BBC HomepageSkip to contentAccessibility HelpYour accountLiveNotificationsHomeNewsSportWeatheriPlayerSoundsBitesizeMore menuMore menuSearch BBCHomeNewsSportWeatheriPlayerSoundsBitesizeCBBCCBeebiesFoodClose menuBBC NewsMenuHomeIsrael-Gaza warCost of LivingWar in UkraineClimateUKWorldBusinessPoliticsCultureMoreTechScienceHealthFamily & EducationIn PicturesNewsbeatBBC VerifyDisabilityWorldAfricaAsiaAustraliaEuropeLatin AmericaMiddle EastUS & CanadaHow would Texas’ controversial SB4 immigration law work?Published3 hours agoShareclose panelShare pageCopy linkAbout sharingImage source, Getty ImagesImage caption, It is unclear how Texas would handle removals without Mexico’s cooperation.By Bernd Debusmann JrBBC News, WashingtonA controversial Texas law that is the focus of an intense legal battle could soon become one of the toughest immigration measures in any US state.The law, known as SB4, would allow local and state police to arrest and prosecute undocumented migrants – upending US immigration enforcement. Texas Governor Greg Abbott signed it into law last year, but court rulings have stopped Texas from enforcing it. SB4 has been harshly criticised by the Biden administration and rights groups. The law “will not only make communities in Texas less safe, it will also burden law enforcement, and sow chaos and confusion at our southern border”, White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said in a statement.But Mr Abbott and Republican lawmakers have argued that Texas has a legal right to defend against the rising number of migrants, and the Texas governor has frequently alleged that President Joe Biden has failed to secure the US southern border in violation of the law.The governor’s office has not responded to the BBC’s request for comment. Here’s what to know. What is Texas Senate Bill 4, or SB4? Immigration enforcement has been historically handled by the federal government, as crossing the border is a federal crime and addressed by immigration courts that fall under the justice department. SB4 would change that by allowing Texas police officers to charge people with a newly created state crime – “illegal entry”. Under the new law, local and state police in the state can detain individuals who they suspect may have entered the US illegally. Those stops would not be allowed in schools, healthcare facilities and places of worship. If those individuals are found guilty, punishments can range from misdemeanours to felonies. They can carry prison time or fines of up to $2,000 (£1,570).Penalties for illegal re-entry to Texas could go up to 20 years in prison, depending on a person’s immigration and criminal history.The law also allows – and in some instances mandates – that Texas judges order people deported from the US. Previously, detained migrants that were not charged with other crimes would be handed over to Customs and Border Protection officers. How can SB4 be enforced? In a guide for Texans, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) – which has sued to stop SB4 – has laid out what it sees as a likely scenario in the event that the law goes into effect. Most SB4 encounters will begin with police officers asking the “suspect” whether they are in the US illegally. If the officer finds or believes that they are, the suspect would then be arrested and taken to a magistrate. They would then have to prove their legal status or be asked to agree to a state deportation. Those who do not agree can be jailed. In practice, however, advocates believe SB4’s implementation is likely to be far more complex and murky. Asylum seekers – whose cases are handled by the federal government – could be picked up by Texas law enforcement officers and removed from the country before their asylum cases are processed. Widespread enforcement could also affect Texas businesses, as they rely on the labour that the nearly five million migrants in the state provide. Adam Isacson, a migration and border expert from the Washington Office on Latin America, told the BBC that SB4 could create a “patchwork” enforcement pattern. Different counties might elect to implement the law differently, with some taking more aggressive approaches than others. Where do Biden and Trump differ on immigration?Three reasons why US border crossings at record high”A sheriff that has a lot of undocumented people in his community is not going to want to enforce it really strongly, because he needs the cooperation of that community’s residents in order to enforce other laws,” Mr Isacson said.It is also unclear how removals will be carried out. Mexico has said it would not accept Texas deportations under “any circumstance”, and the international boundary is under the jurisdiction of federal authorities. Texas has yet to comment on how local jails – which are in many cases overcrowded – would cope with any influx of people arrested under SB4.Image source, Getty ImagesImage caption, Texas launched its own unilateral border security programme, Operation Lone Star, in 2021.Why did Texas try to bring the law? Governor Abbott has repeatedly said Texas needs SB4 to protect the state – and the wider US – from a “tidal wave” of undocumented migrants crossing America’s southern border. He has regularly blamed the federal government and President Joe Biden of failing to adequately stem the migrant numbers, forcing Texas to “defend itself”. “The President of the United States has a constitutional duty to enforce federal laws protecting States, including laws already on the books that mandate the detention of illegal immigrants,” Mr Abbott said in February. The law is one of a number of steps taken by Texas unilaterally. In March 2021, the state also launched Operation Lone Star, a multi-billion dollar border security programme it has credited with stopping hundreds of thousands