A professor of medicine at the University of California, San Francisco filed a lawsuit Wednesday, alleging that the university violated her freedom of speech by suspending her for her online comments on Israel’s war in Gaza, according to court documents.
Rupa Marya’s social media posts included expressing “solidarity with the hospitals and healthcare workers that Israel was attacking in Gaza,” according to court documents.
The complaint stated that Marya “felt an obligation to speak out and did so using her X account.”
Israel’s war in Gaza has left more than 52,000 people dead since Oct. 7, 2023, when Hamas militants killed 1,200 people in Israel and took 251 people hostage. Israel has received intense criticism from around the world, including from the United Nations, for its actions in Gaza.
“Firing Dr. Marya doesn’t only violate her right to free speech, it threatens all of us,” attorney Mark Kleiman said in a statement. “We all need to urgently speak up against these kinds of attacks on our basic rights to advocate for justice, and we expect the Court will agree with us that Dr. Marya’s rights have been violated and must be remedied.”
Marya was placed on leave in September 2024 and her clinical privileges were suspended by the UCSF Executive Medical Board on Oct. 1. The board called her a “possible imminent danger” and cited social media posts, according to court documents. Her privileges were reinstated on Oct. 15.
According to court documents, Marya received “rape and death threats” as well as “repeated harassment and threats” because of her posts, according to court documents.
Before her suspension, Marya had several interactions with the university regarding her online activity.
In November 2023, the dean of UCSF’s School of Medicine notified Marya that the school would be assessing whether her social media activity violated university policies.
“Although the statement did not name Dr. Marya, Dr. Robert Wachter acknowledged in an email that it was in direct response referring to Dr. Marya’s social media thread from January 2,” the complaint claimed. “UCSF’s January 6 statement accused Dr. Marya of promoting a ‘racist’ and ‘antisemitic’ ‘conspiracy theory.’”
According to court documents, Marya’s posts “never impeded the performance of her duties as a physician or faculty member, or the regular operation of the University.”
“As a medical doctor, American citizen and as a person of South Asian descent raised in the Sikh religious tradition, Dr. Marya has long been concerned about American foreign policy, including in the Middle East and the issues surrounding the conflict between Israel and Palestine,” the complaint reads. “Her posts take aim at state policy and supremacist political ideologies, not at any religious or ethnic group.”
A spokesperson for the University of California, San Francisco said that because of privacy laws, the school is unable to comment on the lawsuit.
Marya completed her residency in internal medicine at the University of California at San Francisco in 2007, was subsequently offered employment and joined the faculty. For the past five years, however, Marya had no teaching duties and focused exclusively on patient care in the non-teaching hospital medicine services, according to court documents.
Marya was also appointed by California Gov. Gavin Newsom to the Healthy California for All Commission in 2021, an initiative to advance a system for universal healthcare in the state.
A Department of Homeland Security request for 21,000 National Guard troops to support “expansive interior immigration enforcement operations” includes a call for troops to search for unaccompanied children in some cases and transport them between states, three sources briefed on the plan tell NBC News.
Having National Guard troops perform such tasks, which are not explained in detail in the DHS request, has prompted concern among Democrats in Congress and some military and law enforcement officials.
The tasks are laid out in a May 9th Request for Assistance from the Department of Homeland Security to the Pentagon. The document states that, “this represents the first formal request by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) for the deployment of National Guard personnel in support of interior immigration enforcement operations.”
The request calls for National Guard troops to be used for “Search and Rescue for UACs [Unaccompanied Alien Children] in remote or hostile terrain,” and “Intra- and inter-state transport of detainees/ unaccompanied alien children (UACs),” without clearly explaining what that would entail.
Most of the troops, about 10,000, would be used for transporting detained individuals, the DHS said. Roughly 2,500 troops would be used for detention support but the document does not specify where. Another 1,000 troops would be assigned to administrative support, such as processing detainees.
