Academy of Sciences permanent secretary Hans Ellegren (C), Jakob Svensson (L) and Jan Teorell, of the Nobel assembly at the Swedish Riksbank announces the Swedish Riksbank’s prize in economic science in memory of Alfred Nobel 2024, which goes to Daron Acemoglu, Simon Johnson and James A Robinson, during a press meeting at the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences in Stockholm, Sweden, on Monday. Photo by Christine Olsson/EPA-EFE
Oct. 14 (UPI) — Three U.S.-based economists were awarded the Nobel Prize in economic sciences Monday for their work examining how institutions are formed and their effect on prosperity.
Daron Acemoglu and Simon Johnson, both from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and James A. Robinson, from the University of Chicago, won the Sveriges Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel, the committee said.
The Committee for the Prize in Economic Sciences said the three demonstrated “the importance of societal institutions for a country’s prosperity.”
“Societies with a poor rule of law and institutions that exploit the population do not generate growth or change for the better,” it said.
The committee said the European colonization around much of the globe played a role in the wealth of societies because of the institutions they put in place.
“This was sometimes dramatic, but did not occur in the same way everywhere,” the committee said. “In some places, the aim was to exploit the indigenous population and extract resources for the colonizers’ benefit. In others, the colonizers formed inclusive political and economic institutions for the long-term benefit of European migrants.
“Inclusive institutions were often introduced in countries that were poor when they colonized, over time resulting in a generally prosperous population. This is an important reason why former colonies that were once rich are now poor and vice versa.”
The economic situation in colonies often led to political change when poor conditions led to a revolt from the Indigenous people or paved the way to a democratic system of government that ushered out colonial rulers.
“Reducing the vast differences in income between countries is one of our time’s greatest challenges,” Jakob Svensson, chair of the committee said. “The laureates have demonstrated the importance of societal institutions for achieving this.”
The Supreme Court
Win McNamee/Getty Images
hide caption
toggle caption
Win McNamee/Getty Images
The Supreme Court on Monday intervened in New York’s redistricting process, blocking a lower court decision that would likely have flipped a Republican congressional district into a Democratic district.
At issue is the midterm redrawing of New York’s 11th congressional district, including Staten Island and a small part of Brooklyn. The district is currently held by a Republican, but on Jan. 21, a state Supreme Court judge ruled that the current district dilutes the power of Black and Latino voters in violation of the state constitution.
GOP Rep. Nicole Malliotakis, who represents the district, and the Republican co-chair of the state Board of Elections promptly appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, asking the justices to block the redrawing as an unconstitutional “racial gerrymander.” New York’s congressional election cycle was set to officially begin Feb. 24, the opening day for candidates to seek placement on the ballot.
As in this year’s prior mid-decade redistricting fights — in Texas and California — the Trump administration backed the Republicans.
Voters and the State of New York contended it’s too soon for the Supreme Court to wade into this dispute. New York’s highest state court has not issued a final judgment, so the voters asserted that if the Supreme Court grants relief now “future stay applicants will see little purpose in waiting for state court rulings before coming to this Court” and “be rewarded for such gamesmanship.” The state argues this is an issue for “New York courts, not federal courts” to resolve, and there is sufficient time for the dispute to be resolved on the merits.
The court majority explained the decision to intervene in 101 words, which the three dissenting liberal justices summarized as “Rules for thee, but not for me.”
The unsigned majority order does not explain the Court’s rationale. It says only how long the stay will last, until the case moves through the New York State appeals courts. If, however, the losing party petitions and the court agrees to hear the challenge, the stay extends until the final opinion is announced.
Dissenting from the decision were Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson. Writing for the three, Sotomayor said that if nonfinal decisions of a state trial court can be brought to highest court, “then every decision from any court is now fair game.” More immediately, she noted, “By granting these applications, the Court thrusts itself into the middle of every election-law dispute around the country, even as many States redraw their congressional maps ahead of the 2026 election.”
