca each year. The UK consistently ranks as the second-largest source of international visitors to the island, making up about 20% to 26% of all tourist traffic, trailing just behind Germany, according to Road Genius.

The decision in Palma de Majorca comes as another holiday island has also cracked down on beach regulations, banning nearly 700 loungers. Authorities imposed the ban on Formentera in the Balearics, effective immediately until 2029. A further 339 parasols have also been ordered to be removed from beaches.

WASHINGTON — The Trump administration wants all current and future federal employees to sign nondisclosure agreements, part of a continuing crackdown on leaks to the media.

The notice in the Federal Register from the Office of Personnel Management posted Tuesday asked for comment on a draft NDA to be used by federal agencies for “both new and existing employees.”

“The form is intended to document Federal employees’ acknowledgment of, and agreement to comply with, current legal obligations to safeguard non-public, confidential, or proprietary information, created or obtained through their official duties, while expressly preserving the right to make disclosures authorized by law,” the notice said.

The Office of Personnel Management noted “several recent instances” where internal agency communications related to rulemaking and policy development were disclosed without authorization. It also discussed specific instances in which federal employees at the FBI and the Department of Homeland Security disclosed information without authorization about planned immigration enforcement actions.

In one case, the New York Times and Washington Post received unauthorized information on the U.S. raid on Venezuela in January and delayed “publishing what they knew to avoid endangering U.S. troops,” the request for comment said.

Representatives for the two newspapers did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Ferreting out leaks that the administration deems harmful to its messaging has been a priority across multiple agencies since President Trump returned to the White House. As part of that crackdown, the FBI in January seized the electronic devices of a Washington Post reporter, a move that alarmed media organizations and advocates of press freedom.

One other notable incident occurred last year when dozens of reporters turned in their access badges at the Pentagon, rejecting new rules imposed by Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth that would leave journalists vulnerable to expulsion if they sought to report on information — classified or otherwise — that had not been approved by Hegseth for release.

The American Federation of Government Employees did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

A new report warns that Britain is undergoing a “deeply troubling transformation” in how it treats political protest as climate activists and pro-Palestine campaigners increasingly face lengthy prison sentences, sweeping legal restrictions and months in jail before trial.

The report, Britain’s Political Prisoners, copublished by researchers at the Centre for Climate Crime and Climate Justice at Queen Mary University of London and the campaign group Defend Our Juries, said the UK has “witnessed an increase in anti-protest powers granted to the police and the courts through legislation” that has “created a significantly more repressive legal terrain for activists engaging in civil disobedience and direct action”.

It traces the shift from crackdowns on protests by Extinction Rebellion, Black Lives Matter, Insulate Britain and Just Stop Oil to more recent prosecutions linked to Palestine solidarity actions, including campaigns targeting British factories operated by Elbit Systems, Israel’s largest weapons manufacturer.

The report, released on Tuesday, found that a combination of new laws, broader police powers and increasingly punitive court tactics has reshaped Britain’s protest landscape since 2019.

The United Kingdom has witnessed numerous mass protests and direct actions by activists to pressure the government to stop selling arms to Israel during its genocidal war on Gaza, in which more than 72,000 Palestinians have been killed, including more than 40,000 women, children and elderly.

So what does Britain’s shifting stance on protests mean for civil rights, and what’s behind the legal clampdown on climate and pro-Palestine protests?

How Britain’s legal system has changed since 2019

The report painted a stark picture of how Britain’s legal system has changed in response to climate and pro-Palestine direct action campaigns through a mix of new laws, expanded police powers and what campaigners describe as increasingly punitive court tactics. What this means for protesters is longer jail sentences, stricter bail conditions and harsher treatment in the courts than was once typical for acts of civil disobedience, according to the report.

At the centre of that shift are two major laws introduced after waves of demonstrations by groups such as Extinction Rebellion and Just Stop Oil, two environmental groups that employ nonviolent civil disobedience tactics to pressure governments to address the climate crisis.

The Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act 2022 transformed the old common law offence of “public nuisance” into a formal criminal offence carrying a sentence of up to 10 years in prison. This means actions that seriously disrupt the public – such as blocking roads, stopping traffic or shutting down infrastructure – can now lead to far more severe criminal penalties than before because the offence was never previously codified into legislation. Campaigners said the law has given prosecutors a powerful new tool to pursue long prison sentences against protesters.

The Public Order Act 2023 introduced a series of protest-specific offences in May of that year, largely in response to climate protests by groups including Just Stop Oil, Insulate Britain and Extinction Rebellion, whose actions included blocking motorways, occupying oil terminals and targeting infrastructure projects in an attempt to pressure the government to halt new oil and gas extraction.

Such offences under the act included “locking on”, in which protesters attach themselves to roads, buildings, vehicles or each other using chains, glue or other devices to make removal difficult. The law also criminalised tunnelling, a tactic used by some activists to delay infrastructure projects, and introduced offences for disrupting major transport networks, oil terminals and other nationally important infrastructure. 