The request also asks for up to 3,500 troops to “Attempt to Locate — Fugitives” and to conduct “surveillance and canvassing missions,” as well as “night operations and rural interdictions.” It also asks for support for ICE in “joint task force operations for absconder/fugitive tracking,” according to the three sources familiar with the plans.
Democrats in Congress and military and law enforcement officials have expressed concern about the use of National Guard troops to perform what they say are civilian law enforcement duties.
One characterized the plan as the Trump administration “finding a way to get the National Guard into the streets and into American homes,” saying, “I fear it’s going to look like a police state.”
A second source said, “Trump has said he wants to use the National Guard for law enforcement, and the Pentagon and other entities have always said, ‘Oh, don’t worry, it will never come to that.’ But this is it.”
Defense officials say the request has not been approved and is being evaluated by Pentagon policy officials, the General Counsel’s office, and other Pentagon leadership. The officials say the most likely course of action would be for some parts of the request to be approved and others rejected.
But one source briefed on the plans said that Secretary of Defense Peter Hegseth is close to approving some elements of the request and considering which state governors to approach first regarding National Guard units. “We are so much closer to this being real,” said the source, who spoke on condition of anonymity.
DHS is requesting the National Guard troops under Title 32 status, which means they would remain on state active duty under the command of their governor but would be federally funded. Title 32 status generally allows National Guard troops to conduct law enforcement activities without violating the Posse Comitatus Act, an 1878 law that bars the use of federal troops in law enforcement operations.
A National Guard member who opposes troops performing such tasks told NBC News, “I plan to leave the National Guard soon over this.”
EDMONTON, Alberta — Brad Marchand scored on a breakaway in double overtime and the defending champion Florida Panthers punched back against the Edmonton Oilers in Game 2 of their Stanley Cup Final rematch, winning 5-4 on Friday night to even the series.
Marchand’s second goal of the night 8:04 into the second OT allowed Florida to escape with a split after Corey Perry scored to tie it with 17.8 seconds left in the third period and Stuart Skinner pulled for an extra attacker. Each of the first two games this final have gone to overtime, for the first time since 2014 and just the sixth in NHL history.
Much like last year and the playoff run to this point, Sergei Bobrovsky was dialed in when he was needed the most, making some unreal saves while stopping 42 of the 46 shots he faced. His teammates provided the necessary goal support.
How to watch the Stanley Cup Final
The Florida Panthers won Game 2 in double OT, 5-4, over the Oilers to tie the best-of-7 series 1-1 Friday night in Edmonton.
The teams will head to Sunrise, Florida, for Game 3, which starts at 8 p.m. ET on Monday.
A possible Game 7 would be June 20 in Edmonton. Eight of the 24 finals this century have gone the distance.
Edmonton is a -125/+105 series favorite over Florida in Las Vegas.
Along with Marchand, Sam Bennett scored his postseason-leading 13th goal and NHL record 12th on the road. Seth Jones scored into a wide-open net after some spectacular tic-tac-toe passing, and fellow defenseman Dmitry Kulikov tied it with a shot through traffic that Stuart Skinner almost certainly did not see.
Kulikov’s goal came after Florida controlled play for several minutes in the second, hemming Edmonton in its zone shift after shift and piling up a 34-13 advantage in shot attempts during the period. Marchand’s OT goal was his 10th career goal in the final to lead all active players.
Game 3 is Monday night as the teams traverse the continent and play shifts to Sunrise.
The Panthers wrested home-ice advantage away from the Oilers by splitting the first two, rebounding from a Game 1 overtime loss and asserting they won’t go quietly against Draisaitl and Connor McDavid looking like they’ll do everything in their power to hoist the Cup for the first time.
Of course, those stars had their moments. They assisted on Evan Bouchard’s goal when coach Kris Knoblauch put them on the ice together, and McDavid stickhandled through multiple defenders in highlight-reel fashion to set up Draisaitl scoring on the power play.
There were a lot of those — 10 in total — after officials whistled 14 penalties, including three in the first four minutes. Each team had a few calls it was not happy with, though most of that evened out over the course of the game.
