restore

WASHINGTON — Cornell University has agreed to pay $60 million and accept the Trump administration’s interpretation of civil rights laws in order to restore federal funding and end investigations into the Ivy League school.

Cornell President Michael Kotlikoff announced the agreement on Friday, saying it upholds the university’s academic freedom while restoring more than $250 million in research funding that the government withheld amid investigations into alleged civil rights violations.

The university agreed to pay $30 million directly to the U.S. government along with another $30 million toward research that will support U.S. farmers.

Kotlikoff said the agreement revives the campus’ partnership with the federal government “while affirming the university’s commitment to the principles of academic freedom, independence, and institutional autonomy that, from our founding, have been integral to our excellence.”

The six-page agreement is similar to one signed by the University of Virginia last month. It’s shorter and less prescriptive than others signed by Columbia University and Brown University.

It requires Cornell to comply with the government’s interpretation of civil rights laws on issues involving antisemitism, racial discrimination and transgender issues. A Justice Department memo that orders colleges to abandon diversity, equity and inclusion programs and transgender-friendly policies will be used as a training resource for faculty and staff at Cornell.

The campus must also provide a wealth of admissions data that the government has separately sought from campuses to ensure race is no longer being considered as a factor in admissions decisions. President Trump has suggested some campuses are ignoring a 2023 Supreme Court decision ending affirmative action in admissions.

Education Secretary Linda McMahon called it a “transformative commitment” that puts a focus on “merit, rigor, and truth-seeking.”

“These reforms are a huge win in the fight to restore excellence to American higher education and make our schools the greatest in the world,” McMahon said on X.

Cornell’s president must personally certify compliance with the agreement each quarter. The deal is effective through the end of 2028.

It appears to split the difference on a contentious issue colleges have grappled with as they negotiate an exit from federal scrutiny: payments made directly to the government. Columbia agreed to pay $200 million directly to the government, while Brown University reached an agreement to pay $50 million to state workforce organizations. Virginia’s deal included no payment at all.

Binkley writes for the Associated Press.

Millions of YouTube TV subscribers could miss “Monday Night Football” on ESPN and ABC News’ election day coverage as the blackout of Walt Disney-owned channels stretches into a second week.

“Monday Night Football” features the Dallas Cowboys battling the Arizona Cardinals. In addition, several important political contests are on Tuesday ballots, including the New York City mayor’s election, gubernatorial races in Virginia and New Jersey, and California’s Prop. 50 to decide whether officials can redraw the state’s congressional map to favor Democrats.

Disney on Monday sought a temporary thaw in tensions with Google Inc. after the two sides failed last week to strike a new distribution contract covering Disney’s television channels on Google’s YouTube TV.

“Despite the impasse that led to the current blackout, we have asked YouTube TV to restore ABC for Election Day so subscribers have access to the information they rely on,” a Disney spokesperson said in a statement Monday. “We believe in putting the public interest first and hope YouTube TV will take this small step for their customers while we continue to work toward a fair agreement.”

A Google spokesperson was not immediately available for a comment.

ABC’s “World News Tonight With David Muir” is one of television’s highest rated programs.

More than 10 million YouTube TV customers lost access to ESPN, ABC and other Disney channels late Thursday after a collapse in negotiations over distribution fees for Disney channels, causing one of the largest recent blackouts in the television industry.

The two TV giants wrangled for weeks over how much Google must pay to carry Disney’s channels, including FX, Disney Jr. and National Geographic. YouTube TV — now one of the largest pay-TV services in the U.S. — has balked at Disney’s price demands, leading to the outage.

YouTube TV does not have the legal right to distribute Disney’s networks after its last distribution agreement expired.

“We know this is a frustrating and disappointing outcome for our subscribers,” a YouTube spokesperson said in a statement last week. “We continue to urge Disney to work with us constructively to reach a fair agreement that restores their networks to YouTube TV.”

YouTube has said that should the outage stretch for “an extended period,” it would offer its subscribers a $20 credit.

Spanish-language TelevisaUnivision-owned channels were knocked off YouTube TV in a separate dispute that has lasted more than a month. Televisa has appealed to high-level political officials, including President Trump and Federal Communications Commission Chairman Brendan Carr.

Last year, after Disney-owned channels went dark on DirecTV in a separate carriage fee dispute, Disney offered to make available to DirecTV subscribers its ABC coverage of the sole presidential debate between President Trump and then-Vice President Kamala Harris.

DirecTV viewed ABC’s offer as something of a stunt, noting the debate would be streamed. DirecTV countered by asking Disney to instead make all of its channels available.

That fee dispute resulted in a 13-day blackout on DirecTV, one that was resolved a few days later.

Heightened tensions in the television industry have led to numerous blackouts.

In 2023, Disney and Charter Communications were unable to iron out a new contract by their deadline, resulting in a 10-day blackout of Disney channels on Charter’s Spectrum service. A decade earlier, Time Warner Cable subscribers went nearly a month without CBS-owned channels.

Programming companies, including Disney, have asked for higher fees for their channels to help offset the increased cost of sports programming, including NFL and NBA contracts. But pay-TV providers, including YouTube have pushed back, attempting to draw a line to slow their customers’ ever-increasing monthly bills.

More than 40 million pay-TV customer homes have cut the cord over the last decade, according to industry data. Many have switched to smaller streaming packages. YouTube TV also benefited by attracting disaffected customers from DirecTV, Charter Spectrum and Comcast. YouTube TV is now the nation’s third-largest TV channel distributor.

Elon Musk’s $56bn pay package from Tesla should have been restored by a vote of the company’s shareholders last year, a Tesla attorney has said to the Delaware Supreme Court in the United States.

The Tesla lawyer made his arguments on Wednesday as one of the biggest corporate legal battles entered its final stage after a lower court judge had in January 2024 rescinded the Tesla CEO’s record compensation. The company is also appealing a ruling by the lower court that rejected as legally invalid a vote by shareholders to restore the pay package.

“This was the most informed stockholder vote in Delaware history,” Jeffrey Wall, an attorney for Tesla, told the justices. “Reaffirming that would resolve this case.”

The case’s outcome could have substantial consequences for the state of Delaware, its widely used corporate law, and its Court of Chancery, a once-favoured venue for business disputes that has recently been accused of hostility towards powerful entrepreneurs.

The Court of Chancery ruling striking down Musk’s pay has become a rallying cry for Delaware critics. Chancellor Kathaleen McCormick ruled that the Tesla board lacked independence from Musk when it approved the pay package in 2018 and that shareholders lacked key information when they voted overwhelmingly in favour of it. As a result, she applied a demanding legal standard and found the pay unfair to investors.

Musk did not attend the arguments, which were held in a special court to accommodate the 65 people in attendance, mostly lawyers.

The defendants, current and former Tesla directors, denied wrongdoing and said McCormick misinterpreted the facts and the law.

Dexit

Tesla argued in Dover, Delaware that the five justices on Delaware’s high court had three avenues to reverse the lower court ruling.

They could find that Musk, who owned 21.9 percent of Tesla stock in 2018, did not control the board pay negotiations and that shareholders were fully informed when they voted to approve it that year. They could determine that rescinding the pay was an improper remedy because it did not undo the work that Musk had done or the gains that shareholders had received. Or they could determine that last year’s vote demonstrated shareholders wanted to accept the pay deal, despite the legal flaws.