The legislation also significantly widened police powers whereby officers may now place restrictions on even one-person protests if they are deemed disruptive. Police were also granted powers to carry out stop-and-search operations in designated protest zones without needing reasonable suspicion that someone has committed an offence – a significant expansion of police authority criticised by civil liberties groups.

But the report argued the crackdown extends beyond parliament and into the courts.

One of its central findings is the growing use of civil injunctions and contempt of court proceedings against activists.

Oil companies, arms manufacturers, councils and universities have increasingly obtained court orders banning protests near their sites, the report said.

The report identified contempt of court as the most common route to imprisonment among the 249 protest-related cases it analysed. Contempt of court usually refers to someone disobeying a judge’s order or behaving in a way the court says interferes with justice. In protest cases, it has increasingly been used against activists who ignore injunctions or refuse to follow restrictions imposed during trials.

Because contempt proceedings are handled directly by judges rather than juries, campaigners argued they allow courts to imprison protesters more quickly and with fewer legal safeguards.

Researchers also highlighted what campaigners described as the “gagging” of defendants. Judges have increasingly stopped protesters from mentioning climate concerns, Gaza, international law or their political motivations in front of juries.

Courts have often argued that juries should focus only on whether a defendant broke the law, not on the political or moral reasons behind their actions. Critics said those restrictions prevent activists from fully explaining why they protested in the first place.

Campaigners also said the legal shift reflects a broader political change, driven in part by corporate lobbying under successive Conservative governments and continuing under Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s Labour government. They argued that peaceful protest is increasingly being criminalised to protect corporate interests, regardless of wider ethical concerns about the supply of arms to Israel during its war on Gaza or opposing fossil fuel projects linked to the climate crisis.

Perhaps most controversially, the report pointed to the growing use of lengthy pretrial detention. That means protesters being held in prison before they have been convicted of any crime.

According to the findings, many activists spend months on remand awaiting trial while some Palestine Action defendants have been held for more than a year before their cases are heard in court.

In 60 percent of the cases studied, the final sentence handed down was shorter than the time defendants had already spent in custody awaiting trial.

Are lobbyists influencing the crackdown?

Tim Crosland, director of Defend Our Juries, said the findings challenge Britain’s claims of ensuring democratic protections.

“This report strips away the illusion that Britain remains committed to democratic principles,” Crosland said.

“It reveals that peaceful protesters are being jailed in ever-increasing numbers under pressure from the oil and arms industries, the Israeli government and their lobbyists.”

The report pointed to what it described as growing political and corporate pressure behind Britain’s crackdown on protest movements.

Researchers cited reports that parts of the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act may have originated in proposals from the right-wing think tank Policy Exchange. According to the investigative news site Open Democracy, Policy Exchange has previously received funding from ExxonMobil. The think tank had earlier published a report titled Extremism Rebellion, which called for new laws targeting Extinction Rebellion activists.

Al Jazeera could not independently verify the links between the think tank and the legislation.

The report further alleged that British officials came under pressure from both Elbit Systems and the Israeli government to take a tougher approach towards Palestine Action protests targeting Elbit’s UK factories.

According to correspondence quoted by the researchers, the British government said in 2022 that it had “expressed our support in recognising the attacks and boycott on Elbit UK”. The report said the issue was later raised directly with then-Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab during a visit to Israel, where he reportedly “declared that the British government is committed to stopping the attacks”.

Zoe Blackler, founding director of the London events space Kairos, said: “In the face of this clampdown on the right to peaceful protest, we need to come together in solidarity and defiance.”

Which are the cases at the centre of Britain’s protest crackdown?

The report traced Britain’s hardening response to the protests through a series of landmark cases involving climate activists and Palestine solidarity campaigners, many of whom received lengthy prison sentences or spent months behind bars before trial.

Among the most high-profile is the case of the Whole Truth Five, a group of Just Stop Oil activists jailed in July 2024 over a Zoom call discussing plans to disrupt the M25 motorway. The five were convicted of conspiracy to cause a public nuisance and initially sentenced to between four and five years in prison.

The report described the case as one of the clearest examples of the tougher approach now being taken towards protest movements. Campaigners argued the sentences were extraordinary because the activists were punished largely for planning disruptive action rather than carrying it out. Prosecutors relied on conspiracy laws, which allow people to be charged for agreeing to commit an offence even if the planned action never ultimately happens.

Four Palestine Action activists were also sentenced to between 23 and 27 months for conspiring to damage an Israeli-linked arms factory in Wales. Meanwhile, four Just Stop Oil activists received prison terms of up to 30 months over plans to disrupt Manchester Airport despite never reaching the site. A fifth defendant, Noah Crane, spent almost a year in jail on remand before later being acquitted.

