lawsuit

The UFC White House event scheduled for Sunday, 14 June has been challenged by a federal lawsuit which alleges it is unlawful.

UFC Freedom 250 is set to take place on the White House’s South Lawn on US President Donald Trump’s 80th birthday, as part of celebrations to mark 250 years of United States independence.

However, the Public Integrity Project has filed a lawsuit – seeking an emergency temporary retraining order – against the event billed as the first professional sporting event to be held on the White House grounds.

“We think that this is a profound misuse of our sacred national monuments for private gain. And we think that needs to be stopped because it breaks the law,” said Brendan Ballou, lead attorney for the Public Integrity Project.

The Public Integrity Project is a self-described anti-corruption law firm based in Washington. It is led by Democrats including former Senator Russ Feingold and politician Zephyr Teachout, and has brought several suits against Trump, including one to undo the sale of the social media app TikTok and another to stop a billion-dollar “anti-weaponisation” fund.

The group argues that Trump and the UFC believe they do not have to apply for a permit to use the National Mall, ask Congress to approve construction of “The Claw” at the White House, or conduct an environmental review, because the fight is part of special semiquincentennial celebrations.

But it says that the event does “not in any material sense” celebrate the anniversary of the country’s founding and is not being carried out by the federal government or the official commission steering the anniversary’s observance.

The Trump administration issued a response to the BBC: “This is an obstructionist, baseless and dilatory lawsuit brought simply to prevent President Trump from hosting what will undoubtedly go down as one of the most historic sporting events in our nation’s history during our semiquincentennial celebration.”

Legal challenge claims US president did not seek proper approval for fighting event to be held on his 80th birthday.

A lawsuit is seeking to stop United States President Donald Trump from hosting an Ultimate Fighting Championship (UFC) match at the White House.

The lawsuit, lodged on behalf of two Virginia residents, is the first known legal challenge to the mixed martial arts event, which is set to be hosted on June 14.

The event will take place on Trump’s 80th birthday. It is also pegged to the 250th anniversary of the signing of the Declaration of Independence, which the US will commemorate on July 4 of this year.

The legal challenge filed on Saturday maintained that Trump did not receive proper authorisation to host the fight.

It argued that the event violated US National Park Service regulations prohibiting sporting events on federal parklands, that Congress did not consent to the construction of a towering arch overlooking the event space, and that no environmental review was conducted before the construction.

“This is fundamentally a private, commercial, corrupt use of our most sacred national monuments for private gain,” said Brendan Ballou, a lawyer for the plaintiffs. “And that is what is motivating this lawsuit.”

In a statement to the Associated Press, the White House dismissed the lawsuit as “obstructionist, baseless, and dilatory”.

The White House maintained the UFC fight was “no different than the various other White House-hosted events on the South Lawn and properly permitted events on the Ellipse and National Mall throughout the year”.

Crews have been erecting an octagon-shaped fighting cage on the South Lawn of the White House, with Trump saying the project will include a “5,000-seat arena right outside the front door of the White House”.

Attendance at the fight will be invite-only and closely monitored. The Military Times news site reported earlier this week that 1,200 service members given tickets to the event must meet certain waist-to-height ratio standards.

Public viewing areas will also be set up at the nearby Ellipse.

Trump has long been closely involved with both professional wrestling and UFC, with his casinos and event spaces hosting past events.

He regularly appeared as a version of himself in World Wrestling Entertainment (WWE) events throughout the 1990s and early 2000s. His current secretary of education, Linda McMahon, is a co-founder of the WWE.

Trump has more recently embraced UFC, which is currently owned by the same company, TKO Group Holdings, as the WWE.

UFC president Dana White has been a close ally of Trump’s.

Political analysts have credited Trump’s embrace of the sport with reaching disaffected male voters in the US, particularly during his 2024 election campaign.

A federal judge sided with California and other Democratic states on Friday in a preliminary injunction that blocked the Trump administration’s attempt to condition food benefits on compliance with the president’s policies on gender and immigration.

Twenty states and the District of Columbia filed a lawsuit in March against the Trump administration in U.S. District Court in Massachusetts, arguing that the “unlawful” and “unconstitutional” funding requirements are vague and designed to force policies on states.

Billions in federal funding are ultimately at stake, including money for school lunch programs that provide meals to 30 million children nationwide and food stamps that support about 40 million Americans living in low-income households.

“As the Trump Administration tries to use essential programs and billions in funding as leverage to advance their hateful, discriminatory agenda, California continues to fight to uphold the law and ensure that our communities can continue to access the funding they need to thrive,” said California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta in a statement.

The policy shift from the United States Department of Agriculture marks another effort by the president to force left-leaning states to submit to his positions on hot-button political and cultural issues to receive government funding. California’s current budget relies on $174.5 billion in federal dollars, or roughly one-third of the overall state budget funds.

Last year, the Trump administration canceled a sexual education grant to California after the state declined to remove gender identity from sexual education curriculum. The administration is also restricting federal funds in an attempt to force states to ban transgender athletes from competing in women’s sports.

The funding conditions from the USDA relate to gender ideology, women and girls’ sports and immigration, according to the lawsuit.

States argue that the conditions do not explain what activities are prohibited for entities that receive grants. The USDA did not cite any law allowing the organization to impose anti-discrimination policies that go beyond federal law, the suit states.

The states that joined the lawsuit contend that they are left with the “unlawful” choice of adhering to the conditions or risk losing up to $74 billion in collective federal assistance from the USDA.

U.S. District Judge Myong Joun approved a preliminary injunction Friday and is expected to issue a memorandum later explaining the decision, according to the Associated Press.

The artist who painted a giant mural on a building in downtown Dallas of life-sized swimming whales has filed a $25 million lawsuit against soccer’s international governing body and others, saying they illegally painted over his work to promote the city’s upcoming World Cup matches.

The artist Wyland says he hand-painted the sprawling mural that covered roughly 17,000 square feet across two of the building’s walls.

The mural stood for nearly three decades before workers began painting over it last month, causing an uproar among residents who admired the mural’s grand scale and message of ocean conservation.

The area’s World Cup organizing committee said in a statement that, in place of Wyland’s mural, new artwork is planned “that captures this current historical moment and reflects the energy, unity, and global spirit surrounding the World Cup 2026.” It said a portion of Wyland’s mural would be preserved.

Wyland filed suit Monday in U.S District Court in Dallas saying that World Cup organizers, along with the building’s owner and management company, painted over his mural without his consent or even notifying him. He says their actions violated a 1990 federal law passed to protect visual artists from destruction of publicly displayed works.

Wyland is seeking at least $25 million in damages. His lawsuit says world soccer’s governing body, FIFA, and other defendants “hastily and irrevocably destroyed a civic landmark” to promote the World Cup.

“Though FIFA claims they were working to develop art for the host city, in truth, they defaced an historic fixture of the host city,” the artist’s lawsuit says.

A FIFA spokesperson said Tuesday the federation “has no involvement in this whatsoever” and referred a reporter to the tournament’s local organizing committee.

A spokesperson for the North Texas FWC Organizing Committee declined to comment. The committee isn’t named as a defendant in the lawsuit.

A spokesperson for Slate Asset Management, which manages the building where the mural was painted over, said in a statement that local World Cup organizers asked Slate in March to donate the mural space for “a new public art installation.”

“Slate is not being compensated in any way for the use of the wall space and was told by the local groups that Mr. Wyland had been notified,” the management company’s spokesperson said in an email.

Dallas is hosting more World Cup matches than any of the other sites in the event co-hosted by the U.S., Canada and Mexico, with nine matches set to be played at AT&T Stadium in suburban Arlington, home of the Dallas Cowboys.

Wyland’s Dallas mural, titled “Whaling Wall 82,” was finished in 1999 and is among more than 100 similar murals known as Whaling Walls the artist painted around the world to promote the conservation of ocean life.

An online petition protesting the mural’s destruction and calling for protecting of public artwork in Dallas has received more than 2,600 signatures.

Wyland’s lawsuit alleges violations of the Visual Artists Rights Act, a 1990 federal law that protects artwork of “recognized stature” even if someone else owns the physical artwork.

A judge cited that law in 2018 when he ordered a property owner to pay a group of New York graffiti artists $6.7 million for whitewashing dozens of their spray-painted murals on buildings that once housed a factory in Queens. The ruling was upheld on appeal.

Bynum writes for the Associated Press. Bynum reported from Savannah, Ga.

What’s 2,030-feet long-by-167-feet wide and blue all over? If you guessed the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool, you’re right!

Bonus points for triggering someone in your immediate orbit, because ever since President Trump announced his intention to apply blue paint to the basin of architect Henry Bacon’s 1923 pool, the mere mention of the project can make certain people’s heads explode. To wit, a lawsuit filed this month in district court by the Cultural Landscape Foundation and a former Park Service landscape architect, Charles Birnbaum, claims Trump’s actions have caused Birnbaum to suffer “aesthetic injury.”

The phrase might sound humorous at first read, but anyone who cares about art, architecture and the experience of shared public space knows there’s nothing funny about it. We’ve all felt the empty sorrow of staring into the abyss of a boxy Walmart superstore, and experienced a deep malaise of the soul when driving past an endless crush of fast food chains on the outskirts of a major metropolitan area.

It’s doubtful this sadness is shared by Trump, for whom an “aesthetic injury” might best be represented by a McDonald’s without its golden arches. Plus, our president clearly thinks a great deal of good will come from painting the reflecting pool at the center of the National Mall American Flag Blue.