“Shareholders in 2024 knew exactly what they were voting for,” Wall said.

Greg Varallo, an attorney for Richard Tornetta, the small investor who brought the case in 2018, said if the court accepted ratification, it would allow a party to change the outcome after a court case had run its course. “Lawsuits would be interminable”, he told the justices.

Varallo tried to convince the justices the lower court ruling was a result of careful fact-finding and based on settled law. “There is nothing extraordinary about this trial opinion,” he said. “What makes it truly extraordinary is that it addresses the largest pay package in human history, awarded to the richest man on earth, who is also one of the most powerful men on earth.”

After the Musk pay ruling, large companies, including Tesla, Dropbox, and the venture capital firm Andreessen Horowitz, switched their legal homes to Texas or Nevada, where courts are friendlier toward directors. Delaware lawmakers responded to the corporate departures, a trend known as “Dexit,” by overhauling its corporate law.

If Musk loses the appeal, he will still reap tens of billions of dollars in stock from the electric vehicle (EV) company, which agreed in August to a replacement deal if his 2018 plan is not restored. Tesla has said the replacement plan will cost $25bn or more in accounting charges.

The company said the replacement award was meant to focus the attention of Musk, who said earlier this year that he was forming a new US political party, on transitioning Tesla to robotics and automated driving. Tesla is now incorporated in Texas, where it is far more difficult for a shareholder to challenge board decisions.

New pay plan

Tesla’s board last month proposed a $1 trillion compensation plan, highlighting confidence in Musk’s ability to steer the company in a new direction, even as Tesla loses ground to Chinese rivals in key markets amid softening EV demand.

The justices are considering the appeal of the pay ruling as well as the $345m legal fee that McCormick ordered Tesla to pay to the attorneys for Tornetta, who held just nine Tesla shares when he sued to block the pay deal. The court typically takes months to rule.

Tesla estimated in 2018 that the stock options plan would be worth $56bn if the company met operational and financial goals, which it did. Because the stock continued to appreciate, the options are currently worth closer to $120bn, by far the largest executive compensation ever. Musk is the world’s richest person with a fortune of around $480bn, according to Forbes.

The defendants have argued that McCormick erred in finding social and business ties to Musk compromised their independence, and said Tesla shareholders were informed of the economic terms of the pay deal before they approved the plan. The directors said she should have reviewed the pay package under the “business judgment” standard, which protects directors from second-guessing by courts.

The directors have long argued the pay package performed as hoped – it focused the attention of Musk, a serial entrepreneur, and he transformed Tesla from a startup into one of the world’s most valuable companies.

Ukraine’s Zelenskyy and Syria’s President Ahmed al-Sharaa discuss cooperation and mutual respect as Ukraine and Syria rebuild diplomatic relations.

Ukraine and Syria have formally restored diplomatic relations as their leaders met on the sidelines of the United Nations General Assembly, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said following his meeting with Syrian interim President Ahmed al-Sharaa.

Syria’s Foreign Minister Asaad al-Shaibani, along with an accompanying delegation, also attended the meeting on Wednesday in New York, the Syrian Foreign Ministry said in a brief statement.

Ukraine broke off relations with Syria in 2022 after the government of the country’s former ruler, Bashar al-Assad, moved to recognise the “independence” of the Russian-backed breakaway republics of Donetsk and Luhansk in eastern Ukraine. Shortly after, Syria announced it would break ties with Kyiv.

Zelenskyy said Ukraine and Syria signed a communique on the restoration of their diplomatic relations.

“We welcome this important step and are ready to support the Syrian people on their path to stability,” the Ukrainian leader wrote on X.

“During our negotiations with the President of Syria Ahmed al-Sharaa, we also discussed in detail promising sectors for developing cooperation, security threats faced by both countries, and the importance of countering them,” Zelenskyy said.

Today, Ukraine and Syria signed a Joint Communiqué on the restoration of diplomatic relations. We welcome this important step and are ready to support the Syrian people on their path to stability.

During our negotiations with President of Syria Ahmed al-Sharaa, we also discussed… pic.twitter.com/HBXsoaRob8

— Volodymyr Zelenskyy / Володимир Зеленський (@ZelenskyyUa) September 24, 2025

The Ukrainian leader said the two sides agreed to build “our relations on the basis of mutual respect and trust”.

Al-Sharaa arrived in New York on Sunday with a delegation of ministers to join the annual UN General Assembly, marking Syria’s first participation in the event at the presidential level in nearly 60 years.

Damascus had boycotted the gathering after the 1967 Arab-Israeli war, when Israel occupied the Golan Heights in southwest Syria.

President Nureddin al-Atassi was the last Syrian head of state to attend the UN summit, holding office from 1966 to 1970.

In January, al-Sharaa assumed power in Damascus after the opposition forces he led overthrew President al-Assad’s regime, bringing an end to the Assad family’s five-decade rule over Syria.

In his debut speech at the UNGA earlier on Wednesday, al-Sharaa called for the lifting of international sanctions on his war-torn nation.

Al-Sharaa highlighted the reform measures introduced in the months since he took power, including the creation of new institutions, plans for elections and efforts to attract foreign investment.

A federal judge Thursday said she was “inclined to extend” an earlier ruling and order the Trump administration to restore an additional $500 million in UCLA medical research grants that were frozen in response to the university’s alleged campus antisemitism violations.

Although she did not issue a formal ruling late Thursday, U.S. District Judge Rita F. Lin indicated she is leaning toward reversing — for now — the vast majority of funding freezes that University of California leaders say have endangered the future of the 10-campus, multi-hospital system.

Lin, a judge in the Northern District of California, said she was prepared to add UCLA’s National Institutes of Health grant recipients to an ongoing class-action lawsuit that has already led to the reversal of tens of millions of dollars in grants from the National Science Foundation, Environmental Protection Agency, National Endowment for the Humanities and other federal agencies to UC campuses.

The judge’s reasoning: The UCLA grants were suspended by form letters that were unspecific to the research, a likely violation of the Administrative Procedure Act, which regulates executive branch rulemaking.

Though Lin said she had a “lot of homework to do” on the matter, she indicated that reversing the grant cuts was “likely where I will land” and she would issue an order “shortly.”

Lin said the Trump administration had undertaken a “fundamental sin” in its “un-reasoned mass terminations” of the grants using “letters that don’t go through the required factors that the agency is supposed to consider.”

The possible preliminary injunction would be in place as the case proceeds through the courts. But in saying she leaned toward broadening the case, Lin suggested she believed there would be irreparable harm if the suspensions were not immediately reversed.

The suit was filed in June by UC San Francisco and UC Berkeley professors fighting a separate, earlier round of Trump administration grant clawbacks. The University of California is not a party in the case.

A U.S. Department of Justice lawyer, Jason Altabet, said Thursday that instead of a federal district court lawsuit filed by professors, the proper venue would be the U.S. Court of Federal Claims filed by UC. Altabet based his arguments on a recent Supreme Court ruling that upheld the government’s suspension of $783 million in NIH grants — to universities and research centers throughout the country — in part because the issue, the high court said, was not properly within the jurisdiction of a lower federal court.

Altabet said the administration was “fully embracing the principles in the Supreme Court’s recent opinions.”

The hundreds of NIH grants on hold at UCLA look into Parkinson’s disease treatment, cancer recovery, cell regeneration in nerves and other areas that campus leaders argue are pivotal for improving the health of Americans.

