fight

SACRAMENTO — The state’s biggest energy utility has made the unusual move to attack candidate Tom Steyer in the California governor’s race.

State campaign filings show that Pacific Gas & Electric has plowed at least $13.5 million into efforts to oppose Steyer. Other major utilities in the state have also donated to another committee backing the anti-Steyer effort.

Steyer, a billionaire and former hedge fund founder who became a high-profile environmental advocate, accuses the big three California utility companies — PG&E, San Diego Gas & Electric Co. and Southern California Edison — of “raking in” record profits at the expense of their customers. He blames the utilities for high consumer bills and causing deadly wildfires with their faulty utility equipment.

Though other candidates in the race are also criticizing the utilities, Steyer is the most aggressive.

“Big energy companies really piss me off,” Steyer said in one of his own campaign ads earlier this year.

In another attack, Steyer called PG&E less of an electric company and more of a “sophisticated Sacramento lobbying and influence operation that also happens to sell electricity. California needs a governor who will stand up to these monopolies, hold them accountable, and break them up.”

Lynsey Paulo, a spokesperson for PG&E, declined to answer questions about the utility’s spending, referring The Times to the committee running anti-Steyer ads.

“Tom Steyer has spent over $200 million trying to buy the Governor’s office,” the committee said in a statement.

Steyer, a Democrat who is relying on his vast fortune in the race, is seeking to advance past the June 2 primary to the November general election. Recent polls put him behind Republican Steve Hilton, a former Fox News commentator, and onetime Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra.

The utility-funded advertisements against Steyer don’t mention his position on energy policies, focusing instead on his onetime hedge fund’s investments in coal and for-profit detention centers. One ad compares him to President Trump.

“When Steyer sells himself as a different kind of billionaire, tell him where to stick it,” a voiceover says.

Another advertisement from the anti-Steyer group California is Not for Sale highlights its support for Becerra. The California Assn. of Realtors and the California Building Industry Assn. are also supporting the group.

Steyer’s campaign last week embraced the spending from PG&E and others.

“When you’re opposed by the people responsible for devastating wildfires and outrageous rate hikes, you’re doing something right,” Steyer spokesperson Sepi Esfahlani said.

Steyer has used his criticism of the California utilities and the oil industry as a shield against attacks that he made billions of dollars from fossil fuels when he ran his hedge fund, and to elevate himself as an advocate for working-class Californians.

When Democratic rival Katie Porter ripped into Steyer at a recent debate for using his riches to support his gubernatorial campaign, Steyer pointed to the attacks by PG&E and others as evidence that he’ll take on Sacramento’s powerful special interests.

“There is one person that the corporations are going after, including Big Oil, who is spending millions of dollars to stop me,” Steyer responded during the April debate at Pomona College in Claremont.

“The electric monopolies, PG&E, millions of dollars to stop me, because I’m the person on this stage who’s the change agent,” he said. “I’m the person who’s going to drive down costs for the people of California by taking on the special interests.”

PG&E CEO Patti Poppe and Steyer lauded one another in social media posts after appearing together at various conferences last year, the California Post reported.

“Loved sitting down to talk the future of energy with Tom Steyer at the Galvanize Solutions Summit,” Poppe wrote on LinkedIn in December. Steyer co-founded Galvanize, an asset management firm.

The California Chamber of Commerce’s political action committee this year collected at least $2 million each from PG&E, Sempra — the parent company of SoCalGas and San Diego Gas & Electric — and Edison. The chamber’s committee in turn has donated $9.75 million toward the anti-Steyer committee.

John Myers, a representative for the Chamber of Commerce, said the committee’s leadership, not donors, make spending decisions.

California electric rates are the nation’s second highest after Hawaii, contributing to the state’s high cost of living — one of the biggest concerns of voters.

PG&E serves Northern and Central California, while Southern California Edison is available in Central, coastal and Southern California. San Diego Gas & Electric services Southern California.

The California Public Utilities Commission sets the rate of return that the companies can make. Steyer has argued that “perverse” structure allows utilities to disregard cheaper cost-effective solutions in favor of more expensive options, such as undergrounding power lines.

Despite Steyer’s talk of “breaking up” utilities, he doesn’t propose dismantling them. Instead, he vows to put reform-focused appointees on the regulatory agency and reduce utility rates. He also wants more battery storage for renewal energy, as well as additional rooftop and community solar.

The three utilities recently opposed a bill to require that wildfire safety spending by Southern California Edison, PG&E and San Diego Gas & Electric be audited by an independent accounting firm.

The bill by Assemblywoman Tasha Boerner, an Encinitas Democrat, stalled out earlier this month. It would have required the state’s regulatory agency to consider the audits’ findings before agreeing to raise customer rates to cover even more wildfire prevention spending.

Audits of the three companies’ wildfire spending from 2019 to 2020 found that $2.5 billion could not be accounted for.

Matt Abularach-Macias, political director of Environmental Voters, said the utilities probably consider Steyer as a threat to their business. The companies plan infrastructure projects five or 10 years ahead and don’t want disruptions, he said.

Environmental Voters has endorsed Steyer and former Orange County Rep. Katie Porter. The group’s educational arm received a $500,000 donation from a Steyer-backed entity in 2013.

Leah Stokes, associate professor of political science at UC Santa Barbara, called PG&E’s outlay in the governor’s race part of a “corrupt system.”

“These are monopoly companies, you can’t choose to buy from anybody else,” Stokes said. “They take your money, turn it into profits because they are poorly regulated, and then undermine political candidates who would actually hold them accountable.”

Stokes has publicly endorsed Steyer.

A spokesperson for Southern California Edison said the company funds its political contributions from “shareholder dollars.”

“No customer dollars, or any part of the rates paid by Southern California Edison customers, are used to support political candidates,” he said.

Times staff writer Melody Petersen contributed to this report.

Oleksandr Usyk defends his WBC world title against Rico Verhoeven on Saturday in Egypt.

The fight is unusual in location as in nature, with kickboxing world champion Verhoeven getting a title shot in just his second boxing fight – and first since 2014.

The 37-year-old Dutchman is aiming to pull off arguably the biggest upset in the sport’s history.