Only a few days ago Trump posted what I can only assume was an AI-generated image of the final product on Truth Social. The blue in question is shockingly bright — like the sky over the Aegean Sea at noon on a cloudless day. That kind of blue can be breathtakingly beautiful, but in this case it swallows up everything around it, including the Lincoln Memorial and the Washington Monument, which it was built to reflect.

The blue pool, in other words, is the main event — and that is not what was intended by its creators. Indeed, Birnbaum’s lawsuit notes the value of various design choices including, “the grey, achromatic basin of the Reflecting Pool as the source of the pool’s profound reflective depth.”

The lawsuit continues, “The ongoing resurfacing of the basin in vivid blue has materially degraded Mr. Birnbaum’s aesthetic experience. Mr. Birnbaum’s aesthetic enjoyment of the Reflecting Pool — as a historic designed landscape whose character he has documented, championed, and personally appreciated over many years — is being concretely harmed by Defendants’ ongoing alteration of its character defining features.”

Many other critics and vocal members of the public have claimed similar harm resulting from the numerous renovations Trump is making in the nation’s Capitol — mostly without court approval or congressional oversight — including his demolition of the White House’s East Wing, his construction of a massive ballroom to replace it, the building of a towering triumphal arch, and the creation of a Hero’s Garden in a public park space along the Potomac river.

Painting the Reflecting Pool American Flag Blue may not be the most intrusive of these impulsive, self-aggrandizing acts, but it was the pigment that broke the camel’s back.

I’m Arts editor Jessica Gelt, in blue. This is your arts and culture news for the week.

The week ahead: A curated calendar

FRIDAY

Gustavo Dudamel conducting the 2025-26 season opener at Walt Disney Concert Hall on September 25.

(Timothy Norris/Los Angeles Philharmonic)

Gustavo Dudamel and the Los Angeles Philharmonic
The departing maestro and his colleagues are in the homestretch and it’s a busy one. This weekend, there are performances of world premieres of Roberto Sierra’s “Estudios Sinfónicos” (Friday and Sunday) and Angélica Negrón’s “Mundillo (Little World)” (Saturday, featuring YoYo Ma). Both new works are paired with Richard Strauss’ “Ein Heldenleben, Op. 40.” On Thursday, Dudamel celebrates the musicians of the L.A. Phil with an eclectic program including compositions by Rossini, Paganini, Mozart, Mendelssohn, Tchaikovsky and Philip Glass, plus the world premieres of “Bravo Gustavo!” by John Williams and Gabriela Ortiz’s “Mujer Arena.”
Strauss, 11 a.m. Friday; 2 p.m. Sunday; Yo-Yo Ma, 8 p.m. Saturday; Celebrating the Musicians of the L.A. Phil, 8 p.m. Thursday. Walt Disney Concert Hall, 111 S. Grand Ave., downtown L.A. laphil.com

Grangeville
A 2025 drama by the bard of Idaho, Samuel D. Hunter, the play considers the complex relationship of two half-brothers connecting virtually to discuss the care of their ailing mother. Tim Cummings and Jeff LeBeau star. Directed by John Perrin Flynn.
Through July 12. Ruskin Group Theatre, 2800 Airport Ave., Santa Monica. ruskingrouptheatre.com

How to Have Sex Again
The Rebel & the Warrior, a new theater producing collective, present their first L.A. production, the world premiere of a romantic comedy by Louis Reyes McWilliams.
8 p.m. Friday, Saturday, Sunday ; 7:30 p.m. Thursday; 8 p.m. June 5; 3 and 8 p.m. June 6; and 7:30 p.m. June 7. June Odyssey Theatre, 2055 S. Sepulveda Blvd. sanguinenyc.com

Jodie Landau
The composer-performer presents the West Coast premiere of “Performance of Self,” combining memoir, concert, cabaret with original chamber rock compositions, backed by a six-piece ensemble. Directed by Diana Wyenn. Part of OperaFest LA.
8 p.m. Friday and Saturday. REDCAT, 631 W. 2nd St., downtown L.A. redcat.org

Let’s Get It On: The Wearable Art of Betye Saar
The exhibition highlights the role of costume design in the artist’s life and work, including more than 200 objects, including photographs, drawings, garments, jewelry, artworks and historical materials from the 1950s-1970s.
Opening reception, 5-7 p.m. Friday; exhibition continues through Aug. 22. Roberts Projects, 442 S. La Brea Ave. robertsprojectsla.com

Shelley Conducts America @ 250
Pacific Symphony concludes its season with incoming new music director Alexander Shelley conducting the premiere of Peter Boyer’s “American Mosaic,” with accompanying video imagery by award-winning photographer Joe Sohm.
8 p.m. Friday and Saturday. Renée and Henry Segerstrom Concert Hall, 615 Town Center Drive, Costa Mesa. pacificsymphony.org

Leslie Uggams in 1972’s ‘Black Girl.’

(UCLA Film & Television Archive)

UCLA Festival of Preservation
“Don’t miss your chance to see these rarely screened films on the big screen where they belong,” writes former Times movie critic Kenneth Turan in his preview of the event. The 22nd festival, which opens with Ossie Davis’ 1972 drama “Black Girl,” presents 11 feature films, four television programs and 30 short works, cartoons and newsreels, all newly preserved and restored by the UCLA Film & Television Archive and its partners and funders.
Through Sunday. Billy Wilder Theater, UCLA Hammer Museum, 10899 Wilshire Blvd., Westwood. cinema.ucla.edu

SATURDAY

Actor Alec Baldwin will narrate “Lincoln’s Portrait,” part of Pasadena Symphony’s America @ 250 concert.

(Pasadena Symphony)

America @ 250
The Pasadena Symphony’s season ending concert, celebrating the nation’s sesquicentennial, includes John Williams’ “Liberty Fanfare,” George Gershwin’s “Concerto in F for Piano and Orchestra,” and Aaron Copland‘s “Appalachian Spring” Suite and “Lincoln Portrait,” the latter narrated by actor Alec Baldwin.
2 and 8 p.m. Ambassador Auditorium, 131 S. St. John Ave., Pasadena. pasadenasymphony-pops.org

Baroque in Bloom
Soprano Amanda Forsythe joins the Los Angeles Chamber Orchestra for arias from Handel’s “Giulio Cesare” and Bach’s “Wedding Cantata.” The program also includes LACO’s principal bassoon Andrew Brady performing “Vivaldi’s Concerto for Bassoon in A minor, RV 497,” Telemann’s “Don Quixote Suite” and Biber’s “Battalia.”
7:30 p.m. Saturday. Rothenberg Hall, the Huntington, 1151 Oxford Road, San Marino; 4 p.m. Sunday. The Wallis, 9390 N. Santa Monica Blvd., Beverly Hills. laco.org

From Hell to Hollywood: Films Music’s First Golden Age and the Émigré Community
The Scott Dunn Orchestra performs the music of Arnold Schoenberg, Max Steiner, Erich Wolfgang Korngold, Franz Waxman, Dimitri Tiomkin, Bronisław Kaper, Kurt Weill, Ernest Gold and Miklós Rózsa.
7:30 p.m. Saturday. The Wallis, 9390 N. Santa Monica Blvd., Beverly Hills. thewallis.org

Life, Liberty, and Los Angeles
Through historical and contemporary objects, media, art and community collaborations, the exhibition brings together stories of diverse Angelenos and demonstrates the ways their hopes and dreams built the city while reflecting the values of a burgeoning nation.
Opening May 30-Jan. 31. Autry Museum of the American West, 4700 Western Heritage Way, Griffith Park. theautry.org

Sydney Mancasola as Pamina in LA Opera’s 2026 presentation of “The Magic Flute.”

(Cory Weaver)

The Magic Flute
LA Opera music director James Conlon’s final production will be Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart’s fan favorite about a prince, a princess and an enchanted instrument. Starring Miles Mykkanen in his LA Opera debut as Prince Tamino, Sydney Mancasola as Princess Pamina, Kyle Miller as the sidekick Papageno, Aigul Khismatullina as Queen of the Night and Kwangchul Youn and Sarastro.
Through June 21 Dorothy Chandler Pavilion, 135 N. Grand Ave., downtown L.A. laopera.org

The Satie Project
The artists of Piano Spheres perform the complete four-hand works of French composer and pianist Erik Satie, plus seven newly-commissioned response pieces, alongside the experimental puppetry David Gordezky in what promises to be a truly zany show.
8 p.m. Saturday; 2 p.m. Sunday. Boston Court Pasadena. 70 N. Mentor Ave., Pasadena. bostoncourtpasadena.org

SUNDAY

Bleak Week: The Cinema of Despair
Isabelle Huppert, Ari Aster, Denis Villeneuve, Werner Herzog and many others are the scheduled guests for the fifth edition of the global festival. The L.A. festivities, featuring 48 films from 18 countries, start with Béla Tarr’s 1994 film “Sátántangó” (2 p.m. Sunday at the Aero).
Through June 7. Aero Theatre, 1328 Montana Ave., Santa Monica; Egyptian Theatre, 6712 Hollywood Blvd.; Los Feliz Theatre, 1822 N Vermont Ave. americancinematheque.com

Exhibition photography for “Marilyn Monroe: Hollywood Icon” at the the Academy Museum of Motion Pictures in Los Angeles.

