casino game online khelne wala
The long-awaited hearing to discuss cannabis rescheduling will begin on January 21, 2025 , marking a significant moment in the ongoing debate over cannabis regulation. As Business of Cannabis reported , the six-week hearing will continue until March 6, 2025 , but its outcome remains uncertain due to political and procedural challenges. With key positions in the new administration still unconfirmed, many questions remain about how much influence the incoming cabinet will have on the hearings. This uncertainty has raised concerns over the DEA’s impartiality and the fairness of the process. Legal Challenges From Health Coalitions And Advocates In a move that has added to the controversy, the Doctors for Drug Policy Reform has filed a federal court petition challenging the DEA's exclusion from the hearings. According to Businnes of Cannabis, the group argues that their medical expertise is essential for evaluating the implications of cannabis rescheduling, particularly regarding medical marijuana prescriptions. Additionally, weeks ago, the agency denied MedPharm's bid to join the December 2 hearing . MedPharm , a DEA-registered research firm, criticized the exclusion of marijuana researchers and the inclusion of prohibitionist organizations such as Smart Approaches to Marijuana (SAM) . SAM has been also at the center of the controversy. On November 28, attorney Matt Zorn sued the DEA for failing to release records related to its communications with the organization. The DEA dismissed them as "gossip," arguing that there was no illegal contact, despite SAM President Kevin Sabet admitting to discussing the details of the rescheduling with DEA insiders. SAM also denied that the conversations had anything to do with the rescheduling procedure. Earlier in November, the Veterans Action Council , a cannabis advocacy organization for military veterans, filed a petition challenging its exclusion from the DEA’s participant list, published in October. The petiton followed the withdrawal of some designated participants and growing scrutiny over the agency's handling of the rescheduling process. Several organizations have pulled out of the hearings since the initial announcement. The American College of Occupational and Environmental Medicine missed important procedural deadlines, while an oncologist representing the American Academy of Hospice and Palliative Medicine opted not to participate. Additionally, five remaining participants are represented by David Evans , a prominent anti-cannabis advocate, highlighting the polarized nature of the upcoming hearings. Scheduled Presentations And Participants The DEA has outlined a strict schedule for the hearings, featuring presentations from various stakeholders, including industry groups, law enforcement and medical professionals. Notable participants include the National Cannabis Industry Association and Smart Approaches to Marijuana , among others. The schedule includes: January 21 : Presentation by the government January 22-23 : Presentations from Hemp for Victory , Cannabis Bioscience International Holdings and other groups January 28-30 : Presentations from the Connecticut Office of the Cannabis Ombudsman , National Cannabis Industry Association and additional participants February 4-6 : Presentations from The Commonwealth Project , Veterans Initiative 22 and others February 18-20 : Presentations from the Tennessee Bureau of Investigation , International Association of Chiefs of Police and more February 25-27 : Presentations from Smart Approaches to Marijuana , Community Anti-Drug Coalitions of America and other stakeholders March 4-6 : Presentations from Dr. Kenneth Finn , N ational Drug and Alcohol Screening Association and others. Public Comments Excluded From the Process Although more than 43,000 public comments were submitted during the 60-day comment period, the DEA has ruled that these comments will not be accepted as evidence, citing the limitations of the Administrative Procedure Act. This decision has generated criticism from cannabis advocates and industry leaders. High Stakes For The Industry Reclassifying marijuana could provide significant advantages to the U.S. cannabis industry . It would ease research and financial restrictions, improve access to banking and reduce legal challenges, enabling businesses to operate more freely. A Schedule III classification could also lead to broader insurance coverage and more federal funding for cannabis research, potentially fostering growth, investment and innovation. Advocates argue that rescheduling would enhance regulation and increase access to medical cannabis, but given the complexities of the process, the final decision may still be months away, with lasting impacts on the industry. Cover image made with AI © 2024 Benzinga.com. Benzinga does not provide investment advice. All rights reserved.
