It was a decision that Jussie Smollett’s lead attorney said was no surprise, but it still took nearly six years to arrive at Thursday’s conclusion.

The Illinois Supreme court ruled Thursday that the case against the “Empire” actor never should have been brought in the first place, with the main argument centering around Smollett striking a deal with the Cook County State’s Attorney’s Office to drop charges in 2019.

“This was a vindictive persecution,” said Nenye Uche, Smollett’s lead attorney. “This was not a prosecution.”

Smollett’s attorneys had argued that a deal existed between their client and Cook County States Attorney Kim Foxx’s office when initial charges were dropped in the case in March 2019, three weeks after the actor had officially been charged and accused with staging a racist, homophobic attack in Chicago’s Streeterville neighborhood earlier that winter.

According to defense attorneys, the agreement held that there would be no prosecution if Smollett did community service and paid a $10,000 fine. However, they said the deal was upended by public reaction to the plea bargain, which Foxx said is common in misdemeanor cases like Smollett’s.

“You almost never see these cases end up in a courtroom,” she said.

A special prosecutor was later hired in the case and ultimately brought new charges against Smollett, which resulted in a conviction and a prison sentence of 150 days.

Smollett’s attorneys said everyone from the office of the Special Prosecutor on down should have known better than to pursue the new charges, arguing that a contract existed by way of that plea agreement, and that trying the case exposed their client to double jeopardy.

“None of us wants that to happen to us, to have a deal and they take that agreement back,” said attorney Shay Allen.

In their 32-page ruling, the Illinois high court agreed with that assessment. In the 5-0 majority opinion penned by Justice Elizabeth Rochford, the justices acknowledged that many in the public thought the initial deal clearing Smollett was unjust.

“What would be more unjust than the resolution of any one criminal case would be a holding from this court that the State was not bound to honor agreements upon which people have detrimentally relied,” she said.

But while appointed special prosecutor Dan Webb said he disagreed with the Supreme Court’s finding, faulting its factual and legal reasoning, Uche called the ruling a victory, especially in the age of social media.

“The big challenge is holding the line for the rule of law,” Uche said. “That’s exactly what the court did today.”

The International Criminal Court has issued arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former defence minister Yoav Gallant “for crimes against humanity and war crimes”.

The move is a dramatic escalation of legal proceedings over Israel’s offensive in Gaza, and marks the first time that the court, which was set up in 2002, has issued a warrant for a western-backed leader.

It means that the ICC’s 124 member states — which include most European and Latin American countries and many in Africa and Asia — would be obliged to arrest Netanyahu and Gallant if they entered their territory. But the court has no means of enforcing the warrants if they do not.

The warrants, however, will reinforce the sense that Israel has become increasingly isolated internationally over the conduct of its war against Hamas in the besieged Gaza strip.

Announcing the decision on Thursday, the court said there were “reasonable grounds” to believe that Netanyahu and Gallant bear criminal responsibility for “the war crime of starvation as a method of warfare; and the crimes against humanity of murder, persecution, and other inhumane acts”.

It said there were reasonable grounds to believe the pair bear criminal responsibility “for the war crime of intentionally directing an attack against the civilian population”, and had “intentionally and knowingly deprived” Gaza’s civilians of food, water, medical supplies, fuel and electricity.

The court said it had unanimously decided to reject Israel’s appeal against the ICC’s jurisdiction. Neither Israel nor its largest ally the US are members of the court.

The Israeli prime minister’s office branded the warrants “antisemitic” and said Israel “rejects with disgust the absurd and false actions and charges against it”, calling the ICC “a biased and discriminatory political body”.

“No anti-Israel resolution will prevent the state of Israel from protecting its citizens,” it said. “Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu will not give in to pressure, will not flinch and will not retreat until all the war goals set by Israel . . . are achieved.”

Palestinian officials welcomed the ICC’s announcement. Husam Zomlot, Palestinian ambassador to the UK, said the warrants were “not only a step towards accountability and justice in Palestine but also a step to restore the credibility of the rules-based international order”. Hamas called on the court to expand the warrants to other Israeli officials.

The ICC also issued an arrest warrant for Hamas leader Mohammed Deif for crimes against humanity and war crimes over the militant group’s October 7 2023 attack on Israel that triggered the war in Gaza. Israel said in August it had killed Deif in an air strike in Gaza a month earlier.

In the US, figures from both the Biden White House and incoming Republican administration condemned the warrants. The White House said it “fundamentally rejects” the ICC’s decision.

“We remain deeply concerned by the prosecutor’s rush to seek arrest warrants and the troubling process errors that led to this decision,” said the US National Security Council.

Mike Waltz, who will serve as national security adviser when Donald Trump’s administration takes office next year, said the ICC had “no credibility”. “You can expect a strong response to the antisemitic bias of the ICC and UN come January,” he wrote on X.

Senator Lindsey Graham, a close Trump ally, called for fresh sanctions against the court. Trump’s previous administration imposed sanctions on top ICC officials, including then-prosecutor Fatou Bensouda, over its probe into allegations of war crimes in Afghanistan. The Biden administration later lifted them.

“The court is a dangerous joke. It is now time for the US Senate to act and sanction this irresponsible body,” Graham said.

Republicans will control all three branches of government next year, raising the likelihood that the US will bring in new sanctions against the ICC.

However, the EU’s top diplomat, Josep Borrell, said the warrants were not political, and that the court’s decision should be respected and implemented.

