(NEW YORK) — Prince Harry and Meghan plan to travel to the United Kingdom next month to attend the public celebrations for Queen Elizabeth’s Platinum Jubilee, a first for the couple since stepping down from their senior royal roles two years ago.
Harry and Meghan, the duke and duchess of Sussex, also plan to bring their children, 3-year-old Archie and 10-month-old Lilibet, a spokeswoman for the Sussexes confirmed Friday.
“Prince Harry and Meghan, The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are excited and honoured to attend The Queen’s Platinum Jubilee celebrations this June with their children,” the spokeswoman said in a statement to ABC News.
The trip will mark the first time the California-based family has traveled to the U.K. together.
Archie, who is celebrating his third birthday Friday, was born in the U.K. but has not traveled back there publicly with his parents since they moved to California in 2020.
Lilibet was born last June in Santa Barbara, California, making her the first senior royal baby born in the United States, and the first great-grandchild of the queen to be born outside of the United Kingdom.
The Sussexes’ attendance at The Queen’s Platinum Jubilee celebration in June will also mark Harry and Meghan’s first public, joint return to the U.K.
The couple made a private stop in the U.K. earlier this month to visit Queen Elizabeth, their first in-person visit with the queen together in two years.
The celebration of Queen Elizabeth’s 70 years on the throne will be a multi-day celebration that is scheduled to include, among other things, a public concert, a church service and the annual Trooping the Colour parade.
Because they are no longer senior working royals, Harry and Meghan will not be part of the traditional Buckingham Palace balcony appearance royal family members make during Trooping the Colour, according to a Buckingham Palace spokesperson.
Harry’s uncle, Prince Andrew, who in February agreed to settle a sexual assault lawsuit, will also not be present on the balcony as he is also no longer a senior working member of the royal family.
“After careful consideration, The Queen has decided this year’s traditional Trooping the Colour balcony appearance on Thursday 2nd June will be limited to Her Majesty and those Members of the Royal Family who are currently undertaking official public duties on behalf of The Queen,” a palace spokesperson said in a statement.
Among the royals who will join Queen Elizabeth on the balcony will be Harry’s father, Prince Charles, and his wife, Camilla, duchess of Cornwall, and Harry’s older brother, Prince William, and his wife, Kate, duchess of Cambridge, and their three children, according to the palace.
Harry and Meghan’s return to the U.K. will undoubtedly put a spotlight on the tensions Harry has faced with his father and brother, whom he is known to have seen in-person only a few times since leaving his royal role.
When interviewed earlier this month while at the Invictus Games in the Netherlands, Harry did not answer a question about his relationship with his brother, William, and their father, Charles.
“He completely avoided the question. He changed the subject,” said ABC News royal contributor Victoria Murphy. “That really gives us a huge amount of insight into the fact that, clearly, significant bridges still need to be built there.”
Harry also raised questions and drew some backlash from the British press with his comments in the same interview about protecting the queen. The interview took place just a few days after he and Meghan visited her in the U.K.
When asked about his visit with the queen, Harry told NBC News, “Being with her, it was great. It was just so nice to see her. … She’s on great form.”
“I’m just making sure that she’s, you know, protected and got the right people around her,” said Harry, who described his relationship with his grandmother as “really special,” adding, “We talk about things that she can’t talk about with anybody else.”
The royal family has so far not issued any official response to Prince Harry’s comments.
Camila Cabello joined the ever-growing list of celebrities — both male and female — calling upon the Supreme Court to uphold Roe V. Wade, the 1973 decision that made abortion a constitutional right.
The “Bam Bam” singer was honored at Variety‘s Power of Women event on Thursday, where she was recognized as one of the strongest female voices in media and entertainment. Camila used the moment to speak out about reproductive rights and why they need to be protected.
“It’s atrocious,” she said of the court possibly striking down Roe V. Wade. “Obviously, it’s going to affect poor women the most, because women that have resources — even like me — will be able to handle things if they’re needed.”
The Grammy nominee continued, “The idea of having one moment transform the course of a woman’s life is tragic. And it’s tragic [that] the people affected are not having a say.”
Camila hopes this re-energizes voters and encourages them to “get involved” in all elections. She warned local elections are just as important as the rest because it ensures, “We have state and local legislators that are representing our interest.”
“Obviously, donating can make a difference,” she said of other ways to support the protection of reproductive rights. “And also being loud and angry about it.”
She mentioned during her acceptance speech that the night’s ceremony came “at a moment when women’s rights in America face greater threats than at any time in the last 50 years.”
Camila also highlighted the importance of mental health advocacy and why she founded the Healing Justice Project last year, which aims to provide activists with mental health support. Variety honored the “Havana” singer for her activism and philanthropy in supporting mental health initiatives.
In the follow-up to her 2018 self-titled debut album, Ella Mai dropped off her latest project Heart on My Sleeve on Friday.
The new 15-track LP is a collection of heartfelt R&B tracks with features from Roddy Rich, Lucky Daye and Latto.
“Congrats on your new album frienddd @ellamai so happy to be a part of it!” Latto wrote on Instagram, sharing a snapshot image of her collaboration with the Canada-born singer on “Didn’t Say.”
Ella Mai teased the album’s arrival by releasing singles “DFMU” and “Leave You Alone” earlier this year. She then officially announced its release in March saying, “i poured my whole heart into this album, more so than ever before. i am overly excited for this sophomore journey. let’s do it all over again!”
Heart on My Sleeve showcases a more vulnerable side to the 27-year-old “Boo’d Up” singer. “The album takes you on a love rollercoaster through the affairs of the heart, ups and downs of a relationship and all the complexities that are the grey areas in between,” she said in a press release.
Mother, tell your children not to hold out hope for another Danzig tour or album.
“I don’t think I’m going to tour anymore,” frontman Glenn Danzing tells Revolver. “I’m just going to fly out to a show here or there. I’ll maybe be down to do some one-offs. But I just don’t see myself getting on a tour bus anymore.”
Danzig does, however, refer to his just-launched run of 10 North American dates as “not really much of a tour,” so perhaps his definition of “tour” is relative.
As for future Danzig music, the Misfits icon says he writes “songs here and there, but “[doesn’t] know” if he’s “ever going to do another album again.”
“I might do an EP or I might just record some songs and put them out for free on the internet,” Danzig says. “We’ll see. It could be that right now I’m just not interested, and then a month from now I’ll be in the studio. It depends.”
“I’ve got to be excited about working in order to go do it,” he adds. “And right now I’m not that excited.”
Danzig’s current “tour,” or whatever he wants to call it, concludes May 19 in Austin, Texas. Meanwhile, Misfits are set to headline Chicago’s Riot Fest this September.
(NOTE LANGUAGE) Thursday’s seventh night of the streaming service’s Netflix Is a Joke festival featured an event called “Cobra Kai, Live and Bada**”, held at Los Angeles’ Microsoft Center.
Cast members were on hand for the celebration of the series, where it was announced that the fifth season of the Emmy-nominated show will be released September 9.
The trailer for the fifth season was also revealed and subsequently posted online. The new footage shows Thomas Ian Griffith‘s Terry Silver on the march. “Our competition has closed up shop,” he gloats.
“This is what we’re up against, Ralph Macchio‘s Daniel LaRusso says. “…I have to take him down.”
“You’re playing with fire, Danny Boy,” Silver teases.
Netflix teases, “Following the shocking results of the All Valley Tournament, Season 5 finds Terry Silver expanding the Cobra Kai empire and trying to make his ‘No Mercy’ style of karate the only game in town. With Kreese behind bars and Johnny Lawrence setting karate aside to focus on repairing the damage he’s caused, Daniel LaRusso must call on an old friend for help.”
The announcement follows the release of the first track from the album, “evergone,” which was inspired by the loss of Christina’s daughter Rosie. The album will be Christina’s first studio album since 2013’s Head or Heart, not counting the two albums of lullabies she recorded for her daughters: Songs for Carmella and Songs for Rosie.
She’s also dropped a new track, “mothers.” The perfect song for this Sunday’s Mother’s Day, it’s a love letter to moms everywhere, especially those who are struggling. “This one’s for you/’cause I’ve been there too,” Christina sings. Her daughter Carmella, who’s four, adorably chimes in at the end, “I love you, mom.”
Carmella also contributed to Songs for Rosie, and Christina tells ABC Audio she’s amazed at what a naturally gifted singer her daughter is.
“I hate to be like a stage mom, you know, but like, she’s so talented!” laughs Christina. “Like, you can’t obviously make someone that good at singing. She just really is good at singing!”
“I noticed that, I feel like, when she was, like, maybe one, because now she’s four. But when she was like one, one-and-a-half, she learned every word to the Taylor Swift song [‘Love Story’] — I don’t even know the words! She knew every word to it! And I was like, ‘OK!’ And then I just sort of watched it evolve.”
Christina adds that Carmella “definitely has interest” in following in her mom’s footsteps.
Adele is grateful she’s another year older and wiser. The powerhouse singer turned 34 on Thursday and took to social media to reflect on why this milestone is so important to her.
“What a difference a year makes,” she wrote on Instagram and shared two makeup-free selfies that showed off her fine lines and freckled skin. “If time keeps healing and smoothing out all the creases in my life like it does as the years fly by, then I can’t wait to be 60! I’ve never been happier!”
Reflecting on her life so far, Adele continued, “So many lessons, so many blessings to be grateful for. This is 34, and I love it here! Thank you for the birthday love as always.”
Much has changed in Adele’s life over the past few years. She divorced her husband of three-years, Simon Konecki, in 2021 and released the emotionally charged album 30, which documented that journey. The former couple share a young son, Angelo.
30 went onto become 2021’s best-selling album, despite being released in November, and has already generated serious awards buzz.
Adele is now romantically linked to sports agent Rich Paul.
Arcade Fire has announced a North American headlining tour in support of the band’s brand-new album, WE.
The outing will launch October 28 in Washington, D.C., and will wrap up December 1 in Toronto. Each show will feature an opening acoustic set from Beck.
Tickets go on sale next Friday, May 13, at 10 a.m. local time.
Prior to the North American run, Arcade Fire will launch a European tour in late August, which will stretch to October. Feist will open those shows.
For the full list of Arcade Fire’s tour dates and all ticket info, visit ArcadeFire.com.
WE, the sixth Arcade Fire album and first since 2017’s Everything Now, is out today. Arcade Fire will celebrate the record’s arrival with their milestone fifth performance on Saturday Night Live tomorrow.
The Rolling Stones have debuted two previously unheard live performances that will appear on the upcoming archival concert album Live at the El Mocambo, which will be released next Friday, May 13.
Renditions of The Stones’ 1972 hit “Tumbling Dice” and their funky 1976 gem “Hot Stuff” are available now as digital downloads and via streaming services, and you also can check out visualizervideos for the tunes at the band’s official YouTube channel.
As previously reported, Live at the El Mocambo features performances from two shows that the British rock legends played at the 300-capacity Toronto club on March 4 and 5, 1977.
The album, which will be available as a two-CD set, a four-LP collection on either black or neon vinyl, and digitally, features The Stones’ full March 5 concert plus three bonus performances from the previous night.
The concerts were booked as secret shows, where attendees were winners of a ticket giveaway, and The Stones were billed under the moniker The Cockroaches.
The Stones’ set list included a variety of covers, hits and deep cuts. One of the tunes the band played, “Worried About You,” would be released on 1981’s Tattoo You.
Only four songs from the El Mocambo concerts have been officially released previously, appearing on 1977’s Love You Live album alongside many tracks that were captured during The Stones’ 1975 and ’76 tours.
Prior to the release of the “Tumbling Dice” and “Hot Stuff” performances, The Stones premiered two other tracks from the live album — “It’s Only Rock ‘n’ Roll” and “Rip This Joint.”
(WASHINGTON) — With a leaked draft opinion revealing this week that the U.S. Supreme Court appears poised to overturn nearly 50 years of abortion rights precedent, Democrats and activists are sounding alarms that other rights not explicitly listed in the Constitution — but long-considered protected as implied rights of privacy — could be threatened next.
“If the rationale of the decision — as released — were to be sustained, a whole range of rights are in question — a whole range of rights,” President Joe Biden told reporters on Tuesday, offering his first public reaction to the document as the court confirmed its authenticity.
“If the right to privacy is weakened,” said Vice President Kamala Harris, “every person could face a future in which the government can potentially interfere in the personal decisions you make about your life.”
Their anxiety, legal experts told ABC News, is not only with Roe being overturned but in how it would be overturned — and whether the final opinion’s language and reasoning could set the stage for other unenumerated rights — those not directly listed in the Constitution — to be similarly sent back to be decided by the states.
While Justice Samuel Alito writes in the draft opinion that the court’s decision on Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization concerns only abortion and does not extend to other rights, experts say his current justification for overturning Roe opens the door to imperil other long-standing liberties the court has upheld for decades.
Here’s what legal experts are saying about the draft text:
Alito’s ‘originalist’ approach
The Supreme Court grounded its 1973 decision in Roe v. Wade on the Fourteenth Amendment’s due process clause, which the court has said guarantees Americans an implicit “right to privacy,” though that phrase is not used in the Constitution.
Justice Harry Blackmun described the constitutional underpinnings of that right when authoring the opinion: “This right of privacy, whether it be founded in the Fourteenth Amendment’s concept of personal liberty and restrictions upon state action, as we feel it is, or, as the District Court determined, in the Ninth Amendment’s reservation of rights to the people, is broad enough to encompass a woman’s decision whether or not to terminate her pregnancy,” the 1973 decision read.
But Alito — rejecting stare decisis, the legal doctrine intended to bind courts to abide by past rulings, as it relates to abortion — called the court’s decision on Roe “egregiously wrong from the start.” Taking an originalist approach, he argues in the draft opinion obtained by Politico that there’s no explicit right to privacy, let alone the right to an abortion, in the Constitution.