ARLINGTON, Texas — Azura Stevens had 21 points including a career-high five 3-pointers, Dearica Hamby added 20 points, and the Los Angeles Sparks beat the Dallas Wings 93-79 on Friday night to snap a three-game losing streak.
Hamby and Stevens each reached 20-plus points for the fourth time this season. Odyssey Sims, who was coming off a 32-point performance in an 85-80 loss to Phoenix on Sunday, added 19 points and three 3-pointers for the Sparks.
Los Angeles took a 45-40 lead at halftime after Sims converted a three-point play with 2.2 seconds left. Sims finished the half with nine points, Stevens added 13 and Hamby had 11.
The Sparks started the third quarter on a 6-0 run and added a 9-0 run to begin the fourth for a 76-55 lead. The Wings had three turnovers and two missed shots in the opening three minutes of the fourth.
Stevens reached her career high on 3-pointers with 4:45 left in the fourth on a wide-open shot from the corner off a nice drive and pass by Kelsey Plum.
Plum had 11 points, five rebounds and nine assists and Rickea Jackson scored 10 for Los Angeles (3-6).
DiJonai Carrington scored 16 points and JJ Quinerly had a career-high 14 for Dallas (1-8). Luisa Geiselsoder had 11 points and 10 rebounds for her first double-double. Kaila Charles had 10 points.
Dallas has allowed 90-plus points three times during its four-game losing streak.
The escalating war of words this week between President Donald Trump and tech mogul Elon Musk marked the most contentious chapter in a yearslong and at-times rocky relationship between two of the most influential figures in business and politics.
Musk, a former Democrat, has criticized Trump in the past, but over the past year forged a strong relationship with the president that positioned him to wield significant power in the early months of Trump’s second administration.
Those close ties, though, came after years of ups and downs stretching back to 2016 when Musk accepted a spot on several of Trump’s business advisory councils.
Here are some of the highlights of Trump and Musk’s volatile relationship from the past few years.
July 2022: Musk suggests Trump should forgo White House bid
Musk, who would ultimately emerge as one of the most loyal contributors to Trump’s 2024 campaign, was initially a vocal opponent.
Despite a solid working relationship with Trump during his first term, the enigmatic tech leader called on Trump to skip the 2024 race.
“I don’t hate the man, but it’s time for Trump to hang up his hat & sail into the sunset,” Musk wrote on X. “Trump would be 82 at end of term, which is too old to be chief executive of anything, let alone the United States of America.”
The post was not without provocation — Trump days earlier at a campaign rally in Alaska bashed Musk for his effort to purchase X, then known as Twitter, and for saying in an interview that he never voted for a Republican.
“He told me he voted for me,” Trump said at the rally. “He’s another bulls— artist.”
Musk in response threw his support behind Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis.
“If DeSantis runs against Biden in 2024, then DeSantis will easily win — he doesn’t even need to campaign,” he wrote on X.
November 2022: Musk reinstates Trump’s Twitter account
Weeks after officially taking control of X, Musk extended an olive branch to Trump by reinstating his account on the social media platform — once his favorite online megaphone — after it was banned following the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol.
Musk reinstated the account on Nov. 19, four days after Trump formally launched his 2024 campaign.
August 2023: Musk defends Trump as prosecutions pile up
By the summer of 2023, Trump had been indicted in three separate criminal cases. Musk, who months earlier predicted Trump would win the 2024 election if arrested, condemned the prosecutions.
“I did not vote for him last election, but such aggressive legal action against a former president is not right,” Musk wrote.
The post served as a shift for Musk, who soon after began posting more sympathetic messages about Trump.
March 2024: Trump, desperate for cash, meets Musk in Palm Beach
In the first few months of 2024, Trump’s campaign found itself in a cash crunch after allocating upwards of $50 million toward his legal defense.
So when Trump met with Musk alongside several other wealthy Republican donors in Palm Beach, Florida, most political observers were quick to connect the dots.
Musk, the world’s richest man, has insisted that the meeting was unplanned and maintains that Trump never explicitly requested funding.
