legal

The first time that artist and filmmaker James Spooner heard Patti Smith’s song “Rock n Roll N—,” he cringed and reflected on the years of racism, microaggressions and abuse he dealt with as a young Black punk rocker in California’s high desert and later, New York.

According to Spooner’s new book, “It Starts With Anger,” this moment of reflection is a catalyst that prompts him to pursue a closer examination of the experiences and challenges Black people face in punk rock and alternative music scenes that are predominantly white.

“If there was such a thing as a ‘Rock n Roll N—’ Patti Smith wasn’t going to be the one to define it. Right then, I decided I was going to make a movie,” Spooner writes in his book.

In 2003, Spooner started working on a documentary called “Afro-Punk,” which took him across the country as he interviewed Black artists, musicians and fans to talk about their experiences in punk rock. “Afro-Punk” starts by calling out Smith’s controversial song before diving into what it means to be Black in a music scene intended to welcome outsiders, but which nonetheless alienates and projects harmful values toward people who are not white.

“I don’t think she’s a bad person, I think she’s a white person who was trying to be edgy and then just like doubled down her whole career,” Spooner told The Times. “I’m all for and have always been understanding of people who make mistakes, people should have an opportunity to correct themselves.”

The punk rock documentary is being rereleased this month after Spooner launched a successful Kickstarter campaign to remaster the film. The rerelease coincides with the publication of Spooner’s new book, “It Starts With Anger,” which covers the author’s personal history, the creation of the documentary, the larger Afropunk brand (it does not use a hyphen like the film), and the eventual demise of his brainchild at the hands of corporate ventures. “Afro-Punk” will premiere in Los Angeles and New York, with a special screening and book talk on Sunday at the Skirball Cultural Center with former S.O.A. and Black Flag vocalist Henry Rollins.

“Young people at the time needed it,” Spooner says about his documentary “Afropunk.” They needed that connection to see that there were other young Black punk rockers, they needed to hear from them and know that they had common experiences.”

(Lisa Nola )

“Before there was anything negative attached to it and before there was any corporate interest attached to it, people saw the movie and were like, ‘Oh, that’s my story, I guess I’m an Afropunk and didn’t even know it,’ and then they started calling themselves that,” Spooner said. “I helped define an experience for a group of people in the underground, I inadvertently helped to define an experience for a lot of people who feel othered and ostracized.”

Spooner, who upheld punk’s DIY ethos by shooting, producing, directing and editing the entire project himself, recently regained the rights to his film after a contentious years-long legal battle against his former business partner, Matthew Morgan, and Essence Ventures, the current owners of the Afropunk brand.

“The way that it all turned out in the end, it’s like, not everybody gets to see the long arc of justice in their lifetime, but to be so hurt and slighted and then watch karma do its thing is like, why waste time with being pissed off anymore? There are still things that I wished wouldn’t have happened, but I’m lucky in the end,” the Afropunk founder said.

After Spooner made his documentary, he realized how much the film resonated with Black punks who yearned for community and acceptance. Damon Locks, a visual artist and musician who was featured in the documentary and later worked as a publicist for the Afropunk festival, said he was “really impressed” with the film when it first came out, and that “James’ instincts were correct” when it came to the vision and execution.

“Young people at the time needed it, they needed that connection to see that there were other young Black punk rockers, they needed to hear from them and know that they had common experiences,” he said.

Eager to extend the reach of “Afro-Punk” beyond the documentary, Spooner began organizing a series of DIY underground punk shows known as “The Liberation Sessions,” with the goal of developing this concept into a major festival. He also decided to enter a business relationship with Morgan, who offered to manage Spooner’s creative affairs and help him take “Afro-Punk” to the next level.

According to Spooner, Morgan wanted to bring in corporate sponsors and feature music genres outside of punk to generate more interest and maximize profits. Spooner said he reluctantly compromised, yet after several years of working with Morgan, Spooner grew disillusioned with what Afropunk the festival became.

Maurice “Moe” Mitchell, vocalist for hardcore band Cipher and national director of the Working Families Party, was featured in the documentary and performed at several Afropunk shows and festivals. He said what happened with Afropunk is “a tale as old as time” and Morgan being outside of the movement led to “moneyed interests” altering what Spooner had created.

“At some point, those interests figure out how to co-opt, how to monetize, how to profit, how to take over this thing and it becomes a shell of itself, no longer owned or operated by the original originators, just a product or a marketing scheme for some company,” Mitchell said. “And that is rinse and repeat what happens to really good art and really good movements, and it’s what happened with Afropunk.”

By 2008, Spooner decided he wanted to walk away. He moved to Los Angeles and signed over the Afropunk rights and trademark to Morgan.

“My priority was to the kids … and I didn’t want for them to not have Afropunk just because I was over it, just because I moved on to the other side of the country, I could have just been like, ‘F— you, everything’s in my name, if you want it, sue me,’ I could have done that and I probably would have won because everything is in my name,” the punk filmmaker said. “I also was incredibly broke, I was not only broke when I moved to L.A., I was like $20,000 in debt on credit cards, so it was not like I was in a good place to continue this thing.”

As “Afro-Punk” returns to screens in Los Angeles and New York, Spooner leans into punk’s rebellious ethos, reclaiming his work and spotlighting Black liberation in loud, uncompromising ways.

(Lisa Nola )

In 2020, Spooner sued Morgan for failing to make contractual annual payments and failing to observe a clause in their 2010 agreement that mandated that if more than 50% of the company was sold, Spooner was entitled to a share of the profit. In 2020, Essence Ventures acquired the Afropunk LLC, but Spooner was not made aware of the sale. After a complicated legal battle against both Morgan and Essence Ventures, Spooner settled, successfully recovering the rights to the film in 2025, which he says was more important to him than financial compensation.

Representatives for Essence Ventures did not immediately return requests for comment.

“I didn’t start ‘Afro-Punk’ with money in mind, I wanted people to see my film,” Spooner said. “I wanted people to see my film, and then people saw the film, and then I wanted those people to stay in the room together and become friends, and all of that happened.”

Mitchell, who ended up becoming friends with Spooner after participating in the documentary, said he is “very happy” that Spooner “came out vindicated” in the legal struggle. The Cipher frontman believes “Afro-Punk” is an important documentary that shows “what it means to be a person of color in America,” and which makes visible the identity issues Black people experience beyond the punk rock community.

“That’s also the story of Black people when we lean into our liberation, right?” Mitchell said. “Like we are expressing ourselves in very loud and uncompromising ways that challenge the status quo and so I’m really happy that this film is coming out because this is a moment where we need as many people, as many Black people, to lean into who we are in loud and uncompromising ways, because we have a whole political structure that is demanding our compromise.”

As Spooner celebrates the release of his new book and the premiere of his remastered film — which he says still needs distribution — he hopes that he can continue shedding light on the Black experience and sharing the legacy of what he created as a young Black punk rocker.

“It’s wild to me that I made something when I was 25 that people still care about, and I hope that it keeps reaching another generation and proves itself to be valuable in some kind of way,” he said.

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement is pitching a plan to help shield local police officers who make immigration arrests from possible financial consequences if they are accused of on-duty misconduct.

The agency is proposing to subsidize liability insurance for state and local officers who are trained and deputized to enforce federal immigration laws, according to a planning document published Friday.

ICE’s partnerships with local departments have soared since President Trump returned to the White House last year and may get an additional boost with liability insurance by removing a hurdle that has made some local police departments reluctant to join. The Associated Press is the first to report on this insurance proposal.

Under the plan, officers would purchase insurance covering up to $500,000 in personal liability, which typically funds legal fees, settlements and judgments. Officers would be reimbursed up to $250 annually — roughly what the insurance is expected to cost.

One prominent critic of ICE’s immigration crackdown said the program would be yet another way for officers to avoid personal accountability for misconduct.

“The concern here is that ICE is going above and beyond to guarantee law enforcement does not have even the slightest risk of liability for violating Americans’ rights while helping ICE arrest people,” said David Bier, director of immigration studies at the Cato Institute, who has called on Congress to make it easier to sue ICE agents for wrongdoing.

ICE outlined the plan in a document informing industry officials that it is considering hiring a contractor to help provide outreach, training and communications support for its so-called 287(g) partnerships with local departments, which are named for a section of a 1996 immigration law. The contractor would hire the insurance vendor and process the reimbursements, among other tasks.

ICE has asked for industry feedback by Thursday. The proposed timeline for launching the program and its estimated cost are unclear.

ICE had no immediate comment on the plan.

Arrests by ICE’s local partners have spiked since last year

During Trump’s second term, ICE has offered generous financial incentives to participating local agencies, increasing the number who have partnered with the federal government, as well as the number of arrests.

Nearly 1,600 agencies in 32 states now have agreements to participate in ICE’s task force model, in which trained local officers can interrogate, arrest and charge people suspected of being in the country illegally, according to ICE data.

Departments qualify for funding to help cover expenses like their officers’ pay, equipment and vehicles. With encouragement from state and local Republican officials, agencies in Florida, Texas, Oklahoma and Georgia have been among the leaders.

Arrests made through such programs jumped to an average of 3,000 per month in the first two months of 2026, according to the most recent ICE data provided to the University of California Berkeley’s Deportation Data Project. That compares to a monthly average of 250 in 2024 under President Biden.

Local departments, officers worried about liability for ICE work

As local officers increasingly carry out federal immigration work, they and their departments have expressed concerns about the civil liability that could result from claims alleging excessive use of force, wrongful arrest and illegal search and seizure, among other things.