“It held that the abortion right, which is not mentioned in the Constitution, is part of a right to privacy, which is also not mentioned,” Alito writes, calling the Roe decision “remarkably loose in its treatment of the constitutional text,” and arguing that stare decisis “does not compel unending adherence to Roe’s abuse of judicial authority.”
Taking issue with Alito’s reasoning, Biden said Wednesday he believes the court’s current conservative majority would agree with failed Supreme Court nominee Robert Bork’s view that the right to privacy should not have been guaranteed with the court’s ruling in 1965 in Griswold v. Connecticut, which overturned a ban on married couples’ access to contraception.
“Griswold was thought to be a bad decision by Bork, and my guess is, the guys on the Supreme Court now,” Biden said.
Marc Spindelman, a professor at The Ohio State University Moritz College of Law, said it’s because of Alito’s reasoning — appearing to reject court precedent and the right to privacy in favor of an originalist interpretation of the Constitution — that puts other precedents, like the right to same-sex intimacy in Lawrence v. Texas in 2003 and same-sex marriage in Obergefell v. Hodges in 2015, at-risk, since those rights were also bound to the Fourteenth Amendment.
“From the point of view of originalist reasoning, it’s difficult to see what is distinctive about abortion compared to other rights that are now constitutionally protected but that originalist methodology, in principle, threatens,” Spindelman said.
Kate Shaw, a professor at Cardozo School of Law and an ABC News contributor, echoed that view.
“The whole method that the Roe Court used, which is basically to say what are the kind of key attributes of liberty that the Constitution has to protect, whether or not they’re written in the document, Alito says that method is totally illegitimate,” she said. “And instead, what the Constitution should be read to protect is the explicitly enumerated rights and a small, a small list of unenumerated rights, but only rights that are deeply rooted in history and tradition.”
Spillover concern
Alito wrote in the draft opinion, “Nothing in this opinion should be understood to cast doubt on precedents that do not concern abortion.”
“What sharply distinguishes the abortion right,” he said, is that it destroys “potential life,” and that “none of the other decisions cited by Roe and Casey involved the critical moral question posed by abortion.”
In deciding whether a right is protected, Alito said the court “has long asked whether the right is ‘deeply rooted in [our] history and tradition’ and whether it is essential to our Nation’s ‘scheme of ordered Liberty.'” In Alito’s view, abortion does not meet that standard.
“What Alito says is, don’t worry. Our decision today is only about abortion, not about anything else,” Spindelman said. “But if an originalist approach is the touchstone for judgment in the case, then it’s hard to see how or why the decision should not apply to other kinds of individual rights that the Court has said are protected by the Fourteenth Amendment.”
That approach, in principle, could doom any right that didn’t exist since the country’s founding, Spindelman said.
“It’s difficult to see why if once you pull row up from the roots, why decisions of more recent vintage ought to stay in the ground to be counted by the court as part of its respect for its own precedent,” he added.
So, could the court find a way to pull abortion from the right to privacy without unraveling other precedents? Former Justice Antonin Scalia clerk and vice-dean at the NYU School of Law, Rachel Barkow, doesn’t think so.
“I think that you can’t coherently do it,” she said. “Unfortunately, that is actually what erodes the legitimacy of the court as an institution because it’s not the leak that’s going to damage the court’s legitimacy, it’s not upholding rationales and being consistent over time.”
The problem for the court, she said, is that the Roe decision is part of a line of cases bound to recognizing the right to privacy, “and the draft opinion shows no respect for the right to privacy, and in light of that, all the cases that rely on that right to privacy would also find themselves falling under the same rationale.”
“I think the bigger thing that the public sees is no precedent is safe,” Barkow said “The court’s willingness to just cast aside a 50-year-old precedent, not just any precedent, but one that has been the subject of these confirmation hearings, and it’s a reason that they’re sitting there is they gave assurances to senators that they weren’t going to overrule it, and then they did.”
“I don’t think anyone can really take that group of people’s word if they say, ‘Oh, no, the other precedents are safe,'” she added. “I think they cried wolf one time too many.”
The opinion could change
When the court confirmed the document’s authenticity on Tuesday, it stressed in a statement that it “does not represent a decision by the Court or the final position of any member on the issues in the case.”
Experts stressed to ABC News that court opinions can change throughout their drafting. The leaked decision could potentially emerge with a different decision entirely — or completely unchanged.
“We don’t know exactly what this final opinion is going to look like when it is issued,” Shaw said. “But I would say absent something truly extraordinary and unexpected happening inside the court, some version of this opinion will be issued as the opinion of the court in a matter of weeks that will be the law of the land, and Roe versus Wade will be no more.”
And if so, the question becomes how soon the fate of other privacy rights will come before the court — from states and others challenging their constitutionality, using the conservative justices’ own arguments.
