Elections

The scandal surrounding Justice Clarence Thomas has further eroded the already record-low public confidence in the Supreme Court. If Chief Justice John Roberts wonders how such a thing could have happened, he might start looking for answers within the cloistered walls of his own courtroom.Over more than two decades, the Supreme Court has gutted laws aimed at fighting corruption and at limiting the ability of the powerful to enrich public officials in a position to advance their interests. As a result, today wealthy individuals and corporations may buy political access and influence with little fear of legal consequences, either for them or for the beneficiaries of their largess.No wonder Justice Thomas apparently thought his behavior was no big deal.He has been under fire for secretly accepting, from the Republican megadonor Harlan Crow, luxury vacations worth hundreds of thousands of dollars, a real estate deal (involving the home where his mother was living) and the payment of private school tuition for a grandnephew the justice was raising. Meanwhile, over the years, conservative groups with which Mr. Crow was affiliated filed amicus briefs in several matters before the Supreme Court.That sounds like the very definition of corruption. But over the years, many justices — and not just conservatives — have championed a different definition.The landmark case is the court’s 2010 decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission. A five-justice majority — including Justice Thomas — struck down decades-old restrictions on independent campaign expenditures by corporations, holding that they violated the companies’ free speech rights. It rejected the argument that such laws were necessary to prevent the damage to democracy that results from unbridled corporate spending and the undue influence it can create.The government’s legitimate interest in fighting corruption, the court held, is limited to direct quid pro quo deals, in which a public official makes a specific commitment to act in exchange for something of value. The appearance of potentially improper influence or access is not enough.In dissent, Justice John Paul Stevens accused the majority of adopting a “crabbed view of corruption” that the court itself had rejected in an earlier case. He argued that Congress has a legitimate interest in limiting the effects of corporate money on politics: “Corruption operates along a spectrum, and the majority’s apparent belief that quid pro quo arrangements can be neatly demarcated from other improper influences does not accord with the theory or reality of politics.”Citizens United opened the floodgates to unlimited corporate spending on behalf of political candidates and to the influence that spending necessarily provides. But the decision didn’t come out of nowhere: The court has often been unanimous in its zeal for curtailing criminal corruption laws.In the 1999 case of United States v. Sun-Diamond Growers of California, the court unanimously held, in effect, that it is not a violation of the federal gratuities statute for an individual or corporation to have a public official on private retainer. The court rejected a theory known as a “status gratuity,” where a donor showers a public official with gifts over time based on the official’s position (that is in contrast with a more common gratuity, given as a thank you for a particular act by the official). The quite reasonable rationale behind that theory was that when matters of interest to the donor arose, the past gifts (and hope for future ones) might lead the official to favor his or her benefactor.That actually sounds a lot like the Crow-Thomas relationship. But the court held that such an arrangement is not unlawful. The gratuities law, the court ruled, requires that a particular gift be linked to a particular official act. Without such a direct link, a series of gifts to a public official over time does not violate the statute, even if the goal is to curry favor with an official who could act to benefit the gift giver.In the wake of Sun-Diamond, federal prosecutors increasingly turned to a more expansive legal theory known as honest services fraud. But in Skilling v. United States, the court ruled that theory is limited to cases of bribes and kickbacks — once again, direct quid pro quo deals. Three justices, including Justice Thomas, wanted to go even further and declare the statute that prohibits honest services fraud unconstitutional.The court proceeded to limit its “crabbed view of corruption” even further. In the 2016 case McDonnell v. United States, the court held that selling government access is not unlawful. Gov. Bob McDonnell of Virginia and his wife, Maureen, accepted about $175,000 in secret gifts from the businessman Jonnie Williams, who wanted Virginia’s public universities to perform research studies on his company’s dietary supplement to assist with its F.D.A. approval. In exchange, Mr. McDonnell asked subordinates to meet with Mr. Williams about such studies and hosted a luncheon at the governor’s mansion to connect him with university health researchers.A jury convicted the McDonnells on several counts of corruption. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit — hardly known as a bastion of liberalism — unanimously affirmed the convictions. But the Supreme Court unanimously reversed, holding that the things Mr. McDonnell did for Mr. Williams did not qualify as “official acts” under federal bribery law. Selling official access may be tawdry, the court held, but it is not a crime.Those who think Justice Thomas may be guilty of corruption may not realize just how difficult the court itself has made it to prove such a case. Now only the most ham-handed officials, clumsy enough to engage in a direct quid pro quo, risk prosecution.Viewed in light of this history, the Thomas scandal becomes less surprising. Its own rulings would indicate that the Supreme Court doesn’t believe what he did is corrupt. A powerful conservative with interests before the court who regularly provides a justice with vacations worth more than his annual salary is, as the court said in Citizens United, merely the “appearance” of potential corruption. In the court’s view, the public has no reason to be concerned.But the public clearly is, and should be, concerned over the ability of the rich and powerful to purchase access and influence unavailable to most citizens. Unfortunately, Citizens United is here to stay without a constitutional amendment or an overruling by the court, neither of which is very likely.But it’s still possible for the rest of the country to move past the court’s naïve and inadequate view of corruption. Congress could amend criminal corruption laws to expand their scope and overturn the results in Sun-Diamond, Skilling and McDonnell. It could increase funding for enforcement of the Ethics in Government Act and increase the penalties for filing a false financial disclosure form (or failing to file one at all). Beefed up disclosure regulations could make it more difficult for officials to hide financial interests and could make it clear there are no disclosure exceptions for enormous gifts of “personal hospitality,” contrary to what Justice Thomas claims he believed. And Congress could pass legislation like the proposed Disclose Act, to require transparency regarding who is behind political donations and spending.Congress so far has shown little interest in passing such reforms. But that’s where the remedy lies. It’s time for Congress to act.In his Citizens United dissent, Justice Stevens observed, “A democracy cannot function effectively when its constituent members believe laws are being bought and sold.” That’s exactly how it now appears to the public — and that applies to Supreme Court justices as well as to politicians.Randall D. Eliason is the former chief of the fraud and public corruption section at the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia and teaches white-collar criminal law at George Washington University Law School. He blogs at Sidebarsblog.com.The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email: [email protected] The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram. More

Michelle Cottle, Ross Douthat, Carlos Lozada and Listen to and follow ‘Matter of Opinion’Apple Podcasts | Spotify | Stitcher | Amazon MusicIt’s 77 weeks before Election Day and over half a dozen people have already thrown their hats into the G.O.P race. On our new podcast, “Matter of Opinion,” Michelle Cottle, Ross Douthat, Carlos Lozada and Lydia Polgreen take a tour of the 2024 Republican primary field to understand what it takes to survive in the present-day Republican ecosystem — and maybe even beat the Trump in the room.(A full transcript of the episode will be available midday on the Times website.)Photograph by Scott Olson/GettyThoughts? Email us at [email protected] or leave us a voice mail message at (212) 556-7440. We may use excerpts from your message in a future episode.By leaving us a message, you are agreeing to be governed by our reader submission terms and agreeing that we may use and allow others to use your name, voice and message.Follow our hosts on Twitter: Michelle Cottle (@mcottle), Ross Douthat (@DouthatNYT), Carlos Lozada (@CarlosNYT) and Lydia Polgreen (@lpolgreen).“Matter of Opinion” was produced this week by Phoebe Lett, Sophia Alvarez Boyd and Derek Arthur. It was edited by Stephanie Joyce and Annie-Rose Strasser. Mixing by Pat McCusker. Original music by Pat McCusker, Sonia Herrero, Isaac Jones and Carole Sabouraud. Fact-checking by Mary Marge Locker. Special thanks to Shannon Busta and Kristina Samulewski. More

Cherelle Parker’s win in the Democratic primary is a sign of how the city has changed. But Philadelphia’s challenges remain deep and daunting.PHILADELPHIA — The afternoon before Election Day, Jennifer Robinson, 41, was trying to manage her two small children in the quiet corner of a public library in a pocket of her city that had endured generations of abandonment. She was despondent about the state of Philadelphia, most of all about the crime, but she talked about the mayoral primary as if it had little bearing on any of it.“Nobody has any answers,” Ms. Robinson said, shifting her restless 11-month-old from arm to arm. “It’s a feeling of hopelessness.”This is the city that Cherelle Parker will be leading as mayor if she wins the general election in November, and these are the sentiments she will be trying to turn around. On Tuesday, Ms. Parker, a former state legislator and City Council member, secured a surprisingly decisive victory in a Democratic primary that had been seen as a tight five-way race up until Election Day.The huge number of undecideds in the last polls appear to have broken heavily for Ms. Parker, 50, the only Black candidate of the five main contenders hoping to lead a city where Black people make up more than 40 percent of the population and where the Black neighborhoods have been especially hard hit by gun violence and Covid.If she wins the general election, which she is favored to do given that registered Democrats outnumber Republicans in Philadelphia more than seven to one, Ms. Parker will be the first woman in a line of 100 mayors.That list of men goes back centuries, before the city had established itself as the cradle of American independence, and long before President Biden came to Independence Hall last September to warn the nation about threats to democracy.For Philadelphia, Ms. Parker’s primary victory is a sign of how the city has changed in just the last half-century. For most of the 1970s, the mayor was Frank Rizzo, a former police commissioner who embraced brutal police tactics, particularly toward Black Philadelphians. But the city’s challenges remain deep and daunting.At least a half dozen Philadelphia public schools have been shut down because of asbestos contamination, a predictable