TOP NEWS

May 15 (UPI) — A federal judge has ruled that the Trump administration unconstitutionally retaliated against the American Bar Association when it abruptly canceled millions in grants awarded to the world’s largest association of lawyers and legal professionals.

Judge Christopher Cooper of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia issued a preliminary injunction against the cancelation of the five grants and ordered the Justice Department to fully pay out the $3.2 million previously allocated to the ABA. The grants were intended to train lawyers and judges who work with survivors of domestic violence and sexual assault.

“The ABA has made a strong showing that Defendants terminated its grants to retaliate against it for engaging in protected speech,” the President Barack Obama-appointed judge wrote in his ruling.

The Trump administration has been accused of retaliating against President Donald Trump‘s perceived political opponents, including law firms associated with Democrats and judges who have ruled against his policies.

The ABA is among those who have described such attacks as threats to the judiciary, and in February, it joined a lawsuit challenging the Trump administration’s freeze of international development grants to the U.S. Agency for international Development.

In April, Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche issued a memorandum calling out ABA over its lawsuit against the government and support for “activist causes,” essentially severing the Justice Department’s interactions with the organization. The department then canceled the grants the next day

The organization filed its lawsuit against the Trump administration on April 23, accusing it of unlawful retaliation for exercising its First Amendment right to petition the courts.

“This lawsuit is necessitated by DOJ’s undisguised efforts to retaliate against the ABA for taking positions that the current Administration disfavors,” the lawsuit filed by Democracy Forward on behalf of ABA stated.

In his ruling Wednesday, Cooper said the government does not have any “meaningful” arguments to contest ABA’s claims, stating it points to deficiencies in the organization’s performance of its grant obligations while conceding that similar grants administered to other organizations remain in place.

“The government claims that it had a non-retaliatory motive for terminating the grants: They no longer aligned with DOJ’s priorities. But the government has not identified any non-retaliatory DOJ priorities, much less explained why they were suddenly deemed inconsistent with the goals of the affected grants,” he said, adding that similar grants to other organizations continue without the government explaining why those are still being maintained.

“The government’s different treatment of other grantees suggests this justification is pretextual.”

Democracy Forward President and CEO Skye Perryman celebrated the ruling in a statement, saying it is “welcome news” for survivors of domestic and sexual violence and for their families.

“For decades, the American Bar Association has provided critical training to lawyers to enable the provision of essential legal services to survivors. The court recognized today that the ABA is being unconstitutionally targeted by the Department of Justice because of their longstanding and unchanged stance on the importance of the rule of law and our Constitution,” Perryman said.

May 15 (UPI) — Authorities in western New Jersey arrested and charged a mother and stepfather after their 18-year-old daughter whom they had chained up and locked in a dog create for years escaped their home last week.

Circumstances of her escape were not made public, but authorities said the unidentified girl had fled her home Thursday and received assistance from a neighbor.

The girl told authorities that she had been physically, mentally and sexually abused by her parents since about 2018, when her mother removed her from school.

The girl’s parents, Brenda Spencer, 38, and Branndon Mosley, 41, were arrested and charged Sunday with a slew of offenses, including kidnapping, endangering the welfare of a child, criminal restraint and assault with a deadly weapon. Mosley, the stepfather, faces additional charges of sexual assault, aggravated sexual assault and endangering the welfare of a child by sexual assault.

“This is the most abhorrent, heinous crime anyone could commit,” Camden County Prosecutor Grace MacAulay said during a press conference Wednesday.

“You see criminals all over the country doing horrific, horrible acts, whether it’s physical or sexual abuse. When it comes at the hands of a parent to a child, there’s nothing worse.”

Authorities said the 18-year-old girl told detectives that shortly after being removed from sixth grade at Spencer’s discretion to be allegedly homeschooled, she was confined to live in a dog crate, where she lived for one year, before being chained up and forced to live in a padlocked bathroom, where she was let only only when family visited.

She was also forced, at times, to live in a bare room with just a bucket to use as a toilet, according to authorities who said she informed detectives that it was armed with an alarm system that would alert the defendants if she tried to leave.

She informed police that Mosley had sexually abused her and beat her with a belt.

MacAulay told reporters that the girl was “living in squalid, filthy conditions” alongside numerous animals, including large dogs and chinchillas.

During the press conference, it was also revealed that the girl’s 13-year-old sister was also living in the same residence, though it was not stated if she was subjected to the same treatment, but that she, had also been removed from school years earlier at Spencer’s discretion to be homeschooled.

In New Jersey, parents are only required to notify the school district of their intent to homeschool their children without requirements from the state’s Department of Education to follow up or to confirm attendance or accreditation, MacAulay explained.

“Homeschooling may be the right choice for many families. Unfortunately, it can be used by others as a means to hide abuse,” she said.

MacAulay said both girls were safe but did not elaborate on their conditions as they are minors and victims of abuse.

“As you can imagine, anyone who’s been confined for a period of seven years, held in these conditions, living in squalid filth, is going to be damaged psychologically, physically, emotionally, mentally,” she said.

“And as you can appreciate when it comes to cases involving child endangerment and child abuse and sexual assault, confidentiality to protect the victims is paramount.”

Gloucester Township Police Chief David Harkins explained the several-day gap between the 18-year-old’s escape and her parents’ arrest was due to authorities not knowing the extent of the situation.

He said on Thursday when police were contacted, what the girl had described was “a domestic violence-type situation” and that “she did not want to disclose all this information.

“She did not disclose this information about being held to this level,” he said.

An investigation was conducted Thursday following the girl’s escape, but based on the information they had, their investigative authorities were limited.

“Without a corroborating victim, there’s only so much we could do,” he said. “We offered her services. We gave her some resources at that time. She was looking for homeless services.”

On Saturday, the girl contacted authorities again, at which point they learned to what degree she was being held, Harkins said.

“This is one of the most despicable cases that I’ve ever run across,” he said.

Spencer was described as unemployed, and Mosley worked as a train conductor with the SEPTA Regional Rail system.

Both defendants were being held at the Camden County Correctional Facility, pending detention hearings.

Washington, DC – A federal judge has ordered Georgetown University scholar Badar Khan Suri released from immigration detention, in the latest victory for US visa holders targeted by the administration of President Donald Trump for pro-Palestine stances or advocacy.

The ruling on Wednesday by US District Judge Patricia Tolliver Giles comes shortly after two other prominent students targeted for deportation, Columbia University Student Mohsen Mahdawi and Tufts University PhD student Rumeysa Ozturk, were ordered released from detention as their deportation cases move forward.