Another major case involved the Filton 24, Palestine Action activists prosecuted after a protest at an Elbit Systems factory in Bristol. Some defendants were held on remand for up to 18 months before trial.

After several activists were acquitted of aggravated burglary charges, most were eventually granted bail.

The report said the case raises “serious concerns” that prosecutors used unusually serious charges to justify holding defendants in prison for long periods before trial.

The report also highlighted the Brize Norton Five, activists accused of spray-painting air force planes in protest against Britain’s military links to Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza. According to the report, the group has remained on remand since August and is not expected to stand trial until 2027, meaning some could spend close to two years in jail before a verdict is reached.

Other cases revealed the growing use of judicial “gagging orders”.

During the retrial of the Filton 6, a separate trial from the Filton 24, the judge barred defendants from mentioning Gaza, Elbit’s role in supplying weapons to Israel and their political motivations for protesting. Critics argued such restrictions make it harder for juries to hear the broader context behind direct action campaigns.

In another case, three Insulate Britain activists were imprisoned for contempt of court after defying a judge’s order not to mention the “climate crisis” or “fuel poverty” before a jury.

Despite the legal restrictions, several juries continued to acquit activists. The report pointed to acquittals involving Just Stop Oil protesters, Extinction Rebellion activists and a hung jury in the first Filton 6 trial as evidence that some jurors remained unconvinced by the increasingly aggressive prosecution of protest movements.

Kerry Moscogiuri, Amnesty International UK CEO, told Al Jazeera that “the right to protest is being eroded before our eyes.”

“We’re seeing a worrying shift where the state is using remand, sweeping injunctions and contempt proceedings to lock people up or silence them before they’ve even stood trial.

“The broader legal implications here are concerning. It’s not just about one group of activists; it’s about a systemic attempt to shut down dissent, something we’ve been ringing the alarm on for a long time.

“By replacing the presumption of liberty with preemptive legal intimidation, it creates a chilling effect, undermines the rule of law and flies in the face of basic human rights.”

WASHINGTON, May 20 (UPI) — As sports betting and prediction market platforms like Kalshi and Polymarket grow in popularity, U.S. senators on Wednesday weighed the need to regulate use of the platforms by minors.

One main issue senators raised during a hearing by the Senate Commerce Subcommittee on Consumer Protection, Technology and Data Privacy was how prediction markets use social media to advertise their platforms to underage users, putting them at risk of a gambling addiction.

“Young people are being inundated with advertisements on social media. Their favorite influencers and sports figures are introducing minors to betting,” said Sen. Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn., who chaired the hearing.

“This is not safe. It needs to stop, and advertising to minors is disgusting,” Blackburn said.

The “No Sure Bets: Protecting Sports Integrity in America” hearing was intended to discuss the prevalence of sports betting and its impact on the integrity of matches.

It followed a unanimous Senate vote last month to ban its members and their staffs from trading on prediction market platforms, and the senators seemed determined to do more. Issues surrounding gaming continue to be a hot topic in Congress, where more than 10 active bills are related to prediction markets.

Some recent high-profile scandals surrounding prediction market platforms have also drawn attention to the industry, including the arrest of U.S. Army soldier Gannon Van Dyke last month. He was charged with using classified information to profit from a Polymarket wager related to the capture of Venezuelan president Nicolás Maduro in January.

In the same month, Kalshi fined and suspended from its platform three congressional candidates for betting on the outcomes of their own elections.

In the hearing, Sen. John Hickenlooper, D-Colo., criticized prediction markets like Kalshi for hiring social media influencers to promote their platforms to adolescent users.

“I think it’s specifically dangerous for minors to get into sports betting, and especially on prediction markets. That’s why almost all the states say [the legal betting age] is 21, not 18,” Hickenlooper said.

“Prediction markets let users as young as 18 bet on sports, but they also market their products to younger, more vulnerable audiences who are in many cases adept at getting around the platform precautions.”

A study released in January by Common Sense Media found that more than one-third of adolescent boys aged 11 to 17 admitted to engaging in gambling over the past year. Almost 60% of those who have been gambling said that they were exposed to gambling content through social media.

Kalshi, in an email, denied advertising to minors and pointed to recently implemented consumer protection measures, including requesting a selfie from the user to supplement documents verifying their age.

Hickenlooper grilled Patrick McHenry, a former U.S. representative now acting as senior adviser to the Coalition for Prediction Markets, on the guardrails to ensure underage users could not access their platforms.

McHenry pointed to the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, which oversees prediction markets and regulates them as a form of financial derivative rather than an avenue for gambling.

“The CFTC is a cop on the beat. It has the capacity to oversee this market, just as they’ve done with a broader commodities marketplace that has been around and well-versed for decades,” he said.

The Commodity Futures Trading Commission’s jurisdiction over prediction markets has been a contentious topic, since users can trade event contracts related to sports, weather, politics and more.