“I’m not paying his legal bills in any way, shape or form … and he did not ask me for money,” Musk said in an interview after the meeting, though he did say afterward that he was at least “leaning away” from President Joe Biden.
When asked about their meeting, Trump said he’d “helped” Musk in the past, without providing details.
Soon after, reports emerged that Trump and Musk had discussed a possible advisory role for the Tesla CEO in a second Trump administration, an effort to ensure Musk would hold a key position in the White House.
July 2024: Musk endorses Trump
Less than an hour after an assassination attempt on Trump at a rally in Pennsylvania, Musk officially threw his support behind Trump’s candidacy.
“I fully endorse President Trump and hope for his rapid recovery,” Musk wrote on X.
Trump responded by touting reports that Musk planned to contribute $45 million a month to his re-election effort and promising to make life “good” for him.
“We have to make life good for our smart people. You know, we have some smart people. We have to make life good for our smart people, and he’s as smart as you get,” Trump said at his first campaign event after the assassination attempt.
August 2024: Trump and Musk hold campaign event on X
In an event billed by Trump’s campaign as “the interview of the century,” Trump joined Musk for an online rally on X.
The event was repeatedly delayed due to tech issues, but saw the pair bond over their shared disdain for Biden’s immigration policies. It also saw Musk unsuccessfully try to prod Trump into prioritizing renewable energy over fossil fuels.
October 2024: Musk joins Trump at Pennsylvania rally after spending millions
When Trump returned to the site of the first assassination attempt against him, he shared the rally stage with Musk, who accused Democrats of seeking to take away voters’ freedom of speech and right to bear arms.
Musk emphatically encouraged Trump supporters to “vote, vote, vote.”
By October, Musk had already given nearly $75 million to the super PAC he created to support Trump, according to campaign finance filings. That money was used in part to fund sprawling get-out-the-vote drives in battleground states, including door-knocking programs in deep-red, traditionally low-turnout areas.
Elon Musk jumps on stage as he joins President Donald Trump during a campaign rally in Butler, Pa., in 2024.Jim Watson / AFP / Getty Images file
November 2024: Trump wins the election, after Musk spends $250 million on the race
Trump’s striking victory, in which he won all seven battleground states and the popular vote for the first time, came as Musk’s spending for the effort surpassed a quarter billion dollars, according to campaign finance reports. Of that total, $120 million came in the final weeks of the race.
In his election night speech, Trump praised Musk, saying, “A star is born.”
One week after the election, Trump appointed Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy to head up a newly formed Department of Government Efficiency, fulfilling a campaign promise to allow Musk to oversee cuts to government spending. Ramaswamy later left to pursue a gubernatorial bid in Ohio.
Toward the end of the month, Trump traveled to Texas to watch the launch of Musk’s SpaceX Starship rocket, despite previously ridiculing the company.
January 2025: Musk speaks at Trump’s inauguration rally
Musk spoke at Trump’s inauguration rally at Capital One Arena, emphatically lauding Trump’s victory, jubilantly raising the prospect of taking DOGE to Mars and thanking the crowd for voting to guarantee “the future of civilization is assured.”
“My heart goes out to you,” Musk said before forcefully touching his heart and raising his hand in a gesture some critics likened to a Nazi salute. Musk has denied that assertion.
Among the first executive orders Trump signed on Jan. 20 was one that formalized the creation of the Musk-led Department of Government Efficiency. The White House officially announced Musk’s role in early February, clearing way for him to oversee a wide-ranging effort to reduce to the size of the federal government through mass job cuts, the cancellation of research programs and grants and the dismantling a federal agencies.
March 2025: Trump publicly limits Musk’s authority amid clashes with Cabinet
In an early sign of tensions between Musk and several Cabinet members, Trump placed limits on his adviser, making clear in a Truth Social post that staffing decisions across the federal government will be determined by agency heads, not Musk. The Tesla CEO had been exercising authority over rank-and-file federal workers, including a threat to fire them if they didn’t respond to inquiries regarding their work output.
