Breaking AI & Tech News Analyzed

Deontay Wilder survived a relentless challenge from 42‑year‑old Derek Chisora to claim a split‑decision win at the O2 Arena, London, on April 5, 2026. The bout, billed as Chisora’s 50th professional fight and farewell, unfolded as a high‑octane slugfest that many are already dubbing a fight‑of‑the‑year contender.Wilder opened the contest displaying the power that once made him a feared puncher, but Chisora responded with aggressive pressure, landing an early uppercut that sent both men teetering over the ropes. The second round mirrored the first, with Chisora’s forward thrust met by a slick combination from Wilder.Mid‑fight drama escalated when Chisora was knocked down in the eighth round. He beat the count and, despite a point deduction for Wilder later in the bout, rallied to force the American onto the ropes, showcasing remarkable resilience.The judges’ cards read 115‑111, 112‑115, and 115‑113 in favour of Wilder, delivering him a split‑decision triumph. The narrow margin underscores how closely contested the encounter was, keeping Chisora in the conversation for future heavyweight match‑ups.Adding to the night’s spectacle, former champion Anthony Joshua made a surprise appearance, greeting Chisora on his way to the ring – his first public outing since a December 2025 car crash that claimed two close friends.Throughout the ten‑round battle, both fighters exchanged knock‑downs and near‑knockouts. Wilder was deducted a point for a foul, while Chisora survived two knock‑downs without being stopped, earning a hero’s reception from the crowd during his final three minutes.While the arena roared for the last three minutes of Chisora’s career, the referee never intervened, allowing the British veteran to exit the ring to a standing ovation, marking an emotional close to a storied tenure in heavyweight boxing.

A United States federal judge has rejected a motion from the Department of Justice to reconsider his earlier ruling dismissing subpoenas against Jerome Powell, the chairman of the Federal Reserve.In a six-page opinion published on Friday, Judge James Boasberg reaffirmed his decision to nullify the subpoenas, stating that they were issued for an 'improper purpose': to pressure Powell into compliance with President Donald Trump's demands.The subpoenas were part of an investigation into Powell's handling of renovations to the Federal Reserve's historic buildings in Washington, DC, which have gone over budget. The Trump administration has accused Powell of 'malfeasance' and called for his premature resignation.Boasberg criticized the Trump administration's efforts, saying they presented 'no evidence whatsoever of fraud' and that the subpoenas were an attempt to undermine the Federal Reserve's independence.The ruling is likely to set the stage for the Trump administration to appeal, with US Attorney Jeanine Pirro previously denying any political motivation for the investigation.

Lawyers estimate that as many as 75 women could have a claim in the $72.5 million settlement reached with Bank of America over alleged involvement in Jeffrey Epstein’s sex‑trafficking network. U.S. District Judge Jed Rakoff has instructed counsel to assemble a broad list of publications by the upcoming Friday to ensure every potential victim receives notice, emphasizing that "nobody is left out." A final approval hearing is scheduled for August 27. The settlement was first disclosed in court filings on March 27 after a proposed class‑action lawsuit was permitted to move forward. In October, a plaintiff using the pseudonym Jane Doe filed the suit on behalf of herself and other alleged victims, accusing the bank of overlooking suspicious transactions tied to Epstein’s operations. According to the complaint, Bank of America allegedly benefited knowingly from its relationship with Epstein and impeded enforcement of the Trafficking Victims Protection Act, a federal statute aimed at combating sex trafficking. Bank of America reiterated its stance that it did not facilitate Epstein’s crimes, stating that the resolution allows the institution to move past the matter and provides "further closure for the plaintiffs." Judge Rakoff gave preliminary approval, noting that while no monetary figure can fully compensate for the magnitude of Epstein’s offenses, victims are entitled to restitution from any party that "knowingly, recklessly or otherwise unlawfully facilitated" the trafficking. This agreement follows similar settlements in 2023: JPMorgan Chase paid $290 million and Deutsche Bank settled for $75 million with Epstein victims. Rakoff previously dismissed a suit against Bank of New York Mellon; the plaintiffs are now appealing that decision. He stressed that liability should be limited to entities that knowingly assisted or profited, not to every organization that merely intersected with Epstein’s network. Jeffrey Epstein, a wealthy financier who died by suicide in a New York City jail in 2019, was accused of preying on girls and young women for decades and maintained ties to high‑profile figures across politics, arts, and business. One of Doe’s attorneys, David Boies, believes that 60 to 75 women may qualify for the settlement, and cautions that additional claimants could emerge as the search continues.

