(DEDHAM, Mass.) — The judge in the Karen Read murder trial has declared a mistrial after the jury said it was unable to reach a unanimous consensus on the fifth day of deliberations Monday.
Read was charged with killing her boyfriend, Boston police officer John O’Keefe, in January 2022.
Prosecutors allege she hit O’Keefe with her car and left him to die in the middle of a snowstorm after the two got into an argument earlier in the day. Read has strenuously denied the allegations, and her lawyers alleged that a fellow police officer was involved in O’Keefe’s death and colluded with others in a cover-up.
She had pleaded not guilty to second-degree murder, manslaughter while operating a motor vehicle under the influence and leaving the scene of a fatal accident.
After jurors told the court earlier Monday they had been unable to attain a consensus, Judge Beverly Cannone read them the Tuey-Rodriguez instructions and had them return to their deliberations. Per Tuey-Rogriguez, the judge would be forced to declare a mistrial if the jury returned once more undecided.
In a note to the court Monday afternoon, the jury said it was unable to reach a unanimous consensus despite an exhaustive deliberation process.
“Despite our rigorous efforts we find ourselves at an impasse,” the note, as read aloud by Cannone, said. “The deep division is not due to lack of consideration but to a severe adherence to our personal beliefs and moral compasses. To continue to deliberate would be futile.”
In response, Cannone stated, “Your service is complete. I am declaring a mistrial.”
This is a developing story. Please check back for updates.
(WASHINGTON) — A helmet-mounted indoor visualization and navigation device that allows first responders to see through dark smoke could soon be available to fire departments around the country, according to the Department of Homeland Security.
The Department’s Science and Technology Directorate is opening applications for fire departments around the country to apply for the technology developed by an Austin, Texas, startup Qwake Technologies. The technology was developed by Qwake along with the DHS through a 2020 contract to develop fire safety technology.
The device is called C-THRU, according to the Department.
“We know improved equipment and technology for first responders will help save lives and protect firefighters,” said Dr. Dimitri Kusnezov, DHS Under Secretary for Science and Technology. “Through collaborative partnerships with industry, S&T supports the development of devices like C-THRU that address challenges we know exist for first responders, and we’re leveraging emerging technology to meet their most urgent needs.”
There are 400 prototype devices available for fire departments to apply for.
The device is hands-free, light-weight and has a high-speed thermal camera, mounted to the device and similar to those firefighters currently use, which captures surroundings.
MORE: Canadian wildfire smoke could again impact US, experts said “Along with providing a clearer, real-time view of an environment, C-THRU also helps reorient firefighters with navigation for backtracking that provides turn-by-turn guidance,” according to a press release from the department.
“If a firefighter does become lost in a burning building, a mayday function can be activated, which alerts other C-THRU wearers in the area to find the distressed first responder. Similar to a smartphone, the system will continuously improve with over-the-air software updates.”
(NEW YORK) — Hunter Biden on Monday sued Fox News and its parent company over their production of a fictional miniseries that attorneys for the president’s son called “an effort to harass, annoy, alarm, and humiliate him, and tarnish his reputation.”
The miniseries, called “The Trial of Hunter Biden,” is described by Fox as a mock trial that seeks to show “how a possible Hunter Biden trial might look,” and includes several sexually graphic images of Hunter Biden.
In their suit, filed Monday in New York state court, attorneys for Hunter Biden accuse the network of “politically motivated attacks against the President and his family” and the “unlawful commercial exploitation of Mr. Biden’s image, name, and likeness.”
They accused the network of unlawful dissemination of an intimate image, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and unjust enrichment. The complaint requests a jury trial, compensatory and punitive damages, and the disgorgement of any profits from “The Trial of Hunter Biden.”
“This entirely politically motivated lawsuit is devoid of merit,” a Fox News spokesperson said in response to the suit. “The core complaint stems from a 2022 streaming program that Mr. Biden did not complain about until sending a letter in late April 2024. The program was removed within days of the letter, in an abundance of caution, but Hunter Biden is a public figure who has been the subject of multiple investigations and is now a convicted felon.”
“Consistent with the First Amendment, FOX News has accurately covered the newsworthy events of Mr. Biden’s own making, and we look forward to vindicating our rights in court,” the Fox spokesperson said.
