hearing

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Goldman dismissed Lander’s efforts as performative.

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

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

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

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

Izaguirre writes for the Associated Press.

The Championship play-off final may not go ahead on Saturday 23 May as the English Football League (EFL) investigates the Spygate scandal surrounding finalists Southampton.

A hearing conducted by an Independent Disciplinary Commission will take place on or before Tuesday 19 May.

Saints have been charged by the EFL with breaking rules by observing one of Middlesbrough’s training sessions before last Saturday’s semi-final first leg at the Riverside.

Southampton are due to face Hull City in the play-off final for a place in the Premier League next season.

Although the EFL has warned supporters there could be changes to the fixture, they are working on the basis that the final will go ahead as planned, with a kick-off time of 16:30 BST.

Should the match need to be rescheduled due to the outcome of the hearing and any subsequent appeal process, the EFL says it has a “number of contingency plans” available.

The Championship fixture is the first of three play-off finals held across three days at Wembley, with the League One and Two versions due to be held on the Sunday and Monday, respectively.

The stadium is booked out the following weekend, when the Rugby League Challenge Cup final will be played on 30 May and the Women’s FA Cup final on 31 May.

A major music event takes place at the stadium on the following weekend on Saturday 6 June.

A city hearing concerning on-site alcohol sales provided the public a chance to air their opinions on the possible reopening of the Cinerama Dome and ArcLight Hollywood on Tuesday morning.

Though a final letter of determination is still to be issued, Tim Fargo, the associate zoning administrator in charge of Tuesday’s meeting, said he was “inclined to approve” the conditional-use permit under consideration. The permit would cover the Cinerama Dome, 14 adjacent auditoriums and a restaurant café with two outdoor spaces.

The Dome closed in March 2020 with the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic and in April 2021 it was announced that the venue would not be reopening. Film lovers in Los Angeles and around the world have since been hopeful the venue, seen by many as a symbol for Hollywood itself, could reopen.

During the meeting, Elizabeth Peterson-Gower, a land use consultant representing the owner and applicant Dome Center LLC, was asked if there was a timeline for reopening the theaters. She responded, “I too don’t have a schedule yet, but when I do, I’ll convey it to you.”

In a separate phone interview following the meeting Tuesday, Peterson-Gower referred to the approval of the conditional-use permit as a “milestone” in the process of reopening the theaters and added that ownership has noted the intense public interest around the Dome and the ArcLight and that “it will inspire a time frame in the near future.”

Throughout the meeting, Peterson-Gower referred to the success of the Blue Note jazz club that opened on a corner of the property in August 2025.

“What it proves to me is that the ownership cares greatly,” Peterson-Gower said after the meeting. “That’s a big undertaking and a big statement in favor of the fact that ownership care what’s there.”

Numerous other voices were heard throughout the hearing as well. Ted Walker, planning deputy for Council District 13, where the theater is located, said, “Too often we see [historic-cultural monuments] around our city sitting vacant. So we’re very supportive of anything to bring some life back into this. We know there’s a lot of love for the Cinerama Dome and we want to acknowledge the work of all the community members who are advocating for it. We believe resuming these operations will further enhance the vibrancy of Hollywood.”

Burbank City Council member Konstantine Anthony noted that he was a former usher at the Dome and also voiced support for the reopening.

More than 30 people provided public comment. Among those were Kat Kramer, daughter of filmmaker Stanley Kramer, director of “It’s a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World,” the very first film to play in the Dome in 1963, film critic Wade Major and Ben Steinberg, who has led a grassroots campaign to get the venue reopened.

The Blue Note Jazz Club undergoes construction near the Cinerama Dome on Tuesday, Aug. 5, 2025, in Los Angeles.

(Juliana Yamada / Los Angeles Times)

One commenter said, “Why have they kept it closed? Is this just a strategy to let it rot so that they can get building violations and just tear it down and build condos? There’s a lot of fear about what’s going to happen with this thing that people feel attached to. And to not answer questions over all this time has frankly been offensive.”

Another commenter said that the delays in reopening feel like ownership “keeping a bit of our heritage hostage from us.”

Even those who were asking for clear specifics from ownership were nearly all in favor of granting the conditional-use permit, which was the ostensible purpose of the meeting. As local preservation advocate Kim Cooper said, “I know that this has been hard and it has seemed like the citizens versus the ownership — that’s not what it is. People want to come together and help and bring this place back.”

Speaking after the meeting, Peterson-Gower noted her own history with the Dome, having been involved with many events there in the late ’80s and early ’90s when she was vice president of the Hollywood Athletic Club, located just a few blocks away on Sunset Boulevard.

“Everyone has a story about the Dome that’s lived here, even me,” she added. “I didn’t want to bring my personal life into the hearing, but I care passionately as well about it opening.”

While the final outcome of the hearing is still to be fully determined, all signs point to the permit being granted and the project being free to move forward.

“I was overwhelmingly pleased with the comments,” said Peterson-Gower. “I think that it shows that there’s a great historic use in a historic property and I think that people care passionately about it operating and are very, very proud of the property being here in Hollywood.”

A preliminary hearing the murder case against David Anthony Burke, the 21-year-old singer better known as D4vd, will go forward at the end of June, setting a timeline for when more detailed evidence about the gruesome murder and dismemberment of 14-year-old Celeste Rivas Hernandez will become public.

Burke — who prosecutors say sexually abused the teen for a year before stabbing her to death and mutilating her corpse last year — will face the hearing on June 29, attorneys said during a brief hearing Tuesday morning.

After the singer’s arrest in April, his legal team pushed for an immediate preliminary hearing — where a judge determines if prosecutors have enough evidence to bring a case to trial — but they backed off after prosecutors began turning over what they have described as a massive amount of digital evidence linking Burke to the teenager’s brutal slaying. Burke has pleaded not guilty in the case.

The hearing is expected to last at least five days. A status conference hearing will take place on June 17.

Questions about the singer’s connection to Hernandez’s grisly end have circled since last summer, ever since her badly decomposed and dismembered body was found in the trunk of a Tesla linked to Burke. Late last month, prosecutors filed a nine-page brief laying out what they believe to be Hernandez’s final moments and Burke’s alleged horrific actions after her death.

In the filing, prosecutors said Burke stabbed Hernandez to death inside a Hollywood Hills residence after she threatened to go public about the ascendant singer’s continual sexual abuse. After killing her, Burke ordered a chainsaw, a “burn cage,” a shovel and other implements he used to dismember her remains in his garage, prosecutors alleged last week.

The motion also laid out the dramatic steps Burke went to in order to continue his relationship with the teen. In February 2024, Hernandez was reported missing to the Riverside County Sheriff’s Department by her parents, who were concerned about her involvement with Burke, according to the filing. Hernandez went home and had her phone taken away, but Burke allegedly paid a junior high school student $1,000 to give her a new device so they could stay in touch.

Prosecutors also said they found images of Hernandez naked and performing sex acts on Burke’s phone, according to the document. Deputy Dist. Atty. Beth Silverman said in court last month that search warrants turned up “a significant amount of child pornography” on Burke’s devices.

Burke’s lawyers have not commented on their defense strategy.

WASHINGTON — Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth faced tough questions Tuesday from Republican and Democratic lawmakers about the Trump administration’s end game for the Iran war, the cost of the conflict and its impact on diminishing U.S. weapons stockpiles.

For his part, the Pentagon chief softened his tone from hearings before Congress nearly two weeks ago, notably avoiding the same pointed criticism of lawmakers in his opening remarks as he outlined the Trump administration’s efforts to ramp up production of weapons and other military capabilities.

Even so, Hegseth insisted that the military has plenty of missile defense systems and other munitions for the Iran war or future conflicts as both Republicans and Democrats hammered him with those concerns.

“I take issue with the characterization that munitions are depleted in a public forum,” Hegseth said. “That’s not true.”

The cost of the Iran war has risen to about $29 billion, the vast bulk of which — $24 billion — is related to replacing and repairing munitions but also includes operational costs to keep forces deployed, Pentagon comptroller Jay Hurst said. That’s up from $25 billion that he told lawmakers nearly two weeks ago.

The powerful House and Senate Appropriations subcommittees that oversee defense spending are holding back-to-back hearings to review the Trump administration’s 2027 military budget proposal, which calls for a historic allocation of $1.5 trillion. The discussions in the House quickly veered into the handling of a war that appears locked in a stalemate as higher fuel prices pose political problems for Republicans in the midterm congressional elections.

