R&A chief executive Mark Darbon says that players guilty of on-course misconduct could receive a two shot penalty at the Open in July.
This follows a reprimand for Sergio Garcia at last month’s Masters where the Spaniard damaged a tee box with his club after an angry reaction to an errant tee shot on the second hole of his final round.
Scotland’s Bob MacIntyre was also warned by Augusta officials after microphones caught him swearing and gesturing angrily during a ruinous first-round 80 at the year’s opening major.
Both incidents brought player behaviour into sharp focus in a season where the four major tournaments, the Masters, US PGA, US Open and Open, have agreed to implement a new code of conduct.
The leading professional tours are expected to follow suit, but unlike the majors, their policies have yet to be formalised.
There has always been scope for a player to be disqualified for a serious breach, as Garcia was for furiously damaging a green in a DP World Tour event in Saudi Arabia in 2019.
But now there is scope for referees to impose shot penalties for players who seriously breach the etiquette of the game. It means that, for the first time, a fit of temper could affect a leaderboard at one of golf’s big four tournaments.
“I think first and foremost, you want passion,” Darbon told BBC Sport.
“You want passion from players, you want passion from spectators, but there’s a fine line, and one of the amazing things about this sport are the values and integrity that underpin it.
“So we will watch that line very closely. We, like many of the other major events, are looking to implement a new code of conduct policy that will be in place this summer here at Royal Birkdale.
“And it will give us another measure by which to help influence and control that behaviour.”
Asked how this might impact competitors at the 154th Open, Darbon said: “It will depend on the circumstance and a determination of what their actions may lead to, but you could well see a two-shot penalty, for example, being deployed.
“We will clarify all of those details in the buildup to the championship.”
WASHINGTON — In the span of 10 days, the nation’s capital saw a cascade of ethical scandals that cut across party lines and branches of government, raising fresh doubts about whether Washington is capable of holding itself accountable.
Three members of Congress — two Democrats and a Republican — resigned within days of one another as they faced calls for their expulsion due to their alleged misconduct. A fourth lawmaker is facing the same pressure but has so far refused to step down.
A Cabinet secretary stepped down amid a months-long investigation into allegations that she pursued a romantic relationship with a member of her security detail, while her husband stood accused of sexually assaulting female staffers in her agency.
In a separate case, the Department of Homeland Security confirmed last week that it put a senior counterterrorism official on administrative leave as it investigates an ex-boyfriend’s allegations that she was seeking out wealthy men online to pay for luxury items.
The back-to-back resignations and investigations, spanning both parties and both the legislative and executive branches, have reignited a debate about whether Washington’s rules and institutions for self-oversight can keep pace with the misconduct unfolding within it. Even those charged with policing it say the system is failing.
“Clearly, we have an ethical problem,” Rep. Mark DeSaulnier (D-Concord), the top Democrat on the House Ethics Committee, said in an interview.
DeSaulnier, who has served on the committee since 2023, said the panel is long overdue for an overhaul. He would like to see the committee speed up investigations and give it more authority to root out misconduct before lawmakers can resign to avoid accountability.
“It takes too long,” he said, drawing an analogy to law enforcement standards for officers facing misconduct allegations. “If you’re a law enforcement officer, there are standards for a suspension with pay or without pay. I think we need to take a look at things like that.”
The committee’s records show that since 1976, it has investigated 28 instances in which a House member was suspected of sexual misconduct. The outcome in 13 of those cases was a loss of jurisdiction, meaning the member resigned, retired or otherwise left the House before the committee could reach a conclusion on the allegations.
“Unfortunately, there likely exist matters never reported to the Committee,” the panel said in a rare statement last week. It added that its “greatest hurdle” in evaluating allegations of sexual misconduct is “convincing the most vulnerable witnesses to share their stories.”
Lonna Drewes, left, and her attorney, Lisa Bloom, arrive at a news conference in which Drewes accused U.S. Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-Dublin) of sexual assault, on April 14 in Beverly Hills.
(Justin Sullivan / Getty Images)
The two most recent cases in which the committee lost jurisdiction were the investigations into former California Rep. Eric Swalwell, a Democrat accused of sexual assault who denied the allegations, and Republican former Texas Rep. Tony Gonzales, who last month admitted to a sexual relationship with a staffer who later died by suicide.
The committee is currently investigating Rep. Cory Mills, a Florida Republican, on allegations of “sexual misconduct and/or dating violence.” Mills has denied wrongdoing and declined to step down, telling CNN that House Speaker Mike Johnson told him not to resign and let the process play out.
Johnson, a Louisiana Republican, has defended his stance on ensuring there is due process for House members, telling reporters last week that representatives should not be removed based only on allegations.