Ukrainian Usyk, 39, is aiming to continue his near 17-year winning streak.

Will we see an underdog win for the ages or will Usyk’s dominance continue?

BBC Sport asks the boxing world for their predictions.

NEW YORK — Former Columbia University graduate student Mahmoud Khalil will ask the U.S. Supreme Court to intervene after a federal appeals court on Friday declined to reconsider a decision that put the government a step closer to deporting him, the pro-Palestinian activist’s lawyers said.

Judges on the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia voted 6-5 against having the court’s full complement of judges review the ruling. In January, a three-judge 3rd Circuit panel found that a federal judge in New Jersey who had sided with Khalil and ordered his release last year from immigration detention didn’t have jurisdiction to decide the matter.

The American Civil Liberties Union, which is involved in representing Khalil, said his lawyers will ask the 3rd Circuit for an order preventing the decision from taking effect — and barring Khalil from being detained or deported — while it asks the Supreme Court to take up the case.

An appeal to the high court is expected in the coming months, possibly in late summer.

“Today’s decision is not the final word, and we still strongly believe in our arguments going forward,” ACLU senior counsel Brett Max Kaufman said in a statement.

In its January ruling, the 3rd Circuit found that Khalil’s lawsuit challenging his detention and U.S. District Judge Michael Farbiarz’s subsequent rulings in the case were premature because federal law requires that such challenges first move through the separate immigration court system. That system is part of the Justice Department, not the judicial branch.

The decision didn’t decide the key issue in Khalil’s case: whether the Trump administration’s effort to throw Khalil out of the U.S. over his campus activism and criticism of Israel is unconstitutional.

Judge Cheryl Ann Krause, who had voted for the 3rd Circuit to review the decision, wrote in a dissent that the court was “abdicating our duty to meaningfully review Khalil’s constitutional claims. The Judicial Branch, she wrote, cannot fulfill its role as a check on the other branches of government, “if we write ourselves out of relevance and leave the Executive Branch to check itself.”

Khalil, 31, has also appealed to the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Louisiana, where he was detained, after the Board of Immigration Appeals upheld his removal order.

Through his lawyers, Khalil argued that the immigration judge who issued the order failed to consider relevant evidence and wrongly upheld a charge that he had misrepresented information on his application for legal permanent resident status. That charge, Khalil’s lawyers said, was brought in retaliation for his protest activity.

The immigration judge suggested Khalil could be deported to Algeria, where he maintains citizenship through a distant relative, or Syria, where he was born in a refugee camp to a Palestinian family. Khalil’s lawyers have said he would face mortal danger if forced to return to either country.

An outspoken leader of the pro-Palestinian movement at Columbia, Khalil was arrested in March 2025. He then spent three months detained in a Louisiana immigration jail, missing the birth of his child.

Federal officials have accused Khalil of leading activities “aligned to Hamas,” though they have not presented evidence to support the claim and have not accused him of criminal conduct. They also accused Khalil of failing to disclose information on his green card application.

Khalil has dismissed the allegations as “baseless and ridiculous,” framing his arrest and detention as a “direct consequence of exercising my right to free speech as I advocated for a free Palestine and an end to the genocide in Gaza.”

The government justified the arrest under a seldom-used statute that allows for the expulsion of noncitizens whose beliefs are deemed to pose a threat to U.S. foreign policy interests. In June 2025, Farbiarz ruled that justification would likely be declared unconstitutional and ordered Khalil released.

President Trump’s administration appealed that ruling, arguing the deportation decision should fall to an immigration judge, rather than a federal court. The 3rd Circuit ruled 2-1 in the administration’s favor.

Judge Emil Bove, who was involved in investigating student protesters while a top Justice Department official, did not participate in the 3rd Circuit vote on whether to review the decision. He later issued an order denying a request by Khalil’s lawyers that he step aside from the matter, calling it moot.

Sisak writes for the Associated Press. AP writer Lindsay Whitehurst contributed to this report.

Usyk is one of the sport’s most decorated fighters, an Olympic gold medallist who has unified both the cruiserweight and heavyweight divisions across 24 unbeaten fights.

On paper, a rise on the scales may prompt questions about why he is operating outside his most effective weight, particularly against a boxing novice.

Fury’s conditioning in his 2023 bout with Francis Ngannou, when he was dropped and laboured to a narrow points win over the MMA fighter, is often cited as an example of how preparation and focus can come under scrutiny in crossover fights.

In Usyk’s case, however, his approach and discipline have remained consistent throughout his amateur and professional career across weight classes, with the Ukrainian considered one of the sport’s ultimate professionals.

He said at Thursday’s news conference that when a stoppage opportunity presents itself, he will take it.

The increase on the scales could therefore suggest he is looking to carry more power into the contest and planning a quick victory.

Nouakchott, Mauritania – Across a vast stretch of the Sahel and West Africa, armed groups are expanding their reach, military governments are replacing fragile democracies, and “counterterrorism” efforts continue to contend with armed violence, often rooted in poverty and challenging living conditions.

While the Sahel has become synonymous with instability, tucked between the region and the Atlantic coast sits Mauritania, a country that has somehow managed to douse the flame. The explanation for this resilience often begins with a woman in a headscarf sitting across from a young man or a woman in a prison cell, talking about God.

Mauritania’s mourchidates are female Islamic spiritual guides, trained, certified, and deployed by the state under the Ministry of Islamic Affairs since 2021. They are not a new phenomenon, as the programme has its roots in Morocco.

Morocco’s mourchidates were introduced after the 2003 Casablanca bombings, a series of coordinated attacks in the Moroccan city that killed dozens and injured hundreds, as part of a broader religious reform.

Youssra Biare, a Moroccan researcher, states: “Morocco’s mourchidates offer one of the most established examples of women’s religious leadership as a tool for peace-building and preventing violent ‘extremism’.”

Since the programme’s launch in 2006, Morocco’s mourchidates have received formal theological and social training, which enables them to provide religious guidance and family counselling.

“Beyond their role in countering extremist narratives, they address the social and emotional factors that can make young people vulnerable to radicalisation,” Biare told Al Jazeera.