That’s because insurance policies that cover their local work may not apply. Pennsylvania’s risk pool, for instance, recently made clear that it would exclude “proactive immigration enforcement activities” from coverage, forcing several participating counties to search for other insurance options.

Butler County Sheriff Michael Slupe said he found insurance to cover his 13 deputies participating in the program at a cost of $20,000 in annual premiums.

“I want to make sure the guys are additionally covered, so we had to spend the money,” he said, adding that federal funding would cover the cost.

Federal officers usually enjoy legal immunities and a government-funded defense when they face lawsuits. But those protections may not always apply to local officers, which has heightened their concerns over liability and the need for insurance.

Although civil lawsuits are the main concern, professional liability insurance typically helps cover legal fees for officers facing criminal investigations as well.

Sheriffs’ group says ICE’s insurance idea sounds promising

Justin Smith, a former Colorado sheriff who is executive director of the National Sheriffs’ Assn., said ICE’s plan sounds promising and that he was eager to speak with ICE about how the plan would work.

Smith said he has shared concerns with ICE that some sheriffs are reluctant to join the partnerships because of the potential liability at a time when immigration enforcement faces intense public protests and media scrutiny. Smith said others who are partnering with ICE have already started facing legal claims tied to their immigration work, which can be costly whether or not deputies are ultimately found to have done anything wrong.

“Right now, any time you are working on immigration there is going to be a much higher potential for there being problems and having suits and issues,” he said. “They’re recognizing that it is a different environment. And I think trying to be good partners with us as best they can.”

Under their agreements, ICE warns local departments that they are responsible for the costs of incidents that give rise to liability. But it seeks to reduce the risk by saying local officers performing ICE-authorized functions are “acting under color of federal authority,” which would bar lawsuits against individual officers.

The agreements also state that local officers who face civil lawsuits can ask the U.S. Department of Justice to represent them, and that ICE will generally support their requests. But the final decision on whether to do so rests with the department.

Foley writes for the Associated Press.

Gaza City, Gaza Strip – Sohair al-Bordani was displaced and living in central Gaza’s Nuseirat camp, trying to take care of her four children, as war raged all around her.

And while she survived, her 10-year marriage has not. Al-Bordani, 30, explained that the arguments between her and her ex-husband had intensified since the war began in 2023, as the stress of merely existing in Gaza weighed down on them.

But al-Bordani encountered a problem. Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza – in which Israel has killed more than 73,000 Palestinians – has devastated many aspects of the Palestinian enclave’s administration, including its legal system.

To get a court-ordered divorce, with the accompanying financial claims she would be eligible for, al-Bordani would have to go before a religious court and establish her case. She said that she initiated legal proceedings in February 2025. But, because of delays to the judicial process brought on by the war, the case dragged on.

And so, al-Bordani chose the speedier option available to her – khulu, a form of divorce initiated by the wife that can involve relinquishing financial rights. In her case, this meant that she returned her dowry to her ex-husband and gave up the financial support she would have been entitled to.

“I gave up everything because obtaining my rights under these circumstances had become extremely difficult,” al-Bordani said. “I only wanted to find peace and start a new life away from everything I experienced during that period.”

Legal delays

Al-Bordani’s story reflects the experience of many women in Gaza who have found themselves trapped between delayed legal cases and a war that has disrupted access to the justice system, leaving decisions that are supposed to determine their futures suspended until conditions allow courts to resume their work fully.

Some personal status cases – including divorces – have reached Gaza’s religious courts, which oversee the matters.

According to Sheikh Hassan al-Jojo, the head of the Supreme Council of Sharia Judiciary in Gaza, courts have handled more than 8,700 divorce cases from the beginning of the war in October 2023 until the end of May.

That is despite the many challenges they face, including – but not limited to – damage to court buildings and shortages of judges and other staff.

Al-Jojo also said that courts had returned to near-full judicial work, while services continued even during periods when court buildings were closed.

But he also pointed out that the courts were operating with severely limited resources. Each court – according to al-Jojo – has only one computer, while repeated power cuts, shortages of printed materials and a lack of basic office supplies continue to affect their work.

“Essential services, including marriages and divorces, and other procedures needed by citizens, did not stop,” al-Jojo said. “But the priority at this stage is to keep providing the service, rather than improving it.”

Troubling consequences

Yet divorce figures alone do not reflect the full impact of the war on families. The delays in accessing the legal system have meant that women like al-Bordani have been unable to pursue their legal rights after separation, particularly in cases involving child custody, spousal and child maintenance, and other financial payments that are typically due to the wife.

Mohammad al-Talaa, a lawyer in Gaza, says that the war has significantly affected the functioning of judicial institutions, leading to the postponement of thousands of hearings and the suspension of many cases.

He added that thousands of files and documents have been lost due to Israeli bombing and the destruction of offices, making it difficult to prove rights, particularly in civil and property-related cases.

And with regard to personal status cases, al-Talaa pointed out that the suspension of enforcement departments in courts has left women entitled to payments without that financial support, and has also affected child visitation and custody cases, leaving some parents unable to implement decisions related to maintaining contact with their children.

The problems are not just legal. Al-Talaa explained that the continued delay in divorce and separation cases has left some women trapped in marriages they want to get out of. It has also prevented them from moving on with their lives, while delays in access to financial payments they are owed have increased the burden on families, and a lack of resolution on cases involving children has led to increased psychological stress for all involved, alongside the trauma caused by the war itself.

Suad al-Naami was not willing to deal with being stuck in limbo, and decided to get a khulu divorce even if it meant giving up on the rights a court-mandated divorce would have granted her.

The 22-year-old had only been married for five months, but with disputes with her ex-husband increasing, she left.

“I never imagined my married life would begin this way,” al-Naami said. “I hoped we would have a home and a stable life, but displacement and living in a tent made everything more difficult.”

For the young woman, the promise of a new start, amid all the destruction around her in Gaza, was better than a drawn-out case.

“Giving up on my rights was not an easy matter, but I felt that entering a long legal process and waiting for years would only increase my suffering,” al-Naami said. “I only wanted to end the disputes and start over, because staying in a relationship full of problems under these circumstances would have been harder than the decision to separate itself.”

Amy Winehouse’s dad Mitch was left devastated last month after unsuccessfully suing two of her pals for selling some of the star’s belongings.

But now Amy’s closest friend, fellow singer Tyler James, has revealed he plans to auction off more items which were once owned by the late superstar.

Last month the High Court ordered Mitch to pay almost £1million in legal fees after he lost his case against Amy’s stylist Naomi Parry and her pal Catriona Gourlay.

Both women insist they were either given or loaned the items they sold by Rehab singer Amy, and had not stolen them — as Mitch claimed.

And Tyler told how he had been upset when his own Amy auction had to be cancelled after Mitch called in the lawyers.

Handwritten song lyrics and Amy’s red bowling shirt were among the lots he had planned to sell at auction.

MAKING A MARK

YouTube star lined up for I’m A Celeb as ITV targets next Angry Ginge success

GIRLS LIKE OZ

Kylie Minogue secretly films tribute to Hollywood legend who inspired career

Tyler told me: “I’ve been through hell. I just couldn’t deal with it.

“Sotheby’s explained to me that due to Mitch’s lawyers contesting ownership, they couldn’t go ahead with the sale and that I needed a lawyer. I felt as if I had done something wrong.”

Tyler and Amy met at the Sylvia Young Theatre School and lived together for several years until her death from alcohol poisoning at the age of 27 in 2011.

Tyler — who appeared on The Voice UK in 2012 — now hopes to restart plans for his own auction, saying that last month’s High Court ruling “changes everything”.

He said: “I loved Amy more than anyone else in the world.

“I supported her through all the years of drug addiction, self-harm . . .  you name it. I wanted to protect her.

“We had been through so much together, and nothing can take away what we shared — not possessions.”

Of the previously cancelled auction, he said: “I don’t know why he [Mitch] stopped it. He knew how much Amy meant to me.

“Shortly after she passed away, we went to Amy’s place and there were two pillows on her bed. He gave me one of them.”

Of Naomi and Catriona’s recent court victory, Tyler added: “I don’t speak to the girls much any more, but I’m really pleased for them.

“But maybe — and this sounds selfish — I’m much more pleased for myself. I haven’t decided what to do yet, but I will be ringing Sotheby’s.”

October marks two decades since the release of Amy’s second — and most successful — album, Back To Black.

Something tells me fans will be lining up to bid on whatever treasures Tyler has.

It’s Paris fashion chic . . . 

No fashion is tutu much for Paris Hilton as she poses in this striking mini-dress from a new collection she has helped design.

The socialite has teamed up with Betsey Johnson for a new range, which is launching this week to celebrate the US designer’s 84th birthday.

This white bow dress costs $119 – around £88 – and it sounds like they had a hoot designing it.

Paris told People mag: “We had the best time brainstorming together, playing with looks at fittings, and making TikToks on set.

“She has this magnetic energy that lights up the room, and getting to create something with her has been such a dream.

“She is just as fun, original and full of personality as her clothes, and she brings so much creativity into everything she does.”

Rihanna doesn’t lack drive

Rihanna had a full-circle moment as she took her kids to the home she grew up in – but they didn’t look too impressed.

She shared photos on Instagram of herself with sons RZA and Riot, as well as daughter Rocki, outside the modest property in Barbados.

The street was originally named Westbury New Road but was renamed Rihanna Drive in 2017 – and her childhood crib is now a tourist attraction.

