SEOUL: A huge blast on an oil tanker in a South Korean port Saturday sparked a raging fire that spread to a nearby vessel, leaving 18 people injured, authorities said.
A ball of fire shot up high above the ship and thick black smoke billowed into the air, dramatic images showed. Firefighters struggled to contain the blaze and prevent it spreading, shooting streams of water up onto the deck from beside the vessel in the southeast port of Ulsan.
All 25 of those on board the Cayman Islands-flagged tanker and the 21 people on the second ship have been rescued, according to the Coast Guard.
Twelve sailors and six rescue workers were injured, Yonhap news agency said, quoting local authorities. Nine of the injured were South Korean.
The Russian vice-consul in Busan said the tanker crew comprised 10 Russians, including the captain, and none had been seriously injured.
"Some received medical help on the spot, but no Russian has been hospitalised," said Evgeny Evdokimov, quoted by the Russian news agency Tass.
"There were no repairs or loading operations underway on the ship at the time of the explosion. It is obviously something in the cargo that caused the explosion and the fire," he said.
The Coast Guard said the cause of the blast was being investigated.
Huge tanker blast sparks fire injuring 18 in South Korea
Huge tanker blast sparks fire injuring 18 in South Korea
- A ball of fire shot up high above the ship and thick black smoke billowed into the air, dramatic images showed
- All 25 of those on board the Cayman Islands-flagged tanker and the 21 people on the second ship have been rescued
US judge strikes down Trump order against law firm, scolds him for ‘settling personal vendettas’
- Judge Howell rules Trump’s order violates free speech and due process
- Trump’s order targeted Perkins Coie over Clinton campaign and diversity policies
A federal judge on Friday struck down Donald Trump’s executive order targeting law firm Perkins Coie as a violation of the US Constitution’s protections of free speech and due process, and castigated him for “settling personal vendettas.”
US District Judge Beryl Howell’s ruling represented the broadest rebuke yet for the Republican president’s pressure campaign against law firms that he has accused of “weaponizing” the justice system against him and his political allies.
It was also the first ruling by a judge deciding the legal merits of any of the several directives Trump has aimed at law firms that have handled legal challenges to his actions, represented political adversaries or employed lawyers who have taken part in investigations of him.
Howell, in a sharply worded, 102-page opinion, said Trump’s executive order was an attack on foundational principles of American jurisprudence and the role lawyers play in ensuring the fair and impartial administration of justice.
“Settling personal vendettas by targeting a disliked business or individual for punitive government action is not a legitimate use of the powers of the US government or an American President,” Howell wrote.
Perkins Coie said in a statement it welcomed the judge’s ruling and was grateful to “those who spoke up” in support of the firm’s lawsuit.
“As we move forward, we remain guided by the same commitments that first compelled us to bring this challenge: to protect our firm, safeguard the interests of our clients, and uphold the rule of law,” a spokesperson for the law firm said.
White House representatives did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Howell, based in Washington, barred federal agencies from enforcing Trump’s March 6 order against Perkins Coie. The judge had previously issued a temporary restraining order blocking enforcement of key provisions of Trump’s directive.
The Justice Department can appeal Howell’s order to the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.
Perkins Coie, a 1,200-lawyer firm founded in Seattle, represented the campaign of 2016 Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton, who Trump defeated in his first presidential run.
Trump’s executive order sought to restrict Perkins Coie’s lawyers from accessing government buildings and officials, and it threatened to cancel federal contracts held by the firm’s clients.
The firm sued, calling the order a violation of the Constitution’s First Amendment protections against government abridgment of speech and Fifth Amendment guarantee of due process — a requirement for the government to use a fair legal process.
US Justice Department lawyer Richard Lawson, defending the orders in court, argued in each case that Trump was lawfully exercising his presidential power and discretion.
“In a cringe-worthy twist on the theatrical phrase ‘Let’s kill all the lawyers,’” Trump’s executive order “takes the approach of ‘Let’s kill the lawyers I don’t like,’ sending the clear message: lawyers must stick to the party line, or else,” Howell wrote.