The Prediction Markets Are Gambling Act, which Sen. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., introduced in March, seeks to ban prediction markets from listing contracts that resemble sports bets, arguing that such contracts are considered gambling and should be subject to state regulation.

The agency argues that sports event contracts were treated as “swaps,” a term used to describe events that have potential economic consequences.

But Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, pushed back against the classification of sports contracts on prediction markets as financial derivatives.

“What is the economic consequence of whether a pitcher throws a ball or strike?” he asked.

Another bill specifically targeting digital gambling advertisements to minors was introduced Monday. Sens. Richard Blumenthal D‑Conn., and Katie Britt, R‑Ala., are advocating the Gaming Advertisement to Minors Enforcement Act, which would implement a federal ban on sports betting ads on social media platforms for minors.

MINNEAPOLIS — A Minnesota prosecutor on Monday announced charges against an Immigration and Customs Enforcement officer in the nonfatal shooting of a Venezuelan man during the Trump administration’s crackdown in the state.

The officer, Christian Castro, is charged with four counts of second-degree assault and one count of falsely reporting a crime in the Jan. 14 shooting of Julio Cesar Sosa-Celis, Hennepin County Atty. Mary Moriarty said at a news conference. A warrant was issued for his arrest.

“Mr. Castro is an ICE agent, but his federal badge does not make him immune from state charges for his criminal conduct in Minnesota,” Moriarty said, adding that Sosa-Celis never posed a threat. “There is no such thing as absolute immunity for federal officers who commit crimes in this state or any other.”

A federal officer shot Sosa-Celis in the thigh after he and another officer chased a different man to the apartment duplex where the man and Sosa-Celis lived. Moriarty said both Sosa-Celis and the other man were legally in the U.S.

Federal authorities initially accused Sosa-Celis and Alfredo Alejandro Aljorna of beating an officer with a broom handle and a snow shovel during the incident. But a federal judge later dismissed the charges, and federal officials opened an investigation into whether two immigration officers lied under oath about what happened.

Minneapolis last month released video of the incident captured from a distance by a city-owned security camera.

Department of Homeland Security and Justice Department officials didn’t immediately respond to emails seeking comment. Homeland Security previously said that lying under oath is a “serious federal offense” and that making false statements could result in an officer being fired or prosecuted.

The administration sent thousands of officers to the Minneapolis and St. Paul area as part of President Trump’s national deportation campaign. Homeland Security, which oversees ICE, called Operation Metro Surge its largest immigration enforcement operation ever and deemed it a success.

But tensions mounted during the weekslong campaign, and the shooting deaths of U.S. citizens Renee Good and Alex Pretti by federal officers provoked mass unrest and questions about officers’ conduct.

Hennepin County, which includes Minneapolis, has been conducting investigations into multiple incidents and filed charges last month against an ICE agent for alleged actions while on duty.

Minnesota leaders and the Trump administration have since clashed over which has the authority to investigate and prosecute officers for conduct while on duty. The Trump administration has suggested that Minnesota officials don’t have jurisdiction.

State officials have said they don’t trust the federal government to investigate itself or hold officers accountable.

“There’s no modern precedent for what happened to the people here in Minnesota,” Moriarty said Monday. “So it requires a lot of us to dig in and look at ways to hold people accountable that we probably never thought we would be looking at in our careers.”

Hennepin County continues to investigate Good’s and Pretti’s killings and sued the administration in March over access to evidence in the two cases, as well as in the case involving Sosa-Celis. Although Moriarty hasn’t charged anyone in either killing, she has said she’s confident her office’s investigations will bring transparency, even if not criminal prosecution.

Fingerhut and Sullivan write for the Associated Press. Fingerhut reported from Des Moines, Iowa.

Military and law enforcement clashed with demonstrators outside La Paz, Bolivia, in an attempt to clear roadways that had been blocked as part of nationwide antigovernment protests.

As many as 3,500 soldiers and police were deployed as part of the operation that began in the early hours of Saturday. Around 57 people were arrested, according to the citizens’ rights ombudsman’s office.

Miners, schoolteachers, Indigenous groups and unions have helped to organise the protests, which aimed to convey outrage against the government of centre-right President Rodrigo Paz.

Bolivia is in the grips of an historic economic crisis, considered the worst the country has seen in decades.

The government’s foreign currency reserves have cratered, as exports from Bolivia have slowed down.

Key among those was natural gas. Vast reserves of the fuel were discovered in the late 20th century, and for nearly three decades, those natural gas deposits powered Bolivia’s economy, transforming the South American country into a major energy exporter.

But in 2022, the dynamic switched, amid mismanagement and dwindling supplies. Since then, Bolivia has had to import fuel from abroad, exacerbating its economic crisis.

Currently, many parts of the country have experienced long lines for fuel and shortages of basic supplies like food.

Paz, who was elected in October, had campaigned on alleviating the economic stress. But since taking office, he has spurred outrage by ending a two-decade-old fuel subsidy and pushing to privatise state-owned companies.

