warn

TIMOTHÉE Chalamet’s painful Oscars experience was made worse by love rival Travis Scott cheering for Michael B. Jordan, a source close to the star told The U.S. Sun.

Chalamet endured a brutal Academy Awards, from being roasted by host Conan O’Brien to missing out on a career-defining award.

O’Brien targeted the Willy Wonka actor over his scathing remarks about opera and ballet, which had sparked global criticism and threatens to end his partnership with Cartier.

Chalamet said last month in a CNN town hall with Matthew McConaughey that “no one cares” about either artform, with one Academy insider labelling him as “arrogant.”

The night, however, reportedly worsened when controversial rapper Scott — girlfriend Kylie Jenner’s ex and father of her two children — openly supported Jordan, who beat Chalamet in the Best Actor category.

The insider said the 30-year-old was “shaken” after Marty Supreme failed to win any of its nine nominations.

While he was happy for Jordan, who impressed judges with his dual role in Sinners, Chalamet struggled to hide his disappointment, and his tension with Scott reportedly hit an “all-time low.”

“Travis’s support for Michael B. Jordan was seen as a direct snub, and it’s clear he has little respect for Timothée’s talent,” the source said. “While he isn’t confrontational, their relationship has grown colder than ever.”

Chalamet was, according to the insider, withdrawn throughout the evening, leaving the after-party earlier than usual.

Another source also told The U.S. Sun that the couple even walked out of the Oscars ceremony for an hour, leaving seat fillers in their spot.

People close to him said he leaned heavily on Jenner for comfort, appearing so reliant that she sometimes seemed overwhelmed.

It has been a dispiriting awards season for Chalamet.

Last month at the 2026 BAFTA Film Awards in London, he was nominated for Best Actor for Marty Supreme but lost to Robert Aramayo for his performance in I Swear.

Marty Supreme, which tells the true story of a table tennis player in the 1940s, went home empty-handed despite nine nominations.

Sources said Chalamet left the BAFTA ceremony visibly deflated, struggling to enjoy himself despite efforts from Jenner and his friends.

“Going home with nothing in London deeply bruised his ego, though he will certainly learn from the experiences of the last few months.

“He never truly settled into the vibe of the ceremony; his mood was tense and stressed, and he struggled to enjoy himself.”

It wasn’t just host O’Brien laughing at him, either.

Another roast came from Alexandre Singh, who accepted the award for Best Short Film (a tie between The Singers and Two People Exchanging Saliva) and addressed Chalamet’s ballet comments.

“Maybe it takes ten years’ time, but we can change people’s lives through art, through creativity — through theatre and ballet — and also cinema,” Singh said after collecting his award.

The insider said the energy throughout the night was tense, with Jenner’s behavior described as almost maternal.

“The atmosphere was strange for everyone involved. Kylie has become his primary safe space, to the point where those around him feel she is essentially babysitting him.

What did Timothee Chalamet say about ballet and opera? Oscars controversy explained

Timothée Chalamet has sparked a heated cultural debate following comments made at a CNN and Variety Town Hall on February 21, 2026.

Speaking alongside Matthew McConaughey about needing “draws” to pull in an audience to his movies, Chalamet made harsh comments about industries he claimed feel forced to stay afloat.

“I don’t want to be working in ballet or opera… where it’s like, ‘Hey, keep this thing alive, even though no one cares about this anymore,’” he said.

The remarks mirror sentiments Chalamet expressed as early as 2019 during a promotional event for The King, where he labeled the disciplines “dying art forms.”

The Royal Ballet and Opera issued a formal rebuttal, emphasizing that these art forms do not exist in isolation but rather “inform, inspire, and elevate” the broader cultural landscape, including the film industry itself.

“It is a bizarre dynamic; while she seems to embrace her influence over him, it often feels like she is acting as a maternal figure rather than a partner, which many find frustrating to witness.”

Sources said the Oscars provided Chalamet a reality check when he faced fellow nominees Jordan and Brazilian actor Wagner Moura.

Friends have advised him to adopt a more mature public persona, projecting confidence rather than appearing like a “young boy with a high school girlfriend.”

“The gap in maturity was obvious,” the insider said. “He’s been told multiple times he needs to project more maturity to be taken seriously as a leading man.”

Chalamet now plans to put the disappointment behind him by going on vacation, attending some NBA games, and “reconnecting with himself” before returning to work.

Thousands rallied in central Madrid calling for an end to the war involving the United States, Israel and Iran, with protesters warning the conflict could escalate into a global war.

One UK mum who is raising her kids in Spain has shared the ‘things no one warns you about’. She shared the three big differences she’s noticed since moving her family abroad

Many people are prepared for a few culture clashes when they move abroad. However, one UK mum who is raising her kids in Spain has shared the ‘things no one warns you about’. Jodie, known as @jodiemar1ow on Instagram, shared details about her new life in Spain with her 6,400 followers on the app. In one of her latest reels, she shared the three big differences she’s noticed when it comes to raising her kids abroad.