The new publicly established guardrails appeared to do little to hurt the pair’s relationship, with Trump a week later turning the South Lawn of the White House into a Tesla show room to demonstrate support for Musk amid slumping sales for his electric vehicle company.
Elon Musk and President Donald Trump in a Tesla Model S vehicle on the South Lawn of the White House on March 11, 2025.Samuel Corum / Bloomberg / Getty Images
May 2025: Musk exits the White House amid simmering tensions
On the first day of May, Musk told reporters at the White House that he would soon step back from DOGE to focus on his companies, comparing the shift to going from full-time to part-time work. The announcement came after Tesla reported a drop in its first-quarter profit and revenue.
By the end of the month, Musk’s exit was formalized. The White House on May 28 confirmed that Musk’s tenure as a special government employee, a temporary role that he soon would legally have to exit anyway, had come to an end.
Musk thanked Trump “for the opportunity to reduce wasteful spending,” and the president at a news conference with Musk days later said, “Elon’s service to America has been without comparison in modern history.” Trump presented Musk with a gold-colored key at the event.
But underneath the polite exchanges hid simmering tension: Musk days earlier appeared on CBS’ “Sunday Morning” and bashed a massive Republican bill, designed to fund much of Trump’s domestic agenda, by condemning the expected impact of the legislation on the national debt. Trump soon after pulled the nomination of billionaire Jared Isaacman, an associate of Musk, to be NASA administrator.
June 2025: Tensions boil over and spill into public
Days after formally departing the White House, Musk launched a scathing attack on the Trump-backed bill making its way through Congress.
“I’m sorry, but I just can’t stand it anymore,” Musk wrote in a post on X. “This massive, outrageous, pork-filled Congressional spending bill is a disgusting abomination. Shame on those who voted for it: you know you did wrong. You know it.”
Asked about those criticisms, Trump expressed disappointment.
“Elon knew the inner workings of this bill,” Trump told reporters, before suggesting Musk’s opposition to the bill was personal.
“Elon is upset because we took the EV mandate which was a lot of money for electric vehicles. They’re having a hard time the electric vehicles, and they want us to pay billions of dollars in subsidy,” Trump said.
Musk called out Trump’s “ingratitude,” arguing that Republicans would have lost the 2024 election without his support. Trump in response said Musk “went crazy” after being asked to leave his White House role, and he toyed with the idea of severing government ties with Musk’s companies.
Musk replied by claiming Trump was in what are known as “the Epstein Files,” and said Trump’s tariff policy would cause a recession. He also amplified a post calling for Trump to be impeached and replaced by Vice President JD Vance.
A day after the barrage of attacks, Trump told reporters he’s no longer thinking of Musk.
“Honestly, I’ve been so busy working on China, working on Russia, working on Iran, working on so many — I’m not thinking about Elon. You know, I just wish him well,” he said.
A federal judge signed off on arguably the biggest change in the history of college sports Friday, clearing the way for schools to begin paying their athletes millions of dollars as soon as next month as the multibillion-dollar industry shreds the last vestiges of the amateur model that defined it for more than a century.
Nearly five years after Arizona State swimmer Grant House sued the NCAA and its five biggest conferences to lift restrictions on revenue sharing, U.S. Judge Claudia Wilken approved the final proposal that had been hung up on roster limits, just one of many changes ahead amid concerns that thousands of walk-on athletes will lose their chance to play college sports.
The sweeping terms of the so-called House settlement include approval for each school to share up to $20.5 million with athletes over the next year and $2.7 billion that will be paid over the next decade to thousands of former players who were barred from that revenue for years.
The agreement brings a seismic shift to hundreds of schools that were forced to reckon with the reality that their players are the ones producing the billions in TV and other revenue, mostly through football and basketball, that keep this machine humming.
The scope of the changes — some have already begun — is difficult to overstate. The professionalization of college athletics will be seen in the high-stakes and expensive recruitment of stars on their way to the NFL and NBA, and they will be felt by athletes whose schools have decided to pare their programs. The agreement will resonate in nearly every one of the NCAA’s 1,100 member schools boasting nearly 500,000 athletes.