debacle in a city where the average age of public school buildings is over 70 years. Housing costs are out of the reach for many residents. There is a city staffing shortage, with thousands of municipal positions unfilled. Hundreds of Philadelphians have died in recent years from opioid overdoses.Jennifer Robinson has become increasingly frustrated with local politicians over the last few years and doubts that any candidates for mayor can make a difference.Rachel Wisniewski for The New York TimesLooming over all of this are the killings. Rates of gun violence have risen in cities large and small across the country, but they have been particularly severe in Philadelphia, a city of 1.6 million, nearly a quarter of whom live in poverty. More than 500 people were killed in each of the past two years, the highest annual tolls for the city on record, and many hundreds more have been injured by gunfire. The number of shootings and homicides has declined this year, but the city is awash in guns; Republican legislators have tried to remove the district attorney over the enforcement of gun laws, while city officials have sued Republican legislators for limiting their ability to enact stricter ones.Philadelphians are virtually unanimous in their alarm about the violence but have been less unified about the solutions. Larry Krasner, the progressive district attorney who has insisted that the city cannot simply arrest its way out of the crisis, was re-elected by an overwhelming margin in 2021, with some of his strongest showings in the neighborhoods most scarred by violence.On Tuesday, many of those same neighborhoods voted for Ms. Parker, who pledged to hire hundreds more police officers and bring back what she called “constitutional” stop-and-frisk.“People are not feeling safe, they’re feeling that a sense of lawlessness is being allowed to prevail,” she said in an interview shortly before she launched her mayoral campaign. “We can’t ignore that.”These proposals have faced strong pushback and skepticism about the ability to hire hundreds of officers at a time when police departments nationwide have struggled with recruiting.Her Republican opponent in the November general election is David Oh, also a former City Council member.Ms. Parker hugged supporters at a polling site during the primary election on Tuesday.Rachel Wisniewski for The New York TimesIn the Democratic primary, Ms. Parker’s pitch to voters was that she understood firsthand what their lives were like, as a Philadelphia native, as a Black woman who was the daughter of a teenage mother and as the mother of a Black son.This appeal has created lofty hopes among Black voters, said Carl Day, a pastor who leads the Culture Changing Christians Worship Center in one of the poorest and most violent areas of the city. “The expectation is definitely there from the Black community that she knows what we’re going through and so she will definitely bring about change,” he said.Still, he said, these hopes appeared to be mostly held by older Black voters, who were also more likely to embrace Parker’s agenda, including her push for more policing.Younger Black Philadelphians, Pastor Day said, were more skeptical of Ms. Parker and even worried about some of her policing plans. Already, Pastor Day said, he had seen younger people online wondering what this means, and saying that nothing was going to change. There is a seeming contradiction here: that a city deeply unhappy with the way things are going just voted for a candidate who was endorsed by dozens of sitting lawmakers, City Council members and ward leaders — even the current mayor, Jim Kenney, a term-limited Democrat who has become highly unpopular, said he voted for her.Isaiah Thomas, who won an at-large City Council seat on Tuesday, said that even with that support, it was not fair to call her the establishment candidate — most of her opponents had their own networks of connections. But he said the breadth of her support, including trade unions and lawmakers, showed that she knew how to build, and maintain, coalitions.“She’s a worker,” said Mr. Thomas, who joined the Council in 2020 and worked alongside Ms. Parker managing its response to the crises of the last three years. “She understands government, she understands the budget.”Carl Day, a pastor, said older Black voters were more likely than younger Black voters to embrace Parker’s agenda, including her push for more policing.Rachel Wisniewski for The New York TimesIn state government, any Democratic mayor would find a more willing partner than his or her immediate predecessors. Last November, Democrats won control of the Pennsylvania House for the first time in a dozen years, a majority that was reconfirmed after a special election on Tuesday night. The current House Speaker, Joanna McClinton, represents part of Philadelphia, as does the chairman of the House Appropriations Committee. The new governor, Josh Shapiro, and the majority of the Democratic caucus in the State Senate are from the region.“There’s reason to be more optimistic about Harrisburg’s relationship with Philadelphia than there has been in many years,” said State Senator Nikil Saval, a Democrat, who endorsed one of Ms. Parker’s opponents in the race but praised some of her accomplishments on the City Council, such as a program she helped create that offered low-interest loans to homeowners.Still, in interviews in Philadelphia this week, voters and local politicians alike said that the most urgent task of the new mayor would be to give the city a jolt of optimism. For many in the city’s poor and working-class neighborhoods, that might start with the attention of someone who has seen up close their daily struggles. But, people insisted, hope would stick only if there were tangible results.“I haven’t seen anyone help; it’s just getting worse,” said Ms. Robinson, the mother in the library. “For me to vote for someone, I’d have to see difference.” More