Three other major law firms — WilmerHale, Jenner & Block and Susman Godfrey — also sued the administration to block the executive orders Trump issued against them. Other judges have temporarily blocked those orders while the cases proceed.
Nine rival firms — including Paul Weiss, Latham & Watkins; Skadden Arps; and Willkie Farr — have reached deals with Trump that averted punitive actions, pledging a combined total of nearly $1 billion in free legal services to advance causes he supports.
Trump’s targeting of firms has drawn condemnation from many within the legal industry. Some have criticized the firms that reached agreements as capitulating to presidential coercion.
Perkins Coie argued it was targeted over its work for Clinton’s campaign and the firm’s policies promoting workplace diversity and inclusion.
Trump’s order accused Perkins Coie of “dishonest and dangerous activity.”
It also said Perkins Coie “racially discriminates” in its hiring — referring to the firm’s diversity policies. Trump and his allies have portrayed such policies as discriminatory against white people. Trump’s order also criticized the firm’s work representing Clinton’s campaign.
Each of the firms suing the administration called the orders against them existential threats. They argued that the orders limited the ability of their lawyers to practice law and sought to intimidate their clients into seeking new counsel.
Despite economic contraction, Trump insists US will have ‘greatest boom in history’
- Economy was down in first three months of the year as Trump began his plans for sweeping tariffs
WASHINGTON: President Donald Trump insisted Friday that his policies will bring a boom in the US economy even as he acknowledged the possibility of a recession.
The US economy, the world’s largest, unexpectedly contracted in the first three months of the year as Trump began his plans for sweeping tariffs.
“This is a transition period. I think we’re going to do fantastically,” Trump told NBC News show “Meet the Press with Kristen Welker.”
Pressed on whether the United States could dip into recession, Trump said, “Anything can happen.”
“But I think we’re going to have the greatest economy in the history of our country. I think we’re going have the greatest economic boom in history,” Trump said in excerpts of the interview, which will be aired in full on Sunday.
Financial markets have been in tumult since Trump took office and moved to revamp the global economic order with a return to sweeping tariffs on imports.
Share prices rose on Friday, however, after a solid jobs report in the United States.
NYPD shared a Palestinian protester’s info with ICE. Now it’s evidence in her deportation case
- Leqaa Kordia, whose mother is an American citizen, was arrested at a protest outside Columbia University on March 13
- New York City law generally prohibits police from sharing information about arrests with federal immigration officials
NEW YORK: New York City’s police department provided federal immigration authorities with an internal record about a Palestinian woman who they arrested at a protest, which the Trump administration is now using as evidence in its bid to deport her, according to court documents obtained by The Associated Press.
The report — shared by the NYPD in March — includes a summary of information in the department’s files about Leqaa Kordia, a New Jersey resident who was arrested at a protest outside Columbia University last spring. It lists her home address, date of birth and an officer’s two-sentence account of the arrest.
Its distribution to federal authorities offers a glimpse into behind-the-scenes cooperation between the NYPD and the Trump administration, and raises questions about the city’s compliance with sanctuary laws that prohibit police from assisting with immigration enforcement efforts.
Kordia, 32, was among the earliest people jailed in President Donald Trump’s crackdown on noncitizens who participated in pro-Palestinian demonstrations.
She was detained during a voluntary check-in with immigration officials in Newark, New Jersey, on March 13, then flown to an immigration jail in Texas. Her arrest was announced by the US Department of Homeland Security the next day in a statement that cited an expired visa and her role in “pro-Hamas protests.”
It remains unclear how immigration authorities were able to learn about Kordia’s presence at the protest near Columbia last April.
At the demonstration, police cited Kordia with disorderly conduct. But the charge was dismissed weeks later and the case sealed.
City law generally prohibits police from sharing information about arrests with federal immigration officials, although there are exceptions for criminal investigations.
On March 14, an NYPD officer generated a four-page report on Kordia and shared it with Homeland Security Investigations, a division of US Immigrations and Customs Enforcement.
In an emailed statement, an NYPD spokesperson said the department “received a request from a federal agency related to a criminal investigation and shared relevant information in accordance with our sanctuary city policies.”
“The NYPD does not participate in programs that are designed for visa revocation or any civil immigration matter,” the statement added.
