International
Controversial assisted suicide bill introduced in UK Parliament
British lawmakers began debating on Friday the processing of a bill on assisted dying for certain terminally ill patients, a proposal that has sparked controversy.
The bill would allow assisted suicide for patients in England and Wales who are terminally ill, with only six months of life expectancy remaining.
To qualify for this option, patients must be able to express a clear choice and obtain approval from two doctors and a judge.
The bill’s sponsor, Labour MP Kim Leadbeater, argues that these provisions make it “the most robust” legislation on the issue in the world.
Speaking before the House of Commons, Leadbeater said the bill aims to provide “choice, autonomy, and dignity” to adults suffering from terminal illnesses.
She argued that the current law “is not clear and does not protect patients, families, and healthcare staff, which forces people into desperate actions.”
Leadbeater shared the story of Norman, a man who had been battling prostate cancer for 15 years. “When the disease spread and the pain became unbearable, he went to his garden and shot himself in the head.”
If the bill passes this initial stage, it will need to be reviewed and amended in committee before being brought back for approval by both houses of the British Parliament.
Although the proposal originates from within the Labour Party, the Labour government has not officially endorsed it, and the outcome of the vote will depend more on personal convictions than party directives.
Nine years ago, a similar bill on assisted suicide was rejected by Parliament, but public opinion has shifted since then and is now largely supportive of the proposal.
A poll published on Friday by YouGov found that three-quarters of residents in England and Wales support this change in the law.
International
Marco Rubio launches U.S. campaign to “dismantle” the International Criminal Court
U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced Monday (July 13, 2026) the launch of a diplomatic campaign aimed at “dismantling” the International Criminal Court (ICC), a key institution in the global justice system, while pressuring Washington’s allies to withdraw from the organization, which he accused of interfering in U.S. affairs.
“The ICC represents an intolerable threat to American sovereignty: it claims the authority to prosecute and even imprison military personnel and officials acting in defense of the national interests of the United States,” Rubio said.
He also accused the court of waging “a war against our country, not with bullets or missiles, but with statutes, agreements and the power of what they call international law.”
The United States is not a signatory to the Rome Statute, the treaty that established the ICC. The Trump administration has previously imposed sanctions on senior court officials over investigations into alleged war crimes committed by U.S. personnel in Afghanistan and actions targeting Israeli officials, a key U.S. ally.
“Step by step, if necessary”
The new State Department initiative proposes banning ICC personnel from entering the United States and expanding sanctions against court members and affiliated organizations.
The plan also includes increasing pressure on Washington’s allies, particularly countries that “benefit from the U.S. security umbrella,” to publicly reject ICC actions and distance themselves from the institution.
The Trump administration will summon foreign ambassadors and senior officials to highlight what it describes as “ICC abuses” and encourage them to withdraw from the court.
Washington also plans to increase scrutiny of countries that refuse to reject what the administration calls the ICC’s “claimed authority” while continuing to rely on U.S. assistance.
Rubio said the ICC seeks to become “a global unaccountable arbiter.” In an opinion piece published Monday in The Wall Street Journal, the secretary of state said that with the support of its allies, the United States would dismantle the ICC “step by step, if necessary.”
International
ICE reverses course and moves forward with New Jersey migrant detention facility project
The administration of President Donald Trump has reversed course and resumed plans to convert a warehouse in New Jersey, purchased for $129.3 million, into a migrant detention facility with capacity for up to 1,500 people, according to a court filing in the state.
U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) submitted a document Friday to a federal court in New Jersey stating that it will continue moving forward with plans to establish the facility in the township of Roxbury.
According to the court filing, ICE had previously informed the court on June 29 that it had decided to abandon the plan to convert the property into a detention center.
However, on July 8, Department of Homeland Security (DHS) officials notified attorneys that, “after reconsideration,” the agency intended to continue evaluating the renovation of the warehouse for use as a migrant detention facility.
“DHS officials further informed counsel that, as of July 10, the agency’s deliberations remain ongoing,” the document stated.