Our topic for today is — who’s worse, Donald Trump or Ron DeSantis?Nonononofair! There is no way I’m ever going to vote for either one of them! Why should I care?Hey, knowledge of public affairs is always important.DeSantis made headlines this weekend when he showed up to campaign in Iowa while Trump canceled a rally because of bad weather.“Iowa is the Florida of the Midwest,” the governor of Florida claimed at one point in his burger-flipping, speech-giving trek. Now this was clearly intended as a compliment, but Iowans, do you actually want to be the Florida of the Midwest? The weather is certainly great in January, but there’s plenty of downside. Do your Midwestern neighbors ever mutter, “What our state needs is a heck of a lot more floods and sinkholes …”?DeSantis and his wife/political adviser, Casey, have three small children, who once starred in a gubernatorial election ad in which he demonstrated his devotion to President Donald Trump by showing one of his daughters how to build a toy wall and reading his son “The Art of the Deal.” (“Then Mr. Trump said, ‘You’re fired.’ I love that part.”)You may be seeing a lot more of little Madison, Mason and Mamie DeSantis in the months to come. But no one’s going to be reading from Trump’s collected works.Trump has five children counting Ivanka, who’s sorta cut herself off from the clan. And Tiffany, who everybody, including her father, seemed to have forgotten for a very long stretch. And Eric, whom we mainly hear about during riffs from the late-night comics. And Barron, the youngest at 17, who lives quietly with his mom.Donald Jr. is truly his dad’s kid. He’s off this summer to Australia for a speaking tour blasting “woke identity politics.” Ranting against “woke” is sort of a DeSantis thing, but give Junior a break. He’s spent his entire life trying to please a father who was absent for most of his childhood and who is said to have resisted having his firstborn named after him, in case the kid turned into a “loser.”Now Don Jr. has five children too! And he’s not shy about putting them in the news either. A while back he posted an Instagram photo of the kids publicizing a Trump-branded leash. (“You can get yours at the Trump Store too.”) Before that, Dad once tweeted that he planned to confiscate half of his then-3-year-old daughter’s Halloween candy “to teach her about socialism.”Hard to imagine the Trump and DeSantis families getting together for a cookout. But the gap between the two men grows much wider when you look at personal behavior. Only one of them just lost a $5 million verdict from a jury that found he sexually abused a woman in a department store dressing room.Trump has been trying to insinuate that DeSantis had some shady doings with high school girls in his far, far distant past. And running an ad reminding the world that his probable Republican opponent has a history of eating pudding with his fingers.But what about the issues? Sorta hard to pin down since Trump is given to, um, free-associating on this stuff. But he certainly has been running to DeSantis’s left, accusing the Florida governor of wanting to slash Social Security and Medicare benefits.When he was in Congress, DeSantis did vote for Republican proposals along that line. He’s on the no-changes-no-how bandwagon now. But let’s look at abortion — much easier to pin down. DeSantis, as governor, just signed a bill he supported that will bar abortions in Florida after six weeks. By which time many, many women — particularly the very young, very poor, very traumatized — have no idea they’re pregnant.DeSantis has at least been consistent. A devout Catholic, he’s had the same position for his entire political career. Trump, on the other hand, um, adapts.Trump made a huge impact by appointing three anti-choice judges to the Supreme Court. But now he’s noticed that voters are coming down very strong in favor of abortion rights, and he’s switched right around. He claims “many people within the pro-life movement” found the new Florida law “too harsh.”Our bottom line here, people, is that you have two top candidates for the Republican presidential nomination. DeSantis adheres to a strong, faith-based social conservatism. He’s pro-gun, opposed to diversity and inclusion programs in public colleges. And currently having a big fight with Disney, one of Florida’s top employers, over a comment from a Disney C.E.O. that criticized a DeSantis bill to prohibit classroom discussions of sexual orientation in the early grades.Hard to imagine a Gov. Donald Trump taking the same road.Unless it would somehow win him an election. Trump’s politics are deeply, deeply pragmatic. If an angel appeared promising him another term in the White House if he killed every puppy in America, those doggies would be toast.(That is an imperfect example since The Donald hates dogs anyway, but bear with me.)The bottom line: Would you rather see the Republicans nominate a candidate who had an exemplary family life and an agenda based on longstanding, extremely conservative beliefs? Or a guy with a sleazy personal history who’d probably go anywhere the votes were?Some days it pays to be a Democrat.The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email: [email protected] The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram. More