“There’s got to be an element of due process,” he said at a news conference, in which he also acknowledged that “sometimes it takes a long time” to achieve that and that he is open to suggestions on how to make the process better.
House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) has also expressed hesitance in ousting members before they receive due process. He said that much in relation to Rep. Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick (D-Fla.), who eventually resigned as she faced an ethics investigation and federal criminal charges of stealing $5 million in disaster relief funds. She has pleaded not guilty to the charges.
House Ethics Committee Chairman Michael Guest (R-Miss.) and Ranking Member Mark DeSaulnier (D-Concord) speak to reporters after a hearing with the House Ethics Committee on Capitol Hill on Tuesday in Washington.
(Anna Moneymaker / Getty Images)
The stance has drawn objections from 14 House Democrats in competitive swing districts, including California Reps. Mike Levin and Derek Tran.
In a letter addressed to Johnson and Jeffries, the lawmakers urged both House leaders to push the Ethics Committee to “expedite their investigation” with more transparency, including public hearings.
“We must demonstrate that no one is above the law and that serious misconduct will result in serious consequences,” the lawmakers wrote.
The calls for reform are not limited to the House.
Sen. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) said Congress as a whole needs to increase transparency around how ethics complaints are handled and create a system that better protects junior staffers rather than members and senior aides who oversee them.
“The House of Representatives has an office that provides legal advice and representation to staff, but the Senate doesn’t appear to have such a thing,” Schiff said. “So that is also something I’m looking into.”
Schiff is also looking beyond Capitol Hill. He is pushing to install an inspector general inside the executive office of the President, a watchdog position that has never existed there despite being standard across the rest of the federal government.
Inspector General Michael E. Horowitz, left, chair of the Pandemic Response Accountability Committee, and David Smith, assistant director, Office of Investigations U.S. Secret Service, arrive for the House Oversight and Accountability Committee hearing titled Federal Pandemic Spending: A Prescription for Waste, Fraud and Abuse in Rayburn Building on Feb. 1, 2023.
(Tom Williams / CQ Roll Call via Associated Press)
President Trump has fired at least a dozen inspectors general during his second term, according to the New York Times. The dismissals of those independent watchdogs across the executive branch are likely to complicate Schiff’s efforts, which he said will need to “overcome the instinctual opposition of many in the president’s party who may view [the bill] as an indictment of the president’s actions.”
“But if we are ever going to ensure that a president and his administration are not above the law, an inspector general in the executive office is critical,” he said.
Richard Painter, a former White House ethics lawyer under President George W. Bush, said he has long advocated for installing an independent watchdog in the White House but doubts that a Congress operating under its own cloud of scandal would take that step now.
“They are not complying with their own rules,” he said. “It is a big problem.”
Painter also argued that Trump’s own conduct is itself reshaping what members of his own administration and allies in Congress believe they can get away with.
The president’s past social ties to convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein have also received renewed scrutiny as his administration is criticized for the handling of the files. Trump has denied wrongdoing in all three matters.
“That sends a message to the entire administration and to Congress as to what is acceptable,” Painter said.
Trump, who is known for chiming in on myriad topics on social media, has not talked much about the sex scandals on Capitol Hill. But the president did call Swalwell a “sleazebag” in a recent interview with the Daily Mail.
“I don’t know anything about the charges, but he’s a bad guy,” Trump said. “He’s always been a bad guy, he’s a corrupt politician, and everyone knows it, so it’s happening to him, and we’ll see what happens. Right? Let him go defend himself.”
The president has not been as candid with his administration’s own controversies, but watchdogs in executive agencies have scrutinized some of his members.
Lori Chavez-DeRemer attends the world premiere of Amazon MGM’s “Melania” at The Trump-Kennedy Center on Jan. 29 in Washington.
(Taylor Hill / WireImage via Getty Images)
The White House declined to comment on the allegations against former Labor Secretary Lori Chavez-DeRemer, who stepped down last week after multiple allegations of abusing her position’s power, including having an affair with a subordinate and drinking alcohol on the job.
The New York Times reported that Chavez-DeRemer was under investigation by the agency’s inspector general, and that an imminent report was likely to be unfavorable toward her. The investigation had been ongoing for several months before her departure.
In a separate case, the Department of Homeland Security confirmed to the Los Angeles Times that Julia Varvaro, the agency’s deputy assistance secretary, was put on administrative leave amid an investigation into allegations that she was seeking out so-called sugar daddies online.
The scandals come as recent polling shows Americans are growing more dissatisfied with Trump and Congress.
Congress’ approval rating has plummeted to 10%, according to Gallup polling released last week. Public approval of Trump has dropped to 28%, according to a Marquette University Law School poll released earlier this month. The president’s approval ratings are tightly linked to concerns about the Iran war and the economy.
