More stories

  • in

    Harvard Removes Binding of Human Skin From Book in Its Library

    The decision to find a “respectful final disposition” for human remains used for a 19th-century book comes amid growing scrutiny of their presence in museum collections.Of the roughly 20 million books in Harvard University’s libraries, one has long exerted a unique dark fascination, not for its contents, but for the material it was reputedly bound in: human skin.For years, the volume — a 19th-century French treatise on the human soul — was brought out for show and tell, and sometimes, according to library lore, used to haze new employees. In 2014, the university drew jokey news coverage around the world with the announcement that it had used new technology to confirm that the binding was in fact human skin.But on Wednesday, after years of criticism and debate, the university announced that it had removed the binding and would be exploring options for “a final respectful disposition of these human remains.”“After careful study, stakeholder engagement, and consideration, Harvard Library and the Harvard Museum Collections Returns Committee concluded that the human remains used in the book’s binding no longer belong in the Harvard Library collections, due to the ethically fraught nature of the book’s origins and subsequent history,” the university said in a statement.Harvard also said that its own handling of the book, a copy of Arsène Houssaye’s “Des Destinées de L’Ame,” or “The Destiny of Souls,” had failed to live up to the “ethical standards” of care, and had sometimes used an inappropriately “sensationalistic, morbid and humorous tone” in publicizing it.The library apologized, saying that it had “further objectified and compromised the dignity of the human being whose remains were used for its binding.”We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    British Museum Sues Former Curator for Return of Stolen Items

    The museum accuses Peter Higgs, a former keeper of Greek and Roman antiquities, of stealing or damaging at least 1,800 artifacts and selling many on eBay.A judge has ordered a former curator who the British Museum says stole hundred of artifacts to return any gems or jewelry from the institution that are in his possession.The museum claims that the former curator, Peter Higgs, who once ran the museum’s Greek and Roman antiquities department, stole or damaged over 1,800 artifacts from its collections and sold hundreds of those items on eBay, according to court documents.Officials also want Mr. Higgs to explain the whereabouts of other artifacts that they says the former curator sold online. The court documents state that Mr. Higgs disputes the accusations against him.At a High Court hearing in London, the presiding judge, Heather Williams, ordered Mr. Higgs to return any items within four weeks. Judge Williams also ordered PayPal, the online payments company, to disclose data relating to Mr. Higgs’s eBay accounts, including his transaction history.The missing museum items include engraved gems and jewelry, some of which are thousands of years old.On Tuesday, Mr. Higgs and his family did not respond to emails and social media messages from The Times. In court papers, the museum’s lawyers said the curator was “suffering from severe mental strain” and was “unable to respond effectively to the proceedings.”We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    Why the Solar Eclipse Will Not Leave People Without Power

    Grid managers say they are well prepared to handle a sharp drop in the energy produced by solar panels as the eclipse darkens the sky in North America on April 8.When the sky darkens during next month’s solar eclipse, electricity production in some parts of the country will drop so sharply that it could theoretically leave tens of millions of homes in the dark. In practice, hardly anyone will notice a sudden loss of energy.Electric utilities say they expect to see significant decreases in solar power production during the eclipse but have already lined up alternate sources of electricity, including large battery installations and natural gas power plants. Homeowners who rely on rooftop solar panels should also experience no loss of electricity because home batteries or the electric grid will kick in automatically as needed.At 12:10 p.m. on April 8, the solar eclipse will begin over southwestern Texas, the regional electrical system perhaps most affected by the event, and last three hours.“I don’t think anything is as predictable as an eclipse,” said Pedro Pizarro, president and chief of executive of Edison International, a California power company, and the chairman of the Edison Electric Institute, a utility trade organization. “You can prepare.”This year’s solar eclipse will darken the sky as it passes over a swath of Mexico, the United States and Canada. That leaves solar energy systems — one of the nation’s fastest growing sources of electricity — vulnerable.Although solar power produces only when the sun shines, forecasters can generally predict pretty well how much electricity panels will produce on any given day depending on the weather. That helps utility and grid managers make sure they have other sources of energy available to meet consumer needs.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    Has the Luxury E-Commerce Bubble Burst?