Hegseth and Caine face bipartisan pushback on munitions stockpiles

Rep. Rosa DeLauro, the ranking Democrat on the House Appropriations Committee, told Hegseth that the “question must be answered at the end of this crisis: What have we accomplished and at what cost?”

“This administration has not presented Congress with any kind of clear or coherent strategy week to week, day to day, hour to hour,” DeLauro said. “The rationale shifts, the objectives change. The end game is ill-defined when it is defined at all.”

California Republican Rep. Ken Calvert, the House subcommittee’s chair, also asked about the impact of the Iran war on military funding as well as the U.S. military’s weapons stockpiles.

“Questions persist about whether we are building the depth and reliance required for a high-end conflict,” Calvert said.

Minnesota Rep. Betty McCollum, the defense subcommittee’s ranking Democrat, pressed Hegseth on whether the military has a plan to draw down troops in the Middle East if Congress passes so-far-unsuccessful efforts to end the Iran war.

“We have a plan to escalate if necessary,” Hegseth said. “We have a plan to retrograde if necessary. We have a plan to shift assets.”

He said he would not reveal any next steps publicly. Noting repeated questions from lawmakers over the military’s weapons stockpiles, drawn down from the Iran war, Hegseth said the concerns have been “unhelpfully overstated” and that “we have plenty of what we need.”

He said the defense industry has been told to “build more and build faster,” blaming the military industrial base’s inadequate capacity on previous administrations and U.S. aid to Ukraine in its war with Russia.

Trump administration faces pressure from impact of the Iran war

President Trump is facing increasing pressure from the economic shocks of Iran effectively closing the Strait of Hormuz, a vital shipping corridor where 20% of the world’s oil normally flows. The U.S. military in turn has blockaded Iranian ports and the two sides have traded fire, with American forces thwarting attacks on their warships and disabling Tehran-linked oil tankers.

Trump said Monday that the ceasefire is on “massive life support” and criticized Iran for its latest proposal, pointing to his demands that Iran significantly limit its nuclear program.

“I would call it the weakest right now after reading that piece of garbage they sent us,” Trump said.

The Republican president also said he wanted to suspend the federal gas tax to help Americans shoulder surging fuel prices. He has previously said higher costs are worth it to prevent Iran from getting a nuclear weapon.

Tuesday’s hearings are giving a mostly new group of lawmakers the chance to grill or applaud Hegseth and Gen. Dan Caine, chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, on the planning and execution of the war.

The Senate hearing later Tuesday will include Sen. Susan Collins of Maine, a Republican whose reelection this year is far from guaranteed. She voted with Democrats on an effort to halt the conflict late last month, saying she wants to see a defined strategy for bringing the war to a close.

Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski, another Republican on the Senate Appropriations defense subcommittee, has voted against the string of unsuccessful war powers resolutions but spoken of the need for congressional authorization so Americans will know the war’s limits and objectives.

He also will face plenty of friendly Republicans, including the Senate subcommittee’s chair, Sen. Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, and perhaps the Iran war’s biggest booster in Congress, Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina.

Finley, Toropin and Barrow write for the Associated Press. Barrow reported from Atlanta.

THE HAGUE — Venezuela ’s acting President Delcy Rodríguez told journalists Monday that her country had no plans to become the 51st U.S. state after President Trump said he was “seriously considering” the move.

Rodríguez was speaking at the International Court of Justice in The Hague on the final day of hearings in a dispute between her country and neighboring Guyana over the massive mineral- and oil-rich Essequibo region.

“We will continue to defend our integrity, our sovereignty, our independence, our history,” said Rodríguez, who assumed power in January following a U.S. military operation that ousted then-President Nicolás Maduro. Venezuela is “not a colony, but a free country,” she added.

Speaking to Fox News earlier on Monday, Trump said he was “seriously considering making Venezuela the 51st U.S. state,” according to a post by Fox News’ co-anchor John Roberts on social media. The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the matter.

Trump has made similar comments about Canada.

Rodríguez went on to say that Venezuelan and U.S. officials have been in touch and are working on “cooperation and understanding.”

Before addressing Trump’s comments, Rodríguez defended her country’s claim to Essequibo at the United Nations’ highest court, telling judges that political negotiations — not a judicial ruling — will resolve the century-old territorial dispute.

The 62,000-square-mile territory, which makes up two-thirds of Guyana, is rich in gold, diamonds, timber and other natural resources. It also sits near massive offshore oil deposits currently producing an average 900,000 barrels a day.

That output is close to Venezuela’s daily production of about 1 million barrels a day and has transformed one of the smallest countries in South America into a significant energy producer.

Venezuela has considered Essequibo its own since the Spanish colonial period, when the jungle region fell within its boundaries. But an 1899 decision by arbitrators from Britain, Russia and the United States drew the border along the Essequibo River largely in favor of Guyana.

Venezuela has argued that a 1966 agreement sealed in Geneva to resolve the dispute effectively nullified the 19th-century arbitration. In 2018, however, three years after ExxonMobil announced a significant oil discovery off the Essequibo coast, Guyana’s government went to the International Court of Justice and asked judges to uphold the 1899 ruling.

Tensions between the countries further flared in 2023, when Rodríguez’s predecessor, Maduro, threatened to annex the region by force after holding a referendum asking voters if Essequibo should be turned into a Venezuelan state. Maduro was captured Jan. 3 during a U.S. military operation in Venezuela’s capital, Caracas, and taken to New York to face drug trafficking charges. He has pleaded not guilty.

Rodríguez did not address the referendum in her remarks, but she told the court that the 1966 agreement is designed to allow negotiations between Venezuela and Guyana to resolve the territorial dispute. And she accused Guyana’s government of undermining the agreement with the “opportunistic” decision to ask the court to address the dispute.

“At a time when the mechanisms established in the Geneva agreement were still fully in force, Guyana unilaterally chose to shift the dispute from the negotiating arena to a judicial resolution,” she said. “This change was not accidental; it coincided with the discovery in 2015 of the oil field that would become world-renowned.”

When hearings opened last week, Guyana’s foreign minister, Hugh Hilton Todd, told the panel of international judges that the dispute “has been a blight on our existence as a sovereign state from the very beginning.” He said that 70% of Guyana’s territory is at stake.

The court is likely to take months to issue a final and legally binding ruling in the case.

Venezuela has warned that its participation in the hearings does not mean either consent to, or recognition of, the court’s jurisdiction.

Quell and Cano write for the Associated Press. Garcia Cano reported from Mexico City.

MONTGOMERY, Ala. — A national redistricting battle over U.S. House seats swung toward Republicans on Friday, as a Virginia court invalidated a Democratic gerrymandering effort and Republicans in Alabama approved plans for new primary elections if courts allow GOP-drawn House districts to be used in the November midterm elections.

The Alabama legislation, which was signed quickly into law by Republican Gov. Kay Ivey, is part of an effort by Republicans in Southern states to capitalize quickly on a recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling that significantly weakened Voting Rights Act protections for minorities.

Tensions ran high in the Alabama Statehouse. And Republican lawmakers in Louisiana and South Carolina also faced staunch opposition from civil rights activists and Democrats as they presented plans Friday to redraw their congressional districts.

The action came just a day after Tennessee enacted new congressional districts that carve up a Democratic-held, Black-majority district in Memphis. The state Democratic Party sued on Friday, seeking to prevent the districts from being used until after this year’s elections because of the tight time frame

Even before last week’s Supreme Court ruling in a Louisiana case, Republicans and Democrats already were engaged in a fierce redistricting battle, each seeking an edge in the midterm elections that will determine control of the closely divided House. That battle tilted further toward Republicans when the Virginia Supreme Court ruled Friday that Democratic lawmakers had violated constitutional requirements when placing a redistricting amendment on the ballot.

Since President Trump prodded Texas to redraw its congressional districts last summer, Republicans think they could gain as many as 14 seats from new districts in several states while Democrats think they could gain up to six seats. But the parties may not get everything they sought, because the gerrymandering could backfire in some highly competitive districts.

Alabama primaries could be in flux

Demonstrators outside the Alabama Statehouse on Friday shouted “fight for democracy” and “down with white supremacy.”

