Connect with us

News

Drone Collision Grounds Firefighting Plane in Los Angeles

Published

on

Drone Collision Grounds Firefighting Plane in Los Angeles

A firefighting plane flying over the Palisades fire in Los Angeles collided with a civilian drone on Thursday, officials said, putting the plane out of service and further stretching the resources available to battle the raging fires in Southern California.

The plane landed safely after the incident, said the Federal Aviation Administration, which will investigate the episode. The collision punctured a wing and put the plane out of commission, said Chris Thomas, a Cal Fire spokesman.

The blazes that broke out this week in the Los Angeles area were fueled by fierce winds that initially prevented aircraft from taking off safely. Once conditions improved, dozens of helicopters and planes joined the fight to contain the fires. More were on the way Thursday night, the authorities said.

The plane involved in the collision on Thursday is a Canadair CL-415 Super Scooper, leased by the Los Angeles County Fire Department from the Canadian province of Quebec, said Kenichi Haskett, a department spokesman. The department said on social media that the collision on Thursday, at around 1 p.m., involved a civilian drone.

The CL-415 can fly very low and scoop up water to dump on fires, according to its maker, De Havilland Aircraft of Canada. Mr. Thomas, the Cal Fire spokesman, said the Super Scooper holds 1,600 gallons and can refill in about five minutes.

Advertisement

In an hour, even if a refill takes 10 minutes, “that’s six water drops,” he said while discussing the setback to firefighting efforts. “So whose house is not going to get that water to protect it?”

The F.A.A. has imposed temporary flight restrictions in the Los Angeles area while firefighters work to contain the fires. The agency said Thursday that it has not authorized anyone who is not involved in the firefighting operations to fly drones in the restricted zones. Despite that, many videos of wildfire areas that appear to be from drones have been posted on social media this week.

Flight restrictions are often imposed by the F.A.A. when wildfires break out, and the authorities have warned for years about the threat posed by drones to firefighting aircraft. In September, at least two drone incursions were reported as firefighters battled the Line fire in Southern California.

Drone sightings force the authorities to ground firefighting aircraft for a minimum of 15 minutes and for as much as 30 minutes while they confirm it is safe to fly again, Mr. Thomas said.

“We have a saying: ‘If you fly, we can’t,’” he added. “But I don’t know how effective it is because everybody thinks it’s so cool to fly a drone up through the fire.”

Advertisement

Disrupting firefighting on public lands is a federal crime, punishable by up to 12 months in prison, according to the F.A.A., which said it can also impose a civil penalty of up to $75,000 on a drone pilot who interferes with efforts to suppress wildfires.

News

Video: At Least Two Killed in Shooting at Brown University

Published

on

Video: At Least Two Killed in Shooting at Brown University

new video loaded: At Least Two Killed in Shooting at Brown University

transcript

transcript

At Least Two Killed in Shooting at Brown University

Students remained locked in their dorms and classrooms as the police searched for the shooter, who was described as a man wearing black. At least two people are dead, and eight are in critical condition.

At 4:00 in the afternoon, we received a call. 4:05 was when the initial call came in to Brown University of a report of an active shooter. I can confirm that there are two individuals who have died this afternoon, and there are another eight in critical status. We do not have a shooter in custody at this time. There is a shelter in place in effect for the greater Brown University area. If you live on or near Brown’s campus, we are encouraging you to stay home and stay inside. This is a sad state of our country right now where you have to plan for these things. And hopefully the community takes some comfort to know that their Providence leadership has planned for this occurrence, including very recently.

Advertisement
Students remained locked in their dorms and classrooms as the police searched for the shooter, who was described as a man wearing black. At least two people are dead, and eight are in critical condition.

By McKinnon de Kuyper

December 13, 2025

Continue Reading

News

Multiple people shot near Brown University, police say

Published

on

Multiple people shot near Brown University, police say

In this image from video, law enforcement officials gather outside the Brown University campus in Providence, R.I., on Saturday, Dec. 13, 2025.

Kimberlee Kruesi/AP


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

Kimberlee Kruesi/AP

Multiple people have been shot near Brown University in Providence, R.I., on Saturday, police said.

The Providence Police Department said it is actively investigating the situation and is encouraging the public to shelter in place until further notice.

There is no suspect in custody, the university said on X, adding that it’s coordinating with multiple law enforcement agencies to search for a suspect.

Advertisement

The university  issued an alert Saturday afternoon that the shooter was spotted near the Barus and Holley building, which houses the School of Engineering and Physics Department.

“Continue to shelter in place. Remain away from Barus & Holley area. Police do not have a suspect in custody and continue to search for suspect(s). Brown coordinating with multiple law enforcement agencies on site,” the university said.

This is a developing story and will be updated.

Continue Reading

News

What to know about Kilmar Abrego Garcia’s release from immigration custody

Published

on

What to know about Kilmar Abrego Garcia’s release from immigration custody

BALTIMORE — Kilmar Abrego Garcia, whose mistaken deportation helped galvanize opposition to President Donald Trump’s immigration policies, was released from immigration detention on Thursday, and a judge has temporarily blocked any further efforts to detain him.