Speaking at a news conference following the hearing at the federal court in Arlington, Virginia, Khan Suri’s wife, Mapheze Saleh, thanked supporters who demonstrated outside of the facility.

“I thank everyone who came out to support the cause of a truth-telling, speaking up and standing for Palestinian rights,” said Saleh, who is Palestinian American.

As with similar cases where visa holders have been targeted for deportation related to their pro-Palestine views and advocacy, lawyers for Suri Khan – who has Indian citizenship and a US student visa – argued ICE agents unlawfully detained him outside his Virginia home in March for speech that should have been constitutionally protected.

The Trump administration has taken the broad position that those constitutional protections do not apply to temporary visa holders or even US permanent residents. The question will likely eventually be decided by the US Supreme Court.

The administration has further relied on the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 to justify its actions. An obscure provision of the law allows the US secretary of state to deport any non-citizen deemed to have “potentially serious adverse foreign consequences”.

In a separate ruling related to Columbia University Student Mahmoud Kahlil in April, a federal judge adopted a broad interpretation of the provision, saying Kahlil was deportable based on Rubio’s claims he took part in “anti-Semitic” protests. That came despite the top US diplomat providing no further evidence.

Similarly, the Department of Homeland Security had previously claimed in a post on X that Khan Suri was “spreading Hamas propaganda and promoting antisemitism on social media”.

It added he “was married to the daughter of a senior advisor for to Hamas terrorist group”.

But speaking to reporters, Nermeen Arastu, one of the lawyers representing Khan Suri, noted that evidence backing up those claims has not been presented by government lawyers in court.

Arastu, who is also an associate professor of law at the CUNY School of Law, said it was notable that “the court today also pointed out that the government is kind of throwing around accusations in social media, but not presenting them in the formal courtroom setting”.

“And tied that to this due process concept that’s so important here to understand – that at the very basic level, you have a right to understand the allegations that are being brought against you,” she said.

‘Badge of honour’

Critics have further accused the Trump administration of targeting Khan Suri based on his familial ties. His wife is the daughter of Ahmed Yousef, a former adviser to assassinated Hamas political leader Ismail Haniyeh who left his position with the armed group more than a decade ago.

“He should have never been arrested and jailed for his constitutionally protected speech just because the government disagrees with him,” ACLU of Virginia senior immigrants’ rights lawyer Sophia Gregg, told reporters on Wednesday.

“He should have never been punished for his relationship with his wife or his father-in-law,” she said.

Like in the cases of Ozturk and Mahdawi, Khan Suri’s cases will proceed despite his release. He faces two separate legal proceedings, one in immigration court in the one challenging his arrest and detention in Virginia.

He remained in detention in Texas when the ruling was issued on Wednesday, his lawyers said, adding they were expecting him to be released shortly.

Saleh said at the court that she had recently spoken to her husband from the detention centre in Texas, where he was held.

“He told me if my suffering in the detention centre is because I married a Palestinian and because I spoke out against the genocide in Gaza, then I should wear it as a badge of honour,” she said.

May 14 (UPI) — A Russian Harvard University Medical School researcher held in U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement custody since February has been arrested and charged with smuggling biological material into the United States.

The one count of smuggling goods into the United States was announced by the Justice Department on Wednesday, marking a dramatic escalation in the case that has garnered attention from academics.

According to the affidavit in support of the criminal complaint — which was dated Monday but made public Wednesday — Kseniia Petrova had frog embryos and embryonic samples in her possession when entering the country that she did not declare to immigration authorities.

The document states she arrived at Boston’s Logan International Airport from Paris on Feb. 16. A Customs and Border Protection canine alerted its handler to Petrova’s bag, which was removed and brought to an agricultural secondary inspection area for further screening where biological items were found.

When questioned about it, she allegedly denied carrying any biological material, but a search of a plastic bag she was carrying revealed additional biological material.

Under oath, she admitted that the items were biological material and said she was not sure if she was supposed to declare them on her arrival, the document states, adding that a search of her found text messages to the contrary.

“[I]f you bring samples or antibody back, make sure you get the permission,” one text message she received from an unidentified person said.

“What is your plan to pass the American … Customs with samples? This is the most delicate place of the trajectory,” another text message read.

A third message to Petrova’s phone had asked: “what is your plan for getting through customs with samples?”

“No plan yet,” Petrova allegedly replied, according to excerpts of the messages included in the court document. “I won’t be able to swallow them.”

If convicted, Petrova could face up to 20 years in prison, five years of supervised release and a fine of up to $250,000.

“The rule of law does not have a carve out for educated individuals with pedigree,” U.S. Attorney Leah Foley said in a recorded statement.

The affidavit states her visa was canceled at the airport.

“The U.S. visa that Ms. Petrova was given — which was revoked by customs officials as a result of her conduct — is a privilege, not a right.”

Her lawyer, Gregory Romanovsky, told The New York Times that Petrova’s J-1 visa was canceled and that deportation proceedings were initiated.

He said normally, a case like this would be treated as a minor infraction, and that filing the criminal charge three months after the alleged violation, “is clearly intended to make Kseniia look like a criminal to justify their efforts to deport her.”

Romanovsky also added that a Vermont hearing held earlier Wednesday had essentially established that his client was detained unlawfully and that the complaint had “blindsided” them, and Petrova’s transfer from immigration to criminal custody was “suspect” as it occurred right after a judge set a bail hearing, signaling she could be released.

During the Vermont hearing, U.S. District Judge Christina Reiss had questioned the government over the legality of its actions.

“Where does a Customs and Border Patrol officer have the authority on his or her own to revoke a visa?” Reiss asked, NBC News reported.

“You cannot be found inadmissible because of the customs violation.”

According to the affidavit, Petrova told customs that she is fearful of going back to Russia.

“She claimed she had protested the Russian Federation,” the affidavit states. “She provided no other details.”

In an opinion piece she wrote for The New York Times — and which was published Tuesday — Petrova states she had left Russia after being arrested for protesting its war in Ukraine.

The charge was filed as the Trump administration has been conducting a crackdown on immigration, including targeting foreign-born academics, particularly over their support for Palestine amid Israel’s war against Hamas in Gaza.

Some of those detained students have been released by judges who have ruled against the Trump administration’s use of immigration enforcement to seek to deport them.