ST. LOUIS COUNTY — The prosecuting attorney here said Thursday he was again seeking the removal of a St. Louis County councilman and also pointed to what he described as a government cover-up that included possible grand jury leaks and illegal document tampering. Councilman Dennis Hancock, from Fenton, not only violated nepotism laws by hiring his stepdaughter, Hollie Galati, but he also worked with other government employees to retroactively save his own job, St. Louis County Prosecuting Attorney Wesley Bell said. Bell, at a press conference Thursday morning, released evidence his office has collected that he said supports the county’s effort to oust Hancock, including birth and marriage certificates, a property deed, emails, social media posts, county payroll records and other government documents. The prosecutor also provided a recording made in August of a phone call between Hancock and County Counselor Dana Redwing, the attorney for county government. In the conversation, Redwing tells Hancock that he had forfeited his office by hiring his stepdaughter, a violation of the Missouri Constitution’s prohibition against nepotism. Hancock, a former mayor, said “no one made (him) aware” of the rule. He then asked Redwing if he could rectify the matter by having Galati resign. Redwing told him no, that wasn’t option. “Councilman Hancock can step down and do the honorable thing,” Bell said Thursday. “If not, we are filing our quo warranto and according to the law, he should be removed immediately during this process.” His office filed the action later Thursday. Hancock’s lawyer, Kimberley Mathis, said on Thursday afternoon that she had not received information regarding any legal steps being taken against Hancock or a lawsuit against him. "I have heard from many reporters that there have been press releases and press conferences, but nothing actually filed in court," she said. The filing represents the second time Bell has attempted to oust Hancock over the nepotism violation. In August, he went to court to bar Hancock from participating in any official activity or exercising any authority until the nepotism case could be heard by a judge. After pressure on the judge for a swift ruling, though, Bell’s office dropped the filing in mid-November. Bell, who was elected last month to Congress, is expected to resign as prosecutor on Jan. 2. A dispute about Bell’s successor is currently in the courts. County Executive Sam Page, a Bell ally, asserts he has the authority to name an interim prosecutor; the state contends the governor names Bell’s replacement. A judge last week ruled for the state , but Page has said he plans to appeal. "Until I step down, I am the elected county prosecutor," Bell said Thursday. "There are one of two people who are going to be taking my role, both of which I have a lot of confidence in." Galati’s employment began on Aug. 19, with a salary of $51,888 per year and additional benefits, documents released Thursday show. After Hancock realized her hiring was in violation of nepotism laws, Bell says Hancock worked with St. Louis County Clerk Diann Valenti to alter the already-filed employment documents to show that she did not accept the job. Bell said Valenti changed the status in the system from “new hire” to “rejected” in the county’s ticketing and personal system, and asked another government employee to change fields in the personnel electronic ticketing employee action data page and messaging system. Valenti was also accused of requesting a screenshot of the data system reflecting that Galati was never employed at St Louis County. Bell said Valenti gave those screenshots to Hancock. He then forwarded the screenshots to a lobbyist who publicly distributed them. “I want to say this to not only our St. Louis County public, but also members of the media: you were lied to,” Bell said during Thursday’s press conference. “You were given false information. You were given a false narrative that that the Miss Galati was not hired. I saw the interviews, I saw the statements made by certain public officials that this did not happen, that the paperwork was never processed, when, in fact, it was.” Jane Dueker, a police union lobbyist, swiftly took to social media and identified herself as the lobbyist. “This record was not falsified,” she wrote. “Ms. Valenti is included in the workflow as the person who signs off employment. Ms. Galati told St. Louis County and Ms. Valenti she didn’t want to be employed or be paid. Upon that and upon being told employment could potentially violate the law, Ms. Valenti properly did her job and rejected the employment.” Valenti was indicted by a grand jury last week on forgery and other charges. Her attorney, Joe Hogan, told the Post-Dispatch he expected Bell’s successor to dismiss the case. Bell argued that Hancock’s removal was necessary “to prevent further misconduct and retaliation.” He told reporters he anticipates more charges to be filed in connection to the cover-up. “We started seeing evidence of information that was being leaked prior to us even announcing it,” Bell said. “For example, prior to a true bill even being approved by the grand jury. This information was being leaked, and that means that there’s a potential that someone in our office or in county government was doing that.”
To The New York Times, it was a standard journalistic practice done in the name of fairness — asking someone involved in a story for comment. To the mother of the nominee for secretary of defense, it constituted a threat. On Wednesday, Pete Hegseth's mother accused the Times of making “threats” by calling about its story on an email she had sent to her son six years earlier that criticized his treatment of women. Penelope Hegseth sought and received an interview on Fox News Channel to support her son, whose confirmation chances are threatened by a series of damaging stories about his personal conduct. At one point, she said she wanted to directly tell President-elect Trump that her son “is not that man he was seven years ago.” She also called the Times “despicable” and attacked a basic tenet of journalism: giving someone the chance to speak for a story about actions that could be seen in a negative light. The Times' story, published Saturday , quoted from a private email that Penelope Hegseth sent to her son in 2018 while he was in the midst of divorcing his second wife. She criticized his character and treatment of women, suggesting that he get some help. “I have no respect for any man that belittles, lies, cheats, sleeps around and uses women for his own power and ego,” she wrote to her offspring. “You are that man (and have been for many years).” She told the Times for its story that she had sent the email in a moment of anger and followed it up two hours later with an apology. She disavows its content now. When the Times called her for comment on the story, Hegseth told Fox News that, at first, she did not respond. She said she perceived the calls as a threat — “they say unless you make a statement we will publish it as is and I think that's a despicable way to treat anyone,” she