“For countries such as Mauritania, the Moroccan model demonstrates how investing in well-trained female religious leaders can strengthen community trust, promote moderate religious discourse, and create culturally grounded approaches to youth de-radicalisation and social cohesion.”

The mourchidates operate across schools, youth centres, mosques, hospitals, and, critically, prisons. They provide religious counsel grounded in mainstream Islamic scholarship, challenge the theological justifications that armed groups use, and offer a credible alternative to their narratives.

What makes the programme distinctive is the involvement of women with dedicated religious scholarship. More than social workers with a passing familiarity with Islamic texts, the mourchidates are trained in Quranic interpretation, Islamic jurisprudence, and the history of theological thought.

When they sit with detainees convinced that violence is a religious obligation, they can engage on their own terms and dismantle those arguments point by point.

Prison as a battleground for ideas

Prisons have long been recognised globally as sites of radicalisation, where recruitment networks operate. Mauritania, however, has pursued a different approach. Inside its prisons, mourchidates engage detainees linked to armed groups operating in the Sahel region, including those convicted of planning or participating in attacks across Mauritania, as well as those joining radicalised groups in neighbouring countries.

Their work goes beyond pastoral care to critically engage prison populations on an ideological level. They sit with these people over extended periods, building trust and addressing the theological arguments that justified violence, such as the belief that attacks on civilians could be sanctioned in the name of religion.

By patiently challenging these interpretations and offering alternative readings of Islamic texts, the mourchidates gradually open space for detainees to reconsider their choices.

De-radicalisation, when it works, tends to be built on relationships. The mourchidates, through their close ties to communities, are often well-placed to build these relationships in ways that male guards, military officials, or even male religious scholars are not always able to.

A significant portion of what mourchidates do is preventive, operating in community spaces to reach young people before they become vulnerable to recruitment. Armed groups exploit unemployment, marginalisation, and legitimate grievances to draw young men and women to their cause, often using the language of faith.

Countering this radicalisation requires a coherent narrative more than a militaristic approach, and that is precisely what the mourchidates provide.

“One of the strengths of the Mauritanian model is that it understood early on that violent extremism cannot be addressed through security responses alone,” Aminata Dia, a Mauritanian founding member of Elles Du Sahel Network and the executive director of the nonprofit Malaama, told Al Jazeera.

“The country invested in prevention, religious dialogue and community trust-building, particularly through the mourchidates programme,” she said.

Yahia Elhoussein, a scholar who runs a maourchidate school in Nouakchott, told Al Jazeera that this approach works due to its credibility.

“The mourchidates were deployed by the Ministry of Islamic Affairs to different parts of the country, where they educated young people on the true teachings of Islam, such as tolerance, charity, and accountability, playing an important role in de-radicalisation without any use of force,” Elhoussein said.

Why Mauritania stands apart

The results, while difficult to quantify, are reflected in Mauritania’s regional trajectory. The country has not been immune to threats from armed groups, enduring attacks in the mid-to-late 2000s that pushed it to reassess its approach.

What followed was a comprehensive strategy combining intelligence, community engagement, religious reform, and programmes like the mourchidates. Since then, Mauritania has largely avoided the scale of attacks that have devastated its neighbours, such as Mali and Burkina Faso.

Security analysts point to Mauritania as a case study for a preventive model, investing in conditions that make radicalisation less likely rather than responding solely to violence. The mourchidates are central to that model.

None of this suggests that Mauritania has solved the problem, or that its approach is without limitations. The country faces governance challenges, while the broader Sahel region continues to experience expanding armed violence, poverty, displacement, and weak state presence, pressures that no single programme can fully address.

Critics note that the reach of the mourchidates, while meaningful, remains constrained by resources and scale.

There are also questions about how replicable this model is elsewhere. Morocco’s version has been partially adapted in other Muslim-majority countries, but conditions in Mauritania, a deeply religious society, such as respected female scholarship, credible state authority, and political will, make it unique.

In Burkina Faso, Mali, and Niger, replicating this model would require rebuilding trust between the state and the community, which appears to have eroded.

At a time when international counterterrorism policy in the Sahel is dominated by military presence, drone strikes, and external interventions, Mauritania’s experience offers a different lesson. Some of the most effective tools for preventing violent activism are not found in special forces and military operations but in trained women, armed with knowledge and patience.

“Mauritania’s mourchidates prove that community-based approaches can be more effective than any other approach,” said Elhoussein.

Richarlison had given Robert de Zerbi’s disappointing side hope, after Enzo Fernandez and Andrey Santos gave the hosts a deserved two-goal advantage, when Chelsea‘s combative left-back Marc Cucurella unceremoniously dragged Spurs defender Micky van de Ven to the floor.

It came as Mathys Tel prepared to take a corner and Spurs demanded a penalty that never came, their disbelief doubled when Cucurella was cautioned over the incident.

Video assistant referee (VAR) checks detected his foul came seconds, maybe even one second, before the ball came into play, meaning a penalty could not be awarded.

Referee Stuart Attwell could only take action against Cucurella with a yellow card, and once VAR confirmed the ball had not been kicked there was no room to initiate a review and subsequent spot-kick.

Former Chelsea and England striker Daniel Sturridge told Sky Sports: “One second difference and it is a guaranteed penalty. Cucurella is so lucky.”

It was the tightest of calls.

Spurs boss De Zerbi refused to dwell on it, but said the Everton game was arguably “more important” than the club’s Europa League final against Manchester United last season, which they won in Bilbao.

He added: “It is not my business. My business is to focus on preparing the next game and to get the points we need because Sunday is the final for us.

“This game is important, more than playing for a trophy. Last season ended with playing for a trophy. We play for something more important than a trophy because of the pride and history of the club.

“You can win a trophy but it does not change anything. The most important thing is the pride and dignity of the club, so that we can go on holiday, in the Premier League.

“We have to stay alive. Sunday against Everton is a big day for us.”

WASHINGTON — In the latest escalation of a fight over the use of paid social media creators, Tom Steyer’s campaign for governor filed a complaint Tuesday accusing influencers who posted content supportive of Xavier Becerra’s campaign of failing to disclose that they had been paid, which is required by California law.