Last week, White House senior adviser Stephen Miller said they are “actively looking at” suspending the writ of habeas corpus, which is the right to challenge the legality of a person’s detention by the government.

State-owned airline Qatar Airways has signed an agreement to buy 210 aircraft from United States manufacturer Boeing, coinciding with President Donald Trump’s visit to Qatar as part of his tour of the Gulf region.

Trump and Qatar’s emir, Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani, witnessed the signing ceremony in Doha on Wednesday. The White House said that the deal for the Boeing 777X and 787 planes with GE Aerospace engines was worth $96bn.

Trump said Boeing CEO Kelly Ortberg, who signed the deal with Qatar Airways CEO Badr Mohammed Al Meer next to Trump and the emir, told him: “It’s the largest order of jets in the history of Boeing. That’s good.”

Trump had initially said that the deal was worth more than $200bn and was for 160 planes, before the White House issued updated numbers after his comments.

The White House also said that agreements signed by the US and Qatar would “generate an economic exchange worth at least $1.2 trillion”.

“This is a critical next step for Qatar Airways on our path as we invest in the cleanest, youngest and most efficient fleet in global aviation,” Qatar Airways Group CEO Badr Mohammed Al-Meer said in a statement.

“After two consecutive years of record-breaking commercial performance and with this historic Boeing aircraft order – we’re not simply chasing scale; we’re building strength that will allow us to continue to deliver our unmatched products and customer experiences.”

The sale is also a boost for Boeing and its biggest engine supplier at a time when large versions of rival Airbus’ A350, powered by Rolls-Royce engines, have struggled with maintenance problems from operating in the world’s hottest climates, including the Gulf region.

Boeing shares rose 0.9 percent in New York, while GE Aerospace stock edged up 0.1 percent.

For the 787s, Qatar opted for GE Aerospace’s GEnx engines rather than Rolls-Royce’s Trent 1000, according to the administration. GE Aerospace’s GE9X is the only engine option for the 777X.

It is the largest widebody engine deal for GE Aerospace, the company’s CEO Larry Culp said in a statement.

Faisal al-Mudahka, editor-in-chief of the Gulf Times, said the Qatar Airways purchase of Boeing aircraft is a “win-win”.

As one of the world’s top airlines with a growing market, Qatar Airways has more demand than supply at the moment and will need the fleet, he said.

“I think Donald Trump and Qatar know how to package things to make political gains and economic gains.”

Trump’s Qatar visit is the second destination of his Gulf tour, after an initial stop in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, where he made a surprise announcement about lifting sanctions on Syria and then met the country’s president, Ahmed al-Sharaa.

Trump is to land on a third and final stop in the United Arab Emirates on Thursday for a one-day visit.

No mention of Gaza

The Qatari emir said the two leaders had a “great” few hours of discussion covering a range of issues. “I think after signing these documents, we are going to another level of relations,” he said.

Trump thanked the emir and said it had been a “very interesting couple of hours” discussing topics including the Russia-Ukraine war, Iran and trade relations.

However, Israel’s war on Gaza was not mentioned by either leader.

Omar Rahman, a fellow at the Middle East Council on Global Affairs, said the fact that Gaza wasn’t mentioned led him to believe the discussion is “ongoing”.

“When it comes to Gaza, you have the Israelis there as well. On the issue of a ceasefire, Trump can put pressure on the Israelis, … but you still have the Israelis there making decisions. This is going to be a little bit more difficult to work out,” he told Al Jazeera.

US Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff, who was also in Doha, said “we’re making progress” in response to a question by Al Jazeera Diplomatic Editor James Bays on whether discussions on Gaza were ongoing.

“His tone was pretty telling. He was very positive,” Bays said. “When I asked him whether that was regarding aid deliveries or a ceasefire, he said, ‘We’re making progress on all fronts.’”

“He said he hopes there would be a positive announcement ‘soon’, but we have no indication of what that might mean,” Bays added.

May 14 (UPI) — For a third straight day, the United States on Wednesday issued sanctions targeting Iran as the Trump administration attempts to negotiate a new nuclear arms deal with the Middle Eastern country.

The punitive measures imposed by the Treasury Department are secondary sanctions, meaning those aimed and punishing third parties for dealing with previously designated entities, individuals and countries.

The sanctions target six individuals and 12 entities in China and Iran accused of aiding Tehran source the manufacturing of critical materials used in the Islamic state’s ballistic missile program, specifically carbon fiber materials used in the construction of intercontinental rockets.

The State Department spokesperson Tammy Bruce explained in a statement that Iran is “heavily reliant on China to conduct its malign activities in the Middle East.”

The targets work with the U.S.-sanctioned elite Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.

“The United States cannot allow Iran to develop intercontinental ballistic missiles,” Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said in a statement.

“The Iranian regime’s relentless and irresponsible pursuit of advanced ballistic missile capabilities, including its efforts to indigenize its production capacity, represents an unacceptable threat to the United States and the stability of the region.”

The sanctions are the third batch of Iran-targeted punitive measures that the Trump administration has imposed this week as it engages in negotiations with Iran on a new agreement aimed at preventing Tehran from securing a nuclear weapon — a goal long held by President Donald Trump.

In 2018, during his first term in the White House, Trump slapped sanctions on Iran and unilaterally pulled the United States from a landmark Obama-era multinational accord, calling it “defective at its core.”

He pursued a so-called maximum pressure campaign of sanctions and other punitive measures, but failed to coerce Iran back to the negotiating table, and it instead advanced its nuclear weapons capability to the point the U.S. government estimated in 2022 that it would need just a week to produce enough weapons-grade highly-enriched uranium for a nuclear weapon.

In February, Trump reinstated his maximum pressure policy, which includes the recent batches of further sanctions.

The United States and Iran have had four recent negotiations on a new deal, but there does not appear to be a fifth round scheduled yet.

Trump administration officials have said a deal would see Iran dismantle its three enrichment facilities, but Iranian officials have said it will not stop enriching uranium but would be open to restrictions.

Trump is in the Middle East this week for a four-day trip, and has repeatedly voiced optimism that a deal can be made.

“I have a feeling it’s going to work out. I think it’s going to work. It’s got to work out, one way or the other we know it’s going to work out,” Trump said during a press conference Wednesday in Doha, Qatar.

Later to reporters aboard Air Force One, he was more direct with his threats against Iran.

“One way or the other. It’s very simple. It’s going to happen one way or the other. They can’t have a nuclear weapon. So, we will either do it friendly, or we will do it very unfriendly, and that won’t be pleasant,” he said.