The Trump administration has proposed a roughly $1.2-billion fine and demanded campus changes over admission of international students and protest rules. Federal officials have also called for UCLA to release detailed admission data, ban gender-affirming healthcare for minors and give the government deep access to UCLA internal campus data, among other demands, in exchange for restoring $584 million in funding to the university.

In addition to allegations that the university has not seriously dealt with complaints of antisemitism on campus, the government also said it slashed UCLA funding in response to its findings that the campus illegally considers race in admissions and “discriminates against and endangers women” by recognizing the identities of transgender people.

UCLA has said it has made changes to improve campus climate for Jewish communities and does not use race in admissions. Its chancellor, Julio Frenk, has said that defunding medical research “does nothing” to address discrimination allegations. The university displays websites and policies that recognize different gender identities and maintains services for LGBTQ+ communities.

UC leaders said they will not pay the $1.2-billion fine and are negotiating with the Trump administration over its other demands. They have told The Times that many settlement proposals cross the university’s red lines.

“Recent federal cuts to research funding threaten lifesaving biomedical research, hobble U.S. economic competitiveness and jeopardize the health of Americans who depend on cutting-edge medical science and innovation,” a UC spokesperson said in a statement Thursday. “While the University of California is not a party to this suit, the UC system is engaged in numerous legal and advocacy efforts to restore funding to vital research programs across the humanities, social sciences and STEM fields.”

A ruling Lin issued in the case last month resulted in $81 million in NSF grants restored to UCLA. If the UCLA NIH grants are reinstated, it would leave about $3 million from the July suspensions — all Department of Energy grants — still frozen at UCLA.

Lin also said she leaned toward adding Transportation and Defense department grants to the case, which run in the millions of dollars but are small compared with UC’s NIH grants.

The hearing was closely watched by researchers at the Westwood campus, who have cut back on lab hours, reduced operations and considered layoffs as the crisis at UCLA moves toward the two-month mark.

In interviews, they said they were hopeful grants would be reinstated but remain concerned over the instability of their work under the recent federal actions.

Lydia Daboussi, a UCLA assistant professor of neurobiology whose $1-million grant researching nerve injury is suspended, observed the hearing online.

Aftewards, Daboussi said she was “cautiously optimistic” about her grant being reinstated.

“I would really like this to be the relief that my lab needs to get our research back online,” said Daboussi, who is employed at the David Geffen School of Medicine. “If the preliminary injunction is granted, that is a wonderful step in the right direction.”

Grant funding, she said, “was how we bought the antibodies we needed for experiments, how we purchased our reagents and our consumable supplies.” The lab consists of nine other people, including two PhD students and one senior scientist.

So far, none of Daboussi’s lab members have departed. But, she said, if “this goes on for too much longer, at some point, people’s hours will have to be reduced.”

“I do find myself having to pay more attention to volatilities outside of our lab space,” she said. “I’ve now become acquainted with our legal system in ways that I didn’t know would be necessary for my job.”

Elle Rathbun, a sixth-year neuroscience PhD candidate at UCLA, lost a roughly $160,000 NIH grant that funded her study of stroke recovery treatment.

“If there is a chance that these suspensions are lifted, that is phenomenal news,” said Rathbun, who presented at UCLA’s “Science Fair for Suspended Research” this month.

“Lifting these suspensions would then allow us to continue these really critical projects that have already been determined to be important for American health and the future of American health,” she said.

Rathbun’s research is focused on a potential treatment that would be injected into the brain to help rebuild it after a stroke. Since the suspension of her grant, Rathbun, who works out of a lab at UCLA’s neurology department, has been seeking other funding sources.

“Applying to grants takes a lot of time,” she said. “So that really slowed down my progress in my project.”

Syria, Jordan and the United States have announced plans to restore security in Suwayda, where sectarian violence in July claimed the lives of more than 250 people.

“The roadmap for a solution in Suwayda includes holding accountable those who attacked civilians, continuing humanitarian and medical aid, compensating those affected, ensuring the return of displaced persons, restoring basic services, deploying local Interior Ministry forces to protect roads, uncovering the fate of missing persons and returning abductees,” Syrian Foreign Minister Asaad al-Shibani said in a news release on Tuesday after meeting with his Jordanian counterpart Ayman Safadi and US Syria’s envoy Tom Barrack in Damascus.

Al-Shibani also said the government was working on a plan for the return of those displaced by the violence, who number more than 160,000, according to UN figures. He did not give details on how these steps would be achieved.

The new plan includes proposals to launch an internal reconciliation process. Violence erupted on July 13 between Bedouin tribal fighters and Druze factions in the southern Syrian province.

Safadi, for his part, said the parties agreed on a Syrian-Jordanian-American plan “to overcome the events in Suwayda under the framework of Syria’s unity and stability.”

“We want Syria to stabilise, recover and rebuild after years of destruction and suffering, and to start practical steps toward a brighter future for all Syrians,” he added.

Jordan borders Suwayda province and has spent years fighting drug and weapons smuggling from its northern neighbour.

Sectarian violence

The fighting broke out in July following the abduction of a Druze truck driver on a public highway, and later drew in Bedouin tribal fighters from other parts of the country. A ceasefire was established after a week of violence in the Druze-majority province.

The government forces were deployed to restore order, but were accused of siding with the Bedouins.

Israel launched dozens of air attacks on convoys of government forces in Suwayda and even struck the Syrian Ministry of Defence headquarters in the capital Damascus. Israel has pledged to protect Syria’s Druze minority, which it sees as potential allies.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said in August that his country was engaged in talks to establish a demilitarised zone in southern Syria.

Syria said it held Israel “fully responsible” for the unrest.

After opposition fighters toppled Syrian President Bashar al-Assad in December, Israel deployed troops to the buffer zone on the Golan Heights. Israel still occupies the Golan Heights, recognised as Syrian territory.

Israel has also repeatedly bombed Syria since al-Assad’s fall.

Meanwhile, Syria’s Foreign Ministry said on Tuesday that Damascus and Washington were working to reach security understandings with Israel as part of a plan for stability announced earlier in the day with US and Jordanian support for violence-hit Suwayda province.

“The United States, in consultation with the Syrian government, will work to reach security understandings with Israel concerning southern Syria that address the legitimate security concerns of both Syria and Israel while emphasising Syria’s sovereignty and territorial integrity,” the Foreign Ministry said in a statement outlining the roadmap.

Confidence-building

No concrete steps were released Tuesday for how the goals discussed between Jordan, Syria and the US would be accomplished.

“Suwayda belongs to all its components, and it is the state’s duty to restore trust among them, return the displaced, and there is a determination to restore normal life to the governorate,” al-Shibani said in the news release on Tuesday.

Jordan’s Foreign Minister Safadi said Syria’s security is an extension of Jordan’s security, adding that “all Syrians are equal citizens in rights and duties within their state”.

He stressed the need to hold perpetrators of human rights violations accountable and deliver humanitarian assistance.

The US envoy Barrack said he came to Syria “as a representative of the president of the United States and the secretary of state in a difficult moment in the region and the world.”

Barrack said confidence-building “takes inches, centimetres and decades to build and can be lost in an instant.”

“We are going to hit speed bumps or we are going to have bus stops along the way,” he added.