Attorneys for Biden framed their suit as an “analogous situation” to the recent suit filed by Dominion Voting Systems, which ultimately concluded with a $787.5 million settlement agreement.
“Like in the Dominion case, Fox knew its conduct was unlawful but it did it anyway,” according to the complaint.
Hunter Biden’s legal team first threatened to sue Fox in April over the miniseries. Fox removed “The Trial of Hunter Biden” from its platform days later, “however, promotional reels and clips of the mocu-series have not been removed by Fox,” Biden’s lawsuit claims.
To file the suit, Hunter Biden enlisted the law firm Geragos & Geragos, whose principal, Mark Geragos, has represented A-listers like Michael Jackson, singer Chris Brown, and actress Winona Ryder.
Geragos also has experience representing family members of presidents: He negotiated a plea deal in 2001 for Roger Clinton Jr., the brother of former President Bill Clinton, for driving under the influence.
Hunter Biden was found guilty last month on three counts related to his 2018 purchase of a firearm while allegedly addicted to drugs. He faces a separate trial on tax charges in September.
(NEW YORK) — Hurricane Beryl regained its Category 4 status as it slammed into Carriacou Island with maximum sustained winds of 150 mph.
Beryl made landfall in Carriacou at 11:10 a.m. ET as an “extremely dangerous” storm, according to the National Hurricane Center. The cyclone hit Carriacou with maximum winds that were just 5 mph short of Category 5 status, the most powerful hurricane on the Saffir-Simpson Hurricane Scale.
Before making landfall, the storm was gaining strength as it headed toward the Windward Islands — which also include Grenada, St. Vincent, Grenadines and Petite Martinique islands. Life-threatening and potentially catastrophic wind, waves and storm surges are expected there. Heavy rain and flooding are also forecast.
Over the weekend, Beryl went from a tropical depression to a major Category 4 hurricane in just 48 hours, becoming the earliest Category 4 on record for the Atlantic Basin, breaking the record Hurricane Dennis held from July 7, 2005. Beryl is the first Category 4 ever recorded in the month of June.
The hurricane was downgraded Sunday evening to a Category 3, but picked up power and speed over warm ocean water and was upgraded to Category 4 Monday morning.
Ocean temperatures in the area where Beryl is located are 2 to 3 degrees above normal for this time of the year. Such temperatures are usually not seen until September.
Beryl is moving west at 20 mph. Some fluctuations of strength are expected but Beryl is forecast to remain at major status through the day as it passes the Windward Islands. A life-threatening storm surge will raise water levels by as much as 6 to 9 feet above normal tide levels in areas of onshore winds near where the eye makes landfall in the hurricane warning area. Near the coast, the surge will be accompanied by large and destructive waves.
Beryl is expected to produce rainfall totals of 3 to 6 inches across Barbados and the Windward Islands through this afternoon. Localized maxima of 10 inches are possible, especially in the Grenadines and Grenada. This rainfall may cause flash flooding in vulnerable areas.
Beryl will continue to track toward Jamaica, reaching near the island on Wednesday. Even if Beryl doesn’t make a direct landfall in Jamaica it will be close enough to cause issues.
After that, Beryl will move over the Yucatan Peninsula and then likely into eastern Mexico after another stint in the Gulf.
(WASHINGTON) — The Supreme Court on Monday handed down a historic decision on whether a former president is shielded from criminal liability for “official acts” taken while in the White House.
In the case, Donald Trump aimed to secure such immunity to try to quash the federal election subversion prosecution brought by special counsel Jack Smith.
Smith charged Trump with four felony counts, including conspiracy to defraud the United States and conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding, over his efforts to hold onto power after his 2020 election loss. Trump pleaded not guilty and has denied any wrongdoing. The trial was set to start on March 4, but has been delayed while the high court considers the immunity question.
Here’s how the news is developing. All times Eastern:
Jul 01, 11:03 AM Special counsel Jack Smith declines to comment
Special counsel Jack Smith’s office declined to comment on the Supreme Court ruling, a spokesperson told ABC News.
The court’s ruling will affect whether former President Donald Trump faces a federal trial this year on four felony counts brought by Smith, including conspiracy to defraud the U.S. and obstruction of an official proceeding, for his attempts to overturn his 2020 election loss to President Joe Biden.
Jul 01, 10:48 AM Trump reacts to SCOTUS ruling
Former President Donald Trump released a statement about the Supreme Court’s presidential immunity decision in a post on his social media platform.