The Trump administration has said it has sanctioned more than 250 people, entities and vessels related to Iran and its proxies since February.

Qatar’s role as a global mediator and a massive purchase of Boeing airliners were prime areas of focus in official talks between US President Donald Trump and Emir of Qatar Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani.

May 14 (UPI) — Health and Human Services Secretary Robert Kennedy Jr. defended proposed 2026 budget reductions during separate House and Senate committee budget hearings on Wednesday.

Kennedy started the morning by fielding questions from members of the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services, Education and Related Agencies.

Chairman Rep. Robert Aderholt, R-Ala., opened the hearing by acknowledging President Donald Trump‘s efforts to enforce the border and its effect on community health and safety.

“The president’s success in securing our border directly benefits public health by reducing the incoming flow of illicit drugs, like fentanyl, which has fallen by 54% since this time last year,” Aderholt said. “That’s no small thing.”

He also commended the Trump administration for reducing the number of unaccompanied minors crossing the border and said he wants to hear Kennedy’s ideas for reforming the Department of Health and Human Services and its sub-agencies.

‘Disastrous’ program funding reductions

Ranking Member Rep. Rose DeLauro, D-Conn., was less conciliatory and referred to the Trump administration’s budget request for the Department of Health and Human Services as “disastrous.”

DeLauro said the proposed budget would reduce funding for health programs by $33 billion.

The proposed HHS budget for the 2026 fiscal year is $93.8 billion, which is a 26.2% reduction from the current budget and includes funding reductions across most programs.

“I view it as a disgrace,” DeLauro said. “Under your budget proposal, Americans would die needless and preventable deaths.”

DeLauro cited funding cuts to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and accused Kennedy and the Department of Government Efficiency Director Elon Musk of “eliminating entire divisions without consideration for what is being lost.”

The cuts “affect families and communities” and “are dangerous,” DeLauro said.

Kennedy said his goal is to make America healthy again by focusing on the “chronic disease epidemic.”

HHS also seeks to deliver more effective and efficient services for Americans who rely on Medicaid, Medicare and other programs while reducing costs for taxpayers, Kennedy said.

During the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee budget hearing Wednesday afternoon, Kennedy said states and localities can do a better job of responding to disasters at the state and local levels than the federal government.

He cited Florida’s success in handling hurricanes Helene and Milton last year, with no lives lost there, as an example and said the federal government should focus on national disasters.

Drug prices and healthcare as a human right

Sen. Bernie Sanders, D-Vt., asked Kennedy if he is willing to work to make drug prices in the United States the lowest in the world, to which Kennedy said he is.

Sanders then asked Kennedy if healthcare is a “human right.”

Kennedy said healthcare is not part of the rights enumerated in the Constitution and called it more of a philosophical matter.

Sanders responded by saying “every other country guarantees healthcare” as a right and said Americans don’t want the choice to be uninsured or not have the ability to see a doctor.

Kennedy said “Obamacare” is not working and he and President Trump want to enable everyone to be insured and have access to quality healthcare.

Sanders then cited proposed cuts to programs that serve middle-class and poor Americans and claimed they would end healthcare coverage for 13 million Americans.

Kennedy said the cuts only are for waste and denied they would affect coverage for Americans.

Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., followed Sanders and cited examples of wasteful programs that the proposed budget would eliminate.

They include a recent study on the effects of cocaine on lab rats and another study that showed about half of biological males who medically transition to female believe they can get pregnant, the senator said.

Gain-of-function research and COVID-19

Paul also said bipartisan support exists for better controlling gain-of-function research on Ebola, avian flu and other infectious diseases and the potential dangers they pose to Americans.

The senator cited a research study that would put Ebola in an aerosol as a potential biological weapon, which he said could be potentially very dangerous to the general public.

Paul asked Kennedy if HHS would be transparent in gain-of-function research regulations and protect Americans from potentially deadly outbreaks.

Kennedy said HHS would be “absolutely transparent” in regulating gain-of-function research and “bring the public in on the debate.”

He also said National Institutes of Health research “almost certainly” caused the COVID-19 pandemic through gain-of-function research.

Lack of access to critical care

Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash., said she opposes staffing reductions at the NIH and cited a constituent with stage-four cancer who recently was told her treatment would be delayed by four weeks due to staffing shortages.

Kennedy offered to intervene on that person’s behalf and ensure she receives needed care right away.

Sen. Tammy Baldwin, D-Wis., accused Kennedy of “hiding information” from the American people and asked if he believes lead poisoning is a problem.

Kennedy said he thinks it’s a very serious problem, but Baldwin said “the entire lead-poisoning program staff has been fired.”

She asked if Kennedy intends to eliminate the program that helps communities address lead poisoning, which he said will not happen.

She also said HHS has provided about $1 billion less in Head Start program funding and asked why there are funding delays.

“There should not be any delays,” Kennedy said. “The funding is there.”

He suggested staffers who want to make the Trump administration look bad are slowing down disbursements for Head Start and similar programs.

The House and Senate hearings were held before a vote on a proposed 2026 federal government budget measure that Trump has referred to as “one big, beautiful bill.”

Protesters arrested for disrupting hearing

While the Senate hearing was underway, Ben & Jerry’s co-owner and co-founder Ben Cohen and six others were arrested for disrupting the hearing, Axios reported.

Cohen and the others were protesting the United States’ support of Israel in its war with Hamas in Gaza.

The protesters yelled, “RFK kills people with hate!” before Capitol Police escorted them from the room.

They were arrested and charged with crowding, obstructing proceedings or incommoding.

Some protesters also were charged with assaulting a police officer or resisting arrest, but Cohen was not among those so charged.

Taipei, Taiwan – As Taiwan prepares to shut down its last nuclear reactor, soaring energy demand driven by the island’s semiconductor industry is rekindling a heated debate about nuclear power.

Taiwan’s electricity needs are expected to rise by 12-13 percent by 2030, largely driven by the boom in artificial intelligence (AI), according to the Ministry of Economic Affairs.

Environmental group Greenpeace has estimated that the Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company (TSMC), the world’s largest contract chipmaker, will by itself consume as much electricity as roughly one-quarter of the island’s some 23 million people by the same date.

The self-ruled island’s soaring appetite for power complicates Taipei’s pledge to reach net-zero emissions by 2050, which is heavily dependent on raising renewable energy production to about 60-70 percent of the total from about 12 percent at present.