The road to a settlement
Wilken’s ruling comes 11 years after she dealt the first significant blow to the NCAA ideal of amateurism when she ruled in favor of former UCLA basketball player Ed O’Bannon and others who were seeking a way to earn money from the use of their name, image and likeness (NIL) — a term that is now as common in college sports as “March Madness” or “Roll Tide.” It was just four years ago that the NCAA cleared the way for NIL money to start flowing, but the changes coming are even bigger.
Wilken granted preliminary approval to the settlement last October. That sent colleges scurrying to determine not only how they were going to afford the payments, but how to regulate an industry that also allows players to cut deals with third parties so long as they are deemed compliant by a newly formed enforcement group that will be run by auditors at Deloitte.
The agreement takes a big chunk of oversight away from the NCAA and puts it in the hands of the four biggest conferences. The ACC, Big Ten, Big 12 and SEC hold most of the power and decision-making heft, especially when it comes to the College Football Playoff, which is the most significant financial driver in the industry and is not under the NCAA umbrella like the March Madness tournaments are.
Roster limits held things up
The deal looked ready to go since last fall, but Wilken put a halt to it after listening to a number of players who had lost their spots because of newly imposed roster limits being placed on teams.
The limits were part of a trade-off that allowed the schools to offer scholarships to everyone on the roster, instead of only a fraction, as has been the case for decades. Schools started cutting walk-ons in anticipation of the deal being approved.
Wilken asked for a solution and, after weeks, the parties decided to let anyone cut from a roster — now termed a “Designated Student-Athlete” — return to their old school or play for a new one without counting against the new limit.
Wilken ultimately agreed, going point-by-point through the objectors’ arguments to explain why they didn’t hold up.
“The modifications provide Designated Student-Athletes with what they had prior to the roster limits provisions being implemented, which was the opportunity to be on a roster at the discretion of a Division I school,” Wilken wrote
Winners and losers
The list of winners and losers is long and, in some cases, hard to tease out.
A rough guide of winners would include football and basketball stars at the biggest schools, which will devote much of their bankroll to signing and retaining them. For instance, Michigan quarterback Bryce Underwood’s NIL deal is reportedly worth between $10.5 million and $12 million.
Losers, despite Wilken’s ruling, figure to be at least some of the walk-ons and partial scholarship athletes whose spots are gone.
Also in limbo are Olympic sports many of those athletes play and that serve as the main pipeline for a U.S. team that has won the most medals at every Olympics since the downfall of the Soviet Union.
All this is a price worth paying, according to the attorneys who crafted the settlement and argue they delivered exactly what they were asked for: an attempt to put more money in the pockets of the players whose sweat and toil keep people watching from the start of football season through March Madness and the College World Series in June.
What the settlement does not solve is the threat of further litigation.
Though this deal brings some uniformity to the rules, states still have separate laws regarding how NIL can be doled out, which could lead to legal challenges. NCAA President Charlie Baker has been consistent in pushing for federal legislation that would put college sports under one rulebook and, if he has his way, provide some form of antitrust protection to prevent the new model from being disrupted again.
A former girlfriend of Diddy’s going by the pseudonym “Jane” wept on the witness stand today as she described drug-induced sexual encounters with male escorts while she traveled the world with the music mogul. The marathon sex sessions, described by her as “hotel nights” and similar to “freak offs,” were organized at Diddy’s direction, could last multiple days, and involved drugs and baby oil, she said.
Through tears, she testified that she didn’t know why she couldn’t outright tell Diddy to stop and that he would give her “multiple doses” of ecstasy per night to keep her awake. On her birthday in Miami in 2023, she testified, she had sex with multiple men as Diddy watched.
Jane previously testified that Diddy was paying her rent and reiterated today that he continues to. She is one of four accusers referred to in the government’s indictment that alleges Diddy ran his business empire as a criminal enterprise and exploited the women through his financial support. “It’s true that at any moment he could just do that if he wanted to,” Jane testified, “cut me off.”
🔎 The view from inside
By Adam Reiss and Jing Feng
Diddy sat with his hands clasped in front of him as Jane testified, while attorneys for both the prosecution and defense appeared riveted by her on the stand.
Diddy’s demeanor is in the spotlight after Judge Arun Subramanian yesterday scolded his defense team for allowing him to make facial expressions toward the jury. Subramanian said it was “absolutely unacceptable” and warned that if it happens again, he may remove Diddy from the courtroom.
In other news: An attorney for Jane complained to Subramanian that media outlets are trying to expose her identity. The attorney accused the outlets of livestreaming and posting related articles, and asked the court to “stop these attempts to violate the court’s order” not to name her. The judge said he would consider issuing a media gag order if someone is found to have violated the rules.
🗓️ What’s next
Next week: Jane is expected to return for more questioning by the prosecution before the defense begins its cross-examination.
PSA: Every night during Diddy’s trial, NBC’s “Dateline” will drop special episodes of the “True Crime Weekly” podcast to get you up to speed. “Dateline” correspondent Andrea Canning chats with NBC News’ Chloe Melas and special guests — right in front of the courthouse. Listen here. 🎧
LOS ANGELES — Federal immigration authorities raided “multiple locations” throughout the city Friday, officials said, in action that drew an immediate rebuke fromarea officials and a distanced response from local law enforcement.
Agents targeted clothing manufacturer, importer and wholesaler Ambiance Apparel in the city’s Fashion District, U.S. Attorney Bill Essayli told NBC Los Angeles.
The agents served a search warrant and were looking for “fictitious employee documents,” Essayli said.
A rep for Ambiance Apparel could not be immediately reached for comment on Friday.
People look inside importer and wholesaler Ambiance Apparel in Los Angeles Fashion District on Friday.NBC LA
Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass said there were federal immigration raids at “multiple locations” that spread “terror in our communities.”
“This morning, we received reports of federal immigration enforcement actions in multiple locations in Los Angeles,” Bass said in a statement. “As Mayor of a proud city of immigrants, who contribute to our city in so many ways, I am deeply angered by what has taken place. These tactics sow terror in our communities and disrupt basic principles of safety in our city.”
She added: “My Office is in close coordination with immigrant rights community organizations. We will not stand for this.”
U.S. Sen. Alex Padilla, D-Calif., called the ICE action “a continuation of a disturbing pattern of extreme and cruel immigration enforcement.”
“These indiscriminate raids prove once again that the Trump administration cares about nothing but instilling harm and fear in our communities to drive immigrants into the shadows,” Padilla, a Los Angeles native and son of Mexican immigrants, said in a statement.
Los Angeles Police Chief Jim McDonnell and Sheriff Robert Luna were both quick to state that their personnel had no role in the federal action.
“Today the LAPD became aware that ICE was conducting operations in the City of Los Angeles,”McDonnell said in a statement. “I’m aware that these actions cause anxiety for many Angelenos, so I want to make it clear: the LAPD is not involved in civil immigration enforcement.”
Luna acknowledged that raids “have caused fear” but asked residents to “remain calm and peaceful as we continue to place your safety and well-being at the forefront of our efforts.”
A person is led out during a raid at Ambiance Apparel in Los Angeles on Friday morning.NBC LA
Eleven members of the 15-member L.A. City Council condemned the action.
“This indiscriminate targeting of children and families not only harms the individuals who are directly impacted, but destroys our communities’ sense of trust and safety in their own homes,” the lawmakers said in a joint statement.
“We condemn this in no uncertain terms: Los Angeles was built by immigrants and it thrives because of immigrants. We will not abide by fear tactics to support extreme political agendas that aim to stoke fear and spread discord in our city.”
Andrew Blankstein and Erick Mendoza reported from Los Angeles and David K. Li from New York City.
This is a developing story. Please check back for updates.
WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Friday left in place a longstanding gun restriction in the District of Columbia that bans magazines that hold more than 10 rounds of ammunition, opting once again to avoid taking up a new gun rights case.
