GUNS

He’s never held public office or donned a judge’s robes, but an arch-conservative Los Angeles County attorney is racing toward confirmation on the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, accelerating the once-liberal court’s sharp rightward turn under President Trump.

A competitive target shooter with a background in a cryptocurrency, Eric Tung was approached by the White House Counsel’s Office on March 28 to replace Judge Sandra Segal Ikuta, a Bush appointee and one of the court’s most prominent conservatives, who is taking senior status.

A new father and still a relative unknown in national legal circles, Tung found an ally in pal Mike Davis, a reputed “judge whisperer” in Trump’s orbit. Speaking to the New York Post in mid-March, Davis touted Tung as Ikuta’s likely successor.

The Pasadena lawyer appeared on a Federalist Society panel at the Reagan Library this year, debating legal efforts to restrain “ ‘agents’ of the left.”

“Eric is a Tough Patriot, who will uphold the Rule of Law in the most RADICAL, Leftist States like California, Oregon, and Washington,” Trump wrote on Truth Social when the nomination was announced in July.

The response from California senators was apoplectic.

“Mr. Tung believes in a conception of the Constitution that rejects equality and liberty, and that would turn back the clock and continue to exclude vast sections of the American public from enjoying equal justice under the law,” said Sen. Alex Padilla.

In the past, senators from a potential judge’s home state could block a nomination — a custom Trump exploded when he steamrolled Washington senators to install Eric D. Miller to the 9th Circuit in 2019.

Tung has been tight-lipped about his ascent to the country’s busiest circuit. He did not respond to inquiries from The Times.

A Woodland Hills native and conservative Catholic convert, Tung made a name for himself as a champion of the crypto industry and elegant legal writer, frequently lecturing at California law schools and headlining Federalist Society events.

After graduating from Yale and the University of Chicago Law School, he clerked for Supreme Court Justices Antonin Scalia and Neil Gorsuch before joining the white-shoe law firm Jones Day, a feeder to the Trump Justice Department.

Many lauded the nomination when it was first announced, including the National Asian Pacific American Bar Assn.

“Eric is a highly regarded originalist who would follow in the footsteps of Justice Scalia, for whom he clerked,” said Carrie Campbell Severino, president of the Judicial Crisis Network, a conservative legal advocacy group.

Groups on the left, including Alliance for Justice, Demand Justice and the National Council of Jewish Women, have lobbied against putting Tung on the appellate court.

If confirmed, Tung will be Trump’s 11th appointment to the 9th Circuit, a court the president vowed to remake when he first took office in 2017.

During Trump’s first term, Judge Ikuta was part of a tiny conservative minority on the famously lopsided bench, a legacy of President Jimmy Carter’s decision to double the size of the circuit and pack it with liberal appointees.

Many Trump judges ruffled feathers at first, and most have shown themselves to be “pretty conservative and pretty hard nosed,” said Carl Tobias, a professor at the University of Richmond School of Law.

Their ranks include the former Hawaii Atty. Gen. Judge Mark J. Bennett, as well as the circuit’s first openly gay member, Judge Patrick J. Bumatay.

Trump’s appellate appointees helped deliver him several controversial recent decisions, including the finding in June that Trump had broad discretion to deploy the military on American streets. Another 9th Circuit ruling this month found that the administration could all-but eliminate the country’s refugee program via an indefinite “pause.”

But they’ve also clashed sharply with the Justice Department’s attorneys, even in cases where the appellate panel ultimately sided with the administration.

That’s what the president is trying to avoid this time around — particularly with his picks headed in the west, experts said.

“People on the far right are pushing [Trump] to have people who will be ‘courageous’ judges — in other words, do things that are really unpopular that Trump likes,” Tobias said.

Tung may fit the bill. In addition to his crypto chops and avowed support for constitutional originalism, he has been an ardent defender of religious liberty and an opponent of affirmative action. He shoots competitively as part of the International Defensive Pistol Assn.

Both Tung and his wife Emily Lataif have close ties to the anti-abortion movement. Tung worked extensively with the architect of Texas’ heartbeat bill; Lataif interned for the Susan B. Anthony List, an anti-abortion policy group that seeks to make IUDs and emergency contraception illegal and opposes many forms of in-vitro fertilization.

“Emily is the epitome of grace under pressure, as was evidenced … when she and Eric had to evacuate their home during the California wildfires, only days after welcoming their first child,” Severino said. “She’s worked at the highest levels, from the White House to the executive team at Walmart, and her talent is matched only by her kindness and love for her family.”

When asked by Sen. Chris Coons of Delaware whether he believed IVF was protected by the Constitution, Tung declined to answer.

It wasn’t the only question the nominee ducked. Democratic members of the Senate Judiciary Committee accused Tung of giving only “sham answers” to their inquiries, both in chambers and through written follow-ups.

After pressing him repeatedly for his position on landmark cases including Obergefell vs. Hodges and Lawrence vs. Texas — privacy right precedents Justice Clarence Thomas wrote should be reconsidered after the fall of Roe vs. Wade — Sen. Adam Schiff pushed the nominee for his opinion on Loving vs. Virginia, the 1967 case affirming interracial marriage.

“Was that wrongly decided?” the California lawmaker asked the aspiring judge.

“Senator, my wife and I are an interracial couple, so if that case were wrongly decided I would be in big trouble,” Tung said.

“You’re willing to tell us you believe Loving was correctly decided, but you’re not willing to say the other decisions were correctly decided,” Schiff said. “That seems less originalist and more situational.”

In the second violent crime in this country connected with the ATF’s failed Fast and Furious program, two Arizona undercover police officers were allegedly assaulted last year when they attempted to stop two men in a stolen vehicle with two of the program’s weapons in a confrontation south of Phoenix.

The officers, members of an elite Arizona Department of Public Safety law enforcement unit, said the driver rammed their cars and threatened them with the firearms, and then fled into the Arizona desert. The driver was caught and arrested, and two firearms –- a Beretta pistol and AK-47 semiautomatic assault rifle — were found in the stolen Ford truck, the police said.

The suspect, Angel Hernandez-Diaz, 48, believed to be a Mexican national, was charged with aggravated assault on a police officer, driving the stolen vehicle and illegal possession of the weapons. He has pleaded not guilty and is scheduled to stand trial in Pinal County, Ariz., next month.

Also arrested in the incident was the passenger, Rosario Zavala, 30, of Mexico, who was charged with possession of narcotics and the stolen vehicle.

The encounter came five months after the Fast and Furious program began, in which ATF agents allowed the illegal purchase of weapons to try to track the firearms to Mexican drug cartels. And it occurred nine months before the fatal slaying in December of U.S. Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry, killed in a separate assault in which two Fast and Furious firearms were discovered at the scene south of Tucson.

Sources said this is the first case so far of Fast and Furious weapons found at the scene of another violent crime other than Terry’s. Officials at ATF headquarters and the Justice Department are sifting through records to see whether there are more. About 2,000 weapons were allowed to be illegally purchased in the Phoenix area, and the vast majority were lost track of by ATF agents.

“There is bound to be a lot of them,” said one source close to case.

The new incident outside Phoenix, in the suburb of Maricopa, is the crime that the Justice Department alluded to last week in a report to congressional investigators reviewing Fast and Furious. They did not, however, provide any details. The Justice Department originally told Congress there were 11 sites in the U.S. with Fast and Furious guns, but last week revised the number to two identified so far.

Information about the crime surfaced Thursday after officials at the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives at Washington headquarters contacted Arizona law enforcement officials, and they agreed to discuss it.

The weapons found in the vehicle were the 9-millimeter Beretta, hidden under the front console, and the AK-47 in the back seat. Authorities in Arizona said they were told both weapons were illegally purchased under the Fast and Furious program that began in November 2009. Also in the truck were four boxes of ammunition for the AK-47, a box of 23 9-mm bullets for the Beretta, and four cases of Bud Light beer.

According to police reports, indictments and Officer Carrick Cook, the truck was stopped on the night of March 4, 2010, when the undercover unit realized the vehicle was stolen. Rather than exit, the driver revved the car and repeatedly rammed the two unmarked police vehicles.

Inside the truck, the driver removed the Beretta from his waistband, flashed it at the officers, and then bolted from the truck. He then turned in a crouched position as though he was pointing another weapon. At that point, Officer Mike Ruiz fired several times because “he felt his life was in danger and that of the other officer.”

Ruiz missed, and Hernandez-Diaz surrendered.

