Latest news with #TheNewYorkTimes
Straits Times
4 hours ago
- Politics
- Straits Times
Australia is offering a special ‘climate' visa - and people in Tuvalu are applying fast
Tuvalu is home to just about 10,000 or so people scattered across nine small coral islands. PHOTO: AFP Australia is offering a special 'climate' visa - and people in Tuvalu are applying fast As sea levels rise, Australia said it would offer a special, first-of-its-kind 'climate visa' to citizens of Tuvalu, a Polynesian island nation of atolls and sandbars where waters are eating away at the land. The visa lottery opened last week, and already nearly half of Tuvalu's population has applied. By any measure, Tuvalu is one of the smallest countries in the world. It's home to just 10,000 or so people scattered across nine small coral islands that add up to less than 10 square miles (26 sq km). It has been losing land to rising seas, and further losses could make it one of the first countries to become uninhabitable because of climate change. Seawater is increasingly seeping into the country's few drinking-water wells. Within a century, some scientists predict, the twice-daily high tide alone will inundate more than 90 per cent of the country's capital, the island of Funafuti, as well as Tuvalu's only airport. Most Tuvaluans live on Funafuti, which is just a few feet above sea level. Concerns like these underpinned an agreement two years ago between Tuvalu and Australia, with the latter pledging not just to help build sea walls but to grant a special visa to 280 Tuvaluans per year that would 'provide a pathway for mobility with dignity as climate impacts worsen'. The agreement, known as the Falepili Union treaty, allows grantees to obtain permanent residency and move freely between the countries. But both countries have taken pains to avoid using language that implies that Tuvalu may one day cease to exist. Should the most dire predictions come true, Tuvalu would be a test case for how the world treats a citizenry who haven't lost their land to annexation but to a changing climate. Australia's Foreign Ministry says the program is an opportunity for Tuvalu citizens to work or go to school in Australia. The pact 'recognises that Tuvalu's statehood and sovereignty will continue', the ministry said in a statement. At the rate of 280 people annually, it would take around 40 years for all of Tuvalu's citizens to relocate to Australia. Australia's immigration posture toward Tuvalu contrasts with that of the United States, which is considering adding Tuvalu to a list of countries subject to a travel ban, The New York Times reported recently. The State Department declined to comment on why Tuvalu was included in that list. In 2023, Tuvalu joined five other Pacific island nations in calling for a global fossil fuel nonproliferation treaty. It pledged to spearhead that movement by ending its own use of the planet-warming fuels as soon as possible. Tuvaluan officials have sought to use their country's plight to highlight how climate change is already having dramatic effects on communities and cultures, and how small islands and developing countries bear the brunt. In 2021, the foreign minister at the time, Mr Simon Kofe, released a widely shared video in which he stands at a lectern, dressed in a business suit, and appeals to the world to limit global warming. As he speaks, the camera pulls back, revealing that he's actually standing knee-deep in a lagoon. 'We will not stand idly by as the water rises around us,' Mr Kofe said. In addition to offering the special climate visas, Australia is also contributing millions of dollars to Tuvalu's Coastal Adaptation Project, which aims to reclaim land around Funafuti. Those funds and the modest number of visas are a relatively small price for Australia to pay Tuvalu for something Oceania's giant is far more concerned about: China. Beijing has been offering to invest in Pacific island nations if they drop their recognition of Taiwan's independence. Tuvalu is one of only 12 nations in the world to still have formal diplomatic relations with Taiwan. Its agreement with Australia says that Tuvalu will not enter any other international security arrangement without Australia's explicit approval. The country's representative to the United Nations in New York City, as well as its director for climate change and disaster coordination, did not respond to requests for comment. NYTIMES Find out more about climate change and how it could affect you on the ST microsite here.