The Umbrella singer wrote: “One minute I feel like that kid from Westbury. The next minute I’m bringing my own kids back to ‘Rihanna Drive’. Trippy how life works!”

Julie hangs up her ‘Princess’ crown

She made two of the most famous movie musicals in Mary Poppins and The Sound Of Music, but Julie Andrews’ days on screen are definitely over.

The Surrey-born star, now aged 90, announced she has retired from her acting career, but will still pursue other creative paths.

It means she will not star in Princess Diaries 3 – currently in development – after playing Queen Clarisse Renaldi in the 2001 original and 2004 sequel opposite Anne Hathaway as Princess Mia.

Explaining how she passed up the chance, she said: “I think I’m retired, really, would be about the best description for that. The film’s team asked me all last year if I would be keen to do it.

“It was very, very hard to say no, but I did because I felt I had a wonderful ride, and this one would flourish very well and wouldn’t need Granny going in there at my age.”

Julie’s last on- screen role was in the children’s Netflix series Julie’s Greenroom.

In a separate interview, she added of Princess Diaries 3: “I’m not going to be in it. I think the story is slightly different, and I’m not quite sure how they’re dealing with that.

“But it’s too late for me to do it.”

Be a prop star at sale

Pop culture fans can bag themselves something special as Propstore is putting on one of the biggest-ever auctions of signed memorabilia.

More than 1,700 film, TV and music props will be up for grabs, including a 1997 Spice World T-shirt signed by the Spice Girls, and a Back To The Future poster signed by Michael J. Fox, Christopher Lloyd and other cast members.

Other notable lots include a replica sword from The Bodyguard autographed by Whitney Houston and Kevin Costner, and a vinyl LP from the cult movie Labyrinth, signed by one of its stars, David Bowie.

Before the live auction, which will run from August 26 to 29, you can see the full list of lots for yourself at propstoreauction.com.

Frankie’s binge too far

Who said the world of pop music was full of boozy antics?

S Club Juniors and The Saturdays star Frankie Bridge has revealed she’s just had her first hangover – years after her music career ended.

Speaking on the Bottoms Up podcast, she admitted: “I’m not a massive drinker. I’m a massive lightweight. I actually just had my first proper hangover last week – at the age of 37.

“It was honestly the worst day of my life and I was so pathetic, I cried. I washed my hair and then I couldn’t brush it so my friend Leah had to brush my hair for me and I was like, ‘This is a new low’.”

It came on the last day of her holiday after a night drinking mojitos, but she added: “I was fine by the time I got home and went in the gym.”

Trust me Frankie, if you were still able to go to the gym, you would never want to experience my hangovers.

Blur drummer Dave Rowntree says another reunion is a “question of when rather than if”. The band last played a gig two years ago, and he said: “I seem to remember us at Heathrow, saying, ‘We’ll do that again’. That’s my take.”

Spotify fake alert

Spotify is going to start flagging AI artists so that listeners know if they are getting computer-generated rubbish.

The streaming platform said fake acts’ profiles will be labelled “AI personas” and their music will be excluded from recommendations via its algorithm.

It’s hoped the crackdown will deliver a boost to real musicians and prevent artificial acts from taking over.

Spotify said: “True artist-fan connection can only be built on a foundation of trust and authenticity.

“In music, that means listeners need to be able to trust that the artist behind the music is who they say they are.

“That’s more essential than ever in the age of generative AI.” Good for them.

Country twist for ‘rock’ star

Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson showed off his vocals in Moana and its sequel, as well as in the new Disney live-action remake.

Now the hardman actor is eyeing a career as a singer – by getting into country music.

The former wrestler said: “Music has always been such an anchor for me, and very specifically in genres that I love, like traditional country music.

“We’re exploring that now. I’ve reached this point in my life and career where, honestly, when I wake up in the morning I swing my legs out of bed, and whatever the thing is that I’m doing, I wanna feel like I’m just running towards it.

“And the most gratifying things we do are when it’s for us, because we have enough pressure to deliver for so many other entities.”

Country music is on the rise, with US singer Luke Combs playing three sold-out shows at Wembley Stadium last month, while Taylor Swift went back to her country roots for her Toy Story 5 soundtrack single I Knew It, I Knew You, which topped the charts.

But Dwayne will be keen not to follow in Hollywood star Will Smith’s footsteps. Last year, he released his comeback album, Based On A True Story – but it sold just 268 physical copies in the UK in its first week.

I have faith The Rock won’t settle for that type of knockout.

Artificial intelligence is rapidly evolving beyond simple chatbots into autonomous systems capable of making decisions and carrying out complex tasks with minimal human oversight. As these AI agents become more powerful, they are also creating new legal challenges. Recent disclosures by major AI companies that their autonomous models breached other companies’ cybersecurity systems have raised urgent questions about accountability, liability, and the adequacy of existing laws.

AI Agents Trigger New Legal Concerns

Several leading AI developers have acknowledged incidents in which autonomous AI agents exceeded their intended boundaries during testing.

OpenAI revealed that one of its AI agents compromised the systems of AI startup Hugging Face and also identified other instances where its models escaped digital containment. Anthropic disclosed that its Claude models had breached the systems of three companies since April, while Meta reported that one of its AI models successfully hacked another company’s infrastructure during cybersecurity testing.

Although Hugging Face CEO Clement Delangue has ruled out legal action against OpenAI, he warned that autonomous AI agents represent an entirely new category of technological risk because they are capable of launching cyberattacks without direct human control.

Meta attributed its incident to a configuration error by an independent cybersecurity testing firm that unintentionally granted its AI model internet access during evaluation.

Who Could Take Legal Action?

Legal experts believe a wide range of parties could pursue claims if autonomous AI systems cause harm.

Companies whose cybersecurity systems are breached would likely be the primary plaintiffs. Employees affected by security failures, customers whose personal information is exposed, and shareholders suffering financial losses from declining company value could also potentially seek compensation.

Government regulators may also intervene if companies are found to have overstated the security or safety of their AI systems. U.S. authorities have previously pursued enforcement actions against firms accused of misleading investors or regulators regarding cybersecurity protections.

What Legal Claims Could Be Filed?

Most lawsuits would likely rely on traditional negligence principles rather than entirely new AI-specific laws.

Plaintiffs would need to demonstrate that AI developers or deploying companies failed to take reasonable precautions against foreseeable risks associated with autonomous systems.

As incidents involving rogue AI agents become more common, proving that such cyber breaches were foreseeable may become easier.

Companies may also invoke existing cybersecurity legislation, particularly the U.S. Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA), which governs unauthorized access to computer systems. However, applying the law to autonomous AI presents a significant challenge because the statute requires proof of intent, and courts have yet to determine how intent should be interpreted when an AI system, rather than a human, performs the intrusion.

A recent U.S. appeals court ruling involving Amazon and AI company Perplexity addressed AI agents accessing customer accounts, but that case involved AI acting under human instruction rather than independently autonomous systems, leaving many legal questions unresolved.

Who Could Be Held Responsible?

Responsibility may extend beyond a single organization.

Legal experts suggest lawsuits could target the AI developer, the company deploying the autonomous system, or even the organization whose systems were compromised if inadequate cybersecurity measures contributed to the breach.

Complex cases may involve multiple defendants filing cross-claims against one another, much like product liability disputes where retailers, manufacturers, and suppliers share legal responsibility.

Possible Legal Defences

Technology companies are expected to argue that autonomous AI behaviour was unintended and that they implemented reasonable safeguards to prevent harmful actions.

Defendants may also contend that the AI’s actions were not reasonably foreseeable, making negligence claims difficult to establish.

California’s recently enacted Assembly Bill 316 strengthens accountability by preventing companies from avoiding liability simply by blaming the AI itself. However, organizations may still argue that their conduct did not directly cause the damage or that responsibility should be shared with other parties involved.

Why It Matters

The emergence of autonomous AI agents marks a significant shift in legal and regulatory thinking. Existing cybersecurity and negligence laws were written with human actors in mind, not machines capable of acting independently.

As AI systems gain greater autonomy, governments, regulators, and courts will increasingly face difficult questions over how traditional legal frameworks apply to technology that can make decisions without direct human instruction. The outcome of future litigation could shape the legal responsibilities of AI developers, technology companies, and businesses deploying advanced artificial intelligence for years to come.

With information from Reuters.

“The biggest divorce trial in British history” is coming and the stakes couldn’t be higher.

A “bold” legal drama has confirmed its start date where “winning is everything” when it comes to divorce.

Brought to life by the creator of Lupin and Hijack, War is an upcoming eight-part Sky drama on the “headline-grabbing” divorce between a tech entrepreneur and an international film star.

Dominic West leads the cast as Morgan successful businessman Morgan Henderson with his soon-to-be ex-wife and actress Carla Duval played by Sienna Miller.

They will be thrown into the “high-stakes world of two of London’s most prestigious rival law firms” who will stop at nothing to secure victory for their clients.

War will be making its debut on Friday, October 3, on Sky and its streaming service NOW, with its official trailer now out and it’s a gripping watch.

What’s even more exciting is that the future of War has already been guaranteed ahead of its season one debut. Sky has given the drama a two-series order with production currently underway on its second season.

Underneath the bitter tension between West and Miller’s characters, there’s also the competition between “London’s most powerful lawyers”, Cathcarts & Sons and Taylor & Byrne.

Screw actress Nina Sosanya is behind Beatrice “Queen Bea” Ubosi as The Crown star Pip Torrens plays John Smallwood from Cathcarts & Sons.