“BIG WIN FOR OUR CONSTITUTION AND DEMOCRACY. PROUD TO BE AN AMERICAN!” Trump wrote on Monday morning.
Jul 01, 10:44 AM Biden campaign reacts to SCOTUS ruling
A senior Biden campaign advisor released a statement about the court’s ruling on immunity, stating, “Today’s ruling doesn’t change the facts, so let’s be very clear about what happened on January 6: Donald Trump snapped after he lost the 2020 election and encouraged a mob to overthrow the results of a free and fair election.”
The campaign argued that Trump “thinks he’s above the law and is willing to do anything to gain and hold onto power for himself.”
Jul 01, 10:36 AM Supreme Court rules president has no immunity for unofficial acts
The Supreme Court ruled 6-3 on the immunity case against former President Donald Trump stating, “The President enjoys no immunity for his unofficial acts, and not everything the President does is official.
The ruling, in which all of the liberal justices dissented,” added, “The President is not above the law. But under our system of separated powers, the President may not be prosecuted for exercising his core constitutional powers, and he is entitled to at least presumptive immunity from prosecution for his official acts.”
Jul 01, 9:41 AM ‘It’s a BIG decision,’ Trump says
With the Supreme Court poised to rule in Trump’s presidential immunity case, former President Donald Trump is continuing to push his defense, saying Monday’s decision with be a “big” and “important” one.
“It is a BIG decision, an important decision, a decision which can affect the Success or Failure of our Country for decades to come. We want a GREAT Country, not a weak, withering, and ineffective one. STRONG PRESIDENTIAL IMMUNITY IS A MUST!” Trump posted on his social media platform on Sunday.
Jul 01, 9:35 AM View from Trump’s legal world ahead of today’s ruling
While Trump’s team is focused on the implications this ruling will have on the Jan. 6 case, they are also particularly interested in how this could affect his other outstanding criminal cases.
Why’s that?
Trump’s lawyers have an outstanding motion to dismiss the Florida classified documents case based on presidential immunity.
While it’s not likely that case will go to trial before the election, the judge in that case, Judge Aileen Cannon, has indicated she wants to wait for the Supreme Court decision before she entertains that motion. And, given her unpredictability, the Trump legal team believes the ruling could give Cannon yet another avenue to throw the case’s future in doubt.
The best case scenario for Trump’s lawyers would be for the Supreme Court to rule he has full immunity for any actions taken while in office, which is not likely. The worst case would be that the justices uphold lower court rulings that said criminal laws apply to ex-presidents like they apply to everyone.
What do they expect? Not a full win for either side.
If the Supreme Court says its mandate could go into effect immediately, Trump’s lawyers expect Judge Tanya Chutkan to get the ball rolling very soon after in the Jan. 6 case and likely schedule a briefing in the next week and a status conference once the mandate is docketed.
There would also likely be action in Florida, where Judge Cannon could move to schedule a briefing or an in-person hearing on the motion to dismiss.
Jul 01, 9:19 AM ‘Disturbing’: What legal experts had to say about immunity arguments
When the justices appeared open to the idea of some level of immunity for former presidents, it was a shock for many veteran court observers.
“It was surprising to hear, at least from some of the justices, the possibility that a president could somehow commit criminal misconduct for which they could never be held liable in court,” said constitutional law expert Michael Gerhardt. “I think that has struck many people as just, up until now, inconceivable.”
One point that stood out to Gerhardt was when Justice Elena Kagan pressed Trump attorney John Sauer if a president could order the military to stage a coup and be immune. Sauer said, in their view, a president could.
“The answer that she got was one of the most disturbing I’ve ever heard at the Supreme Court,” he said.
Read more about reaction to the April arguments here.
Jul 01, 6:41 AM Five key takeaways from arguments heard in April
The high court in April heard historic arguments on whether former President Donald Trump can be criminally prosecuted related to his efforts to overturn his 2020 election loss.
Trump denies all wrongdoing and insists he should have “absolute immunity” for any “official acts” while in office.
(WASHINGTON) — The Supreme Court on Monday rejected Donald Trump’s sweeping claim of “absolute” immunity from criminal prosecution for “unofficial acts” but granted some protections for former presidents for official acts taken while in the White House.