of migrants from entering the US. Why is there a legal battle? As immigration enforcement is historically handed by the federal government and its immigration courts, this makes major changes to enforcement authorities and even could affect the relationships and agreements between the US and foreign countries. The Biden administration and ACLU – both of which are involved in the legal battle – have argued that SB4 is therefore unconstitutional. The ACLU has also suggested that SB4 could lead to discrimination and racial profiling. “States cannot adopt immigration laws that interfere with the framework enacted by Congress,” Associate Attorney General Vanita Gupta said in January. The case also has some precedent that will need to be addressed in court. Another controversial immigration law in Arizona, known as SB 1070 or the “show me your papers” law was partially struck down by the US Supreme Court. The judges ruled that federal law already fulfilled that function. “That’s the dispute again here, and that’s a problem for Texas,” said Carl Tobias, a law professor at the University of Richmond. “In that case, the Supreme Court said that immigration is assigned to the federal government, not individual states.” Mexico’s government has also reacted negatively to SB4, questioning Texas’ ability to enforce immigration laws and warning that it could violate the human rights of over 10 million people of Mexican origin in the state. It plans to file a legal brief outlining the potential effects the law could have on US-Mexico relations. How would it affect US immigration policy?If SB4 takes effect, it could upend the entire US immigration system. Other states might follow Texas’ example and adopt their own immigration laws if Governor Abbott’s efforts are successful. Already, lawmakers in Iowa have passed a bill making illegal immigration a state crime. It allows state courts to order deportations and to have law enforcement officers escort suspects to ports of entry at the border. The Iowa governor, Kim Reynolds, has not yet signed the bill. Governors and state lawmakers who support Donald Trump and his maga movement “are seeing this as an opportunity to challenge the Supreme Court ruling that struck down SB 1070 in Arizona”, Mr Isacson said.He noted that if SB4 is ultimately struck down by the Supreme Court, however, it may “in a blanket way, strike down all other states’ attempts” at similar legislation.Related TopicsMexico–US borderUS immigrationTexasUnited StatesMore on this storyFreeze remains on strict new immigration law in TexasPublished4 hours agoThree reasons why US border crossings at record highPublished26 FebruaryWhere do Biden and Trump differ on immigration?Published28 FebruaryTop StoriesThis will be year economy bounces back, Sunak says, after inflation fallsPublished5 hours agoFresh string of defeats in the Lords over government’s Rwanda billPublished2 hours agoUK rent prices up 9% in record yearly rise, says ONSPublished1 hour agoFeaturesFamine looms in Sudan as civil war survivors tell of killings and rapesWill the UK economy ‘bounce back’ this year? AudioWill the UK economy ‘bounce back’ this year?AttributionSoundsThe GP who became Ireland’s youngest taoiseachEmma Barnett: ‘Why I wanted a baby loss certificate’Bafta TV Awards: The list of nominationsWatch: An emotional farewell to the Hairy Bikers. VideoWatch: An emotional farewell to the Hairy BikersPain, anger and disquiet as new Welsh first minister takes the stageLondon Tube strikes: All you need to knowI took three bullets to stop Princess Anne’s kidnap. VideoI took three bullets to stop Princess Anne’s kidnapElsewhere on the BBCThe ultimate bromanceWatch the masters of satire Peter Cook and Dudley Moore with a look back through the archivesAttributioniPlayerAre you a descendant of royalty?Geneticist Dr. Adam Rutherford sets out to prove that we all are…AttributionSoundsFrom the largest ship to disasters on deck…A closer look at times when cruise ships have caused commotionAttributioniPlayerA satirical look at the scheming world of PRCharles Prentiss and Martin McCabe embark on a new career as spin doctorsAttributionSoundsMost Read1Woman found with £2bn in Bitcoin convicted2Man given ‘wife’s ashes’ before her cremation3Macron flexes political muscle in boxing photos4Harry Potter steam train service suspended5Fresh defeats in the Lords over Rwanda bill6I am no longer best man to be Irish PM – Varadkar7Man murdered couple with drug before re-writing will8UK economy to ‘bounce back’ in 2024, says Sunak9UK rent prices up 9% in record yearly rise, says ONS10Kate hospital responds after alleged privacy breach

[ad_1] If it comes into effect, Texas’ SB4 law could lead to a patchwork of rules across Texas and the US.

BBC HomepageSkip to contentAccessibility HelpYour accountLiveNotificationsHomeNewsSportWeatheriPlayerSoundsBitesizeMore menuMore menuSearch BBCHomeNewsSportWeatheriPlayerSoundsBitesizeCBBCCBeebiesFoodClose menuBBC NewsMenuHomeIsrael-Gaza warCost of LivingWar in UkraineClimateUKWorldBusinessPoliticsCultureMoreTechScienceHealthFamily & EducationIn PicturesNewsbeatBBC VerifyDisabilityWorldAfricaAsiaAustraliaEuropeLatin AmericaMiddle EastUS & CanadaSupreme Court says Texas can arrest, jail migrantsPublished18 minutes agoShareclose panelShare pageCopy linkAbout sharingBy Bernd Debusmann JrBBC News, WashingtonThe Supreme Court has ruled that Texas can arrest and jail migrants, as part of the state’s new tough immigration law. The law, SB4, will allow local and state police to arrest and prosecute those suspected of illegally crossing the Mexican border. The Biden administration has called the law unconstitutional, The decision comes a day after it was blocked by the same court while emergency appeals played out. In total, SB4 was delayed three times by Justice