Villager Ika Magdalena (front) and her sister walk past trees tied with yellow cloth as a marker for sacred sites for their Dayak people

A third suspect pleaded guilty Monday to his role in the New York City murder of DJ Jam Master Jay, a founding member of legendary hip-hop group Run DMC.

Jay Bryant, 52, faces 15 to 20 years in prison for being an accomplice after he "opened a locked fire escape exit door" to a music studio, letting in two men convicted in the musician's "execution style" murder in 2002, federal prosecutors said in a statement.

Jam Master Jay, whose real name was Jason Mizell, was 37.

The crime remained unsolved for nearly two decades, until two people close to the "It's Tricky" star --  longtime friend Ronald Washington and his godson Karl Jordan Jr. -- were indicted in 2020.

Prosecutors said the two men sought revenge after being cut out of a cocaine deal and were convicted based on testimony of two witnesses who came forward after many years.

The two men deny the accusations and were convicted in 2024, but Jordan's conviction was overturned in 2025 after a federal judge ruled the prosecutor had failed to prove the drug-trafficking motive.

The US Attorney's office has appealed that decision.

Bryant, who was identified by DNA testing, did not name his accomplices, media present in the courtroom reported Monday.

One of the early innovators of hip hop in the 1980s in the Queens borough of New York City, Run DMC had success with "My Adidas," "It's Like That," and the genre-bending rap-rock collaboration "Walk this Way" with Aerosmith.

Jam Master Jay's death was a blow to the rap world, years after the murder of Tupac Shakur in Las Vegas in 1996 and The Notorious B.I.G. in Los Angeles in 1997.

pel/eml/sla/jgc

(The Center Square) – Florida's Legislature reconvenes Tuesday for a special called session that will consider new congressional maps.

Republicans could gain as many as four congressional seats in Florida if the redistricting plan is approved, spokeswoman Lauren Guagliardo of the House Democratic Caucus said at a news conference Monday.

“Ron DeSantis called the Legislature back to play politics and redraw maps,” Guagliardo said. “This middecade redistricting is an illegal gerrymander because Donald Trump asked for it. Middecade redistricting is not normal. The Sunshine State has seen population growth for at least a century. It has never caused us to redraw maps in the middle of the decade before.”

The House Redistricting Committee will consider the plan on Tuesday, the state’s Republican House Speaker, Daniel Perez, said in a memo on Monday.

“We currently anticipate consideration of the map by the full House on Wednesday,” Perez wrote in the memo.

New maps are in play for the 2026 elections in California, Missouri, North Carolina, Ohio and Texas. Litigation has also led to changes in Utah and remains ongoing in Virginia, Georgia, Louisiana and New York.

Maryland’s bid died two weeks ago.

California has the potential to flip five seats to Democrats for a 48-4 representation for the party and Utah one to Democrats cutting into Republicans’ 4-0 representation. For Republicans, Missouri (to 7-1) and North Carolina (to 11-3) could gain one seat each; Ohio two (to 12-3); and Texas five (to 30-7).

In the House of Representatives, at the 2024 election Republicans won a 220-215 majority. Today, it is 217-212 with one independent that was formerly Republican and five vacancies.

DeSantis called the special session on the “false premise” that the U.S. Supreme Court will affirm Louisiana's redistricting plan, Guagliardo said Monday.

“That has not been decided,” she said. “The argument was held in October and no opinion has been issued.”

DeSantis, a Republican, in January called the special session that is scheduled to begin Tuesday.

A reporter Monday asked Guagliardo if Democrats would have also redrawn congressional districts if they controlled a majority in the Florida Legislature. Guagliardo called the question a “leap” and laughed.

“The point of it is that this is an illegal partisan gerrymander," she said. “My God I would love to see us in power one day and have the majority and to be able to represent the issues of the people. But what’s happening right now is what can occur when one party has had control for far too long and has forgotten who it is that they serve.”

Argentine President Javier Milei's government on Monday intensified a standoff with the media by blocking journalists from accessing the presidential palace for a third day running.

The firebrand Milei, a staunch ally of US President Donald Trump, has a turbulent relationship with the media, which he has copiously insulted since taking office in December 2023.

On Thursday and Friday, the government barred journalists accredited to cover events at the Casa Rosada from entering the palace, while investigating claims of "illegal espionage."

Journalists who showed up on Monday again found the gates closed to them.

The presidential security service is investigating two journalists from the Todo Noticias channel for allegedly filming in restricted areas inside the palace without authorization.

The journalists claim they had permission and that the areas filmed were frequently visited by children on school trips.