Diving into the first issue, Jodie said it was bedtime. She explained: “Bedtimes… they just aren’t a thing. We have been to parties until 10pm, in fact Jayden had a party that was going to end at 12am.

“I actually did pick him up at 11pm because I was like he’s 6-years-old. This is so late.”

She added: “Kids are playing on the street until 11pm is just normal. Bedtimes just don’t exist. What is bedtime?”

The second issue she raised was that kids in Spain finish school at 5pm. She said: “It makes no sense to us Brits that they finish at 5pm, and for their dinner breaks they have 2.5 hours to have their food and play.

Like they have a sit down three course lunch at lunch time. If I did that, I’d be done for the day. I can not do a three-course lunch.

“People in Spain find it mad I just have a sandwich, it’s crazy.”

Jodie said that if ever kids then do after-school activities they finish even later.

The third thing the mum had noticed is that her kids are ‘definitely more Spanish’ than her.

“If you ask them they’ll say they’re Spanish-English,” she said.

“They correct me now if I say things in Spanish wrong and they’re basically fluent.

“I wasn’t prepared for all these correction and how they pronounce things [so well].”

Many people could relate to Jodie in the comments, as one person wrote: “I’m a Canadian living in Spain, so nice to meet you! The lunch is insane, haha I mean I love it for my son but I was blown away by it.”

While another added: “Taking Iyla to her friends soft play party at 5yrs I was in shock. I said, ‘I’m leaving now as Iyla has bedtime’. Everyone was looking at me weird haha.”

A third chimed in: “I’m in Alicante with a 6 month old baby and everything is baffling me already. Sensory classes for babies simply don’t exist, wild.”

However, one other person wrote: “Our school day has always finished at 2, both primary and secondary school. I think it depends on area.”

The United States Supreme Court ruling against the administration of US President Donald Trump’s sweeping global tariffs has left a question unanswered on what is the refund process for the funds collected over the past several months through the tariffs that had been imposed on most US trading partners .

In a 6–3 decision issued on Friday, Chief Justice John Roberts upheld a lower court ruling that found the president’s use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) exceeded his authority.

The high court did not specify how the federal government would refund the estimated $175bn collected under the tariffs. In his dissent, Justice Brett Kavanaugh warned that issuing refunds would present practical challenges and said it would be “a mess”.

The case will now return to the Court of International Trade to oversee the refund process.

More than 1,000 lawsuits have already been filed by importers in the trade court seeking refunds, and a wave of new cases is expected. Legal experts say the administration will likely require importers to apply for refunds individually. That process could disproportionately burden smaller businesses affected by the tariffs.

“The government is probably not going to voluntarily pay back the money it unlawfully took. Rather, the government is going to make everyone request a refund through different procedures by filing formal protests. They’re going to delay things procedurally as long as they can. Hiring lawyers and going through these procedures costs money and time,” Greg Shaffer, a law professor at Georgetown University, told Al Jazeera.

“I imagine the largest companies, who have been prepared for this eventuality, will eventually get their money back. But smaller importers, it’s a cost-benefit analysis where they might shrug their shoulders and say it’s not worth going through the hassle to get the unlawfully imposed taxes paid back to them.”

Trump’s path forward

Despite Friday’s ruling, other sweeping levies remain in place. Trump had invoked Section 232 of the 1962 Trade Expansion Act to impose sector-specific tariffs on steel and aluminium, cars, copper, lumber, and other products, such as kitchen cabinets, worldwide.

On Friday, Trump said he would impose a 10 percent global tariff for 150 days to replace some of his emergency duties that were struck down. The order would be made under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974, and the duties would be over and above tariffs that are currently in place, Trump said.

The statute allows the president to impose duties of up to 15 percent for up to 150 days on any and all countries related to “large and serious” balance of payments issues. It does not require investigations or impose other procedural limits.

The president also has other legal avenues available to continue taxing imports aggressively.

“Our trading partners were well aware of the risks the President faced in using IEEPA as the basis for reciprocal and other tariffs. Nevertheless, they chose to conclude deals with Washington, convinced by Washington that other statutes would be utilised to keep the tariffs in place,” Wendy Cutler, vice president of the Asia Society Policy Institute, told Al Jazeera in a statement.

“With respect to China, USTR [United States trade representative] still has an active Section 301 investigation on China’s compliance with the Phase One agreement, which could be a major feature of the back-up plan for Beijing.”

The president is expected to travel to Beijing next month to meet his Chinese counterpart, Xi Jinping, to discuss trade.

“The two main options include Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974, the traditional mechanism for imposing tariffs in response to unfair trade practices by other countries. It requires an investigation and a report, but ultimately gives the president considerable discretion to impose tariffs. It has been used in the past and will likely be the most frequently used measure going forward,” Shaffer, the law professor, said.

He noted, however, that the administration’s tariff options could not be applied retroactively, meaning any new tariffs would apply only to future imports rather than covering duties already paid.