President Guillermo Lasso disbanded the National Assembly as the opposition-led body was trying to oust him on embezzlement charges.President Guillermo Lasso of Ecuador disbanded the country’s opposition-led National Assembly on Wednesday, a drastic move as the right-leaning leader faced impeachment proceedings over accusations of embezzlement.The constitutional measure, never before used, allows the president to rule by decree until new elections can be held, marking a moment of extraordinary political turbulence for a country of 18 million already in turmoil.Ecuador has long been a relative haven in the region, but in recent years it has been convulsed by rising violence and a skyrocketing homicide rate as increasingly powerful narco-trafficking groups fight for territory.Opposition lawmakers accused Mr. Lasso of turning a blind eye to irregularities and embezzlement in a contract between a state-run shipping company and an oil tanker company that wasn’t delivering on its promises — allegations first made in news reports. The country’s constitutional court later approved a charge of embezzlement against the president but denied two charges of bribery.The charge was being investigated by congress and is political in nature. It is not a criminal charge.Last week, the National Assembly voted to begin impeachment hearings, but all proceedings were permanently halted once Mr. Lasso dissolved congress.The president has repeatedly denied the charges, pointing out that the contract was signed before he took office.“The prosecutors of this trial have acknowledged that they have nothing,” Mr. Lasso said on Tuesday during the impeachment proceeding. “This inquiry is political.”He added, “This is not about saving a presidency, but about preserving a functioning democracy.”This was the second time the opposition had tried to remove Mr. Lasso from the presidency since he took office in 2021.He has faced growing criticism and petitions for his removal from civil society groups in the face of soaring rates of crime, extortion, kidnappings and robberies. Gangs battle for control of drug routes and have gained greater control over the country’s prisons, leading to several prison riots and massacres over the last three years.For weeks, the president and congress were locked in a game of brinkmanship, with legislators threatening to impeach and remove Mr. Lasso as he threatened to dissolve congress and call new elections — a move known in Ecuador as muerte cruzada, or mutually assured death.The mechanism was written into the Constitution in 2008 as a tool to end deadlocks between the presidency and the legislature. But until now, no president had ever enacted it.With Mr. Lasso’s approval ratings plummeting, in some cases below 20 percent, he will govern by decree until new elections are held. The Constitution gives the national election body seven days to set a date for a presidential and legislative vote. The newly elected president and National Assembly would then govern until the end of the original term, 2025.The disbanding of congress provides temporary stability for the country, said Arianna Tanca, an Ecuadorean political scientist, allowing Mr. Lasso to pass laws without a deadlock and giving political parties the chance for a “reset.”But it also threatens to undercut the country’s democracy. A head of government calling for new elections is common in parliamentary democracies, but has no parallel in other presidential democracies in Latin America, said Mauricio Alarcón Salvador, the director of Transparency International’s chapter in Ecuador.“To see a president shut down the assembly and assume legislative power in a transitory manner is, undoubtedly, a blow to democracy,” he said, “and, above all, to the system of checks and balances that should be in force in any democracy in the world.”Mr. Lasso’s decision comes amid upheaval in the region. In December, Peru’s president attempted to dissolve congress — in this case an illegal move that led to his removal and arrest, and then to widespread protests that left dozens of people dead.In January, supporters of former President Jair Bolsonaro of Brazil stormed government buildings in the capital, arguing that November’s election, in which he was defeated, had been rigged.Will Freeman, a fellow for Latin America studies at the Council on Foreign Relations, said that Mr. Lasso’s decision to go around legislators could — possibly — be good for him.“Even though he is very unpopular now, I could see six months of rule by decree actually boosting his popularity if he can do something quickly about the twin crises of crime, and hunger and poverty,” he said. “Although, given his track record, that’s a big if.”Some human rights activists said they worry that Mr. Lasso’s power to govern by decree could open the door for serious rights violations, like using terrorism laws to target Indigenous organizations and other groups that might oppose him.“The executive branch governing by decree could continue to exacerbate and favor the interests of the banks, the oil mining companies and certain privileged sectors, to the detriment of the rights of the majorities,” said Lina María Espinosa, a human rights lawyer.Mr. Lasso’s first act on Wednesday under his new powers was a tax cut for businesses and middle-class Ecuadoreans, a move that was welcomed by María Paz Jervis, the president of the Chambers of Industries and Production, a business group.While the dissolution of the legislature could lead to unrest and hurt the economy, Ms. Jervis said new elections were a positive development for a country that needed economic growth, to fight poverty and to produce more jobs.“After this weariness, after this burden that we have felt with this political class, we believe that it is the moment to inaugurate a new politics in Ecuador,” she said.José María León Cabrera More