The department declined to say what the investigation entailed.
Inquiries to the DHS and ICE were not returned.
Legal experts and civil liberties advocates said the document reflected a worrisome level of information-sharing between the city and the federal government, which has conflated criticism of Israel with support for Hamas, a US-designated terror group.
“The intention of the sanctuary laws is to protect against this kind of collusion and pretextual information sharing,” said Meghna Philip, the director of special litigation at the Legal Aid Society.
“It seems to be a clear violation of the law,” Philip added, “and raises questions about what guardrails, if any, the NYPD has around sharing information with a federal government that is seeking to criminalize speech.”
A low-profile protester
Kordia grew up in Jerusalem and the West Bank, and moved to New Jersey in 2016 with her mother, an American citizen. She studied English at a local exchange program, but let her student visa expire because she believed her application for permanent residency was sufficient to remain in the country legally, according to her attorneys.
Kordia’s case stood out among those ensnared by Trump’s crackdown. She was not an outspoken activist and had not publicly criticized Israel, either in social media posts or newspaper op-eds. She maintained no social media presence and did not appear on any of the public lists maintained by pro-Israel groups that seek to identify people who participate in pro-Palestinian demonstrations. Her name was not mentioned in news reports about the demonstrations.
While the Trump administration identified her as a Columbia student, she has never been affiliated with the university and was not enrolled in any college when she joined a protest in 2024 outside Columbia. Her attorneys said she was peacefully voicing her dissent against Israel’s military campaign in Gaza, which they said has killed over 100 of her relatives.
A spokesperson for the NYPD declined to say when they were first approached by federal authorities or whether the March 14 report was the first time they had shared information about Kordia’s arrest record.
Surveillance and interrogations
Beginning in early March, attorneys for Kordia say federal agents began interrogating members of her family and her neighbors. They also subpoenaed records from her MoneyGram account and “established a trace on her WhatsApp messaging account,” her attorneys said in a court filing.
“The investigation revealed nothing except that Ms. Kordia sent a single payment to a Palestinian family member in 2022, which itself is protected First Amendment” rights, the filing states.
At an April 3rd hearing, the federal government pointed to Kordia’s prior arrest for protesting as a reason she should not be released. An immigration judge found no evidence she had acted violently at the protest and agreed to grant Kordia a $20,000 bond, which her family paid.
The government has appealed that decision, keeping her detained for now.
In a petition seeking her release, attorneys for Kordia, a devout Muslim, said she had been denied halal meals since arriving at the jail. As a result, she has lost 49 pounds (22 kilograms) and fainted in the shower, according to facility records shared with her attorneys.
“The government’s entire argument that Ms. Kordia is a danger to the United States rests on a single summons for her participation in a demonstration,” Arthur Ago, her attorney, said. “The only reason she’s confined right now is because of her political viewpoint.”
Mayoral cooperation
New York City Mayor Eric Adams has criticized the city’s sanctuary protections, while insisting his administration is “meticulously” following the law.
When asked by the AP last month if the NYPD could turn over information to its federal law enforcement partners about a summons issued to a protester, the mayor insisted no such request was ever made.
“We have no record that this happened,” Adams said. “When I inquired, they said we did not turn over anything and we don’t collaborate for civil enforcement. They said that over and over again.”
His office did not respond to inquiries Friday.
Togo nationals captured with Russian forces on Ukraine front; Moscow accused of trying to murder prominent blogger
- Most of the Togo nationals were recruited under alleged scholarships in Russia, says foreign ministry
- Ukraine intel agency says woman arrested after failed hit on Internet personality Serhii Sternenko
LOME, Togo: People from the small west African nation Togo have been “captured and detained” by Ukrainian armed forces after taking part “in military operations alongside Russian armed forces,” Togolese authorities said Friday.
In a statement seen by AFP, Togo’s foreign ministry said that the “majority of compatriots, in particular young students, had left Togo under alleged scholarships offered by structures claiming to be based in Russia.”
The ministry called on citizens, “particularly young people who wish to pursue their studies abroad, to exercise utmost vigilance.”