“I was out there in 1965 marching for the right to vote, and now we are back here in 2026 doing the same thing,” Betty White Boynton said.

During debate inside the statehouse, Black lawmakers sharply criticized the Republican legislation, saying it harks back to the state’s shameful Jim Crow history. The new law would ignore the May 19 primary results for some congressional seats and direct the governor to schedule a new primary under revised districts, if a court allows it. Lawmakers also approved a similar bill related to state Senate districts.

“What happened here today is that we were set back as a people to the days of Reconstruction,” Democratic state Sen. Rodger Smitherman said after the vote.

Senate Democrats shouted “hell no” and “stop the steal” as the vote occurred in the Alabama Senate.

The special primary would happen only if the courts agree to lift an injunction that put a court-selected map in place until after the 2030 census. That order required a second district where Black voters are the majority or close to it, resulting in the 2024 election of Democratic Rep. Shomari Figures, who is Black. If a court lifts the injunction, Republican officials want to put in place a map lawmakers drew in 2023 — which was rejected by a federal court — that could allow them to reclaim Figures’ district.

“With this special session successfully behind us, Alabama now stands ready to quickly act, should the courts issue favorable rulings in our ongoing redistricting cases,” Ivey said in a statement.

Virginia ruling centered on timing of election

Democrats had hoped to gain as many as four additional U.S. House seats under new districts narrowly approved by voters in April. But the state Supreme Court invalidated the measure because it said the Democratic-led legislature violated procedural requirements.

To place a constitutional amendment before voters, the Virginia Constitution requires lawmakers to approve it in two separate legislative sessions, with a state election sandwiched in between. The legislature’s initial approval of the redistricting amendment occurred last October — while early voting was underway but before it concluded on the day of the general election. The legislature’s second vote on the amendment occurred after a new legislative session began in January.

The Supreme Court said the initial legislative approval came too late, noting that more than 1.3 million ballots already had been cast in the general election, about 40% of the total votes ultimately cast.

Louisiana lawmakers look at map options

A Louisiana Senate committee considered several redistricting options Friday from Republican state Sen. John “Jay” Morris that would eliminate either both or one of the current Black-majority U.S. House districts.

“Every one of these maps reduces Black voting power in every one of the districts. And I think that’s a problem,” Democratic state Sen. Sam Jenkins told Morris.

Morris denied that the proposed redistricting maps were racially discriminatory. He said his goal was to be “respectful of the traditional boundaries” of the state’s six congressional districts.

“I don’t think we should care that much about race,” Morris said.

The only four Black congressmen who have represented Louisiana since the end of the Reconstruction era appealed to state senators to keep two majority-Black districts in a state where one-third of voters are Black.

Leona Tate, who as a 6-year-old girl was escorted by federal marshals through a racist white mob trying to prevent her from desegregating a New Orleans elementary school, told lawmakers she felt they were taking a step backward in time by reducing Black political power.

“You have a choice in front of you: You can draw a map that reflects what Louisiana actually is — a state where Black voices belong in the halls of Congress,” said Tate, 71. “Or you can draw a map that tells my grandchildren that their votes don’t count, that their faces don’t matter and that the progress I helped build with my own two feet as a 6-year-old can be erased at will.”

South Carolina considers a House map

A small group of South Carolina lawmakers held a rare Friday meeting to discuss a proposed new congressional map intended to allow Republicans a clean sweep of the state’s seven U.S. House seats.

The hearing was the first step in redistricting. But its future remains murky. The state Senate has yet to agree to consider new districts later this month, an action that would require a two-thirds vote.

The new map has some Republicans nervous. Breaking up the 6th District, represented by Rep. James E. Clyburn (D-S.C.), makes the other six districts less Republican.

At Friday’s subcommittee meeting, lawmakers heard hours of testimony, almost all against the new map. The hearing included a consultant who reviewed the map, saying it appeared to be legal under the Supreme Court’s decision in the Louisiana case.

“I agree if the law allows us to do it, then we can do it,” Democratic state Rep. Justin Bamberg said. “But I can slap somebody’s mama and it’s not the right thing to do.”

Some absentee ballots already have been returned for the state’s June 9 primary elections. The legislative subcommittee advanced a plan to delay the congressional primaries to August and reopen a candidate filing period, if a new map is approved.

Chandler, Brook, Collins and Lieb write for the Associated Press. Collins reported from Columbia, S.C.; Brook from Baton Rouge, La.; and Lieb from Jefferson City, Mo.

Caracas, May 8, 2026 (venezuelanalysis.com) – The Venezuelan government reasserted its sovereignty claim over the Essequibo Strip during an International Court of Justice (ICJ) hearing aimed at resolving the long-standing territorial dispute with Guyana.

Venezuelan representative Samuel Moncada, defended the country’s “inalienable right” over the 160,000 square kilometer resource-rich territory during his intervention on Wednesday.

The ICJ is holding a week of hearings in The Hague between the two South American nations over the controversy, which in recent years has raised fears of a possible military confrontation. Venezuela has repeatedly stated that it does not recognize the court’s jurisdiction over the matter. However, Guyana unilaterally brought the dispute before the ICJ in 2018.

In this context, Moncada argued that the only valid legal instrument governing the dispute is the 1966 Geneva Agreement, which calls for a practical and mutually satisfactory solution between Caracas and Georgetown.

“Venezuela is here today because it cannot remain silent in the face of a process in which Guyana seeks to use the Court to unilaterally redefine the nature of the controversy,” Moncada said. He added that Venezuelans rejected the ICJ’s jurisdiction over the issue in the December 2023 referendum. 

For his part, Guyanese Foreign Minister Hugh Hilton Todd told the judges that the case has “existential importance for Guyana” because it affects more than 70 percent of the country’s territory.

“For Guyanese people, the very idea that our country could be dismembered is a true tragedy because we would lose the vast majority of our land and population. Guyana would cease to be Guyana without them,” Todd argued during Guyana’s hearing session on Monday.

Moncada responded by saying that Guyana’s position implied that decades of mediation efforts by United Nations officials and Good Offices processes were attempts to “dismember” Guyanese territory, when in reality they sought the negotiated settlement that Guyana is now attempting to avoid.

The Guyanese government intends to have the ICJ uphold an 1899 arbitration ruling that awarded the Essequibo to the United Kingdom. However, in 1962 Venezuela filed a complaint before the United Nations seeking to nullify the award after evidence emerged suggesting that the decision had been reached fraudulently.

As a result, in 1966, while Guyana was negotiating its independence from the United Kingdom, the parties signed the Geneva Agreement, establishing that the Essequibo region would remain administered by Guyana while its sovereignty claim by Venezuela remained unresolved until a mutually agreed settlement could be reached.

The accord effectively superseded the Paris ruling and established a four-year framework to resolve the dispute in a “practical, peaceful and satisfactory” manner for both sides. Although no final resolution has been achieved, the agreement is still considered to be in force.

Tensions between the two countries escalated significantly in 2015 after ExxonMobil discovered massive offshore oil reserves in the disputed area, giving Guyana access to one of the world’s highest per capita oil reserves. Though the Essequibo is under Guyanese administration, Venezuela includes the territory in its official map and recently established administrative structures for its eventual 24th state.

The court at The Hague is scheduled to hold four hearings in total, during which both countries will present their legal arguments.

Guyana presented its first round of arguments on Monday, May 4, while Venezuela did so on Wednesday, May 6. Guyana’s second round took place on Friday, May 8, and Venezuela is scheduled to respond again on Monday, May 11.

Although the hearings will conclude that day, a final ruling could take months or even years. While ICJ rulings are legally binding, the court has no direct mechanism to enforce compliance.

According to Venezuelan Foreign Minister Yván Gil, regardless of the judicial proceedings, “the inevitable outcome will be Guyana’s return to the negotiating table to definitively resolve the territorial controversy under the framework of the 1966 agreement.”

Edited by Ricardo Vaz in Caracas.

In a hearing about competing protective order filings from reality TV star Taylor Frankie Paul and her ex-boyfriend Dakota Mortensen, a Utah judge granted Thursday that both orders go into effect, though he delayed making a decision on a custody arrangement.

The orders, which were issued by third district court commissioner Russell Minas, are in place for three years and require Paul and Mortensen to stay at least 100 feet away from each other. He also warned that they both could be subjected to criminal charges if there’s a violation of the orders.