An appellate panel in Colorado has ordered a new sentencing hearing for former Mesa County clerk Tina Peters, whose original nine‑year prison term was overturned on procedural grounds. The three‑judge panel ruled that the trial court improperly considered Peters's personal belief in alleged 2020 election fraud when determining her punishment, rendering the sentence invalid. While the conviction for assisting an out‑of‑state actor in accessing and copying Mesa County voting‑machine data remains intact, the court emphasized that the sentence, not the guilt, was flawed. "The trial court’s comments about Peters’s belief in the existence of 2020 election fraud went beyond relevant considerations for her sentencing," the opinion read. Judge Matthew Barrett, who previously described Peters as a “charlatan” peddling “snake‑oil” claims, was specifically cited for remarks that the appeals court deemed extraneous to the sentencing decision. Peters was found guilty in August 2024 of facilitating the theft of election‑system files for a person linked to efforts to overturn former President Donald Trump's 2020 loss. The stolen copies were later disseminated on social media, fueling the broader election‑denial movement. In December, President Trump issued a pardon for Peters. However, the appellate court clarified that a presidential pardon cannot override state convictions, stating, "We have found no instance where the presidential pardon power has been stretched in such a way as to invade an individual state’s sovereignty." Governor Jared Polis of Colorado has hinted at the possibility of clemency, though no formal action has been announced. The case continues to serve as a rallying point for Trump supporters who claim the 2020 election was riddled with fraud, a narrative that persists despite the former president’s re‑election in 2024 and ongoing legal scrutiny.

Arsenal’s loss to Manchester City in the Carabao Cup final has haunted manager Mikel Arteta ever since the 2‑0 defeat at Wembley, where Nico O’Reilly scored both goals to crush the Gunners’ quadruple hopes.Artura described the aftermath as “a ball of poison in my stomach”, saying the feeling could linger for “the next 30 years” unless he channels it into improvement.He emphasized that the pain must be converted into motivation to secure silverware before the season ends, insisting the sting of the loss will remain a driving force for weeks, months and years to come.In the wake of the final, Arteta faced criticism for keeping Kepa Arrizabalaga in goal despite the keeper’s error that led to the first goal. The manager defended his choice, stating, “I never judge a player solely on an error; attitude and behaviour matter 100%.” He added that Arrizabalaga’s experience makes him ready for the upcoming FA Cup sixth‑round clash with Southampton.Artura also hinted at his selection criteria for the Southampton match, joking that the goalkeeper would be “European, under 32, right‑footed and speaks at least two languages.” While David Raya started the Carabao Cup final, the Spaniard is expected to feature again in the FA Cup run.Regarding squad availability, Arteta confirmed that Declan Rice is operating at only 70% fitness, a condition that has persisted for some time, and noted that Piero Hincapié and Noni Madueke will miss the Southampton game. He left open the possibility that Martin Ødegaard and Jurrien Timber could feature.Addressing criticism over the number of international withdrawals, Artura said, “It’s part of the narrative, but we’ve dealt with similar situations before; we’ll see who is available tomorrow and adjust accordingly.”

A federal judge has dismissed 10 out of 13 claims made by Blake Lively against director Justin Baldoni, including allegations of sexual harassment, conspiracy, and defamation. The lawsuit, which centers around the filming of 'It Ends With Us,' a domestic abuse drama where Lively and Baldoni starred as characters with intimate scenes, will proceed to trial next month on claims of a retaliatory campaign against Lively.Baldoni's lawyer, Bryan Freedman, described the defendants as 'very good people who have not engaged in this sexual harassment as alleged.' He expressed satisfaction with the court's ruling, stating it confirms what his legal team believed from the start.The judge's 152-page opinion emphasized that Lively's claims must be viewed in the context of the film's production, noting that creative artists need space to experiment within scripted scenes without fear of liability for sexual harassment. The court also determined Lively was working as an independent contractor, not an employee, which impacted her ability to bring sexual harassment claims.Lively's attorney, Mike Gottlieb, responded that the ruling was based on 'legal technicalities' and not an endorsement of the defendants' conduct. A trial is scheduled for May 18.