Time of India
5 hours ago
- Politics
- Time of India
Can babies be stateless in the US? What the Supreme Court's ruling means for birthright citizenship
The Supreme Court has permitted President Trump's order on birthright citizenship to advance in 28 states. A 30-day delay is in place. Legal challenges are ongoing. States like California and New York are exempt for now. Class-action lawsuits are being pursued. Experts warn of potential statelessness for some children. Mixed-status families may face complications. Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads What the Supreme Court's Decision Means for Birthright Citizenship Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads In a key decision, the Supreme Court has allowed President Donald Trump's executive order ending birthright citizenship for children of undocumented immigrants and temporary visa holders to proceed in 28 states. While the court did not rule on the constitutionality of the order, it struck down nationwide injunctions that had blocked its enforcement. A 30-day delay has been set before the order takes effect, giving legal challengers time to including California, New York, and Maryland—part of a group of 22 states that had sued the federal government—will not see immediate enforcement due to existing court blocks. Lawyers representing those states are now moving quickly to convert their cases into class-action lawsuits to preserve broader Yale-Loehr, immigration scholar at Cornell Law School, said as told to The New York Times:'The court decision today means that unless a court certifies a class action within the next 30 days, the Trump administration can start to implement its repeal of birthright citizenship.'With the 30-day window now active, immigration lawyers and civil rights groups are racing to block enforcement before it begins. The constitutional question of who qualifies as an American citizen remains unresolved and is likely headed for another round in the The court imposed a 30-day delay. The order may be implemented only in the 28 states that did not file legal challenges. In states that did, earlier court rulings remain in place, pending further have filed for class-action status, which would allow affected individuals across all states to be represented collectively. The Supreme Court left open this legal path. Federal judges will need to certify these classes quickly for them to have legal Mays, legal director at Democracy Defenders Fund, said to The New York Times:'The Constitution guarantees birthright citizenship, and no procedural ruling will stop us from fighting to uphold that promise.'Yes. In enforcement states, babies born to undocumented immigrants may not receive US citizenship. While many will inherit citizenship from their parents' home countries, some may not, depending on each country's nationality say deportation would depend on the parents' immigration status. Cristina Rodriguez, a professor at Yale Law School, told The New York Times:'What will matter is the status of the parents, in which case there is no bar for removing the babies along with parents.'Under the executive order, children born to individuals on temporary visas—such as H-1B workers or student visa holders—would not automatically receive citizenship. These children may inherit temporary status but would lack the rights tied to added:'They just won't get birth certificates.'Children born during enforcement might gain retroactive citizenship if courts eventually invalidate the order. However, this would require a formal process and could delay access to healthcare, education, and legal warned:'Practically, it could be a gigantic hassle, and there could be significant consequences.'If a family has children born before and after the order, citizenship status could differ among siblings. This may lead to complications in accessing benefits or remaining in the told The New York Times:'The practical problems of ending birthright citizenship are both huge and unpredictable.'
Time of India
5 hours ago
- Politics
- Time of India
US Senate rejects bid to curb Trump's Iran war powers
The Senate, led by Republicans, dismissed a Democratic effort to curb President Trump's authority to use military force against Iran, despite Trump's consideration of further bombings. The resolution, requiring congressional approval for hostilities, failed in a 53-47 vote, highlighting divisions over war powers. Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) speaks to reporters at the Capitol in Washington on Tuesday, June 24, 2025. The Senate on Friday, June 27, 2025, blocked a Democratic resolution sponsored by Kaine that would have forced President Donald Trump to go to Congress for approval of further military action against Iran, dealing a blow to efforts to rein in his war powers. (Eric Lee/The New York Times) Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads The Republican-led U.S. Senate rejected a Democratic-led bid on Friday to block President Donald Trump from using further military force against Iran , hours after the president said he would consider more Senate vote was 53 to 47 against a war powers resolution that would have required congressional approval for more hostilities against Iran. The vote was along party lines, except Pennsylvania Democrat John Fetterman voted no, with Republicans, and Kentucky Republican Rand Paul voted yes, with Tim Kaine , chief sponsor of the resolution, has tried for years to wrest back Congress' authority to declare war from both Republican and Democratic said his latest effort underscored that the U.S. Constitution gives Congress, not the president, the sole power to declare war and requires that any hostility with Iran be explicitly authorized by a declaration of war or specific authorization for the use of military force."If you think the president should have to come to Congress, whether you are for or against a war in Iran, you'll support Senate Joint Resolution 59, you'll support the Constitution that has stood the test of time," Kaine said in a speech before the have been pushing for more information about weekend U.S. strikes on Iran, and the fate of Iran's stockpiles of highly enriched on Friday, Trump sharply criticized Iran's Supreme Leader, Ali Khamenei, dropped plans to lift sanctions on Iran, and said he would consider bombing Iran again if Tehran is enriching uranium to worrisome was reacting to Khamenei's first remarks after a 12-day conflict with Israel that ended when the United States launched bombing raids against Iranian nuclear sites.'OBLITERATED'Members of Trump's national security team held classified briefings on the strikes for the Senate and House of Representatives on Thursday and Friday. Many Democratic lawmakers left the briefings saying they had not been convinced that Iran's nuclear facilities had been "obliterated," as Trump announced shortly after the of the resolution said the strike on Iran was a single, limited operation within Trump's rights as commander-in-chief, not the start of sustained Bill Hagerty, a Tennessee Republican who served as ambassador to Japan during Trump's first term, said the measure could prevent any president from acting quickly against a country that has been a long-term adversary."We must not shackle our president in the middle of a crisis when lives are on the line," Hagerty said before the has rejected any suggestion that damage to Iran's nuclear program was not as profound as he has said. Iran says its nuclear research is for civilian energy U.S. law, Senate war powers resolutions are privileged, meaning that the chamber had to promptly consider and vote on the measure, which Kaine introduced this to be enacted, the resolution would have had to pass the Senate as well as the House of Representatives, whereSpeaker Mike Johnson, a close Trump ally, said this week he did not think it was the right time for such an Trump's first term, in 2020, Kaine introduced a similar resolution to rein in the Republican president's ability to wage war against Iran. That measure passed both the Senate and House of Representatives, with some Republican support, but did not garner enough votes to survive the president's veto.
USA Today
6 hours ago
- Entertainment
- USA Today
Is this the best movie of the 21st century? 500 Hollywood power players think so.
The people have spoken, and the best movie released since Jan. 1, 2000, has been chosen. And by people, we mean the 500 or so actors, directors, writers and other Hollywood power players The New York Times surveyed for its 100 best movies of the 21st century ranking, which came out with its top 20 on June 27. The likes of Pamela Anderson, Nicholas Sparks, Stephen King, Simu Liu, Sofia Coppola, Danielle Brooks, Brian Cox, Ava DuVernay, Molly Ringwald, Rachel Zegler and Mel Brooks had their say — and yes, you can even see each of their top 10 picks, Letterboxd style. Oscar-winning director Coppola apparently took a shining to the 2004 Pixar classic (and fellow Oscar winner) "The Incredibles," while Julianne Moore admitted she's not above a raunchy comedy like "Superbad" and "The 40-Year-Old Virgin." And Sparks isn't only watching soppy romances; he's also enjoying dramas like "Inception" and "Gladiator." Undeserved Oscar winners – and the ones that should have won What's the best movie released since 2000? None other than Bong Joon Ho's "Parasite," which in 2020 became the first ever non-English film to earn the best picture Oscar, ranked as the No. 1 highest-voted film in the NYT's survey. And no wonder, because it earned an eye-boggling 99% "fresh" rating from nearly 500 film reviews on Rotten Tomatoes. In 2019, USA TODAY's film critic Brian Truitt was close to giving the social commentary thriller full marks (he ended up giving three and a half of four stars). The Korean film "is expertly paced with its reveals, never falls apart (even when it descends into bloody chaos) and also features outstanding acting performances," he noted in his review. In case anyone was wondering, director Bong did not include any of his own films (which includes the recent "Mickey 17" as well as 2017's "Okja" and 2013's "Snowpiercer) in his top nine ranking. New on streaming: From 'Minecraft' to 'KPop Demon Hunters,' what to watch right now The top 20 films since 2000 The top 20 highest-voted films were as follows:
The Star
7 hours ago
- The Star
Opinion: Wanna help save the planet? Stop asking AI dumb questions
It takes huge amounts of energy to power artificial intelligence – so much energy that it's looking less and less likely that the US will meet its goals for reducing greenhouse gas emissions. (If we still have any such goals under President Donald Trump.) What's less known is that AI also consumes copious amounts of water needed to cool all that IT equipment. To generate a 100-word email, a chatbot using GPT-4 requires 519 millilitres of water – roughly equivalent to an 18-ounce bottle of water. That doesn't sound like much, but when you multiply that by the number of users, it's significant. Also, it requires far more than 100 words for AI to respond to our most pressing questions, such as: – What are three excuses for skipping dinner at my (fill in the blank's) house tonight? – Can you rewrite this email to make me sound smarter? – How do you make a mojito? – Does this outfit look good on me? If you are wondering about that last query, yes, there are folks who rely on ChatGPT for wardrobe advice. Some check in with Chat on a daily basis by uploading a photo of themselves before they leave the house, just to make sure they look presentable. These superusers often spring for a US$20-per-month (RM84) subscription to ChatGPT Plus, which provides priority access, among other perks. Chat can also help you write a dating profile, plan a trip to Mexico City, manage your finances, give you relationship advice, tell you what shampoo to use and what color to paint your living room. Another plus: ChatGPT never talks down to you. Even the most outlandish queries get a polite, ego-boosting response like this: 'That's a thoughtful and important question. Here's a grounded response.' Google vs ChatGPT But again, it's hard to get around the fact that AI is hard on the planet. Example: The New York Times reports that Amazon is building an enormous AI data centre in Indiana that will use 2.2 gigawatts of electricity, which is enough to power a million homes. And according to a report from Goldman Sachs, 'a ChatGPT query needs nearly 10 times as much electricity to process as a Google search.' So we could save energy by opting for Google search, except Google is getting in to the AI business, too. Have you noticed those 'AI overviews' at the top of search results? Those come at an environmental cost. 'Embedding generative AI in such a widely used application is likely to deepen the tech sector's hunger for fossil fuels and water,' writes Scientific American staffer Allison Parshall. The good news is there is a way to block those pesky AI overviews; YouTube has tutorials like this one that will walk you through it. In further good news, there are smart people looking for ways to make AI more environmentally friendly, but that could take a while. in the meantime, should we conserve water and energy by letting AI focus on important tasks like diagnosing breast cancer, predicting floods and tracking icebergs? Maybe stop running to ChatGPT every time we have a personal problem? Should I feel guilty, for example, if I ask Chat how to stop my cats from scratching the couch? Not according to Chat. 'No, guilt isn't productive unless it's leading you to positive action,' Chat told me. 'Instead, awareness is more productive.' But if you do worry about the planet, Chat recommends using AI 'with purpose' rather than as entertainment. No need to swear it off entirely. 'The focus should be on conscious consumption rather than abstinence,' Chat says. Lower 'brain engagement' That sounds reasonable, except a recent MIT study offers evidence that the longer we use AI, the less conscious we become. Using an EEG to measure brain activity of 54 subjects, researchers found that those who used ChatGPT to write SAT essays had lower 'brain engagement' than two other groups – one was allowed to use Google search and the other relied solely on brain power to complete the essays. 'Over the course of several months, ChatGPT users got lazier with each subsequent essay, often resorting to copy-and-paste by the end of the study,' Time magazine reported. Granted, this is only one small study. But to be on the safe side, I'm going to lay off Chat for a while. Maybe I'll hit Google with that cat question. There is, however, one thing Google can't tell me: Does that dress I ordered online look OK on me or should I send it back? Tell me what you think, Chat. And please, be brutally honest. – The Sacramento Bee/Tribune News Service