“I do think it’s important that there be mutual orders,” Minas said. “I am just concerned that if I don’t order both of them to stay away from each other, there’s going to be some additional problems.”

Addressing Paul and Mortensen, Minas said: “I’m hoping that you’re not people who just thrive on the drama and the conflict … I do want to work with both of you to try to restore some sense of normalcy. I just think right now, you two need to stay away from each other and there needs to be orders that will result in consequences if you attempt to try to engage each other because I still think you have this attraction to each other, physical or otherwise.”

“The Secret Lives of Mormon Wives” star, 31, and Mortensen, 33, both appeared in Utah court for the hearing, which was livestreamed, the first time they’ve been seen in the same room together since news broke last month that they were involved in domestic violence investigations involving multiple allegations.

In the weeks leading up to the ruling, the judge had granted Mortensen custody of their son, with up to eight hours per week of supervised visitation for Paul, known as one of the stars of Hulu’s “The Secret Lives of Mormon Wives.” That arrangement will stay in place until the judge offers his recommendation on parent time on or before May 11.

Dakota Mortensen in the courtroom on Thursday.

(Bethany Baker / Associated Press)

A review hearing is set for June, once mental health and domestic violence assessments of Paul and Mortensen ordered as part of the safety plan by child protective services have been completed and processed.

Paul’s attorney, Eric M. Swinyard, described the hearing as a “significant step forward.”

“Taylor was incredibly candid with the Court that she is not perfect and owned her faults,” read part of his statement. “She looks forward to continuing to cooperate with the Court to make progress in the custody case.”

The Times also reached out to Mortensen for comment.

Paul and Mortensen had been under investigation by both the Draper City Police Department and West Jordan Police Department regarding a series of allegations each made that the other had acted violently during altercations in February, as well as an incident that took place in 2024. After the February allegations made headlines, a video of Paul in 2023 that led to her arrest was leaked; it showed the reality star throwing bar stools at Mortensen while her daughter was present. (Paul pleaded guilty in abeyance to aggravated assault following that incident and her probation in that case will be up in August.) Amid the investigation, Mortensen and Paul filed competing protective orders against each other.

The Salt Lake County district attorney’s office and the Draper City prosecutor both declined to file charges against Paul in April, citing insufficient evidence to prove allegations beyond a reasonable doubt.

The situation between the embattled exes also resulted in the pausing of filming of “Mormon Wives” Season 5. The show has documented the pair’s tumultuous relationship since it’s launch in 2024. It also led to the shelving of Season 22 of ABC’s “The Bachelorette,” which featured Paul as its heroine.

But Thursday’s ruling on the orders comes a week after reports surfaced that “Mormon Wives” has resumed production on its fifth season, without Paul and Mortensen’s involvement — though, Paul reportedly has the option to return. The fate of the unaired season of “The Bachelorette” remains unclear.

Alexandra Del Rosario contributed reporting.

Evidence in the murder case against the singer D4vd — who is charged with the brutal killing of 14-year-old Celeste Rivas Hernandez — will not become public until at least late next month, after his defense attorneys pumped the brakes on a preliminary hearing that was scheduled to take place this Friday.

David Anthony Burke, 21, was charged with murder, continuous sex abuse of a minor and mutilating a corpse earlier this month after Los Angeles police stormed a Hollywood Hills home and arrested him. He pleaded not guilty last week.

The singer has long been linked to Hernandez’s disappearance and death, after her badly decomposed body was found in the trunk of a Tesla he owned at a Hollywood tow yard last September. Authorities said Hernandez was last seen at Burke’s Hollywood residence on April 23, 2025.

Los Angeles County Dist. Atty. Nathan Hochman said last week that Burke killed the 14-year-old because she threatened to expose the fact that he’d been sexually abusing her for nearly a year. An autopsy report made public last week revealed Hernandez died from a pair of stab wounds. Her body was dismembered when police found it in the trunk and two of her fingers had been amputated, the report said.

Burke’s lead defense attorney, Blair Berk, said she does not believe the prosecution’s case can hold up to scrutiny and pushed for an immediate preliminary hearing during his initial court appearance. Defendants have a right to a preliminary hearing, in which a judge determines whether prosecutors have enough evidence to bring a case to trial, within 10 business days. In Burke’s case, that would have put the preliminary hearing on track for May 1.

But on Wednesday afternoon, attorney Marilyn Bednarski asked that the hearing be pushed back to May 26, citing the voluminous amount of discovery in the case. Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Charlaine Olmedo agreed there was “good cause” to delay the hearing a few weeks.

Deputy Dist. Atty. Beth Silverman expressed some annoyance at Bednarski and Berk’s change of heart, noting she’d already warned the defense team that prosecutors had a trove of evidence to turn over.

Silverman said last week that discovery materials would include the results of a wiretap and searches of Burke’s cellphone and iCloud accounts, which prosecutors allege turned up “a significant amount of child pornography.” Law enforcement executed 54 search warrants in the case, according to court records.

The medical examiner’s report detailing how Hernandez died was not available to the defense until last week. Prosecutors also convened three secret grand juries between November 2025 and February 2026 to collect evidence against Burke, according to Silverman. Transcripts from those hearings were under seal as of last week.

Bednarski said Wednesday she needed “additional time to review the discovery we either just got, or are about to get, in order to have a full and free preliminary hearing.”

“We told them that this was what was going to be coming,” Silverman argued in reply. “As I said in my brief, we sent out subpoenas, we’ve been preparing, we’ve been telling witnesses to cancel planned vacations.”

Berk also sought to have Olmedo seal a filing that Silverman submitted early Wednesday that laid out evidence she plans to present at a preliminary hearing.

“The prosecution has appeared to file a rather unusual pre-preliminary hearing brief that appears to be a very one-sided view of what is anticipated as the evidence in this case. But no evidence has been presented by the prosecution in a courtroom. Certainly there has been no adjudication of the admissibility of that evidence,” Berk said, expressing worry that the publication of such materials would taint future jury pools.

Prosecutors normally file such briefs ahead of trial, which include a list of witnesses they plan to call and a summary of arguments they will make. Olmedo rejected Berk’s request to seal the motion. A copy of the document was not immediately available for review at the downtown Los Angeles courthouse.

WASHINGTON, Apri; 29 (UPI) — Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth alternated between championing a proposed massive increase to defense spending and fielding attacks from Democratic lawmakers during testimony on Capitol Hill Wednesday.

It marked the secretary’s first appearance before lawmakers since the start of a war that has roiled the global economy and decimated Iran’s military.

Hegseth appeared before the House Armed Services Committee alongside Gen. Dan Caine, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and the Pentagon’s comptroller, Jules Hurst III. They entered the hearing room past protesters’ chants of “arrest Hegseth” and yells of “war criminal.” The secretary appeared unfazed.

“We’re rebuilding a military that the American people can be proud of — one that instills nothing less than unrelenting fear in our adversaries.” Hegseth said in his opening statement.

Hegseth’s testimony was intended to serve as a defense of the White House’s petition to Congress for $1.5 trillion in defense spending for 2027, a 44%t increase from the 2026 budget.

It’s an increase that, by itself, would be more than the total defense spending of any other nation, according to recently released figures. The spending level exceeds that spent on the Reagan-era military buildup and would be only overshadowed by levels seen during World War II.

The spending boom would come at the cost of domestic programs and at a time when federal tax revenue is set to take a $4.5 trillion hit over the next 10 years, mostly from tax cuts codified in last year’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act, according to the Bipartisan Policy Center, a Washington-based think tank.

But rather than question Hegseth on the specifics of the budget proposal, many Democratic members grilled him about the war in Iran, recent firings of senior leaders in the Pentagon and lethal strikes against alleged drug traffickers in the Pacific and Caribbean oceans.

In one heated exchange, Rep. John Garamendi, D-Calif., delivered a sharp critique of the war in Iran when questioning the defense secretary, calling it a “blunder” in which the United States had expended much to gain little.

Garamendi said it would take years for the U.S. and global economies to recover. The war has hiked average unleaded gas prices in the country to more than $4.20 a gallon and inflation to its highest level in nearly two years.

“Secretary Hegseth, you have been lying to the American public about this war from Day 1,” Garamendi said. “The strategy has been an astounding example of incompetence.”