Nuclear power advocates argue that the energy source is the most feasible way for Taiwan to reach its competing industrial and environmental goals.

On Tuesday, Taiwan’s legislature passed an amendment to allow nuclear power plants to apply for licences to extend operations beyond the existing 40-year limit.

The opposition Kuomintang and Taiwan People’s Party passed the bill over the objections of the ruling Democratic Progressive Party, which came to power in 2016 on a pledge to achieve a “nuclear-free homeland”.

The legal change will not halt Sunday’s planned closure of the last operating reactor – the No 2 reactor at the Maanshan Nuclear Power Plant – though it casts doubt over the island’s longstanding opposition to nuclear power.

The government said after the vote that it had no immediate plans for any future nuclear power projects, though Premier Cho Jung-tai indicated earlier that the government would not oppose the restoration of decommissioned reactors if the amendment passed.

Cho said Taipei was “open” to nuclear power provided safety was ensured and the public reached a consensus on the issue.

Any move to restart the local nuclear industry would, at a minimum, take years.

Taiwan began its civilian nuclear programme in the 1950s with the assistance of technology from the United States.

By 1990, state-owned power firm Taipower operated three plants with the capacity to generate more than one-third of the island’s electricity needs.

‘Renewable energy isn’t stable’

Angelica Oung, a member of the Clean Energy Transition Alliance who supports nuclear power, said Taiwan could generate about 10 percent of its energy requirements from nuclear plants when the DDP came to power nearly a decade ago.

“Energy emissions at the time were lower than now – isn’t that ridiculous?” Oung told Al Jazeera.

“At the time, it was reasonable to launch the anti-nuclear policy as the public was still recovering from the devastating Fukushima nuclear disaster … but now even Japan has now decided to return to nuclear,” Oung said, referring to Tokyo’s plans to generate 20 percent of its power from the energy source by 2040.

“That’s because renewables simply don’t work.”

“The supply of renewable energy isn’t stable … solar energy, for example, needs the use of batteries,” Oung added.

While the 2011 Fukushima disaster helped solidify opposition to nuclear power, Taiwan’s history of anti-nuclear activism stretches back decades earlier.

The DPP was founded just months after the 1986 Chornobyl disaster and included an anti-nuclear clause in its charter.

The following year, the Indigenous Tao people launched protests against Taipower’s policy of dumping nuclear waste on Orchid Island, helping cement the civil anti-nuclear movement.

Nuclear energy attracted further negative scrutiny in the 1990s, when it emerged that about 10,000 people had been exposed to low levels of radiation due to the use of radioactive scrap metals in building materials.

In 2000, Taipei halted construction of a planned fourth nuclear plant amid protests by environmental groups.

A 2021 referendum proposal to restart work on the mothballed project was defeated 52.84 percent to 47.16 percent.

Chia-wei Chao, research director of the Taiwan Climate Action Network, said nuclear power is not the answer to Taiwan’s energy needs.

“Developing nuclear energy in Taiwan often means cutting the budget for boosting renewables, as opposed to other countries,” Chao told Al Jazeera.

Chao said Taiwan’s nuclear plants were built without taking into account the risk of earthquakes and tsunamis, and that establishing a local industry that meets modern standards would be costly and difficult.

“Extension of the current plants and reactors means having to upgrade the infrastructure to meet more updated safety standards and factoring in quake risks. This costs a lot, so nuclear energy doesn’t translate into cheaper electricity,” he said.

Lena Chang, a climate and energy campaigner at Greenpeace East Asia, said that reviving nuclear energy would not only be costly, but potentially dangerous, too.

“We, Greenpeace, firmly [oppose] restarting nuclear plants or expanding the use of nuclear because nuclear poses an unresolved safety, waste and environmental risk, particularly in Taiwan – a small island that can’t afford a nuclear and environmental disaster,” Chang told Al Jazeera.

Chang said the chip industry should have to contribute to the cost of switching to renewable energy sources.

“They should be responsible for meeting their own green energy demand, instead of leaving all the work to Taipower, as any of the money to build more energy plants and storage facilities ultimately comes from people’s tax money,” she said.

Chao agreed, saying chip giants such as TSMC should lead the push to go green.

“The chipmaking industry is here to stay … Sure, energy supply will be tight in the next three years, but it’s still enough,” he said.

May 14 (UPI) — Award-winning actress, comedian, television host and entrepreneur Whoopi Goldberg will headline the Cannabis Means Business event next month in New York City.

The Cannabis Means Business trade event is scheduled June 4-5 at the Javits Center, where Goldberg plans to launch her “Whoop-Tea” hemp-derived beverage.

Goldberg will join CNBC’s Tim Seymour at the CMB event’s opening day to hold an “exclusive conversation” in the special events area at the cannabis trade show.

The pair will discuss the rapidly growing cannabis beverage market and her Whoop-Tea product, which is being produced with the help of the Pure Genesis cannabis beverage brand.

“I wanted to create something that’s fun, relaxing and brings people together without the hangover,” Goldberg said in a news release.

“Whoop-Tea is exactly that,” she said. “It’s tea. It’s lemonade. It’s THC, and it’s all about unwinding and enjoying the moment.”

Goldberg said she is “excited” to “be a part of this incredible shift in wellness culture” and unveil her beverage during the cannabis industry event.

CMB organizers said the global cannabis beverage market was valued at $1.16 billion and is projected to top $3 billion in 2025.

Pure Genesis and Goldberg have partnered to produce Whoop-Tea, which is a non-alcoholic beverage that has THC and blends lemonade and iced tea.

“We’re thrilled to partner with Whoopi, a cultural icon who shares our passion for quality, community and breaking stigma,” Pure Genesis co-founder and Chief Executive Officer Faye Coleman said.

Pure Genesis co-founder Priscilla Wynn called the beverage a “testament to what’s possible when visionary women lead.”

Event attendees will have the opportunity to enjoy free samples.

US federal prosecutors say defendant and co-conspirators got the company to pay for deliveries that never occurred.

A former food delivery driver pleaded guilty to conspiring to steal more than $2.5m from the food delivery service DoorDash.

Sayee Chaitanya Reddy Devagiri pleaded guilty on Tuesday in a federal court in San Jose, California, to a single count of conspiracy to commit wire fraud, the US Attorney’s Office said.

Devagiri and his co-conspirators would get the company to pay for deliveries that never occurred, federal prosecutors said.