The 12‑member National Capital Planning Commission, the agency that reviews construction on federal sites in Washington, D.C., voted on Thursday to approve President Donald Trump’s proposal for a massive ballroom at the White House. The project envisions a 90,000‑square‑foot (8,400‑square‑metre) space on the site of the East Wing, which Trump ordered demolished in October. Commission chair Will Scharf, a former personal lawyer to the president, said the ballroom could eventually be regarded as a "national treasure" comparable to other iconic White House components. However, the approval comes at a time when a U.S. District Judge has blocked further work pending explicit congressional authorization. Judge Richard Leon warned that while the president is the steward of the White House for future First Families, he is not its owner, emphasizing that major construction projects require legislative consent. Trump responded on social media, insisting the ballroom is funded by private donations and that past White House projects never needed congressional approval. Financially, the ballroom’s estimated cost has ballooned to roughly $400 million, double the $200 million figure cited by the White House in July 2025. Trump has pledged to complete the venue before the end of his term in early 2029, relying on contributions from wealthy donors—a point critics argue could create undue influence over the administration. Public sentiment appears overwhelmingly negative. Democracy advocate Jon Golinger of Public Citizen remarked, "The American people have weighed in on this project, and they hate it." The commission’s vote was delayed from March after a surge of public comments, the majority of which opposed the construction. Despite the commission’s endorsement, the ballroom’s future remains uncertain. The judge’s ruling underscores that without a congressional green light, the project cannot legally move forward, setting the stage for a continued clash between the White House, lawmakers, and the public over the use of the nation’s most symbolic residence.

Tiger Woods, the renowned golf superstar, has made a significant decision to step down as the US captain for the 2027 Ryder Cup. This move allows him to focus on his health and well-being, following a recent court ruling that granted him permission to travel abroad for comprehensive inpatient treatment.A Florida judge approved Woods's request, citing his need for an “intensive, highly individualized and medically integrated program” away from media scrutiny. Woods's lawyer argued that his client's complex clinical presentation required a level of care that couldn't be safely provided in the United States.The decision comes on the heels of Woods's recent misdemeanor driving under the influence (DUI) charges following a rollover crash in Jupiter, Florida. Woods had pleaded not guilty to the charges, which included property damage and refusal to submit to a urinalysis. The incident revealed that Woods had been swearing profusely, showed signs of lethargy, and had extremely dilated pupils.Woods has been open about his need for treatment, stating that he aims to achieve lasting recovery. In a public statement, he expressed his commitment to prioritizing his health and seeking the necessary support. The PGA of America, PGA Tour, and Augusta National Golf Club have all offered their support for Woods during this challenging time.The PGA of America has announced that they will provide further updates on the Ryder Cup Captaincy when appropriate. For now, Woods's focus remains on his health and well-being, and the golf community rallies around him in support of his journey toward recovery.

A US court has dismissed a lawsuit from WhatsApp's former security chief, who alleged that parent company Meta ignored internal flaws he flagged about the messaging app's digital defenses.Abdullah Baig, who claims he was fired in retaliation for raising these concerns, had alleged that billions of users had been put at risk because of these vulnerabilities. Thousands of employees could view sensitive user data, including profile photos and location, Baig claimed in the lawsuit filed in September. A judge ruled he had not presented enough evidence to move forward.The US district court in northern California ruled last month to dismiss Baig's claims, with the judge, Laurel Beeler, writing on 19 March that 'the complaint does not contain sufficient facts to show that the plaintiff reported violations of SEC rules or regulations.'Baig was head of WhatsApp's security division from 2021 to 2025. He said he had expressed concerns about cybersecurity issues to his supervisor five times but was ignored; he also said he wrote directly to Meta's CEO, Mark Zuckerberg, about what he saw as a violation of US Securities and Exchange Commission rules and escalating retaliation against him. He also claimed that the company didn't fix the hacking of more than 100,000 accounts daily – and focused instead on user growth. At the time, WhatsApp said in a statement that he was 'a former employee dismissed for poor performance' who had filed a suit based on distorted claims.A WhatsApp spokesperson said: 'This ruling reaffirms what we've said all along: These claims have no merit. We're proud of our strong record of protecting people's privacy and security, and will continue building on it.'Baig's lawyer suggested in a statement emailed to the Guardian that the legal fight was not over. 'Mr Baig is not done fighting for users,' said Wilmer Harris, who represents Baig. 'The judge dismissed on pleading grounds, not merit, and we look forward to addressing those deficiencies and ensuring Meta has to finally engage with the substance of Mr Baig's allegations.'