The decision to revive the project comes two weeks after The New York Times reported that ICE had decided not to proceed with plans to establish new detention facilities as part of the Trump administration’s immigration detention and deportation strategy.
According to that report, the agency had planned to sell seven warehouses, including the Roxbury property, for more than $700 million or transfer them to other federal agencies.
The New Jersey facility proposal is part of broader efforts by the Trump administration to expand immigration enforcement infrastructure amid its push to increase detention capacity and accelerate deportations of undocumented immigrants.
International
Judge rules Trump’s IRS lawsuit was a “bad faith” attempt to manipulate the judicial process
A federal judge ruled Monday that a lawsuit filed by President Donald Trump against the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) was an attempt to “manipulate the judicial process” and determined that the case was brought in bad faith.
U.S. District Judge Kathleen Williams ordered sanctions against the attorneys involved in the lawsuit, which led to an effort to create the now-defunct $1.8 billion “anti-weaponization” fund aimed at addressing alleged political targeting by government institutions in favor of Trump allies.
The lawsuit was also used to justify a government order that sought to provide Trump and his companies with immunity from any past tax-related matters.
In a 56-page opinion, Williams sharply criticized both the Department of Justice (DOJ) — saying the government’s response to the case disregarded agency policies and may have violated the law — and the private attorneys who filed the lawsuit on Trump’s behalf.
“The very nature of the lawsuit and the conduct of the parties and counsel since its filing make clear that this was an attempt to use the court to provide legitimacy to an agreement designed to grant immunity to individuals and entities connected to the president and to allocate billions of taxpayer dollars to remedy grievances that the law does not recognize,” Williams wrote.
The judge also ordered that her opinion be referred to attorney disciplinary authorities in New York and Washington, which are already reviewing previous ethics complaints involving Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche and Deputy Attorney General Stanley Woodward.
Williams criticized the Justice Department for abandoning its responsibility to defend the interests of the United States, arguing that the government entered into an agreement that departed from its position in similar legal cases, ignored DOJ policies and pursued objectives beyond what is permitted by law.
“By abandoning its responsibility to vigorously defend the interests of the United States, the government entered into an agreement that deviated from its litigation position in similar cases, ignored Department of Justice policies and achieved objectives that exceeded those authorized by law, as well as others expressly prohibited,” Williams wrote.
The judge also referred one of Trump’s private attorneys to the Florida Bar for possible disciplinary action and barred another lawyer representing the president from appearing before the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida for one year.
The ruling adds another legal setback for attorneys involved in cases connected to Trump’s administration and raises new questions about the conduct of government lawyers and private counsel involved in the IRS lawsuit.
Marco Rubio launches U.S. campaign to “dismantle” the International Criminal Court
ICE reverses course and moves forward with New Jersey migrant detention facility project
Judge rules Trump’s IRS lawsuit was a “bad faith” attempt to manipulate the judicial process
Tec de Monterrey honors one of its students for his contribution to nanotechnology in medicine
Defense Minister commends salvadoran soldier for Central American Cross Country victory
Extension of the state of emergency approved in southern Chile
-
Central America3 days agoPanama launches anti-drone measures as prison security crisis deepens
-
International4 days agoDeadly Drug Trade Rivalry Suspected After Eight Bodies Discovered in Southern Mexico
-
Central America4 days agoRegional Naval Operations Strike Drug Cartels, Disrupting Cocaine and Weapons Trafficking Routes
-
International4 days agoTensions Escalate in Middle East as U.S. Bombs Iran After Maritime Attacks
-
International23 hours agoVenezuela Earthquake Death Toll Rises to 4,490 as Rescue Efforts Continue
-
International44 minutes agoMarco Rubio launches U.S. campaign to “dismantle” the International Criminal Court
-
International3 hours agoJudge rules Trump’s IRS lawsuit was a “bad faith” attempt to manipulate the judicial process
-
International50 minutes agoICE reverses course and moves forward with New Jersey migrant detention facility project