[email protected]

WASHINGTON — The F-35 is the most advanced fighter jet on the planet, capable of waging electronic warfare, of dropping nuclear weapons, of evading the surveillance and missile defenses of America’s most fearsome enemies at supersonic speeds.

Ten of them are being deployed by a newly branded War Department to Puerto Rico to combat drug traffickers in dinghies.

It is the latest example of the Trump administration using disproportionate military force to supplement, or substitute for, traditional law enforcement operations — first at home on the streets of U.S. cities and now overseas, where the president has labeled multiple drug cartels as foreign terrorist organizations and has vowed a “tough” response.

On Tuesday, that response began with an inaugural “kinetic strike” targeting a small vessel in the Caribbean allegedly carrying narcotics and 11 members of Tren de Aragua, one of the Venezuelan gangs President Trump has designated a terrorist group. Legally designating a gang or cartel as a terrorist entity ostensibly gives the president greater legal cover to conduct lethal strikes on targets.

The operation follows Trump’s deployment of U.S. forces to Los Angeles and Washington, D.C., for operations with dubious justifications, as well as threats of similar actions in San Francisco, Chicago and New Orleans, moves that a federal judge said last week amount to Trump “creating a national police force with the President as its chief.”

Trump has referred to both problems — urban crime and drug trafficking — as interlinked and out of control. But U.S. service members have no training in local law or drug enforcement. And experts question a strategy that has been tried before, both by the United States and regional governments, of launching a war against drugs only to drive leaders in the trade to militarize themselves.

U.S. drug policy “has always been semi-militarized,” said Jeremy Adelman, director of the Global History Lab at Princeton University. Trump’s latest actions simply make more explicit the erasure of a line “that separates law enforcement from warfare.”

“One side effect of all this is that other countries are watching,” Adelman said. “By turning law enforcement over to the military — as the White House is also doing domestically — what’s to stop other countries from doing the same in international waters?

“Fishermen in the South China Sea should be worried,” he added.

The Trump administration has not provided further details on the 11 people killed in the boat strike. But officials said the departure of a drug vessel from Venezuela makes Nicolás Maduro, Venezuela’s dictatorial president labeled by the White House as a top drug kingpin, indirectly responsible.

“Let there be no doubt, Nicolás Maduro is an indicted drug trafficker in the United States, and he’s a fugitive of American justice,” Marco Rubio, Trump’s secretary of State and national security advisor, said on a tour of the region Thursday, citing a grand jury indictment in the Southern District of New York.

U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio speaks during a news conference Wednesday in Mexico City.

(Hector Vivas / Getty Images)

The president’s war on drug cartels will continue, Rubio said, adding that regional governments “will help us find these people and blow them up.”

Maduro has warned the strike indicates that Washington seeks regime change in Caracas. The Venezuelan military flew two aircraft near a U.S. vessel in international waters Thursday night, prompting an angry response from Pentagon officials and Trump to direct his Defense secretary, Pete Hegseth, to “do what you want to do” in response.

“Despite how dangerous this performance could be, because of its political consequences, it can’t be taken seriously as a drug policy,” said Lina Britto, an expert on Latin America and the Caribbean at Northwestern University with a focus on the history of the drug trade. “It lacks rigorousness in the analysis of how drug trafficking operates in the hemisphere.”

Most drugs entering the U.S. homeland from South America arrive in shipping containers, submarines and more efficient modes of transportation than speedboats — and primarily come through the Pacific, not the Caribbean, Britto said.

Trump has flirted with military strikes on drug cartels since the start of his second term, working with Mexico’s president, Claudia Sheinbaum, to coordinate drone strikes over Mexican territory for surveillance of cartel activity.

But Sheinbaum has ruled out the use of force against cartels, or the deployment of U.S. forces within Mexico to combat them, warning that U.S. military action would violate Mexican sovereignty and upend collaboration between the two close-knit trade and security partners.

In comparison, Venezuela offers Trump a cleaner opportunity to test the use of force against drug cartels, with diplomatic ties between the two governments at a nadir. But a war with Maduro over drugs could create unexpected problems for the Trump administration, setting off a rare military conflict in a placid region and fueling further instability in a country that, over the last decade, already set off the world’s largest refugee crisis.

Ryan Berg, director of the Americas Program and head of the Future of Venezuela Initiative at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, said that Trump’s use of foreign terrorist designations changes the rules of engagement in ways that allow for action “where law enforcement solutions failed in the past.”

“What we are witnessing is a paradigm shift in real time,” Berg said. “Many of Latin America’s most significant criminal organizations are now designated foreign terrorist organizations. The administration is demonstrating that this is not only rhetorical.”

But Paul Gootenberg, a professor at Stony Brook University and author of “Andean Cocaine: The Making of a Global Drug,” characterized Trump’s military operation as a “simplistic” approach to complex social problems.

“This is more a performative attack on the Venezuelan regime than a serious attempt at drug policy,” Gootenberg said.

“Militarized drug policy is nothing new — it was tried and intensified in various ways from the mid-1980s through 2000s, oftentimes under U.S. Southern Command,” he added. “The whole range and levels of ‘war on drugs’ was a long, unmitigated policy failure, according to the vast, vast majority of drug experts.”

Times staff writer Ana Ceballos contributed to this report.

Guitar ace Slash rose to prominence with an unmistakable look as the anchor of Guns N’ Roses. A true rock ’n’ roll persona, the artist was once rarely seen without a drooping cigarette and a top hat, the latter of which could barely contain his face-engulfing curly hair.

Now, as of this week, he’s a theme park character at Universal Studios Hollywood.

• Share via Close extra sharing options

Slash, or, rather, a skeletal facsimile of him played by an actor, will be available for photo opportunities and meet and greets at Universal’s Halloween Horror Nights, which runs most evenings through Nov. 2. For the musician, born Saul Hudson, it’s a dream fulfilled. A lifelong devotee of theme parks and coasters, Slash has been closely aligned with Halloween Horror Nights since 2014, when he first began scoring music for its haunted houses.

And the character, he says, was partly his idea.

“I went to them and said, ‘Hey, can we have one of those stilt walkers?’” says Slash, referring to the larger-than-life lurkers who haunt guests during the festivities. “That would be really cool. So they came up with one and he looks pretty menacing.”

Slash enjoys the idea of being a towering, sometimes intimidating presence. That’s clear when he’s on stage as the attention-demanding cornerstone of numerous bands. And he likes to scare, as evidenced by his own horror-focused film production company, BerserkerGang. But get Slash one-on-one, and he really just wants to geek out on his favorite theme park rides.

Universal Studios has released a second vinyl compilation of music Slash has composed for Halloween Horror Nights over the years.

(Gabriella Angotti-Jones / For The Times)

We talked to Slash about a week before Halloween Horror Nights opened from Orlando, Fla., where he was holed up recording an album with his band the Conspirators. That work, he says, will be released in 2027 due to planned 2026 touring obligations with Guns N’ Roses. He lamented that he wouldn’t have time to visit Walt Disney World and Universal’s new Epic Universe. The latter Florida park is home to a monsters-themed land that Slash said he was eager to see.

His love of theme parks runs deep, and is, of course, nonpartisan.

“I’m a real Disney head,” he says, joking that such a declaration may not make his Universal partners happy. He says he first visited Disneyland in the early 1970s. “I really can’t put into words what makes it so magical, but there is a definite thing there that you feel when you’re actually there. I’ve loved it since I was a little kid.”

“But I love theme parks in general,” he continues. “I love roller coasters. I love that carnival energy going on. I love arcades. I love everything about that festive outdoor thing, and I’ve never grown out of it.”

Arguably, he’s grown into it.

Halloween season means it’s time for Universa’s Halloween Horror Nights, which runs through early November at the theme park.

(Gabriella Angotti-Jones / For The Times)

Slash has a deep fascination with Universal Studios, made clear by his knowledge of how the park’s backlot tram trek — officially designated as the World-Famous Studio Tour — has shifted over the years. And as a lifelong horror fan who speaks nostalgically of watching 1970s films such as “The Wicker Man,” “The Omen” and “The Exorcist” with his parents, Halloween Horror Nights is especially dear to Slash’s heart.

Slash was first drawn to the event in 2013 due to a haunted house themed around the music and images of Black Sabbath. The artist was given a tour of Horror Nights by John Murdy, who has long overseen the West Coast edition of the festivities.