Hegseth counterattacked. With his voice raised, he accused the congressman of “handing propaganda to our enemies.”

“I hope you appreciate how reckless it is,” Hegseth said of Garamendi’s description of the two-month-long war as a quagmire. “Shame on you.”

Hurst, the comptroller, told lawmakers the Iran war has cost the Pentagon $25 billion. Committee ranking member Rep. Adam Smith, D-Wash., responded that was the first time he had been given a cost figure, despite repeated inquiries to the department.

In March, the Pentagon reportedly petitioned Congress for an additional $200 billion to replace stocks from the war and prepare for future operations, should they be ordered. When asked about it at the time, Hegseth indicated the report’s veracity.

“That number could move, obviously,” Hegseth said then. “It takes money to kill bad guys.”

Hegseth’s central defense of the war during the hearing was arguing that it served to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. Republican members echoed his contention.

Iran maintains uranium supplies that could eventually be used to build a nuclear weapon if it were to be further enriched. But since the U.S. bombed Iran’s nuclear facilities in June, Iran has made “no efforts since then to try to rebuild their enrichment capability,” Tulsi Gabbard, the director of national intelligence, said in a written statement to Congress in March.

“What is it worth to ensure Iran never gets a nuclear weapon?” Hegseth asked rhetorically in Wednesday’s hearing.

A defense budget unprecedented in modern times

The Pentagon’s budget request is composed of $1.1 trillion in base discretionary funding and an additional $350 billion in mandatory spending.

The mandatory funds, which are earmarked mostly for munitions and the expansion of the defense industry, would go through the budget reconciliation process and therefore would be shielded from a potential Democratic filibuster in the Senate.

The expansion of America’s defense industrial base — the network of private manufacturers that supply the Pentagon — is a central facet of the proposed budget.

“President Trump inherited a defense industrial base that had been hollowed out by years of ‘America Last’ policies,” Hegseth said. “Under the leadership of President Trump, our builder-in-chief, we are reversing this systemic decay and putting our defense industrial base on a war-time footing.”

Another of the administration’s top defense funding priorities, as reflected in the budget document, is the procurement of munitions.

“Critical munitions are vital to the administration’s priorities to defend the homeland and deter potential aggression after years of neglect by the previous administration,” the White House wrote in a recent budget justification. Limited munitions stockpiles and the United States’ inability to quickly produce them have long troubled U.S. war planners.

While the Trump administration has pushed to expand munitions stockpiles, it has also expended massive amounts of scarce ordnance in the Middle East in recent months.

An April analysis by the Center for Strategic and International Studies estimated that the U.S. military has expended more than 850 Tomahawk cruise missiles in the Iran war from an estimated prewar inventory of 3,100.

Key U.S. capabilities like the Patriot and THAAD air defense systems have also seen stockpiles dwindle by about half since the start of the war, according to the report.

“We’re fighting wars”

The administration’s request for the massive infusion of cash comes as Trump has said that federal spending on healthcare and social programs should take a back seat to “military protection.”

In its proposed budget, the White House moved to cut non-defense discretionary spending by 10%. The spending category comprises public health, scientific research and scores of other domestic programs, but excludes mandatory programs like Medicare and Medicaid.

In a speech at a private Easter luncheon, Trump said spending on childcare, Medicare and Medicaid should be left to the states, while the federal government should be focused solely on national defense.

“We’re fighting wars,” Trump said.

The sentiment runs contrary to Trump’s long-held foundational critique of his predecessors — that money spent on foreign wars from Iraq, to Afghanistan, to Ukraine, should have been used to benefit Americans at home.

One judge claims his colleagues have adopted a “gangster mentality” in order to shut him up.

Another compared the state board accusing him of serious misconduct to “the Russian mafia.”

Judicial elections are usually sleepy affairs, subject to little political fanfare or interest. But two battles on the June ballot in Los Angeles have raised the temperature this campaign season and invited questions about the lengths members of the insular local bench will go to protect their own.

Lawyers who aspire to become judge often run for open seats. The challengers in these races, however, say they specifically targeted incumbents they believe are unfit for the office, which carries an annual salary of more than $244,000.

One of the contests could unseat 84-year-old Judge Robert Draper, who is seeking reelection despite having spent the last three years relegated to a room at the Santa Monica courthouse without a computer or caseload, which two other judges described to The Times as a “closet.”

In 2023, then-Presiding Justice Samantha Jessner said Draper was “unable to carry out the duties and responsibilities of a judge” due to deteriorating mental and physical health, according to a letter she sent to the state’s Commission on Judicial Performance.

Draper denied all wrongdoing in an interview with The Times, and said that although he has been diagnosed with Parkinson’s disease, he remains fit for the bench. He has also been accused of sexual harassment and making improper and biased comments by the judicial commission. He is contesting those claims. A hearing that could result in his removal began Monday and is expected to last into early May.

Deputy Dist. Atty. Paul Thompson at Clara Shortridge Foltz Criminal Justice Center in Los Angeles.

(Myung J. Chun / Los Angeles Times)

The other incumbent fighting to save his seat is Judge Pat Connolly, 61, a former prosecutor who has drawn support from several other sitting L.A. County judges. But his opponent, Deputy Dist. Atty. Paul Thompson, has called Connolly a “rogue judge” who needs to be replaced.

Connolly has been disciplined multiple times in his 18-year judicial tenure for improper comments toward litigants and, in one case, exhibiting bias against a defense attorney against whom he was weighing contempt charges, according to state judicial commission records.

Thompson, who gained notoriety for his role winning a rape conviction against Harvey Weinstein, purchased the rights to the domain name “patconnolly4judge.com,” which now redirects to one of the commission’s admonishments of Connolly.

“What I see is a man who repeatedly prioritizes his own goodwill over that of the community and the public he is serving … a man who has been repeatedly disciplined for prioritizing his own interests,” said Thompson, who has been endorsed by the L.A. County Democratic Party.

In a bizarre turn, the race was linked to the recent shooting at the White House Correspondents’ Assn. dinner after conservative influencers posted a picture of a Thompson campaign sign on the Torrance lawn of the suspected gunman, Cole Tomas Allen.

Thompson lives next door to the Allen family and described the suspect’s parents as great neighbors. He said he didn’t know their son and dismissed “internet trolls” for trying to tie his campaign to political violence.

This year’s election has sparked conversations about the unwavering support incumbent judges seem to enjoy among their colleagues.

Despite the concerns about Draper’s health, a political action committee run by fellow judges gave $72,500 to his campaign, state election finance records show. The PAC gave the same amount to Connolly.

Judge Maria Lucy Armendariz, who oversees the PAC, did not return a call seeking comment.

“The PAC has some explaining to do here. Why is there this show of support for someone who is facing so many challenges?” asked Laurie Levenson, a former federal prosecutor who now teaches at Loyola Law School. “It doesn’t reflect well on the bench.”

Deputy Dist. Atty. Tal Khan Valbuena at Grand Park in downtown Los Angeles.

(Christina House / Los Angeles Times)

Draper’s opponent is Deputy Dist. Atty. Tal Khan Valbuena, a refugee from Pakistan who works in the Hollywood mental health court. Khan Valbuena believes his lived experience as a gay Muslim who has faced bigotry will bring a compassionate perspective to a bench some complain is overrun with old-school tough-on-crime prosecutors.

But he also expressed concern about Draper’s mental decline after meeting him for lunch earlier this year.

“His honor had exemplified disorganized thought behavior, tangential thought … things I see on a day-to-day basis [in mental health court],” Khan Valbuena said, while acknowledging that he is not a doctor.

The Los Angeles County Bar Assn. issued its ratings for every judicial candidate last week. Connolly graded best among the judges in the contentious races, described as “well qualified.” Thompson and Khan Valubena were rated as “qualified.” Draper was one of only three candidates labeled “unqualified.”

In 2022, Judge Eric Taylor said he noticed a sharp change in Draper’s behavior that included sending “abusive” and “incoherent” e-mails to colleagues that contained racist and profane language, according to a letter Taylor sent to the state judicial commission.

“He has demonstrated a flagging handle on reality,” Taylor wrote.