Earlier this month, the protests forced the repeal of a land reform measure, Law 1720, that critics claimed could be used to dispossess small, rural landowners, in favour of bigger holdings.

The Bolivian government has estimated that 22 roadblocks have been erected across the country in recent weeks.

Some of the protesters have demanded Paz’s resignation: His election in October marked the end of nearly two decades of rule by the Movement for Socialism (MAS).

But Paz’s office has blamed the demonstrations for cutting off key supplies to cities like La Paz, which holds the seat of government.

Food prices have increased since the blockades began, and the government claims three people have died after being unable to reach hospitals.

According to presidential spokesperson Jose Luis Galvez, Saturday’s crackdown on the protesters was designed to create a “humanitarian corridor” to ensure the free flow of supplies to hospitals in La Paz.

Earlier this week, Paz also thanked his Argentinian counterpart, Javier Milei, for delivering humanitarian assistance to Bolivia.

“This gesture of solidarity not only strengthens the historic bonds of brotherhood between our nations, but also represents vital relief for our communities in times of great need,” Paz wrote on social media on Friday.

Milei responded by denouncing the protesters as anti-democratic.

“Argentina stands with the Bolivian people and supports their democratically elected authorities against those who seek to destabilise the country and obstruct the path toward freedom and progress,” the Argentinian president said.

NEW YORK — A federal immigration court in Lower Manhattan has come to represent the Trump administration’s deportation campaign in New York City, with agents carrying out chaotic and sometimes violent arrests in the hallway as migrants leave hearings.

Now the court is serving as a front in a different kind of battle: one of the city’s most closely watched congressional races.

In the Democratic primary between incumbent U.S. Rep. Dan Goldman and former city Comptroller Brad Lander — for a district so solidly blue that the June primary is considered its deciding election — both candidates have made the Trump administration’s treatment of migrants at 26 Federal Plaza a feature of their campaigns, but with decidedly different approaches.

Goldman — an heir to the Levi Strauss denim fortune and former prosecutor who was lead counsel for President Trump’s first impeachment — has approached the topic with a lawyerly bent that leverages the power of his office.

He sued the administration to open immigration detention centers to members of Congress, conducts oversight visits and turned his office across the street into what he’s called a triage center that connects immigrants with advocacy groups and legal services that has, his campaign said, helped more than 30 people get released from federal custody.

After a recent visit, Goldman credited his oversight work as a reason conditions at a holding facility inside the building have improved.

“What you see from our multipronged approach is the way that I push back, which is not performative, but it is substantive,” he told the Associated Press outside 26 Federal Plaza after he toured the detention center that is closed to the public.

Meanwhile, Lander — a progressive city government stalwart who is running with the support of Mayor Zohran Mamdani — has acted as protester and court observer, watching hearings and attempting to accompany immigrants out of the building past masked federal agents.

His efforts have gotten him arrested twice, with the most recent case headed to a trial scheduled to take place just before the primary.

“I would characterize his oversight function as strongly worded letters,” Lander told AP when asked about Goldman’s approach. “And my oversight function is: Show up with hundreds of your neighbors and bear witness and accompany people and demand access and stay until they give it to you or they arrest you.”

Lander’s first arrest happened last year when he linked arms with a person authorities were attempting to detain in the hallway outside the court. Lander was running for mayor at the time, and the arrest gave his campaign a jolt of excitement at a time when Mamdani and former Gov. Andrew Cuomo were considered the front-runners in the race.

A few months later, after losing the mayoral primary but not long before launching his congressional campaign, Lander was arrested again during a large protest at the building and hit with a misdemeanor obstruction charge.

But instead of accepting a deal that would have made the case go away in six months, Lander instead opted to go to trial. He said the case would extract information about the federal government’s immigration enforcement efforts at the building during a tense period that predates Goldman’s oversight visits.

Goldman dismissed Lander’s efforts as performative.

“I don’t understand why someone would reject a dismissal of a case so that he can have a public trial, ostensibly to ask for information that I could provide him whenever he wanted because I have the answers from doing my oversight,” he said.

This week, Lander returned to 26 Federal Plaza to sit in on hearings. But just before entering the building, his team got word that federal agents were lingering outside an immigration hearing at a different federal courtroom in a building across the street. He raced over and eventually found the agents, who were wearing masks and milling around in the court’s waiting room.

“The challenge is trying to figure out who they’re going to arrest,” Lander said, popping out of the hearing, where he sat in a back row and took notes. After a while, the agents walked away from the hearing room, down a hallway and exited the floor. It was not clear why they left.

“Maybe we have different styles,” Lander said of his opponent after the agents departed. He later went back across the street and filmed a campaign video in front of 26 Federal Plaza.

Izaguirre writes for the Associated Press.

TALLINN, Estonia — Belarus’ authoritarian leader on Friday greeted U.S. Rev. Franklin Graham, who arrived in the tightly controlled country to hold the largest evangelical Christian gathering in its history.

Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko asked Graham to convey warm greetings to President Trump and tell him that he has “reliable friends and supporters in Belarus.”

Since Trump returned to the White House, Lukashenko has released hundreds of political prisoners as part of U.S.-brokered deals that lifted some U.S. sanctions, part of the isolated leader’s efforts to improve ties with the West.

“Without the U.S. president, it might have been more difficult for us to establish our relations,” Lukashenko told Graham, president of Samaritan’s Purse and the Billy Graham Evangelistic Assn. Graham was accompanied by Greta Van Susteren, the anchor for Newsmax TV who is married to Trump’s special envoy for Belarus, John Coale.

Lukashenko has ruled the nation of 9.5 million with an iron fist for more than three decades, and the country has been sanctioned repeatedly by Western countries — both for its crackdown on human rights and for allowing Moscow to use its territory in the full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022.

Graham is set to hold the largest gathering of evangelicals ever in Belarus’ history, with thousands expected to attend what the organizers called the Festival of Hope at an indoor sports arena in Minsk, the capital.

Lukashenko’s rule was challenged after a 2020 presidential election, when hundreds of thousands took to the streets to protest a vote they viewed as rigged. In an ensuing crackdown, tens of thousands were detained, with many beaten by police. Prominent opposition figures fled the country or were imprisoned.

Five years after the mass demonstrations, Lukashenko won a seventh term last year in an election that the opposition called a farce.

As part of a deal in March that Washington helped broker, Lukashenko ordered the release of 250 political prisoners, while the U.S. agreed to lift sanctions from two Belarusian state banks and the country’s Finance Ministry, and to remove the top Belarusian potash producers from a sanctions list.

Another deal in April released prominent journalist Andrzej Poczobut in a swap with Poland that saw a total of 10 people freed.

However, Belarus still has 845 political prisoners, including 22 journalists, according to the Viasna human rights center.

Belarus opposition leader-in-exile Sviatlana Tsikhanouskaya voiced hope that Graham’s visit will help the release of all political prisoners. “We continue to push for a complete end to the harsh political repressions in Belarus,” Tsikhanouskaya told the Associated Press.

Belarusian authorities’ permission for the massive gathering of evangelicals marks a shift, following years of crackdown on clergy — Catholic, Orthodox and Protestant — which saw dozens jailed, silenced or forced into exile for protesting the 2020 election. In the country of 9.5 million, about 80% are Orthodox Christians; nearly 14% are Catholics, residing mostly in western, northern and central parts of the country; and about 2% belong to Protestant churches.

A 2024 law required all religious organizations to reregister with authorities or face being outlawed if their loyalty to the state is in doubt.

The U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom has listed Belarus among countries with religious freedom violations, particularly noting its restrictive legislation.

Natallia Vasilevich, coordinator of the Christian Vision monitoring group, noted that even as Graham’s visit to Belarus was a “mega-important event” for evangelicals in the country, they continue to face a repressive environment.

“Some believers view Graham’s visit as a miracle and a window of opportunity, while others see a risk that they will have to turn a blind eye to repression and take part in something that makes the regime look nice,” Vasilevich said.

Karmanau writes for the Associated Press.

RYANAIR is clamping down harder on passengers attempting to sneak oversized bags onboard.

The airline’s boss announced that staff are set to get an even BIGGER bonus if they see customers trying to board with luggage that doesn’t fit inside the sizer.

Follow The Sun’s award-winning travel team on Instagram and Tiktok for top holiday tips and inspiration @thesuntravel.

Ryanair chief executive Michael O’Leary has announced that he is planning on increasing the staff bonus for those who identify oversized luggage.

He added that since it was made public knowledge that staff receive additional payment for catching out passengers with incorrectly sized bags, the number of passengers stopped has gone down.

Michael O’Leary said: “The number of outsized bags is falling from, I don’t know, 0.0001 [per cent] to 0.00001.

SAVE IT

Seaside holiday parks that still have VERY cheap summer deals, from £2.29pp a night

LAST MINUTE

All the CHEAPEST holidays you can still book for May half term – from £163pp

“As the numbers fall, I think we will up the rate of commission, from €2.50 (£2.16) to €3.50 (£3.03) or so. Everybody must know, do not show up with a bag that doesn’t fit in the sizer because you will be charged.”

Passengers caught out with an oversized bag at the gate will need to put it in the hold and face an additional £75 fee.

This isn’t the first time the staff incentive increased.

In November year, the airline raised the commission for its gate staff from €1.50 (£1.30) to €2.50 (£2.16) per bag.

Last year, Mr O’Leary said that around 200,000 passengers per year were forced to pay extra to place carry-on luggage in the hold.

He added: “I am still mystified by the number of people with rucksacks who still think they’re going to get through the gate and we won’t notice the rucksack.