“I was so blown away,” Slash says. “I was elated. I remember physically making giddy sounds. The whole thing, from the stilt walkers to the invisible bush figures who would hide in the bushes and were camouflaged, it was unbelievable. I wanted to be involved.”

Murdy was open to the idea. “The first time I walked into his personal recording studio, the first thing I noticed was a huge print of ‘Bride of Frankenstein,’ our 1935 classic, hanging on the wall. And I was like, ‘Oh, we have something in common.’”

Halloween Horror Nights is filled with haunted houses and scare actors.

(Gabriella Angotti-Jones / For The Times)

Slash would go on to write the music for six Halloween Horror Nights houses centered around Universal’s classic monster characters. This year, he’s returned to Horror Nights with a score set to a relaunch of an original, Depression-era set maze, “Scarecrow.” Musically, it’s a departure for the artist. “Scarecrow” includes a Slash-composed cover of traditional folk number “O Death.”

“We started talking ‘Scarecrow,’ and as pure coincidence, he said, ‘Oh, I just learned the banjo and the dobro,’” Murdy says. “He was learning all these traditional Appalachian instruments, and I said, ‘That’s awesome because my house is set in the Dust Bowl.’”

That Slash has been dipping into more Americana-influenced music isn’t a complete surprise. His 2024 solo effort, “Orgy of the Damned,” leans blues for instance, including a blistering, rootsy take on early Fleetwood Mac rocker “Oh Well” with country star Chris Stapleton. Selections from Slash’s Halloween Horror Nights work, minus the new “Scarecrow” music, will again be available on a limited-run vinyl sold at Universal Studios during Halloween Horror Nights.

Slash is featured this year as a “character” at Halloween Horror Nights, a skeletal, stilt-walking interpretation of the artist.

(Gabriella Angotti-Jones / For The Times)

“As soon as they gave me the concept, my brain went into that realm — I could pull out my pedal steel, and do an Americana-type approach, as opposed to the goth, kind of pseudo-metal thing I was doing for all the Universal Monsters,” Slash says.

Slash has become such a Halloween Horror Nights fixture that this year will feature a bar centered around the artist, one complete with a mini top hat as a dessert. When asked how he feels to be immortalized as a sculpted sponge cake with coconut lime mousse, he doesn’t flinch.

“I wish I could explain in words how much I love that kind of stuff,” Slash says.

He is, after all, a theme park regular, although his favorite rides are found a few miles from Universal Studios in Anaheim. “I love the Haunted Mansion at Disneyland. That and Pirates of the Caribbean will always be my two favorite rides,” he says. “The attention to detail and the creative element and everything that is going on with those old Disney rides is still, to this day, second to none.”

The mark of any true theme park aficionado is an appreciation of slow-moving, old-school dark rides, attractions that are set in darkened show buildings and often filled with an assortment of vignettes. Slash singles out Universal’s “The Secret Life of Pets: Off the Leash” as another highlight.

“I went with my stepdaughter and we went on that ride and it’s great,” Slash says. “The ‘Pets’ one is really sweet. I’m a big animal guy. We love our cats, so that was a lot of fun.”

Crowds lined up to enter “Scarecrow,” a haunted house at Halloween Horror Nights featuing music by Slash.

(Gabriella Angotti-Jones / For The Times)

And before Slash can finish his next thought, he starts gushing about a recent trip to Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates, where he visited Ferrari World, home to a number of celebrated roller coasters.

“I can talk about this stuff all day,” he says.

Aug. 22 (UPI) — U.S. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth has authorized members of the National Guard who are patrolling Washington, D.C., to begin carrying weapons on duty, a Defense official said.

The new authority is expected to become effective in coming days, the person told ABC News, CNN and Fox News.

The decision paves the way for the nearly 2,000 troops mobilized in the district to expand their operations, including possible security patrols in neighborhoods that struggle with crime.

“At the direction of the Secretary of Defense, [Joint Task Force]-DC members supporting the mission to lower the crime rate in our nation’s capital will soon be on mission with their service-issued weapons, consistent with their mission and training,” the official said.

President Donald Trump visited with National Guard personnel Thursday and suggested the military would be playing a larger role in law enforcement in the city.

“You got to be strong, you got to be tough,” Trump told Guard personnel at the U.S. Park Police Anacostia Operations Facility. “You got to do your job. Whatever it takes to do your job.”

Though they will carry weapons, they will not be able to make arrests. They will still be under orders to temporarily detain people if needed before transferring them to law enforcement as soon as possible.

“The D.C. National Guard remains committed to safeguarding the District of Columbia and serving those who live, work, and visit the District,” the official added.

The move comes as other states’ National Guard members have begun arriving in Washington to be in-processed to help the D.C. National Guard.

More than 1,900 troops from multiple states have been called up as part of the mission, including from West Virginia, South Carolina, Mississippi, Ohio, Louisiana, and Tennessee, according to a release from JTF-DC on Thursday.

In “The Hunting Wives,” a brightly configured murder mystery cum cartoon sex opera premiering Monday on Netflix, Brittany Snow plays Sophie O’Neil, newly arrived from Boston with husband Graham (Evan Jonigkeit) and prop young son to fictional Maple Brook, Texas, a rich people’s town somewhere in the vicinity of Dallas. Graham is an architect, seemingly — at one point he will say, “Soph, you gotta check out this joinery,” which, in the three episodes out for review, is as specific as that will get — who has come to work for rich person Jed Banks (Dermot Mulroney) to build “the new Banks HQ.” What will happen in there is not said.

The O’Neils step into this world by way of a fundraiser at which Banks, who wants to be governor, is making a speech in support of the National Rifle Assn., highlighting the need for guns for “good people” to fend off “all sorts of evil sumbitches” and the “personas malos keep pouring in every day” across the border. This is as much of a platform as he will bother to have; plotwise, the point is that running for office may expose his swinging private life to public scrutiny.

Over the course of the party, we meet the major players: Jill (Katie Lowes) is married to Rev. Clint (Jason Davis), who runs the local megachurch; her son Brad (George Ferrier) — who would be named Brad — is an unpleasant slab of basketball-playing meat who is seeing, which is to say, trying to sleep with Abby (Madison Wolfe), a nice girl from the wrong side of the tracks. (Jill is against the relationship; Abby’s mother, Starr, played by Chrissy Metz, has her own reservations.) Callie (Jaime Ray Newman), second among the eponymous wives, is married to Sheriff Jonny (Branton Box); I’m not sure whether Jonny is his first or last name, but this does seem the kind of place where the sheriff would be known by his first. Supplementary wives Monae (Joyce Glenn) and Taylor (Alexandria DeBerry) are just there to make up the numbers.

Most important is Margo Banks (Malin Akerman), whom Sophie encounters in a bathroom where she has gone to take a Xanax for her social anxiety, and who, within seconds and not for the last time, is casually topless. Margo has no social anxiety.

She seizes on Sophie as fresh blood, or from some genuine connection, or because she recognizes in the newcomer the sort of person who needs a person like her, someone Margo can productively dominate to their mutual advantage. Margo immediately declares they’ll be besties — creating a rift with Callie, the current occupant of that role, who, radiating jealousy at every pore, is determined to get between them.

Sophie, Graham seems proud to announce, was once “a bit of a wild child … a party girl” who became a career woman — a political PR operative — and, for the last seven years, a full-time mother. He has a lightly controlling, “for your own good” manner, keeping her from drinking or driving — there’ll be a reason for that, you’ll have guessed — but before long, she will drink, and she will drive. “Two rules,” says Margo, getting her behind the wheel. “Trust me and do everything I say.”

Drafted into Margo’s world, Sophie is soon shooting skeet, and then, having bought her own guns, wild boar. I cite again the Chekhov dictum to the effect that a gun in the first act ought to go off in the second, but there are so many about here, and our attention so significantly drawn to them, it would be a shock if some didn’t fire — the only questions being which and when and whose, pointed at what or whom.

Developed by Rebecca Perry Cutter (“Hightown”) from May Cobb’s 2021 novel of the same name, the series offers a light dusting of political references — “deplorables,” Marjorie Taylor Greene, no abortion clinics “left to bomb,” negative mentions of feminism and liberals — that might as easily been left off in light of the insular fantasyland within which “The Hunting Wives” operates. (Did J.R. Ewing ever express a political opinion?) Given the context — liberal Northerners camped among conservative Southerners — one might have expected a “Stepford Wives” scenario, but this is something different. Within, or exploiting, their sociocultural limits (“We don’t work, we wife,” says Monae proudly), the women party heartily while the men, even when nominally powerful, come across as comparatively bland, uninteresting and distracted. Graham, who is very nice, can seem positively dim; “Take my wife, please,” he’ll happily joke when Margo rides up on a jet ski to spirit Sophie away from a family day at the lake.