Tuesday’s discussions build on earlier rounds hosted by Amman in July and August that focused on consolidating a ceasefire in Suwayda and finding a resolution to the conflict there. Suwayda has observed a ceasefire since July 19.

Amorim could be excused for thinking someone is having a cruel joke at his expense when he assesses an opening that starts with Arsenal at Old Trafford, includes a trip to Manchester City and home game with Chelsea in United’s first five games, and then Liverpool at Anfield in match eight on 18 October.

By that point, it will almost be 12 months since the dismissal of Ten Hag and assessments will be being made about what has changed.

And that is the rub.

United, led by chief executive Omar Berrada, went for an imaginative choice rather than the safe options – which included Marco Silva, Thomas Frank and Graham Potter – suggested by then sporting director Dan Ashworth as Ten Hag’s replacement.

Amorim came to prominence at Sporting by delivering outstanding results with a specific formation. Three central defenders, wing-backs and two inside forwards behind a number nine. The immediate collateral damage in shaping a United squad to fit that system was the discarding of five players – four of whom are senior internationals who prefer to play wide.

The full extent of the additional impact Amorim has made by bringing in Matheus Cunha, Bryan Mbeumo and Benjamin Sesko, at a combined cost in the region of £200m, to fill the attacking roles remains to be seen.

However, the intention is for skipper Fernandes to play deeper in one of the two midfield slots. How much meaningful time on the pitch is afforded to England duo Mason Mount and Kobbie Mainoo, whose contract stand-off remains unresolved, is open to question.

At the back, team selections in five unbeaten games in three countries across pre-season, suggest Harry Maguire and Matthijs de Ligt are battling for a single slot as the middle defender, while Luke Shaw and Lisandro Martinez, when fit, are vying to be first choice on the left of the three.

De Ligt has proved adept at moving into midfield when United’s keeper has the ball. This, Amorim reasons, clears the space for his side to get possession into the areas of the field where they can cause more damage. Fernandes’ task, in Amorim’s ideal world, is to get on the ball as often as possible, and then make the right decisions.

It’s all very technical. In theory, it also provides support in midfield, which tended to be completely overrun during Ten Hag’s time because the Dutchman wanted to stretch the space in that area of the field, something Casemiro was not able to do, while none of those asked to partner him made a particular success of either.

Casemiro’s game intelligence, his ability to read situations and the Brazilian’s calmness under pressure brought him back into favour under Amorim towards the end of last season.

The 33-year-old does not have limitless energy but he was preferred to Christian Eriksen, who was about to leave the club, and, more significantly, Manuel Ugarte, who cost £50.8m to sign from PSG less than 12 months ago, for the Europa League final against Tottenham in May, which United lost.

It seems Amorim regards finding an upgrade in this area of the pitch to be more of a priority than replacing goalkeeper Andre Onana.

That Amorim talks a good game is not in question. Now his team have to deliver.

The target is clear. Amorim has said European qualification is the aim. His players have said the same. More importantly, a financial outlook provided for the club by an external agency spoke about delivering a place in the Europa League at the end of this season as a stepping stone to a return to the Champions League in 2027-28.

It would be unfair to judge United’s season on one game, or even eight looking at that fixture list. But, as Amorim has previously said, he used up a lot of goodwill from the stands last season.

He promised this season will be better. It has to be.

South Korea’s President Lee Jae-myung said he will restore a military agreement to rebuild trust with North Korea.

South Korea has said it intends to restore an agreement suspending military activity along its border with North Korea and revive inter-Korean cooperation, as President Lee Jae-myung attempts to dampen soaring tensions over Pyongyang’s nuclear programme and deepening ties with Russia.

Marking the 80th anniversary of Korea’s liberation from Japanese colonial rule on Friday, Lee said he will seek to restore the so-called September 19 Military Agreement and rebuild trust with North Korea.

“To prevent accidental clashes between South and North Korea and to build military trust, we will take proactive, gradual steps to restore the [2018] September 19 Military Agreement,” Lee said in a televised speech.

Lee added that his government “will not pursue any form of unification by absorption and has no intention of engaging in hostile acts” against its northern neighbour.

The September 19 agreement was signed at an inter-Korean summit in 2018, where the leaders of both countries declared the start of a new era of peace.

But Seoul partially suspended the deal in late 2023 after it objected to North Korea launching a military spy satellite into space, with Pyongyang then effectively ripping up the deal as it deployed heavy weapons into the Demilitarized Zone between both countries and restored guard posts.

Tensions then spiralled between the two Koreas under Yoon Suk-yeol, South Korea’s conservative ex-president who was elected in 2022 but removed from office in April and is now serving jail time for his brief imposition of martial law in December.

South Korea and North Korea – separated along the heavily militarised buffer zone known as the 38th parallel – are still technically at war after their 1950-53 war ended in an armistice, not a peace treaty.

Making clear his desire to resume dialogue with Pyongyang since winning a snap election in June, South Korea’s new left-leaning President Lee has taken a softer tone and sought rapprochement with North Korea.

Soon after his inauguration and in his government’s first concrete step towards easing tensions, Lee halted the South blasting propaganda messages and K-pop songs across the border into the North.

Earlier this month, South Korea began removing its loudspeakers from its side of the border, while Seoul’s Joint Chiefs of Staff claimed it had evidence that Pyongyang was doing the same.

But, on Thursday, Kim Yo Jong – the powerful sister of North Korea’s long-ruling leader Kim Jong Un – dampened any suggestion of warming ties between the Koreas.

Kim, who oversees the propaganda operations of the Workers’ Party of Korea, which has ruled the country since 1948, accused Seoul of misleading the public and “building up the public opinion while embellishing their new policy” towards Pyongyang.

“We have never removed loudspeakers installed on the border area and are not willing to remove them,” Kim said.

Aug. 9 (UPI) — The U.S. Justice Department is asking for $1 billion from the University of California, Los Angeles in exchange for re-starting federal funding to the public land-grant research institution, school officials confirmed.

“The University of California just received a document from the Department of Justice and is reviewing it,” University of California President James Milliken said in a statement this week.

“As a public university, we are stewards of taxpayer resources and a payment of this scale would completely devastate our country’s greatest public university system as well as inflict great harm on our students and all Californians.”

Earlier this week, UCLA announced it had lost millions in federal research funding after the Justice Department accused it of failing to protect Jewish students during on-campus pro-Palestinian protests. The school at the time did not specify a dollar amount, but that figure is now believed to be around $500 million.

“The UC Board of Regents and the UC Office of the President are providing counsel as we actively evaluate our best course of action. I will continue to be in constant communication with you on key decisions and update you on any developments,” UCLA Chancellor Julio Frenk said following Milliken’s statement.

The deal offered by President Donald Trump‘s administration to the 106-year-old academic institution would involve the school making a $1 billion payment. It would also pay an additional $172 million which would go to a larger fund to compensate victims of civil rights violations, the New York Times reported, citing a draft of the proposal.

Gov. Gavin Newsom, D-Calif., said the state would push back against the proposed settlement.

“We’ll sue,” Newsom told reporters at a news conference Friday when asked about the news. Newsom had been discussing California’s involvement with Texas lawmakers who are trying to block a Republican redistricting plan in the Lone Star state.

“[Trump] is trying to silence academic freedom,” Newsom said, “attacking one of the most important public institutions in the United States of America.”