The Ambito Financiero financial daily has sought an emergency court ruling forcing the government to restore access.

The Argentine media association ADEPA complained that the press ban "directly impacts freedom of expression and the right to information, fundamental pillars of the democratic system."

Milei shrugged off the criticism.

In an X post, he wrote "NOLSALP" -- the Spanish acronym of his slogan "We don't hate journalists enough."

The Catholic Church has offered to mediate in the standoff.

Archbishop Jorge Lozano, a spokesman for the association of Argentine Catholic bishops, said Monday he was "surprised" by the media ban and offered to serve as a go-between on restoring access.

sa/lm/cb/ksb

A proposed emergency tax on California billionaires to help fund the state's cash-strapped healthcare system has gathered enough signatures to trigger a referendum in November, the union behind the measure announced.

The proposal gathered 1.5 million signatures -- nearly twice the number required to get on the ballot.

"Most Californians and most billionaires recognize how reasonable and necessary this proposal is -- both to keep emergency rooms open and to save California businesses from closing," Suzanne Jimenez of the Services Employees International Union-United Healthcare Workers West (SEIU-UHW), the measure's lead sponsor, said late Sunday.

Under the California Billionaire Tax Act, the state's wealthiest residents would be hit with a one-time tax of five percent of their net worth.

Some 90 percent of the tens of billions of dollars in expected revenue would be used to fund the state healthcare system for five years to offset the massive federal cuts imposed by President Donald Trump's budget law.

While the tax would be a one-off, the proposal has sparked controversy in the most populous state and across the nation.

Opponents fear it will scare off Silicon Valley and trigger an exodus of the ultra-wealthy, which would hurt tax revenue. California is home to more than 250 billionaires, more than any other US state.

The American left has been divided on the issue. Governor Gavin Newsom, a Democrat who is considered a potential 2028 presidential hopeful, opposes it, while progressive Senator Bernie Sanders is its chief supporter in Congress.

High-profile entrepreneurs are against it. According to US media, Google co-founder Larry Page, Oracle's Larry Ellison, and Palantir co-founder Peter Thiel have all taken steps to reduce their footprint in California.

And the cryptocurrency and artificial intelligence communities are funding ad campaigns against it.

Jimenez, the union leader, described the measure's wealthy opponents as "a very small group of the most controversial billionaires on the planet."

"Healthcare workers and our allies won't quit until we fully protect our patients from the looming healthcare disaster that will be caused by $100 billion in cuts to California healthcare," she added.

In the face of growing wealth inequality worldwide, taxation of the ultra-rich has become a flashpoint of debate in recent years.

Brazil put the idea of a billionaire tax on the G20 agenda when it hosted the forum's annual leaders' summit in 2024.

Last year France's parliament rejected the proposed 'Zucman tax,' a measure that would have taxed the ultra-wealthy at an annual rate of two percent.

rfo-mlm/ksb

(The Center Square) – Trump administration officials on Monday detailed charges against the suspected attacker of the White House Correspondents' Association's Dinner in Washington, D.C.

Cole Tomas Allen faced three charges on Monday, including attempted assassination of President Donald Trump. Allen was also charged with transporting firearms across state lines and with discharge of a firearm during a crime of violence. 

Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche said the charge of attempting to assassinate a sitting U.S. president carries as much as life in prison. Discharge of a firearm during a crime of violence and interstate transmission of a firearm both carry as much as a 10 year prison sentence, each, if convicted. 

Officials said Allen boarded a train in California on April 21 bound for Chicago and later arrived in Washington, D.C. Allen arrived in Washington, D.C., at about 1 p.m. Eastern on April 24 and checked into the Washington Hilton Hotel. 

He approached a security checkpoint at 8:40 p.m. on April 25 on the terrace level of the hotel, which is a floor above where the dinner was taking place, authorities said. 

Jeanine Pirro, U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia, said Allen made it clear that he intended to assassinate Trump. She said Allen made his reservation at the dinner on April 6, a month after Trump announced he would be attending on March 2. 

"He is very much aware that the president and the first lady entered the ballroom at 8:00 p.m," Pirro said. "It was 8:40 that he made the decision to rush the ballroom." 

Pirro said Allen had a pump-action shotgun, a semi-automatic gun and at least three knives when he approached the security checkpoint in the hotel. 

"The Constitution and the laws of the United States permit us to register our views through our voices and our votes," Pirro said. "What they don't permit is making your views known through violence, especially violence directed at the President of the United States. That is anti-democratic at its core."