Devagiri, 30, of Newport Beach, California, admitted to working with three others in 2020 and 2021 to defraud the San Francisco-based delivery company, federal prosecutors said. The other three were indicted by a federal grand jury in August.

Prosecutors said Devagiri used customer accounts to place high-value orders and then used an employee’s credentials to gain access to DoorDash software and manually reassign the orders to driver accounts that he and others controlled. He then caused the fraudulent driver accounts to report that the orders had been delivered when they had not and manipulated DoorDash’s computer systems to pay the fraudulent driver accounts for the nonexistent deliveries, officials said.

Devagiri would then use DoorDash software to change the orders from “delivered” status to “in process” status and manually reassign the orders to driver accounts he and others controlled, beginning the process again, prosecutors said.

Devagiri is the third defendant to plead guilty to having a role in this conspiracy. Two co-defendants previously entered pleas to one count of conspiracy to commit wire fraud, authorities said.

Manaswi Mandadapu pleaded guilty this month, and Tyler Thomas Bottenhorn pleaded guilty in November 2023. Bottenhorn was charged separately.

Devagiri faces a maximum sentence of 20 years in prison and a fine of $250,000. He is scheduled to return to court on September 16.

May 14 (UPI) — A lard-covered obelisk is more than a slippery slope for U.S. Naval Academy plebes, who view it as a rite of passage that changes them into midshipmen.

Dozens of freshmen who are called “plebes” were tasked with climbing the 21-foot-tall Herndon Monument on Wednesday, with the mission being to replace a cap placed on top to mark the end of their first year at the Naval Academy in Annapolis, Md.

They accomplished the feat in 2 hours, 27 minutes and 31 seconds by using the kind of teamwork that is required to effectively operate vessels on the high seas like the U.S. Navy has done for almost 250 years, and as it today carries out missions on land and in the air, as well.

The annual climb is a 75-year tradition that started in 1950 and scales the monument to Commander William Lewis Herndon, who went down with his ship when a hurricane sank it in 1857.

The climb requires Naval Academy plebes to scale the obelisk after it has been covered with 200 pounds of lard, remove a “Dixie cup” placed on top and replace it with the hat of an upperclassman.

The Dixie cup is not a reference to the paper cup that often is used at water dispensers.

Instead, it is a reference to the “low-rolled brim, high-domed item constructed of canvas” cap that was created in 1886 and has represented the U.S. Navy throughout the 20th century and beyond.

The Dixie cup cap is featured in the iconic photo of a sailor kissing a nurse in New York City’s Times Square on Victory over Japan Day in 1945.

It also was featured in many classic films and was worn by the S.S. Minnow’s first mate Gilligan on television’s “Gilligan’s Island.”

Members of the Naval Academy’s class of 2028 successfully undertook the task of replacing the Dixie Cup with the upperclassman’s hat.

The 2028 class has about 1,187 plebes, who now are referred to as “midshipmen” upon their completion of the annual rite of passage.

Singer says on day three of trial Sean ‘Diddy’ Combs routinely beat her and threatened to ruin her career with videos of sexual encounters.

Casandra Ventura, the singer popularly known as Cassie and former girlfriend of rap mogul Sean “Diddy” Combs, has taken to the witness stand on the third day of his trial to portray a relationship defined by physical abuse and routine humiliation.

Testifying before the court on Wednesday, Ventura said Combs, who faces sex trafficking and racketeering charges, beat her and threatened to release compromising videos that could damage her career.

“He would grab me up, push me down, hit me in the side of the head, kick me,” Ventura, a rhythm and blues singer, told jurors in Manhattan federal court.

“It would just make him more violent, make him stronger, make him want to push me harder,” Ventura said of efforts to resist Combs’s violent behaviour during their decadelong relationship.

Prosecutors have alleged that Combs used his wealth and control of an entertainment empire to manipulate and coerce women, sometimes through physical violence, into participation in drug-fuelled sex parties known as “freak-offs” and then used videos of sexual encounters as blackmail.

“He said that it would ruin everything that I had worked for, that it would make me look like a slut, that I would be shamed,” Ventura said. “Nobody should do that to anyone.”

She stated participation in the “freak-offs” started to feel like “a job where there was no space to do anything else but to recover and just try to feel normal again” and she developed an opioid addiction to cope.

On one occasion in 2013, Ventura sent Combs pictures of injuries she sustained when he threw her into a bed frame so he could “remember” what he had done.

“You don’t know when to stop. You pushed it too far and continued to push,” he responded. “Sad.”

Combs’s lawyers have conceded that the rapper has an aggressive temperament and has physically assaulted people but state he has been incorrectly charged with racketeering and sex trafficking and a freewheeling sexual lifestyle is being misconstrued by prosecutors.

Combs has pleaded not guilty to five counts of racketeering conspiracy, sex trafficking and transportation to engage in prostitution. If he is convicted on all charges, he faces a mandatory minimum sentence of 15 years in prison.

File Photo by John Angelillo/UPI | License Photo

May 14 (UPI) — U.S. District Judge Patricia Giles on Wednesday ordered the immediate release of Indian national and Georgetown University postdoctoral fellow Badar Khan Suri. He had been held by ICE for two months despite not having been charged with a crime.

Suri was in the United States on an academic visa. He was arrested March 17 by masked ICE agents and sent to a Texas detention immigration detention facility.

Judge Giles ordered Suri released without bond on condition that he maintain a residence in Virginia and attend hearings in his case in person. For Texas immigration hearings, Suri can attend virtually.

The judge said at Suri’s hearing his release is “in the public interest to disrupt the chilling effect on protected speech.”

Suri’s defense lawyers alleged he was singled out for revocation of his visa and deportation “based on his family connections and constitutionally protected speech.”

Suri has not been charged with a crime. He was taken by ICE for his social media posts supporting Palestinians.

Assistant Secretary of Homeland Security Tricia McLaughlin cited the posts as she claimed without including concrete evidence that Suri allegedly had connections to a senior adviser of Hamas.

Suri said in an April statement that he had “never even been to a protest.”

His release petition argued that he was likely targeted by the Trump administration due to his marriage to a U.S. citizen of Palestinian origin.

Also, Suri’s father-in-law Ahmed Yousef was an adviser to Hamas over a decade ago.

Giles ruled in March that Suri “shall not be removed from the United States unless and until the court issues a contrary order.”

Suri’s release order follows court-ordered releases from ICE custody of fellow immigrant academics Mohsen Mahdawi, a Columbia University Palestinian student, and Tufts University student Rumseya Ozturk.