Samuel Alito. Then on Tuesday the Supreme Court ruled that SB4 can take effect, while the lower federal appeals court weighs its legality. The court’s three liberal judges – Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson – dissented. “The court gives a green-light that will upend the longstanding federal-state balance of power and sow chaos,” Ms Sotomayor wrote in the dissenting opinion. SB4 gives local and state police officers the ability to stop and arrest anyone suspected of having crossed the border illegally, except in schools, healthcare facilities and places of worship.Punishments would range from misdemeanours to felonies and potential imprisonment, or fines of up to $2,000 (£1,570).Penalties for those who illegally re-enter Texas after having been deported could go up to 20 years in prison, depending on a person’s immigration and criminal history.SB4 was signed into law in December and was initially due to come into effect on 5 March. Top StoriesEntire Gaza population facing acute hunger – USPublished1 hour agoFirst convicted cyber-flasher jailed under new lawPublished1 hour agoTesco forced to change Clubcard logo after Lidl rowPublished45 minutes agoFeaturesWhat is Hong Kong’s tough new security law?Trump needs a $464m bond in six days. What if he can’t get it?Gillian Anderson: Why I changed my mind on playing Emily MaitlisIs TikTok really a danger to the West?The English heiress who joined the IRA’Untreated trauma led to our soldier son’s suicide’Bridgerton’s Nicola Coughlan: Why I hate on-screen vanityThe highs and lows of Welsh First Minister Mark DrakefordWould you recognise Wales’ next first minister? VideoWould you recognise Wales’ next first minister?Elsewhere on the BBCA fun and judgement-free guide to RamadanBig Zuu joins Mehreen to debunk some of the popular myths around the holy monthAttributionSoundsFrom slaps to snubs…Thirteen iconic moments from Oscar historyAttributioniPlayer’A few people laughed, a few cried, most were silent’The extraordinary story of the rise and fall of the inventor of the atomic bomb, J Robert OppenheimerAttributioniPlayerThe powerful emotional impact of Pink Floyd’s musicShine On You Crazy Diamond has helped people through their hardest timesAttributionSoundsMost Read1Deliveroo rider bites off customer’s thumb2Tesco forced to change Clubcard logo after Lidl row3First convicted cyber-flasher jailed under new law4Sabalenka to play in Miami Open after boyfriend’s deathAttributionSport5Why William and Kate video won’t stop online rumours6Trump needs a $464m bond. What if he can’t get it?7Speculation mounts over who will be next James Bond8HMRC will close tax helpline for half the year9Rare Antiques Roadshow brooch sells for thousands10Plan to ban accused MPs from Parliament diluted

[ad_1] The decision paves the way for Texas to implement SB4, which critics have called unconstitutional.

Other Story

BBC HomepageSkip to contentAccessibility HelpYour accountNotificationsHomeNewsSportWeatheriPlayerSoundsBitesizeMore menuMore menuSearch BBCHomeNewsSportWeatheriPlayerSoundsBitesizeCBBCCBeebiesFoodClose menuBBC NewsMenuHomeIsrael-Gaza warCost of LivingWar in UkraineClimateUKWorldBusinessPoliticsCultureMoreTechScienceHealthFamily & EducationIn PicturesNewsbeatBBC VerifyDisabilityWorldAfricaAsiaAustraliaEuropeLatin AmericaMiddle EastUS & CanadaCould you be a fair juror for Trump? We asked New YorkersThis video can not be playedTo play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser.Could you be a fair juror for Trump? We asked New YorkersCloseJury selection is under way in Donald Trump’s New York City hush-money trial, with hundreds of people selected as potential jurors.They must answer a questionnaire to determine, among other things, if they can be impartial about the former president.The BBC asked some of those questions to Manhattan residents.SubsectionUS & CanadaPublished50 minutes agoShareclose panelShare pageCopy linkAbout sharingRead descriptionExplore moreCould you be a fair juror for Trump? We asked New Yorkers. Video, 00:02:16Could you be a fair juror for Trump? We asked New YorkersSubsectionUS & CanadaPublished50 minutes ago2:16Up Next. A view from inside court for Trump’s blockbuster trial. Video, 00:01:15A view from inside court for Trump’s blockbuster trialSubsectionUS & CanadaPublished19 hours agoUp Next1:15Press, police and protesters: Outside Trump courthouse. Video, 00:01:12Press, police and protesters: Outside Trump courthouseSubsectionUS & CanadaPublished1 day ago1:12Trump’s ‘perp walk’ moment explained in 60 seconds. Video, 00:01:00Trump’s ‘perp walk’ moment explained in 60 secondsSubsectionUS & CanadaPublished31 March 20231:00Editor’s recommendationsCopenhagen stock exchange engulfed by huge fire. Video, 00:01:03Copenhagen stock exchange engulfed by huge fireSubsectionEuropePublished12 hours ago1:03Moment spire collapses at Copenhagen stock exchange. Video, 00:00:43Moment spire collapses at Copenhagen stock exchangeSubsectionEuropePublished11 hours ago0:43Dormice ladders built in the Forest of Dean. Video, 00:00:51Dormice ladders built in the Forest of DeanSubsectionGloucestershirePublished1 day ago0:51Liz Truss: The world was safer under Trump. Video, 00:00:35Liz Truss: The world was safer under TrumpSubsectionUK PoliticsPublished22 hours ago0:35Huge fires blaze along Miami highway. Video, 00:00:33Huge fires blaze along Miami highwaySubsectionUS & CanadaPublished12 hours ago0:33Watch: Georgia opposition leader punches MP during debate. Video, 00:00:34Watch: Georgia opposition leader punches MP during debateSubsectionEuropePublished21 hours ago0:34Wheelie bins fly and a caravan overturns in strong wind. Video, 00:00:24Wheelie bins fly and a caravan overturns in strong windSubsectionStoke & StaffordshirePublished1 day ago0:24Hannah Waddingham calls out demanding paparazzi. Video, 00:00:28Hannah Waddingham calls out demanding paparazziSubsectionEntertainment & ArtsPublished1 day ago0:28Endangered California condor chicks hatched in LA. Video, 00:01:28Endangered California condor chicks hatched in LASubsectionUS & CanadaPublished1 day ago1:28

