(ATLANTA) — Nearly 400 flights were canceled into and out of Atlanta’s Hartsfield-Jackson International Airport on Saturday after severe weather and hail fell overnight.
Weather so far has forced 380 Delta flight cancellations at the airport, with additional delays and cancellations expected.
Around 100 Delta Airlines aircrafts were inspected overnight for possible damage from the hail that fell last night, with nearly all having returned to service Saturday, according to a spokesperson for Delta.
“Delta people are working as safely and quickly as possible to recover flights impacted by thunderstorms, lightning, hail and winds at our Atlanta hub Friday night. We thank our customers for their continued patience and understanding,” the airline spokesperson said.
“Intense thunderstorms, including one that brought reports of microburst winds and quarter-inch hail to our hub at Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport, drove more than 90 diversions to other airports in the U.S. Southeast and a pause in airport operations for safety reasons the evening of June 27,” the spokesperson added.
Severe weather conditions in the area led to ground stops and flights being diverted at the airport on Friday.
The air traffic control tower that manages aircraft around the Hartsfield-Jackson Airport in Atlanta was briefly evacuated Friday evening due to “strong winds,” according to the FAA. The tower was not unstaffed during this time as few controllers stayed back to handle the air traffic in the area, the agency said.
In ATC recordings, controllers can be heard telling pilots that they evacuated due to weather and there are three personnel in the tower — controller, supervisor and traffic management.
Delta said it is performing inspections on its aircraft for any potential hail damage.
(DELAWARE) — California Gov. Gavin Newsom is suing Fox News for $787 million for defamation.
Newsom’s allegations stem from Fox News host Jesse Watters’ coverage of the battle between the governor and President Donald Trump when the Trump administration sent the California National Guard to Los Angeles earlier this month.
Watters allegedly reported on Fox News that Newsom lied about a phone call with Trump, and the governor claims in his lawsuit that Watters’ show misleadingly edited a video of Trump to support the claim.
Trump, asked by a reporter on June 10 when was the last time he had spoken to Newsom, replied, “A day ago. Called him to tell him, got to do a better job, he’s doing a bad job” — even though, according to Newsom, the last time they had spoken was three days prior to that, at 1:28 a.m. ET on June 7, and Newsom said they had not discussed the riots in question.
After Newsom asserted on X that the two had not spoken on June 9 as Trump appeared to have said, Watters, according to the lawsuit, accused Newsom of lying and played the video clip of Trump telling the reporter the two had spoken — but edited out the start of the clip where Trump said “a day ago.”
“If Fox News wants to lie to the American people on Donald Trump’s behalf, it should face consequences — just like it did in the Dominion case,” Newsom said in a statement Friday, referring to the 2023 settlement Fox reached with Dominion Voting Systems — also for $787 million — after the voting machine company accused Fox News of knowingly pushing false conspiracy theories that Dominion rigged the 2020 presidential election in Joe Biden’s favor.
“I believe the American people should be able to trust the information they receive from a major news outlet,” Newsom said in his statement. “Until Fox is willing to be truthful, I will keep fighting against their propaganda machine.”
In a letter sent to Fox, Newsom’s attorneys said that unless Fox News issues a retraction and an on-air apology, “we will proceed with the lawsuit so that a jury can determine Fox News’s culpability and assign a monetary value to its ‘blatantly unethical’ conduct.”
Fox News, in a statement, said, “Gov. Newsom’s transparent publicity stunt is frivolous and designed to chill free speech critical of him. We will defend this case vigorously and look forward to it being dismissed.”
(BOULDER, Colo.) — The man accused of throwing Molotov cocktails at a group of Colorado marchers advocating for the release of hostages being held in Gaza pleaded not guilty to federal hate crime charges on Friday.
Mohamed Soliman, 45, appeared in federal court in Denver for his arraignment after being indicted this week on a dozen federal charges in connection with the June 1 attack. He had previously been charged by complaint with a federal hate crime offense.
Prosecutors say Soliman ignited and threw two Molotov cocktails at the Run for Their Lives group during their Boulder walk, at one point shouting, “Free Palestine!”
During an interview with law enforcement, Soliman said he learned of the Run for Their Lives walk after searching for “Zionist” events online, according to the 12-count indictment.
A handwritten document recovered from his vehicle stated, “Zionism is our enemies untill [sic] Jerusalem is liberated and they are expelled from our land” and described Israel as a “cancer entity,” according to the indictment.
He remains in federal custody.
Soliman also faces 118 state charges in connection with the attack, which left over a dozen people, including a Holocaust survivor, injured. The slew of charges includes 28 counts of attempted murder, along with assault and explosives charges.
He is next scheduled to appear in court in the state case on July 15.
(MINNESOTA) — Minnesotans are lining up at the state capitol on Friday to honor a slain lawmaker and her husband as their accused killer made a brief appearance in court.
Melissa Hortman is the first woman to lie in state, according to the Minnesota House of Representatives.
Next to the Hortmans was their golden retriever, Gilbert, who was wounded in the attack and later had to be euthanized, officials said.
Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz and first lady Gwen Walz are among those paying their respects.