FBI director Kash Patel said agents were dispatched to Allen's home in California. He also said agents were dispatched to New London, Connecticut, to conduct further interviews during the process. 

"In less than 48 hours, you know almost every single thing we know," Patel said. "What we have not told you yet, we will tell you in short order."

Blanche criticized elected officials and members of the media for what he called contributions to the rhetoric that led to the Allen's alleged actions. 

"When you have media just being overly critical and calling the president horrible names for no reason and without proof it shouldn't surprise us that this type of rhetoric takes place," Blanche said. 

Blanche said law enforcement fired five shots responding to the attacker. He also said that authorities believe Allen fired a shot from the shotgun in his possession.

"As far as getting into exacting ballistics, um, I'm not going to do that today because it's still being looked at and finalized," Blanche said. 

Blanche also expressed support for Trump's planned White House ballroom. He said it would allow for a space in Washington, D.C., to host future events similar to the White House Correspondents' Association dinner. 

"Violence has no place in civic life," Blanche said. "It cannot and will not be used to disrupt democratic institutions or intimidate those to serve them and it certainly cannot continue to be used against the president of the United States."

(The Center Square) – Virginia Supreme Court justices zeroed in Monday on one question: Did lawmakers follow the rules when they put a redistricting amendment on the ballot?

The case is not about how people voted. Rather, according to justices, it is about whether the process used to get the amendment there met the requirements in Virginia’s constitution.

That process is laid out in Article XII. Lawmakers must pass an amendment, wait for an election, pass it again, and then send it to voters.

Justices spent much of the hearing asking whether that sequence happened the way the constitution requires.

One issue is what counts as the required “intervening election.” Attorneys disagreed on whether that means Election Day itself or the broader voting period.

Another issue is the special session lawmakers used. Republican challengers say that session was called for budget work, not redistricting.

They told the court there is no clear example of lawmakers using a special session that way.

Justices pushed on that point, asking whether the Legislature can expand the scope of a session once it starts.

A justice pressed attorneys on whether lawmakers followed the rules for expanding the special session, at one point asking whether it was “irrelevant” if those requirements were not followed.

Attorneys for the commonwealth said the process was valid and warned against overturning a vote after it already happened.

Virginia Solicitor General Tillman J. Breckenridge told the court it would be “patently unfair” to throw out the result based on process questions after voters had already weighed in.

Justices also examined the purpose behind those rules, including giving voters time to understand proposals and allowing accountability between legislative approvals.

They questioned whether technical issues, like timing or publication rules, should outweigh the outcome of a statewide vote.

Some justices raised concerns about setting a precedent where procedural missteps could undo election results.

Others questioned whether courts should step in at all when it comes to the Legislature’s internal rules.

The case is one of several legal fights tied to the new maps.

Breckenridge told the court there are at least two other separate lawsuits still moving. One focuses on whether the districts meet constitutional compactness standards.

A Circuit Court ruled Sunday against a Republican effort to block the maps on those grounds, though that decision is expected to be appealed.

The state is also trying to move parts of the case faster through the courts.

The court had not issued a ruling as of publication. Candidate filing for Virginia’s August congressional primaries closes in late May, creating urgency for campaigns and election officials who need to know which district lines will apply.

Throughout the hearing, justices did not signal how they will rule, but their questions stayed focused on whether lawmakers followed the constitution step by step.

The outcome will determine whether the amendment stands or whether the process has to start over.

The US Supreme Court heard a bid on Monday by German agrichemical giant Bayer to put an end to a wave of lawsuits over the weedkiller Roundup.

Bayer has spent more than $10 billion settling litigation linked to Roundup since it acquired its producer, the US agrochemical group Monsanto, in 2018.

The World Health Organization's International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) considers glyphosate, one of Roundup's ingredients, a probable human carcinogen, but Bayer says scientific studies and regulatory approvals show the widely used weedkiller is safe.

The top US court agreed to hear Bayer's appeal of a $1.25 million Missouri jury award to a man, John Durnell, who claimed Roundup was responsible for his cancer -- one of thousands of similar "failure-to-warn" lawsuits facing the company.

Bayer is arguing that it should be shielded from state lawsuits since the federal Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) approved the sale of Roundup to consumers and farmers without any warnings.

"Every agency around the globe -- New Zealand, Japan, Australia, the European Union, Canada -- they've looked at glyphosate," Paul Clement, an attorney for Bayer, told the justices.

"It's probably the most like studied herbicide in the history of man and they've all reached the conclusion based on more data and the kind of expert analysis they can do that there isn't a risk here," Clement said. "You shouldn't let a single Missouri jury second-guess that judgment."