“We will, and you will be paying for the rucksack. You’re not getting on if it doesn’t fit.”

Ryanair’s cheapest fares only include one small bag per passenger which must fit under the seat in front of them, for example a handbag or small backpack.

For those taking additional cabin baggage onboard, it must be stored in the overhead locker and be 55x40x20cm in dimension.

The Ryanair boss recently called for a ban on the sale of alcohol before morning flights – an airport tradition for most.

Current rules allow pubs and restaurants in airports to serve alcohol at any time as they do not have to follow the same licensing rules elsewhere in the country.

Talking to The Times, he called for a two-drink cap as rowdy behaviour from drunk passengers is becoming a challenge for all airlines.

A large scale immigration enforcement operation launched under Donald Trump in Minneapolis significantly disrupted federal crime fighting efforts in the region, according to a review of court records and interviews with law enforcement officials.

The operation brought thousands of immigration agents into Minnesota beginning in December as part of a broader crackdown targeting undocumented immigrants and alleged criminal networks.

While the administration described the campaign as a public safety initiative focused on violent offenders, officials and legal records suggest the crackdown diverted federal resources away from investigations into serious crimes including gun trafficking, drug offenses, gang activity, and sex trafficking.

Federal Criminal Prosecutions Dropped Sharply

Court records reviewed by Reuters showed a steep decline in federal prosecutions during the first four months of the year.

Between January and April, federal prosecutors charged only eight individuals with gun or drug crimes compared with seventy seven during the same period last year.

Overall felony prosecutions also fell sharply, with ninety felony cases filed compared with nearly double that number a year earlier.

A significant portion of those cases involved immigration related offenses or arrests linked to protests against the crackdown itself rather than traditional violent crime investigations.

Prosecutors and Agents Were Reassigned

Officials said many federal agents who had previously worked on drug task forces and gang investigations were reassigned to immigration enforcement duties.

Some investigators reportedly became unavailable for ongoing criminal investigations because they were focused on immigration operations.

The crackdown also triggered major staffing problems inside the Minnesota office of the United States Attorney.

Several prosecutors reportedly resigned after being ordered to investigate the widow of a protester who was fatally shot during the immigration operation.

Sources familiar with the office said staffing levels dropped to roughly half of their normal strength, leaving prosecutors struggling to manage existing cases.

Local Authorities Say Public Safety Was Affected

Mary Moriarty, the top prosecutor in Hennepin County, said federal investigators had begun bringing complex criminal cases to local authorities because federal prosecutors lacked the resources to handle them.

She argued that the diversion of resources toward immigration enforcement weakened efforts to address serious crimes such as drug trafficking and sex trafficking.

Former federal prosecutor John Marti warned that reduced federal involvement could leave dangerous criminals operating without effective intervention.

Officials also expressed concern that the long term impact on federal and local cooperation could continue even after the immigration operation ends.

Immigration Crackdown Sparked National Controversy

The operation became one of the most controversial domestic security actions of Trump’s presidency.

Federal agents conducted large scale raids, detentions, and deportation efforts across Minneapolis, leading to protests and confrontations with demonstrators.

Two American citizens, Renee Good and Alex Pretti, were fatally shot during the unrest, intensifying public outrage and increasing political pressure on the administration.

The crackdown eventually prompted a partial retreat by federal authorities amid growing criticism over aggressive policing tactics.

Cases Delayed and Dismissed

The shortage of prosecutors and staff disruptions also affected ongoing criminal cases.

In one example, a federal judge dismissed a firearms case against Tavon Timberlake after prosecutors repeatedly missed deadlines, with staffing shortages cited as one factor.

Federal prosecutors also sought to drop a major carjacking case involving multiple deaths so that local prosecutors could take over.

At the same time, authorities continued pursuing charges against dozens of protesters linked to demonstrations against the immigration operation, although many of those cases were later dismissed.

Analysis

The Minneapolis operation highlights the broader national debate over balancing immigration enforcement with traditional public safety priorities.

Supporters of the crackdown argue that stronger immigration controls are necessary to combat crime and restore law and order. Critics contend that redirecting federal resources toward mass immigration enforcement weakens efforts to investigate violent crime and organised criminal activity.

The situation in Minnesota also illustrates how large scale political priorities can reshape the functioning of federal law enforcement agencies at the local level.

Analysts say the long term consequences may include weakened cooperation between federal and local authorities, reduced capacity for complex investigations, and growing concerns over whether public safety resources are being allocated effectively.

With information from Reuters.

WASHINGTON — Most U.S. adults say the United States is no longer a great place for immigrants, according to a new AP-NORC poll, as about one-third of Americans report knowing someone impacted by the Trump administration’s aggressive immigration enforcement.