The split 6-3 opinion was authored by Chief Justice John Roberts.
“The President is not above the law,” the opinion read. “But under our system of separated powers, the President may not be prosecuted for exercising his core constitutional powers, and he is entitled to at least presumptive immunity from prosecution for his official acts. That immunity applies equally to all occupants of the Oval Office.”
The ruling will affect whether Trump faces a federal trial this year on four felony counts brought by special counsel Jack Smith, including conspiracy to defraud the U.S. and obstruction of an official proceeding, for his attempts to overturn his 2020 election loss to President Joe Biden.
(WASHINGTON) — The Supreme Court on Monday sidestepped ruling whether Florida and Texas laws limiting how social media companies regulate content violate the First Amendment, sending the issue back to the lower courts for further review.
(WASHINGTON) — The Department of Justice is preparing to present the Boeing Company a plea deal that would again allow the aerospace giant to avoid a trial over an alleged conspiracy to defraud the United States, according to attorneys for families of victims of two fatal Boeing 737 Max crashes who were briefed on the department’s plans Sunday afternoon.
Under the proposed deal, Boeing would be required to enter a guilty plea to the conspiracy charge, which was first filed January 2021, for allegedly misleading the FAA during its evaluation of the Boeing 737 Max aircraft. The company must also agree to the appointment of an external corporate monitor, pay a fine of about $200 million and remain on probation for three years, according to lawyers for the families.
During the briefing with the DOJ, family members of the crash victims expressed dissatisfaction with the proposal, according to attorneys representing the families. The families contend that the deal contains no accountability and no admission that Boeing’s alleged conspiracy caused the deaths of 346 people who were killed in the two Max crashes in 2018 and 2019. The victims’ families have been pushing DOJ to take the company to trial and to impose fines upwards of $20 billion.
“The Justice Department is preparing to offer to Boeing another sweetheart plea deal,” wrote attorneys Robert Clifford and Paul Cassell in a statement. “The deal will not acknowledge, in any way, that Boeing’s crime killed 346 people. It also appears to rest on the idea that Boeing did not harm any victim. The families will strenuously object to this plea deal. Judge [Reed] O’Connor [of the Northern District of Texas] will have to decide whether this no-accountability-deal is in the public interest. Indeed, he will have to decide whether to approve [an agreement] that ties his hands at sentencing and prevents him from imposing any additional punishment or remedial measures. The memory of 346 innocents killed by Boeing demands more justice than this.”
According to the statement from Clifford and Cassell, “Glenn Leon, Chief of the Fraud Section of the Criminal Division at the U.S. DOJ, told the group on the call that the DOJ hasn’t shared the new plea agreement with Boeing but would do so later Sunday. [Leon] admitted there is ‘a strong interest’ by the families to go to trial, but he repeatedly said that the DOJ couldn’t prove charges by a reasonable doubt. Families argued over and over for a trial and to allow a jury to make that decision,” the statement said.
Mark Lindquist, another attorney for crash victims’ families, told ABC News that Boeing will be given until the July 7 to accept the deal. If Boeing rejects the terms, the DOJ will pursue prosecution.
“The company would be absolutely brutalized in a highly public trial,” Lindquist said. “Boeing has way too much dirty laundry to risk the bright spotlight of a trial.”
The Department of Justice and Boeing declined to comment.
Clifford and Cassell told the DOJ that the victims’ families “will be traveling from around the world to go to the next hearing before Judge O’Connor in Texas “to fight this,” according to the attorneys’ statement.
The deferred prosecution agreement (DPA) was put into place in the final days of the Trump administration, when the DOJ charged Boeing in a criminal information with one count of conspiracy to defraud the U.S. for allegedly misleading the FAA during the agency’s evaluation of the new Boeing 737 MAX aircraft. Over 300 people died in the two MAX crashes — the first in Indonesia in October 2018 and the second five months later in Ethiopia.
Under the terms of that agreement, the DOJ fined Boeing $243.7 million and required the company to pay $1.77 billion in compensation to its airline customers and $500 million to the victims’ beneficiaries. The company was also required to disclose any allegations of fraud, cooperate with the government and avoid committing any felony offense. Under these conditions, the DOJ agreed to defer criminal prosecution for three years.