Columbia University last month agreed to pay $221 million in fines to settle similar accusations against the private New York City university.

At the time, Trump said he also expected to reach a settlement with Harvard University.

Published on
08/08/2025 – 14:08 GMT+2

ADVERTISEMENT

Binance is partnering with Spain’s Banco Bilbao Vizcaya Argentaria (BBVA) to allow crypto customers to store their funds with the bank instead of keeping them directly on the crypto exchange, according to reporting by the Financial Times.

The move is aimed at rebuilding trust with investors after Binance was hit with a record fine from US regulators nearly two years ago.

Binance is the world’s largest cryptocurrency exchange by trading volume, and it handles billions of dollars in trades each day across hundreds of cryptocurrencies.

What does this mean for crypto?

BBVA, as a bank, will act as an “independent custodian” or a separate and trusted third party and ensure a greater level of safety when it comes to customers’ funds or assets that are traded through Binance.

As the second largest bank in Spain and praised for its innovation and sustainability, BBVA will act as a security guarantee, giving traders a reduced risk while encouraging them to invest in the high-returns crypto exchange.

By storing them with BBVA, if Binance runs into trouble, like being hacked, declaring bankruptcy or facing regulatory action, the funds would still be safe with BBVA.

Banks are much more closely regulated than crypto exchanges, so BBVA’s obligation to follow compliance rules should lead to more interest in crypto overall.

Essentially, the move is akin to putting your valuables in a safe or a secure bank, instead of being displayed in a storefront as they’re being bought and sold.

Binance trying to clean up its reputation

Binance, the world’s largest crypto exchange, got slammed in 2023 with a record $4.3 billion (€3.69bn) fine after US regulators accused it of not keeping checks on its trading floor.

US officials said Binance allowed shady funds to flow through its exchange and allegedly permitted laundered money to be used, helping its big clients dodge the rules.

Founder Changpeng ‘CZ’ Zhao stepped down and served four months in prison for failing to stop money laundering.

Now, with regulators watching its every move, Binance is trying to clean up its act and by partnering with Spain’s BBVA, hopes to prove it can play by the rules.

Ukraine’s parliament has voted to restore the independence of two key anti-corruption agencies, moving to defuse the country’s biggest political crisis since Russia’s invasion.

Lawmakers on Thursday voted 331 to 0 in favour of the bill, which President Volodymyr Zelenskyy submitted last week following pressure from thousands of protesters and top European officials.

The measure now goes to Zelenskyy for a signature.

More to come…

Syria’s security forces have begun deploying in the restive southern province of Suwayda, a Ministry of Interior spokesperson has said, where heavy fighting between Druze and Bedouin armed groups and government forces has left hundreds dead, compounded by Israeli military intervention.

The deployment on Saturday came hours after the United States announced that Israel and Syria have agreed to a ceasefire, an as yet uncertain truce amidst overnight fighting.

Syria’s government announced the ceasefire early on Saturday, saying in a statement it is being enacted “to spare Syrian blood, preserve the unity of Syrian territory, the safety of its people”.

The country’s president, Ahmed al-Sharaa, in a televised address, stated that he “received international calls to intervene in what is happening in Suwayda and restore security to the country”.

Israeli intervention has “reignited tensions” in the city, with fighting there “a dangerous turning point”, he said, also thanking the US for its support.

Earlier, Interior Ministry spokesman Noureddine al-Baba had said in a statement on Telegram that “internal security forces have begun deploying in Suwayda province … with the aim of protecting civilians and putting an end to the chaos.”

Ethnically charged clashes between Druze and Bedouin armed groups and government forces have reportedly left hundreds dead in recent days.

On Wednesday, Israel launched heavy air attacks on Syria’s Ministry of Defence in the heart of Damascus, and also hit Syrian government forces in the Suwayda region, claiming it had done so to protect the Druze, who it calls its “brothers”.

Communities in Suwayda are ‘noble people’

“Al-Sharaa said that national unity was a priority for his government and that part of the role of the government was to be a neutral referee between all parties,” said Al Jazeera’s Mohamed Vall, reporting from the capital Damascus.

“He praised the people of Suwayda, other than the few elements that wanted to sow trouble, saying that both Druze and Arab communities in the city were noble people.”

It was unclear whether Syrian troops reached Suwayda city as of Saturday morning or were still on the city’s outskirts, Vall said.

Bedouin tribal fighters had been waiting to hear more from the government about the ceasefire, while Druze leaders have varying attitudes on it – some welcoming it, and others pledging to continue fighting, he added.

Fighting has “been going on throughout the night”, but the deployment of Syria’s internal security forces was “welcome news” to many in the city, Vall said.

On Friday, an Israeli official, who declined to be named, told reporters that in light of the “ongoing instability in southwest Syria”, Israel had agreed to allow the “limited entry of the [Syrian] internal security forces into Suwayda district for the next 48 hours”.

According to Syria’s Health Ministry, the death toll from fighting in the Druze-majority city is now at least 260. An estimated 80,000 people have fled the area, according to the International Organization for Migration.

“A lot of extrajudicial killings [are] being reported,” said Vall. “People are suffering, even those who have been killed or forced to flee, they don’t have electricity, they don’t have water, because most of those services have been badly affected by the fighting.”

‘Zero-sum formula of territorial expansion and concurrent wars’

The Reuters news agency on Saturday reported that Syria’s government misread how Israel would respond to its troops deploying to the country’s south this week, encouraged by US messaging that Syria should be governed as a centralised state.

Damascus believed it had a green light from both the US and Israel to dispatch its forces south to Suwayda, despite months of Israeli warnings not to do so, Reuters reported, quoting several sources, including Syrian political and military officials, two diplomats, and regional security sources.

That understanding was based on public and private comments from US special envoy for Syria Thomas Barrack, as well as security talks with Israel, the sources said.

Analysts say Israel’s attacks have “less to do with the minority Druze community and more with a strategic Israeli objective to create a new reality,” said Al Jazeera’s Nour Odeh.

“It’s part of Israel trying to show that it is the hegemonic power in the Middle East.”

She added: “It’s a zero-sum formula of territorial expansion and concurrent wars. Endless war on Gaza, relentless attacks on Lebanon, strikes on Yemen, threats of resumed hostilities with Iran and in Syria, territorial expansion, [and] direct military intervention.

“This contradicts the Trump administration’s declared policy of seeking to expand normalisation deals with Israel in the region, which the new government in Syria had welcomed and entertained before this crisis,” said Odeh.

Carlos Alcaraz, Aryna Sabalenka and the end of London’s tropical heatwave have ensured that a sense of normality has returned to the lawns of Wimbledon on day three of the tournament after two sweat-soaked days of shocks.

A stream of big names – including Coco Gauff, Jessica Pegula, Alexander Zverev and Daniil Medvedev – have crashed and burned in the oven-like temperatures of the first round.

So when Alcaraz walked onto Centre Court on Wednesday in his quest for a third successive title against British qualifier Oliver Tarvet, the thought surely lurked somewhere in his mind that he could be the fall guy in the tournament’s greatest upset.

The 21-year-old second seed was not at his best, but after saving three break points in a nervy opening service game against a college student ranked 733rd in the world, he asserted his authority to win 6-1, 6-4, 6-4.

Sabalenka tops Bouzkova

Earlier on Centre Court, the women’s top seed, Sabalenka, battled to a 7-6(4), 6-4 win against Czech Marie Bouzkova.