A new survey from The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research of more than 2,500 U.S. adults finds about 6 in 10 say the country used to be a great place for immigrants but is not anymore. About one-third of U.S. adults — and more than half of Hispanic adults — say that over the last year they, or someone they know, have started carrying proof of their immigration status or U.S. citizenship, been detained or deported, changed travel plans, or significantly changed routines, such as avoiding work, school or leaving the house, because of their immigration status.

The poll comes as the Supreme Court is considering whether the Trump administration should be allowed to restrict birthright citizenship, as well as following months of sweeping immigration enforcement and mass deportations of immigrants.

Missouri retiree Reid Gibson, an independent, is furious about the Trump administration’s treatment of immigrants. He hopes America eventually becomes more welcoming to immigrants again, but he worries “it may take many years to reverse the damage that the Trump administration has inflicted” with its policies.

The poll finds that many Americans know someone who has been affected by Trump’s approach. That includes Gibson’s stepdaughter, who he says started carrying her passport because of concerns that her darker skin would make her a target in immigration crackdowns.

“It’s just plain wrong,” Gibson, 72, added. “This is not a good country for immigrants anymore.”

Americans’ personal connections to immigration enforcement

Many U.S. adults have adapted their lives to heightened immigration enforcement over the last year, as Trump increased detentions and sought to conduct the largest deportation operation in American history.

Democrats are more likely than independents or Republicans to know someone affected, and those with a personal connection are more likely to say the U.S. is no longer a great place for immigrants.

Kathy Bailey, a 79-year-old Illinois Democrat, has seen the administration’s immigration policies seep into the small-town swim class she regularly attends. She said two women in the class — both naturalized U.S. citizens — have begun carrying their passports when they leave home. Bailey says one of the women, who is from Latin America, has been especially worried about sticking out in an overwhelmingly white community.

“She’s an American citizen now, but she’s so scared that she has to carry her passport,” said Bailey. “She’s just another sweet old grandmother swimming at 5 in the morning.”

About 6 in 10 Hispanic adults say they or someone they know has been impacted by immigration enforcement in this way, much higher than among Black or white adults.

“This is terrible for these women!” Bailey said. “I’m just stunned at what we are coming to.”

Most believe the U.S. used to be a great place for immigrants

Nick Grivas, a 40-year-old from Massachusetts, said his own grandfather’s immigration to the U.S. from Greece has made him feel the impact of the president’s policies. It’s part of why he believes the U.S. stopped being a promising place for people seeking a new life.

“We can see how we’re treating children and the children of the immigrants, and we’re not viewing them as potential future Americans,” Grivas said.

Roughly 3 in 10 U.S. adults say the U.S. is a great place for immigrants, according to the poll, while about 1 in 10 say it never was. The belief that America is no longer great for immigrants is more common among Democrats and independents, as well as among those born outside the U.S.

Grivas, a Democrat, worries that federal policies against immigration could stunt the country by discouraging new arrivals from investing in their local communities, especially if they don’t believe they will be allowed to remain.

“You’re less willing to commit to the project if you don’t think that you’re gonna be able to stay,” he said.

Most support birthright citizenship, but also hold nuanced views

The Supreme Court recently heard arguments in President Trump’s efforts to restrict birthright citizenship by declaring that children born to parents who are in the country illegally or temporarily are not American citizens.

About two-thirds of U.S. adults in the poll say automatic citizenship should be granted to all children born in the country, a view that most Democrats and independents back. Republicans are more doubtful: just 44% support birthright citizenship. The poll also shows that some people are conflicted, saying in general that they support birthright citizenship but also that they oppose it in some specific circumstances.

Among those who object to automatic citizenship is Linda Steele, a 70-year-old from Florida, who believes that only children born to American citizens should be granted citizenship. Steele, a Republican, does not believe foreigners living legally in the U.S. — whether for work or other reasons — should be able to have a child who automatically becomes a U.S. citizen.

“That shouldn’t be allowed,” she said. “They’re just here visiting or going to school.”

When asked about some specific circumstances, about 6 in 10 U.S. adults say they support birthright citizenship for children born to parents on legal U.S. tourist visas, while only about half support it for those born to parents who are in the country illegally. An even higher share, 75%, support automatic citizenship for children born in the U.S. to parents who are in the country legally on work visas, with much of that increased support coming from Republicans saying this was an acceptable situation.

Kevin Craig, a 57-year-old from Wilmington, North Carolina, does not believe citizenship should be automatically granted. Craig, who leans conservative, believes there should be “at least some opportunity for intervention by a human being who can make some sort of a judgment.”

But he added: “I think my personal opinion is that I can’t think of a situation where it would not be granted.”

Sanders, Sullivan and Catalini write for the Associated Press. Sullivan reported from Minneapolis. Catalini reported from Morrisville, Pa. The AP-NORC poll of 2,596 adults was conducted April 16-20 using a sample drawn from NORC’s probability-based AmeriSpeak Panel, which is designed to be representative of the U.S. population. The margin of sampling error for adults overall is plus or minus 2.6 percentage points.