Attorneys representing Suri said during his detention he was transferred to five different facilities across three states. They said he at one point slept in a room with no bed and a TV blaring almost all day for nearly two weeks.

In a letter to his lawyers, Suri wrote, “My only ‘crimes’ making me a ‘national security threat’ are my marriage to a United States citizen of Palestinian origin and my support for the Palestinian cause.”

President Donald Trump’s embrace of Syria’s new leadership, driven by Saudi lobbying, marks a major realignment in regional power dynamics. Al Jazeera’s Hashem Ahelbarra was in Riyadh, reporting on this historic shift in Middle East geopolitics.

May 14 (UPI) — A Russian court on Wednesday sentenced well-known election watchdog Grigory Melkonyants to five years in prison after it found him guilty of allegedly working for a so-called “undesirable” organization.

“Don’t worry, I’m not despairing,” Melkonyants was quoted telling supporters after the sentence was handed down by Moscow’s Basmanny District Court in a latest blow to free speech in Russian President Vladimir Putin’s regime.

“You shouldn’t despair either!” he reportedly stated.

Melkonyants, who has been in custody since his August 2023 arrest, co-founded Russia’s most respected and prominent election monitoring group which in 2013 was designated as a “foreign agent” by Russian authorities.

The charge stems from alleged ties to the European Network of Election Monitoring Organizations, which was declared “undesirable” by the Russian state in 2021.

Melkonyants has denied the allegations.

Three years later, Golos — which means “vote” in Russian — was liquidated as a non-governmental organization but despite court orders, continued to publish reports on Russia’s local and national elections, which international experts contend were not free or fair.

“Grigory Melkonyants has committed no crime,” Marie Struthers, Amnesty International‘s director for Eastern Europe and Central Asia, said Wednesday in a statement in calling for his “unconditional” release.

Struthers says his only “offense” was “defending the right to free and fair elections,” and that Russian authorities “instigated this criminal case in order to silence one of the country’s most respected election observers.”

The election monitoring group was long-accused by Russian officials of multiple violations and for allegedly being tainted by money it received from the U.S.-based National Endowment for Democracy and the U.S. Agency for International Development.

“Golos gave rise to a massive election monitoring movement in Russia in 2011, then the protests began which gave Putin quite a scare,” according to Leonid Volkov, a close associate of late Russian political opposition leader Alexei Navalny.

“So many years have passed, and he still seeks revenge,” he wrote on social media.

Melkonyants expressed worry for the group’s 3,000 election monitors during Russia’s 2011 elections as it came under fire while Putin, then prime minister, was ultimately re-elected to succeed then-President Dmitry Medvedev for another term.

Meanwhile, the Britain-headquartered Amnesty International considers him a “prisoner of conscience” who was prosecuted and imprisoned solely for peaceful activism.

“The international community cannot remain silent,” Amnesty’s Struthers added Wednesday.

“Neither on this appalling verdict nor on the outrageous assault on civic space that is taking place in Russia.”

On Monday, the United States and China reached an agreement to slash sky-high tariffs for 90 days. Though both sides claimed they could withstand a long trade war, they reached a truce quicker than many analysts expected.

The breakthrough marked a dramatic ratcheting down of trade tensions following the tariff war launched by US President Donald Trump during his “liberation day” announcement on April 2.

Trump initially unveiled so-called reciprocal tariffs on dozens of countries before pausing them just one week later. China, however, did not get off the hook and Beijing soon retaliated with tariffs of its own.

Tit-for-tat exchanges quickly snowballed into eye-watering sums. By April 11, tariffs on Chinese goods entering the US had reached 145 percent and levies on US products going to China had swelled to 125 percent.

Tensions were already at boiling point last weekend when US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and He Lifeng, China’s vice-premier, agreed a ceasefire that would slash respective tariffs by 115 percentage points for three months.

US duties on Chinese products will now fall to 30 percent, while China’s tariffs on US goods will drop to 10 percent. Stock Markets rallied on the news, with the Nasdaq Composite climbing 4.3 percent on Monday and gaining 20 percent over its April low.

But one key question has significant implications for trade talks to come: Did Washington or Beijing flinch first?

What did the two countries say?

The tariff suspension, which was sharper than analysts expected, came after two days of trade talks in Geneva, Switzerland. On Monday, the US and China released a joint statement announcing the deal.

The two countries acknowledged the importance of their “bilateral economic and trade relationship” as well as the importance of a “sustainable, long-term, and mutually beneficial economic and trade relationship”.

The US and China agreed to establish a mechanism to continue discussing trade relations. China also agreed to “suspend or cancel” non-tariff measures against the US, but did not provide any details.

Speaking to reporters in Geneva last weekend, China’s Vice Premier He described the talks as “candid, in-depth and constructive”.

For his part, US Treasury Secretary Bessent told Bloomberg Television on Monday that “both sides agree we do not want a generalised decoupling.”

“The US is going to do a strategic decoupling in terms of the items that we discovered during COVID were of national security interests – whether it’s semiconductors, medicine, steel,” Bessent said.

After the talks concluded, Trump praised negotiations as a “great trade deal”, adding “we’re not looking to hurt China.” He then claimed a personal win, saying he had engineered a “total reset” with Beijing.

Elsewhere, Hu Xijin, former editor of the Chinese state-run Global Times publication, said on social media that the deal was “a great victory for China”.

What are the terms of the pause?

After the tariff pause had been announced, Bessent said it’s “implausible” that reciprocal tariffs on China will fall below 10 percent. However, he said the April 2 level – set by President Trump at 34 percent – “would be a ceiling”.

He also said “we could see some amount of the fentanyl tariffs… come off.” Earlier this year, Trump put a 20 percent tariff on China, accusing it of not doing enough to stop the flow of fentanyl, a highly addictive and deadly opioid, into the US.

For now, Chinese goods will continue face a 30 percent tariff. In addition, specific products from China, such as electric vehicles, steel and aluminium, are subject to even higher, separate tariffs imposed in recent years.

On Monday, the White House also issued an executive order lowering duties on low-value packages – items costing up to $800 – from China from 120 to 54 percent.

And while a minimum $100 fee on packages from e-commerce sites Temu and Shein will remain in place, the increase to $200 planned for June 1 was dropped.

On the flip side, Beijing pledged to suspend non-tariff forms of retaliation imposed since April 2, such as export restrictions on critical minerals that US manufacturers use in high-tech equipment and clean energy technology.