Draper was accused of sexual harassment, making racist remarks and callous behavior all over the course of one hearing. According to the state judicial complaint and testimony at Draper’s removal hearing on Monday, the judge allegedly stroked a female lawyer’s hair after going on a tangent to a Black attorney about “Black history, Black football players, the Civil Rights Act, and the Black Lives Matter movement,” even though the case had nothing to do with those issues.

Judge Robert Draper outside the Ronald Reagan Federal Building in Los Angeles.

(Robert Gauthier / Los Angeles Times)

Later in chambers that same day, he made crude remarks to a group of female attorneys while reflecting on his time as a civil attorney, recalling how male lawyers would deride female secretaries, insisting they learn to “f— better than they could type,” according to testimony given by attorney Janice Brown at Draper’s hearing.

Brown told the review panel that Draper’s behavior left her “aghast” and “perplexed.”

Draper denied much of what was in the complaint. He says that he never touched a lawyer’s hair, and that the comments about Black culture were meant to express his pride at racial progress in America. He criticized the Commission on Judicial Performance.

“This is like the Russian mafia, it’s like Germany,” he said. “There’s no due process for any judge.”

Draper’s attorney, Ashley Posner, said his client would routinely walk up seven flights of stairs when he was assigned to the downtown Stanley Mosk courthouse and remains sharp.

“Things were set up to portray him in the worst light possible … he’s been portrayed as a bigot. He’s been portrayed as doddering and demented, which couldn’t be further from the truth,” Posner said.

In court on Monday, Posner suggested the complaint was part of a broader campaign to force Draper to retire and accused the L.A. County Superior Court’s leadership of ageism. A court spokesperson said they could not comment on personnel matters.

The race between Connolly and Thompson has also focused heavily on alleged misconduct.

Connolly’s past admonishments by the state commission include complaints that he yelled at attorneys for appearing remotely during the COVID-19 pandemic. The judge also told a recently acquitted defendant that he knew the man was guilty, records show.

“I don’t think it’s as much what I’ve said as how I have said it. I think that they have taken issue with the terms that I’ve used,” Connolly said, noting he has never been accused of ethical violations or moral impropriety.

L.A. County Superior Court Judge Pat Connolly at the Compton Courthouse.

(Robert Gauthier / Los Angeles Times)

A legal expert raised questions in 2023 about the propriety of Connolly seeking to disqualify a fellow judge from ruling on a petition to resentence a convicted cop killer that Connolly had prosecuted in the late 2000s. The state commission is also currently reviewing two additional complaints against Connolly, according to e-mails seen by The Times. Connolly said he couldn’t comment on either situation.

In an interview with The Times, Connolly said he was surprised by the “venom” Thompson had injected into the race.

He said he sees himself as a fair jurist with a knack for finding creative solutions to cases that balance public safety and alternatives to incarceration. In 2022, court records show, he negotiated a plea deal for an NFL player facing prison time for weapons charges, ordering him to organize sports camps for underprivileged youth.

“I’m one of those who listens to both sides, who gives both sides the opportunity to voice their positions,” he said.

Connolly enjoys the support of many sitting judges and law enforcement leaders, including former Dist. Atty. Steve Cooley and the head of the court’s criminal division, Ricardo Ocampo.

Thompson says some of Connolly’s allies on the bench have come after his supporters.

When Thompson launched his campaign, he published an endorsement from L.A. County Superior Court Judge Scott Yang on his campaign website. Within weeks, Thompson said, Yang asked him to take the endorsement down, claiming he was being pressured by other judges.

Yang, who presides over a court in the Antelope Valley, said his colleagues on the bench exhibited a “gangster mentality” when they told him to withdraw his endorsement in a judicial election, according to a text message reviewed by The Times.

“They were going to target him. They were going to run at him. They were potentially going to make false disciplinary reports around him,” Thompson said.

Connolly was not accused of being involved in the alleged harassment and declined to discuss the matter. Yang did not respond to multiple requests for comment. A court spokesperson said they had not received any reports of threats made against Yang, but a law enforcement source said Yang told them he was harassed by fellow judges over his endorsement of Thompson. The source spoke on condition of anonymity for fear of reprisals from the bench.

The conflict has generated whispers among L.A. County judges, one of whom requested anonymity due to concerns of backlash for speaking publicly. Word of the threats against Yang, the judge said, left some fearing they too could face retribution for breaking ranks.

“It’s totally concerning,” the judge said. “How different is that than the deputy gangs?”

WASHINGTON — Directly outside the Washington Hilton ballroom, as the yearly White House Correspondents’ Assn. dinner got underway Saturday, a Times reporter had just entered the men’s room when he heard a handful of loud pops ring out.

“Shooter!” someone shouted. “Get down! Shots fired!”

Inside the ballroom, thousands of journalists and politicians began to duck for cover as the event devolved from a celebration of free speech to a scene of fear.

The Times had six reporters at the dinner, seated at a table near the right side of the stage.

The Times reporter in the restroom, Gavin Quinton, heard the gunfire around 8:30 p.m. He had left The Times’ table minutes earlier, moving past the TV cameras and up toward the raised terrace near the ballroom’s security entrance. He crossed paths with CNN anchor Wolf Blitzer.

Outside the restroom, Cole Tomas Allen, 31, had broken into a sprint through the metal detectors, security footage would later show, getting within feet of the ballroom entrance.

Five or six shots fired by Secret Service agents missed Allen before agents brought him down near a staircase leading to the main floor, where Trump sat prominently in view.

A federal agent was hit in the chest in the exchange of gunfire but was wearing a bullet-proof vest and not seriously injured.

Inside the restroom, Quinton crouched near a corner. Others rushed into the room, including three hotel security guards who flung themselves in so quickly their backs slammed against the tiled wall. Within moments, a Secret Service agent positioned himself at the bathroom entrance, his pistol drawn.

“Head count?” he asked.

“A dozen — no, 15!” someone shouted back.

People stayed locked in bathroom stalls. Some tried to overcome the poor cellphone service to call loved ones. Confused, the mix of tuxedo-clad attendees, uniformed hotel guards and waitstaff tried to piece together what had happened.

“He had a gun,” one of the hotel guards said.

Another witness told Quinton that he initially thought Blitzer had been the shooter’s target.

“I look around and I hear shots as I’m opening the door. And I turn and I see him,” the man said of the gunman. “I look again and I’m like, ‘Oh, they just shot someone.’ ”

Blitzer, who was tackled to the floor by officers during the incident, would later say that “the first thing that went through my mind was whether he was going to shoot me.”

As the group speculated over whether the shooter had died in the volley, one man wondered aloud whether the event would continue. Initially thinking the gunman must have been killed, Quinton replied no.

“Why not?” the man asked. “It’s a bad guy who’s dead. It was a good f— ending. Seriously.”

The Washington Hilton has hosted the annual correspondents’ dinner for decades. The event, referred to locally as “Nerd Prom,” now comes with a slate of pre-parties and after-parties.

This was the president’s first appearance at the dinner since 2015; he had skipped it during his entire first term.

Questions now surround the security protocols. Guests faced little screening to enter the hotel on Saturday — a quick flash of a paper ticket — before heading down escalators to the only area with magnetometers, where bags were also searched.

Trump had entered the ballroom at 8:15 p.m. as the Marine band played “Hail to the Chief.”

Twenty minutes later, videos show, Secret Service officers with ballistic vests and long guns barked instructions to clear a path as they rushed into the ballroom and onto the stage.

One agent pulled Vice President JD Vance away. Another escorted Trump, who appeared to trip, but later explained he had been urged to drop to the floor.

Other officials — Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, FBI Director Kash Patel, Homeland Security advisor Stephen Miller — were quickly whisked away too.

At The Times’ table in the ballroom, nothing appeared amiss at first.

Waiters had just begun to clear plates of spring pea and burrata salad. The reporters did not hear the gunshots, but watched as the room fell silent and others began to drop from their seats and duck under the floor-length white tablecloths.

One reporter lost a shoe in the process and then feared a gunman would spot it. She dragged it under the table.

They stayed in place for several minutes, texting loved ones and waiting for an all-clear, but none came.

From under the tablecloth, reporters heard someone yell out, “God bless America! USA!” They feared that was the shooter.

It turned out to be Dan Scavino, White House deputy chief of staff. The chant did not catch on.

Eventually, others could be heard speaking loudly and dishes clanking. Guests began to peek out from under their tables and warily stand up. Uneasy laughter flickered about the ballroom.

Cellphone service inside the ballroom was spotty. There was confusion at first about whether a shooting had occurred or whether plates dropping to the floor had been mistaken for gunshots.

“I thought it was a tray going down,” Trump said later.

Just before 9 p.m., Weijia Jiang, a senior White House correspondent for CBS News who is president of the White House Correspondents’ Assn., told guests the program would “resume momentarily.”

A half hour later, Jiang returned to the stage and announced that law enforcement had requested guests leave the premises. She said Trump had told her no one was hurt and that he, the first lady and members of the Cabinet were safe.

In closing remarks, Jiang said journalism is a public service “because when there is an emergency, we run to the crisis — not away from it.”

“And on a night when we are thinking about the freedoms of the 1st Amendment, we must also think about how fragile they are,” she said. “I saw all of you reporting, and that’s what we do.”

Law enforcement and media leaders offered conflicting guidance. Quinton was among the first to evacuate the building, though the vast majority of guests waited inside for longer.

On his way out, he noticed a metal detector had already partially been dismantled when the shooter ran through.

Quinton passed the grounded shooter, restrained on his stomach, near the staircase just 20 or so feet from the bathroom entrance. He lifted his phone and recorded a brief, shaky video of the scene before security forced him out of the hotel and onto the street.

The entire spectrum of emotion was on display when security finally ordered everyone to evacuate. Women in gowns ran in fear. One man sobbed into the sleeves of his evening jacket.

Photos on social media showed others stopping to take selfies. Some drank wine straight form the bottle.

Quinton spotted the presidential motorcade outside of the hotel lobby at about 8:45 p.m. Around the same time, an ambulance arrived as about 100 event attendees were escorted out of the secured event perimeter.

More law enforcement was inside the hotel as guests exited the building, including agents from the Secret Service, ATF, FBI and the Department of Homeland Security. National Guard soldiers replaced celebrities and politicians at the red carpet entrance.

Outside, Metropolitan police ushered people north on Columbia Road NW. Hungry guests in tuxedos filed into a nearby 7-Eleven. The dinner’s main course — prime beef and Maine lobster — had not been served.

At the White House afterward, Trump said the event would be rescheduled.

“We’re not going to let anybody take over our society,” he told reporters who had rushed to the news conference still dressed in gowns and black tie. “We’re not going to cancel things out because we can’t do that.”

Meanwhile, the night’s after-parties continued, though organizers attempted a more somber tone. MS NOW, for instance, told those who had RSVP’d that their “Democracy After Hours” party would be a “space for friends and colleagues to be together.”

Independent journalist Tara Palmeri posted a photo on the social media site X of a full party with blue mood lighting.

“People were still partying, still hitting WHCD afterparties last night,” she wrote. “Epstein corruption, an escalating Iran conflict, and an active shooter— and Washington just… kept going. The cognitive dissonance is the system.”

On Sunday morning, the Washington Hilton appeared back to normal, except for the presence of journalists using the hotel as a backdrop for their live shots.

Bill Cassidy’s roles as a lawmaker, a doctor and a political candidate will collide on Wednesday as he questions Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. in two high-stakes Senate hearings.

The Louisiana Republican chairs one of the Senate committees that oversees Kennedy’s department and sits on another, giving him two chances to interrogate the secretary about his plans for an agency responsible for public health programs and research. As a doctor, Cassidy has clashed with Kennedy’s anti-vaccine ideas even though he provided crucial support for the health secretary’s nomination last year.

At the same time, Cassidy is fighting for his political future in next month’s primary in Louisiana, where President Trump has endorsed one of his opponents in an unusual attempt to oust a sitting senator from his own party.

How Cassidy handles the hearings could affect his chances at a pivotal moment of his reelection campaign and set the tone for how Congress oversees the nation’s health agenda at a time of rampant distrust and misinformation.

Cassidy hasn’t faced Kennedy in public since September. In the subsequent months, Kennedy has attempted a dramatic rollback of vaccine recommendations that, if not blocked by an ongoing lawsuit, could undermine protections against diseases like flu, hepatitis B and RSV.

After a backlash, Kennedy has also pivoted to spending more time talking about less controversial topics like healthy eating — albeit with his own spin, including sharing exaggerated claims that various ailments can be cured by diet alone.

Cassidy will have to decide on Wednesday whether to grill Kennedy on vaccines, an issue deeply important to him, or put their differences aside and prioritize loyalty to the Trump administration.

“He’s taken a risk showing any sort of resistance to RFK,” said Claire Leavitt, an assistant professor at Smith College who studies congressional oversight. “He may pay an electoral price for that.”

Cassidy has long advocated for vaccines

Cassidy has spent years walking a political tightrope. He’s one of the few Republican senators who voted to convict Trump during an impeachment trial after the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol.

As a liver doctor, he advocated for babies to receive hepatitis B vaccines shortly after birth, a step that could have prevented the disease in his patients. But when Trump nominated Kennedy, a longtime anti-vaccine activist, Cassidy supported him. He did so after securing various commitments, including that Kennedy would work within the current vaccine approval and safety monitoring system and support the childhood vaccine schedule.

The vote for Kennedy did not appear to mollify Trump. The president endorsed U.S. Rep. Julia Letlow, one of Cassidy’s two primary opponents.

Cassidy also faces opposition from Kennedy’s allies in the “Make America Healthy Again” movement, a group that includes both anti-vaccine activists and a wide variety of other crusaders for health and the environment. The MAHA PAC, aligned with Kennedy, has pledged $1 million to Letlow’s campaign. While the organization hasn’t publicly said so, some have questioned whether the support is partly in retaliation against Cassidy for criticizing Kennedy’s vaccine policy agenda.

“I’m not really sure what MAHA’s beef is,” Cassidy told reporters earlier this month. “Let me point out that I am the reason that Robert F. Kennedy is now the secretary of HHS. He would not have gotten there otherwise.”

Cassidy argues that he has “strongly supported” the MAHA agenda, especially when it comes to the fight against ultraprocessed foods. However, the physician-turned-senator acknowledged that he and MAHA have “disagreed on vaccines.”

“We’ve seen, frankly, that I am right,” Cassidy added, pointing to recent measles-related deaths of children who were not vaccinated.

At a hearing in September, he slammed Kennedy’s decision to slash funding for mRNA vaccine development. He interrogated Kennedy over his attempt to replace members of a vaccine committee, suggesting the new members could have conflicts of interest. He also raised concerns that Kennedy’s vaccine policy decisions could be making it harder for Americans to get COVID-19 shots.

Later that month, Cassidy convened a hearing featuring former U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Director Susan Monarez, who was ousted by Kennedy less than a month into her tenure after they clashed over vaccine policy, and former CDC Chief Medical Officer Debra Houry, who resigned in August citing an erosion of science at the agency.

“I want to work with the president to fulfill his campaign promise to reform the CDC and Make America Healthy Again. The president says radical transparency is the way to do that,” Cassidy said at the time.

Experts say Cassidy’s vaccine stance might not hurt him

Political consultants said they expect Cassidy’s primary opponents, Letlow and Louisiana Treasurer John Fleming, to seize on any sound bites from Wednesday’s hearings that can make Cassidy seem at odds with the Trump administration.

But Dorit Reiss, a vaccine law expert at UC Law San Francisco, said the political risk of advocating for vaccines may not be as strong among Republicans as some people assume.

“He’s probably not alienating voters by focusing on the issue and calling it out,” she said.

Louisiana political consultant Mary-Patricia Wray said she thinks most diehard MAHA voters already know who they are voting for, and it’s probably not Cassidy.

Instead, she said, he may still be able to appeal to Democrats who switch their party registration to vote in the primary, as well as a wide swath of still-undecided Republican voters who care about the same health care affordability issues he advocates for every day in Congress.

“If I was advising Bill Cassidy, I would tell him your goal here is not to get out unscathed,” Wray said. “Your goal is to prove that your consistency on issues regarding public health is an asset in your campaign, not a detriment.”

Election outcome will shape future oversight of HHS

Also at stake if Cassidy doesn’t make it to November’s general election is what will happen to his responsibility to oversee the massive U.S. Department of Health and Human Services as the chair of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions committee.

Leavitt, the Smith College professor, said seniority typically plays the most important role in who chairs Senate committees. She said another Republican in today’s increasingly hyperpartisan Congress may not be as willing as Cassidy to check Kennedy’s power.