“I firmly believe that entering into this resolution is the right thing for us to do — a step that appropriately acknowledges how we fell short of our values and expectations,” David Calhoun, Boeing president and CEO, said in a note to employees after the company was charged by the DOJ in 2021. “This resolution is a serious reminder to all of us of how critical our obligation of transparency to regulators is, and the consequences that our company can face if any one of us falls short of those expectations.”
But in May — four months after the door plug fell off Alaska Airlines flight 1281 over Portland, Oregon — the DOJ informed Boeing that the company had failed to live up to its obligations under the DPA.
The DOJ’s determination once again opened Boeing up to possible prosecution on the original charge or “for any federal criminal violation of which the United States has knowledge,” according to a DOJ letter sent last month to U.S. District Judge Reed O’Connor, who presides over the criminal case.
Boeing has disputed the DOJ’s finding of a breach in the DPA.
“We believe that we have honored the terms of that agreement, and look forward to the opportunity to respond to the Department on this issue,” the company said in a statement in May.
Nadia Milleron, mother of Samya Rose Stumo, 24, a Massachusetts native who died in the Boeing Max crash in Ethiopia in 2019, spoke to ABC News Sunday after the families of victims were briefed by the DOJ.
“I don’t understand why they’re offering the plea deal. They don’t need to,” Milleron said. “They should just take them to trial.”
Milleron said that Boeing pleading guilty without a trial is “not what the victims want. That’s not what the victims’ families want.”
Milleron said she planned to travel to Fort Worth, Texas, to oppose the plea deal if and when it is presented to the judge.
In a written statement, Javier de Luis, who lost his sister in the 2019 crash, called the deal “inadequate.”
“The issue is not whether there should be trial vs a plea deal. The issue is that the penalties being proposed by the DoJ are totally inadequate both from the perspective of accountability for the crimes committed, and from the perspective of acting in the public interest by ensuring a change in Boeing’s behavior,” read Luis’ statement. “The penalties proposed here are essentially the same as those proposed under the previous DPA which, as Alaska Air demonstrated, did nothing to increase the safety of the flying public.”
(NEW YORK) — Since the pandemic, concerns over personal health have been at the forefront of consumers’ minds. One of the concerns that took flight was gut health and the microbiome, with a rise in sales for products like probiotics, greens powder, and digestive sodas (like Poppi and Olipop).
But conversations around microbiome health aren’t exclusive to just the gut. The same interest has moved into beauty, with brands touting the importance of maintaining a healthy skin microbiome to prevent premature aging and acne. The Rootist, a new hair-care line launched in April, is introducing fermented ingredients as the next wave of innovation in the shampoo aisle with promises of “anchored, active roots, a hydrated, balanced scalp, and strong, healthy hair.”
Clare Hennigan, principal analyst – Beauty & Personal Care at Mintel, says these brands have already piqued consumer interest.
“In hair care from 2022 to 2023, the number of products that feature microbiome in the product description have actually increased 52.3%,” Hennigan told ABC News. “We really see, especially in hair care, the momentum stirring and the demand growing for microbiome hair care solutions.”
But what are these fermented ingredients, how do brands claim they work and are they worth the hype?
What are fermented ingredients and how can they help maintain and balance the microbiome?
Very simply put, fermented ingredients are bacteria, says Dr. Mona Gohara, MD, a board-certified dermatologist and associate clinical professor at Yale School of Medicine.
“If you leave something out long enough, things kind of grow out of it. One of the things that grows is bacteria,” Gohara told ABC News.
Not all bacteria are bad, however, think of yogurt and kombucha for instance, which are made through fermentation.
The Rootist says that it’s this fermenting process that makes their products “easily recognized and received by roots, scalp, and hair.” Just like skin and the gut, the scalp has its own bacteria and types of fungi which together create its microbiome. According to Gohara, the presumption here is that the fermented ingredients in products like that of The Rootist help feed the bacteria on our scalps which in turn supports the health of our pre-existing scalp microbiome.
And maintaining a balanced scalp microbiome is crucial to keeping hair healthy, says Dr. Jeannette Graf, MD, a board-certified dermatologist and assistant clinical professor of dermatology at the Mount Sinai School of Medicine. Conditions like dandruff or acne can be influenced by the microbiome.
“If we have an imbalance of our microbiome or a microbiome is not working correctly, we need to create an environment on the skin of the scalp, on the skin of face, where they can exist,” Graf told ABC News.