“Honestly, it is sad to see so many upsets in the tournament in both draws, women’s and men’s,” Sabalenka, who is bidding for her first Wimbledon title, said.

“Honestly, I’m just trying to focus on myself.”

Australian Open champion Madison Keys, the sixth seed, also made it safely into round three, beating Olga Danilovic 6-4, 6-2 while unseeded four-time Grand Slam champion Naomi Osaka eased past Czech doubles specialist Katerina Siniakova 6-3, 6-2.

Lower temperatures did not mean an end to the surprises entirely, though, as American world number 12 Frances Tiafoe became the 14th of the 32 men’s seeds to depart, going down 4-6, 6-4, 6-3, 7-5 to Cameron Norrie, one of seven British players in second-round singles action on day three.

Sonay Kartal led the home charge by beating Bulgaria’s Viktoriya Tomova 6-2, 6-2 to book her place in the last 32 for the second year in succession.

There was disappointment, though, for Britain’s Katie Boulter, who served 14 double faults as she went down 6-7(9), 6-2, 6-1 to 101st-ranked Solana Sierra, the Argentinian who lost in qualifying but has seized her lucky loser spot with both hands.

Alcaraz congratulates Tarvet

Alcaraz, bidding to do the French Open-Wimbledon double for the second successive year, needed five sets to get past Italian veteran Fabio Fognini in the first round and set up an intriguing clash with Tarvet.

Tarvet, who plays on the United States collegiate circuit for the University of San Diego, said he believed he could beat anyone, even Alcaraz, after winning his Grand Slam debut match against fellow qualifier Leandro Riedi of Switzerland on Monday.

He was clearly not overawed at sharing a court with a five-time Grand Slam champion, and had he taken any of the eight break points he earned in the first set, it could have been closer.

Alcaraz proved to be the better player on Wednesday, though, as he moved through the gears when required to keep an eager Tarvet under control.

Just as the Spaniard did in his first round when going to the aid of a female spectator suffering in the heat, Alcaraz again endeared himself to the Centre Court crowd.

“First of all, I have to give a big congratulations to Oliver. It’s his second match on the tour. I just loved his game to be honest, the level he played,” Alcaraz said.

Play on the courts without roofs was delayed for two hours by light morning rain, but once the clouds rolled away, the place to be for those without show-court tickets was Court 12 for Brazilian teenager Joao Fonseca’s second-round match against American Jenson Brooksby.

The 18-year-old is widely tipped as a future challenger to Alcaraz and Jannik Sinner, and he showed exactly why during a 6-2, 5-7, 6-2, 6-4 win that was celebrated by a large contingent of exuberant Brazilians.

Raducanu sets up Sabalenka tie

Facing a rival who has already experienced the joys of winning Wimbledon did not faze Emma Raducanu as the Briton rode out the “crazy pressure” heaped on her slender shoulders to defeat Marketa Vondrousova 6-3, 6-3 in the second round.

In a battle between two Grand Slam champions, both unseeded after years of trials and tribulations, Czech Vondrousova would have fancied her chances of knocking out Britain’s big hope.

After all, the 2023 champion had arrived at the All England Club fresh from winning the grass-court title in Berlin with victories over Australian Open champion Madison Keys and world number one Sabalenka en route.

However, it was Raducanu whose game sparkled on Centre Court as she produced the kind of carefree, yet potent shots that had carried her to the US Open title in 2021.

“Today I played really, really well. There were some points that I have no idea how I turned around,” a delighted Raducanu told the crowd.

“I knew playing Marketa was going to be an incredibly difficult match. She has won this tournament, which is a huge achievement. I’m really pleased with how I played my game the whole way through.”

An eye-popping running backhand passing shot winner handed her the break for a 4-2 lead in the first set.

Although a sloppy service game gave Vondrousova the break back in the next game, the British number one wasted little time in regaining the advantage for a 5-3 lead after a forehand error from the Czech.

Moments later, thundering roars from the Centre Court crowd could be heard around the All England Club and beyond as Vondrousova surrendered the set with yet another miscued forehand.

Clearly unsettled, the errors started piling up for Vondrousova, who had previously admitted that she did not envy the “crazy pressure” Raducanu had to deal with day in and day out after becoming the first British woman to win a major in 44 years.

Yet another forehand slapped long by Vondrousova handed Raducanu a break for 2-1, and from then on, there was no stopping the Briton. She sealed a third-round meeting with Sabalenka after her opponent swiped a backhand wide.

New Delhi put into ‘abeyance’ its participation in the 1960 transboundary treaty after 26 people were killed in Indian-administered Kashmir in April.

India will never restore the Indus Waters Treaty with neighbouring Pakistan, and the water flowing there will be diverted for internal use, says federal Home Minister Amit Shah.

India put into “abeyance” its participation in the 1960 treaty, which governs the usage of the Indus River system, after 26 people were killed in Indian-administered Kashmir in April, in what New Delhi described as an act of terror backed by Pakistan.

Pakistan denied involvement in the incident, which led to days of fighting between the two nuclear powers – their worst military escalation in decades, bringing them to the brink of another war.

Despite a ceasefire agreed upon by the two nations last month, Shah said his government would not restore the treaty, which guaranteed water access for 80 percent of Pakistan’s farms through three rivers originating in India.

“It will never be restored,” Shah told The Times of India newspaper in an interview on Saturday.

“We will take water that was flowing to Pakistan to Rajasthan by constructing a canal. Pakistan will be starved of water that it has been getting unjustifiably,” he added, referring to the northwestern Indian desert state.

The transboundary water agreement allows the two countries to share water flowing from the Indus basin, giving India control of three eastern Himalayan rivers – Ravi, Sutlej, and Beas – while Pakistan got control of the three western rivers – Jhelum, Chenab, and Indus.

The treaty also established the India-Pakistan Indus Commission, which is supposed to resolve any problems that arise. So far, it has survived previous armed conflicts and near-constant tensions between India and Pakistan over the past 65 years.

However, the comments from Shah, the most powerful minister in Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s cabinet, have dimmed Islamabad’s hopes for negotiations on the treaty in the near term.

Pakistan has not yet responded to Shah’s comments. But it has said in the past that the treaty has no provision for one side to unilaterally pull back, and that any blocking of river water flowing to Pakistan will be considered “an act of war”.

“The treaty can’t be amended, nor can it be terminated by any party unless both agree,” Pakistani Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar said last month.

Islamabad is also exploring a legal challenge to India’s decision to hold the treaty in abeyance under international law.

Legal experts told Al Jazeera in April that the treaty cannot be unilaterally suspended, and that it can only be modified by mutual agreement between the parties.

“India has used the word ‘abeyance’, and there is no such provision to ‘hold it in abeyance’ in the treaty,” Ahmer Bilal Soofi, a Pakistani lawyer, told Al Jazeera. “It also violates customary international laws relating to upper and lower riparian, where the upper riparian cannot stop the water promise for the lower riparian.”

Anuttama Banerji, a political analyst based in New Delhi, told Al Jazeera in April that the treaty might continue, but not in its present form.

“Instead, it will be up for ‘revision’, ‘review’ and ‘modification’ – all three meaning different things – considering newer challenges such as groundwater depletion and climate change were not catered for in the original treaty,” Banerji said.

Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass has reached an agreement with City Council President Marqueece Harris-Dawson to find the money to reverse the cuts to police hiring made last month by the council.

On Friday, Bass signed the 2025-26 budget approved by the council, which reworked much of her plan for closing a $1-billion shortfall. Among the council’s changes to the mayor’s spending plan was a reduction in the number of police officers hired in the coming fiscal year, which would drop from 480 to 240.

The following day, as part of her signing announcement, the mayor highlighted the separate deal with Harris-Dawson to ensure that “council leadership will identify funds for an additional 240 recruits within 90 days.” The budget year begins July 1.

The money for the additional officers would be allocated within the 90-day deadline, said Bass spokesperson Zach Seidl.

“No one got everything they wanted,” Harris-Dawson said in a statement. “There is still more work ahead, especially our commitment to work with the Mayor to identify the funds for an additional 240 recruits within 90 days.”

Restoring the 240 police recruits would require the council to free up an additional $13.3 million for the coming year. In 2026-27, the cost of those officers — who would be working their first full year — would grow to about $60 million, according to a city estimate.

Bass proposed a budget in April that called for laying off about 1,600 civilian city workers, one-fourth of them at the LAPD. The council voted last month to reduce the layoff number to around 700, in part by scaling back the mayor’s hiring plans at the LAPD and the Los Angeles Fire Department.

During their deliberations, council members said a slowdown in the hiring of police officers would protect the jobs of other workers at the LAPD, including civilian specialists who handle DNA rape kits, fingerprint analysis and other investigative tasks.

Bass, in her statement, thanked the council for “coming together on this deal as we work together to make Los Angeles safer for all.” She said the budget invests in emergency response, homeless services, street repairs, parks, libraries and other programs.

“This budget has been delivered under extremely difficult conditions — uncertainty from Washington, the explosion of liability payments, unexpected rising costs and lower than expected revenues,” she said.

During the budget deliberations, Bass voiced dismay about slowing down recruitment at the LAPD. In recent days, she had weighed whether to veto all or a portion of the budget, which could have led to a messy showdown with the council.

The council voted 12 to 3 to approve the reworked budget proposal last month. Because only 10 votes are needed to override a veto, Bass would have had to secure at least three additional votes in support of her position on police hiring.

Whether Harris-Dawson has the support of his colleagues to find the money — and then spend it on police hiring — is unclear. Unless the city’s labor unions make financial concessions, the council would likely need to either tap the city’s reserve fund or pull money from other spending obligations, such as legal payouts or existing city programs.

The budget provides funding for six classes with up to 40 recruits each at the Police Academy over the coming fiscal year. Bass had originally sought double that number, providing the department with 480 recruits.

Councilmember Katy Yaroslavsky, who chairs the council’s budget committee, said she shares the mayor’s goal of restoring LAPD recruit classes — and looks forward to “working with her to make it happen.”

“The question has always been how to do it in a way that is fiscally responsible and sustainable,” Yaroslavsky said.

To increase police hiring and eliminate the remaining 700 layoffs, the council will need to turn to the city’s labor unions for additional savings, Yaroslavsky said.

The council’s budget provided enough funding to ensure the LAPD has 8,399 officers by June 30, 2026, the end of the next fiscal year. The $13.3 million sought by Bass would bring the number of officers to more than 8,600.

The LAPD had 8,746 officers in mid-May, down from about 10,000 in 2020, according to department figures.

The California Public Utilities Commission failed to abide by state law when it slashed financial incentives for residential rooftop solar panels in 2022, environmental groups argued before the California Supreme Court Wednesday.

The commission’s policy, which took effect in April 2023, cut the value of the credits that panel owners receive for sending power they don’t need to the electric grid by as much as 80%.

In arguments before the court, the environmental groups said the decision has stymied efforts to get homeowners and businesses to install the climate-friendly panels.

The commission violated state law, the groups argued, by not considering all the benefits of the solar panels in its decision and by not ensuring that rooftop solar systems could continue to expand in disadvantaged communities.

More than two million solar systems sit on the roofs of homes, businesses and schools in California — more than any other state. Environmentalists say that number must increase if the state is to meet its goal set by a 2018 law of using only carbon-free energy by 2045.

On the other side of the courtroom battle were lawyers from Attorney General Rob Bonta’s office, arguing that the commission’s five members, all pointed by Gov. Gavin Newsom, had followed the law in making their decision.

In briefs filed before Wednesday’s oral arguments, the government lawyers sided with those from the state’s three big for-profit electric utilities — Southern California Edison, Pacific Gas & Electric and San Diego Gas & Electric.

Mica Moore, deputy solicitor general, said at the hearing in downtown Los Angles that the credits given to the rooftop panel owners on their electric bill have become so valuable that they were resulting in “a cost shift” of billions of dollars to those who do not own the panels. This was raising electric bills, she said, especially hurting low-income electric customers.

The credits for the energy sent by the rooftop systems to the grid are valued at the retail rate for electricity, which has risen fast as the commissioners have voted in recent years to approve rate increases the utilities have requested.

The environmental groups and other critics of the commission’s decision have argued that there is no “cost shift.” They say that the commission failed to consider in its calculations the many benefits of the rooftop solar panels, including how they lower the amount of transmission lines and other infrastructure the utilities need to build.

“The cost shift narrative is a red herring,” argued plaintiff’s attorney Malinda Dickenson, representing the Center for Biological Diversity, the Environmental Working Group and the Protect Our Communities Foundation.

Moore countered by saying the commission doesn’t have to consider all the possible societal or private benefits of the rooftop panels.

For example, even though the rooftop panels could result in conserving land that was otherwise needed for industrial scale solar farms, the government lawyers argued in their brief, the commission was not obligated to consider that value in its calculation of the amount of costs the rooftop panels shift to other customers.

The government lawyers also said the commission had created other programs beyond the electric bill credits to help disadvantaged communities afford the solar systems.

The utilities have long complained that electric bills have been rising because owners of the rooftop solar panels are not paying their fair share of the fixed costs required to maintain the electric grid.

During the oral arguments, the seven justices focused on a legal question of whether a state appeals court erred when it ruled in January 2024 against the environmental groups and said that the court must defer to how the commission interpreted the law because it had more expertise in utility matters.

“This deferential standard of review leaves no basis for faulting the Commission’s work,” the appeals court concluded in its opinion.

The environmental groups argue the appeals court ignored a 1998 law that said the commission’s decisions should be held to the same standard of court review as those by other state agencies.

Moore told the seven justices that the appeals court had made the correct decision to defer to the commission.

Not all justices seemed to agree with that.

“But we’re pretty good about figuring out what the law says,” Associate Justice Carol Corrigan said to Moore during the proceeding. “Why should we defer on that to the commission?”

The justices will weigh the arguments made by both sides and issue a decision in the next 90 days.

The big utilities have for decades tried to reduce the energy credits aimed at incentivizing Californians to invest in the solar panel systems that can cost tens of thousands of dollars. The rooftop systems have cut into the utilities’ sale of electricity.

On another front, the state’s three big utilities are now lobbying in Sacramento to reduce credits for Californians who installed their panels before April 15, 2023. The commission’s decision in 2022 left the incentives in place for those panel owners for 20 years after their purchase.