The complaint, filed with California’s Fair Political Practices Commission, accuses Jay Gonzalez of producing at least 14 pro-Becerra posts on Instagram and Facebook in late April and early May, after he was hired by the campaign, and only belatedly editing the posts to acknowledge they had been sponsored by the campaign.

The complaint also said that a social media creator named Maggie Reed, who posts under the username mermaidmamamaggie, created four pro-Becerra posts on Instagram and had previously offered to create paid posts for another gubernatorial campaign, though the complaint doesn’t specify how the campaign knows Reed was paid.

Reed and a talent agency that represents her did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

The Becerra campaign maintained that it has not paid influencers who have created posts in support of the campaign.

“All of the content you see online is entirely and purely organic,” said Becerra spokesman Jonathan Underland.

Becerra and Steyer have been the top two Democratic candidates in recent polling for the governor’s race, with Becerra consistently maintaining a slight edge in those polls.

The complaint by Steyer’s campaign comes after two influencers who support Becerra filed a complaint last week accusing social media creators hired by the Steyer campaign of failing to disclose that they had been paid to produce their posts.

The campaign of the billionaire candidate for governor had previously disclosed payments to some influencers with large audiences, including one creator with the user name zayydante, who has 1.8 million followers on TikTok, and another with the user name littleyeg, who has nearly 350,000 followers on TikTok. The complaint filed last week said that both of these influencers failed to disclose that they had been paid by the campaign to produce content.

The complaint also highlighted several accounts created by user who don’t appear to live in California who created posts promoting Steyer and, in at least one case, posted elsewhere that they had been paid by the campaign.

The influencers who filed the original complaint said they saw the newly filed complaint as an attempt by Steyer’s campaign to deflect criticism.

“All he’s done is attack his opponent instead of taking accountability for violating the law,” said Kaitlyn Hennessy, one of the two influencers who filed the complaint against Steyer’s campaign. Hennessy and the other influencer who filed the complaint both said they have not been paid by the Becerra campaign.

In a post on Substack, Steyer defended his campaign’s use of paid social media influencers and said that it had been transparent about their use.

“Every creator we compensate has been and will be publicly disclosed as required by law,” he wrote.

Under a California law passed in 2023, social media creators who create paid content on behalf of a political campaign are required to disclose in their post that the material was sponsored and who paid for it.

The onus is on creators to provide the disclosure, but campaigns are required to notify influencers they hire of the requirement.

Violation of the rules doesn’t trigger criminal, civil or administrative penalties but the FPPC can take alleged offenders to court and ask a judge to force compliance with the law.

Rousey won the fight with her signature armbar lock, forcing Carano into submission just 17 seconds into the bout.

Mixed martial arts (MMA) star Ronda Rousey has re-retired after demolishing fellow combat sports trailblazer Gina Carano in their long-awaited non-title comeback bout in Los Angeles, defeating her rival by armbar after just 17 seconds.

After a hype-filled build-up, the bout on Saturday was a jarring anti-climax, with Rousey flooring Carano almost immediately before wrestling her into an armbar to end the fight.

American stars Rousey, 39, and Carano, 44, are widely regarded as two of the most important female fighters in the history of MMA, helping to take the sport into the mainstream during their fighting heydays more than a decade ago.

Carano had parlayed her success into a Hollywood career, appearing in several action movie roles, but had not fought since 2009 before her appearance in Saturday’s featherweight bout.

Rousey, a 2008 Olympics judo bronze medallist who subsequently found huge success in the Ultimate Fighting Championship (UFC), retired from the sport in 2016 after suffering back-to-back defeats against Amanda Nunes and Holly Holm.

The fighters were lured back into the cage for Saturday’s card at the Intuit Dome with the promise of a bumper payday that will reportedly see each fighter earn several million dollars from the streaming giant.

Rousey (13-2-0 MMA) secured her 10th submission win, returning to the cage following an exit from MMA in December 2016.

She insisted afterwards her return to the ring was a one-off and ruled out the possibility of fighting again after paying tribute to Carano.

“Gina is the only person who could have brought me back into MMA – she’s my hero,” Rousey said. “She changed my world, and we changed the world, and I’ll never ever forget that or be able to pay that back enough.

“I’m so glad we finally got to share this moment.”

Asked about possibly extending her comeback, Rousey added: “There’s no way I could have ended it better than this. I want to have some more babies, got to get cooking.”

Carano (7-2-0 MMA) ⁠⁠had been inactive in the sport since August 2009, returning to MMA after a conversation last year at Rousey’s encouragement. She admitted the fight was too fast for her, regretting what ⁠⁠more she could have done in a short timeframe.

“I feel great,” Carano said after the loss. “I wanted to fight, ⁠⁠and I didn’t get that. But she trained. She ⁠⁠had her game plan. I have so much love and respect for her, and this was a victory in my life. She changed it. I woke up at 3am every morning thinking about ‌‌her. I fell back in love with mixed martial arts. There’s ‌‌so ‌‌many things to think about here. It’s just [that] the fight didn’t go my way.

“I wanted that to last longer – I felt like I was so ready, I felt so good,” she said. “But I haven’t been here for 17 years. I wanted to hit her.”

Carano, 44, is unsure whether she’ll return to MMA, choosing to keep the door open.

Carano said the mere fact of getting in shape for her return – she revealed before the bout she had shed more than 100 pounds (45kg) in the two years leading up to the contest – was a victory.

“Right now, just getting in the cage was a victory, getting here after 17 years is a victory. Fighting a legend was a victory. I feel great, I just wanted to fight, and I didn’t get to do that.”

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.”

The Times earned prestigious Associated Press Sports Editors triple crown honors for a sixth consecutive year, claimed first place in two individual categories and finished in the top 10 in eight categories.

The staff submitted work published in 2025 and competed against the largest print and digital sports publications in the country.

Bill Plaschke took top honors in the columnist category for a portfolio that included commentary about using boxing to aid his fight with Parkinson’s disease, the affect of nearly losing his Altadena home in the Eaton Fire, the Dodgers’ 18-inning win during the World Series and UCLA’s fight for the right to break its Rose Bowl lease.