Abrego Garcia currently can’t be deported to his home country of El Salvador thanks to a 2019 immigration court order that found he had a “well founded fear” of danger there. However, the Trump administration has said he cannot stay in the U.S. Over the past few months, government officials have said they would deport him to Uganda, Eswatini, Ghana and, most recently, Liberia.

Abrego Garcia is fighting his deportation in federal court in Maryland, where his attorneys claim the administration is manipulating the immigration system to punish him for successfully challenging his earlier deportation.

Here’s what to know about the latest developments in the case:

Abrego Garcia is a Salvadoran citizen with an American wife and child who has lived in Maryland for years. He immigrated to the U.S. illegally as a teenager to join his brother, who had become a U.S. citizen. In 2019, an immigration judge granted him protection from being deported back to his home country.

Advertisement

While he was allowed to live and work in the U.S. under Immigration and Customs Enforcement supervision, he was not given residency status. Earlier this year, he was mistakenly deported to El Salvador, despite the earlier court ruling.

When Abrego Garcia was deported in March, he was held in a notoriously brutal Salvadoran prison despite having no criminal record.

The Trump administration initially fought efforts to bring him back to the U.S. but eventually complied after the U.S. Supreme Court weighed in. He returned to the U.S. in June, only to face an arrest warrant on human smuggling charges in Tennessee. Abrego Garcia was held in a Tennessee jail for more than two months before he was released on Friday, Aug. 22, to await trial in Maryland under home detention.

His freedom lasted a weekend. On the following Monday, he reported to the Baltimore immigration office for a check-in and was immediately taken into immigration custody. Officials announced plans to deport him to a series of African countries, but they were blocked by an order from U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis in Maryland.

On Thursday, after months of legal filings and hearings, Xinis ruled that Abrego Garcia should be released immediately. Her ruling hinged on what was likely a procedural error by the immigration judge who heard his case in 2019.

Advertisement

Normally, in a case like this, an immigration judge will first issue an order of removal. Then the judge will essentially freeze that order by issuing a “withholding of removal” order, according to Memphis immigration attorney Andrew Rankin.

In Abrego Garcia’s case, the judge granted withholding of removal to El Salvador because he found Abrego Garcia’s life could be in danger there. However, the judge never took the first step of issuing the order of removal. The government argued in Xinis’ court that the order of removal could be inferred, but the judge disagreed.

Without a final order of removal, Abrego Garcia can’t be deported, Xinis ruled.

The only way to get an order of removal is to go back to immigration court and ask for one, Rankin said. But reopening the immigration case is a gamble because Abrego Garcia’s attorneys would likely seek protection from deportation in the form of asylum or some other type of relief.

One wrinkle is that immigration courts are officially part of the executive branch, and the judges there are not generally viewed as being as independent as federal judges.

Advertisement

“There might be independence in some areas, but if the administration wants a certain result, by all accounts it seems they’re going to exert the pressure on the individuals to get that result,” Rankin said. “I hope he gets a fair shake, and two lawyers make arguments — somebody wins, somebody loses — instead of giving it to an immigration judge with a 95% denial rate, where everybody in the world knows how it’s gonna go down.”

Alternatively, the government could appeal Xinis’ order to the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals and try to get her ruling overturned, Rankin said. If the appeals court agreed with the government that the final order of removal was implied, there could be no need to reopen the immigration case.

In compliance with Xinis’ order, Abrego Garcia was released from immigration detention in Pennsylvania on Thursday evening and allowed to return home for the first time in months. However, he was also told to report to an immigration officer in Baltimore early the next morning.

Fearing that he would be detained again, his attorneys asked Xinis for a temporary restraining order. Xinis filed that order early Friday morning. It prohibits immigration officials from taking Abrego Garcia back into custody, at least for the time being. A hearing on the issue could happen as early as next week.

Meanwhile, in Tennessee, Abrego Garcia has pleaded not guilty in the criminal case where he is charged with human smuggling and conspiracy to commit human smuggling.

Advertisement

Prosecutors claim he accepted money to transport, within the United States, people who were in the country illegally. The charges stem from a 2022 traffic stop in Tennessee for speeding. Body camera footage from a Tennessee Highway Patrol officer shows a calm exchange with Abrego Garcia. There were nine passengers in the car, and the officers discussed among themselves their suspicions of smuggling. However, Abrego Garcia was eventually allowed to continue driving with only a warning.

Abrego Garcia has asked U.S. District Court Judge Waverly Crenshaw to dismiss the smuggling charges on the grounds of “selective or vindictive prosecution.”

Crenshaw earlier found “some evidence that the prosecution against him may be vindictive” and said many statements by Trump administration officials “raise cause for concern.” Crenshaw specifically cited a statement by Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche on a Fox News Channel program that seemed to suggest the Justice Department charged Abrego Garcia because he won his wrongful-deportation case.

The two sides have been sparring over whether senior Justice Department officials, including Blanche, can be required to testify in the case.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending