illegal

After Gov. Gavin Newsom announced this week that the U.S. Department of Justice may be investigating his wife, Jennifer Siebel Newsom, media and pundits pounced on millions in charity payments he has solicited for nonprofits, including ones she is involved in.

Those donations, known as “behested payments,” aren’t illegal in California, but, long before Newsom started asking for them, many have found them unsavory — with good cause. A behest, after all, is by definition a command or at least a strong suggestion.

Anytime a politician is commanding money, regardless of the purpose, there is at least the appearance that the giver — Meta, Google, Blue Shield for example — may expect something in return.

It may seem absurd that the Trump administration could be investigating Newsom for questionable ethics, when Trump has hawked everything from crypto-coins to sneakers from the Oval Office. But the problem Newsom now faces is that behested payments are actually skeevy, and legal or not, they make an excellent target for pummeling the presidential contender. Especially because some of the charities are tied to his wife.

“The Newsom case has blown it wide open, but this has been an issue for years,” Sean McMorris told me. He’s the transparency, ethics and accountability program manager at Common Cause, a nonpartisan organization that has been raising alarms over behested payments for more than a decade.

McMorris said that while these payments don’t violate any laws, they are “ripe for abuse” because companies and people likely aren’t ponying up cash just to be good citizens. If you or I called up PG&E and asked them to give a few million to our favorite cause, I doubt we’d have much luck, even if it involved kittens, puppies or small children in need.

The entire system, McMorris points out, “doesn’t really work unless you’re shaking down people who you know need things from you as a politician.”

Jerry Brown used behested payments to get millions for charter schools he supported. Lesser luminaries such as mayors (including Antonio Villaraigosa, Eric Garcetti and Karen Bass, just to name the last three in L.A.) have used them for all kinds of stuff from jobs programs to fixing up official residences.

And it’s far from a Democratic thing. Arnold Schwarzenegger, a Republican, used them to pay for travel and after-school programs. Republican James Gallagher, who recently won a congressional seat, used them to fund computers for schools while he was in the state Legislature. Senate Minority Leader Brian Jones has raised millions, including helping to get $800,000 in donations to fund a replica of a historic ship for the maritime museum in his San Diego district.

Trump himself could be considered king of behested payments, with his corporate-paid ballroom and birthday bash.

Literally, folks, find me a politician with an itty-bitty bit of clout, and I’ll show you a trail of behested payments stretching through their pet projects. For that reason alone, it’s unlikely that California legislators will take any action to curb them, especially now when doing so would appear as a criticism to Newsom and Democrats in general.

And, to be fair, behested payments can do a lot of good. Newsom supercharged behested payments during the pandemic, raising hundreds of millions for programs to get Californians through that social disaster.

For that reason and others, not all experts find them terribly troubling. Jessica Levinson, a Loyola Law School professor with an expertise in election and governance issues, points out that money in politics is nothing new and at least behested payments are (mostly) required to be acknowledged. Anything over $5,000 and the politician has to report it to the California Fair Political Practices Commission, which keeps a public database.

That makes behested payments far more transparent than, say, dark money donations to a mysterious political action committee. And at least the money is going to a good cause, be it historical ships or computers for kids.

“I actually don’t think that they’re the evil mechanism that other people do,” Levinson said. “I mean, my feeling is like, let’s live in reality, right? People are going to want to give as much money to or close to powerful people as possible, and I think that we have a choice between money going to independent expenditure groups or political committees or going to nonprofits.”

So behested payments in and of themselves might not be much of a headache for Newsom. But some of the payments Newsom solicited went to nonprofits Siebel Newsom is involved with, and which have paid her a salary. That proximity is uncomfortable for many of us. There is no distinction for a behest given to a charity with direct ties to the politician, but maybe there should be.

Still, salaries being paid by behested payments also aren’t illegal, and it’s been done before, even by Newsom. Villaraigosa was paid through behested funds for his work as the state “infrastructure czar” back in 2022. Bass considered paying former L.A. Police Commissioner Steve Soboroff through behested-funded nonprofits for his work after the recent fires before public scrutiny pushed him to forgo the funds.

None of that is to say the Newsoms are off the hook in a federal investigation. Newsom’s office said that along with the FBI, agents from the IRS have been knocking on doors and asking questions. All of us — probably the Newsoms included — will just have to wait to see if the fine-tooth combs of the feds pick up any dirt.

If there is any lesson to be learned at this point, it’s about ambition and hubris. Behested payments are easy money for California politicians and business as usual — everyone does it. But maybe they shouldn’t. It’s not black or white.

Newsom is learning quickly what it means to have a powerful enemy like Trump, one who has shown he will use the full power of the American government for his own purposes. One who can tip the scales and slide white to gray and gray to felony.

Federal investigators do not like to come up empty-handed, and the wink-wink nature of behested payments creates just that kind of ambiguity that provides reasonable cause for investigation — a self-inflicted vulnerability that surely has every California politician nervous.

MAFS Australia stars Bec Zacharia and Awhina Rutene have revealed they’re going under the knife to have their ribs “recontoured” in a procedure that’s illegal in Australia.

Bec, who became one of the most controversial stars of the latest series, said she had been flooded with hate by nasty trolls commenting on her appearance.

The reality star, who tied the knot with Danny Hewitt on the show, has previously been open about her drastic weight loss, losing over 4st.

In a new video with influencer Joshua Fox, Bec admitted she still had a lot of loose skin that she was desperate to get rid of as she flew to Bali for the procedure.

Speaking to the influencer, she said: “I’ve got a lot of loose skin, this is the most vulnerable I’m ever going to be because there are parts of me that I can’t stand looking in the mirror.

“Your body, your choice, what you feel confident with and what you feel comfortable, f***ing do it.

“So why are all these Karen’s coming at me. Let me get my ribs done.”

The TV star said: “No one wants to look like me, see this sloth over here.

“Get your teeth done, get your jaw done, get your skin done, get your nose done, trust me if I could I would.”

Joshua shared his fears, saying: “It’s not available in Australia yet because it take a long time for things to be approved there.

“I just worry it sets this new standard.”

Meanwhile, second bride Awhina, who starred on the show in 2025, said she was also planning to undergo the same procedure to achieve a more “hourglass” figure.

She said: “There was no way I was going to be removing ribs from my body where it’s protecting vital organs, I was really worried about all of that.

“But I looked into it, it’s rib contouring, where they are going to angle my rib inwards to give me that natural hourglass silhouette.

“I’m not worried that I’m a blue print for anyone else.”

Joshua captioned the post: “In a matter of hours, Bec, Awhina and the other influencers on this trip will all undergo the ‘rib recontouring’ procedure here in Bali. But why are they doing this? And do they think they’re setting a dangerous example?

“Ep 2 of the investigative pod series out now. Follow here for part 3 and our journey in the hospital.”

In May, Bec returned to social media after her ‘ban’ over a dress scandal as she’s mocked by her show rival.

The TV star endured an explosive time during her Married At First Sight stint with groom Danny amid clashes with bride Gia Fleur.

Just weeks after Bec was dumped at Final Vows her actions caused her Instagram account to be deleted from the platform entirely.

Bec claimed that her main profile was removed after she was reported by other users because she was involved in drama with an Australian designer bridal rental company reports Heart.

Now, Bec is back on Instagram and captioned a series of images: “Sticks and stones may break our bones, but names will NEVER hurt us.”

The images included a smiling Bec posing alongside MAFS bride Alissa Fay who was also blindsided at the end of the series.

Brides Gia and Bec clashed several times throughout the season after failing to hit it off just minutes into meeting during the hen party.

And after the dress scandal, Gia took to social media and mocked Bec saying: “In the light of what’s going on just now with some people losing their Instagrams and people acting at fashion week above people.

“Let’s be humble.”

Gia then modelled a $12 dollar outfit and explained that nobody knew them before the show as she appeared to then impersonate Bec.

Gia’s followers flocked to comment and one said: “Still attacking Bec.”

Another said: “Let’s be humble. Then goes on to talk about someone else… that’s also not being humble.”

A third added: “The impression at the end was funny.”

Awhina and show husband Adrian had a highly turbulent relationship.

They chose to stay together at final vows, but split just a few days later.

Caracas, June 12, 2026 (venezuelanalysis.com) – Venezuela’s Bolivarian National Armed Forces (FANB) have launched a large-scale operation on Tuesday in Bolívar state, one of the country’s main mineral-rich regions in the southeast and also one with a heavy presence of criminal organizations.

Local media outlets and non-governmental organizations reported helicopter overflights, explosions, and the displacements of hundreds of people leaving gold extraction zones in Las Claritas and the area known as Kilometer 88, two key locations within the Orinoco Mining Arc.

According to Bloomberg, the military actions targeted illegal mining operations controlled by armed groups. Former opposition lawmaker for Bolívar state Américo De Grazia claimed that military forces attacked several gold-mining enclaves through aerial bombardments and gunfire.

The Venezuelan government, led by acting President Delcy Rodríguez, and the armed forces have offered no official information regarding the operations, as well as casualties, arrests, or official goals. Rodríguez met with military leaders on Wednesday to discuss a “100-Day Plan” to optimize the functioning of the armed forces but did not comment on the reported Bolívar deployment.

The operation took place in a region where the state has struggled to assert authority in the face of a proliferation of armed groups that control and administer mines, run artisanal mining activities, and regulate economic activity linked to gold extraction.

At the same time, local reports indicated that the military operation could be aimed at capturing Yohan José Romero, known as “Yohan Petrica,” a founding member of the Tren de Aragua criminal outfit, who reportedly operates in the area alongside Juan Gabriel Rivas Núñez, alias “El Negro Juancho,” and a third figure known as “Humbertico.”

Some sources have also not ruled out the presence of Héctor Guerrero, alias “Niño Guerrero,” the top leader of the large-scale criminal group that emerged inside Tocorón prison in Aragua state.

In September 2023, the Venezuelan government deployed “Operation Gran Cacique Guaicaipuro,” with more than 11,000 security personnel, to intervene in Tocorón prison. However, multiple reports indicated that “Niño Guerrero” and other senior gang leaders were warned in advance and escaped through a network of secret tunnels.

Guerrero is currently the subject of an Interpol Red Notice on charges related to transnational organized crime, drug trafficking, money laundering, and arms trafficking. The US State Department is offering a reward of up to US $5 million for information leading to his capture.

For its part, the media platform Miraflores al Momento denied separate reports alleging the presence of US military contingents in El Callao, another major gold-mining area in Bolívar state. Likewise, fact-checking outlets Cazadores de Fake News and CotejoInfo confirmed that images circulating were generated by artificial intelligence.

However, local outlets confirmed that, though without any military presence, US officials and business executives have conducted visits to gold-processing facilities belonging to the state-owned Venezuelan Mining Corporation (Minerven) in El Callao.

Last April, Venezuela approved a new mining law granting expanded incentives for private corporations to exploit gold and other “strategic minerals.” Concessions will last up to 30 years and may be renewed for two additional ten-year periods. The new law 

The legislation additionally introduced provisions for international arbitration in dispute resolution, a safeguard sought by investors, and a reduction of royalties and taxes at the Venezuelan government’s discretion.

Among the companies expressing interest are Canadian firms Gold Reserve and Augusta Capital Corporation, which seek to revive the large-scale gold and strategic minerals project known as “Siembra Minera.” Likewise, Roland Mineral Enterprises Corp. has already begun procedures to explore and develop gold, copper, and silver deposits. Swiss commodities giant Trafigura is also advancing a responsible sourcing program in partnership with state-owned Minerven.

There have additionally been corporate initiatives and feasibility studies by US companies—including mining firms such as Hartree, Peabody Energy, Ivanhoe, and TechMet—to enter the sector, though security concerns reportedly remain an obstacle.

Mining municipalities in southern Venezuela report some of the country’s highest rates of homicide, as well as reports of forced labor and widespread sexual violence. The gold extracting activities are mostly unregulated. According to former opposition lawmaker Américo De Grazia, only the gold processed by Minerven enters official records, while the rest circulates through parallel channels.

Similarly, Transparency Venezuela estimates that just 14 percent of the revenues generated by the gold sector reach the Central Bank and public coffers through royalties and export-related payments.

Edited by Ricardo Vaz in Caracas.

The Palestinian Authority condemned Israel’s decision to build 2,162 illegal settlement units in the occupied West Bank, calling for US intervention to halt the Israeli “madness.”

“All settlement activity is illegal under international law and does not confer legitimacy to anyone,” the authority said in a statement carried by the official news agency Wafa.

It said the Israeli decision constitutes a “blatant challenge to international law and UN resolutions,” particularly UN Security Council Resolution 2334, which affirms the illegality of the Israeli settlements in all occupied Palestinian territories, including East Jerusalem.

It held the Israeli authorities responsible for the “serious consequences” of the settlement policies, warning that they would push the region toward “further cycles of violence and escalation.”

READ: Situation worsening in West Bank, warn Italy, UK, France, Germany

The authority called on the US administration to intervene immediately “to stop the Israeli madness if it genuinely seeks to promote security and stability in the region and globally.”

It stressed that the Palestinian people would remain “steadfast on their land and committed to their legitimate national rights,” saying the illegal settlement plans would not deter them from continuing their struggle to establish an independent Palestinian state on the June 4, 1967 borders with East Jerusalem as its capital.

The statement came after Israel’s Higher Planning Council approved the construction of 2,162 new settlement units across several illegal settlements in the occupied West Bank.

The plans include 1,006 units in the Gevaot settlement within the Gush Etzion bloc south of Bethlehem, 922 units in the Har Brakha settlement south of Nablus, and 234 units in Kiryat Arba settlement built on land belonging to the city of Hebron.

Palestinians view the new plans as part of an accelerated Israeli policy aimed at expanding illegal settlements, confiscating Palestinian land and creating new facts on the ground.

READ: Israeli authorities issue order to seize 74 acres East of Bethlehem

June 5 (UPI) — The Treasury Department on Friday issued an advisory that financial institutions, including banks and casinos, to “be vigilant” against signs of unlawful employment of illegal immigrants.

The Department’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, called FinCEN, in the advisory calls on the institutions employ methods to detect schemes covering up the employment of people who are not authorized to work in the United States.

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said in a FinCEN press release that part of the Trump administration’s crackdown on illegal immigration includes “securing our financial system.”

“This administration will not allow illegal aliens to abuse financial institutions to steal billions of dollars from hardworking American taxpayers,” Bessent said.

In order for non-immigrants to work in the United States, employers are required to petition with U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services for eligibility, before a prospective employee either applies to the State Department for a visa or enters the country through a port of entry, according to USCIS.

FinCEN said in the release that the hiring, concealing and exploiting of workers without visas can give employers advantages over other businesses, depress wages, facilitate identity theft and steal tax revenue from the United States.

The agencies additionally said that the hiring of these workers can also help fund and assist criminal enterprises that include drug trafficking and human trafficking.

The financial institutions are being asked to watch out for red flags of shell companies, identity theft, fraudulently used social security and worker identification numbers, shell companies and a raft of other detectable signs of fraud.

In addition to depository institutions such as banks, credit unions, money services businesses and securities and futures firms, FinCEN has aimed the advisory at casinos, the insurance industry, mortgage companies and brokers, and the precious metals and jewelry industries.

The Treasury Department said that more than $2.5 billion in suspicious activity reported by financial institutions was linked to payroll fraud schemes in 2025 alone, noting one multi-year scheme that cost the United States more than $38 million in tax revenue.

NEW YORK — American businesses big and small have started receiving tariff refunds after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that President Trump lacked the constitutional authority to impose higher import taxes on goods from nearly every other country.

The process could grind to a halt, however, after the Trump administration said Friday that it intended to appeal a federal judge’s order to allow all companies that paid the illegal import taxes to seek refunds, not just the ones that filed lawsuits.

Until the Department of Justice informed the judge of its planned appeal, the refund system overseen by U.S. Customs and Border Protection had been working fairly smoothly. Refunds reached the bank accounts of the first successful applicants on May 12, about three weeks after American importers and their customs brokers could start submitting claims through an online system, according to CBP.

Applications for refunds totaling $85 billion — more than half of the $166 billion the agency estimated the government owes to companies that paid the illegal tariffs on imported goods — were accepted for processing as of May 22, CBP reported in a legal filing earlier in the week. It said it had so far directed the Treasury Department to issue $20.6 billion in refunds.

The administration revealed its appeal preparations while objecting to a demand by Judge Richard K. Eaton for CBP Commissioner Rodney Scott to appear in the U.S. Court of International Trade to answer questions about how long it would take to repay all 330,000 importers that might be eligible for refunds. The judge has scheduled a June 9 hearing on why he shouldn’t require the government do whatever it takes to speed up the process.

Justice Department lawyers asked Eaton to allow one or two of Scott’s deputies to appear in his place, arguing that as a high-ranking presidential appointee, the CBP chief could not be compelled to testify in court. They also argued that Eaton exceeded his own authority when he determined in March that the Supreme Court’s ruling entitled “all importers of record’’ to refunds.

“For that reason, defendants intend to appeal the court’s universal injunction,” the lawyers wrote, adding that CBP would continue to move “as quickly as it can to process refunds in a phased approach” for businesses that filed some 485 pending trade court complaints to assert their rights to refunds.

In a terse reply Friday, Eaton said he needed to hear directly from Scott whether the government would return all of the money it collected between when Trump imposed what he called “reciprocal” tariffs on goods from most countries in April 2025 and when the Supreme Court struck them down in late February.

“This case involves $166 billion,” the judge wrote. “It is undisputed that the remedy for this unlawful collection is for the United States government to refund the unlawfully collected duties.”

Some national retail chains said they planned to use their tariff refunds to lower customer prices on some items. Walmart Chief Financial Officer John David Rainey told analysts last week that the company would implement price cuts even though the maximum refund it might be eligible for represented less than half of 1% of Walmart’s $483 billion in annual U.S. sales.

Some smaller companies told the Associated Press that the partial refunds they’ve received so far would go toward paying remaining or future tariffs, reducing debt or just keeping the lights on after more than a year of uncertainty and additional import costs.

Jay Foreman, chief executive of toy company Basic Fun, said he received about $450,000, or 7% of his total claim, over two consecutive days this month. He took the initial repayment as a positive sign but said that after having less than $10,000 refunded since then, the process seemed like a “total slow roll.”

“It’s time to release the funds back into the economy, especially given how much we and others need these funds to support our businesses and fund our operations,” Foreman said.

Anderson writes for the Associated Press.

May 8 (UPI) — The Department of Government Efficiency illegally canceled roughly $100 million in grants that Congress had approved the National Endowment for the Humanities to award, a judge ruled.

U.S. District Court Judge Colleen McMahon said Thursday in a 143-page decision that DOGE and the Trump administration had “no constitutional authority to block, amend, subvert or delay spending appropriations based on the president’s own policy preferences,” CBS News and The Washington Post reported.

DOGE used ChatGPT to revoke grants the NEH had already awarded that it thought were related to diversity, equity and inclusion programs the administration sought to rapidly eliminate throughout the federal government in 2025.

The NEH was one of 16 “small agencies” that President Donald Trump last May marked for elimination in his 2026 budget proposal, which the DOGE effort, as spearheaded by Elon Musk, had already started culling expenditures from.

“The termination of NEH grants challenged in this action was unlawful because it was undertaken in violation of the First Amendment, in violation of the equal protection component of the Fifth Amendment and without statutory authority,” McMahon wrote in the decision.

The lawsuit was brought by the American Council of Learned Societies, the American Historical Association and the Modern Language Association of America after DOGE cut more than 1,400 grants that had been awarded to scholars, research institutions and humanities organizations.

McMahon said that because Congress had not given DOGE the authority to “identify, select or direct the termination of the grants,” she permanently enjoined the government from terminating all of the grants referenced in the lawsuit, as well as from cutting any others using the arguments rejected in the ruling.

Representatives of the three organizations hailed the ruling and said they would continue to push for the full restoration of all the NEH grants, which includes “staff, programs and capacity to serve the public it was created to support.”

“This ruling is an important achievement in our effort to restore the NEH’s ability to fulfill the vital mission with which Congress charged it,” Sarah Weicksel, executive director of the American Historical Association, said in a press release.

“From history exhibitions and path breaking scholarship to library programs and professional development opportunities, the humanities help us understand our past and ourselves, providing all of us with the essential tools for our future,” she said.

Kid Cudi has fired M.I.A. as an opening act on his Rebel Ragers tour following backlash over her onstage comments in Dallas, where she said she “can’t do illegal” and appeared to accuse audience members of being in the country illegally.

The controversy first gained steam on Reddit where concertgoers expressed their concerns about her comments at Saturday’s show, including that she reportedly claimed she was canceled for being a brown Republican voter, prompting boos from the audience. Although she is not a U.S. citizen, she endorsed Donald Trump’s 2024 presidential campaign.

In one video, she says she “can’t do illegal, though some of you could be in the audience,” drawing audible gasps.

In a statement Monday, Kid Cudi announced that M.I.A. was no longer with the tour and noted that he had previously had his management tell her team that he “didn’t want anything offensive” in his shows and that he was assured this message was understood.

“After the last couple shows, I’ve been flooded with messages from fans that were upset by her rants,” he wrote in a statement on Instagram. “This, to me, is very disappointing and I won’t have someone on my tour making offensive remarks that upsets my fanbase.”

The rant came as she introduced her song “ILLYGIRL,” which has lyrics that say “I’m illegal, f— your law.” In another video, she can be heard saying, “I’m illegal, half my team are not here because they didn’t get the visa,” before instructing the audience not to listen to “what the bots say on the internet.”

After Cudi’s announcement about her being removed from the tour, she responded in an all-caps message on X, writing, “I WROTE BORDERS AND ILLYGAL AND PAPER PLANES BEFORE YOU THOUGHT IMMIGRANT RIGHTS WERE COOL. I’VE HAD [THESE] BATTLES BY MYSELF WITHOUT THE HELP OF MILLIONS OF FANS BACKING ME.”

M.I.A., whose real name is Mathangi “Maya” Arulpragasam, is a British-born rapper with Sri Lankan parents. She spent her early childhood in Sri Lanka before her family returned to London as refugees during the country’s civil war.

She is best known for her 2008 smash hit “Paper Planes,” which includes the lyrics “If you catch me at the border I got visas in my name.” Several of her songs deal with themes of immigration, politics and war.

In 2022, she announced her conversion to born-again Christian, which inspired her recently released album M.I.7, featuring heavy Christian themes.

In her X statement on Monday, she accused people of gaslighting her song lyrics, noting that “IS THE WORK OF SATAN.” She also made comments about Jesus being an immigrant and a rebel and said he returned to lead the world to fight injustice. She ended the post with a call for everyone to listen to M.I.7.

Kudi’s 33-show Rebel Ragers tour kicked off March 28 with M.I.A. and Big Boi billed as the opening acts. On Monday, he also announced that his Tuesday show in Birmingham, Ala., was canceled due to low ticket sales. The tour is set to continue with Big Boi as an opener and A-Trak, Me N Ü and Dot Da Genius slated to open at certain shows.

Tens of thousands of partygoers gathered for an illegal “free party” at a military firing range near Bourges, despite warnings about unexploded World War II ordnance. Authorities warned of serious risks, while organisers said the event was attended by 40,000 to protest against proposed laws targeting unregistered raves.

A nonprofit advocacy group, Social Equity LA, organized with local cannabis business owners to oppose the measure in letters to Mayor Karen Bass.

Luis Rivera, executive director of the nonprofit, said Measure CB risks legitimizing the illegal cannabis industry while linking city finances to the tax revenue the businesses would generate. The measure also would undermine Proposition 64, the state law that requires cannabis businesses to be licensed, he said. And amid the city’s struggles to track and close illegal cannabis businesses, Rivera said it will be difficult to force them to pay up.

“There’s no guarantee or mechanism to assure that illegal operators will pay the taxes or fulfill their obligations,” Rivera said.

Even if they pay taxes, illegal operators could undercut legal businesses by selling unregulated products and avoiding requirements, such as code inspections and safety tests for merchandise, that legal businesses must fulfill to keep their licenses, he said. For an already struggling industry, the answer isn’t taxing more businesses, he said — it’s lowering taxes.

WASHINGTON — An appeals court on Friday blocked President Trump’s executive order suspending asylum access, a key pillar of the Republican president’s plan to crack down on migration at the southern border of the U.S.

A three-judge panel from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit found that immigration laws give people the right to apply for asylum at the border, and the president can’t circumvent that.

The panel concluded that the Immigration and Nationality Act doesn’t authorize the president to remove the plaintiffs under “procedures of his own making,” allow him to suspend plaintiffs’ right to apply for asylum or curtail procedures for adjudicating their anti-torture claims.

“The power by proclamation to temporarily suspend the entry of specified foreign individuals into the United States does not contain implicit authority to override the INA’s mandatory process to summarily remove foreign individuals,” wrote Judge J. Michelle Childs, who was nominated to the bench by Democratic President Biden.

The White House didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.

ACLU attorney Lee Gelernt said in a statement that the appellate ruling is “essential for those fleeing danger who have been denied even a hearing to present asylum claims under the Trump administration’s unlawful and inhumane executive order.”

Judge Justin Walker, a Trump nominee, wrote a partial dissent. He said the law gives immigrants protections against removal to countries where they would be persecuted, but the administration can issue broad denials of asylum applications.

Walker, however, agreed with the majority that the president cannot deport migrants to countries where they will be persecuted or strip them of mandatory procedures that protect against their removal.

Judge Cornelia Pillard, who was nominated by Democratic President Obama, also heard the case.

NEW YORK — Beverly Hills-based Live Nation and its Ticketmaster subsidiary faced a bruising courtroom loss Wednesday after a federal jury found that the company operated a monopoly over concert venues.

The verdict by a Manhattan, N.Y., jury came after a five-week trial and caps a closely watched case that could have far reaching effects across the music industry, potentially leading to the breakup of the companies.

Ticketmaster is the world’s largest ticket seller for live events, while Live Nation is a dominant force in the concert business.

The civil case began when the federal government alleged that Live Nation used its clout to engage in a variety of anticompetitive practices, including preventing venues from using multiple ticket sellers.

“It is time to hold them accountable,” Jeffrey Kessler, an attorney for the states, said in a closing argument. He called Live Nation a “monopolistic bully” that drove up prices for ticket buyers.

Jurors agreed. They found that Ticketmaster had overcharged consumers by $1.72 for each ticket. The judge will assess damages later.

Live Nation, which owns and operates hundreds of venues, countered that it did not violate U.S. antitrust laws, arguing that artists, sports teams and venues decide prices and ticketing practices.

“Success is not against the antitrust laws in the United States,” Live Nation attorney David Marriott said in his summation.

Live Nation said in a statement that the “jury’s verdict is not the last word on this matter,” noting the court had yet to rule on a motion it had filed to challenge its liability in the case.

The trial revealed some embarrassing internal communications, including emails from a Live Nation executive who called customers “so stupid” and said the company was “robbing them blind, baby.” The executive, Benjamin Baker, testified that the messages were “very immature and unacceptable.”

The original lawsuit, led by a cadre of interested parties including the federal government, 39 states and the District of Columbia, dates to 2024. It alleged that Live Nation and Ticketmaster monopolized various aspects of the live music industry, such as concert promotion, venue operations, artist management and ticketing services.

Live Nation manages more than 400 artists and controls more than 265 venues in North America, while Ticketmaster simultaneously controls around 80% of the primary ticket marketplace and also is increasing its involvement in the resale market, according to the lawsuit.

Last month, Live Nation secured an unexpected tentative settlement with the Department of Justice in which the company agreed to several structural changes to its business, including adjustments to ticketing deals with venues, capping service fees and paying a $280-million fine.

However, more than 30 states, including California, decided to proceed with the trial. California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta praised these state-led efforts to protect consumers, even amid dwindling antitrust enforcement from the Trump administration, he said in a statement.

“This is a historic and resounding victory for artists, fans, and the venues that support them,” Bonta said. “We are incredibly proud of today’s outcome … this verdict shows just how far states can go to protect our residents from big corporations that are using their power to illegally raise prices and rip-off Americans.”

Though a verdict has been reached, remedies for how Live Nation will be held accountable for its actions are still being decided by the judge.