Also, hot years ahead as global temperatures rise.President Biden leaving for Japan.Kenny Holston/The New York TimesWhat to watch at the G7The annual Group of 7 summit opens today in Hiroshima, Japan, where the leaders of the seven major industrial democracies will discuss how to keep the global economy stable. They will also focus on shoring up diplomatic relations at a time of great global uncertainty.“There will be two major issues on the agenda,” my colleague David Sanger said. “How to bring the Ukraine war to an end and how to deal with China.”But the most pressing potential threat, at least to the global economy, may be turmoil in the U.S. The country is two weeks away from running out of money to pay its bills, and a default would jolt its economy and those of the other G7 countries.To address the debt issue at home, President Biden, who is traveling to Japan to attend the summit, canceled the second part of his planned trip — skipping visits to Papua New Guinea and Australia. Fears of an unreliable and dysfunctional America will be revived in that region, analysts warn, where the U.S. has only recently started to rebuild trust and momentum.Papua New Guinea: It scrambled to mobilize 1,000 security officers and 17 other world leaders agreed to visit for just a few hours with Biden. Now, those plans have been scrapped.A hot day in Manhattan in 2016, which is currently the warmest year on record.Bryan Thomas for The New York TimesHeat is likely to soar in the next 5 yearsGlobal temperatures are likely to reach record highs over the next five years, a new analysis showed. Forecasters at the World Meteorological Organization said that human-caused warming and the climate pattern known as El Niño will almost certainly make 2023 to ’27 the warmest five-year period ever recorded.The higher temperatures could exacerbate the dangers from heat waves, wildfires, drought and other calamities, scientists say. Every fraction of a degree increase brings new risks. El Niño will very likely cause further turmoil by shifting precipitation patterns. The organization said it expected increased summer rainfall over the next five years in places like Northern Europe and the Sahel in sub-Saharan Africa and reduced rainfall in the Amazon and parts of Australia.Context: Many world leaders have insisted on the aspirational goal, set out in the Paris climate agreement, of holding global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius. But nations have delayed making the monumental changes necessary to achieve this goal, and now scientists think that the world will probably exceed that threshold around the early 2030s.Indonesia’s plan to move its capitalJakarta, above, is sinking. So Joko Widodo, Indonesia’s president, is trying to build a new capital city, called Nusantara, from the ground up. It’s supposed to be a green and walkable beacon for other megacities in developing nations trying to confront climate change — and usher in a new national mood.“This is not physically moving the buildings,” Joko told my colleague, Hannah Beech, leading her on a tour through the construction site. “We want a new work ethic, new mind-set, new green economy.”The project is a daring attempt at what climate experts call a “managed retreat,” an engineered withdrawal of communities from vulnerable land. It’s also a test case for other similar megacities, which are struggling to negotiate rapid population growth and climate change.Challenges: Nusantara faces political opposition. It also may be behind schedule: Joko wants to inaugurate it next August, but not a single showcase structure has been completed.Why is Jakarta sinking? In part, deforestation and overcrowding. But also many residents have dug thousands of illegal wells to search for clean water, which has deflated the marshes under the city.THE LATEST NEWSAsia PacificChina fined a comedy studio about $2 million for a joke comparing the military to stray dogs.Taiwan’s opposition party nominated a moderate for president, an appeal to voters wary of Beijing.Timed to the G7 summit, some Japanese lawmakers are pushing for an L.G.B.T.Q. rights bill. Japan is the only G7 country that has not legalized same-sex unions.The War in UkraineEuropean countries are pressuring the U.S. to allow Ukraine to procure American-made F-16 fighter jets.Ukraine said its gains around Bakhmut were shifting the momentum.Ukraine and Russia have agreed to extend an agreement that allows Ukraine to ship grain across the Black Sea.Around the WorldPresident Guillermo Lasso, center, faces impeachment proceedings over accusations of embezzlement. Jose Jacome/EPA, via ShutterstockEcuador’s president, who used a constitutional measure that will allow him to rule by decree, disbanded the opposition-led congress.Prince Harry and his wife Meghan said they were chased by paparazzi. Officials characterized the event as less dramatic.State executions worldwide rose to the highest recorded number in five years in 2022, even as more countries moved to outlaw the death penalty.In the U.S., a handful of activists who no longer identify as transgender have become the faces of a Republican campaign to restrict gender transition care for minors.A Morning ReadThe writer Qian Julie Wang reviewed two memoirs that explore the many forms of hunger that come with being Asian in America: Fae Myenne Ng’s “Orphan Bachelors” and Jane Wong’s “Meet Me Tonight in Atlantic City.”The two books were written by second-generation Americans with ancestral roots in southern China. The authors have also known hungers of many kinds, inheriting their ancestors’ “insatiable” appetites — for food and water, but also for connection.ARTS AND IDEASA new theory of human evolutionFor a long time, scientists argued that modern humans arose from one place in Africa during one period in time. But a new analysis, based on the genomes of 290 people, rejects that theory, revealing a surprisingly complex origin story.The new research concludes that modern humans descended from at least two populations that coexisted in Africa for a million years. These groups later merged in several independent events.“There is no single birthplace,” said an expert who was not involved in the study. “It really puts a nail in the coffin of that idea.”PLAY, WATCH, EATWhat to CookAndrew Purcell for The New York TimesDrizzle honey or dust cinnamon on top of torrijas, a Spanish-style French toast.What to ReadMichael Lewis had a front-row seat to the implosion of FTX. His new book about it, “Going Infinite,” will be published in October.HealthI reported on a new trend in hydration, where the thirsty enthusiastically mix syrups and powders into tap water. But … is any of it even water?Now Time to PlayPlay the Mini Crossword, and a clue: Loaf around the kitchen (five letters).Here are the Wordle and the Spelling Bee.You can find all our puzzles here.That’s it for today’s briefing. See you tomorrow. — AmeliaP.S. The Times is introducing a new audio journalism app, New York Times Audio. It has exclusive shows, including “The Headlines,” a quick take on the day’s biggest news.“The Daily” is on Turkish politics.You can reach our team at [email protected]. More