Former Vice President Kamala Harris will attend the couple’s private funeral on Saturday, according to a source familiar with Harris’ plans.
Harris spoke to the Hortmans’ two children, Sophie and Colin, in the last week “to express her deep condolences and offer her support,” the source said.
Meanwhile, the Hortmans’ alleged killer, Vance Boelter, who faces federal charges including stalking and state charges including first-degree murder, briefly appeared in federal court on Friday.
Boelter alleged the conditions in jail have kept him from sleeping for 12 to 14 days, according to Minneapolis ABC affiliate KSTP. Boelter claimed the doors are slammed incessantly, the lights are always and that he sleeps on a mat without a pillow, KSTP reported. He also allegedly said an inmate next to him spreads feces, KSTP reported.
The judge agreed to push back Boelter’s hearing to July 3, according to KSTP. Boelter has not entered a plea.
Boelter is accused of shooting and killing the Hortmans at their home in Brooklyn Park and shooting and wounding Democratic state Sen. John Hoffman and his wife, Yvette, at their house in nearby Champlin in the early hours of June 14, authorities said.
Boelter, 57, allegedly showed up to their doors, impersonating a police officer and wearing a realistic-looking latex mask to carry out his “political assassinations,” prosecutors said.
Investigators recovered a list of about 45 elected officials in notebooks in his car, according to prosecutors. Two other lawmakers were spared the night of the shootings, officials said.
ABC News’ Ahmad Hemingway and Brittany Shepherd contributed to this report.
(WASHINGTON) — The Supreme Court on Friday granted a partial stay of nationwide injunctions issued by district judges against President Donald Trump’s executive order to effectively end birthright citizenship.
The 6-3 opinion came from Justice Amy Coney Barrett. The court’s three liberal justices dissented.
The court, however, said it was not deciding whether the executive order from Trump was constitutional, rather focusing on whether a single judge has the authority to issue universal injunctions.
“Government’s applications for partial stays of the preliminary injunctions are granted, but only to the extent that the injunctions are broader than necessary to provide complete relief to each plaintiff with standing to sue,” the opinion read.
“Amazing decision, one we’re very happy about,” Trump told reporters in a rare appearance in the White House briefing room shortly after the court announced its decision.
“This morning the Supreme Court has delivered a monumental victory for the Constitution, the separation of powers and the rule of law in striking down the excessive use of nationwide injunctions to interfere with the normal functioning of the executive branch,” he said.
However, legal challenges will continue to Trump’s Day 1 order to deny citizenship to children born on U.S. soil to unlawful immigrants or those on a temporary immigrant status, as the court did not rule on the merits of the cases.
The individual plaintiffs in these cases remain protected under the injunctions issued.
“Prohibiting enforcement of the Executive Order against the child of an individual pregnant plaintiff will give that plaintiff complete relief: Her child will not be denied citizenship,” Barrett said. “Extending the injunction to cover all other similarly situated individuals would not render her relief any more complete.”
Trump can move forward immediately, though, with developing plans to implement the birthright citizenship order, which does not take effect for 30 days.
Friday’s decision is a boost for Trump in his crusade against nationwide injunctions that have blocked some of the executive actions he’s taken so far in his second term.
Supporters of nationwide injunctions say they serve as an essential check to potentially unlawful conduct and prevent widespread harm. Critics say they give too much authority to individual judges and incentivize plaintiffs to try to evade random assignment and file in jurisdictions with judges who may be sympathetic to their point of view.
Justice Sonia Sotomayor read her dissent aloud from the bench, criticizing the court’s majority.
“No right is safe in the new legal regime the Court creates,” Sotomayor wrote. “Today, the threat is to birthright citizenship. Tomorrow, a different administration may try to seize firearms from lawabiding citizens or prevent people of certain faiths from gathering to worship.”
“The majority holds that, absent cumbersome class-action litigation, courts cannot completely enjoin even such plainly unlawful policies unless doing so is necessary to afford the formal parties complete relief,” she added. “That holding renders constitutional guarantees meaningful in name only for any individuals who are not parties to a lawsuit. Because I will not be complicit in so grave an attack on our system of law, I dissent.”
President Trump first celebrated the court ruling as a “GIANT WIN” in a post on his conservative social media platform.
“Even the Birthright Citizenship Hoax has been, indirectly, hit hard. It had to do with the babies of slaves (same year!), not the SCAMMING of our Immigration process,” Trump wrote. “Congratulations to Attorney General Pam Bondi, Solicitor General John Sauer, and the entire DOJ.”
(WASHINGTON) — President Donald Trump took a victory a lap on Friday after the Supreme Court limited nationwide injunctions issued by lower court judges against his executive order to effectively end birthright citizenship.
“This was a big one, wasn’t it?” Trump said as he walked into the White House briefing room.
While Trump celebrated the 6-3 court decision as a “monumental win,” the justices did not weigh in on whether his executive order is constitutional and allowed legal challenges to continue.
(MILWAUKEE) Two Milwaukee police officers were shot after responding to a call for a person with a weapon late Thursday, police said.
A suspect has been arrested in connection with the shooting on Friday morning, police said.