BBC HomepageSkip to contentAccessibility HelpYour accountNotificationsHomeNewsSportWeatheriPlayerSoundsBitesizeMore menuMore menuSearch BBCHomeNewsSportWeatheriPlayerSoundsBitesizeCBBCCBeebiesFoodClose menuBBC NewsMenuHomeIsrael-Gaza warCost of LivingWar in UkraineClimateUKWorldBusinessPoliticsCultureMoreTechScienceHealthFamily & EducationIn PicturesNewsbeatBBC VerifyDisabilityUKEnglandN. IrelandScotlandAlbaWalesCymruIsle of ManGuernseyJerseyLocal NewsFirst product of Meghan’s lifestyle brand revealedPublished11 minutes agoShareclose panelShare pageCopy linkAbout sharingImage source, ReutersImage caption, Meghan pictured at a polo match in Florida last weekBy Sean CoughlanRoyal correspondentA first glimpse of the new business venture from the Duchess of Sussex has been teased on social media, with pictures of a jar of strawberry jam.In a bid to preserve a sense of mystery, the jam from the new American Riviera Orchard brand seemed to be spread among friends and influencers.Fashion designer Tracy Robbins posted a picture of the jam on Instagram.It was numbered “17 of 50”, suggesting the number of recipients of this first fruit of the new business.The arrival of Meghan’s new California-based lifestyle brand had been signalled on social media last month and this suggests that it will be selling food products.What do we know about Meghan’s new brand?Five things about Harry and Meghan’s brand revampWhy did Harry and Meghan leave the Royal Family?There seemed to be have been something of a re-launch for Meghan and husband Prince Harry’s brands and businesses this year, beginning with the overhaul of their regal-looking website under the sussex.com label.Their latest projects seem to be moving away from a previous focus on their time as working royals, such as their Netflix film Harry and Meghan and Prince Harry’s memoir Spare.The hint about the strawberry jam from Meghan’s American Riviera Orchard brand seems to fit with the couple’s latest Netflix plans.Meghan is going to launch a Netflix show which will “celebrate the joys of cooking and gardening, entertaining, and friendship”.Prince Harry will be involved in another Netflix venture showing the inside track on the world of polo. That’s the equestrian sport, not the mints.Delfina Blaquier, married to Prince Harry’s polo-playing friend Nacho Figueras, also posted a picture of the new jam, with hers labelled “10 of 50”.The social media trail for American Riviera Orchard evokes a sense of the couple’s home in California – and this soft launch for the jam show pictures of the jars in a sunny basket of lemons.It’s not known how much items from the new lifestyle brand will cost. Although there are already plenty of other royals getting into jams. Visitors to the gift shops in royal palaces can get a Buckingham Palace Strawberry Preserve for £3.95 or Windsor Castle Fine Cut Seville Orange Marmalade, also for £3.95.On both sides of the Atlantic they seem to be conserving their finances.Related TopicsUK Royal FamilyMeghan, Duchess of SussexMore on this storyWhat we know about Meghan’s regal lifestyle brandPublished16 MarchMeghan launches surprise new lifestyle brandPublished14 MarchTop StoriesMPs back smoking ban for those born after 2009Published8 minutes agoMuslim student loses school prayer ban challengePublished2 hours agoBowen: Iran’s attack on Israel offers Netanyahu a lifelinePublished7 hours agoFeaturesJeremy Bowen: Iran’s attack on Israel offers Netanyahu a lifelineIranians on edge as leaders say ‘Tel Aviv is our battleground’A really, really big election with nearly a billion votersWhat is the smoking ban and how will it work?Martin Tyler: I nearly lost my voice foreverWho are the millions of Britons not working?How to register to vote for the local elections ahead of midnight deadlinePlaying Coachella after cancer emotional, says DJHow the Alec Baldwin fatal film set shooting unfoldedElsewhere on the BBCFrom weight loss to prolonging lifeIs intermittent fasting actually good for you? James Gallagher investigatesAttributionSoundsCould Nina shake up the unspoken rules of modern dating?Brand new comedy about love, friendship and being your own selfAttributioniPlayerWill the UK introduce tough anti-tobacco laws?Under new plans, anyone turning 15 from this year would be banned from buying cigarettesAttributionSoundsCan William Wisting find the truth?The Norwegian detective returns, tackling more grisly cold casesAttributioniPlayerMost Read1Nursery boss ‘killed baby she strapped to beanbag’2Birmingham Airport flights disrupted by incident3Muslim student loses school prayer ban challenge4First product of Meghan’s lifestyle brand revealed5MPs back smoking ban for those born after 20096Police told to shut down right-wing Brussels conference7Historic Copenhagen stock exchange goes up in flames8Bowen: Iran’s attack on Israel offers Netanyahu a lifeline9Marten a ‘lioness’ who ‘loved her cubs’, court told10Sons of McCartney and Lennon release joint single