Some lawmakers, like DeSaulnier, worry the scandals will continue to erode Americans’ confidence in the government and the people who represent them.
“If they don’t have trust in these institutions and the people who are in these positions, that’s a real, serious problem for American democracy,” he said.
A former executive at Live Nation, the world’s largest live entertainment company, is suing the company, alleging that he was wrongfully terminated after he raised concerns about alleged financial misconduct and improper accounting practices.
Nicholas Rumanes alleges he was “fraudulently induced” in 2022 to leave a lucrative position as head of strategic development at a real estate investment trust to create a new role as executive vice president of development and business practice at Beverly Hills-based Live Nation.
In his new position, Rumanes said, he raised “serious and legitimate alarm” over the the company’s business practices.
As a result, he says, he was “unlawfully terminated,” according to the lawsuit filed Thursday in Los Angeles County Superior Court.
“Rumanes was, simply put, promised one job and forced to accept another. And then he was cut loose for insisting on doing that lesser job with integrity and honesty,” according to the lawsuit.
He is seeking $35 million in damages.
Representatives for Live Nation were not immediately available for comment.
Rumanes’ lawsuit describes a “culture of deception” at Live Nation, saying its “basic business model was to misstate and exaggerate financial figures in efforts to solicit and secure business.”
Such practices “spanned a wide spectrum of projects in what appeared to be a company-wide pattern of financial misrepresentation and misleading disclosures,” the lawsuit states.
Rumanes says he received materials and documents that showed that the company inflated projected revenues across multiple venue development projects.
Additionally, Rumanes contends that the company violated a federal law that requires independent financial auditing and transparency and instead ran Live Nation “through a centralized, opaque structure” that enables it to “bypass oversight and internal checks and balances.”
In 2010, as a condition of the Live Nation-Ticketmaster merger, the newly formed company agreed to a consent decree with the government that prohibited the firm from threatening venues to use Ticketmaster. In 2019 the Justice Department found that the company had repeatedly breached the agreement, and it extended the decree.
Rumanes contends that he brought his concerns to the attention of the company’s management, but his warnings were “repeatedly ignored.”
California’s trial attorneys and Uber — longtime courtroom foes — are officially bringing their fight to the November ballot.
A coalition of lawyers and advocates announced Thursday that it has gathered enough signatures to ask voters to support a “first in the nation” law that would make rideshare companies legally responsible for sexual assaults that happen to a driver or customer during a trip. Uber has argued it’s not liable for assaults committed by drivers, who are considered independent contractors.
“We must hold Uber accountable today,” said Danielle Tudahl, who recounted being sexually harassed and chased by an Uber driver after ordering a ride through the app, at a Sacramento news conference. “Californians are finally demanding action to try and close some of these gaps and put people’s safety over corporate profits.”
Uber has described the ballot measure, which is sponsored by the Consumer Attorneys of California, or CAOC, as retaliation for its own November ballot push to cap how much attorneys can earn in car crash cases in California.
“This ballot measure is a cynical ploy by billboard lawyers,” said Nathan Click, a spokesperson for A More Affordable California, an Uber-backed coalition. “CAOC didn’t spend millions to put this on the ballot to protect survivors — their goal is protecting billboard lawyer profits.”
The coalition that supports Uber announced last week it had gathered enough signatures for a measure that would cap attorney fees for car crash cases at 25%, among other changes.
Uber says its ballot measure will give victims a larger cut of their settlement money, rather than the payout getting siphoned off primarily to attorneys and doctors. Attorneys fire back that it will leave thousands of people with small or thorny cases without a lawyer because they won’t have financial incentive to sue.
Both sides are gearing up for an expensive fight. Uber has given more than $77 million. The Alliance Against Corporate Abuse, the CAOC-backed coalition pushing the sexual assault measure, has raised more than $68 million from law firms across the state, according to campaign finance records.
The money has helped pay for billboards that have sprouted across L.A. informing drivers that, according to the New York Times, Uber received a report of sexual assault or misconduct every eight minutes on average between 2017 and 2022. The company was the subject of a series of investigations by the paper into sexual assault by drivers. The company says it has invested billions in keeping riders safe and has “done more than any other company to confront” sexual violence.
The proposed sexual assault measure would require ride-share companies to let riders know if the person picking them up has a history of sexual misconduct and conduct yearly fingerprint and background checks for drivers.
The company is currently fighting more than 3,000 lawsuits from passengers who claim they were sexually assaulted or harassed by Uber drivers. Those cases are being coordinated by a federal judge in California.
The attorney coalition had also pushed an initiative aimed at nullifying Uber’s fee-capping measure if it passed. Alex Stack, a spokesperson for the campaign, said they were “pausing/withdrawing” the measure to “focus the fight on our sexual assault prevention measure and beating Uber’s initiative.”