    After implosions by Farfetch and MatchesFashion — and with other blowouts possible — the future for online fashion retailers looks uncertain.Rosh Mahtani, the founder of the jewelry brand Alighieri, is celebrating the 10th anniversary of her company this year. Her handmade gold-plated pieces, inspired by Dante’s “Divine Comedy,” made her a winner of the Queen Elizabeth II Award for British Design and a mainstay of luxury e-commerce vendors.During Paris Fashion Week last month, buyers came to her showroom to select stock for the upcoming season, including MatchesFashion, a leading multibrand fashion retailer that is responsible for about half a million pounds, or $630,000, of Alighieri’s projected revenues. But there was a problem.“They had owed me 70,000 pounds [about $88,000] in unpaid invoices since October and had been asking for discounts on those bills,” Ms. Mahtani said last week. It made her uneasy, even if such bargaining was increasingly commonplace for independent brands like hers. Still, she said, she wasn’t quaking in her boots.“The team made a selection, and we talked about a capsule collection for the summer,” she said. “I don’t think any of us had a sense of what would come next.”Days later, MatchesFashion was put into administration (the British term for bankruptcy). Its owner, Frasers Group, which bought the company in December for about 52 million pounds, or $66 million, now said the operation was not commercially viable. Overnight, almost half of the staff was fired from a company that had been valued at $1 billion when it was sold to Apax Partners in 2017. Today, 200 brands are owed money and cannot access unsold inventory, and a furious customer base rages online about accessing orders or making returns.Rosh Mahtani, founder of cult jewelry label Alighieri, was owed substantial sums by MatchesFashion when the retailer was put into administration earlier this month.via Alighieri JewelryWe are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    Appeals Court Keeps Block on Texas Migrant Law

    The decision in favor of the federal government left in place a trial court injunction while courts determine whether the measure is legal. A federal appeals court late Tuesday ruled against Texas in its bitter clash with the federal government, deciding that a law allowing the state to arrest and deport migrants could not be implemented while the courts wrestled with the question of whether it is legal.A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, which has a reputation for conservative rulings, sided in its 2-to-1 decision with lawyers for the Biden administration who have argued that the law violates the U.S. Constitution and decades of legal precedent.The panel’s 50-page majority opinion left in place an injunction imposed last month by a lower court in Austin, which found that the federal government was likely to succeed in its arguments against the law. The opinion was written by the Fifth Circuit’s chief judge, Priscilla Richman, a nominee of President George W. Bush, and was joined by Judge Irma Carrillo Ramirez, who was nominated to the bench by President Biden last year.Judge Richman found that Texas’ law conflicted with federal law and with Supreme Court precedent, particularly a 2012 immigration case, Arizona v. United States.“For nearly 150 years, the Supreme Court has held that the power to control immigration — the entry, admission and removal of noncitizens — is exclusively a federal power,” she wrote. “Texas has not shown that it is likely to succeed on the merits,” she said after discussing how various arguments made by the state fell short.It was a setback for Gov. Greg Abbott but not an unexpected one: The governor has said that he anticipated the fight over the law’s constitutionality to eventually reach the Supreme Court. Mr. Abbott has said the law, which allows the state to arrest and deport migrants on its own, is necessary to deal with the record number of migrants crossing into Texas from Mexico. We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    Democrat Running on Abortion and I.V.F. Access Wins Special Election in Alabama

    Marilyn Lands, a Democrat, won a special election Tuesday for a State House seat in Alabama after campaigning on access to abortion and in vitro fertilization, underscoring the continued political potency of reproductive rights.Ms. Lands defeated her Republican opponent, Teddy Powell, by about 25 percentage points — an extraordinary margin in a swing district where she lost by seven points in 2022. The special election was called when David Cole, the Republican who had held the seat, resigned and pleaded guilty to voter fraud.“Today, Alabama women and families sent a clear message that will be heard in Montgomery and across the nation,” Ms. Lands, a licensed counselor, said Tuesday night. “Our legislature must repeal Alabama’s no-exceptions abortion ban, fully restore access to I.V.F. and protect the right to contraception.”Her election, in the largely suburban House District 10 in northern Alabama, does not change the balance of power in the state; Republicans still hold supermajorities in both its House and its Senate. And the race was small, with only about 6,000 votes cast.But the outcome and the margin add further evidence to the pile of election results over the nearly two years since the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade that abortion, and, now, I.V.F., is a reliably motivating issue. Democrats are counting on abortion rights in 2024 to continue to help power wins in key states.Alabama has banned abortion at all stages of pregnancy, with no exceptions for rape and incest. And last month, the Alabama Supreme Court ruled that frozen embryos were people with rights — upending I.V.F. care, which typically involves creating multiple embryos but implanting only one at a time, and indefinitely freezing or sometimes destroying those left over.In response to the backlash over that ruling, the Alabama Legislature passed a law giving I.V.F. clinics criminal and civil immunity and Gov. Kay Ivey, a Republican, signed it. It did not address embryos’ legal status.Mr. Powell, the Republican candidate, avoided talking about abortion and I.V.F. during the campaign, focusing instead on issues including education and local infrastructure. That strategy, which many national candidates have also adopted over the past two years, does not appear to have been effective.Heather Williams, the president of the Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee, which works to elect Democrats to state legislatures, called Ms. Lands’s victory “a harbinger of things to come.”“Republicans across the country have been put on notice that there are consequences to attacks on I.V.F.,” Ms. Williams said.President Biden’s re-election campaign, which is planning to focus heavily on abortion as well, also highlighted the result, calling it a “major warning sign” for former President Donald J. Trump. Mr. Trump, who appointed three of the Supreme Court justices who overturned Roe, has indicated that he is likely to support a 15-week federal abortion ban.“Voters will not stand for his attacks on reproductive health care,” Mr. Biden’s campaign manager, Julie Chavez Rodriguez, said in a statement. More