In what is being described as an “ambush,” officers were fired upon as they approached an alley, according to police.
A 32-year-old officer has been hospitalized in critical condition while a 29 year-old officer hospitalized with a non-life-threatening injury, police said.
The identity of the suspect has not been revealed by police, but officials said criminal charges will be presented to the Milwaukee district attorney’s office “in the upcoming days.”
“Thank you to our law enforcement partners who assisted us in taking the suspect into custody. As a start reminder, the Milwaukee Police Department will not tolerate harm to our community or our officers. Individuals inflicting harm against the public and our officers will be held accountable,” police said in a statement.
“It is with profound sorrow and outrage that we confirm that two Milwaukee police officers were tragically shot and critically injured in the line of duty tonight. Our thoughts are with these officers, their families, friends, and colleagues. These officers face unimaginable suffering and they have long roads ahead of them,” a statement from the Milwaukee Police Association said.
“This senseless act of violence has struck the very heart of our department and our community. We have reached a breaking point. Violence in our city is out of control, and those who protect our neighborhoods are increasingly in the crosshairs,” the statement continued. “We have had five officers killed in the line of duty over the past seven years and dozens of our officers have been shot and shot at while trying to serve our neighborhoods. Our officers wear the badge with pride and honor, but our officers need more leadership from the city to bring an end to this violence.”
Milwaukee Mayor Cavalier Johnson said in response to the shooting: “It’s a sad day. It’s a very sad day. Because no officer, no person in law enforcement should ever, ever be fired upon. For the person that shot at our police officer, I want you to know, you should turn yourself in. Know that the men and women on this police force, they are going to find you, they’re going to arrest you, and you’re going to be brought to justice anyway.”
ABC News’ Ahmad Hemingway contributed to this report.
(WASHINGTON) — The Supreme Court ruled Friday that a Texas law that mandated websites with “sexual material harmful to minors” have age verification is constitutional.
The court’s conservative judges ruled 6-3.
An adult entertainment industry trade group challenged a 2023 Texas law that requires sites with more than a third of content containing “sexual material harmful to minors” must receive electronic proof that a patron is 18 or older.
The law requires users to provide digital ID, government-issued ID or other commercially reasonable verification methods, such as a facial scan or credit card transaction data.
The court’s decision only affects the Texas law — not similar laws instituted in other states.
The trade group alleged the verification law uniquely threatens individual privacy and data security for millions of adults who otherwise have a First Amendment right to view the material.
Justice Clarence Thomas, writing for the majority, ruled that “the decades-long history of some pornographic websites requiring age verification refutes any argument that the chill of verification is an insurmountable obstacle for users.”
“The statute advances the State’s important interest in shielding children from sexually explicit content. And, it is appropriately tailored because it permits users to verify their ages through the established methods of providing government-issued identification and sharing transactional data,” he wrote in his decision to uphold the Fifth Circuit’s ruling that sided with the state.
Justice Elena Kagan wrote in her dissent that while protecting children from explicit online material is an important task, the state could have accomplished its objectives and “better protect adults’ First Amendment freedoms.”
“Many reasonable people, after all, view the speech at issue here as ugly and harmful for any audience. But the First Amendment protects those sexually explicit materials, for every adult. So a State cannot target that expression, as Texas has here, any more than is necessary to prevent it from reaching children,” she wrote.
Kagan — joined in her dissent by justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson — said no one disagrees with the paramount importance of protecting children from viewing porn but asks “what if Texas could do better?”
“What if Texas could achieve its interest without so interfering with adults constitutionally protected rights in viewing the speech that HB 1181 covers?”
This is a developing story. Please check back for updates.
(WASHINGTON) — The U.S. Supreme Court, in a 6-3 decision, ruled in favor of parents seeking to opt their children out of public school instruction that conflicts with sincerely held religious beliefs.
The case, brought by a group of Christian, Muslim and Jewish parents from Montgomery County, Maryland, sought a guaranteed exemption from the classroom reading of storybooks with LGBTQ themes, including same-sex marriage and exploration of gender identity.
This is a developing story. Please check back for updates.
(WASHINGTON) — The Supreme Court ruled Friday that a government task force that determines what preventive health care services insurers must cover at no cost under the Affordable Care Act is constitutional.
The vote was 6-3 with conservative Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito and Neil Gorsuch dissenting.
This is a relief to public health advocates and medical groups who had said cancellation of the United States Preventive Services Task Force and invalidation of its recommendations would be devastating to Americans’ health. Roughly 150 million Americans have benefitted from the no-cost provision — which must underwrite a broad range of treatments from cancer screenings to cholesterol-lowering medications and drugs to prevent the spread of HIV.
A group of Christian-owned businesses challenged the arrangement, alleging that the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force, which operates out of the Department of Health and Human Services, is not legally structured and possesses unchecked power to influence the health care system. Lower federal courts agreed.
The 16-member panel of expert volunteers is appointed by the HHS secretary. Members are removable at-will, but they are not confirmed by the Senate. It is also supposed to operate “independent” of political influence, meaning its recommendations are not directly reviewable.
This is a developing story. Please check back for updates.