Raj Bhala, professor of law at The University of Kansas School of Law, argues there are remedies at the president’s disposal in addition to Section 122. Bhala said that Trump could use Section 338 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (also known as the Smoot-Hawley Act). That allows the president to impose a 50 percent tariff to challenge discriminatory trade practices from other countries.

“Each option involves procedural hurdles,” Bhala said.

Congressional pressure

Roberts wrote that the president must “point to clear congressional authorization” to impose tariffs. The ruling has increased pressure on both Trump’s allies and critics in Congress to clarify the scope of executive trade authority.

“What a fantastic ruling for a feckless branch of government. While its current tendency is to abdicate, the court has told Congress to do its job,” a former official in the White House Office of Management and Budget told Al Jazeera in response to the decision.

“Congress must either act with specific legislation, or declare war, which would grant the President the emergency powers to levy tariffs.”

“Congress and the Administration will determine the best path forward in the coming weeks,” House Speaker Mike Johnson said in a post on the social media platform X.

Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer, by contrast, welcomed the ruling, saying it will “finally give families and small businesses the relief they deserve” and that Trump should end “this reckless trade war for good.”

But how that money will get paid back, and if it was already spent, will require Congress to step in.

“If it has been spent, the money will have to be reallocated by Congress. Congress will have to determine how much is owed to importers, pass a law to fund it, and create a mechanism for repayment. There’s also the question of who is entitled to it. Is it only the importer, or does it extend to the end consumer? Where does the line stop?” Babak Hafezi, professor of international business at American University, told Al Jazeera.

“This is not something that will be fixed in 24 hours. It will most likely take years, possibly even a decade, to resolve all the issues this less-than-a-year-old law has imposed on Americans.”

WITH Heathrow Airport set to add a third runway, there are growing fears that it could increase the price of flights.

Airlines warn that the planned expansion could result in a £250 price increase for passengers on a family fare.

With the expansion set to cost £33billion, The Times has reported that airlines are “seriously worried” that Heathrow’s landing charge will increase to pay back the cost of the project for investors.

Their landing fees are already the highest in the world.

In July 2025, Heathrow Airport proposed to the UK Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) to increase airport charges to fund the expansion.

The average charge over the next five years could increase to around £33.26 per passenger, up from the current average of £28.46 per passenger.

GO SEA IT

£9.50 holiday spot with shipwrecks, seals offshore & horseshoe-shaped waterfalls

DREAMY DEALS

Our pick of the best long haul holidays for short haul prices

Now, The Times added that airline bosses have pointed out that the cost of the project would add “at least” £60-£65 to average ticket prices.

This means that the additional cost for a family of four could be as much as £250.

Officials from IAG – the parent company of British Airways, Iberia, Vueling and Aer Lingus – raised their concerns to Downing Street.

Another group called ‘Heathrow Reimagined’ have written to Rachel Reeves about the expansion.

The letter raised points that going ahead with the current model will “deliver a scheme which negatively impacts connectivity, competitiveness and the wider UK economy“.

It added that increased charges that are “already the highest in the world” would undermine the “government’s commitment to reduce the cost of living.”

The letter was signed by the boss of IAG, the chief of Virgin Atlantic and the director-general of the airline trade body International Air Transport Association (Iata).

However, a Heathrow spokeswoman told The Times: “Expansion provides a rare opportunity to drive real economic growth for the UK and deliver value for future generations of passengers.

“With demand consistently outpacing supply, incumbent airlines currently compete to charge a premium and the evidence speaks for itself: airfares at Heathrow have risen by 30 per cent in real terms since 2014, whilst the airport passenger charge has decreased by 19 per cent.”

They added that the analysis has “shown fares will be lower with expansion than without it” and said that they did not “recognise those numbers nor have we seen calculations that would support them.”

The huge expansion for the UK’s busiest airport was given the green light in November 2025.

The Heathrow proposals involve building a 3,500-metre runway which will require a new M25 tunnel and bridges to be built 130 metres west of the existing motorway.

The expansion is estimated to cost £33billion which includes building a 3,500 metre runway.

It will see Heathrow’s capacity increase to 756,000 flights and 150 million passengers per year.

The project has received government backing and is moving forward, but it has not yet received final planning approval or development consent.

Heathrow Airport is making other big changes this year…

London Heathrow will undergo a series of developments this year starting with Terminal 2 and 4…

The airport will improve the passenger experience by using AI-technology and has plans to make flights more punctual along with better baggage facilities.

 Heathrow Airport revealed it will start upgrading Terminal 4 next year costing £1.3billion.

The first step will be building a new multi-storey car park and upgrading its check-in area.

The works will be phased to ensure that there’s no disruption to the running of Terminal 4 – and these are expected to be completed in 2031.

Over in Terminal 2, Heathrow has announced that work will also begin on a new baggage system that will be able to handle 31,000 bags each day.

In order to speed up flights and improve punctuality, it will install AI-powered turnaround tech. This will involve a network of cameras being installed across Heathrow.

Using AI to analyse data, the airport will speed up turnaround times between flights, which will make journeys more punctual.

Coverage is expected to be across all terminals by the end of 2026.