It was Plaschke’s 10th first-place columnist finish of his career. He previously won the APSE’s Red Smith Award, the highest honor in American sports journalism.

The Times also earned first place in event coverage for the staff’s work chronicling the Dodgers World Series Game 7 win, tying with the Dallas Morning News for top honors.

Eric Sondheimer, who is poised to begin his 50th year covering high school sports in Southern California, placed second in short feature for his coverage of the chilling affect immigration raids had on Los Angeles high school football players.

Kevin Baxter placed ninth in national beat writing for his coverage of preparation for the 2026 World Cup, including a look at why FIFA president Gianni Infantino has worked to court President Trump.

The Times’ eight top-10 finishes included the categories print portfolio, digital, event coverage, special sections, investigative, national beat writing, columns and short feature. The staff also earned an excellence in video award.

Having arrived an hour later than the champion to the venue because of Manchester traffic, Dubois made a brisk, business-like ringwalk.

Wardley, in his first appearance since being upgraded to world champion, soaked in the atmosphere with a leisurely entrance. Draped in an Ipswich Town Football Club robe, he was greeted by a warm reception from the 18,000-strong crowd.

With a combined record of 42 wins – 40 coming by knockout – there was palpable anticipation inside the arena, and Wardley stayed true to his promise to bring the action early as Dubois immediately hit the canvas after a flush right hand.

Dubois winked to his corner but looked shell-shocked. He wrestled Wardley to the ground as both fighters swung for the hills.

Many expected Dubois to impose himself early before Wardley could settle. Considered the better technical boxer, he regrouped and landed a right in the second.

Momentum swung again in the third when Wardley, who looked sharp with his overhand right and uppercuts, sent Dubois wobbling. Dubois took a knee and survived the count before firing back with a right hand that rocked Wardley.

The fighters and fans struggled to catch a breath as trainer Don Charles urged Dubois to lean on his jab, and he followed that instruction to take control of proceedings.

Dubois’ left eye was swollen, but Wardley’s face looked a mess as Dubois set up his attacks with a left jab before landing his biggest shots in the fourth and the sixth.

Wardley, who was working in recruitment a decade ago, showed an extraordinary chin and heart as he refused to go down despite his legs trembling and blood pouring down his face.

Most would likely have been withdrawn by their corner, but Wardley has built a reputation on dramatic comebacks. This time, however, it felt different.

The doctor inspected Wardley’s injuries before the eighth round and allowed him to continue.

By the ninth, the referee looked ready to intervene as Wardley continued to absorb heavy punishment and the contest became increasingly difficult to watch.

Doctors again allowed Wardley to continue before the 10th and when the stoppage finally arrived in the 11th, there was almost a sense of relief.

A sensational fight had reached its conclusion.

Warren – a veteran of 45 years in the sport – described it as “the best heavyweight fight” he has ever promoted.

Two big-hitting British heavyweights will collide for a world title in Manchester on Saturday as Fabio Wardley defends his WBO belt against Daniel Dubois.

Unbeaten Wardley, 31, makes the first defence of his title after the Ipswich fighter was upgraded from interim to full world champion last year.

Londoner Dubois, 28, is aiming to bounce back from his defeat by Oleksandr Usyk last summer, as he looks to become a two-time world champion.

With a combined 95% knockout ratio, it seems unlikely the judges will be needed at the Co-op Live Arena.

BBC Sport spoke to figures from the boxing world to get their predictions.

Walt Disney Co.’s ABC is forcefully resisting Federal Communications Commission efforts to soften the network’s programming, accusing the federal agency of an overreach that violates 1st Amendment freedoms.

Last week, the FCC took the unusual step of calling in the licenses of eight Disney-owned television stations for early review. The move — widely interpreted as an effort to chill the network’s speech — came a day after President Trump demanded that ABC fire late-night talk show host Jimmy Kimmel over a joke about First Lady Melania Trump.

The FCC separately has taken aim at ABC’s daytime discussion show, “The View,” which delves deeply into politics.

The FCC has questioned whether the show, which prominently features Trump critics Whoopi Goldberg and Joy Behar, could continue toclaim an exemption to rules that require broadcasters to provide equal time for opponents of political candidates.

In its filing this week with the FCC, Disney’s Houston television station raised the stakes in the dispute over “The View,” calling the commission’s actions “unprecedented” and “beyond the Commission’s authority.” The ABC station’s petition for a declaratory ruling said “The View,” has long qualified as a “bona fide” news interview program with freedom to conduct interviews of legally qualified political candidates.

“The Commission’s actions threaten to upend decades of settled law and practice and chill critical protected speech, both with respect to The View and more broadly,” the Houston station KTRK-TV said in the filing.

The network’s firm stance sets up a clash with the Trump administration, including the president’s hand-picked FCC Chairman Brendan Carr, who has made no secret of his disdain for Kimmel and other ABC programming. Earlier this year, Carr announced that decades-old exemptions from the so-called “equal time rule” for news programs, including “The View,” were no longer valid.

ABC’s strenuous arguments mark a departure for the Disney-owned outlet.

In December 2024, a month after Trump was elected to a second term, the network quickly settled a lawsuit over statements made by news anchor George Stephanopoulos that Trump found offensive. ABC agreed to pay Trump $15 million to end his legal fight — sparking an outcry among free speech advocates, who accused the network of caving on a case it could have won.

“Some may dislike certain—or even most—of the viewpoints expressed on The View or similar shows,” the station said in its filing. “Such dislike, however, cannot justify using regulatory processes to restrict those views. The government does not get to decide ‘what shall be orthodox in politics, nationalism, religion, or other matters of opinion.’”

The station noted that, while the FCC has questioned the exemption for “The View,” which dates back to 2002, the FCC hasn’t showed interest in regulating programs on other networks, “including the many voices — conservative and liberal — on broadcast radio.”

“The danger is that the government will simply decide which perspectives to regulate and which to leave undisturbed,” ABC said.

On April 28, Carr called for a review of Disney’s broadcast licenses two years before any of them were set to expire, citing the agency’s year-old inquiry into Disney’s diversity, equity and inclusion policies and whether they violated federal anti-discrimination rules.