BBC HomepageSkip to contentAccessibility HelpYour accountNotificationsHomeNewsSportWeatheriPlayerSoundsBitesizeMore menuMore menuSearch BBCHomeNewsSportWeatheriPlayerSoundsBitesizeCBBCCBeebiesFoodClose menuBBC NewsMenuHomeIsrael-Gaza warCost of LivingWar in UkraineClimateUKWorldBusinessPoliticsCultureMoreTechScienceHealthFamily & EducationIn PicturesNewsbeatBBC VerifyDisabilityWorldAfricaAsiaAustraliaEuropeLatin AmericaMiddle EastUS & CanadaSupreme Court hears 6 Jan case that may hit Trump trialPublished2 minutes agoShareclose panelShare pageCopy linkAbout sharingRelated TopicsUS Capitol riotsImage source, Brent StirtonImage caption, Hundreds of Trump supporters stormed the Capitol after holding a “Stop the Steal” rally on 6 January, 2021By Nadine YousifBBC NewsThe US Supreme Court have begun hearing a case that could undo charges for those who stormed the Capitol in 2021. It focuses on whether a 2002 federal law created to prevent corporate misconduct could apply to individuals involved in the 6 January riots. More than 350 people have been charged in the incident under that law, which carries a 20-year prison penalty.Donald Trump faces the same charge in the pending federal case accusing him of election interference. The law makes it a crime to “corruptly” obstruct or impede an official proceeding. On Tuesday, Supreme Court Justices heard two hours of arguments over the law’s interpretation. However, it remained unclear how they would rule. A lawyer for a man who stormed the Capitol and was prosecuted under the law argued before the Justices that “a host of felony and misdemeanour” crimes already exist to prosecute his clients actions.The 2002 law passed in the wake of the Enron accounting scandal, Jeffrey Green said, was not one of them. US Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar counterargued that rioters deliberately attempted “to prevent Congress from certifying the results of the election,” therefore obstructing an official proceeding. Both fielded sceptical questions from the Justices. At one point, Mr Green argued that there is no historical precedent in which the law was used to prosecute demonstrators.Justice Sonia Sotomayor replied: “We’ve never had a situation before where (there was an attempt) to stop a proceeding violently, so I am not sure what a lack of history proves.”On the other hand, Ms Prelogar fielded questions from Justice Neil Gorusch on whether the law could then be stretched to apply to a “sit-in that disrupts a trial” or “a heckler” at the State of the Union Address. “Would pulling a fire alarm before a vote qualify for 20 years in federal prison?” he asked, appearing to reference an incident in which Jamaal Bowman, Democrat House representative, pressed a fire alarm in the Capitol.How the top court rules could have wide-ranging effects on the hundreds of people charged, convicted or sentenced under the law, as well as the prosecution of Mr Trump. Here is a breakdown of the key players and the law being argued: What is the 2002 federal law at the centre of the trial?The law is called the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. It was passed in response to the Enron scandal in the early 2000s, after it was exposed that those involved had engaged in massive fraud and shredding documents. It criminalizes the destruction of evidence – like records or documents. But it also penalises anyone who “otherwise obstructs, influences or impedes any official proceeding, or attempts to do so.” How has it been used in response to the 6 January riots?Under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, the US Department of Justice (DoJ) has brought obstruction charges against those who participated in the storming of the Capitol. Federal prosecutors argue they did so to impede Congress’ certification of the presidential electoral vote count to cement Joe Biden as the winner of the 2020 election. Therefore, the latter portion of the law that deals with obstructing an “official proceeding” would apply, the DoJ says. Who is challenging the law’s use in this case, and why? The Supreme Court is hearing a challenge to the law’s application brought forward by a former Pennsylvania police officer.Joseph Fischer was charged under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act with obstruction of a congressional proceeding on 6 January, as well as assaulting a police officer and disorderly conduct. His lawyers argue that prosecutors overreached with applying the Act, which they say deals explicitly with destroying or tampering with evidence integral to an investigation. Those who challenge the law’s application in 6 January cases also argue that a broad interpretation of the law would allow the prosecution of lobbyists or protestors who disrupt matters in Congress.How could the Supreme Court ruling impact Trump?The former president is charged under the very same law in a federal case accusing him of working to overturn the results of the 2020 election, which he lost to Mr Biden.If Supreme Court justices rule that the law does not apply to the 6 January rioters, Mr Trump could seek dismissal of half the charges he faces in that case.It also could be seen as a political win for the former president, who is seeking re-election in November, as he repeatedly has accused prosecutors of overreach. A final ruling is not expected until June. Related TopicsUS Capitol riotsDonald TrumpMore on this storySupreme Court to hear appeal over Capitol riot chargePublished13 December 2023A very simple guide to Trump’s indictmentsPublished25 August 2023Supreme Court asked to rule on Trump’s immunityPublished12 December 2023Top StoriesMuslim student loses school prayer ban challengePublished1 hour agoBowen: Iran’s attack on Israel offers Netanyahu a lifelinePublished5 hours agoNo liberty in addiction, says health secretary on smoking banPublished4 minutes agoFeaturesJeremy Bowen: Iran’s attack on Israel offers Netanyahu a lifelineIranians on edge as leaders say ‘Tel Aviv is our battleground’A really, really big election with nearly a billion votersWhat is the smoking ban and how will it work?Martin Tyler: I nearly lost my voice foreverWho are the millions of Britons not working?How to register to vote for the local elections ahead of midnight deadlineMeteorite ‘repeatedly transformed’ on space journeyHow the Alec Baldwin fatal film set shooting