The characters are types, but the actors fill them out well, and the dynamic between Margo and Sophie really is … dynamic. Margo is intriguing because she’s hard to figure. Like Sophie, she has a hidden past — when a mysterious figure at the local roadhouse (Jullian Dulce Vida) calls her Mandy, it makes her atypically nervous because, obviously, she was once called Mandy. She lies to her husband; she’s having sex with Brad, which just seems like bad taste. But there’s something authentic and genuine about Margo magnified by Akerman’s entrancing performance. Margo is a temptress, the devil on Sophie’s shoulder — but maybe the angel too.

Lest we forget, there’s a murder, which opens the show in a flash forward; the series catches up with it by the end of Episode 3. (It brings in Karen Rodriguez as Det. Salazar, which promises good things.) There’s also a briefly mentioned missing girl, which will certainly tie in somehow. But with only three episodes out of eight seen, it’s impossible to say where it’s all going — unless you’ve read the book, I suppose, but even then, you never know. What’s clear is that there’ll be more secrets to reveal, with skeletons tumbling out of every closet. And these are big houses, with plenty of storage.

Pam Bondi says the proposed change will give her discretion over who can own firearms, in a move opposed by gun control groups.

Washington, DC – United States Attorney General Pam Bondi has begun a process to make it easier for individuals with criminal convictions to own guns.

The move on Friday comes amid a wider push by the administration of President Donald Trump to make good on campaign promises to gun rights groups, which criticise restrictions on firearm ownership as violations of the Constitution’s Second Amendment. Trump ordered a review of government gun policies in February.

Gun control advocates, meanwhile, have voiced concerns over the administration’s ability to adequately assess which convicted individuals would not pose a public safety risk.

In a statement released on Friday, Bondi said individuals with serious criminal convictions have been “disenfranchised from exercising the right to keep and bear arms — a right every bit as constitutionally enshrined as the right to vote, the right to free speech, and the right to free exercise of religion — irrespective of whether they actually pose a threat”.

“No longer,” she added.

Under the plan, Bondi seeks to return the power to determine which individuals convicted of crimes can own firearms directly to her office.

That exemption process has currently been overseen by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. However, Congress has, for decades, used its spending approval powers to stem the processing of exemption requests.

The Department of Justice said the proposed change “will provide citizens whose firearm rights are currently under legal disability with an avenue to restore those rights, while keeping firearms out of the hands of dangerous criminals and illegal aliens”.

The US attorney general would have “ultimate discretion to grant relief”, according to the department.

It added that, “absent extraordinary circumstances”, certain individuals would be “presumptively ineligible” for the restoration of their gun rights. They include “violent felons, registered sex offenders, and illegal aliens”.

The plan was outlined in a “proposed rule” submitted to the Federal Register on Friday. It will undergo a final public comment period before it is adopted.

In Friday’s statement, US Pardon Attorney Edward Martin Jr said that his team was already developing a “landing page with a sophisticated, user-friendly platform for Americans petitioning for the return of their gun rights, which will make the process easier for them”.

When details of Bondi’s plan initially emerged in March, the gun control group Brady was among those who voiced opposition.

“If and when gun rights are restored to an individual, it needs to be through a robust and thoughtful system that minimizes the risk to public safety,” the group’s president, Kris Brown, said in a statement.

She added that Trump’s restoration of gun rights to those who were convicted — and later pardoned — for their role in the storming of the US Capitol on January 6, 2021, raised concerns over how the administration would exercise its discretion.

“This would be a unilateral system to give gun rights back to those who are dangerous and high risk, and we will all be at greater risk of gun violence,” she said.

As the manager of Guns N’ Roses during the band’s debauched heyday, Alan Niven has no shortage of colorful stories.

The LAPD fetching Axl Rose from his West Hollywood condo and bringing him directly to the stage so Guns N’ Roses could open for the Rolling Stones at the L.A. Coliseum.

Slash going off script and taking a Winnebago for a joyride — and then standing in rush hour traffic and brandishing a bottle of Jack Daniels — while filming the “Welcome to the Jungle” music video.

Guitarist Izzy Stradlin carrying a $750,000 cashier’s check that Niven had to take from him and hide in his own shoe for safekeeping during a raucous trip to New Orleans.

About 15 minutes into a thoughtful Zoom conversation, the garrulous Niven poses a question of his own: “Why was I managing Guns N’ Roses?”

Given what he describes, it is a good question.

“Because nobody else would do it,” he says, noting that the band’s former management firm “could not get away fast enough” from the group. “No one else would deal with them. Literally, I was not bottom of the barrel, darling — I was underneath the barrel. It was desperation.”

Case in point: his very first Guns N’ Roses band meeting. On the way into the house, Niven says, he passed by a broken toilet and “one of the better-known strippers from [the] Sunset Strip.” Stradlin and Slash were the only ones who’d shown up. Once the meeting started, Stradlin nodded out at the table and Slash fed “a little white bunny rabbit” to a massive pet python.

“And I’m sitting there going, ‘Keep your cool. This may be a test. Just go with it and get through it.’ But that was my first GNR meeting.”

These kinds of stranger-than-fiction anecdotes dominate Niven’s wildly entertaining (and occasionally jaw-dropping) new book, “Sound N’ Fury: Rock N’ Roll Stories.” With brutal honesty and vivid imagery, he describes the challenges of wrangling Guns N’ Roses before and after the band’s 1987 debut, “Appetite for Destruction.” These include mundane business matters (like shooting music videos on a budget) and more stressful moments, such as navigating Rose’s mercurial moods and ensuring that band members didn’t take drugs on international flights.

But “Sound N’ Fury” also focuses extensively on Niven’s time managing the bluesy hard rock band Great White, whose lead singer, the late Jack Russell, had his own struggles with severe addiction. To complicate the entanglement, Niven also produced and co-wrote dozens of the band’s songs, including hits “Rock Me” and “House of Broken Love.”

Niven mixes delightful bits of insider gossip into these harrowing moments: firing for bad behavior future superstar director Michael Bay from filming Great White’s “Call It Rock ’n’ Roll” music video; Berlin’s Terri Nunn sending President Reagan an 8-by-10 photo with a saucy message; clandestinely buying Ozzy Osbourne drinks on an airplane behind Sharon Osbourne’s back.

And his lifelong passion for championing promising artists also comes through, including his recent advocacy for guitarist Chris Buck of Cardinal Black.

Unsurprisingly, Niven says people had been asking him for “decades” to write a book (“If I had $1 for every time somebody asked me that, I’d be living in a castle in Scotland”). He resisted because of his disdain for rock ‘n’ roll books: “To me, they all have the same story arc and only the names change.”

A magazine editor paid him such a huge compliment that he finally felt compelled to write one.

“He said, ‘I wish I could write like you,’ ” Niven says. “When he said that, it put an obligation on me that I couldn’t shake. Now I had to be intelligent about it and go, ‘Well, you hate rock ‘n’ roll books, so what are you going to do?’ ”

Niven’s solution was to eschew the “usual boring, chronological history” and structure “Sound N’ Fury” more like a collection of vignettes, all told with his usual dry sense of humor and razor-sharp wit.

“If you tell the stories well enough, they might be illuminating,” he says. “I saw it more as a record than I did a book. And you hope that somebody will drop the needle in at the beginning of the record and stay with the record until it’s over.

“For me, dialogue was key — and, fortunately, they were all more f— up than I was,” he adds. “So my memory of the dialogue is pretty good. … There’s some dialogue exchanges in there that imprinted themselves for as long as I live.”

One of the artists that doesn’t get much ink in “Sound N’ Fury” is another group known for its hedonistic rock ‘n’ roll behavior, Mötley Crüe.

“The fact that people are still interested in what you’ve got to say about things that happened 30 years ago is almost unimaginable,” Alan Niven says.

(ECW Press)

Niven promoted and facilitated distribution of the independent release of the band’s 1981 debut, “Too Fast for Love” and helped connect Mötley Crüe with Elektra Records. He doesn’t mince words in the book or in conversation about the band, saying he feels “very ambivalent about the small role I played in the progression of Mötley Crüe because I know who they are. I know what they’ve done to various people. I know how they’ve treated certain numbers of women. And I am not proud of contributing to that.