Monday’s Supreme Court action deviates from the court’s hands-off pattern in these mid-term redistricting fights this year. In two previous cases — from Texas and California — the court refused to intervene, allowing newly drawn maps to stay in effect.
Requests for Supreme Court intervention on redistricting issues has been a recurring theme this term, a trend that is likely to grow. Earlier last month the high court allowed California to use a voter-approved, Democratic-friendly map. California’s redistricting came in response to a GOP-friendly redistricting plan in Texas that the Supreme Court also permitted to move forward. These redistricting efforts are expected to offset one another.
But the high court itself has yet to rule on a challenge to Louisiana’s voting map, which was drawn by the state legislature after the decennial census in order to create a second majority-Black district. Since the drawing of that second majority-black district, the state has backed away from that map, hoping to return to a plan that provides for only one majority-minority district.
The Supreme Court’s consideration of the Louisiana case has stretched across two terms. The justices failed to resolve the case last term and chose to order a second round of arguments this term adding a new question: Does the state’s intentional creation of a second majority-minority district violate the constitution’s Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments’ guarantee of the right to vote and the authority of Congress to enforce that mandate?
Following the addition of the new question, the state of Louisiana flipped positions to oppose the map it had just drawn and defended in court. Whether the Supreme Court follows suit remains to be seen. But the tone of the October argument suggested that the court’s conservative supermajority is likely to continue undercutting the 1965 Voting Rights Act.
Note: Map shows the area with a shake intensity of 3 or greater, which U.S.G.S. defines as “weak,” though the earthquake may be felt outside the areas shown. The New York Times
A minor earthquake with a preliminary magnitude of 3.5 struck in Central California on Monday, according to the United States Geological Survey.
The temblor happened at 7:17 a.m. Pacific time about 6 miles northwest of Pinnacles, Calif., data from the agency shows.
As seismologists review available data, they may revise the earthquake’s reported magnitude. Additional information collected about the earthquake may also prompt U.S.G.S. scientists to update the shake-severity map.
Source: United States Geological Survey | Notes: Shaking categories are based on the Modified Mercalli Intensity scale. When aftershock data is available, the corresponding maps and charts include earthquakes within 100 miles and seven days of the initial quake. All times above are Pacific time. Shake data is as of Monday, March 2 at 10:20 a.m. Eastern. Aftershocks data is as of Monday, March 2 at 11:18 a.m. Eastern.
The U.S. and Israel have been conducting strikes against targets in Iran since Saturday morning, with the aim of toppling Tehran’s clerical regime. Iran has fired back, with retaliatory assaults featuring missiles and drones targeting several Gulf countries and American bases in the Middle East.
“All six aircrew ejected safely, have been safely recovered, and are in stable condition. Kuwait has acknowledged this incident, and we are grateful for the efforts of the Kuwaiti defense forces and their support in this ongoing operation,” Central Command said.
“The cause of the incident is under investigation. Additional information will be released as it becomes available,” it added.
In a separate statement later Monday, Central Command said that American forces had been killed during combat since the strikes began.
“As of 7:30 am ET, March 2, four U.S. service members have been killed in action. The fourth service member, who was seriously wounded during Iran’s initial attacks, eventually succumbed to their injuries,” it said.
Major combat operations continue and our response effort is ongoing. The identities of the fallen are being withheld until 24 hours after next of kin notification,” Central Command added.
This story has been updated.
Exclusive: DeepSeek withholds latest AI model from US chipmakers including Nvidia, sources say
Mother and daughter injured in Taunton house explosion
10 acres charred, 5 injured in Thornton grass fire, evacuation orders lifted
Wildfire near Gum Swamp Road in Livingston Parish now under control; more than 200 acres burned
YouTube TV billing scam emails are hitting inboxes
OpenAI didn’t contact police despite employees flagging mass shooter’s concerning chatbot interactions: REPORT
Stellantis is in a crisis of its own making
2026 OSAA Oregon Wrestling State Championship Results And Brackets – FloWrestling