One possibility is that the companies could be split up, an outcome favored by critics.

National Independent Venue Assn. Executive Director Stephen Parker said Ticketmaster and Live Nation need to be separate for the industry to see change.

“Live Nation and Ticketmaster must be broken up now. Ticketmaster should not be permitted to participate in the ticket resale market. Live Nation should not be able to promote more than 50% of artists’ tours,” Parker said in a statement. “And the damages paid to the states should be remitted to the independent venues, promoters, festivals, and fans that have suffered under Live Nation’s monopolistic reign over the last 15 years.”

Serona Elton, attorney and interim vice dean at the University of Miami’s Frost School of Music, said that the separation of Live Nation and Ticket master seems to be “on the table,” but she said it’s too early to assess the verdict’s fallout on the music industry.

Elton said fans might notice small changes in pricing, but there are factors other than Live Nation that are contributing to high ticket prices, such as the secondary ticket market as well as supply and demand challenges.

The verdict, Elton said, “sends a message of support to music companies and professionals working in the live space who have felt like they have suffered financial consequences because of Live Nation’s behavior.”

The ruling is a small but necessary step toward achieving a balanced and competitive ticketing industry, said Hal Singer, a managing director of economic consulting firm Econ One, who specializes in antitrust and consumer protection issues.

Forcing a Ticketmaster sale probably is the only remedy that will bring real change, Singer said.

“We’re not out of the woods quite yet,” Singer said. “We’ve kind of tilted the probability.… It could change the competitive balance. But that requires that a meaningful remedy follows the liability. You need both.”

Fans and some artists have long groused about Ticketmaster, which was founded in 1976 and merged with Live Nation in 2010.

Dustin Brighton, director of government relations for the Coalition for Ticket Fairness, agreed that although the verdict is a landmark moment for fans, “it’s not the end of the road.”

“As the court considers remedies, the focus must be on restoring competition, increasing transparency, and ensuring fans have real choice,” Brighton said in a statement.

Times staff writer August Brown and the Associated Press contributed to this report.

April 15 (UPI) — A jury found Wednesday that Live Nation and its subsidiary Ticketmaster maintained an illegal monopoly in ticketing.

The case was heard in a Manhattan federal court over five weeks and saw testimony from dozens of witnesses. The jury began deliberations Friday.

The complaint was brought by the Department of Justice and several state attorneys general in 2024. It said that the company engaged in “anticompetitive conduct” and controlled all ticketing, concert booking, venues and promotions.

Because of this, fans paid higher fees, and artists had fewer options for touring and venues.

Live Nation denies acting as a monopoly.

California Attorney General Rob Bonta called the verdict “a historic and resounding victory for artists, fans and the venues that support them.”

“In the face of dwindling antitrust enforcement by the Trump Administration, this verdict shows just how far states can go to protect our residents from big corporations that are using their power to illegally raise prices and rip-off Americans,” Bonta said in a statement.

The Justice Department struck a settlement deal in March, but states decided to continue with the lawsuit instead.

The Justice Department settlement with Live Nation required Ticketmaster to divest up to 13 amphitheaters, reserve 50% of tickets for nonexclusive venues and cap ticketing service fees at 15%. A senior Justice Department official said it would lower prices by expanding choices.

“This settlement will resolve all remaining matters with the DOJ, without any admission of wrongdoing,” Live Nation said in a statement.

The verdict does not mean prices will drop soon, CNN reported.

Judge Arun Subramanian now must have a second trial to decide on remedies. The states requested a breakup of the company, or he could order a sale of the business.

“It will be an earthquake in the industry in terms of people’s perception in feeling validated,” Scott Grzenczyk, a lawyer with law firm Girard Sharp, told CNN.

“There’s a big difference between people complaining about Goliath and getting a jury verdict that Goliath was a monopolist and doing something wrong,” he said.

Jeffrey Kessler, an attorney for the states, pleaded with jurors during closing arguments to “apply your common sense,” NBC News reported.

“You’re New Yorkers,” he said. “I trust that you know when someone is blowing smoke or being straight with you.”

“It’s time to hold them accountable,” Kessler said.