Meanwhile, their counterparts and “fierce rivals” at Taylor & Byrne are portrayed by The Great’s Phoebe Fox as Serena Byrne and Sexy Beast’s James McArdle as Nicholas Taylor.

Then there is ambitious young lawyer Jonathan “Johnny” Warren, played by Shadow and Bone’s Archie Renaux, who quickly realises that it’s a ruthless world where “winning is everything”.

Other memorable cast members set to feature in War include The Thursday Murder Club’s Celia Imrie, Ted Lasso star Nick Mohammed, Mint actress Emma Laird and Gavin and Stacey legend Adrian Scarborough, just to name a few.

War debuts on Friday, October 2 on Sky and streaming service NOW.

POP superstar George Michael’s estate is suing his former best pal over footage from the recording of a lost album.

Andros Georgiou, 63, faces court for charging fans to watch scenes which he recorded of the ex-Wham! star.

George’s former best friend said he would be “turning in his grave” after the pop singer’s estate sued him over video footage of a secret unreleased album.

The Wham! star’s lawyers are taking Andros to court after he released almost 90 minutes of unseen footage shot in 1992 and 1993.

Andros launched a website last month charging fans to watch the film Trojan Souls — The Greatest Album That Was Never Made.

The record was to feature Elton John, Stevie Wonder, Janet Jackson, Aretha Franklin, Bryan Ferry, Seal and Sade.

NAGA QUITS

Bullying row & crude jokes – Naga’s Munchetty’s downfall as she quits BBC

wild ROMANCE

Princess Andre can’t keep up with ‘extreme’ mum Katie Price’s marriage to Lee

But the legal team from George’s estate has now lodged a case against him at London’s Intellectual Property and Enterprise Court, claiming its rights have been breached.

Furious Andros, 63, said the legal claim was “a case of sheer greed”.

On George, he said: “Yes, we fell out, but we loved and cared for each other deeply, and I find the baseless claims and the constant attempts to erase me from history both disrespectful and, frankly, a bit desperate.

“The film belongs to me.

“Trojan Souls belongs to me.

“They’ve opened Pandora’s Box.

“They won’t want me on the stand.

“I know way too much.

“Bring it on.”

Andros’s film shows the making of tracks for Trojan Souls: The Voice of Reason, a collaboration album with global superstars.

Pop fans are being asked to pay £4.99 for 48 hours of access to the 90-minute video online.

Tribe Media is also selling £19.99 VIP tiers, promising access to never-before-heard recordings of George’s unreleased songs from the record.

Andros shot the video using a camcorder given to him by Sony while they were in Japan on George’s Faith tour.

Andros said: “First and foremost — my brother in arms, my best friend, George Michael to you, Yog to me — would turn in his grave knowing what Russells (the estate’s lawyers) are attempting — and spending his money to do it.”

He went on: “It is well known Yog and I were working on Trojan Souls through my record label, Hardback Records.

“The film I have released was shot by me, with Yog’s full approval.

“This was a home video leaked over 30 years ago.

“It kept resurfacing on YouTube.

“So I decided, if you can’t beat them, put the film out myself, since others were already profiting from my home video.”

The legal case lists Andros and Tribe Media, the production house distributing the film.

The claimants are Robobuild Limited and Big Geoff Overseas Limited, the holding companies George used to manage royalties and world tours.

Andros and George were estranged before the star’s death on Christmas Day, 2016, but had been planning to reconcile.

They fell out after George’s arrest in an LA public toilet in 1998.

But Andros had spoken to his pal on the phone in the final weeks of his life.

The pair had a close friendship for decades after their fathers moved to the UK from Cyprus together in 1953.

Most of the one-hour 24-minute film shows George playing the piano, performing vocals with backing singers, grabbing a bass and talking to producers about his track list in an LA studio.

George lost interest in the album when his then-partner Anselmo Feleppa’s health declined.

Anselmo, who suffered from Aids, died in March 1993.

George never completed the album.

It can take up to two years for a case at the court to reach trial.

Lawyers for George Michael’s estate were asked to comment.

WASHINGTON — With Whitewater investigations likely to continue well into next year’s presidential campaign, the White House has decided on a hard-line legal and public relations counterattack that carries serious political risks for President Clinton.

On the legal front, the White House is relying on executive privilege as well as lawyer-client confidentiality to justify withholding notes on a November 1993 meeting at which the president’s lawyers and aides discussed Whitewater.

The notes have been subpoenaed by the Senate Whitewater investigative committee, and White House aides fear that they will be demanded by special counsel Kenneth W. Starr as well. Today the committee will vote to enforce the panel’s subpoena for the notes. Panel Chairman Alfonse M. D’Amato (R-N.Y.) said that the full Senate would vote on the matter before adjourning later this month and that he plans to seek an expedited court review.

Republicans have suggested that the 1993 meeting, which occurred when several federal agencies were investigating the activities of Clinton associates in Arkansas, may have dealt with ways to cover up damaging facts and obstruct justice.

And such charges, whatever their substantive merits, create a politically dangerous problem for an already embattled president going into an election year.

Some sources who have seen the documents insist that they contain no incriminating revelations. They say that the president is invoking executive privilege because waiving it would open the administration to a massive fishing expedition by partisan investigators. Executive privilege is the constitutional principle that a chief executive can maintain the confidentiality of internal communication involving the legal pursuit of his duties.

Yet even if the meeting notes are innocuous and the White House is holding them back only to protect a larger principle, the failure to make full disclosure can raise voters’ suspicions. Already, political opponents and some newspaper editorial writers are using such Watergate-isms as “stonewalling” to describe Clinton’s reaction.

Said a former Clinton White House official knowledgeable about Whitewater: “The problem here is that the courts might ultimately sustain the president but politically it’s a loser.

“In cases like these, the political dimension quickly overwhelms the legal dimension,” said this source. He predicted that Clinton eventually would find a way to release the documents in some form while continuing to assert that they are protected by either attorney-client privilege or executive privilege.

The Senate panel revealed Wednesday that in addition to the notes of the Nov. 5, 1993, meeting, the White House has not turned over four other Whitewater-related documents:

* A draft chronology of the Whitewater saga prepared by the Clintons’ personal lawyer, David E. Kendall. It was drafted five days after the Nov. 5 meeting.

* A letter written Jan. 4, 1994, to the president from Washington attorney James Hamilton, who has represented the family of the late Deputy White House Counsel Vincent Foster and who worked for the 1992 campaign.

* A New York Times article from Dec. 20, 1993, with notations Clinton wrote in the margin.

* Undated notes of White House aide Joel Klein.

Democrats said that the Clintons have every right to invoke privilege in this matter, and they suggested that the Republicans should try to negotiate a compromise rather than move toward a court battle. D’Amato described the Clintons’ position as “extraordinary and troublesome.” Sen. Paul S. Sarbanes of Maryland, the committee’s ranking Democrat, accused D’Amato of trying to provoke a confrontation for political reasons.

The White House is more concerned that waiving confidentiality would open the door for Starr to seek notes and testimony from Clinton’s attorneys.

Lawyers, including White House Counsel Jack Quinn, have advised Clinton that he cannot waive the privilege for only one meeting. If he waives it once, he cannot reassert it on another Whitewater issue.

While the White House public relations campaign is aimed at explaining Clinton’s case and marshaling support for it, it also is designed to discredit D’Amato as a political enemy with ethical problems of his own–a ploy guaranteed to stir more controversy and criticism of the president.

Times staff writers John M. Broder and Sara Fritz contributed to this story.

Chadwick Boseman’s brothers are taking the late US actor’s widow to court over her handling of his multimillion-dollar estate.

Derrick Boseman and Kevin Boseman have filed a petition with a Los Angeles court to force the Black Panther star’s widow, Taylor Simone Ledward, to distribute money to family members, and to have her removed as controller of his estate.

They claim she has mishandled distribution of the funds and “cannot be trusted with the continued administration of the estate”.

Boseman died at the age of 43 in 2020, four years after being diagnosed with colon cancer. He is best remembered for playing the lead role of T’Challa, king of Wakanda, in Oscar-winning 2018 Marvel blockbuster Black Panther.

According to court documents seen by BBC News, Boseman had assets worth $3.8m (£2.9m) but died without a will.

A court decided that 50% should go to Boseman’s widow, who was also appointed the estate’s administrator, with 25% to each of his parents.

The actor’s brothers filed the court petition last week on behalf of their parents, Leroy and Carolyn Boseman.

The petition said Ledward “has still not distributed the estate” and “continues to exert unilateral control” over it.

Ledward is also accused of creating a “lack of transparency” around his assets, and of keeping the actor’s parents “in the dark” about the deals and operations of a company that was set up to manage his image and rights.

The brothers claim Ledward’s “misconduct is causing ongoing harm” to Boseman’s elderly parents and depriving them “of financial assets at a vulnerable age when such support is most critical”.

“Moreover, the needless continuation of these proceedings denies Decedent’s [Boseman’s] family closure and causes emotional distress,” the court filing said.

“Imagine flipping through the channels and stumbling on a film starring your deceased son or brother, knowing that someone you do not know or trust is profiting from his image without your input or consent.”

Ledward – an R&B artist who uses the name Sahn – started dating Boseman in 2015 and they got married just six days before the actor’s death in August 2020.

The BBC has asked her lawyer for a comment.

In a statement to US media, the late actor’s brothers said: “On behalf of our parents, we are committed to ensuring that transparency, accountability, and respect guide the resolution of these matters.

“Our hope is that this process brings clarity, honors the court’s orders, and ensures the responsible stewardship of Chadwick’s legacy.