Real do not impose sporting sanctions saying 500,000 euro fines concludes the ‘internal procedures’ against the pair.

Real Madrid have fined Aurelien Tchouameni and Federico Valverde 500,000 euros ($588,000) each after a training ground clash that left the latter needing hospital treatment.

The club did not impose any sporting sanctions on the two players, saying in a statement that the fine “thereby concludes the internal procedures” launched against them.

Valverde will miss Sunday’s Clasico against Barcelona as a result of the head injury he suffered during the altercation. The club said he would be out for up to two weeks.

Tchouameni took part in training on Friday and could feature at Camp Nou this weekend.

Madrid said on Friday that both players “expressed their complete remorse for what happened and apologised to each other” while taking part in a club investigation.

“They extended their apologies to the club, their teammates, the coaching staff, and the fans, and both have made themselves available to Real Madrid to accept whatever sanction the club deems appropriate,” read a club statement.

Uruguay international Valverde was accompanied to the hospital facility near the club’s Valdebebas training complex by Madrid coach Alvaro Arbeloa, according to Spanish reports, which said the player needed stitches to treat a facial wound.

Valverde sought to downplay the severity of the altercation with the France midfielder.

“The strain of the competition and frustration caused the situation to escalate,” Valverde wrote on social media, expressing regret at the media coverage of the incident.

“I accidentally hit a table during the argument, causing a small cut on my forehead that required a routine visit to the hospital,” he said.

“At no point did my teammate hit me, and I didn’t hit him either.”

According to reports, the two players quarrelled on Wednesday during training, and their argument continued on Thursday during and after the session.

Spanish media reported Valverde refused to shake Tchouameni’s hand and later fouled him in Thursday’s training session, with the pair scrapping afterwards in the dressing room when the injury occurred.

Tensions are running high at Real Madrid with the club on the verge of a second consecutive season without a major trophy.

Los Blancos trail Barca by 11 points at the top of La Liga, with Hansi Flick’s side able to clinch back-to-back league titles on Sunday if they do not lose.

Daniel is a very introverted man. He’s not somebody who goes out boasting, and I know he’s taken some stick this week because of that quiet nature.

I am protective of him. I always try to talk to him before we go into any media event, prepare him.

He just doesn’t enjoy that part of the fight game. He’s really not into all the verbals.

Whoever you are, you look at how people behave and what their make-up is. That’s if you want to get the best out of them.

You have to be clever, not sly, in how you deal with it. Good interviewers do that. Daniel does all his talking in the ring.

I don’t think he’ll ever change. His dad is his mentor and that’s all he knows – he’ll look to his dad before answering the question and still usually does.

That family is a tight unit. Some boxers, as they get successful, go partying but he doesn’t do any of that stuff.

After he beat Anthony Joshua, he just wanted to go home.

I had to literally push him into the press room so the world could see him after that magnificent performance.

Our job as promoters is to find something you can bring out and get it to the public, so they want to be on this journey with this fighter.

Sometimes it’s difficult. With Prince Naseem Hamed, for example, it was easy. When I first met Naz, I knew exactly what I was going to do with him and how we were going to promote him.

So some guys are easily promotable, others it can be hard work, but that’s the business we’re in.

But Daniel has come out of his skin a bit lately. The funniest thing for me was when he did the head-to-head with Filip Hrgovic a few fights ago.

Hrgovic said Daniel had no heart, and Daniel just said he was going to knock him out – using an expletive I wouldn’t like to repeat.

I had never heard Daniel even swear before!

Everybody there was like: ‘What is that?’ It was like getting the vicar to swear. He found a voice from within himself.

Blake Lively and Justin Baldoni have reached an agreement to resolve their legal dispute, bringing an abrupt end to a high-profile and increasingly contentious battle that had been set to go to trial in two weeks.

“The parties in the Blake Lively and Wayfarer Studios litigation have reached an agreement to resolve the matters,” lawyers for both sides said in a joint statement Monday in a case that has drawn outsized attention for more than a year.

“The end product — the movie ‘It Ends With Us’ — is a source of pride to all of us who worked to bring it to life. Raising awareness, and making a meaningful impact in the lives of domestic violence survivors — and all survivors — is a goal that we stand behind. We acknowledge the process presented challenges and recognize concerns raised by Ms. Lively deserved to be heard. We remain firmly committed to workplaces free of improprieties and unproductive environments. It is our sincere hope that this brings closure and allows all involved to move forward constructively and in peace, including a respectful environment online.”

The statement did not disclose the terms of the agreement.

The bitter dispute, which grew out of the production of the 2024 romantic drama “It Ends With Us,” had sprawled over months into a series of lawsuits, countersuits and public claims, with both sides offering sharply different accounts of what took place during and after filming.

Lively sued Baldoni, his production company Wayfarer Studios and others in December 2024, alleging sexual harassment, retaliation and other claims tied to her experience on the film. Baldoni denied the allegations and pushed back in court filings, arguing that the dispute had been mischaracterized.

Last month, U.S. District Judge Lewis Liman dismissed most of Lively’s claims, including her sexual harassment allegations, significantly narrowing the case ahead of a trial that had been scheduled to begin May 18 in New York.

The remaining claims, centered largely on alleged retaliation, had been expected to be the focus of the trial, which was likely to last two to three weeks and risked reputational damage to both parties.

It was not immediately clear whether the court had formally vacated the trial date.

JACKSON, Miss. — At 16, Edward Blackmon Jr. was arrested during a demonstration for voting rights in his Mississippi hometown. He was loaded with schoolmates into a truck once used to haul chickens and left in the summer heat before spending three nights in an overcrowded jail cell without a bed.

It was a moment that set him on a path to become a civil rights lawyer and one of the first Black lawmakers elected in the state since Reconstruction.

Blackmon was part of a generation of Black Americans across the South who fought in courtrooms and in the streets to dismantle barriers to voting and achieve political representation in a region scarred by the legacy of slavery and its aftermath.

One of the crown jewels of that struggle, the Voting Rights Act, was hollowed out by a Supreme Court ruling last week. The court’s conservative majority said states should not rely on racial demographics when drawing congressional districts, a ruling that opened the door to transforming how political power is distributed and making it harder for minorities to get elected.