(Emily Shur / Academy Museum Foundation)

Marilyn Monroe: Hollywood Icon
A reevaluation of the actor’s artistry and image-making, the exhibition presents hundreds of original objects, including posters, portraits, photographs, production documents, letters, and rarely seen personal materials. A companion screening series also kicks off this week. Times culture critic Mary McNamara attended the opening and wrote about the enduring mystery that still surrounds the life and legacy of the film star 100 years after her birth.
“Gentleman Prefer Blondes,” 6:30 p.m. Sunday; “The Asphalt Jungle,” 7:30 p.m. Monday, with guests author and filmmaker Mark A. Fortin, actor Jack Huston, author, filmmaker and actor Joshua John Miller, and journalist Nancy Jo Sales; “Niagara,” 8 p.m. Wednesday; and “All About Eve,” 7:30 p.m. Thursday, with guest Vanity Fair contributing editor Lorraine Nicholson. Screening series runs through July 3; exhibition continues through Feb. 28. Academy Museum, 6067 Wilshire Blvd. academymuseum.org

Museums of the Arroyo Day
The theme is “Life in the Past Lane” as five local institutions celebrate Arroyo Culture with a day of free admission.
Noon-4 p.m. The Gamble House, 4 Westmoreland Place, Pasadena; Heritage Square, 3510 Pasadena Ave., L.A.; Los Angeles Police Museum, 6045 York Blvd., L.A.; Lummis Home, 200 E. Avenue 43, L.A.; Pasadena Museum of History, 470 W. Walnut St., Pasadena. museumsofthearroyo.com

Now Be Here’s first photograph in Los Angeles, 2016, Hauser & Wirth DTLA.

(Isabel Avila & Carrie Yury, courtesy of Kim Schoenstadt, Now Be Here)

Now Be Here: 2026 Los Angeles Anniversary
A decade ago, the organization launched as a means to “give visibility to women and non-binary artists, bringing equity to the art world,” and was commemorated by the above group photo. To mark the moment, Now Be Here and OXY ARTS present a free day of events (including a new community photo) open to all on the Occidental College campus.
9 a.m.-3 p.m. Occidental College, 1600 Campus Road. oxyarts.oxy.edu/events

Tierra
Craft Contemporary’s 4th Clay Biennial focuses on the work of Latinx, Indigenous and Black artists, emphasizing their deep connections to the geographies that yield the materials they work with. Also opening this week is “Earthen Comforts: Airing Earth,” a courtyard installation led by architect Liz Gálvez, the latest partnership in the ongoing experimental architectural project curated by M&A (Materials & Applications).
Sunday-Oct. 25. Craft Contemporary, 5814 Wilshire Blvd. craftcontemporary.org

TUESDAY

The Sun Rises in Harlem: Black Brilliance and the Harlem Renaissance
The performing arts collaborative MUSE/IQUE, led by artistic and music director Rachael Worby, pays tribute to this transformative era in American arts featuring the music of jazz greats such as Duke Ellington, Cab Calloway and Bessie Smith. With Kecia Lewis, Sy Smith, Leo Manzari, DC6 Singers Collective and the MUSE/IQUE Orchestra.
7:30 p.m. Tuesday-Wednesday. The Huntington, 1151 Oxford Road, San Marino; 3 and 7:30 p.m. June 7. Skirball Cultural Center, 2701 N. Sepulveda Blvd., Los Angeles. muse-ique.com

WEDNESDAY

Colburn Celebrity Recital: Joshua Bell/Jeremy Denk
Frequent collaborators, the acclaimed violinist and pianist perform works by Schubert, Grieg, Ives, Ysaÿe and Ravel in their first joint appearance at Disney Hall since 2010.
8 p.m. Walt Disney Concert Hall, 111 S. Grand Ave., downtown L.A. laphil.com

THURSDAY

Bodytraffic
The contemporary dance troupe closes out a 20-year run with its final three hometown shows, including works by choreographers Fernando Magadan, Cayetano Soto, Joan Rodriguez, Richard Siegal and Trey McIntyre.
7:30 p.m. Thursday and June 4; 2 p.m. June 6; the Wallis, 9390 N. Santa Monica Blvd., Beverly Hills. thewallis.org

Arturo Sandoval
The legendary trumpeter and bandleader, a protégé of jazz great Dizzy Gillespie, performs an eight-show residency at the Blue Note.
7 and 9:30 p.m., Thursday-June 7. Blue Note LA, 6372 W. Sunset Blvd. bluenotejazz.com

Spectacular Balanchine!
American Contemporary Ballet continues its deep dive into the master choreographer’s work with dances from “Who Cares?,” “Stars and Stripes,” “Western Symphony” and “Union Jack” to music by George Gershwin, John Philip Sousa and Hershey Kay.
8 p.m. Thursday-Saturday, through June 20. Bank of America Plaza, 333 S. Hope St., downtown L.A. acbdances.com

Arts anywhere

New and recent releases of arts-related media.

The book jacket for “Miles: The Autobiography.”

(Simon & Schuster)

Miles: The Autobiography
May 26 would have been jazz legend Miles Davis’ 100th birthday and Simon & Schuster has released a centennial edition of his award-winning 1989 memoir, in which he reflects on his career, relationships and battles with racism and addiction. Also check out filmmaker Stanley Nelson’s 2020 documentary, “Miles Davis: The Birth of Cool,” featuring studio outtakes from Davis’ recording sessions, rare photos and interviews with Quincy Jones, Carlos Santana, Clive Davis, Wayne Shorter, Ron Carter, Davis’s family and other notables.
Simon & Schuster: 448 pages, $23; “Miles Davis: Birth of the Cool,” streaming on PBS platform.

— Kevin Crust

Culture news and the SoCal scene

Daniel Harding, Los Angeles Philharmonic’s new music director, visited In-N-Out among other iconic L.A. locations upon his arrival Tuesday.

(Kayla Bartkowski / Los Angeles Times)

The big news of the week was the long-awaited, much-speculated-upon announcement of who will become the next music director of the Los Angeles Philharmonic when Gustavo Dudamel departs later this summer to take his new role at the New York Philharmonic. Surprise (or rather not too much of a surprise depending on who you are and how closely you were watching), the L.A. Phil’s 12th music director will be Daniel Harding, a 50-year-old, Oxford-born conductor and part-time Air France pilot who made his U.S. debut as a young prodigy conducting the L.A. Phil at the 1997 Ojai Festival, writes Times classical music critic Mark Swed.

Gustavo Dudamel, the current Los Angeles Philharmonic music director, left, hugs newly announced L.A. Phil music director Daniel Harding, right, at Dodger Stadium.

(Kayla Bartkowski / Los Angeles Times)

The Times scored an exclusive ride-along with Harding the day after the L.A. Phil’s big announcement. His day included stops at In-N-Out Burger, the Beckmen YOLA Center and the Hollywood Bowl. The evening was spent at a Dodgers game with Dudamel where the two sported matching jerseys emblazoned with their names.

Artist Diana Thater’s new video projection at LACMA’s David Geffen Galleries will debut in the fall.

(Carlin Stiehl / For The Times)

We also got a first look at a new video installation scheduled to light up the underside of LACMA’s new David Geffen Galleries where it forms a bridge over Wilshire Boulevard. Designed by artist Diana Thater, the installation was filmed in Claude Monet’s garden in Giverny, France, and will officially debut in the fall, after which it will run from dusk to dawn, 365 days per year.

Times contributor Jane Horowitz sat down with photographer Catherine Opie to chronicle a moment in time that finds Opie experiencing “one of the most visible stretches of her career, with work appearing simultaneously across Europe and Los Angeles. This includes a career-spanning survey at London’s National Portrait Gallery that will travel to Edinburgh’s Royal Scottish Academy, as well as exhibitions in Kassel, Germany, and Trondheim, Norway. Closer to home, a new exhibit, ‘Holding Blue,’ opens May 28 at Regen Projects.”

Alicia Keys’ musical “Hell’s Kitchen” staged its L.A. premiere at the Hollywood Pantages Theatre.

(Quinn Murphy)

Alicia Keys’ musical “Hell’s Kitchen” made its L.A. debut at the Hollywood Pantages Theatre this week, and Times intern Katie Simons chatted with Keys to get at why this particular moment means so much to her. “We spent 13 years developing this piece,” Keys said. “I believe in this deeply. I stand behind it. I stand for it.”

Swed also wrote a review of the L.A. Phil’s performance of Wagner’s “Die Walküre,” which represented Dudamel’s last grand project with the orchestra, and featured sets designed by Frank Gehry before he died, including paper-sculpture clouds and galloping Valkyrie horses, as well as a fanciful organ-pipe tree.

— Jessica Gelt

And last but not least

You know you want to read this interview with Barry Manilow by Times music critic Mikael Wood. Trust me, everyone else is.

WASHINGTON — A federal judge on Friday temporarily blocked President Trump’s administration from paying any claims through a new $1.776 billion settlement fund for the Republican president’s allies who believe they were victims of a weaponized government.

U.S. District Judge Leonie Brinkema in Alexandria, Va., also barred the government from moving forward with the fund’s creation while litigation is pending to challenge it.

The judge, who was nominated to the bench by President Clinton, a Democrat, scheduled a June 12 hearing for arguments on whether to extend the order blocking payouts from an “Anti-Weaponization Fund.” The government created the fund to resolve Trump’s lawsuit against the Internal Revenue Service over the leak of his tax returns.

The White House declined to comment on the judge’s ruling and referred all questions to the Justice Department, which didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.