The court, which has a 6-3 conservative majority that generally favors gun rights, turned away a challenge to the Washington, D.C., law just a few days after rejecting an appeal over a similar law in Rhode Island.
Then, the court also left in place Maryland’s ban on assault-style weapons including the AR-15 semiautomatic rifle.
The court expanded gun rights in a major 2022 ruling that found for the first time that the right to bear arms under the Constitution’s Second Amendment extends outside the home. But the court has since frustrated gun owners by declining to take up cases that would expand upon that ruling.
The District of Columbia has long been a legal battleground over gun restrictions. The Supreme Court’s landmark 2008 ruling that for the first time found that people have an individual right to bear arms in self defense in their homes arose from a challenge to a D.C. law.
In the latest case, four gun owners challenged the restriction on large-capacity magazines that was enacted in the aftermath of the 2008 Supreme Court ruling, saying the restriction is unlawful under the later 2022 decision.
Both a federal judge and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit upheld the law.
The appeals court, in a 2-1 vote, said in a ruling last year that although large-capacity magazines are arms under the Second Amendment and have been in common use for years, they can be regulated because they are “particularly dangerous.”
Last summer, the Supreme Court sidestepped multiple gun-related disputes soon after it issued a ruling that upheld a federal law that prohibits people subject to domestic violence restraining orders from possessing firearms.
In other action on pending appeals Friday, the court decided against taking up a significant election case involving mail-in ballots in the battleground state of Pennsylvania that pitted Republicans against Democrats.
The decision leaves intact a Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruling that said voters who send mail-in ballots that are flagged as defective can then file a separate provision in-person ballot.
The Republican National Committee was seeking to overturn the 2024 state court decision, while the Democratic National Committee was defending it.
President Donald Trump is free to bar The Associated Press from some White House media events for now, after a U.S. appeals court on Friday paused a lower court ruling mandating that AP journalists be given access.
The divided ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit temporarily blocks an order by U.S. District Judge Trevor McFadden, who ruled on April 8 that the Trump administration must allow AP journalists access to the Oval Office, Air Force One and White House events while the news agency’s lawsuit moves forward.
The 2-1 ruling was written by U.S. Circuit Judge Neomi Rao, joined by fellow Trump appointee U.S. Circuit Judge Gregory Katsas.
Rao wrote that the lower court injunction “impinges on the President’s independence and control over his private workspaces” and that the White House was likely to ultimately defeat the Associated Press’ lawsuit.
The White House and a lawyer for the Associated Press did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
In a dissent, Circuit Judge Cornelia Pillard, an appointee of President Barack Obama, said her two colleagues’ ruling cannot be squared with “any sensible understanding of the role of a free press in our constitutional democracy.”
The AP sued in February after the White House restricted the news outlet’s access over its decision to continue referring to the Gulf of Mexico in its coverage despite Trump renaming the body of water the Gulf of America.
The AP’s lawyers argued the new policy violated the First Amendment of the Constitution, which protects free speech rights.
McFadden, who was appointed by Trump during his first term, said in his ruling that if the White House opens its doors to some journalists it cannot exclude others based on their viewpoints.
Trump administration lawyers said the president has absolute discretion over media access to the White House and that McFadden’s ruling infringed on his ability to decide whom to admit to sensitive spaces.
“The Constitution does not prohibit the President from considering a journalist’s prior coverage in evaluating how much access he will grant that journalist,” lawyers for the administration said in a court filing.
On April 16, the AP accused the Trump administration of defying the court order by continuing to exclude its journalists from some events and then limiting access to Trump for all news wires, including Reuters and Bloomberg.
Reuters and the AP both issued statements denouncing the new policy, which puts wire services in a larger rotation with about 30 other newspaper and print outlets.
Other media customers, including local news organizations that have no presence in Washington, rely on the wire services’ real-time reports of presidential statements as do global financial markets.
The AP says in its stylebook that the Gulf of Mexico has carried that name for more than 400 years and, as a global news agency, the AP will refer to it by its original name while acknowledging the new name Trump has chosen.