unfoldedElsewhere on the BBCFrom weight loss to prolonging lifeIs intermittent fasting actually good for you? James Gallagher investigatesAttributionSoundsCould Nina shake up the unspoken rules of modern dating?Brand new comedy about love, friendship and being your own selfAttributioniPlayerWill the UK introduce tough anti-tobacco laws?Under new plans, anyone turning 15 from this year would be banned from buying cigarettesAttributionSoundsCan William Wisting find the truth?The Norwegian detective returns, tackling more grisly cold casesAttributioniPlayerMost Read1Muslim student loses school prayer ban challenge2Birmingham Airport suspends flights over incident3First product of Meghan’s lifestyle brand revealed4Police told to shut down right-wing Brussels conference5Marten a ‘lioness’ who ‘loved her cubs’, court told6Bowen: Iran’s attack on Israel offers Netanyahu a lifeline7Historic Copenhagen stock exchange goes up in flames8No liberty in addiction, says minister on smoking ban9Sons of McCartney and Lennon release joint single10Boy, 4, dies after fire at family home in Wigan

BBC HomepageSkip to contentAccessibility HelpYour accountNotificationsHomeNewsSportWeatheriPlayerSoundsBitesizeMore menuMore menuSearch BBCHomeNewsSportWeatheriPlayerSoundsBitesizeCBBCCBeebiesFoodClose menuBBC NewsMenuHomeIsrael-Gaza warCost of LivingWar in UkraineClimateUKWorldBusinessPoliticsCultureMoreTechScienceHealthFamily & EducationIn PicturesNewsbeatBBC VerifyDisabilityWorldAfricaAsiaAustraliaEuropeLatin AmericaMiddle EastUS & CanadaNational Conservatism Conference: Police told to shut down right-wing Brussels eventPublished4 minutes agoShareclose panelShare pageCopy linkAbout sharingImage source, ReutersImage caption, Nigel Farage said the decision to shut the conference down was as an attempt to stifle free speechBy Nick Beake in Brussels and Laura GozziBBC NewsBrussels police have been ordered to shut down a conference attended by right-wing politicians across Europe, including Nigel Farage and Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban.Organisers say the National Conservatism Conference in the Belgian capital is continuing, but guests are no longer allowed to enter. Local authorities had raised concerns over public safety.A UK spokeswoman called reports of police action “extremely disturbing”. She said that Prime Minister Rishi Sunak was a “strong supporter and advocator for free speech” and that he was “very clear that cancelling events or preventing attendance and no-platforming speakers is damaging to free speech and to democracy as a result”.Alexander De Croo, the Belgian prime minister, said that the shutting down of the conference was “unacceptable”.Referring to the fact that it was the local mayor, Emir Kir, who opposed the conference, Mr De Croo added that while municipal autonomy was a cornerstone of Belgium’s democracy it could “never overrule the Belgian constitution guaranteeing the freedom of speech”. “Banning political meetings is unconstitutional. Full stop,” Mr De Croo wrote on X.In a message to organisers, Mr Kir had said some of the attendees of Tuesday’s conference held anti-gay and anti-abortion views. “Among these personalities there are several particularly from the right-conservative, religious right and European extreme right,” his statement said.Mr Kir also wrote on X: “The far right is not welcome.”Nigel Farage, who took to the stage this morning, told the BBC the decision to close down the conference because there were homophobes in the audience was “cobblers”, and that he condemned the decision as an attempt to stifle free speech. “Thank God For Brexit”, he said.Organised by a think-tank called the Edmund Burke Foundation, the National Conservatism Conference is a global movement which espouses what it describes as traditional values, which it claims are being “undermined and overthrown”. It also opposes further European integration.The conference said it aimed to bring together “public figures, journalists, scholars and students” who understood the connection between conservatism and the idea of nationhood and national traditions. French far-right politician Eric Zemmour, arriving for the conference after police had blocked the entrance, told journalists that Mr Kir was “using the police as a private militia to prevent… Europeans from taking part freely”.Organisers said Mr Zemmour was not allowed into the venue and that his address would be postponed.Former UK Home Secretary Suella Braverman and far-right French politician Eric Zemmour were listed as keynote speakers. The National Conservatism Conference reportedly started around 08:00 (06:00 GMT) on Tuesday and carried on for three hours until police showed up and asked the organisers to make attendees leave.Later, organisers wrote on X: “The police are not letting anyone in. People can leave, but they cannot return. Delegates have limited access to food and water, which are being prevented from delivery. Is this what city mayor Emir Kir is aiming for?”Hungary’s Prime Minister Viktor Orban and the former Polish Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki were due to speak tomorrow. Earlier, the organisers said on X that they would challenge the order to shut the conference down. “The police entered the venue on our invitation, saw the proceedings and the press corps, and quickly withdrew. Is it possible they witnessed how peaceful the event is?,” they wrote on X.The Claridge event space – located near Brussels’s European Quarter – can host up to 850 people. Around 250 people were in attendance on Tuesday afternoon.Mohamed Nemri, the owner of Claridge, told the BBC he had decided to host the event because “we don’t reject any party…. even if we don’t have the same opinion. That’s normal”.”I am Muslim and people have different opinion and that’s it. We are living in a freedom country. I’d like to people to talk freely,” he added.It is the third venue that was supposed to hold the event, after the previous two fell through. Belgian media reported that one venue pulled out after pressure by a group called the “Antifascist coordination of Belgium”.Related TopicsBelgiumTop StoriesMuslim student loses school prayer ban challengePublished43 minutes agoBowen: Iran’s attack on Israel offers Netanyahu a lifelinePublished5 hours agoLive. US expects to impose further sanctions on Iran ‘in the coming days’FeaturesJeremy Bowen: Iran’s attack on Israel offers Netanyahu a lifelineIranians on edge as leaders say ‘Tel Aviv is our battleground’A really, really big election with nearly a billion votersWhat is the smoking ban and how will it work?Martin Tyler: I nearly lost my voice foreverWho are the millions of Britons not working?How to register to vote for the local elections ahead of midnight deadlineMeteorite ‘repeatedly transformed’ on space journeyHow the Alec Baldwin fatal film set shooting unfoldedElsewhere on the BBCFrom weight loss to prolonging lifeIs intermittent fasting actually good for you? James Gallagher investigatesAttributionSoundsCould Nina shake up the unspoken rules of modern dating?Brand new comedy about love, friendship and being your own selfAttributioniPlayerWill the UK introduce tough anti-tobacco laws?Under new plans, anyone turning 15 from this year would be banned from buying cigarettesAttributionSoundsCan William Wisting find the truth?The Norwegian detective returns, tackling more grisly cold casesAttributioniPlayerMost Read1Muslim student loses school prayer ban challenge2First product of Meghan’s lifestyle brand revealed3Police told to shut down right-wing Brussels conference4Bowen: Iran’s attack on Israel offers Netanyahu a lifeline5Superdry boss hits back at ‘not cool’ criticism6Historic Copenhagen stock exchange goes up in flames7MPs to vote on smoking ban for those born after 20098Stabbed TV presenter ‘feeling much better’9Sons of McCartney and Lennon release joint single10Baby hurt in Sydney stabbing out of intensive care

BBC HomepageSkip to contentAccessibility HelpYour accountNotificationsHomeNewsSportWeatheriPlayerSoundsBitesizeMore menuMore menuSearch BBCHomeNewsSportWeatheriPlayerSoundsBitesizeCBBCCBeebiesFoodClose menuBBC NewsMenuHomeIsrael-Gaza warCost of LivingWar in UkraineClimateUKWorldBusinessPoliticsCultureMoreTechScienceHealthFamily & EducationIn PicturesNewsbeatBBC VerifyDisabilityWorldAfricaAsiaAustraliaEuropeLatin AmericaMiddle EastUS & CanadaNasa says part of International Space Station crashed into Florida homePublished40 minutes agoShareclose panelShare pageCopy linkAbout sharingImage source, NASAImage caption, The recovered object was part of a stanchion used to mount batteries to a cargo palletBy Max MatzaBBC NewsUS space agency Nasa confirmed that an object that crashed into a home in Florida earlier this month was part of the International Space Station (ISS). The metal object was jettisoned from the orbiting outpost in March 2021, Nasa said on Monday after analysing the sample at the Kennedy Space Center.The 1.6lb (0.7kg) metal object tore through two layers of ceiling after re-entering Earth’s atmosphere. Homeowner Alejandro Otero said his son was nearly injured by the impact. Nasa said the object was part of some 5,800lbs of hardware that was dumped by the station after it had new lithium-ion batteries installed. “The hardware was expected to fully burn up during entry through Earth’s atmosphere on March 8, 2024. However, a piece of hardware survived and impacted a home in Naples, Florida,” the agency said.The debris was determined to be part of a stanchion used to mount batteries on a cargo pallet. The object, made from metal alloy Inconel, has dimensions of 4in by 1.6in (10.1cm by 4cm).Mr Otero told CBS affiliate Wink-TV that the device created a “tremendous sound” as it blasted into his home.”It almost hit my son. He was two rooms over and heard it all,” he said.”I was shaking. I was completely in disbelief. What are the chances of something landing on my house with such force to cause so much damage,” Mr Otero continued.”I’m super grateful that nobody got hurt.”According to Nasa, the ISS will “perform a detailed investigation” on how the debris survived burn-up.What’s the risk of being hit by falling space debris?Is it a bird? Is it a plane? No it’s more space junkSpace junk has been a growing a problem. Earlier this month, sky watchers in California watched mysterious golden streaks moving through the night sky.US officials later determined that the light show was caused by burning debris from a Chinese rocket re-entering earth’s orbit.In February, a Chinese satellite known as “Object K” burned up as it re-entered the atmosphere over Hawaii.Last year, a barnacle-covered giant metal dome found on a Western Australian beach was identified as a component of an Indian rocket. There are plans to display it alongside chunks of Nasa’s Skylab, which crashed in Australia in 1979. This video can not be playedTo play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser.Media caption, Object thought to be a satellite burns up on re-entering Earth’s atmosphereRelated TopicsSpace debrisNasaFloridaUnited StatesMore on this storyIs it a bird? Is it a plane? No it’s more space junkPublished3 AprilRobot dog trains to walk on Moon in Oregon trialsPublished3 days agoTop StoriesMuslim student loses school prayer ban challengePublished50 minutes agoBowen: Iran’s attack on Israel offers Netanyahu a lifelinePublished4 hours agoLive. US expects to impose further sanctions on Iran ‘in the coming days’FeaturesJeremy Bowen: Iran’s attack on Israel offers Netanyahu a lifelineIranians on edge as leaders say ‘Tel Aviv is our battleground’A really, really big election with nearly a billion votersWhat is the smoking ban and how will it work?Martin Tyler: I nearly lost my voice foreverWho are the millions of Britons not working?How to register to vote for the local elections ahead of midnight deadlineMeteorite ‘repeatedly transformed’ on space journeyHow the Alec Baldwin fatal film set shooting unfoldedElsewhere on the BBCFrom weight loss to prolonging lifeIs intermittent fasting actually good for you? James Gallagher investigatesAttributionSoundsCould Nina shake up the unspoken rules of modern dating?Brand new comedy about love, friendship and being your own selfAttributioniPlayerWill the UK introduce tough anti-tobacco laws?Under new plans, anyone turning 15 from this year would be banned from buying cigarettesAttributionSoundsCan William Wisting find the truth?The Norwegian detective returns, tackling more grisly cold casesAttributioniPlayerMost Read1Muslim student loses school prayer ban challenge2First product of Meghan’s lifestyle brand revealed3Police told to shut down right-wing Brussels conference4Bowen: Iran’s attack on Israel offers Netanyahu a lifeline5Superdry boss hits back at ‘not cool’ criticism6Historic Copenhagen stock exchange goes up in flames7MPs to vote on smoking ban for those born after 20098Stabbed TV presenter ‘feeling much better’9Baby hurt in Sydney stabbing out of intensive care10Martin Tyler: I nearly lost my voice forever

BBC HomepageSkip to contentAccessibility HelpYour accountNotificationsHomeNewsSportWeatheriPlayerSoundsBitesizeMore menuMore menuSearch BBCHomeNewsSportWeatheriPlayerSoundsBitesizeCBBCCBeebiesFoodClose menuBBC NewsMenuHomeIsrael-Gaza warCost of LivingWar in UkraineClimateUKWorldBusinessPoliticsCultureMoreTechScienceHealthFamily & EducationIn PicturesNewsbeatBBC VerifyDisabilityWorldAfricaAsiaAustraliaEuropeLatin AmericaMiddle EastUS & CanadaFormer Marine jailed for nine years for bombing abortion clinicPublished7 minutes agoShareclose panelShare pageCopy linkAbout sharingRelated TopicsUS abortion debateImage source, CBSBy Max MatzaBBC NewsA former US Marine has been jailed for nine years for firebombing a California Planned Parenthood clinic and plotting other attacks to spark a “race war”.Chance Brannon, 24, pleaded guilty to the March 2022 attack on the healthcare clinic, which provides abortions in some of its locations.He also plotted to attack Jewish people and an LGBT pride event taking place at Dodger Stadium in Los Angeles. At the time of his arrest, he was an active duty member of the US Marines. Prosecutors said Brannon was a neo-Nazi who frequently spoke of “cleansing” the US of “particular ethnic groups”. In November, Brannon pleaded guilty to conspiracy, destruction of property, possession of an explosive and intentionally damaging a reproductive health services facility.Kristen Clarke, the assistant attorney general for the Department of Justice’s Civil Rights Division, said the attack “was designed to terrorise patients seeking reproductive healthcare and the people who provide it”.The explosion damaged the front entrance to the clinic in Costa Mesa, Orange County. No one was injured.However, Mehtab Syed, of the FBI’s Los Angeles field office, said Brannon’s “deep-rooted hatred and extremist views… could have killed innocent people”. Mr Syed added that Brannon plotted to rob Jewish residents in the Hollywood Hills, and had also discussed plans to attack the power grid. Further to this, in 2022, Mr Syed said Brannon, of San Juan Capistrano, placed calls to two US “adversaries” hoping to offer himself as a “mole” providing US intelligence.Two co-defendants, Tibet Ergul and Xavier Batten, have pleaded guilty to similar charges and will be sentenced next month.According to the National Abortion Federation, a group representing US abortion providers, there was a “sharp increase” in violence against clinics in 2022. Related TopicsAbortionUS abortion debateUnited StatesCaliforniaMore on this storyWhat is Planned Parenthood?Published25 September 2015Top StoriesMuslim student loses school prayer ban challengePublished53 minutes agoBowen: Iran’s attack on Israel offers Netanyahu a lifelinePublished3 hours agoLive. Israel demands sanctions on Iranian missile projectFeaturesJeremy Bowen: Iran’s attack on Israel offers Netanyahu a lifelineIranians on edge as leaders say ‘Tel Aviv is our battleground’A really, really big election with nearly a billion votersWhat is the smoking ban and how will it work?Martin Tyler: I nearly lost my voice foreverWho are the millions of Britons not working?How to register to vote for the local elections ahead of midnight deadlineMeteorite ‘repeatedly transformed’ on space journeyHow the Alec Baldwin fatal film set shooting unfoldedElsewhere on the BBCFrom weight loss to prolonging lifeIs intermittent fasting actually good for you? James Gallagher investigatesAttributionSoundsCould Nina shake up the unspoken rules of modern dating?Brand new comedy about love, friendship and being your own selfAttributioniPlayerWill the UK introduce tough anti-tobacco laws?Under new plans, anyone turning 15 from this year would be banned from buying cigarettesAttributionSoundsCan William Wisting find the truth?The Norwegian detective returns, tackling more grisly cold casesAttributioniPlayerMost Read1Muslim student loses school prayer ban challenge2Police told to shut down right-wing Brussels conference3Superdry boss hits back at ‘not cool’ criticism4First product of Meghan’s lifestyle brand revealed5Bowen: Iran’s attack on Israel offers Netanyahu a lifeline6Historic Copenhagen stock exchange goes up in flames7MPs to vote on smoking ban for those born after 20098Stabbed TV presenter ‘feeling much better’9William to return to duties after Kate diagnosis10Baby hurt in Sydney stabbing out of intensive care