The fund has generated a fierce backlash since it was announced last week, with even Republicans pressing acting Atty. Gen. Todd Blanche over the eligibility considerations and the possibility that even violent rioters at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, would be free to seek compensation.

The Justice Department hasn’t formed the five-member commission that will decide on payout criteria, so there has been no money paid out yet or claims accepted.

Plaintiffs’ attorneys from the legal advocacy group Democracy Forward are seeking a court order halting the fund’s implementation and preventing the Trump administration from disbursing any payouts from it. The federal suit claims there is no legal basis or accountability behind the fund.

The Virginia lawsuit’s plaintiffs include a fired prosecutor and a college professor acquitted of assaulting federal agents at a protest.

“The unlawfulness that has imbued the Anti-Weaponization Fund from its inception requires that it be wholly dismantled,” the suit says.

At least two other lawsuits, both filed separately in Washington, also are challenging the fund’s creation. A lawsuit filed by the advocacy group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington refers to the fund as “a jaw-dropping act of presidential corruption.” Two police officers who helped defend the Capitol from a mob of Trump supporters sued last week.

During a congressional hearing, Blanche wouldn’t rule out the possibility that rioters who assaulted police on Jan. 6 could be eligible for fund payouts.

Nearly 1,600 people were charged with Capitol riot-related federal crimes. Over 1,200 were convicted and sentenced before Trump handed out mass pardons, commuted prison sentences and ordered the dismissal of every pending Jan. 6 criminal case last year.

Kunzelman writes for the Associated Press. AP writers Darlene Superville, Alanna Durkin Richer and Eric Tucker contributed to this report.

On the eve of his 25th birthday, Rams star receiver Puka Nacua said he was working on becoming a better person — and that if he continued on that journey the potential massive contract extension that appears to have stalled will take care of itself.

Nacua on Thursday addressed reporters for the first time since checking into a Malibu rehab facility in March. Nacua sought help after a string of incidents, which included a December incident that led to a civil lawsuit.

“Something that I feel like I’ve learned is, it’s OK to ask for support,” Nacua said after participating in an organized-team activity workout in Woodland Hills. “And then to recognize the platform that I have in being a professional football player, and trying to use that for the betterment of myself and for those around me.”

With an offense that features Nacua, quarterback Matthew Stafford — the reigning NFL most valuable player — and receiver Davante Adams, and a defense that includes edge rusher Jared Verse and All-Pro cornerback Trent McDuffie, the Rams are regarded as a favorite to play in Super Bowl LXI at SoFi Stadium.

Last season, Nacua led the NFL with 129 receptions and was voted All-Pro. The 2023 fifth-round draft pick is entering the final year of his rookie contract, and he is eligible for an extension that could surpass the $120-million deal the Seattle Seahawks gave receiver Jaxon Smith-Njigba.

But incidents last season and this offseason caused the Rams to put off talks about awarding Nacua an extension.

During a livestream last December, Nacua criticized NFL officials and made a gesture regarded as antisemitic. Nacua apologized, but after the Rams’ loss to the Seahawks a few days later, Nacua criticized officials in a social media post from the locker room. The NFL fined him $25,000.

In the lawsuit, a woman alleged that Nacua made an antisemitic remark during a group dinner and then bit her while riding in a vehicle.

Rams wide receiver Puka Nacua smiles after speaking to reporters during organized team activities at the training facility in Woodland Hills on Thursday.

(Gary Klein / Los Angeles Times)

His attorney has denied that Nacua made an antisemitic remark and said the bite resulted from “horseplay.”

On Thursday, when asked about the allegations, Nacua declined to comment specifically.

“With it being an ongoing legal battle, out of respect for the other party involved, don’t really have much to speak on,” he said, adding: “A moment for me to learn from, kind of some of the situations I was putting myself in, and then also having just an awareness of how I’m conducting myself in and out of this football field.”

Nacua said he made the decision to seek help with the support from those in his “inner circle.”

“I like to think of myself as a pretty happy outgoing guy that enjoyed life,” he said. “But there also were some difficulties of just being in this professional sport and just throughout my entire life.”

The rehab program was a “short stint,” but Nacua said he continues to meet with a team therapist and has adopted tools such as journaling.

Nacua, who became a father in October, said he was also motivated to continue self-improvement work as a way of sharing with and teaching his son.

“The great things I’ve been able to accomplish and to enjoy those moments, but then also to teach him in some of the mistakes that I’ve made,” he said. “So there’s an opportunity for him to learn before some of those wrong decisions can be made.”

Nacua’s “security in being able to be authentically honest about” seeking help was admirable, coach Sean McVay said.

“I think there’s real strength in some of the vulnerabilities,” McVay said, “and I’m really proud of him.”

Stafford, 38, said he talks with Nacua “nonstop” and that Nacua has looked “fantastic” during workouts.

“He’s a great person, a great kid, and just doing everything I can to try and give advice when it’s needed, or also just be his buddy too,” Stafford said. “I’m doing everything I can — I think everyone is, to just support him. … We’re happy he’s back doing his thing.”

Stafford spoke for the first time since signing a one-year, $55-million extension that keeps him under contract with the Rams through the 2027 season.

“Happy to have … next year taken care of if I decide to play — and they still want me back,” Stafford quipped. “Just excited to get that behind me, cause I just want to come out here and play and not think about that kind of stuff.

“So great to get that done sooner rather than later.”

Before Nacua’s string of incidents, the receiver also appeared on track to receive a possible extension before the 2026 season began.

Now, the Rams are expected to let him play out the season, and then possibly use the franchise tag for 2027 before making a long-term commitment.

Nacua said he could not imagine playing for another team.

“If I can continue to improve as a person, I know the coaches and the people around me are helping me improve as a football player,” he said. “So those are the things I can control, and hopefully allow those other things to handle themselves.”

Nick Pasqual, the “How I Met Your Mother” actor who was found guilty of attempted murder of his ex-girlfriend last month, faces new legal fire.

Makeup artist Allie Shehorn, Pasqual’s ex-girlfriend, on Tuesday sued the actor for sexual battery, assault and negligence, among other counts, according to a lawsuit submitted in Los Angeles County Superior Court. The 17-page complaint echoes details about the May 2024 stabbing that led to Pasqual’s arrest two years ago and his attempted murder conviction. Pasqual was also convicted of injuring a spouse or partner, first-degree burglary and rape.

Legal representatives for Pasqual did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

According to the lawsuit, Shehorn and Pasqual began dating in 2023 and the actor “engaged in a continuing pattern of controlling, coercive, threatening and physically violent conduct” throughout their relationship. Shehorn alleges Pasqual “used force, threats, coercion and physical retraint” to rape and sexually assault her in April 2024. Pasqual also allegedly continued to engage in “escalating threatening” behavior, the lawsuit said.

The lawsuit resurfaces allegations that Pasqual unlawfully entered Shehorn’s home in Sunland a month after he raped her and stabbed her with a knife more than 20 times, “intending to kill her.” The Times previously reported that Shehorn’s friend Christine White found the makeup artist — who filed a restraining order against her former partner — lying in a pool of blood and that Shehorn underwent emergency surgery and remained in the ICU for several days.

Pasqual was arrested May 31, 2024, at a border checkpoint in Sierra Blanca, Texas. The actor, who met Shehorn on the set of Zack Snyder’s “Rebel Moon,” was convicted after a jury trial and will be sentenced on June 2. He could face a maximum sentence of life in state prison.

Shehorn is also suing Pasqual for gender violence, intentional infliction of emotional distress and violation of the Ralph Civil Rights Act. She seeks an unspecified amount in damages, including medical expenses and lost wages.

Time staff writer Cerys Davies and former Times staff writer Nathan Solis contributed to this report.

Pop crooner and “Real Housewives of Beverly Hills” star Erika Girardi quietly put an end to a long and splashy legal battle over her ex-husband’s now-defunct law firm on Thursday, settling a $25-million bankruptcy lawsuit in Los Angeles federal court.

The suit alleged the singer should have known she was profiting off embezzled funds linked to the sprawling case against her ex-husband, former L.A. legal heavyweight Tom Girardi, and his firm Girardi Keese. The couple was accused of funneling millions from the law firm to prop up Erika’s music career.

Performing as Erika Jayne, she topped the charts in the 2010s with a series of raunchy dance club hits. But court records show she spent millions more than she made as a musician.

Larry W. Gabriel, an attorney for the plaintiffs in the case, wrote in a pretrial filing Monday that Erika and a company associated with her “received the benefit of [Tom] Girardi’s massive fraudulent scheme.”

Tom Girardi is currently serving a seven-year sentence in federal prison after he was convicted of wire fraud for bilking his personal-injury clients in 2024. The disgraced former attorney was found to have stolen tens of millions from his firm.

His wife’s pop hits mixed boasts about luxury brands and explicit sex acts with pulsing dance beats and a bratty falsetto, a tone actress Lake Bell famously dubbed “sexy baby voice.”

In depositions taken as part of the suit, Erika said she had no knowledge of her husband’s crimes. She claimed to be ignorant about where the millions she spent on recording, merchandise, tours and “fun, playful, and sparkly outfits” were drawn from.

“I did not know how much I spent per month or per year,” she said in one exchange. “Girardi Keese paid my Amex credit card bill every month.”

Monday’s filings show Girardi Keese paid at least $14 million in charges to her American Express account between 2008 and 2020.