“And on top of that, someone needs to turn around and say, ‘It’s a thin catalog that they produced,’ in terms of what they produced as music,” he continues. “There’s not much there and it’s certainly not intellectually or spiritually illuminating in any way, shape or form. They are brutish entertainers, and that’s it.”

Still, Niven says he didn’t hesitate to include the stories that he did in “Sound N’ Fury,” and by explanation notes a conversation he had with journalist Mick Wall.

“He sent me an email the other day saying, ‘Welcome to the club of authors,’ ” he recalls. “And I’m going, ‘Yeah, right. You’ve been doing it all your life. I’m just an enthusiastic amateur.’ And he said, ‘Welcome to the club — and by the way, it’s cursed.’”

Niven pondered what that meant. “A little light bulb went on in my head, and I went, ‘Ah, yes, the curse is truth,’ because a lot of people don’t want to hear the truth and don’t want to hear what truly happened.

“There are people in the Axl cult who won’t be happy. There will be one or two other people who won’t be happy, but there’s no point in recording anything unless it’s got a truth to it.”

Niven says when the book was done, he didn’t necessarily gain any surprising insights or new perspectives on what he had documented.

“The fact that people are still interested in what you’ve got to say about things that happened 30 years ago is almost unimaginable,” he says. “I never used to do interviews back in the day. But at this point, it would just be graceless and rank bad manners not to respond.

“Occasionally people go, ‘Oh, he’s bitter,’” Niven continues. “No, I am not. I don’t think the book comes off as bitter. Many times I’ve said it was actually a privilege to go through that period of time because I didn’t have to spend my life saying to myself, ‘I wonder what it would have been like to have had a No. 1. To have had a successful band.’ Well, I found out firsthand.”

Niven stresses firmly that management was more than a job to him.

“It was my way of life,” he says. “People who go into management and think it’s a job that starts maybe at about half past 10 in the morning once you’ve had your coffee and then you check out at six, they’re not true managers.

“They’re not in management for the right reasons,” he adds. “Rock ‘n’ roll is a way of f— life. It’s 24/7, 365. And that was my approach to it.”

BARCELONA, Spain — Protesters used water pistols against unsuspecting tourists in Barcelona and on the Spanish island of Mallorca on Sunday as demonstrators marched to demand a rethink of an economic model they believe is fueling a housing crunch and erasing the character of their hometowns.

The marches were part of the first coordinated effort by activists concerned with the ills of overtourism across southern Europe’s top destinations. While several thousand rallied on Mallorca in the biggest gathering of the day, hundreds more gathered in other Spanish cities, as well as in Venice and Portugal’s capital, Lisbon.

“The squirt guns are to bother the tourists a bit,” Andreu Martínez said in Barcelona with a chuckle after spritzing a couple seated at an outdoor cafe. “Barcelona has been handed to the tourists. This is a fight to give Barcelona back to its residents.”

Martínez, a 42-year-old administrative assistant, is one of a growing number of residents who are convinced that tourism has gone too far in the city of 1.7 million people. Barcelona hosted 15.5 million visitors last year with such attractions as Antoni Gaudí’s La Sagrada Familia basilica and the Las Ramblas promenade.

Martínez says his rent has risen more than 30% as more apartments in his neighborhood are rented to tourists for short-term stays. He said there is a related effect of traditional stores being replaced by businesses catering to tourists, such as souvenir shops, burger joints and bubble tea spots.

“Our lives, as lifelong residents of Barcelona, are coming to an end,” he said. “We are being pushed out systematically.”

Around 5,000 people gathered in Palma, the capital of Mallorca, with some toting water guns as well and chanting, “Everywhere you look, all you see are tourists.” The tourists who were targeted by water blasts laughed it off. The Balearic island is a favorite for British and German sun-seekers. It has seen housing costs skyrocket as homes are diverted to the short-term rental market.

Hundreds more marched in Granada, in southern Spain, and in the northern city of San Sebastián, as well as the island of Ibiza.

In Venice, a couple of dozen protesters unfurled a banner calling for a halt to new hotel beds in the lagoon city in front of two recently completed structures, one in the popular tourist destination’s historic center where activists say the last resident, an elderly woman, was kicked out last year.

‘That’s lovely’

Protesters in Barcelona blew whistles and held up homemade signs saying, “One more tourist, one less resident.” They stuck stickers with a drawing of water pistols on the doors of hotels and hostels that said “Citizen Self-Defense,” in Catalan, and “Tourist Go Home,” in English.

There was tension when the march stopped in front of a large hostel, where a group emptied their water guns at two workers positioned in the entrance. They also set off firecrackers next to the hostel and opened a can of pink smoke. One worker spat at the protesters as he slammed the hostel’s doors.

American tourists Wanda and Bill Dorozenski were walking along Barcelona’s main luxury shopping boulevard where the protest started. They received a squirt or two, but she said it was actually refreshing given the 83-degree weather.

“That’s lovely, thank you, sweetheart,” Wanda said to the squirter. “I am not going to complain. These people are feeling something to them that is very personal, and is perhaps destroying some areas” of the city, she said.

There were also many marchers with water pistols who didn’t fire at bystanders, using them instead to cool themselves.

Crackdown on Airbnb

Cities across the world are struggling with how to cope with mass tourism and a boom in short-term rental platforms, like Airbnb, but perhaps nowhere has surging discontent been so evident as in Spain, where protesters in Barcelona first took to firing squirt guns at tourists during a protest last summer.

There has also been a confluence of the pro-housing and anti-tourism struggles in Spain, whose 48 million residents welcomed a record 94 million international visitors last year. When thousands marched through the streets of the capital city of Madrid in April, some held homemade signs saying “Get Airbnb out of our neighborhoods.”

Spanish authorities are striving to show they hear the public outcry while not hurting an industry that contributes 12% of the gross domestic product.

Last month, Spain’s government ordered Airbnb to remove almost 66,000 holiday rentals from the platform that it said had violated local rules.

Spain’s Consumer Rights Minister Pablo Bustinduy told the Associated Press shortly after the crackdown on Airbnb that the tourism sector “cannot jeopardize the constitutional rights of the Spanish people,” which enshrines their right to housing and well-being. Carlos Cuerpo, the economy minister, said in a separate interview that the government is aware it must tackle the unwanted side effects of mass tourism.

The boldest move was made by Barcelona’s town hall, which stunned Airbnb and other services that help rent properties to tourists by announcing last year the elimination of all 10,000 short-term rental licenses in the city by 2028.

That sentiment was back in force on Sunday, as people held up signs saying “Your Airbnb was my home.”

‘Taking away housing’

The short-term rental industry contends that it is being treated unfairly.

“I think a lot of our politicians have found an easy scapegoat to blame for the inefficiencies of their policies in terms of housing and tourism over the last 10, 15, 20 years,” Airbnb’s general director for Spain and Portugal, Jaime Rodríguez de Santiago, recently told the AP.

That argument either hasn’t trickled down to the residents of Barcelona or isn’t resonating.

Txema Escorsa, a teacher in Barcelona, doesn’t just oppose Airbnb in his home city; he has ceased to use it even when traveling elsewhere, out of principle.

“In the end, you realize that this is taking away housing from people,” he said.

Wilson writes for the Associated Press. AP videojournalist Hernán Múñoz in Barcelona and AP writer Colleen Barry in Venice contributed to this report.

California resident shipped at least three containers of guns bound for North Korea, according to prosecutors.

A Chinese man living illegally in the United States has pleaded guilty to exporting guns, ammunition and other military items to North Korea at the direction of Pyongyang, the US Department of Justice has said.

Shenghua Wen, of Ontario, California, admitted to one count of conspiracy to violate the International Emergency Economic Powers Act – a 1977 law that empowers the president to restrict commerce with countries on national security grounds – and one count of acting as an illegal agent of a foreign government, the Justice Department said on Monday.

Wen, 42, shipped at least three containers of guns bound for North Korea in 2023, one of which arrived in Nampo, North Korea, via Hong Kong, according to prosecutors.

To facilitate the scheme, Wen bought a firearms business in Houston, Texas, and used false paperwork to conceal the contents of his shipping containers, according to prosecutors.

Wen, who was arrested in December, also allegedly bought approximately 60,000 rounds of 9mm ammunition and obtained “sensitive technology”, including a chemical threat identification device, for shipment to North Korea.