  • in

    How Los Angeles Is Approaching Homelessness

    A conversation with the Times reporter who wrote about Mayor Karen Bass’s flagship program to solve homelessness.In the Venice Beach neighborhood, Candice Mariona was moved from a sidewalk where an encampment was being cleared by the city.Mark Abramson for The New York TimesAbout 171,000 people living in California are homeless, a total that has grown significantly over the past decade. If you live here, this has surely not gone without notice, as encampments have popped up on sidewalks and in public parks across the state in recent years.Though California accounts for 12 percent of the nation’s population, the state is home to 30 percent of all homeless people in the United States.My colleague Jill Cowan recently wrote about a new program spearheaded by Mayor Karen Bass of Los Angeles that’s aimed at eliminating the most visible encampments in the city. Bass took office in late 2022, and the program, Inside Safe, is at the core of her efforts to solve homelessness.The program provides motel rooms for homeless residents who agree to leave encampments, a shift from sweeps in which officials clear encampments and force people to leave. But while Inside Safe has moved more than 2,100 people into shelters, only 400 of them have since moved into permanent housing. That’s drawn criticism that the program is only a short-term fix and perhaps more for optics than helping Angelenos most in need.You can read Jill’s full article here.I spoke to Jill about her article and her reporting, which spanned more than a year. Here’s our conversation, lightly edited:Why did you decide to focus on Inside Safe?Because it was the mayor’s focus — it was the program she touted the most and it was meant to address some of the people who need it most. You reported that through Inside Safe and other programs, L.A. moved 21,000 people off the street and into temporary housing in 2023, about 4,000 more than it did in the prior year. How are Bass’s efforts seemingly more effective than her predecessors’?We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    Why Didn’t My Sister Include Me in Her ‘Family’ Birthday Party

    A reader’s feelings are hurt after offering to fly to celebrate her sister’s 70th birthday only to be told not to bother, as “all her family” would be there.My sister and I live in different parts of the country. We’re not close, but we are cordial and visit each other every year or two. She is about to turn 70, so I offered to fly halfway across the country to help her celebrate. She declined, saying that “all her family” — her kids and grandkids — were coming for a party, so it wasn’t a good time for a visit. I stay in a hotel when I visit her, so it’s not a matter of putting me up, and there are no hard feelings between us. I am hurt not to be included. I thought I was family, too. I might have accepted a white lie (“I’m not doing anything special”), but telling me I’m not invited to her party seems hostile. Thoughts?SISTERI’m sorry your feelings are hurt. I’m also struck by how readily you placed yourself at the center of your sister’s birthday — in the same breath as reporting you aren’t close to her. (I get it, of course: We are all the starring players in our lives.) I agree that your sister chose her words poorly, but it doesn’t take a big leap to decipher what she really meant: She wants to focus on her children and grandchildren when they visit.Many siblings drift over time (and distance). And your “cordial” relationship with your sister is not uncommon: You may have been central to each other — formative, even — in early life but not so much today. That doesn’t take away from the warmth you feel for each other. She was simply being honest when she said she wanted to give her undivided attention to her children and grandchildren on her birthday. She may not get to see them as often as she would like.Your visit probably constitutes a different kind of special occasion: more nostalgic and rooted in the past. And a gentler reading of your sister’s response is that she didn’t want you to fly halfway across the country and feel neglected. So, I hope you can get past your hurt feelings and find another time for a sisterly celebration.Miguel PorlanNursing a Grudge to Honor a Friendship?In college, my best friend and I dated another pair of best friends. After we graduated, five years ago, the other couple broke up, but my partner and I are still together. My friend’s ex was unkind to her during their breakup, and she still resents him — even though they are both in other relationships now. The problem: The ex is moving to our city. My partner would like me to spend time with his friend and his girlfriend occasionally, but I think my friend would be hurt if I did. (And my partner will be hurt if I don’t!) Advice?We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More