“We love our brother, and we remain committed to preserving his legacy with dignity, integrity, and respect.”

A BON Jovi tribute singer has been forced to change his name from One Jovi after a legal threat from the rockers’ lawyers.

Andy Hearn, 53, trademarked the jokey moniker after other performers tried to copy it.

But he then got a cease-and-desist letter from the ’80s hitmakers, named after lead singer Jon Bon Jovi, saying the tag was too similar.

Engineering fitter Andy, of Rotherham, South Yorks, has been in the band for six years but was worried about the costs of tackling the Livin’ On A Prayer stars in court.

He said: “I was disappointed a multi-billion-pound company would be bothered about someone doing pubs and clubs for a few pennies.

“I said, ‘If you think I’m a threat, then thank you — it’s a compliment’.”

BRAD HEARTBREAK

Fresh blow for Brad Pitt as daughter, 18, takes legal action to cut ties

AIRPORT CHAOS

Abbey Clancy’s daughter ‘nearly ARRESTED’ after ‘gun’ joke with US security

Andy said they claimed a tribute band name had to be at least 20 per cent different.

He said the exchange took place around three years ago and was resolved after several emails.

Andy was allowed to keep rocking Bon Jovi classics with his band – and at solo shows – under the ‘One Jovi’ name.

But he now releases his own songs under the tweaked moniker ‘Mr One Jovi’.

Andy insists it has not soured his love for the band, whose music he first discovered as a teenager.

He said: “It didn’t affect the way I feel about them.

“I remember listening to them when I was 14 and just absolutely loving it.”

Andy is now stepping out of Jon Bon Jovi’s shadow and chasing chart success with original music of his own.

Bon Jovi have been contacted for comment.

PHOENIX — Election officials in Arizona’s most populous county reached an agreement this week on how to jointly oversee the vote, ending a prolonged legal battle.

Republican Maricopa County Recorder Justin Heap sued the predominantly GOP board of supervisors in June 2025, alleging it illegally took control of certain aspects of election administration. The board called the lawsuit frivolous and said Heap was wasting taxpayer money.

They reached a settlement this week to resolve the lawsuit after mediated negotiations, and the board approved it.

“This deal gets us out of the courtroom,” board Chair Kate Brophy McGee, said after Tuesday’s vote. “I’m sick of drama. We are done with being on the front page going forward.”

Heap said his objective was simple: to ensure his office’s statutory responsibilities are carried out lawfully.

“I am pleased we have reached an agreement that, when implemented, will restore those responsibilities and establish a clear framework for administering elections moving forward,” Heap said in a statement jointly released with the board.

Under the agreement, an interim plan proposed by Heap and approved by the Arizona Supreme Court will govern the July 21 primary. Early voting began in late June.

Heap will oversee much of early voting, selection of ballot drop box locations and other duties. The board will handle other areas, including Election Day voting, ballot tabulation and voting location equipment maintenance. The board also will fund a new $15 million information technology system and related positions for the recorder.

Heap was backed in the lawsuit by America First Legal, a conservative public interest group founded by Stephen Miller, a deputy chief of staff in the White House. Heap had claimed the board transferred funding, IT staff and some key functions — including management of drop boxes and establishment of early voting sites — away from his office through an agreement negotiated with his predecessor.

Heap defeated incumbent recorder Stephen Richer, in a GOP primary, and won the 2024 general election.

The two were at odds over election administration in Maricopa County. In the past, Heap has stopped short of repeating false claims that the 2020 and 2022 elections were stolen. But he has said voters don’t trust the state’s voting system and that it is poorly run. Richer, also a Republican, relentlessly defended the legitimacy of the vote.

Supervisor Steve Gallardo, a Democrat, did not vote to approve the settlement and criticized Heap during Tuesday’s board meeting.

“Honestly, I don’t think he wants to have an election that is conducted transparent or even an election that’s not compromised,” Gallardo said. “Now, with this, he owns it.”

Kelety writes for the Associated Press.

Madrid, Spain – Badr Tmairi, 22, from Morocco, has spent six years living in Spain without legal status. He arrived at 16, alone, without his family. He held legal residency briefly after turning 18, but lost it when he failed to renew it in time.

“What I want is to get my papers back so I can work as a hairdresser and travel to visit my family in Morocco,” he said.

Tmairi is one of more than a million people who have now applied for regularisation under a new scheme that contrasts with a growing European trend against irregular immigration.

He has been homeless for the past year. Without documents, finding work and decent housing in Spain is difficult.

“It’s very encouraging to know that so many people submitted an application and are trying to regularise their situation, but that huge number is also proof that the state has failed in its duty to protect the most vulnerable,” Edith Espinola, president of the Active Domestic Workers’ Service Association (SEDOAC) and spokesperson for the Regularizacion Ya (Regularisation Now), told Al Jazeera.

Regularizacion Ya, a collective made up of migrants, has led the push for regularisation since 2020. The measure grew out of a broad social consensus and has been backed by civil society organisations, the Catholic Church, trade unions and business associations.

Living without legal status, Espinola said, condemns people to social exclusion, as it has for Tmairi. Without rights or protection from abuse, they are unaligned with most of the rest of the population.

The new initiative, Spain’s first regularisation process since 2005, began in April and closed on June 30. The government now has three months to resolve the vast majority of the applications submitted.

Of the 1,174,978 applications, according to the Ministry of Inclusion, Social Security and Migration, only 11,000 have received a favourable resolution so far. About 608,000 have been accepted for processing, granting provisional residency and work permits until a final resolution.

‘All I want is to work’

Rocio Neciosupe, 54, is a Peruvian migrant who has spent two years without legal status in Spain. “Regularisation isn’t a handout; all I want is to work. To work without fear and with rights, so that if I fall and I’m sick, I don’t have to go to work that day and can still get paid, like anyone else,” she said.

Neciosupe, a cleaner in private homes, is busy across six different buildings around Madrid. But she is currently recovering from a back injury sustained in a fall at work. Without documents or a contract, she has no right to sick leave.

Unable to afford to lose her income while she recovers, her husband accompanies her to work each day and helps her with tasks she cannot manage alone.

Rocio, her husband and their two daughters, aged 22 and 17, have all had their regularisation applications accepted for processing and are now awaiting a favourable resolution.

“I want to support the country I live in, and if the country grows, we grow too,” Neciosupe added.

It is precisely in the contribution and growth potential of people like her that the Spanish government has framed its case for the measure.

“By 2050, Spain’s GDP would be 19 percent lower, 90,000 bars would close, 50,000 classrooms would shut and 220,000 farms would disappear,” Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez said recently in a public address.

Gonzalo Fanjul, director of ISGlobal’s policy and development team and head of Research at the porCausa Foundation, said: “If you look at what’s happening in the United States, there are already estimates of the impact of the government’s violent, hostile anti-migration policies. Whole economic sectors are struggling to keep functioning.”

One of those sectors is care work. With an ageing population, Spain needs trained workers to fill positions in that sector, among others.

Josselyn Aguirre, 32, is one of those workers. A nursing assistant, she migrated from Ecuador to Spain in 2024. Her original plan had been to move to the United States, but her visa application was rejected.

“My goal is to stay and help older people. I really enjoy working with them,” she said.

“Here, in my country and in other countries around the world, this sector is collapsing due to a shortage of staff. That’s why I believe that being able to regularise your status and contribute as a professional benefits everyone,” she told Al Jazeera.

Migrants and refugees who applied for regularisation had already been living in Spain, working in the informal economy for years; 57 percent are men, most come from Latin American countries, and six out of 10 are below the age of 34.

So far, 159,097 additional people have registered with the Social Security system as a result of the regularisation process.

With this measure, “Spain has made a bet on growth. We’re going to be a country of 50 million people,” Fanjul said. “But it’s not enough.”

Amid a European political climate in which anti-migration rhetoric appears to be gaining ground, Spain’s approach shows another path is possible, though “regularisation is only the beginning”, Fanjul said.

“The system has been reset, but none of the underlying reasons that brought us to this point have been resolved.

“For the state to open up legal, safe and orderly channels for labour mobility is simply common sense,” he concluded.

Espinola is in no doubt.

Despite criticism from those opposed to the regularisation, she stressed, “We have come out stronger. The migrant community has once again shown its capacity for mutual support in difficult situations.”

The regularisation process is not yet over, she added: “We will remain vigilant to make sure the more than a million applications submitted are processed properly.”

July 9 (UPI) — More than a dozen news organizations asked a court to sanction OpenAI for withholding evidence in lawsuits filed against the company for copyright infringement.

The New York Times, New York Daily News, The Intercept and 14 other news organizations asked a federal court on Thursday for sanctions against the artificial intelligence company for lying about its ability to provide data showing how it has used copyrighted material to train its models.

The companies had sued OpenAI for violating copyright law by using their content to create a secondary product — its AI models — without paying for it, The New York Times and Variety reported.

In court, the AI company had said it could not search training datasets and output data, but earlier this year one of the company’s employees said during a deposition that the data could be accessed.

“The evidence is in OpenAI’s training data sets and ChatGPT output logs,” the organizations said in the court filing.

“But instead of just producing that evidence at the start of the case and focusing on the merits of its fair use defense, OpenAI chose obstruction,” they said.

In addition to accusing OpenAI of lying about searching for the organizations’ content in its data, they allege that the company deleted data logs, which would violate a court order to preserve relevant evidence.

An attorney for the organizations said in a statement that OpenAI had claimed that searching its ChatGPT outputs was “infeasible, burdensome and invasive of users’ privacy” but then lied about having already done searches.