Wen was allegedly directed to procure the weapons and sensitive goods by North Korean officials he met at the North Korean Embassy in China before entering the US on a student visa in 2012.

Wen was allegedly transferred about $2m to carry out the scheme.

“Wen admitted that at all relevant times he knew that it was illegal to ship firearms, ammunition, and sensitive technology to North Korea. He also admitted to never having the required licenses to export ammunition, firearms, and the above-described devices to North Korea,” the US Attorney’s Office for the Central District of California said in a press release.

“He further admitted to acting at the direction of North Korean government officials and that he had not provided notification to the Attorney General of the United States that he was acting in the United States at the direction and control of North Korea as required by law.”

During questioning by the FBI, Wen said he believed the North Korean government wanted the weapons and ammunition to prepare for an attack against South Korea, according to a criminal complaint filed in September.

Wen is due to face court for sentencing in August.

He faces a maximum penalty of 20 years in prison for violating the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, and up to 10 years for acting as an illegal agent of a foreign government.

Reporting from Washington — Judge Brett Kavanaugh on Wednesday defended his broad view of gun rights and skepticism of federal regulatory agencies, but left uncertain his position on abortion and refused to detail his views on executive power, including whether a president can be ordered to answer questions in a criminal investigation.

Facing senators during a second day of his confirmation hearing that began in the morning and stretched well into the night, President Trump’s Supreme Court nominee proved adept at giving lengthy answers without fully revealing his views on matters of controversy.

“You’re learning to filibuster,” Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) told him when he steered around her question on whether the president is shielded from being investigated or questioned while in office.

As the evening wore on, none of the exchanges seemed to have changed the vote count in favor of Kavanaugh’s narrow confirmation. At only one point during the hearing — faced with questions about his knowledge of emails allegedly stolen from Democratic senators during the George W. Bush administration — did the otherwise well-prepared nominee appear flustered.

On presidential power, in particular, Kavanaugh seemed to come armed with a well-honed set of responses to questions about his previous writings.

In law review articles in 1998 and 2009, Kavanaugh said the president “should be excused from some of the burdens of ordinary citizenship while serving in office” and should not be subject to investigations or questioning. The “Constitution seems to dictate” that Congress, not a special prosecutor, should investigate a president for lawbreaking, he wrote.

But when pressed repeatedly by Democrats on Wednesday, Kavanaugh contended that he has never taken a position on whether the Constitution allows for indicting or investigating a sitting president for criminal wrongdoing. He did say a president could be tried and convicted after leaving office, whether at the end of a term or because of impeachment.

“I don’t think anyone thinks of immunity” for a president, he said.

The issue has taken on new significance because Trump is caught up in special counsel Robert S. Mueller III’s investigation of Russian interference in the 2016 election and could be called to answer questions from a grand jury.

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Charles E. Grassley (R-Iowa), joining other Republicans in trying to help the nominee articulate his views, asked Kavanaugh “whether you have any trouble ruling against a president who appointed you.”

“You’re correct. No one is above the law in our constitutional system,” Kavanaugh said. “The executive branch is subject to the law, subject to the court system.”

Kavanaugh passed up a chance to show his independence from Trump when Sen. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.) asked him whether he thought it was appropriate for the president to attack Atty. Gen. Jeff Sessions for his prosecutors’ indictments of two GOP congressmen — Reps. Chris Collins of New York and Duncan Hunter of Alpine — ahead of the November election. Trump said it might endanger their reelection, ignoring the serious criminal charges against the men. Kavanaugh declined to offer his opinion. He also rebuffed a request from one Democratic senator that he recuse himself from any future cases involving the Mueller investigation of Trump and his campaign.

When Feinstein asked, “Can a sitting a president be required to respond to a subpoena?” Kavanaugh would not answer. “That’s a hypothetical question,” he said. “I can’t give you an answer to a hypothetical question.”

Kavanaugh did endorse as correct the Supreme Court’s 1974 ruling in United States vs. Nixon, which required President Nixon to turn over the Watergate tapes. It was “one of the greatest moments in American judicial history,” he said.

But he refused to give a similar endorsement for the 1973 ruling in Roe vs. Wade, which established a woman’s right to abortion. Feinstein tried to get him to say whether the ruling was correct; Kavanaugh said only that it was entitled to respect as a precedent.

Most legal experts predict that Kavanaugh, if confirmed, will provide the fifth conservative vote on the court to at least restrict abortion rights, if not overturn Roe. During his campaign, Trump promised to appoint only judges who would vote to overturn the abortion ruling.

But Kavanaugh seemed eager to raise some doubts about those predictions.

“I understand the significance on the issue,” he said Wednesday. “I don’t live in a bubble. I live in the real world.”

Kavanaugh noted several times that the 1973 abortion decision had been repeatedly affirmed, and that a 1992 ruling in Planned Parenthood vs. Casey, which affirmed much of Roe, in effect created a “precedent on precedent.”

And he made an analogy to the late Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist’s decision not to overturn the so-called Miranda rights disclosure requirement for criminal suspects. Rehnquist had long opposed the Miranda ruling, but then decided it was too late to overturn it, he noted. It’s also true, however, that Rehnquist found ways to narrow the ruling’s impact.

Kavanaugh’s remarks about Roe may have been largely directed at two female Republican senators, who support abortion rights and whose votes will be key to his confirmation. Sens. Susan Collins of Maine and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska have not announced how they will vote.

But Kavanaugh gave no assurances about how he might vote, and nothing he said committed him to any particular outcome. In the past, some Supreme Court nominees have spoken about the importance of respecting precedents, and then once on the court voted to overturn them.

Feinstein, for one, seem unsatisfied. “We can’t accept vague promises from Brett Kavanaugh when women’s reproductive freedom is at stake,” she said on Twitter.

Live chat: Brett Kavanaugh confirmation hearings in the Senate »

Last fall, Kavanaugh was involved in a dispute over whether a migrant teenager in Texas could be released from immigration custody to obtain an abortion. A federal judge cleared the way, but Kavanaugh wrote a 2-1 decision siding with Trump administration lawyers and blocking the abortion for up to 10 more days. The full appeals court intervened and overturned his ruling.

In dissent, Kavanaugh faulted his more liberal colleagues for wrongly creating a “new right for unlawful immigrant minors in U.S. government detention to obtain abortion on demand.”

He defended that ruling Wednesday, stressing that the girl was 17 and not yet an adult. “If she had been an adult, she would have had a right to obtain an abortion immediately,” he told Sen. Richard J. Durbin (D-Ill.).

Durbin rejected the distinction, noting that the teenager had appeared before a state judge in Texas who decided she was sufficiently mature to make the decision on her own.

On guns, Kavanaugh stuck fast to his support of a broad 2nd Amendment right to possess many types of weapons, including a semiautomatic rifle with a large magazine of ammunition.

He dissented alone in 2011 when the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit upheld a D.C. ordinance that prohibited semiautomatic “assault weapons.”

Three years before, the Supreme Court in District of Columbia vs. Heller struck down a law prohibiting possession of a handgun at home and established a 2nd Amendment individual right for gun ownership.

Feinstein asked why Kavanaugh believed semiautomatic weapons could not be banned, when appellate judges across the country had upheld such restrictions.

“I had to follow precedent,” Kavanaugh replied. He said the late Justice Antonin Scalia said the 2nd Amendment did not protect weapons that are “dangerous and unusual,” and semiautomatic rifles are not unusual, he said. They are “widely possessed” by millions of gun owners, he said.

Kavanaugh did not back off, even when Feinstein spoke about the wave of mass shootings at schools using assault weapons. He stuck to the same position later when pressed by Democratic Sen. Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut.

On the question of presidential power, Kavanaugh said that “no one is above the law,” a standard response by nominees.

But he declined to answer questions about whether Trump could pardon himself or pardon someone in exchange for an agreement not to testify against him, saying those were “hypothetical” questions that he couldn’t answer without potentially prejudging issues that might come before the courts.

The one issue that seemed to throw the nominee came from Sen. Patrick J. Leahy (D-Vt.), who confronted him with what the senator said was evidence that a Republican staff member during George W. Bush’s administration had supplied Kavanaugh — who was then helping to confirm judges — with information that had been stolen from Democratic files. Leahy said the information detailed what the senator planned to ask nominees during confirmation hearings.