It “urges them to verify the authenticity of scholarship offers before making any commitment, and to contact the relevant departments or any other ministry concerned... to obtain reliable and secure information before any departure abroad, particularly to Russia.”
In March, the Martin Luther King Movement (MMLK), Togo’s leading human rights organization, alerted the authorities to the case of a Togolese student captured on the battlefield and imprisoned in Ukraine.
“Having received his study visa at the Russian embassy in Cotonou, the compatriot left Togo for Russia on August 21, 2024,” MMLK said in a statement.
“Arriving in Russia, he was forced to join the army to go to the front in Ukraine. It was there that he was seriously wounded, captured and thrown in prison,” it said.
The press also reported in recent months several cases of African nationals, often students or former prisoners, notably from the Democratic Republic of Congo, Cameroon and Benin, fighting with Russian forces on the Ukrainian front.
Prominent blogger targetted
In another development, Ukraine’s internal security agency, the SBU, on Friday accused Russian intelligence of orchestrating an attempt to assassinate a prominent Ukrainian blogger, accusing a 45-year-old woman of carrying out the failed hit.
The attempt to kill Internet personality Serhii Sternenko, who once led the local chapter of a right-wing group but is now better known in Ukraine for crowdfunding donations for military drones, took place on Thursday.
In a statement on Telegram, the SBU said the woman, whom it did not name, had fired several shots with a pistol, one of which hit Sternenko in the leg. The blogger said there was no danger to his life.
The woman’s lawyer said in court that she did not contest the facts of the case.
Russia’s FSB security service and its military intelligence agency did not immediately reply to requests for comment on the SBU’s allegations.
The SBU did not specify which of Russia’s several security services it believed to have recruited the woman, but said that they had last year told her to move into Sternenko’s apartment block in Kyiv, and to pick up a pistol from a dead drop.
The SBU said the woman’s handler told her on the morning of May 1 to kill Sternenko outside his apartment block.
The agency posted screenshots of what it said were messages between the woman and the handler and a video from a security camera showing the assassination attempt.
The accused’s lawyer said the contact had told the woman that Sternenko was working for Russia’s FSB.
The woman told the court that the contact, whose gender was not disclosed, had introduced themselves online as an SBU agent, and that she had initially feared them. Subsequently she had fallen in love with them despite never seeing their photo, she said.
US military creates new military zone along border with Mexico
- The US military said it had established the “Texas National Defense Area” in a 63-mile-long strip running east from the Texas-New Mexico border in El Paso
WASHINGTON: The US military has created a second military zone along the border with Mexico, adding an area in Texas where troops can temporarily detain migrants or trespassers to one designated in New Mexico last month.
President Donald Trump has launched an aggressive immigration enforcement campaign since taking office, increasing troops at the southern border and pledging to deport millions of immigrants in the United States illegally.
The Trump administration in April said it designated a 60-foot-wide, 170-mile-long (18 meter by 270 km) strip along the base of New Mexico as a “National Defense Area.”
Late on Thursday, the US military said it had established the “Texas National Defense Area” in a 63-mile-long strip running east from the Texas-New Mexico border in El Paso.
US Customs and Border Protection maintains jurisdiction over illegal border crossings in the area and troops would hand over migrants they detained to US Border Patrol or other civilian law enforcement, according to the Defense Department.
So far, 82 migrants have been charged for crossing into the New Mexico military zone, according to the state’s US Attorney’s Office. US troops have not detained any of them and they were dealt with by CBP officials.
The zone is intended to allow the Trump administration to use troops to detain migrants without invoking the 1807 Insurrection Act that empowers a president to deploy the US military to suppress events like civil disorder.
Around 11,900 troops are currently on the border. The number of migrants caught crossing illegally in March fell to the lowest level ever recorded, according to government data.
Texas Governor Gregg Abbott, a Republican, on Thursday posted pictures of razor wire barrier construction on the border, saying “Texas continues to work with the Trump Administration to stop illegal immigration.”
Since 2021 Abbott has deployed the state’s National Guard and police to border security.
New Mexico Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham has opposed what she called a “deportation buffer zone” in her state.
In a March social media post the Democrat called it “a waste of resources and military personnel, especially when migrant crossings are at the lowest in decades.”