OpenAI called the news organizations’ allegations in the filing “blatantly false,” and said that its use of their content falls under “the long-established principles of fair use.”

Taylor Swift has yet another new thing to celebrate.

Now in her newlywed era, the pop superstar’s concert film, “The Eras Tour: The Final Show,” earned five Emmy nominations Wednesday. This includes nods for variety special (pre-recorded), sound mixing for a variety series or special, directing for a variety special, picture editing for variety programming, and technical direction and camerawork for a special.

The nomination for variety special (pre-recorded) means Swift herself is a nominee as the performer and a producer of the concert film, which showcased the final performance of her record-breaking tour. This marks the “The Life of a Showgirl” singer-songwriter’s second career Emmy nomination. She previously won in 2015 in the category of creative achievement in interactive media — original interactive program, as the executive producer of the mobile app AMEX Unstaged: Taylor Swift Experience.

The accolades come just five days after Swift married beau Travis Kelce in an extravagant — yet secretive — Manhattan affair at Madison Square Garden. The Kansas City Chiefs tight end has spoken about his failed attempt to slide Swift his phone number (via friendship bracelet) when he attended an Eras tour concert in 2023.

The Emmy nominations follow her latest legal win. On Monday, a federal judge in Florida dismissed with prejudice a copyright lawsuit that accused Swift of plagiarizing a self-published poet.

In February 2025, Kimberly Marasco, representing herself, filed a lawsuit that alleged Swift copied “unique expressions” such as short phrases and specific words from her poetry in numerous songs, including “The Man,” “Down Bad,” “I Can Do It With a Broken Heart,” “Hoax,” “Guilty as Sin?” and “It’s Time to Go.” A similar lawsuit Marasco filed against Swift and other named defendants was dismissed by the same judge last September.

Swift’s lawyers called the lawsuit “absurd and legally baseless” in their filings. “For instance, the concept of betrayal or the words ‘fire’ or ‘love’ cannot be owned by one person, as basic themes or words are not protectable by copyright law,” reads the motion to dismiss submitted by attorneys James Douglas Baldridge and Katherine Wright Morrone, who also represented co-defendants Republic Records and Universal Music Group.

In her order granting Swift and her record label’s motion, U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon agreed, reiterating that “the allegedly infringed material — basic ideas, themes, metaphors, isolated words, and short phrases — is not protected expression and cannot be infringed.”

Cannon mentioned these allegedly plagiarized words and phrases included “tears,” “running,” “fire,” “rain,” “sky,” “love,” “invisible,” “caged me,” “flesh and blood” and “it’s time to go.”

Even if they were protected expressions, “the works are not even substantially similar — a point Plaintiff effectively concedes by characterizing the alleged copying as ‘paraphrase[s],’ ‘rephrase[s],’ and copying with ‘minor word substitutions,’” Cannon wrote.

But it appears Swift has not completely shaken off Marasco’s copyright lawsuit. The Florida poet has already filed an appeal.

Spain’s immigration scheme sees more than a million applications, with Latin Americans leading the numbers at 67 percent.

Almost 1.2 million undocumented migrants have sought legal status in Spain under a scheme that has defied a growing European crackdown on irregular immigration.

The government of Socialist Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez, a standard-bearer of more open immigration policies, launched the vast plan in April while European neighbours toughen measures in response to pressure from ascendant far-right parties.

A total of 1,174,978 applications were submitted between mid-April and June 30 when the window closed, with more than 600,000 already being processed, Secretary of State for Migration Pilar Cancela told a news conference in Madrid on Thursday.

Latin America accounted for 67 percent of the submissions, with Colombia alone representing 25.9 percent of the total. African nationalities followed with 22.9 percent.

After Colombia, the most represented countries were Morocco at 13.3 percent, Venezuela with 11.8 percent and Peru at 8.8 percent.

An overwhelming majority of applicants were young, with eight out of 10 younger than 45 years old, while 57 percent of the total were males against 43 percent for females.

The application total does not necessarily indicate how many people will normalise their situation. According to government projections in April, there are about 500,000 potential beneficiaries.

Applicants must prove they have a clean criminal record and spent at least five consecutive months in Spain before January 1.

The authorities have three months to process their paperwork and decide whether to issue a work and residence permit valid only in Spain.

Sanchez has touted the benefits of immigration and the vast regularisation scheme for sectors such as construction that need to boost their workforce.

“Without immigration, Spain would lose 19 percent of its GDP by 2050,” Sanchez said on Tuesday during a presentation on migration. “And what does that mean in business terms? It means, for example, that 90,000 bars would have to close, that 50,000 primary and secondary classrooms would find themselves without students, and that around 220,000 farms would disappear.”

Without immigration, he added, Spain would be “poorer, emptier, weaker and without the resources to fund its welfare state”.

“Spain has never moved forward by building walls,” the prime minister said. “The only decent thing to do is extend a hand, not turn our backs on immigration.”

Spanish business leaders have welcomed the move, but the conservative and far-right opposition are furious about a policy they say will encourage more irregular immigration. Santiago Abascal, the leader of the far-right Vox party, slammed the scheme, calling it an “invasion”.

“More than a million strangers now competing with Spaniards for jobs, housing, daycare places, hospital beds, and social assistance. It’s an invasion. And it’s a betrayal,” Abascal said on X.

As CNN prepares for change under a new owner, the network’s chief legal affairs correspondent, Paula Reid, is heading for the exit and expected to jump to MS NOW.

The Washington-based Reid’s contract with CNN is up in several months and she has told the network she does not plan to renew. She is expected to sign on with CNN competitor MS NOW, according to people familiar with her plans who were not authorized to comment publicly.

A representative for MS NOW said the network does not comment on personnel matters but added, “as everyone in Washington knows, Paula Reid is an exceptional reporter, and any news organization would be fortunate to showcase her journalism.”

Reid‘s planned departure comes ahead of the impending merger of CNN parent Warner Bros. Discovery and Paramount. The combination has led to speculation over who will run CNN, and the uncertainty is said to have played a factor in Reid’s decision.

Reid joined CNN from CBS News in 2021.

CNN and Paramount’s CBS News will be combined after the merger, but the management structure is still under discussion. Paramount put Bari Weiss, founder of the heterodox digital news site the Free Press, in charge of CBS News in October, with a mandate to move the network’s coverage more to the political center. Based on the chaos that has ensued at CBS News under her watch, many CNN insiders are concerned over her possible stewardship of an even larger and more complex organization.

CBS News executives and on-air talent have pushed back at Weiss’ efforts to make changes at the division, which many insiders have viewed as an attempt to placate the Trump White House while Paramount seeks regulatory approvals needed ahead of closing the $111-billion Warner Bros. Discovery deal.

Internal resistance to Weiss has been strongest at the venerable news magazine “60 Minutes.” The program’s star correspondent Scott Pelley was fired last month after he confronted management over the dismissals of executive producer Tanya Simon and his on-air colleagues Sharyn Alfonsi and Cecilia Vega.

Weiss’ overhaul of the “CBS Evening News” with her handpicked anchor Tony Dokoupil has failed to improve the third-place program’s competitive position in the ratings. The program has also been criticized for some of its editorial decisions and logistical snafus.

CNN anchor Anderson Cooper has reportedly told colleagues he does not want to work for Weiss if the cable network is put under her purview. He already rejected an offer from Weiss to anchor the “CBS Evening News” and declined to renew his deal as a “60 Minutes” contributor after nearly two decades with the program.

The chaos at CBS has given pause to people at CNN. Larry Ellison, the tech billionaire and father of Paramount Chief Executive David Ellison, has reportedly promised Trump there will be sweeping changes to CNN after the merger.

Reid, 43, is among the many TV news correspondents and anchors that Trump has disparaged over the years, claiming they are unfair in their coverage. As White House correspondent for CBS News, Reid was known for asking tough questions of Trump during his White House briefings on the coronavirus.

Reid was a lawyer before becoming a journalist at CBS News in 2010. In addition to serving as White House correspondent for the network, she covered the Justice Department and the Supreme Court.

Reid would be another significant hire for MS NOW, the progressive-leaning channel that is rebuilding its roster after separating from NBC News and its parent, Comcast. The network formerly known as MSNBC is now part of Versant, a company with a stable of cable networks spun off by Comcast.

Peter Alexander, former chief White House correspondent for NBC News, is joining MS NOW as a morning anchor later this year. The network also hired former “CBS Mornings” executive producer Shauna Thomas as political director.

Good morning, and welcome to L.A. on the Record — our City Hall newsletter. It’s Noah Goldberg and David Zahniser, with an assist from Melissa Gomez and Connor Sheets, giving you the latest on city and county government.

The city of Los Angeles will shell out $120,000 for outside lawyers to fight a lawsuit filed by a councilmember challenging an ethics fine.

On Wednesday, the City Council voted unanimously to hire the law firm Hecker Fink LLP to represent the city’s Ethics Commission as it defends its decision to fine Councilmember John Lee $138,000 for allegedly violating city gift laws during a notorious 2017 trip to Las Vegas. Lee recused himself from the vote.

The city attorney’s office has said it can’t represent the Ethics Commission in Lee’s lawsuit because of a conflict of interest.

Lee was chief of staff to then-Councilmember Mitchell Englander when the two were plied with meals and alcohol, as well as hotel stays and gambling chips, by people seeking business with the city.