Leahy, whose emails were stolen, quizzed Kavanaugh on whether he knowingly used the stolen documents, noting that Kavanaugh was included in an email chain discussing the information. Kavanaugh said he did not recall. “I don’t really have a specific recollection of any of this,” he told lawmakers.

Leahy said later Wednesday that Grassley agreed to release documents related to the materials he said were stolen, which are now confined only to lawmakers on the committee.

Grassley’s office didn’t make the same pledge. Spokesman Taylor Foy said Grassley would “do his best to accommodate this last-minute request,” adding that waiving the classification would require input from the White House and former President Bush.

Some of the most robust exchanges came near the end from Sen. Kamala Harris (D-Calif.), who has developed a reputation for her tough questioning of Trump nominees during confirmation hearings.

Harris referred back to Kavanaugh’s remark about a “precedent on precedent” concerning Roe vs. Wade, and asked if it were not true that any five justices could overturn a precedent if they wanted.

“There’s a reason why the Supreme Court doesn’t do that,” Kavanaugh responded. “There are times” when the justices do, he said, but it’s “rare.”

She also pressed Kavanaugh on whether he had any conversations about the Mueller investigation with anyone at a law firm founded by one of the president’s lawyers. Kavanaugh avoided answering the question several times, finally saying he remembered no such conversation. A Democratic aide said that Harris’ staff was continuing to investigate the matter.

Kavanaugh was pressed repeatedly to explain his relationship with Judge Alex Kozinski, the former chief judge of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals who retired last December after he was accused of sexually harassing female law clerks.

In 1991, Kavanaugh moved to Pasadena to work for one year as a law clerk for Kozinski. And he continued to consult with Kozinski over the years.

Kavanaugh said he had never heard of Kozinski harassing laws clerks or engaging in improper behavior until it was revealed last year in news stories. “It was a gut punch for me,” he said.

Sen. Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii) said she was skeptical of his response. “It was an open secret, and it went on for 30 years,” she said.

Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.) had a combative exchange with Kavanaugh while trying to pin the nominee down about his views on affirmative action. Booker asked if Kavanaugh believed that having a diverse student body is a compelling government interest that would justify considering race in admissions. Kavanaugh would not comment on his views, instead focusing on the Supreme Court’s precedent on affirmative action.

“I know what the law is now,” Booker said. “I’m worried about what the law is going to be when you get on the court.”

»

[email protected]

[email protected]

[email protected]

UPDATES:

7:05 p.m.: This article was updated after Harris spoke.

5:30 p.m.: This article was updated with Booker’s comments and other new details.

4:55 p.m.: This article was updated with more details from the hearing.

3:30 p.m.: This article was updated with more comments from Feinstein, Kavanaugh and others.

9:50 a.m.: This article was updated with details about Miranda, presidential power and Leahy’s questions.

8:15 a.m.: This article was updated with Kavanaugh’s comments about gun rights.

This article was originally published at 8 a.m.

May 27 (UPI) — Retailer Walmart will pay a $16,000 fine for shipping realistic toy guns to New York buyers in violation of state law, state Attorney General Letitia James announced on Tuesday.

New York law bans retailers from selling or shipping toy guns that are black, dark blue, silver or aluminum-colored and resemble real firearms.

“Realistic-looking toy guns can put communities in serious danger,” James said in a news release. “That is why they are banned.”

She said realistic-looking toy guns can be used to engage in unlawful activity and have led to several deaths and shootings across the state and Walmart’s third-party sellers sold them to New York buyers.

“Walmart failed to prevent its third-party sellers from selling realistic-looking toy guns to New York addresses, violating our laws and putting people at risk,” James said.

“The ban on realistic-looking toy guns is meant to keep New Yorkers safe,” she added. “My office will not hesitate to hold any business that violates that law accountable.”

A state investigation showed third-party retailers used Walmart’s online store to sell non-compliant toy guns that they shipped to New York addresses via Walmart’s fulfillment services.

Investigators bought a realistic-looking toy gun that violated New York’s general business law’s ban on such toys and had it shipped to an address within the state.

The violations netted a $16,000 fine that Walmart paid to settle the matter.

A Walmart official said the retailer does its best to comply with respective state and federal laws and ensure third-party retailers do, too.

“We are committed to complying with all laws, and we have processes in place to ensure products offered for sale by third-party sellers on our marketplace comply with all applicable laws as well,” Walmart global communications senior manager Kelly Hellbusch told UPI in an emailed statement.

James said New York consumers can report non-compliant toy guns by reporting them in an online complaint.

May 18 (UPI) — The federal government will allow the sale of devices that enable standard rifles to operate like machine guns, a move that angered gun control groups.

The Justice Department said Friday it reached a settlement with Rare Breed Triggers. This is in accordance with President Donald Trump‘s Feb. 17 executive order Protecting Second Amendment Rights and the attorney general’s Second Amendment Enforcement Task Force announced on April 8.

“This Department of Justice believes that the Second Amendment is not a second-class right,” Attorney General Pamela Bondi said in a statement. “And we are glad to end a needless cycle of litigation with a settlement that will enhance public safety.”

There are two ways to speed the firing of bullets. Bump stocks use the recoil of the weapon to repeatedly bump the trigger, while trigger devices are aftermarket items that directly engage the trigger.

During the first Trump administration, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives banned bump stocks, which mimic rapid trigger pulls to fire rapidly in a way similar to a machine gun. In 2017, the gunman in a mass shooting killed 58 people in Las Vegas while firing from his hotel room window using bump stocks.

In 2022, ATF included specific trigger devices under the National Firearms Act of 1934. The ATF determined that the devices allow a semiautomatic AR-15 rifle to fire as fast as a military M-16 in automatic mode.

In 2023, the Justice Department, as part of the Biden administration, brought a lawsuit in New York against Rare Breed Triggers.

The National Association of Gun Rights filed a separate lawsuit in Texas challenging the ban and a judge there ruled the ban was unlawful.

In June 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court, by a 6-3 vote in Cargill v. Garland, ruled ATF exceeded its statutory authority by issuing a rule classifying a bump stock as a “machine gun.”

The Court’s majority found that bump stocks do not meet the definition of a machine gun because they didn’t allow for automatic fire with the single pull of a trigger.

The next month, the Northern District of Texas applied the case to a device called a “forced-reset trigger” and concluded that they also cannot be classified as a “machine gun.”

DOJ is avoiding additional legal action against Rare Breed Triggers in appeals and related cases concerning the similar issue, Bondi said.

The settlement with Rare Breed Triggers includes agreed-upon conditions that significantly advance public safety with respect to FRTs, including that Rare Breed will not develop or design them for use in any pistol and will enforce its patents to prevent infringement that could threaten public safety.

Rare Breed also agreed promote the safe and responsible use of its products.

“The cuffs are off. As of May 16, 2025, we’re free! Expect the website to be updated on Monday, May 19,” the company posted on its website.

The decision was condemned by Vanessa Gonzalez, a spokeswoman for Giffords, the national gun violence prevention group led by former Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, who was shot in 2011 while meeting with constituents in her hometown of Tucson, Ariz.

“The Trump administration has just effectively legalized machine guns. Lives will be lost because of his actions,” Gonzalez said. “This is an incredibly dangerous move that will enable shooters to inflict horrific damage. The only people who benefit from these being on the market are the people who will make money from selling them, everyone else will suffer the consequences.”

The national gun control advocacy group Brady United said in a press release that “highly dangerous weapons of war can now be purchased anonymously” and without a background check.

“The Trump Administration’s secret settlement with the gun lobby to permit the sale of Forced Reset Triggers will turn already deadly firearms into weapons of mass destruction,” Kris Brown, president of Brady United, said in the release.

“Machine guns are weapons of war that have absolutely no place in our communities. This dangerous backroom deal is not only an astonishing abuse of power, but undermines decades of sensible government gun safety policy and puts whole communities at immediate serious risk,” he said.

Brady previous was called the National Council to Control Handguns and founded in 1974 by Dr. Mark Borinsky, whose son was shot and killed in 1974.

In 1981, White House Press Secretary Jim “the Bear” Brady suffered a bullet to the head, and the organization now bears his name.

Srinagar, Indian-administered Kashmir – In a quiet laser clinic in Indian-administered Kashmir’s biggest city, Srinagar, Sameer Wani sits with his arm stretched out, his eyes following the fading ink on his skin.

The word “Azadi” (freedom in Urdu), once a bold symbol of rebellion against India’s rule, slowly disappears under the sting of the laser. What was once a mark of defiance has become a burden he no longer wants to carry.