The majority opinion described racism as a problem of the past. Others saw the decision as another example of its resurgence — “a defibrillator to the heart of Jim Crow,” as one Louisiana politician put it.

Blackmon’s son, Bradford, a 37-year-old state senator in Mississippi, said how the political lines are drawn “shapes who has a real chance before anyone ever votes.”

“It’s just sad that we made progress and then they are always trying to roll it back when it shows that minorities are making more progress than I would guess that those in charge think that they’re allowed to make,” he said.

The elder Blackmon, now 78, said he was resigned to the reality that the fight of his youth is not over.

“It’s just another cycle — an ongoing struggle without a foreseeable ending,” he said.

A legacy at risk

The case, involving a challenge to Louisiana’s congressional map, clarified how the Voting Rights Act can be used to contest district lines that may weaken the voting power of Black residents.

For many Black Americans, the decision was a death knell for a cherished pillar of the Civil Rights Movement. Before the Voting Rights Act of 1965, Black voters in the Deep South had no guarantee of equal access to the ballot. Within a year of its passage, more than 250,000 Black Americans had gained the right to vote. By 2024, nearly 22 million Black voters were registered nationwide, according to the U.S. Census Bureau.

The United States is now witnessing the unraveling of nearly a century of organizing, civil disobedience and personal sacrifice by ordinary people who helped build Black political power to heights unseen since Reconstruction. Veterans of the voting rights movement — people who confronted police violence alongside John Lewis on the 1965 “Bloody Sunday” march in Selma, Ala., or rallied with the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. — are seeing those hard-won victories stripped away from their descendants.

“I’m the first generation of Americans born with equal rights,” said Jonathan Jackson, a Democratic congressman from Illinois who is the 60-year-old son of the Rev. Jesse Jackson, the late civil rights leader. He said the idea that his children could grow up with fewer protections was “surreal and devastating.”

For Charles Mauldin, who was beaten by law enforcement as a teenager on Bloody Sunday, the ruling reflects a skirmish that was never as settled as some hoped.

“I’m disappointed but not surprised,” said Mauldin, 78, of Birmingham, Ala. “They’ve been chipping away at the 1965 Voting Rights Act for the last 60 years.”

Who holds power now

In Louisiana, younger Black politicians say the high court’s ruling could reshape not just who wins elections, but whether candidates can compete at all, particularly in down-ballot races that often serve as steppingstones to higher office.

Davante Lewis, a 34-year-old Democrat who serves on the state’s utility regulatory board, said he expects districts could be redrawn in ways that make it harder for candidates like him to win.

“They can target my communities … to ensure that I can’t get to an elected office,” said Lewis, one of several plaintiffs in the Louisiana gerrymandering case that went to the Supreme Court.

Jamie Davis, a Black farmer in northeast Louisiana and a Democratic candidate for U.S. Senate, said the decision risks discouraging voters already skeptical that their voices matter.

“I want to be optimistic, but how can you be optimistic when voter turnout in the past election cycles has been really low?” Davis said.

Tennessee is among the states bracing for new redistricting efforts. State Rep. Justin Pearson, who represents Memphis and is running for Congress, said people who struggled to pass the Voting Rights Act are “shocked and devastated that they’re having to relitigate the same fights that they fought 60 years ago.”

But he also predicted that efforts to reduce Black representation could “reinvigorate a civil rights movement in the South that demands equal representation, that demands fairness, that demands justice and equality.”

Supporters of the Supreme Court ruling said it reinforces a race-neutral approach to redistricting, and they say political lines should not be drawn primarily based on race.

Democratic Mississippi state Rep. Bryant Clark said that view ignores how race and party align in the state. In Mississippi, where most Black voters are Democrats and most white voters are Republicans, he said the two are often indistinguishable.

“It’s just a roundabout way to basically legalize racially discriminatory redistricting in the state,” Clark said.

In 1967, his father, Robert Clark Jr., became the first Black lawmaker elected to the Mississippi Legislature since Reconstruction.

With Black residents making up about 38% of Mississippi’s population, Edward Blackmon Jr. said the current maps allow Black voters to elect candidates in some districts while keeping Republican majorities intact across much of the state.

He said lawmakers have little incentive to change that balance because moving Black voters into more districts would make those seats less reliably conservative and force candidates to compete for a broader electorate.

“Where do you think the population goes? They don’t just disappear,” Blackmon said. “What incumbent wants that type of district right now?”

Fight continues

Blackmon was raised in Canton, “when Jim Crow was in full bloom.”

Black children attended separate schools, and during cotton-picking season, classes let out early as rickety trucks with wooden sides arrived to take students to the fields, where they spent hours working.

At home, he watched those inequalities play out in quieter ways.

His father, a World War II veteran who left the sharecropping farm where Blackmon’s grandfather had worked, struggled to find steady work in Mississippi after returning from military service and becoming involved in civil rights organizing. He eventually left for New York to make a living — part of a generation of Black veterans who faced barriers to jobs and opportunities their white counterparts received.

Blackmon remembers sitting nearby as his father and other community leaders gathered on the porch, talking late into the night about forming a local NAACP chapter.

“It was embedded in my memory and experience that it was worth the struggle,” he said.

When the Voting Rights Act passed, it did not immediately change those realities. In places like Canton, federal officials set up registration tables on downtown streets so Black residents could sign up to vote without facing harassment or intimidation from local authorities.

In the years that followed, Blackmon and other lawyers used the law to challenge at-large election systems that prevented Black communities from electing candidates of their choice. Cities and counties were forced to redraw maps into single-member districts.

When those districts still diluted Black voting strength, activists returned to court.

“Without the Voting Rights Act, Mississippi would look so much different than it looks now,” Blackmon said.

Willingham, Brook, Bates and Amy write for the Associated Press and reported from Boston, New Orleans, Jackson and Atlanta, respectively. AP writers Kristin Hall and Travis Loller in Nashville and Safiyah Riddle and Kim Chandler in Montgomery, Ala., contributed to this report.

Peru’s public prosecutor says many of their citizens are victims of deception, lured by ⁠the promise of jobs but ended up in Ukraine.