Seen by some as spoiler but by others as a kingmaker, Sinan Ogan, the far-right candidate who came in third in the vote, says he is being courted by the two finalists: the sitting president and his challenger.ANKARA — As Sinan Ogan tells it, he has suddenly become the most sought-after man in Turkey.The hard-right nationalist and third-place finisher in presidential elections last weekend, Mr. Ogan told The New York Times that he has been fielding calls all week, from cabinet members to opposition leaders and even the office of President Recep Tayyip Erdogan. They all want the same thing — help wooing his critical swing voters one way or the other in the May 28 runoff between the two front-runners.“Very busy,” Mr. Ogan said at his office in the capital, Ankara, on Tuesday afternoon. “I spent my last three or four days negotiating issues with such high-level people.”Mr. Ogan and other hard-right nationalists made a strong showing in Sunday’s presidential and parliamentary elections, prioritizing national security and the defense of what they consider Turkish identity. In particular, they advocate tough stances on the more than 3.3 million Syrian refugees in Turkey.Since the vote, Mr. Ogan’s has been called everything from a spoiler, who blocked the top presidential contenders from an outright victory, to a kingmaker whose supporters may play a role in deciding the runoff. That has given him a sudden clout, evidenced by the flood of calls he says he has received this week.The strong performance of nationalists in these elections will likely pull Turkish government policy further to the right in the years to come, particularly with regards to the country’s Kurdish minority and Syrian refugees.People walking past a banner of Sinan Ogan, who came in third in presidential elections over the weekend, in Istanbul, Turkey on Thursday.Khalil Hamra/Associated PressIn the vote on May 14, Mr. Erdogan won 49.5 percent while his main challenger, the opposition leader Kemal Kilicdaroglu, took about 44.8 percent. Mr. Ogan won a surprising 5.2 percent.With his comfortable lead in the first round, Mr. Erdogan now looks poised to win the runoff, especially if a good number of Mr. Ogan’s voters throw their support to him. Analysts said they expected more of those voters to choose Mr. Erdogan than his challenger.Mr. Ogan, 55, is a former parliament member and expert on the Caucasus who speaks Russian and earned a doctorate in politics and international relations from a Moscow university.He said he expects to announce his endorsement around Thursday, and assumes that 70 percent of his supporters would follow his recommendation. But political analysts are less sure, noting that Mr. Ogan lacks a powerful party apparatus to corral voters. And many of his supporters may have chosen him to protest the top contenders, and could skip the runoff.Mr. Ogan said he has demands in exchange for throwing his support to a candidate, all of them aimed at promoting nationalist causes. For one, he wants a scheduled plan to deport the refugees from many countries, including Syria and Afghanistan. And in exchange for endorsing a candidate, he also wants a very senior post in the new administration to see his demands through.“Why would I be a minister when I can be vice president?” he said.He declined to say whether he was leaning toward a particular candidate.He said he admired Mr. Erdogan’s work ethic, but also criticized him for not consulting enough with others before making decisions. Mr. Kilicdarolu, he said, was not as hard working but widely solicited others’ opinions.The opposition camp, overlapping with the far right on some issues, including the desire to send the Syrian refugees home, could step up efforts to sway nationalist voters before the runoff.Idris Sahin, an official with DEVA, one of the opposition parties backing Mr. Kilicdaroglu, said his party had done a “sociological study” of Mr. Ogan’s voters and would soon launch a campaign targeting them.On Wednesday, Mr. Kilicdaroglu released a campaign video attacking Mr. Erdogan and his party with harsh nationalist rhetoric.“The border is honor,” Mr. Kilicdaroglu said, referring to the president’s allowing millions of refugees from Syria and elsewhere to settle in Turkey. He called the refugees an “unruly flood of people flowing into our veins every day” and warned that their number would increase and “threaten our survival!”Mr. Ogan would not answer directly when asked whether he had spoken with Mr. Erdogan about a possible endorsement. Officials from Mr. Erdogan’s party and the opposition have not spoken publicly about any negotiations with Mr. Ogan.“I talk to everyone,” he said.Among Mr. Ogan’s other demands, he said he doesn’t want any political party that he considers connected to terrorism — a term the government often uses to refer to Kurdish militants — to have any role in the government.He mentioned two parties specifically: the Free Cause Party, a hard-line Islamist party allied with Mr. Erdogan, and the pro-Kurdish Peoples’ Democratic Party, or H.D.P., which supported Mr. Kilicdaroglu.The first grew out of an underground Islamist organization known for murdering journalists, intellectuals and others in previous decades. The party’s current leaders say they reject violence.Turkey has fought a yearslong and deadly battle against Kurdish militants and the government often accuses the H.D.P. of cooperation with the Kurdistan Workers’ Party, which Turkey, the United States and the European Union all consider a terrorist organization. H.D.P. leaders deny that accusation and say they condemn violence.Mr. Ogan credited his campaign with elevating nationalist causes during the election and hard-right factions also fared well in parliamentary elections. In particular, Mr. Erdogan’s strongest allies in Parliament, the Nationalist Movement Party, performed better than expected.“We blew a very nationalist wind into the field,” Mr. Ogan said.But analysts said it was more likely that such sentiments were already rising among the electorate and Mr. Ogan just happened to catch the wave.Gulsin Harman More