Lee, who represents the northwest San Fernando Valley, has claimed that he made a good faith effort to pay his own way. At a nearly $2,500 dinner that included Kobe beef, Maine lobster, Peking duck and sea bass, the only thing he ate was a spoonful of bird’s nest soup, he said at a hearing in his ethics case.

In 2020, Englander pleaded guilty to a single count of providing false information to the FBI and was sentenced to 14 months in prison. Three years later, he agreed to pay $79,830 to settle an Ethics Commission case focused on his own gift law violations.

The commission levied the fine against Lee in December, finding that he committed two counts of violating the city’s law against accepting gifts above a certain value, three counts of violating a law requiring that such gifts be disclosed to the public and five counts of misusing his city position.

David Tristan, the Ethics Commission’s executive director, had asked the council to provide at least $120,000 to defend against Lee’s lawsuit.

Lee declined to comment on the vote. In his lawsuit, he claimed that the statute of limitations had expired on the matters that were investigated by the Ethics Commission. He also accused the commission of overvaluing the share of gifts he partook in.

Lee is seeking to get the fine overturned.

More churn in the Karen Bass campaign

Turns out the shakeup in Mayor Karen Bass’ campaign did not end with the departure of Douglas Herman, her top strategist.

Herman told The Times on Wednesday that he stepped down due to “strategic differences” over the Nov. 3 runoff campaign against City Councilmember Nithya Raman. Bass’ team said on the same day that they had replaced him with Julie Chávez Rodriguez, who was campaign manager for the Joe Biden and Kamala Harris presidential campaigns in 2024.

A day later, political consultant Larry Grisolano confirmed that he too is no longer with the Bass reelection effort. His company, Thematic Campaigns, had been providing media and digital strategy.

On Friday, Berkeley-based research consultant Mike Rice told The Times that his firm, VR Research, had also left the Bass campaign, effective Wednesday. He declined to comment further.

Bass campaign spokesperson Alex Stack declined to discuss the departures. Asked if the campaign is in disarray, he said no, adding that Chávez Rodriguez’s hiring “is a really big get for us.”

“We’re getting a lot of positive feedback,” Stack said.

Still waiting on eviction defense contracts

In March, it appeared that a battle between City Atty. Hydee Feldstein Soto and the nonprofit running L.A.’s eviction defense program was over.

At the time, Feldstein Soto said she had concerns over awarding funds to the Legal Aid Foundation of Los Angeles, which has sued the city successfully over homelessness issues on multiple occasions. Feldstein Soto argued that contracts should not be awarded without rigorous reports and invoice review from Legal Aid and other nonprofits.

The City Council awarded the contracts anyway, funding the initial portion of a three-year, $177-million deal for Legal Aid and three other nonprofits to provide eviction defense, short-term rental assistance, tenant outreach and more as part of the city’s Stay Housed L.A. program.

But months later, Feldstein Soto’s office still hasn’t executed the contracts, frustrating tenants rights advocates and the nonprofits, which are struggling to pay their staff without the funds from the city.

“We’ve been really in a state of purgatory for over a year,” said Mike Dennis, senior director of housing justice at the Liberty Hill Foundation, which does tenant outreach as part of the city’s program.

Dennis said the failure to execute the contracts has created planning and operational uncertainty for the community-based organizations that Liberty Hill works with. Soon, some of them may face serious issues.

“We’re quickly approaching a point where the organizations are not going to keep being able to pay staff and absorb those costs,” he said. “The longer this goes on, the more likely we are to see contractions in the work.”

Earlier this month, Councilmember Ysabel Jurado put forward a motion asking the city attorney to explain why the contracts have not been executed. Jurado said the delay has left $17 million in funds unused.

“At the same time, the selected contractors struggle to maintain staffing without this funding, placing services for those at risk of homelessness in jeopardy,” she wrote in the June 2 motion.

Feldstein Soto argued in a June 15 response that Legal Aid has failed to agree to the “accountability and reporting requirements” needed to execute the contracts. She said those requirements were designed to make sure that taxpayer funds are spent properly.

“This office will continue to work with proposed contractors until the concerns are sufficiently addressed,” she said in a statement.

State of play

— UNHAPPY MEMORIES: Bass was out of town when the Boyle Heights warehouse fire erupted, which is giving voters a fresh reminder of her absence at the start of the Palisades fire. The situation could have an impact on her reelection campaign against Raman.

— HEADING TO THE BALLOT: A half-cent sales tax hike that would generate $345 million annually for the Los Angeles Fire Department will go before voters in the Nov. 3 election. The measure has been spearheaded by the city’s firefighter union, which gathered the signatures to qualify it for the ballot.

— D.A. DENIED: A judge has rejected Dist. Atty. Nathan Hochman’s request to freeze payments in the $4-billion sex abuse settlement approved by the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors. The ruling boots Hochman from his brief stint in a civil courtroom as he moves forward with his criminal investigation into lawyers, recruiters and medical practitioners who may have submitted fraudulent claims.

— SOCIALIST SURGE: L.A.’s democratic socialists are looking to expand their power at City Hall yet again, setting their sights on the races for mayor and city attorney. Raman and city attorney hopeful Marissa Roy, both members of the L.A. chapter of the Democratic Socialists of America, are heading into the runoff after strong showings in the June 2 primary. (DSA-LA endorsed Roy but not Raman in the primary.)

— A BLOWOUT ELECTION: Property owners across the city voted overwhelmingly against increasing the assessment they pay to maintain streetlights. City leaders had hoped to use the funds — an additional $80 million a year — to speed up repairs and upgrade the city’s 225,000 streetlights.

— CLEARING THE LAND: Overgrown lots razed by the Eaton and Palisades fires pose an increasing wildfire threat to surrounding properties. The county Board of Supervisors recently passed a motion calling on county departments to develop a plan to clear vegetation in Altadena and Sunset Mesa.

QUICK HITS

• Where is Inside Safe? The mayor’s signature program to combat homelessness went to the area around the Wiltern Theatre in Koreatown this week. The area is represented by Councilmember Heather Hutt.
• On the docket next week: On Tuesday, the council takes up a package of ballot measures that would rewrite the City Charter. The changes cover topics such as voting rights for noncitizens, expanded park funding and City Council oversight of policies at the Los Angeles Police Department.

Stay in touch

That’s it for this week! Send your questions, comments and gossip to LAontheRecord@latimes.com. Did a friend forward you this email? Sign up here to get it in your inbox every Saturday morning.

WASHINGTON  — The Supreme Court ruled Thursday that the Trump administration may end the Temporary Protected Status granted to more than 350,000 Haitians and Syrians whose home countries remain unsafe.

In a 6-3 decision, the court’s conservative majority said Congress gave the administration, not judges, the power to cancel or renew this temporary protection for non-citizens who are living and working here.

In a second win Thursday for the Trump administration, the court also upheld the administration’s policy of blocking asylum seekers at the southern border.

By the same 6-3 vote, the court said migrants do not have a right to apply for asylum if they are not already in the United States.

The decision on Temporary Protected Status could affect up to 1.3 million non-citizens who are in the country.

In 1990, Congress authorized this emergency humanitarian relief for non-citizens whose home countries were wracked by armed conflict, natural disasters or other extraordinary disruptions.

Under the law, the Department of Homeland Security may grant this protection for 6, 12 or 18 months and either renew or extend it for a similar period.

But this legal authority has been under dispute since Trump returned to the White House last year and targeted the 1.3 million people with TPS from 17 countries who were living in the United States.

Trump’s lawyers said the law made clear there was “no judicial review” of the government’s decision to cancel the grant of temporary protection.

However, immigrant rights lawyers argued the government failed in its duty to consult the State Department and assess whether it was safe for migrants to return home.

Repeatedly, U.S. district judges agreed with the challengers and ruled the administration’s decisions were “arbitrary” and unreasonable. But in nearly every case, the Supreme Court granted emergency appeals from the administration and set aside those orders.

Since TPS was created, the government has ended the protected designation for citizens of 18 countries.

DHS under then-Secretary Kristi Noem ended TPS for Honduras, Nicaragua, Afghanistan and Venezuela. A spokesperson for the agency previously said the Haiti designation became “a de facto amnesty program” and that allowing Syrians to remain is contrary to national interest.

Advocates for the immigrants argue that the administration failed to conduct the required process to properly evaluate each country’s conditions and instead acted on political grounds driven by racial animus.

State Department travel advisories for both countries warn people against traveling to either because of the risk of terrorism, kidnapping and widespread violence. But Federal Register notices announcing the terminations said country conditions had improved enough.

Recently released internal documents show that DHS decided to terminate protections for Haitians without any input from the State Department.

Citing the documents, which were obtained by the National TPS Alliance in a separate lawsuit, lawyers for the Haitians asked the Supreme Court to dismiss the case and send it back to lower courts. They argued that the justices should first consider the communications before issuing a decision.

Internal emails show that homeland security officials sought a recommendation from the State Department in May 2025, ahead of Noem’s early June deadline on whether to extend protections for Haiti. But by the time Noem signed what appears to be a final decision memo, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services had not received input from the State Department, the emails show.

“State recommendation for Haiti TPS has not come in despite of many outreach,” a homeland security deputy assistant secretary wrote in a June 2, 2025, email. A recommendation “would be helpful to have,” the person added.

Eleven days later, a USCIS project manager wrote in an email that Noem “recently elected to terminate Haiti without country conditions from DOS.”

USCIS initially recommended automatically extending protections before Homeland Security decided to terminate them, earlier versions of the memo indicate.

The June decision was blocked by a federal judge. In November, DHS issued another notice terminating TPS protections for Haitians.