The Dutch foreign minister, Caspar Veldkamp, said the Netherlands “will act on the arrest warrants”, but other European countries struck a more equivocal line.

A spokesperson for UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer said “we respect the independence of the International Criminal Court” and added: “There is no moral equivalence between Israel, a democracy, and Hamas and Lebanese Hizbollah, which are terrorist organisations.”

ICC prosecutor Karim Khan originally sought the warrants in May for Netanyahu, Gallant, Deif and two other Hamas leaders, Yahya Sinwar and Ismail Haniyeh, both of whom Israel has since killed.

The ICC’s move comes as Israel faces intense criticism over the toll of its offensive in Gaza.

The hostilities began when Hamas militants stormed into Israel in October 2023, rampaging through communities, killing 1,200 people, according to Israeli officials, and taking another 250 hostage.

In response, Israel launched a ferocious assault on Gaza, with Gallant announcing a “complete siege” of the strip. Israel’s offensive has killed almost 44,000 people, according to Palestinian officials, displaced 1.9mn of the enclave’s 2.3mn inhabitants and reduced most of it to rubble.

The UN and aid agencies have criticised Israel for restricting the delivery of aid, while warning of the threat of famine and disease.

The fighting has also triggered legal proceedings at the International Court of Justice, which deals with cases against countries.

That court, the highest in the UN system, is hearing a case brought by South Africa accusing Israel of genocide against the Palestinians in Gaza, which Israel has vehemently denied.

Additional reporting by Anna Gross

The Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA) is now open to all students and families hoping to get help paying for college in the 2025-26 school year.

After weeks of testing the online form, the U.S. Department of Education released the official application at studentaid.gov on Thursday. The form may not look new, but it’s certainly improved compared to last year’s version.

“It’s a piece of cake, honestly,” says Christina Martinez, a financial aid advisor at California State University, Los Angeles. She has been helping students fill out the form during the testing period, and says, “It’s been going very smoothly.”

That’s completely different from what students experienced during the last FAFSA cycle:

After a congressionally mandated overhaul intended to simplify the form, the FAFSA was significantly delayed and the rollout was plagued with problems. As a result, many students had to wait months longer than usual to learn what college would cost them and where they could afford to enroll, forcing many to delay their decisions. There’s concern some students decided to put off college altogether. A recent report from the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) found that problems with the last FAFSA “contributed to about 9 percent fewer high school seniors and other first time applicants submitting a FAFSA, with the largest declines among lower-income students.”

MorraLee Keller, of the college access nonprofit National College Attainment Network (NCAN), says this year’s form looks almost identical to the one from last year, but the user experience is significantly improved.

“We really have to spread a very positive message that there’s been a lot of work put into this system for 2025-26 to make it a whole different experience than last year. So everyone needs to give the system a chance.”

What the Education Department is doing differently this time

Filling out the FAFSA is the only way college students can access financial aid from the federal government and be considered for grants, loans and some scholarships. Every year, more than 17 million students fill out the application.

Typically, the form becomes available to all students on Oct. 1. But this year, that’s when the department began testing the form with a limited number of students and institutions. FAFSA Executive Advisor Jeremy Singer said in an August press release that the testing period was intended “to uncover and fix issues with the FAFSA form before the form is available to millions of students and their families.”

During the last FAFSA cycle, in addition to glitches in the form, students also struggled to reach FAFSA’s call center for help. According to the GAO, “nearly three quarters of all calls to the call center” went unanswered in the first five months of the rollout. This time around, the Department of Education has increased call center staffing – by nearly 80% since January – and plans to extend the center’s hours of operation.

“So far, the call center is doing very well,” U.S. Under Secretary of Education James Kvaal told NPR. “At the volume we’re at now, people are getting their calls answered very, very quickly.”

He warns there may be times when higher call volumes lead to wait times, but he’s confident it will be a smoother experience overall.

Beth Maglione, CEO and interim president of the National Association of Student Financial Aid Administrators (NASFAA), says she has been keenly monitoring the department’s testing process, and is pleased with what she’s seen.

“Federal leaders have sort of listened and taken to heart the lessons learned from last year’s troublesome rollout and have used those lessons to chart a more stable path forward.”

So far, a less painful process

Low-income students and students whose parent or spouse does not have a Social Security number (SSN) – which the GAO refers to as “mixed-status families” – suffered most from the previous FAFSA’s troubled rollout. One challenge for mixed-status families was a glitch that blocked anyone without an SSN from filling out the form.

Kvaal says, throughout the beta testing period, “We made a number of changes to make the process easier for parents and spouses who don’t have Social Security numbers. Those people are able to get through now, and that was not always possible six or eight months ago.”

At Cal State LA, where Christina Martinez works, the majority of students are low-income, and many come from mixed-status families. She says most of her students encountered problems with the form last year, but this year is a different story.

Martinez says the form has more instructive language that helps students avoid mistakes. On average, she says it’s taking students about 20 minutes to finish the form, although FAFSA’s website suggests allotting about an hour. (The website also includes a checklist for how to prepare for the application.)

Keller, of NCAN, says while she’s thrilled about the improvements, she’s waiting to see how the new FAFSA system will respond to an increased volume of applications now that the form is officially out of beta testing and open to all families.

Keller has one piece of advice for students and families, which Martinez and Maglione echoed: Fill out your FAFSA as soon as possible.

“Let’s not wait. Jump in. Do your FAFSA as quickly as you can,” Keller says. “Hopefully students being able to start their FAFSA in mid-November is going to result in things like earlier award letters, more time to make decisions, better decisions.”