The Florida governor is making a grab for national attention ahead of his expected presidential campaign rollout.Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida, an all-but-declared presidential candidate, has stepped up his headline-hunting travel and events ahead of an official announcement, traversing the state and trying to hoover up national attention as he signs the sharply conservative legislation he believes can propel him to the Republican Party’s nomination.On Wednesday, Mr. DeSantis signed a slew of measures that hit all the culture-clash notes his base has rewarded him for, including bills banning gender-transition care for minors, preventing children from attending “adult live performances” like drag shows and restricting the use of preferred pronouns in schools.“We need to let our kids just be kids,” Mr. DeSantis said at a Christian school in Tampa. “What we’ve said in Florida is we are going to remain a refuge of sanity and a citadel of normalcy.”It was his third consecutive day of holding public bill-signing ceremonies across the state. The ceremonies, which he hosts in his official capacity as governor, allow Mr. DeSantis to promote his political message in settings that he carefully stage-manages as a veritable M.C., calling up additional speakers and then thanking them for their contributions. These events sometimes take on the feel of political rallies.Such a platform gives Mr. DeSantis an advantage over his potential rivals for the presidency — many of whom are either out of office or hold legislative roles — as he sprints toward declaring his candidacy, which is likely to happen by the end of the month.On Monday, his signing of a bill defunding diversity and equity programs at public colleges and universities drew a robust round of news coverage — as well as loud protesters. He and other Republicans who shared the stage mocked the demonstrators, many of them students at New College of Florida, a public liberal arts school in Sarasota that the governor has sought to transform into a conservative bastion.The signing of bills aimed at the L.G.B.T.Q. community on Wednesday was “an all-out attack on freedom,” Joe Saunders, the senior political director of Equality Florida, an advocacy organization, said in a virtual news conference. He noted that Mr. DeSantis had already signed a six-week abortion ban as well as bills that allowed physicians to decline to provide care based on moral or religious grounds.Mr. DeSantis sees freedom “as a campaign slogan in his bid for the White House,” Mr. Saunders said. “The nation should be on high alert, because, today, we are all Floridians.”Some centrist Republicans say the way Mr. DeSantis has pushed Florida to the right on social issues is a potential weakness in a general election. Representatives for Mr. DeSantis did not immediately respond to requests for comment.As he travels the state, the lines between Mr. DeSantis’s roles as governor and potential presidential candidate can sometimes seem blurred.On Tuesday, after he signed several bills near Fort Lauderdale aimed at curbing human trafficking, an issue that the right has tried to weaponize in national politics, Mr. DeSantis received a boost from Florida’s two top Republican legislative leaders, Kathleen Passidomo, the Senate president, and Paul Renner, the House speaker.After the signing concluded, Ms. Passidomo and Mr. Renner stepped up to a lectern — embossed with Florida’s state seal, rather than the “Stop Human Trafficking” sign that the governor had used moments earlier — to endorse Mr. DeSantis for president, an office he is not yet formally seeking.Katie Betta, a spokeswoman for Ms. Passidomo, said that the endorsement was a matter of convenience because the governor and legislative leaders had not been together since the lawmaking session ended on May 5. “It was a good opportunity to answer a question they have both been getting from the press since the day they were sworn in last November,” Ms. Betta wrote in an email, referring to Ms. Passidomo and Mr. Renner.On Wednesday, the main super PAC backing Mr. DeSantis unveiled endorsements from nearly 100 state lawmakers. Behind the scenes, the governor’s allies and political operatives have been jostling with former President Donald J. Trump’s team to secure those pledges. At the federal level, members of Florida’s congressional delegation have swung heavily for Mr. Trump.Mr. DeSantis has now held an official event on every weekday this month. He spends his weekends on political travel, including to the crucial early-voting state of Iowa last Saturday.Since winning re-election in a rout in November, Mr. DeSantis has regularly faced questions at state events about his national political ambitions. For months, he usually fended them off with quips about how he was not interested in petty infighting and how it was too soon to be talking about future campaigns with the annual lawmaking session pending.No more. On Tuesday, Mr. DeSantis jumped at the chance to call out Mr. Trump for dodging a question about abortion. The former president had criticized Florida’s six-week ban as too harsh while remaining noncommittal about what restrictions he might support.“I signed the bill. I was proud to do it,” Mr. DeSantis told reporters. “He won’t answer whether he would sign it or not.”This time, it was the swipe at Mr. Trump that made headlines. More