“Think of it like a garden, and the soil is the scalp. If the soil is healthy, the plants and the flowers are going to blossom,” explained Gohara. “If the scalp is compromised or inflamed or irritated, it’s less healthy soil, right? And that, and then leads to less healthy, bountiful garden.”
Are they worth the hype?
While in theory fermented hair care ingredients may be beneficial to the scalp microbiome, the bottom line is that there is that there’s still more research that needs to be done.
“Within the personal care industry – there are many new ingredient technologies being developed,” Graf said. “So studies are done by these biotech companies- and good ones. But that is where most of the research and literature is published.”
“It’s safe to say that at a minimum, the product will support a healthy scalp microbiome,” Gohara added, who draws a line at claiming these products will lead to increased hair growth. “It means that in me, whatever my biological potential as a 48-year-old woman at this point, if I use this, it’ll make my hair grow as optimally as it would biologically at this point.”
And while experts say there is still research to be done, Hennigan says the industry is all in on fermented hair.
“This signals broader industry trends overall, where we’ll see how we can really personalize our products specific to even perhaps our own personal microbiomes, to better target and pinpoint our specific needs,” Hennigan said.
France’s President Emmanuel Macron shakes hands with supporters after voting in the first round of parliamentary elections outside a polling station in Le Touquet, northern France, on June 30, 2024. — Ludovic Marin/AFP via Getty Images
(PARIS) — The Rassemblement National, France’s main far-right party, made significant strides in the country’s first round of snap legislative elections on Sunday.
Together with its allies, it rallied close to 11 million French voters, totaling 33.2% of the vote, bringing it closer to being able to form a government after next week’s second round of voting.
The snap elections were called only three weeks ago after President Emmanuel Macron’s party suffered a resounding defeat in the European elections. His party placed third yesterday with the left-wing coalition Nouveau Front Populaire in second place, reaching 28% of the vote.
With this historic result, the Rassemblement National is closer than ever before to power. Jordan Bardella, a 28-year-old rising star in the party, would become prime minister if an “absolute majority” — more than half of the 577 seats — is obtained next Sunday by the RN and its allies.
Marine Le Pen, president of the party and three-time presidential candidate, celebrated this victory by attacking President Macron and speaking of the “willingness to turn the page after 7 years of contemptuous and corrosive power.”
Le Pen took over the RN from her father, Jean-Marie Le Pen, who has multiple convictions for antisemitic and racist hate speech, and the younger Le Pen has spent the last 12 years trying to change the image of her party.
Final results are far from certain, with more than 500 local elections still to be called to know the full makeup of France’s National Assembly, but a RN “absolute majority” would potentially mean drastic changes in France’s international policy, including support to Ukraine.
Prime minister-hopeful Bardella has said he remains “in favor of continuing logistical and defense equipment support to Ukraine” but added that he had two “red lines” that he would not cross: “the sending of French troops to Ukrainian territory” and “the sending of long-range missiles or military equipment […] which could directly strike Russian cities.”
This would stop long-range SCALP missile deliveries to Kyiv as well as put an end to Macron’s promise to send French military instructors to Ukraine. The question remains whether the level of funding for Ukraine would change under an RN government.
Bardella recently said that Russia was a “multidimensional threat to both France and Europe,” trying to distance himself from the party’s historically pro-Russia stance.
Le Pen had in 2017 traveled to Moscow to meet with Russian President Vladimir Putin, who was said to be watching the current parliamentary elections “very closely.”
Because of the two-round voting system and 577 local elections, exact predictions are complicated, with polling agencies giving very rough estimates.
In some local elections, three or four candidates have made it to the second round, which means the left-wing coalition is now pulling out candidates who arrived in third place, in order to block seats for the far-right.
Jean-Luc Mélenchon, leader of radical left La France Insoumise, called on candidates to withdraw if needed: “Not one vote, not one seat more for the RN.”
Although a clear idea of whether or not the RN can form a government will only be known next Sunday, the result has already alarmed many, including minority groups, some of which have said they fear they would be more targeted under a far-right party leading the country.
If the RN fails to obtain an absolute majority, France could face a months-long standstill as no party would be available to successfully vote laws or implement policy. In any case, Macron would remain president until 2027.
Voter turnout soared to a 22-year high on Sunday, with French voters going back to the polls in just six days, for a decisive second round that will shape the country’s future.