The Trump administration has backed Bayer's stance that a federal statute on pesticide labels preempts state laws requiring warnings on products that may be carcinogenic.

It's not feasible to have 50 different states coming out with their own determinations, Deputy Solicitor General Sarah Harris said.

"Iowa says maybe this causes cancer. California says absolutely causes cancer. Some other state says this doesn't cause cancer at all, so put that on your label too," Harris said. "It completely undermines the uniformity of the labeling."

Clement, the Bayer lawyer, also stressed a need for maintaining uniformity.

Failure to do so would "open the door for crippling liability and undermine the interest of farmers who depend on federally registered pesticides for their livelihood," he said.

Ashley Keller, a lawyer representing Durnell, who blames his non-Hodgkin lymphoma on exposure to Roundup, said the EPA's analysis of the weedkiller should not be the final word.  

"I think there are a lot of conscientious people working at that agency," Keller told the court. "I think we should also all agree that things slip through the cracks with that agency."

The Supreme Court is expected to issue a ruling in the case by June or early July.

cl/md

Unprecedented attacks in Mali by Al-Qaeda-linked jihadists and Tuareg separatists who killed the defence minister and seized a key town are the dramatic result of a new alliance the two groups forged a year ago.

The separatists and the jihadists have divergent interests, but are united against a common enemy, experts say: the military junta that has ruled the west African country since 2020 and its Russian paramilitary backers.

Militants from Al-Qaeda's branch in the African Sahel region, the Group for the Support of Islam and Muslims (JNIM), claimed responsibility on Saturday for a series of brazen attacks carried out with the Azawad Liberation Front (FLA), an ethnic Tuareg separatist movement.

Attacking strategic positions held by Mali's ruling junta in several major towns and on the outskirts of the capital, Bamako, the militants took control of the northern town of Kidal and killed Defence Minister Sadio Camara.

JNIM attributed its "victory" to "hard work" and the "active participation of our brothers in the Azawad Liberation Front".

This predominantly Tuareg separatist group, created in 2024, wants independence for the territory of Azawad in northern Mali.

On Saturday, the rebels and jihadists launched a joint assault on Kidal, which they now control again after losing it in November 2023 to the Malian army and allied fighters from the Wagner Group, a Russian mercenary force now largely replaced by Moscow's Africa Corps paramilitary group.

Security sources said the JNIM and FLA also fought together in the northern town of Gao on Saturday. They were pushed back by the Malian army, but remain deployed in the area.

The attacks are reminiscent of a crisis that rocked Mali in 2012, when Tuareg rebels allied with jihadists to capture strategic hubs in the country's vast, remote north.

That was before the alliance disintegrated, the two erstwhile allies turned on each other and the jihadists drove the Tuareg separatists out.

- Different agendas -

Relations between the two were fraught for years, leading to direct clashes in April 2024 on the Mauritanian border.

But they forged a fresh alliance in 2025, according to Wassim Nasr, a researcher at the Soufan Center think tank who specialises in jihadist movements.

The Tuaregs, a historically nomadic people present across Mali, Niger, Algeria, Libya and Burkina Faso, have for decades taken up arms to protest at being marginalised, particularly around Kidal.

The new deal between the FLA and JNIM says the Tuareg rebels will accept the application of sharia law, that judges need to be accepted by both movements before they can be appointed, and that the two will share military expertise.

It also stipulates, Nasr said, that if towns are captured, the urban centres will be administered primarily by the FLA, while rural zones will be the purview of the jihadists.

The decision to cooperate, Nasr said, has been aided by the Islamists' willingness to share their expertise in the use of improvised explosive devices (IEDs) and mortars -- capabilities the FLA had previously struggled to master.

Saturday's coordinated attacks mark "the first time we have truly seen the terms of the agreement put into practice", he said.

A distinctive feature of this new alliance is that it unites two organisations with different agendas, said Jean-Herve Jezequel, the head of the Sahel project at the International Crisis Group.

"JNIM pursues a political-religious agenda, centred on the establishment of sharia law and the rejection of foreign forces, whilst the FLA champions a territorial and autonomist agenda, centred on Azawad," he said.

"This convergence is based above all on the existence of common adversaries, namely the Malian authorities and their Russian partners."

- 'Hasten the junta's fall' -

Nasr said the alliance's strategic goal was not to seize power in Bamako from the ruling junta, but to retake the northern regions.