The payouts began in the late 2000s when Erika, then a stay-at-home mom, sought to relaunch herself as a performer. In 2016, near the height of her pop fame, her husband began to complain she was charging too much on the credit card account. After repeated entreaties to tamp down her spending, Girardi tried for the first time to look at her balance.

Soon after, Girardi grew suspicious of charges being made to her card by a Hollywood costumer — worries she reported to one of Girardi Keese’s clients, an agent in the Secret Service, records show.

On the advice of the agent’s Secret Service colleagues, she said she disputed the AMEX charges and was ultimately refunded more than half a million dollars to her personal account, despite the original payments having come from the law firm.

Erika Girardi’s attorney did not immediately respond to requests for comment Friday.

A visitor has filed a $5-million lawsuit against Disneyland for allegedly failing to properly disclose the use of facial-recognition technology at park and collecting sensitive data on guests.

Summer Christine Duffield of Riverside County filed the lawsuit after a May 10 visit to Disneyland and sister park California Adventure, alleging that the resort violates privacy and consumer protection laws collecting biometric data of visitors, without adequate consent.

“Disney does not adequately disclose the use of their biometric collection, so consumers — which almost always include children — have no idea that Disney is collecting this highly sensitive data,” the plaintiff noted in the lawsuit. “Guests should be able to expressly opt in to this type of sensitive facial recognition technology with written consent — the onus of privacy rights should not be on the victim.”

The suit was filed on May 15 in U.S. District Court in New York. The lawsuit cites an article from The Times on consumer reaction to Disney’s use of facial recognition.

The Walt Disney Company didn’t respond to a request for comment.

“People are getting fed up with being force-fed new tech, new AI, new tracking tools,” said Ari Waldman, Professor of Law at the UC Irvine.

Walt Disney Co. rolled out its facial recognition technology in late April across Disneyland Resort to verify tickets. The way it works is guests’ faces are scanned, converted into a numerical identifier and matched with ticket data.

Disney’s privacy policy notes that the identifiers created for identification are deleted within 30 days unless they need to be kept for legal or fraud prevention purposes.

Guests who don’t want to use the technology can enter through a separate entrance marked with a silhouette of a head and shoulders with a slash through it. However, of the dozens of lines to enter Disneyland and California Adventure, there were only four that didn’t use facial recognition, during an April visit.

The sign saying “Use of this technology is optional,” adorn the security checkpoint entrances.

“This technology facilitates ease of reentry into our parks and helps prevent fraud,” the company noted in its website.

Use of facial recognition technology for crowd management and ticketing has become increasingly commonplace.

Dodger Stadium deploys facial recognition for guests using the “Go Ahead Entry” at certain gates without producing a physical or digital ticket to enter the stadium. At Intuit Dome in Inglewood, visitors can use “GameFaceID” to quickly move through a separate lane with their face as their ID.

The lawsuit comes at a time when there is increasing concern of surveillance in public places, and privacy advocates have rallied against the normalization of surveillance. More recently, concerns of the potentially abusive use of artificial intelligence by government to analyze large quantities of data — from texts to facial scans — to surveil U.S citizens resulted in a high-profile showdown between the Pentagon and Anthropic.

WASHINGTON — The U.S. government will permanently drop tax claims against President Trump, according to a settlement document that is part of a deal to resolve Trump’s $10 billion lawsuit against the Internal Revenue Service over the leak of his tax returns.

As part of the settlement agreement, the U.S. is “forever barred and precluded” from examining or prosecuting Trump, his sons and the Trump organization’s current tax issues, according to a one-page document posted to the Justice Department’s website on Tuesday.

The settlement, which marks an extraordinary use of executive power, goes beyond resolving litigation and effectively helps shield the president from further examination of his finances and legal conduct.

The move comes after the Trump administration announced Monday the creation of a nearly $1.8 billion fund to compensate allies of the Republican president who believe they have been unjustly investigated and prosecuted, an arrangement that Democrats and government watchdogs derided as “corrupt” and unconstitutional.

The “Anti-Weaponization Fund” of $1.776 billion will allow people who believe they were targeted for prosecution for political purposes, including by the Biden administration Justice Department, to apply for payouts, creating what acting Atty. Gen. Todd Blanche called “a lawful process for victims of lawfare and weaponization to be heard and seek redress.”

Blanche, who was grilled by lawmakers on Capitol Hill on Tuesday, would not rule out the possibility that people who carried out violence during the Jan. 6, 2021, riot at the U.S. Capitol will be considered for payouts from the new fund.

Democratic lawmakers and ethics watchdogs slammed the creation of the fund, saying it was corrupt, opaque and had the potential to become a “slush fund” for the president and his allies.

Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., said Democrats intend to “fight every element of this self-dealing settlement.”

“Not only is this another heinously corrupt act by the most corrupt administration in history, it’s clearly a violation of the law that prohibits interference by executive branch officials in IRS audits.”

The fund was announced after Trump, his sons Eric Trump and Donald Trump Jr., and the Trump Organization agreed to drop their lawsuit against the IRS and the Treasury Department. The lawsuit alleged that a leak of confidential tax records caused them reputational and financial harm and negatively affected their public standing, among other allegations.

According to a separate settlement agreement posted to the Justice Department website Monday, Trump will receive a formal apology from the U.S. government but “will not receive any monetary payment or damages of any kind,” from the settlement.

Trump told reporters at the White House on Monday that the fund is dedicated to “reimbursing people who were horribly treated.”

Hussein writes for the Associated Press.

United States President Donald Trump has withdrawn his $10bn lawsuit against the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) stemming from a leak of his tax returns and said his administration will create a $1.77bn anti-weaponisation fund that would compensate some of Trump’s political allies.

The court filing, released on Monday in Florida, did not disclose the terms of the deal, including whether either party settled.

However, the Department of Justice (DOJ) on Monday announced the establishment of a $1.77bn fund called the Anti-Weaponisation Fund that would “provide a systematic process to hear and redress claims of others who suffered weaponisation and lawfare”.

The DOJ said in its press release that it was part of the settlement agreement.

ABC News first reported last week that the president was prepared to drop the lawsuit as part of a deal that would create the fund to pay Trump allies who were perceived as wrongly investigated and prosecuted.

Trump, his adult sons Donald Trump Jr and Eric Trump, and the Trump Organization sued the IRS in January, arguing the agency should have done more to prevent a former contractor from disclosing their tax returns to media outlets during the president’s first term.

The case arose from former IRS contractor Charles Littlejohn’s leak of Trump’s tax returns to media outlets, including the New York Times and ProPublica, in 2019 and 2020.

Those returns showed that Trump paid little or no income taxes in many years, the Times reported in 2020.

Prosecutors charged Littlejohn in 2023 with leaking tax records of Trump and thousands of other wealthy Americans to the media, saying he was motivated by a political agenda. Littlejohn later pleaded guilty to improper disclosures, and a judge sentenced him to five years in prison.

Trump filed the lawsuit personally, not in his official capacity as president.

Political pushback

While the court filing did not mention the terms of any potential deal, news that the president would create a fund to protect his political allies sparked backlash.

Representative Jamie Raskin, a Democrat from Maryland, called the idea “unconstitutional”.

“This, of course, is a political grievance fund that Donald Trump can use to pay off his friends,” Raskin, the top Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, said in an interview on Sunday with the ABC News programme This Week.

“If these people have a valid cause of action, they should bring it to the court like every other American does, and use the system of due process, and prove things by clear and convincing evidence, or a preponderance of evidence. Go and prove it. But the idea that Donald Trump can just pass it out like a pardon is absurd,” he said.

California Governor Gavin Newsom also criticised the president amid reports of the deal.

“Donald Trump wants to settle his joke lawsuit against his own IRS department to hand out $1.7 BILLION of OUR TAX DOLLARS to Jan. 6th insurrectionists and his cronies,” Newsom said in a post on X.

“It is an outrage that the American taxpayers are having to pay for this and that we have a president who is exercising such open corruption in front of everyone and expecting us to go along with it,” Representative Pramila Jayapal, a Democrat from Washington state, told the progressive MeidasTouch network.

Despite the criticisms, it is not clear who would specifically benefit from the funds.

Trump has long claimed that the DOJ under his predecessor, President Joe Biden, a Democrat, was weaponised against him, pointing to the criminal charges where he faced allegations that he conspired to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election, which Trump lost by more than seven million votes, and that he retained classified documents at his Mar-a-Lago estate.

Merrick Garland, the attorney general during the Biden administration, denied allegations of politicisation. The Justice Department also investigated prominent Democrats, including Biden’s son Hunter Biden and former US Senator Bob Menendez, a Democrat from New Jersey.

“The machinery of government should never be weaponised against any American, and it is this Department’s intention to make right the wrongs that were previously done while ensuring this never happens again,” said Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche said in a release.

However, the Trump administration has actively pursued cases against perceived political enemies, including former FBI director James Comey and former Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell, Fed Governor Lisa Cook, New York Attorney General Letitia James, Arizona Senator Mark Kelly, and California Senator Adam Schiff. 

The DOJ said that there is legal precedent for the fund, pointing to a programme called “Keepseagle” under the administration of former US President Barack Obama, a Democrat. That created a fund to address allegations of racism against the federal government.

The White House referred Al Jazeera to the DOJ for a request for comment. The DOJ did not respond.

The government watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics (CREW) announced on X that it would be investigating how the funds would be used.

“While Americans are struggling with an affordability crisis, President Trump plans to use nearly $1.8bn in taxpayer money to pay off his friends and allies—including potentially the violent insurrectionists who attacked the Capitol on January 6th,” CREW’s president, Donald K Sherman, said in a statement provided to Al Jazeera.

“By settling his absurd $10bn lawsuit against his own administration, Trump and the Justice Department just engaged in the most brazen act of self-dealing in the history of the presidency, and did so quickly in order to avoid the scrutiny of the judicial process, while quite likely violating the Constitution’s Domestic Emoluments Clause in the process. This is one of the single most corrupt acts in American history.”

A long time coming

Lawyers for the president asked a federal judge in April to pause the case for 90 days while the two sides worked to reach a settlement or resolution.

“This limited pause will neither prejudice the parties nor delay ultimate resolution,” the filing in April said. “Rather, the extension will promote judicial economy and allow the Parties to explore avenues that could narrow or resolve the issues efficiently.”

When asked in February how he would handle any potential damages from the case, Trump said, “I think what we’ll do is do something for charity.”

“We could make it a substantial amount,” he said at the time. “Nobody would care because it’s going to go to numerous very good charities.”

The litigation against the IRS raised novel legal questions, including conflicts of interest, about whether a president can sue his own government. It is not clear if the judge will accept Trump’s withdrawal of the case.

Under the US Constitution, federal courts may only hear genuine disputes between litigants with opposing stakes in the outcome.

US District Court Judge Kathleen Williams in Miami, who oversees Trump’s lawsuit, wrote last month that it was unclear whether the parties to the lawsuit were “truly antagonistic to each other”.

Williams had set a court hearing for May 27 to hear arguments on whether she should dismiss the case on those grounds.

WASHINGTON — President Trump on Monday moved to withdraw his $10 billion lawsuit against the Internal Revenue Service over the leak of his tax returns after reports that his administration was poised to create a fund to compensate some of his allies.

The disclosure was made in a filing in federal court in Florida, where the lawsuit was filed last year.

ABC News first reported last week that Trump was prepared to drop his lawsuit as part of a deal that would create a $1.7 billion fund to pay allies of the president who believe they were wrongly investigated and prosecuted.

The court filing did not mention terms of any potential deal.

News that the Trump administration was contemplating a fund to pay Trump allies drew an immediate backlash from Democrats, including Rep. Jamie Raskin, who called the idea “unconstitutional.”

“This, of course, is a political grievance fund that Donald Trump can use to pay off his friends,” Raskin, the top Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, said in an interview Sunday on ABC’s “This Week.”

“If these people have a valid cause of action, they should bring it to the court like every other American does, and use the system of due process, and proving things by clear and convincing evidence, or a preponderance of evidence, go and prove it. But the idea that Donald Trump can just pass it out like a pardon is absurd,” he added.

It was not immediately clear who precisely will stand to benefit from the fund but its creation reflects Trump’s long-running claims that the Biden administration Justice Department was weaponized against him.

He has cited as proof the since-dismissed criminal charges he faced between his first and second terms of conspiring to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election he lost and of retaining classified documents at his Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida. Several aides of his were also prosecuted, as were hundreds of Trump supporters who stormed the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.

Merrick Garland, who served as attorney general during the Biden administration, has repeatedly denied allegations of politicization and has said his decisions followed facts, the evidence and the law. His Justice Department also investigated Biden for his handling of classified information and brought separate tax and gun prosecutions against Biden’s son Hunter.

Nonetheless, Trump’s current Justice Department has actively pursued the president’s retribution campaign and grievances, bringing criminal charges against some of his perceived adversaries and initiating a wide-ranging investigation that aims to establish a years-long conspiracy between law enforcement and intelligence officials to destroy Trump’s political prospects and keep him power.

No charges have been brought in that investigation and it is not clear that any ever will be.

Trump filed a lawsuit earlier this year in a Florida federal court, alleging that a previous leak of his and the Trump Organization’s confidential tax records caused “reputational and financial harm, public embarrassment, unfairly tarnished their business reputations, portrayed them in a false light, and negatively affected President Trump, and the other Plaintiffs’ public standing.”

The president’s sons, Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump, are also named plaintiffs in the suit.

Hussein, Tucker and Richer write for the Associated Press.

NASHVILLE, Tenn. — Four Memphis residents are suing U.S. and Tennessee officials, saying they have been harassed, arrested and physically mistreated for engaging in First Amendment protected activities by observing and recording law enforcement agents in their city.

A lawsuit filed Wednesday in federal court targets the Memphis Safe Task Force, comprising agents from 13 federal agencies that President Trump ordered to the city to fight crime alongside Tennessee State Troopers and the Tennessee National Guard.

Since late September, hundreds of federal, state and local law enforcement personnel tied to the task force have made traffic stops, served warrants and searched for fugitives in the majority Black city of about 610,000 people. The lawsuit says the task force has conducted over 120,000 traffic stops.

“In the professed name of crime control, Task Force agents have stopped, menaced, and arrested Memphians engaging in routine, day-to-day activities,” the lawsuit states. “In response, Memphians encountering Task Force agents in public, including Plaintiffs, have stopped to gather information about and record Task Force activities.”

Emails from the Associated Press to the U.S. Department of Justice and a spokesperson for the task force were not returned on Wednesday morning.

Federal officials including Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, former Atty. Gen. Pam Bondi and White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller, have visited Memphis to praise the task force. Miller in October predicted the surge in law enforcement would make the city “safer than any of you could ever possibly imagine” and that “businesses and investment are going to pour in, and Memphis will be richer than ever before.”

The task force is part of a larger effort by Trump to use National Guard troops and surge federal law enforcement in cities, particularly ones controlled by Democrats. Following troop deployments in the District of Columbia and Los Angeles, he referred to Portland, Ore., as “war-ravaged” and threatened apocalyptic force in Chicago. Speaking last year to U.S. military leaders in Virginia, Trump proposed using cities as training grounds for the armed forces.

The lawsuit accuses task force agents of systematically retaliating against the four plaintiffs and other members of the public engaged in similar observations. It claims the threats and harassment are the “direct result of federal policy” that views observing federal agents performing their duties in public as a threat of harm to those agents. The lawsuit also claims that federal and state officials have failed to train their agents not to retaliate against citizens engaged in First Amendment protected activities.

The lawsuit asks the court to declare that retaliation against the plaintiffs for observing and recording law enforcement activity is unconstitutional and to prohibit the agents from further retaliation. It also targets a Tennessee law that requires observers to stand at least 25 feet away from law enforcement officers, if they are warned to do so, or face arrest. The suit asks the court to declare unconstitutional the use of the “Halo Law” against defendants who are not interfering with agents or impeding their duties.

Loller writes for the Associated Press.

An Amazon MGM Studios executive allegedly solicited kickbacks from an aspiring vendor in exchange for post-production contract awards on shows, according to a recently filed lawsuit.

Joe Eckardt, owner and president of Hollywood-based postproduction services firm Unbreakable Post, alleged that the studio’s head of postproduction, Frank Salinas, told him during a business lunch in 2023 that Salinas could “ensure” Unbreakable Post would be included as an approved vendor to bid on Amazon-affiliated projects.

Salinas would give Eckardt the target budget number for his company’s bid and “effectively guarantee that Unbreakable would be awarded the work,” the lawsuit states.

After the contract was awarded, Eckardt would then pay Salinas a percentage of the project value as a kickback, the lawsuit says.

After Eckardt refused, he alleges that his contract opportunities with Amazon dried up.

He states in the lawsuit that although he had done “substantial” work, served as a postproduction consultant or selected vendor on shows such as the Mexico, Brazil and Argentina productions of the reality series “Temptation Island” and the third season of documentary series “Coach Prime,” he was not selected by Amazon for a contract with those projects.

In 2025, Eckardt alleges that he reported Salinas’ conduct to Amazon and after six months of information gathering, the company told him that “its investigation had concluded and that the allegations were ‘not substantiated.’”

Amazon MGM Studios did not respond to a request for comment. Salinas declined to comment.

Eckardt’s lawsuit was filed Wednesday in Los Angeles County Superior Court. He alleges that he lost more than $1 million in contracts, income and future business opportunities. He is seeking a jury trial.

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

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

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

The statement did not disclose the terms of the agreement.

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

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

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

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

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

A group of five consumers have filed a lawsuit against Paramount Skydance seeking to block its acquisition of Warner Bros. Discovery and unwind the earlier merger that joined the storied Melrose Avenue studio with David Ellison’s Skydance Media, alleging that both deals reduce marketplace competition.

The lawsuit, filed Thursday in U.S. District Court in the Northern District of California, alleges the Paramount-Warner deal will lead to increased prices, fewer consumer choices and reduce production of film and TV since a major rival in the entertainment business will be eliminated.

The suit also alleges that the Paramount-Skydance merger, which was finalized last year, led to higher prices for the Paramount+ streaming service.

The plaintiffs — Pamela Faust, Len Marazzo, Lisa McCarthy, Deborah Rubinsohn and Gary Talewsky — are either Paramount+ subscribers, pay for cable bundles that include Paramount-owned TV channels or are moviegoers who watch films in theaters.

The deal activity for Paramount is part of a growing list of recent media mergers, including Walt Disney Co.’s 2019 acquisition of much of 21st Century Fox and Amazon’s purchase of MGM in 2021.

“These acquisitions show an industry moving by successive combinations toward fewer independent rivals, exactly the consolidation backdrop that heightens the competitive threat posed by the next merger, even if the combined firm remains smaller than the largest platforms,” the lawsuit states.

Paramount is aware of the lawsuit and “confident that it is without merit,” a company spokesperson said.

“The combination of Paramount and [Warner Bros. Discovery] will create a stronger competitor that is well positioned to serve as a champion for creative talent and consumer choice,” the spokesperson said in a statement.

The Paramount-Warner deal is currently winding its way through regulatory approvals. While that process is underway, Paramount has asked the Federal Communications Commission for permission to exceed a cap on foreign ownership for U.S. media companies.

Paramount expects to receive $24 billion in funds from three Middle Eastern royal families, who will become part owners of the combined company. Those total funds will represent about 49% of equity in that new company, exceeding the current foreign ownership cap of 25%.

Paramount has said the Ellison family and RedBird Capital Partners “collectively hold the largest equity stake in the combined company and continue to be the sole owners of Class A Common Stock, representing 100% of the voting shares.”

But on Friday, Rep. Sam Liccardo (D- San Jose) urged the FCC to deny Paramount’s petition on the foreign ownership aspect of the deal.

“Congress did not entrust the public airwaves to this agency so that it could auction off America to Riyadh, Abu Dhabi and Doha,” he wrote in a statement. “This will not stand.”

When a federal judge shot down a Trump administration policy of holding immigrants without bond last December, it seemed like a serious blow to the president’s mass deportation effort.

Instead, a top Justice Department official insisted the ruling wasn’t binding, and the administration continued denying detainees around the country a chance for release.

By February, the district court judge, Sunshine Sykes, was fed up. Sykes, a nominee of President Biden, accused Trump officials in a ruling that month of seeking “to erode any semblance of separation of powers,” adding that they could “only do so in a world where the Constitution does not exist.”

Hardly isolated, the case illustrates a broader pattern of defiance of lower court decisions in President Trump’s second term.

The failure of Trump officials to follow court orders has been highlighted most notably in individual immigration cases. But a review of hundreds of pages of court records by the Associated Press also shows an extraordinary record of violations in lawsuits over policy changes and other moves.

In the administration’s first 15 months in office, district court judges ruled it was violating an order in at least 31 lawsuits over a wide range of issues, including mass layoffs, deportations, spending cuts and immigration practices, the AP’s review of court records found. That’s about 1 out of every 8 lawsuits in which courts have at least temporarily blocked the administration’s actions.

The Trump administration’s power struggle with federal courts — which is testing basic tenets of U.S. democracy — reflects an expansive view of executive authority that has also challenged the independence of federal agencies, a president’s ethical obligations and the U.S. role in the international order.

Widespread noncompliance found

The Trump administration violations in the 31 lawsuits are in addition to more than 250 instances of noncompliance that judges have recently highlighted in individual immigration petitions — including failing to return property and keeping immigrants locked up past court-ordered release dates.

Legal scholars and former federal judges said they could recall at most a few violations of court rulings over the full four-year terms of other recent presidential administrations, including Trump’s first time in office. They also noted previous administrations were generally apologetic when confronted by judges; the Trump administration’s Justice Department has been combative in some cases.

“What the court system is experiencing in the last year and a half is just qualitatively completely different from anything that’s preceded it,” said Ryan Goodman, a law professor at New York University who studies federal courts and is tracking litigation against the Trump administration.

Though Trump officials eventually backed down in about a third of the 31 lawsuits, legal experts say their treatment of court orders poses serious dangers.

“The federal government should be the institution most devoted to the rule of law in this country,” said David Super, a constitutional law scholar at Georgetown University. “When it ceases to feel itself bound, respect for the rule of law is likely to break down across the country.”

The White House’s aggressive policy moves have prompted a barrage of lawsuits — more than 700 and counting.

Higher courts boost Trump efforts

The AP’s review also found that higher courts, including the Supreme Court, overruled the district courts and sided with the White House in nearly half of the 31 cases. Critics say those decisions are emboldening the administration to ignore judges’ orders.

White House spokesperson Abigail Jackson said the higher courts had overturned “unlawful district court rulings.” The administration will “continue to comply with lawful court rulings,” she added in a written statement.

“President Trump’s entire Administration is lawfully implementing the America First agenda he was elected to enact,” the statement said.

Among other instances of noncompliance, judges found the White House defied rulings when it deported scores of accused gang members to a notorious prison in El Salvador, withheld billions of dollars in foreign aid and failed to restore programming at the Voice of America. The three cases date to the first few months of the new administration, but judges have continued to find violations since then, including in two cases in April.

“The danger is that this gets normalized,” said JoAnna Suriani, counsel at the nonpartisan group Protect Democracy, which is tracking noncompliance cases. The group is also involved in litigation against the administration.

‘Ham-handed,’ ‘hallucinating’

In October, U.S. District Judge William Smith took little time to conclude Homeland Security officials were flouting one of his orders. Smith, a nominee of President George W. Bush, had blocked them from making billions of dollars in disaster relief funding to states contingent on cooperation with the president’s immigration priorities.

The Department of Homeland Security responded by keeping the immigration requirement on some grants, but making it contingent on a higher court overriding Smith’s injunction. The judge called the move “ham-handed” and said the agency was trying to “bully the states.”

In a case over the suspension of refugee admissions, U.S. District Judge Jamal Whitehead, a Biden nominee, accused the Justice Department last May of “hallucinating new text” in an appellate court order and “rewriting” it to achieve the government’s preferred outcome.

In four additional cases the AP reviewed, judges stopped short of a clear written finding of noncompliance but still criticized the administration’s response to their orders.

Of the judges who have confirmed violations, 22 were appointed by Democratic presidents and seven by Republican presidents.

Former federal judges Jeremy Fogel and Liam O’Grady said jurists are losing trust in the integrity of the Department of Justice.

That’s making them “more aggressive in accusing the government of bad faith,” said O’Grady, who along with Fogel is part of the nonpartisan democracy group Keep Our Republic.

Fogel said judges are also getting frustrated.

“They make orders and the orders don’t get complied with, and then they have to inquire why the orders are not being complied with, and that’s where it gets very mushy and very political,” he said.

Education case raises alarms

In Eureka, Calif., school administrator Lisa Claussen is worried about the impact on her students’ mental health if a judge does not find the Education Department in violation of a court order on federal grants.

Grant money allowed the school district in the poor coastal community in Northern California to hire more than a dozen psychologists and social workers to help students struggling with drug use and suicidal thoughts.

Education officials in the Trump administration told schools in California and other states last year that it was discontinuing the grants; the administration opposed diversity considerations in the grant process.

U.S. District Judge Kymberly Evanson blocked the move permanently in December, but California and 15 other states now say the administration is making an end run around her injunction by imposing new rules, including an initial limit of six months of funding.

Attorneys for the Education Department said they wanted to see whether schools were making progress on performance goals before releasing additional funds. The judge’s order did not block the six-month limit, they added in a court filing.

Evanson, a Biden nominee, has yet to rule.

In the absence of a one-year funding guarantee, Eureka City Schools and other districts say they have already issued layoff notices to mental health providers or eliminated positions.

“We have many kids who don’t trust adults for very good reason, and to be able to just swipe this grant like they’re doing … ,” Claussen said in a phone interview, her voice trailing off. “We didn’t do anything wrong.”

Justice Department response

In court filings, Justice Department attorneys have generally disputed accusations that the government was not complying. They have argued over the meaning of words, cited favorable appellate court rulings and said they were acting outside the scope of the court’s order, among other legal maneuvering.

Outside of court, Trump and White House officials have railed against federal judges. Vice President JD Vance has even suggested the president could ignore court orders.

Will Chamberlain, senior counsel with the conservative legal advocacy group the Article III Project, said many of the judges who have found violations are ignoring laws that clearly prohibit their rulings.

Trump officials are “generally complying, appealing and winning,” he said. “If they were defying orders left and right, they’d be losing them.”

A justice’s rebuke

In March, a federal appeals court ruled Sykes, the judge in California, had probably exceeded her authority in requiring bond hearings nationwide and blocked her February decision.

The outcome was not unusual.

In 15 of the 31 lawsuits the AP reviewed, an appellate court or the Supreme Court either allowed the administration’s underlying policy, limited the district court’s efforts to correct or punish the noncompliance, or both.

Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor criticized her fellow justices after one such ruling.

“This is not the first time the Court closes its eyes to noncompliance, nor, I fear, will it be the last,” she wrote in June in a dissent joined by the court’s two other liberal justices. “Yet each time this Court rewards noncompliance with discretionary relief, it further erodes respect for courts and for the rule of law.”

Thanawala writes for the Associated Press. AP writer Michael Casey in Boston contributed to this report.

A child sexual assault case filed against Aerosmith frontman Steven Tyler will proceed to trial in Los Angeles County Superior Court.

The singer is accused of grooming, sexually assaulting and impregnating 16-year-old Julia Misley in the 1970s. The suit, first filed in 2022 in Torrance, claims he “used his role, status, and power as a well-known musician and rock star” to exploit Misley. The complaint also argues Tyler admitted to the alleged crimes in his own memoir, “Does the Noise in My Head Bother You?,” where he refers to her as his “teen bride.”

Earlier this week, a judge dismissed most of the case, citing the statute of limitations in Massachusetts, where the pair lived during their three-year relationship. But they allegedly crossed state lines while Tyler toured the country with his band, including to California, according to the complaint. Because of California’s Child Victims Act — a 2020 statute that allowed a “lookback window” where alleged victims can file lawsuits regardless of a statute of limitations — a portion of the case will still be tried.