Peru has launched an investigation into an alleged human trafficking network that lured citizens with false promises of employment in Russia, only for them to end up fighting in Russia’s war against Ukraine, the public prosecutor’s office has said.

Individuals were “recruited through deceptive job offers to work as security agents and other roles” in Russia, “with the promise of financial compensation”, the prosecutor’s office said in a statement on Friday.

The investigation will focus on the alleged crimes of “human trafficking” and “aggravated human trafficking”, the office said.

Percy Salinas, a lawyer representing families of people who ended up on the front lines in Ukraine, told the local TV channel N that 13 Peruvians have died in the war in Ukraine so far, according to the AFP news agency.

Salinas said individuals were reportedly offered monthly salaries of between $2,000 and $3,000, and that an estimated 600 Peruvians have been lured since last October to fight for Russia.

In a statement released on Thursday, Moscow’s embassy in Lima acknowledged that Peruvians had signed contracts to join the Russian armed forces.

The Peruvian Ministry of Foreign Affairs said it had asked the Russian embassy to clarify the situation and obtain information about the location and wellbeing of citizens serving in the Russian military. The ministry noted that Peruvian citizens are required to seek permission from the Foreign Ministry before serving in a foreign military.

The families of some of the victims who claimed they were recruited under false pretences to fight in Ukraine protested outside the ministry in Lima on Thursday, demanding their loved ones be repatriated.

Peru is the latest country to raise complaints against Russia over the deceptive recruitment of foreign nationals to fight in Ukraine.

More than 1,780 citizens from 36 African countries are believed to be fighting alongside Russian forces, according to Ukrainian estimates from February.

Russia has also previously acknowledged enlisting soldiers from North Korea, thousands of whom are estimated to have been killed or wounded in battle, as part of a military pact agreed between Moscow and Pyongyang.

In 2020 Jason Moloney was offered the chance to face Inoue for the IBF and WBA bantamweight titles in a temporary venue known as ‘The Bubble’ at MGM Grand in Las Vegas.

The Australian jumped at the chance.

Moloney, who went on to become a WBO bantamweight champion in 2023, describes taking Inoue’s best shots.

“It’s like a shocking power,” he says.

“You go into the fight – you know he’s the Monster. You’ve seen his knockouts. You’ve heard about his power.

“He was throwing a few, I was catching a few on the gloves and I thought ‘this is OK, this is nothing I can’t handle’. But when he lands them, they’re just so crisp.

“It’s a real shock that just sort of goes right through you like electric. They’re not nice to wear.

“In round eight as I’m moving round to my corner, he hit me with a backhand with two seconds to go.

“It hit me flush on the chin. I remember the bell going and I cannot remember a word of what Joe said to me in that corner.

“I remember standing up to go out for round nine and thinking ‘wow, my legs are still shaky’. I still couldn’t feel them.

“It’s more so the timing, the speed and the accuracy.

“It’s more the all-round power around it, rather than a one-shot Deontay Wilder-type power.”

In an interview with Euronews, EU Trade Commissioner Maroš Šefčovič issued a firm warning that the European Union will not hesitate to defend its industries after Beijing signaled possible retaliation over new EU plans to bolster its industrial base.

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

China this week up the pressure on Brussels, threatening countermeasures unless the EU softens core elements of its “Made in Europe” proposal—designed to tighten market access for foreign companies—and its Cybersecurity Act, which could ultimately restrict Chinese telecom firms’ presence across the bloc.

Asked about China’s reaction to what the EU describes as much-needed measures to reinforce its sovereignty and restore a level playing field, Šefčovič told Euronews the EU will “always” defend the interests of its companies.

“We will fight tooth and nail for every European job, for every European company, for every open sector, if we see they are treated unfairly,” said Šefčovič in comments to Euronews in an exclusive interview Friday.

Ballooning trade deficit in detriment to EU

Relations between Brussels and Beijing have deteriorated sharply over the past year, with China tightening export controls on rare earths vital to Europe’s clean-tech and defence industries, as well as restricting chips essential to the automotive sector, intensifying pressure on already fragile supply chains across the bloc.

In response, the EU has pushed for legislative proposals in the domain of cybersecurity and single market rules for companies, prompting a sharp reaction from China which has accused the EU of unfair practices. Earlier this week, Beijing said the EU should not underestimate China’s “firm resolve” to safeguard its interests.

Šefčovič rejected the suggestion that recent developments signal a looming trade war but stressed that the EU does not operate under pressure and expects to be treated with respect. “We never threaten our partners, and we certainly don’t do it through the media,” he said. “What we need is strategic patience and a great deal of courage.”

He said a “war” is often easy to start, but difficult to exit. A Chinese official told Euronews Beijing does not wish for a trade spat to escalate, but said China is serious about what it considers discriminatory practices. The EU disputes discrimination.

The EU’s trade chief pointed to a ballooning trade deficit between the two sides as a cause for concern. The bloc’s trade gap with China surged to €359.3 billion in 2025, a level Šefčovič called “simply unsustainable” that does not show signs of improvement.

He also said policymakers, the European parliament and economic actors in the EU have delivered “a very strong economic and political reaction” to tackle the trade deficit.

So far, Brussels has failed to secure meaningful commitments from Beijing to rebalance trade relations. At the same time, EU officials are growing increasingly concerned that Chinese exports—shut out of the US market by higher tariffs—are being redirected towards Europe. Brussels also points to China’s overcapacity as a source of concern.

The EU is now pressing Beijing to enter serious negotiations and deliver concrete results.

“I invited the Chinese foreign minister to visit Brussels because I think we need a very thorough assessment of the current situation,” Šefčovič told Euronews. “What I want is constructive engagement.”

Faced with a surge in low-cost Chinese imports, the EU is relying on trade defence instruments to counter what it sees as dumped and heavily subsidised goods, while also monitoring efforts by Chinese firms to bypass restrictions by shifting production outside China. Šefčovič made clear the EU will not be pushed into retreat from those issues.

“There are very strong industrial policies in China. You have the same in the US, in Canada, in Japan and in Korea. So, nobody should be surprised if the European Union responds in kind—especially when it comes to public money and public funds.”