"They pinned down the army in the centre, dealt a blow to the government in Bamako -- which paralysed the military response -- and achieved their aims in the north," he said of the capture of Kidal.

"They may subsequently try to press their advantage in the centre of the country... to hasten the fall of the junta and/or elicit regime change in Bamako," he said.

Junta leader Assimi Goita has not spoken or been seen publicly since the attacks began, and the head of the intelligence services, Modibo Kone, has been wounded by gunfire.

The groups' strategy "is to weaken and delegitimise the Malian authorities by increasing security pressure in the hope that the regime will collapse, rather than directly seizing power, which appears more complicated in the short term", Jezequel said.

Unlike the alliances of the early 2010s, which quickly fell apart, Jezequel said, the current cooperation deal could last longer, even if its medium-term future might be uncertain.

Nasr said the real test will be how cities such as Kidal are managed -- a phase that has not yet begun.

bur-bdi/lp/gil/jhb

King Charles III arrives in Washington Monday for a high-stakes state visit aimed at salvaging Britain's frayed ties with Donald Trump, amid extra-tight security following an attack on a gala dinner attended by the US president.

Tensions over the Iran war have rocked the so-called "special relationship" ahead of a trip that was meant to mark the United States' 250th anniversary of independence from the British monarch's ancestors.

Charles and Queen Camilla will now be using their four-day visit -- their first time on American soil since he became king in 2022 -- to mount a diplomatic charm offensive targeting the royalty-obsessed Trump.

White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said Monday the visit would "honor the long-standing and special relationship between the United States and the United Kingdom."

Trump and his wife Melania will greet the British royals at the White House on Monday before hosting them for tea and a tour of a new beehive installed by the First Lady.

On Tuesday, the Trumps will meet Charles and Camilla in the Oval Office and hold a state dinner. Charles will also become the first British monarch to address Congress since his mother, the late queen Elizabeth II, in 1991. 

The royals will visit New York on Wednesday, touring the 9/11 memorial, before departing Thursday for Bermuda for his first visit to a British overseas territory as monarch.

- 'No Churchill' -

Buckingham Palace said the US visit would take place despite the shooting at the annual White House Correspondents Dinner attended by Trump in Washington on Saturday.

Charles was "greatly relieved" that Trump and other guests were unharmed, the palace added.

Christian Turner, Britain's ambassador to the US, told a briefing in Washington late Sunday that after extensive discussions, "we are all very confident that all appropriate security measures are in place" for the state visit.

But as the US leader's war with Iran drives a rare wedge between London and Washington, the visit has generated considerable controversy.

Trump has repeatedly lambasted British Prime Minister Keir Starmer over his war opposition, alongside his government's immigration and energy policies.

The US president has branded Starmer "no Churchill" -- referring to wartime premier Winston Churchill, who coined the phrase the "special relationship." 

The pair however spoke by phone Sunday, with Labour leader Starmer extending "his best wishes" following "shocking scenes" at the gala the night before. 

Starmer has publicly criticized the war, but defended the state visit. An early April YouGov poll found 48 percent of Britons support cancelling it.

- 'Elephant in room' -

Trump has said King Charles's visit could help repair transatlantic relations.

"He's a friend of mine for a long time, so he's coming, and we're going to have a great time, and he represents his nation like nobody else can do it," Trump told Fox News on Sunday.

The US visit represents a personal test for Charles, 77, who has been battling cancer in recent years. 

But the king showcased his diplomatic skills during 79-year-old Trump's state visit to Britain last September, with Royal Holloway University of London monarchy expert Craig Prescott noting he is "generally very good" at navigating such occasions. 

Prescott added that Charles would likely address the war -- the "very big elephant in the room" -- in a coded way in his speech Tuesday to the US Congress.

Meanwhile, the scandal around late US sex offender Jeffrey Epstein threatens to encroach on the highly choreographed tour.

Charles has faced a major crisis over the friendship his brother, the former prince Andrew, had with the late billionaire, who died in prison in 2019.

dk/ksb

(The Center Square) - The man accused of storming the White House Correspondents' Associations Dinner has been charged with the attempted assassination of President Donald Trump. 

Cole Tomas Allen appeared in federal court on Monday in Washington, D.C., after being take into custody on Saturday following the shooting. Allen faced three charges including attempted assassination, transporting firearms across state lines and discharge of a firearm during a crime of violence. 

Allen, a resident of Torrance, California, appeared in court Monday. He did not enter a plea during the brief hearing. He is beleived to have traveled by train from California to Chicago and then onto Washington, acting Attorney General Todd Blanche said.