As Sameer, 28, watches the ink vanish, his mind drifts to a day he will never forget. He was riding his motorbike with a friend when Indian security forces stopped them at a checkpoint.

During the frisking, one of the officers pointed to the tattoo on his arm and asked, “What is this?”

Sameer’s heart raced. “I was lucky he couldn’t read Urdu,” he tells Al Jazeera, his voice tinged with the memory. “It was a close call. I knew right then that this tattoo could get me into serious trouble.”

When he was younger, he said, the tattoo was a “sign of strength, of standing up for something”.

“But now I see it was a mistake. It doesn’t represent who I am any more. It’s not worth carrying the risk, and it’s not worth holding on to something that could hurt my future.”

Sameer is one of many young Kashmiris choosing to erase tattoos that once reflected their political beliefs, emotional struggles or identity. Once worn with pride, the tattoos are now being removed in growing numbers across the region – quietly and without fanfare.

While a trend to remove tattoos was already under way, the urgency has deepened since India and Pakistan – who have fought three wars over Kashmir since emerging as independent nations in 1947 – came to the brink of yet another war following the killing of 26 people in the scenic resort town of Pahalgam in Indian-administered Kashmir last month.

New Delhi accuses Islamabad of backing an armed rebellion that erupted on the Indian side in 1989. Pakistan rejects the allegation, saying it only provides moral diplomatic support to Kashmir’s separatist movement.

Two weeks after Pahalgam, India, on May 7, launched predawn drone and missile attacks on what it called “terror camps” inside Pakistan and Pakistan-administered Kashmir – the most extensive cross-border missile strikes since their war in 1971. For the next three days, the world held its breath as the South Asian nuclear powers exchanged fire until United States President Donald Trump announced a ceasefire between them on May 10.

However, peace remains fragile in Indian-administered Kashmir, where a crackdown by Indian forces has left the region gripped by fear. Homes of suspected rebels have been destroyed, others have been raided, and more than 1,500 people have been arrested since the Pahalgam attack, many under preventive detention laws.

‘We feel it on our skin’

In such a tense atmosphere, many Kashmiri youth say they feel exposed – and more vulnerable to scrutiny over even the most personal forms of expression.

“Every time something happens between India and Pakistan, we feel it on our skin – literally,” Rayees Wani, 26, a resident of Shopian district, tells Al Jazeera.

“I have a tattoo of Hurriyat leader Syed Ali Shah Geelani’s name on my arm, and after the Pahalgam attack, I started getting strange looks at checkpoints,” he said, referring to the separatist leader who passed away at the age of 91 in 2021. The Hurriyat is an alliance of pro-freedom groups in Indian-administered Kashmir.

“Even my friends ask me uncomfortable questions. The media, police, and even the neighbours start looking at you differently,” Rayees added.

“I just wish people understood that a tattoo doesn’t define someone’s loyalty or character. We are just trying to live, not explain ourselves every day. I want to erase this as soon as possible.”

Arsalan, 19, from Pulwama recently booked a tattoo removal session. He did not share his last name over fears of reprisal from the authorities.

“People with visible tattoos – especially those hinting at past political affiliations – are suddenly worried they could be profiled, questioned – or worse,” he said.

To be sure, tattoo culture itself isn’t fading in Kashmir. Tattoo studios are still busy, especially with clients aged between 22 and 40, many of whom wait for hours to get inked. But the trend has shifted; instead of political or religious tattoos, people now prefer minimalistic designs, nature-inspired patterns, names or meaningful quotes in stylish fonts.

Some Kashmiris trying to get rid of tattoos say that’s part of their personal evolution and growth.

“For me, it was about being brave,” Irfan Yaqoob from Baramulla district told Al Jazeera. Now 36, Yaqoob got a slain rebel’s name tattooed on his left arm when he was a teenager.

“Back then, it felt like a symbol of courage. But now, when I look at it, I realise how much I have changed. Life has moved on, and so have I. I have a family, a job, and different priorities. I don’t want my past to define me or create trouble in the present. That’s why I decided to get it removed. It’s not about shame. It’s about growth,” he said.

Many reasons to remove tattoos

It isn’t just the security forces that are driving this move among many Kashmiris to get rid of tattoos.

For some, tattoos became painful reminders of a turbulent past. For others, they turned into obstacles, especially when they tried to move ahead professionally or wanted to align the inscription on their bodies with their personal beliefs.

Anas Mir, who also lives in Srinagar, had a tattoo of a sword with “Azadi” written over it. He got it removed a few weeks ago.

“People don’t clearly say why they are removing tattoos. I removed mine only because of pressure from my family,” the 25-year-old said.

“It’s my choice what kind of tattoo I want. No one should judge me for it. If someone had an AK-47 or a political tattoo, that was their choice. The authorities or government shouldn’t interfere. And yes, tattoo trends also change with time,” he added, referring to the Russian-made Avtomat Kalashnikova assault rifles, arguably the most popular firearm in the world.

One of the key reasons behind people removing tattoos is religion. In a Muslim-majority region, tattoos, especially those carrying religious or political messages, could often conflict with the faith’s teachings.

Faheem, 24, had a Quranic verse tattooed on his back when he was 17.

“At that time, I thought it was an act of faith,” he told Al Jazeera, without revealing his last name over security fears. “But later, I realised that tattoos – especially with holy verses – are not encouraged [in Islam]. It started to bother me deeply. I felt guilty every time I offered namaz [prayers] or went to the mosque. That regret stayed with me. Getting it removed was my way of making peace with myself and with my faith.”

Many others said they shared the feeling. Some visit religious scholars to ask whether having tattoos affects their prayers or faith. While most are advised not to dwell on past actions, they are encouraged to take steps that bring them closer to their beliefs.

“It’s not about blaming anyone,” said Ali Mohammad, a religious scholar in Srinagar. “It’s about growth and understanding. When someone realises that something they did in the past doesn’t align with their beliefs any more, and they take steps to correct it, that’s a sign of maturity, not shame.”

Another key factor driving tattoo removals is job security. In Kashmir, government jobs are seen as stable and prestigious. But having a tattoo, especially one with political references, can create problems during recruitment or background checks.

Talib, who disclosed his first name only, had a tattoo of a Quranic verse shaped like an AK-47 rifle on his forearm. When he applied for a government position, a family friend in law enforcement hinted it might be an issue.

“He didn’t say it directly, but I could tell he was worried,” said the 25-year-old. “Since then, I have been avoiding half-sleeve shirts. I got many rejections and no one ever gave a clear reason, but deep down, I knew the tattoo was a problem. It felt like a wall between me and my future.”

As the demand for tattoo removal rises, clinics in Srinagar and other parts of Indian-administered Kashmir are seeing a steady increase in clients. Laser sessions, once rare, are now booked weeks in advance.

Mubashir Bashir, a well-known tattoo artist in Srinagar who also runs a tattoo removal service, said: “After a popular singer’s death in 2022, the trend of AK-47 tattoos exploded,” Bashir said. Punjabi singer Sidhu Moose Wala, whose music often glorified guns, was killed in May 2022. Police blamed his death on an inter-gang rivalry.

“But now, especially after the Pahalgam attack, we are seeing more people coming in to erase those tattoos. The fear is real,” Mubashir said.

He estimated that tens of thousands of tattoos have been removed in the region over the past seven years, since 2019, when India abrogated Kashmir’s semi-autonomous status and launched a major crackdown, arresting thousands of civilians. “Some say the tattoo no longer represents them. Others mention problems at work or while travelling,” Mubashir said.

Laser tattoo removal isn’t easy. It requires multiple sessions, costs thousands of rupees and can be painful. Even after successful removal, faint scars or marks often remain. But for many Kashmiris, the pain is worth it.

Sameer, whose “Azadi” tattoo is almost gone, remembers the emotional weight of the process. “I didn’t cry when I got the tattoo,” he says. “But I cried when I started removing it. It felt like I was letting go of a part of myself.”

Still, Sameer believes it was the right choice. “It’s not about shame,” he says. “I respect who I was. But I want to grow. I want to live without looking over my shoulder.”

As he finishes another laser session, a faint scar is all that is left of the word that is Kashmir’s war-cry for freedom.

“I will never forget what that tattoo meant to me when I was 18,” Sameer says as he rolls down his sleeve. “But now, I want to be someone new. I want a life where I don’t carry old shadows.”