“This is a massive win for Steven Tyler. Today, the Court has dismissed with prejudice 99.9% of the claims against Mr. Tyler in this case,” Tyler’s lawyer, David Long-Daniels, said in a statement to The Times. “The court has decided that only one night, 50-plus years ago, out of a three-year relationship is allowed to remain.”

New York has a similar statute that was recently employed by singer Casandra “Cassie” Ventura in her case against Sean Combs. She filed a sex-trafficking and sexual assault lawsuit against the music mogul in 2023, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, just days before the expiration of a lookback window.

The lawsuit against Tyler, who previously appeared as a judge on “American Idol,” claims he and Misley first met at an Aerosmith concert in 1973. According to the document, he “performed various acts of criminal sexual conduct upon Plaintiff that night.” At the time, Tyler was in his mid-20s and Julia was 16.

The alleged encounter was the first of many, the lawsuit claims. In 1974, Tyler was named Misley’s legal guardian and took her on tour with the band.

According to the complaint, he described the nature of the relationship in his 2011 memoir, writing, “She was 16, she knew how to nasty … with my bad self being twenty-six and she barely old enough to drive and sexy as hell, I just fell madly in love with her. … She was my heart’s desire, my partner in crimes of passion. … I was so in love I almost took a teen bride. I went and slept at her parent’s house for a couple of nights and her parent’s fell in love with me, signed paper over for me to have custody, so I wouldn’t get arrested if I took her out of state. I took her on tour with me.”

The lawsuit also describes Misley’s alleged pregnancy with Tyler’s child, which ended in a “pressured” abortion.

In previous court documents, Tyler has denied the allegations and attempted to get the case dismissed.

“This reflects years of resilience and courage by Ms. Misley, driven by an unwavering pursuit of truth and justice. It is time for justice and for Tyler to be held accountable by a jury,” Misley’s attorney, Jeff Anderson, said in a statement.

The trial is scheduled for August.

Kylie Jenner is being sued by a second housekeeper who alleges she suffered cruel and unusual treatment while working for the beauty mogul.

Just a week after one woman on Jenner’s cleaning staff sued her, claiming her co-workers harassed and discriminated against her, another housekeeper has come out with allegations. The woman says the “Keeping Up With the Kardashians” star didn’t intervene while she suffered abuse from fellow staff, despite the housekeeper slipping the reality star a letter pleading for help.

Juana Delgado Soto filed a lawsuit against Kylie Jenner, Kylie Jenner Inc., staff supervisor Itzel Sibrian, Tri Star Services and La Maison Family Services on Wednesday alleging racial discrimination, harassment, failure to pay wages, failure to prevent or remedy harassment and discrimination, and more.

A representative for Jenner declined to comment Thursday, noting that the reality star had not yet seen the lawsuit.

According to the lawsuit, obtained by The Times, Soto began working for Jenner in May 2019. She alleges that meal and rest breaks were withheld from her for the first few years of her employment, but that the severity of the abuse and harassment ramped up in late 2023, when Sibrian became her direct supervisor. Soto says that, in 2024, she filed a complaint with Human Resources after Sibrian allegedly mocked and humiliated her for her accent, immigration status and race and called her stupid. Sibrian was temporarily removed because of the complaint and then reinstated, and according to the suit, she set out to retaliate against Soto for filing a complaint by reducing her hourly wage, assigning unreasonable workloads and changing her schedule.

In her lawsuit, Soto says that, as she prepared to leave work on her birthday, Sibrian threatened that she would be fired if she didn’t stay late and told her “no one cares about your birthday, Kylie is having a dinner.” Soto says she missed her own surprise party.

In late 2024, housekeeping supervisors Patsy and Elsy, who are referred to in the first lawsuit against Jenner as well, by their first names only, stepped into their leadership roles. Soto alleges that under Patsy and Elsy, she was denied adequate time off to grieve after the sudden death of her brother, and was told to “report to work immediately.” While she was working, she alleges, staff members “whispered that [Soto] was lying about her brother’s death and kept forcing her to pick up trash they purposely threw on the ground.” She further claims she was harassed when she requested time off to attend her brother’s funeral Mass.

In April 2025, the suit alleges that, after repeated failures by management to address Soto’s concerns, she wrote a long letter to Jenner detailing the harassment, discrimination and retaliation and placed it on Jenner’s massage bed immediately before her massage.

According to the suit, Soto wrote, “I need to express just how terribly I am mentally abused” and “I really apologize for letting you know about all these situations, I know you wouldn’t allow this to happen, if you were aware of it.”

Soto alleges that the following day she was threatened with termination and instructed never to contact Jenner again. “Defendants told her she was no longer allowed to look at Kylie, smile at Kylie and if she saw Kylie she would have to ‘disappear.’”

Soto further alleges that, after she left the letter for Jenner, her supervisors required her to leave the premises when Jenner was present, restricted her restroom access, forced her to clean the doghouse and prohibited her from drinking water at the residence, calling it “Kylie’s water.”

In August 2025, Soto sent a text message to her supervisors, writing, “I am sorry, I cannot do this anymore, every day you guys mistreat me, and I have bitten all my nails off, I cannot sleep at nights, and I always have anxiety because of the way you guys treat me. No matter what I did no one helped me.”

Soto is seeking an unspecified amount of punitive and compensatory damages.

“My client alleges multiple employment & labor law violations by Kylie Jenner and her affiliated companies, and I commend her for the courage to come forward and seek accountability, recognizing that taking the first step is often the most difficult,” Soto’s attorney Della Shaker told The Times. Shaker also represents Angelica Hernandez Vasquez, who filed a suit against Jenner on April 17.

Vasquez’s lawsuit says she was subjected to “severe and pervasive harassment” while employed by the makeup magnate from September 2024 to August 2025.

Vasquez, who states that she is a Salvadoran woman and practicing Catholic, alleges she was humiliated by fellow staff members and belittled because of her race, country of origin, religion and immigration status. Jenner was not personally accused of bullying behavior in the filing brought by Vasquez.

A former executive at Live Nation, the world’s largest live entertainment company, is suing the company, alleging that he was wrongfully terminated after he raised concerns about alleged financial misconduct and improper accounting practices.

Nicholas Rumanes alleges he was “fraudulently induced” in 2022 to leave a lucrative position as head of strategic development at a real estate investment trust to create a new role as executive vice president of development and business practice at Beverly Hills-based Live Nation.

In his new position, Rumanes said, he raised “serious and legitimate alarm” over the the company’s business practices.

As a result, he says, he was “unlawfully terminated,” according to the lawsuit filed Thursday in Los Angeles County Superior Court.

“Rumanes was, simply put, promised one job and forced to accept another. And then he was cut loose for insisting on doing that lesser job with integrity and honesty,” according to the lawsuit.

He is seeking $35 million in damages.

Representatives for Live Nation were not immediately available for comment.

The lawsuit comes a week after a federal jury in Manhattan found that Live Nation and its Ticketmaster subsidiary had operated a monopoly over major concert venues, controlling 86% of the concert market.

Rumanes’ lawsuit describes a “culture of deception” at Live Nation, saying its “basic business model was to misstate and exaggerate financial figures in efforts to solicit and secure business.”

Such practices “spanned a wide spectrum of projects in what appeared to be a company-wide pattern of financial misrepresentation and misleading disclosures,” the lawsuit states.

Rumanes says he received materials and documents that showed that the company inflated projected revenues across multiple venue development projects.

Additionally, Rumanes contends that the company violated a federal law that requires independent financial auditing and transparency and instead ran Live Nation “through a centralized, opaque structure” that enables it to “bypass oversight and internal checks and balances.”

In 2010, as a condition of the Live Nation-Ticketmaster merger, the newly formed company agreed to a consent decree with the government that prohibited the firm from threatening venues to use Ticketmaster. In 2019 the Justice Department found that the company had repeatedly breached the agreement, and it extended the decree.

Rumanes contends that he brought his concerns to the attention of the company’s management, but his warnings were “repeatedly ignored.”

April 17 (UPI) — A federal judge on Friday blocked a lawsuit against the state of Hawaii that the federal government filed to prevent it from suing oil companies.

The Department of Justice last year sued Hawaii to stop a suit against fossil fuel companies for the impact of climate change on the state, but Senior Judge Helen Gillmor of the U.S. District Court in Hawaii said they it has no standing, The Hill and The New York Times reported.

In the ruling, Gillmor said that an “abstract, theoretical future harm” is not a valid basis for a lawsuit because stating an intention to file suit — which the state’s governor declared on television that he planned to do — does not amount to “concrete harm” that would allow an entity to sue.

Gillmor blocked the lawsuit because the DOJ’s theory of harm would require predicting claims brought against unknown companies; predicting that the lawsuit would be successful; “guessing” that oil companies would react in specific way; and then hypothesizing that the reaction would somehow harm the United States’ commerce and future energy policy, she wrote in the 30-page decision.

The DOJ’s suit, which was filed by now-former Attorney General Pam Bondi, alleged that Hawaii’s action was a “burdensome and ideologically motivated” lawsuit that could cause “crippling damages” with the energy and climate policies the state allegedly is pursuing.

“We disagree with the Hawaii District Court’s ruling, which ignored Supreme Court precedent regarding the United States’ interest in the supremacy of federal law,” the DOJ’s principal deputy assistant attorney general Adam Gustafson said in a statement. “We are exploring all options.”