Early this year, Assemblywoman Lisa Calderon (D-Whittier), a former Southern California Edison executive, introduced a bill that would have ended the program for all solar owners who installed their systems by April 2023 after 10 years. In face of opposition and protests by solar owners, Calderon amended the bill so it would end the program — where credits are valued at the retail electric rate — only for those selling their homes.

Calderon said the bill would save the state’s electric customers $2.5 billion over the next 18 years.

On Monday, Roderick Brewer, an Edison lobbyist, sent an email to Assemblymembers, urging them to vote for the bill known as AB 942. “Save Electricity Customers Billions, Promote Equity,” he urged in the email.

The Assembly voted 46 to 14 to approve the bill on Tuesday night, sending it to the state Senate for consideration.

The timing of the vote surprised opponents of the bill. They expected a vote late this week because of rules that allow more time for bills to be reviewed after they are amended. Calderon amended the bill late Monday.

Nick Miller, a spokesman for Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas, said Calderon had asked for a waiver of the rules so that it could be voted on Tuesday night.

Such waivers, Miller said, are “not uncommon.”

Seoul, South Korea – After six hours of emergency martial law, hundreds of days of protests, violence at a Seoul court and the eventual impeachment of President Yoon Suk-yeol, South Korea is now hours away from choosing a new leader in the hope of restoring stability to an unsettled nation.

From 6am to 8pm on Tuesday (21:00 to 11:00 GMT), South Koreans will vote for one of five presidential candidates in a race led largely by the opposition Democratic Party’s Lee Jae-myung. He is followed in the polls by the governing People Power Party candidate Kim Moon-soo.

The election – involving 44.39 million eligible voters – is expected to see either of these two top contenders replace Yoon. The expelled former president last week attended his fifth court hearing where he faces charges of leading an insurrection and abusing power due to his failed imposition of martial law on December 3.

If convicted, Yoon could face a maximum penalty of life in prison or even the death sentence.

Participation in the election is predicted to be at an all-time high amid the political turmoil resulting from the brief imposition of military rule, which still resonates in every corner of society and has sharply divided the country along political lines. There are those who still support Yoon and those who vehemently oppose his martial law decision.

The Democratic Party’s Lee is currently the clear frontrunner, with Gallup Korea’s latest poll on May 28 placing his support at 49 percent, compared with People Power Party Kim’s 36 percent, as the favourite to win.

Early voting, which ended on Friday, had the second-highest voter turnout in the country’s history, at 34.74 percent, while overseas voting from 118 countries reached a record high of 79.5 percent.

Lee Jae-myung’s second chance

In the last presidential election in 2022, Yoon narrowly edged out Lee in the closest presidential contest in South Korea’s history.

After his crushing defeat in 2022 to a voting margin of just 0.73 percentage points, Lee now has another chance at the top office, and to redeem his political reputation.

About a month ago, South Korea’s Supreme Court determined that Lee had spread falsehoods during his 2022 presidential bid in violation of election law.

In addition to surviving a series of bribery charges during his tenure as mayor of Seongnam and governor of Gyeonggi Province, which he claimed were politically motivated, Lee also survived a stabbing attack to his neck during a news conference in Busan last year.

Fortunately for Lee, the courts have agreed to postpone further hearings of his ongoing trials until after the election.

On the campaign trail this time around, Lee addressed his supporters from behind bulletproof glass, with snipers positioned on rooftops, scanning the crowds for potential threats, as counterterrorism units patrolled on foot.

Lee has also been joined on his campaign by conservative lawmakers, his former opponents, who have publicly supported his run for office numerous times during the past month, seeing him as a path back to political stability.

People Power Party candidate Kim was served an especially hard blow when his parliamentary colleague, Kim Sang-wook, defected from the party in early May to join Lee’s Democratic Party.

According to polling data from South Korea’s leading media outlet Hankyoreh, only 55 percent of conservative voters who supported Yoon in the 2022 election said they would back the People Power Party’s Kim this time around.

While such shifts represent the crisis that the mainstream conservative party is facing after the political fallout from Yoon’s botched martial law plan and removal from office, it also testifies to Lee’s appeal to both moderate and conservative voters.

Future president faces ‘heavy burden’

“The events of the martial law, insurrection attempt and impeachment process have dealt a heavy blow to our democracy,” said Lim Woon-taek, a sociology professor at Keimyung University and a former member of the Presidential Commission on Policy Planning.

“So, the new president will receive a heavy burden when assuming the president’s seat,” Lim told Al Jazeera.

Youth unemployment, social inequality and climate change have also become pressing issues that Yoon’s administration failed to tackle.

According to recent research, South Korea’s non-regular workers, including contract employees and part-timers, accounted for 38 percent of all wage and salary workers last year.

Lee has promised to champion business-friendly policies, and concentrate on investment in research and development and artificial intelligence, while refraining from focusing on divisive social issues such as the gender wars.

His stance has shifted considerably from his time moving up the political ranks when he promoted left-wing ideas, such as a universal basic income.

Events on the night of the declaration of martial law on December 3, also helped cement Lee’s image as a political freedom fighter. A former human rights lawyer, Lee was livestreamed scaling the walls of the National Assembly as the military surrounded the compound, where he rallied fellow legislators to vote and strike down Yoon’s decision to mobilise the military.

Among Lee’s most central campaign pledges has been his promise to bring to justice those involved in Yoon’s martial law scheme and tighten controls on a future president’s ability to do the same. Lee also wants to see a constitutional amendment that would allow presidents to serve two four-year terms, a change from the current single-term five years.

While Lee’s closest challenger, Kim, has agreed on such policies and made sure to distance himself from Yoon, the former labour-activist-turned-hardline-conservative has also said the former president’s impeachment went too far.

Trump, tariffs and South Korea’s new direction

The election also unfolds as United States President Donald Trump has proposed a series of tariffs on key South Korean exports such as steel, semiconductors and automobiles.

In the face of those threats, Lee has promised to stimulate demand and growth, while Kim has promised to ease business regulations. Kim also emphasised his plan to hold an immediate summit meeting with Trump to discuss the tariffs.

Lee, on the other hand, has promised a more pragmatic foreign policy agenda which would maintain relations with the US administration but also prioritise “national interests”, such as bridging closer relations with neighbouring China and Russia.

On North Korea, Lee is determined to ease tensions that have risen to unprecedented heights in recent years, while Kim has pledged to build up the country’s military capability to counter Pyongyang, and wants stronger security support from the US.

Lee has also promised to relocate the National Assembly and the presidential office from Seoul to Sejong City, which would be designated as the country’s new administrative capital, continuing a process of city-planning rebalancing that has met a series of setbacks in recent years.

Another major issue that Keimyung University’s Lim hopes the future leader will focus more on is the climate situation.

“Our country is considered a climate villain, and we will face future restrictions in our exports if we don’t address the immediate effects of not keeping limits on the amount of our hazardous outputs,” Lim said.

“The future of our country will really rest on this one question: whether the next president will draw out such issues like the previous administration or face the public sphere and head straight into the main issues that are deteriorating our society.”

The results of Tuesday’s vote are expected to emerge either late on Tuesday or in the early hours of Wednesday morning.

In the 2022 election, Yoon was proclaimed the winner at 4:40am the morning after election day.

With Lee the clear frontrunner in this election, the outcome could be evident as early as Tuesday night.

But enhanced surveillance at polling stations this year due to concerns raised about counting errors may be a factor in slowing down any early announcement of the country’s next president.