Notably, the deal does not include concessions from Beijing on several US sticking points, like its huge trade surplus with the US or its exchange rate policy, China is accused of keeping its renminbi artificially low in order to boost export sales.

Tariff suspensions will be in place for 90 days. They will be subject to reviews based on broad negotiations in the coming weeks and months.

Who conceded more ground?

The speed with which the US and China unwound their tariffs, taking many analysts by surprise, suggests the trade war was inflicting pain on both sides.

The tariffs were threatening job losses for Chinese factory workers and higher inflation and empty shelves for American consumers.

But for Piergiuseppe Fortunato, an adjunct professor of economics at the University of Neuchatel in Switzerland, it is clear who wanted the deal more badly.

“First of all, America made more concessions than China. Second, America’s economy, which is unsteady at the moment, is more reliant on China’s than the other way around.”

In April, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) warned that the US economy was facing an increased risk of recession as Trump’s trade war – and the accompanying increase in consumer prices – could unleash a “significant slowdown”.

Fortunato told Al Jazeera that “Beijing is not in such a precarious position. Take, for example, its latest export figures.”

China’s exports grew sharply in April. The strong performance, an 8.2 percent increase from the year before, came as Chinese firms diverted trade flows to Southeast Asia, Europe and other destinations.

“I think that Washington overplayed its hand with Beijing,” says Fortunato.

“The White House overestimated the importance of the US market, and underestimated China’s success in diversifying its exports away from the US since the first Trump trade war” in 2018.

What will happen next?

“It could take a long time to reach a detailed agreement, if one is even possible,” notes Fortunato.

In 2018, the US backed away from a potential trade deal following talks with Beijing. The next 18 months saw tariff exchanges before a Phase One deal was signed in January 2020.

However, China did not meet all the terms of that purchase agreement. It fell some 43 percent short of the $200bn worth of goods it agreed to buy from the US by 2021.

Then, the US trade deficit with China jumped up during the COVID-19 pandemic, setting the stage for the current trade war.

Earlier this week, Bessent once again hinted that Washington might be looking for the type of “purchase agreements” that characterised the Phase One deal.

“The US has made noises that it may be going for more purchase agreements. But the American economy took a hit last time from similar arrangements,” says Fortunato.

During Trump’s first trade war with China, the US-China Business Council estimated that 245,000 US jobs were lost.

As the scope of tariffs is greater today, even after last weekend’s announcement, it’s fair to assume that even more jobs will be shed.

In the future, Fortunato suspects the US will “land at an average tariff rate of 15-20 percent, and even higher for China. That’s five times greater than what it was in January… a massive change.”

May 14 (UPI) — The House Ways and Means Committee approved the Republican tax package Wednesday, which followed an all-night hearing during which GOP members rejected attempts by Democrats to alter the plan.

The bill was approved on 26-19 party line, which will next move to the chamber’s Budget Committee, where it will be blended with legislation from other committees and presented as part of what President Donald Trump has dubbed the “One, Big, Beautiful Bill.”

“We are in hour 14 of a markup where Democrats are fighting tooth and nail,” posted Ways and Means Chairman Jason Smith, R- Mo. to X at 4:29 a.m. EDT Wednesday,” which followed previous update posts at 2:37 a.m. EDT Wednesday and 11:56 p.m. EDT Tuesday. The hearing began at 2:30 p.m. EDT Tuesday.

Democrats saw all their proposed amendments, which covered items like the expansion of health care coverage under the Affordable Care Act, and green energy, turned down, while also having stumped against the current tax plan, which it called a giveaway to the wealthy.

Democrats also put forth amendments that would have impacted Trump’s tariffs, blocked tax cuts for high earners and expanded child-care incentives among other suggestions, but none were adopted.

The entire package is projected to cost $3.8 trillion, but could still address state and local tax, or SALT, deductions. The Joint Committee on Taxation reported Tuesday that average earners would see their tax bills decrease by double-digit percentages in 2027 under the plan as it stands.

Democrats have also pointed out that under the plan, taxpayers who earn over $500,000 would see a cumulative tax cut of around $170 billion in 2027, while those who will earn between $30,000 and $80,000 that year would only see a collective $59 billion.

The bill is targeted to pass through the enter chamber by Memorial Day, then on to the Senate which is expected to combine the tax laws with the rest of Trump’s “Beautiful” bill, which together would both extend the life of previously set tax cuts and enable Trump’s financial requests.

Dozens of Palestinians have been killed in intense Israeli attacks across Gaza, including attacks on hospitals and refugee camps. UN aid chief Tom Fletcher says Israel is using mass starvation as a weapon by deliberately blocking aid deliveries.

May 14 (UPI) — The European Court of Justice Wednesday ruled there was no plausible reason to block The New York Times from getting European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen’s texts with a Pfizer executive.

The commission blocked the texts from being released to the newspaper, claiming it did not hold them.

“The Commission decision refusing a journalist of The New York Times access to the text messages exchanged between President von der Leyen and the CEO of Pfizer is annulled,” the court ruling said.

The court said Matina Stevi, a journalist with The New York Times, requested access to all text messages between von der Leyen and Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla between Jan. 1, 2021, and May 11, 2022.

The texts were secret messages before a multi-billion-dollar vaccine deal was reached between the European Union and Pfizer.

The commission rejected the request for the texts on the grounds that the commission did not hold the requested documents.

But the court ruling said Stevi and The New York Times “succeeded in rebutting the presumption of non-existence and of non-possession of the requested documents.”

The court added that the commission “has not given a plausible explanation to justify the non-possession of the requested documents.”

The court found the commission should have provided a more detailed explanation on why the documents were withheld.

The commission has the right to appeal the decision.

“The commission will now closely study the General Court’s decision and decide on next steps. To this effect, the Commission will adopt a new decision providing a more detailed explanation,” it said in a statement.

“Transparency has always been of paramount importance for the commission and President von der Leyen. We will continue to strictly abide by the solid legal framework in place to enforce our obligations.”

HEC Paris Business School law professor Alberto Alemanno said the court decision would enhance accountability for EU leaders.

“This judgment provides a fresh reminder that the EU is governed by the rule of law, with its leaders subject to the constant scrutiny of free media and of an independent court,” Alemanno said.

Dutch MEP Raquel Garcia Hermida-van der Walle called the court decision a “slam dunk for transparency.”

“People just want and are allowed to know how decisions are made, it is essential in a democracy. Even if it was done over a text message,” she said.