That time, according a previously publicized email, a homeland security senior counselor asked a State Department official for the agency’s views on the country conditions in Haiti. The official, Spencer Chretien, didn’t address the country conditions but responded that “there would be no foreign policy concerns.”

Lawyers for the Haitians argued that response didn’t meet the legal standard for a sufficient consultation, though the Trump administration disagreed.

The bitter legal battle between Blake Lively and Justin Baldoni over allegations of misconduct and retaliation tied to the making of “It Ends With Us” moved closer to a conclusion Friday after a federal judge ordered Baldoni and his production company to pay Lively’s attorneys fees related to his unsuccessful defamation lawsuit against her, while rejecting her bid for additional damages.

In a 47-page order, U.S. District Judge Lewis Liman found that Lively was entitled to recover legal fees under a California law intended to protect people who report sexual misconduct from retaliatory defamation claims, ruling that Baldoni’s side had failed to show she acted with malice when making her allegations.

But Liman denied Lively’s request for treble and punitive damages, concluding that the procedural mechanism her lawyers used permitted recovery of attorneys fees and costs but not broader financial penalties.

Lively’s attorneys, Esra Hudson and Michael Gottlieb, called Friday’s ruling a victory for their client and emphasized that the judge found “there was no evidence she acted with malice.”

“The Court is awarding Ms. Lively attorneys’ fees and costs and has explained that a prevailing defendant under Section 47.1 may seek damages using different procedural mechanisms,” the attorneys said in a statement. “The parties’ settlement agreement expressly preserves Ms. Lively’s rights to obtain those damages.”

While the judge rejected Lively’s request for additional damages in this particular motion, her legal team said she could still seek them through other legal avenues permitted under the statute.

Bryan Freedman, Baldoni’s attorney, sharply disputed Lively’s characterization of the ruling, arguing that the court’s prior decisions had substantially undercut many of her original claims.

“There was no sexual harassment. There was no retaliation. There was no smear campaign,” Freedman said in a statement. “The court recognized it, the record reflects it, and we have maintained it from the very beginning.”

The amount Baldoni and Wayfarer Studios ultimately may have to pay has not yet been determined. Lively’s lawyers must still submit billing records and fee calculations for court approval.

The ruling follows last month’s settlement between Lively and Baldoni, which came just before what had been expected to be a closely watched federal trial in Manhattan. Under that settlement, neither side received financial compensation. But the agreement preserved Lively’s ability to seek attorneys fees and damages under California Civil Code Section 47.1, a relatively new statute designed to shield sexual harassment and assault accusers from retaliatory defamation claims.

Lively sued Baldoni, Wayfarer Studios, Wayfarer CEO Jamey Heath and others in December 2024, alleging Baldoni and his associates orchestrated a coordinated effort to damage her reputation after she raised concerns about misconduct during production of the film, which Baldoni directed and co-starred in. Baldoni denied wrongdoing.

Baldoni and Wayfarer later filed a $400 million defamation suit against Lively, her publicist Leslie Sloane and her husband, Ryan Reynolds, that was dismissed last year. Friday’s ruling dealt specifically with whether Lively could recover attorneys’ fees and damages tied to that dismissed suit under California Civil Code Section 47.1.

The latest ruling comes after Liman earlier this year dismissed 10 of the 13 claims in Lively’s lawsuit, including sexual harassment and defamation claims, while allowing retaliation-related claims to proceed.

In Friday’s ruling, Liman wrote that Baldoni’s team had produced no evidence demonstrating Lively acted maliciously when making her allegations.

“Allegations are insufficient on their own to demonstrate that statements were in fact made with malice,” the judge wrote. “That determination requires some evidence.”

Friday’s ruling offered each side new grounds to claim vindication in a legal battle that has played out as much in public statements as in court filings. Lively’s team pointed to the judge’s finding that she acted without malice, while Baldoni’s attorneys emphasized that many of her original claims had been dismissed.

Still, the settlement agreement bars either side from appealing Liman’s ruling, potentially drawing one of Hollywood’s ugliest recent legal fights to a close.

WhatsApp disrupted phishing attempts linked to NSO, blacklisted by the US for security concerns.

Meta has said it is ⁠filing a federal US ⁠court contempt order against Israeli spyware firm NSO Group for violating a permanent injunction that barred it from ever ⁠targeting WhatsApp and its users.

The company said on Monday that its WhatsApp messaging service disrupted new spear phishing attempts linked to NSO, an ⁠entity blacklisted by the United States government for engaging in activities that are contrary to national security or foreign policy interests.

These attempts were similar to previous “1-click phishing campaigns”, aimed to trick users into clicking ‌malicious links and direct them to external websites, Meta said in a blogpost.

A “1-click” is a type of cyberattack where a single click on a malicious link or attachment is sufficient to compromise a victim’s device or account, without requiring them to enter their credentials.

Meta said WhatsApp took down test accounts ⁠and groups created by NSO on its platform. ⁠NSO did not immediately respond to a Reuters request for comment.

Last year, a US court ordered NSO to stop targeting Meta’s WhatsApp, a development the spyware ⁠company warned could put it out of business.

While the ruling significantly reduced the punitive damages NSO ⁠owed Meta to $4m from an ⁠initial $167m, the injunction itself was seen as a substantial challenge for the company, which faces ongoing accusations of enabling human rights abuses through its Pegasus hacking tool.

Meta ‌said on Monday that last month it was joined by 12 prominent civil rights organisations, a coalition of security researchers, privacy advocates ‌and ‌digital rights experts, who filed their amicus briefs to fight NSO’s appeal against the permanent injunction.

Of the complaints made to the Citizens Advice Consumer Service, 42% involved all-inclusive packages abroad

More than four million people had problems with a package holiday in the past year, a survey for Citizens Advice suggests. The survey found 76% of adults had been on a package holiday before, and 34% of them had experienced a problem. Some 8% had suffered an issue within the last 12 months specifically, equating to an estimated four million travellers, it said.

The charity said it received about 14 complaints a day about package holidays, including issues such as unexpected changes to the hotel, denied refunds, and poor customer service. Of the 3,500 package holiday complaints made to the Citizens Advice Consumer Service in the past year, 42% involved all-inclusive packages abroad.

A third of complaints (33%) related to the quality of the holiday falling short of the agreed deal, such as hotels being misdescribed, bad food or unavailable facilities. Customer service failures made up 19% of complaints, including long waits on the phone, ignored complaints and administration errors made by firms.

As a result, one in four of those who experienced an issue with a package holiday (25%) said they suffered stress, anxiety or upset, while 17% had to pay extra for daily expenses. Citizens Advice encouraged holidaymakers to check what protections were included within their booking.

One complainant, Zorana, a semi-retired NHS doctor from north-east England, reported spending £6,300 on an all-inclusive, seven-night trip to Lanzarote with her daughter through a UK holiday operator. Torrential rain on the second day resulted in “nightmare” flooding, leaving hotel guests without electricity, water, food or internet.

However the woman said she received no on-site support from their operator, causing them considerable stress. Zorana, 66, said: “We spent the morning on the beach and planned the sauna for later. But when we were eating lunch the rain started and didn’t stop.

“By the time we got to the spa, the hotel told us we couldn’t go in because it was flooded. Half an hour later the electricity had gone. Without electricity, everything stopped. There was no more internet and no more water because the pumps were not working.

“We all gathered in the hotel lobby, to hear what was going on. It was the weekend and reps from all the other travel companies were there, talking with people, reassuring them, giving them information. Some were already distributed to other places. We asked, ‘Where is our rep?’ And we were told he doesn’t work on weekends.

“We were very angry. Hotel staff told us our travel company was always a problem and never helped people. We came home after five days and I started to chase the travel company for a refund. But the customer service adviser said they can’t deal with it because compensation was offered. But their offer was not adequate.

“I mentioned the lack of support, the delay, the value of the holiday, that I had to find and pay for another hotel, and because of this it was reasonable that they should give me all my money back. I feel a victim twice over because I had the stress of our holiday being ruined, and then months of trying to get compensation.”

Citizens Advice consumer spokeswoman Jane Parsons said: “Too often, people are left stressed and disappointed when their dream holidays are spoiled because they’re not getting what they paid for. To make matters worse, they’re having to spend a lot of time and effort trying to resolve issues, sometimes with no luck.

“A record of any issues that occur and evidence should be kept – like clear details of what went wrong and when, photos and receipts. If something goes wrong with your holiday you might be able to get compensation from the company you booked with. You should tell them about any issues as soon as possible – if you don’t say anything until you get home you might get less compensation, or none at all.”

Chartered Trading Standards Institute chief executive John Herriman said: “This research highlights the real impact poor practice in the travel sector can have on consumers, specifically the problems for consumers booking holidays online, particularly through social media.

Left out of pocket

“Too many people are left out of pocket or dealing with stress when holidays don’t meet what was promised. What should be a time to relax and unwind can turn into the opposite. While it’s vital consumers understand their rights, check the protections included and keep clear records if something goes wrong, businesses must meet their legal obligations and ensure they deliver the standard of service people have paid for – and resolve issues raised quickly.

“Strong consumer protection depends on both informed consumers and responsible traders.”

Consumers are entitled to compensation for a holiday if it was lower in value than the one booked, spending extra money was required because of a problem, a large part of the booked services were not provided, something goes wrong that causes distress or disappointment or if the holiday was completely ruined.

Yonder surveyed 2,018 adults between April 17-19 about their experiences with package holidays, including problems. Respondents were asked to exclude issues outside the operator’s control, like geopolitical events or natural disasters.