Reiss, the vaccine law expert, said she wishes Cassidy had done more hearings or introduced legislation to rein in Kennedy. And she said the senator bears the blame for allowing Kennedy to bring unfounded vaccine fears into the government in the first place.

“His original sin, of course, was voting for Kennedy at all,” Reiss said.

Swenson writes for the Associated Press. AP writer Sara Cline contributed to this report.

Kevin Warsh, the man nominated to lead the Federal Reserve, the world’s most important financial institution, told the US Senate Banking Committee on Tuesday that he had made no secret agreements with the White House over interest rate policy, defending his professional integrity.

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

He said he would act independently if confirmed to succeed Jerome Powell, despite continued public pressure from US President Donald Trump for lower borrowing costs.

The question of that independence was put sharply to him during the hearing, when Republican Senator John Kennedy asked whether he would be Trump’s “human sock puppet”. Warsh replied: “Absolutely not.”

His comments came amid broader concerns on Capitol Hill about the future direction of the central bank, with lawmakers divided over his past record and approach to monetary policy.

Warsh insisted that the President had never asked him to commit to any specific interest rate path and said he would not have agreed to such a request.

The hearing highlighted the significant pressure facing the Federal Reserve as it maintains its independence while addressing inflation, which remains at 3.3%.

Just hours before the session began, US President Donald Trump stated in a CNBC interview that he would be disappointed if Warsh did not immediately implement rate cuts.

This current friction suggests that the White House may struggle to secure the necessary votes to confirm Warsh before Powell’s term as Fed Chair expires on 15 May.

Democratic opposition and Republican dissent

Democratic senators were particularly vocal in their scepticism, accusing Warsh of shifting his economic stance to suit the political climate.

US Senator Elizabeth Warren labelled the nominee a “sock puppet”, suggesting his installation would facilitate an “illegal takeover” of the institution.

Critics also pointed to his historical record, alleging that he favoured higher rates during Democratic administrations but has become more dovish under Republican leadership.

US Senator Ruben Gallego cited reporting from the Wall Street Journal (WSJ), which claimed the President had previously urged Warsh to reduce borrowing costs. Warsh responded by stating that such reports were based on inaccurate sources and reiterated that the independence of the Fed is “essential” for economic stability.

Despite Trump’s backing, the nomination also faces a critical roadblock within the Republican Party.

US Senator Thom Tillis, a Republican from North Carolina, reiterated his refusal to support Warsh as long as a Department of Justice investigation into Jerome Powell continues.

The probe, led by Assistant US Attorney Jeannine Pirro, is examining whether Powell committed perjury during testimony last year regarding the budget of a Federal Reserve building renovation project.

Tillis and other Republican colleagues have expressed their support for Powell, arguing that the investigation is meritless. According to Tillis, he will not vote for a successor until the “investigation is dropped,” a stance that effectively freezes the nomination in a closely divided committee.

Federal prosecutors have reportedly continued their efforts to access Fed records as recently as last week, even after a judge previously found no evidence to support the charges.

Legal and ethical hurdles

The proceedings also delved into Warsh’s personal financial interests and the logistical challenges of a potential leadership transition.

US Senator Elizabeth Warren raised questions about the nominee’s investments in private entities, including SpaceX and Polymarket, noting that the specific size of these holdings had not been fully disclosed to the public.

Warsh defended his position by stating that the Office of Government Ethics has already approved his plan to divest all assets within 90 days of his confirmation.

Compounding the uncertainty is the unique situation involving Jerome Powell.

Unlike most departing Chairs, Powell has indicated he intends to remain on the Federal Reserve’s governing board until his separate term ends in 2028, or until the perjury investigation is concluded.

This could create an awkward power dynamic where the former Chair sits alongside his successor, a scenario not seen in Washington since the late 1940s.

While US President Donald Trump has threatened to remove Powell from the board entirely, legal experts suggest such a move would be difficult, particularly given recent US Supreme Court precedents relating to the protection of Fed governors from political dismissal.

Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. on Thursday faced federal lawmakers for the first time since September as he sought to defend a more than 12% proposed cut to his department’s budget and dodge arrows from angry Democrats along the way.

In his testimony before the House Ways and Means Committee, kicking off an expected sprint of seven budget hearings he’ll attend across congressional committees and subcommittees over the next week, Kennedy emphasized the administration’s work to reform dietary guidelines and crack down on waste, fraud and abuse.

Republicans on the committee praised Kennedy as a “breath of fresh air” and asked him to promote his department’s recent actions. Democrats, who have been furious over Kennedy’s sweeping overhaul of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, largely had a different agenda.

They needled Kennedy on what they viewed as the Trump administration’s hypocrisy on fraud, demanded to know why he was cutting budgets for various programs and slammed his efforts to pull back vaccine recommendations and messaging, which they said have caused unnecessary deaths.

Kennedy fired back, often raising his voice as he accused the Democrats of misrepresenting his work and past statements.

Here are three standout moments from Thursday’s hearing:

A standoff over measles

One heated exchange early in the hearing came between Kennedy and Rep. Linda Sanchez. The California Democrat decried recent measles outbreaks across the U.S. and asked Kennedy to answer for the fact that under his leadership, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention pulled back public health messaging supporting vaccination.

“As a mother, this horrifies me,” Sanchez said. “Did President Trump approve your decision to end CDC’s pro-vaccine public messaging campaign?”

Kennedy repeatedly refused to answer, saying first he wanted to respond to the “misstatements that you’ve made” and later praising the Trump administration’s record on preventing measles, although protections against the disease have eroded in some parts of the country as vaccination rates have dropped.

“That’s not answering my question,” Sanchez said as the two talked over each other.

But Sanchez also got Kennedy, a longtime anti-vaccine activist before he entered politics, to acknowledge that a 6-year-old who died of measles last year in West Texas could have potentially been saved with vaccination.

“Do you agree with the majority of doctors that the measles vaccine could have saved that child’s life in Texas?” she asked.

“It’s possible, certainly,” Kennedy said.

RFK Jr. denies talking about Black children being ‘re-parented’

A fight erupted between Kennedy and Rep. Terri Sewell, a Democrat from Alabama, when Kennedy vehemently denied making remarks he’d said in 2024.

The comments dated back to when Kennedy was a presidential candidate. On the “High Level Conversations” podcast last July, he said, “Psychiatric drugs — which every Black kid is now just standard put on Adderall, SSRIs, benzos, which are known to induce violence, and those kids are going to have a chance to go somewhere and get re-parented to live in a community where there’ll be no cellphones, no screens, you’ll actually have to talk to people.”

“Have you ever re-parented, or parented, I should say, a Black child?” Sewell asked, as her staff held up a poster featuring an abbreviated version of the quote.

“I don’t even know what that phrase means,” Kennedy said. “I’m not going to answer something I didn’t say.”

“You’re making stuff up,” he later claimed.

A recording of the podcast shows he made the comments during a conversation about free rehabilitation facilities he was proposing opening at the time in rural areas around the country.

Health and Human Services spokesperson Emily Hilliard said Kennedy before joining the administration was referring to spaces where young people facing alienation, mental health challenges and despair could get re-parented, which she said was a psychotherapy term for “developing the emotional regulation, discipline, boundaries, and self-worth that may not have been established in childhood.”

For Kennedy and his former party, civility is the exception

Kennedy spent most of his life as a Democrat, the scion of one of the nation’s most famous political families. Both Republicans and Democrats during the hearing began their remarks by expressing their admiration of Kennedy’s relatives, among them former President John F. Kennedy.

But again and again throughout Thursday’s hearing, the fraying of bonds between Kennedy and his former party was on full display as spiteful comments were passed back and forth.

The Health secretary grew defensive and visibly agitated. He repeatedly criticized Democratic lawmakers for not giving him a word in edgewise.

“They’ve all shut me up,” Kennedy said at one point. “They give a little speech that they can go and market, you know, for fundraising, and they don’t allow me to answer the question.”

On a few rare occasions, the exchanges were civil. One representative, Gwen Moore of Wisconsin, used humor to make that happen.

“I promise to give you easy, comfortable questions if you don’t yell at me and hurt my feelings,” she told Kennedy. He promised he wouldn’t.

Swenson writes for the Associated Press.