said. “I don't think a lot of people know that's the way they operate,” she said, speaking about the story. She accused the newspaper of being in it "for the money. And they don't care who they hurt, families, children. I don't believe that's the right way to do things.” Charles Stadtlander, a spokesman for the Times, said Hegseth's claim “is flatly untrue,” and she was in no way threatened. “The Times did what it always does in reporting out a story, simply reaching out and asking for a comment, which we included,” he said. Such a call is the opposite of a threat — it's an attempt to be fair, said Tom Rosenstiel, a University of Maryland professor and co-author of “Elements of Journalism: What News People Should Know and What the Public Should Expect.” “She's basically saying that brake lights are a threat because they alert you that the car ahead of you is about to stop," he said. But many Americans would perceive that call as a threat, or certainly as rude and a violation of privacy, said Tim Graham, director of media analysis at the conservative Media Research Center. “She didn't write that email to be on the front page of The New York Times,” he said. A secondary question is the newsworthiness of publishing the content of the private email, one that Hegseth said she almost immediately regretted sending and doesn't reflect how she perceives her son. Graham suggested that the newspaper wouldn't do the same for the nominee of a Democratic president-elect. “The New York Times is out to destroy these nominees,” he said. In its initial story, the Times wrote that it had obtained a copy of the email “from another person with ties to the Hegseth family.” “This was a piece of independently reported journalism published in the name of public awareness of the nominee to lead the largest department in the federal government,” Stadtlander said. “We stand behind it completely.” In many circumstances, an email from a mother to her son would be considered a private matter and out of bounds to a news organization, Rosenstiel said. But in this case, Hegseth, a former Fox News weekend host chosen by Trump to lead the Pentagon, has built himself into a public figure and is up for a very important job — and one that leads the military, which involves waging war and in which character is considered a fundamental trait. “It makes this news, honestly,” Stadtlander said. The Times wrote about Penelope Hegseth's Fox interview on Wednesday, leading with her saying her son “was not the same man he was in 2018 when she fired off an email accusing him of routinely abusing women and lacking decency and character.” There was some question about whether Hegseth would appear for an interview at his former network on Wednesday, after CNN's Kaitlan Collins posted on X the night before that “multiple people” said that was expected. A Fox News representative said that no such interview had been scheduled, and the nominee was on Capitol Hill meeting with senators. He has faced a flurry of other damaging reports, including stories about a sexual assault allegation reported to police in 2017. No charges were filed then, and Hegseth said the relationship was consensual. The New Yorker magazine wrote about reports of financial mismanagement , sexist behavior and excessive drinking when Hegseth ran a veterans' organization, and NBC News wrote about people at Fox News concerned about his alcohol use. David Bauder writes about media for the AP. Follow him at http://x.com/dbauder and https://bsky.app/profile/dbauder.bsky.social. Copyright 2024 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without permission. Stay up-to-date on the latest in local and national government and political topics with our newsletter.
WASHINGTON (AP) — A defiant Pete Hegseth fought to save his nomination to be Donald Trump's defense secretary Wednesday as the president-elect considered possible replacements in the face of growing questions about the former Fox News host's personal conduct and ability to win Senate confirmation. Hegseth met with legislators on Capitol Hill and conducted a radio interview to deny allegations of sexual assault and excessive drinking, insisting he was "not backing down one bit" and that Trump was still backing him. But the president-elect's team was looking at alternatives including Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis. Trump himself remained quiet about Hegseth while issuing a flurry of statements on social media Wednesday about other nominees and his news coverage. Hegseth is the latest nominee-designate to be imperiled by personal baggage after the recent withdrawal of Trump's initial pick for attorney general, former Rep. Matt Gaetz, whose vulnerabilities were well-documented. But Hegseth's past, including the revelation that he made a settlement payment after being accused of a sexual assault that he denies, was not widely known. The Trump transition team was increasingly concerned about Hegseth's path to Senate confirmation and actively looking at potential replacements, a person familiar with the matter said. Three other people said DeSantis, who competed against Trump for the Republican presidential nomination in 2024, was being discussed as an option if Hegseth's nomination does not move forward. The people spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to publicly discuss internal deliberations. Beyond DeSantis, there have also been discussions about shifting Michael Waltz, who was chosen by Trump for national security adviser, to the Defense Department, according to another person familiar with the matter who spoke on condition of anonymity. The Florida congressman is a retired Army National Guard officer and war veteran. Trump aides do not want to be caught flat-footed in case Trump's initial picks fall through. As he made the rounds on Capitol Hill, Hegseth told reporters that he had received a fresh message of support from Trump. "I spoke to the president this morning. He supports me fully. We're not going anywhere," Hegseth said. He ignored questions about the allegations he has faced. Hegseth, accompanied by his wife, held talks in private with GOP senators before shifting to the House to meet with legislators there. While House members have no direct role in the confirmation process, conservatives can hold outsize influence on the debate. The Trump transition team didn't immediately comment. The Wall Street Journal, on Tuesday night, first reported that Trump was considering DeSantis. In an interview taped Wednesday for Megyn Kelly's SiriusXM satellite radio show, Hegseth said Trump told him he wanted a "warfighter" who would clean out the "woke crap." Citing his Capitol Hill meeting, Hegseth said, "No one has looked me in the eye and said, 'I have concerns.'" He added: "We're not backing down one bit." Hegseth paid a woman who accused him of sexual assault at a California hotel in 2017 after Hegseth had given a speech at a Republican event. His lawyer said the payment was to head off the threat of a baseless lawsuit. Asked by Kelly if he sexually assaulted the woman, Hegseth said "absolutely not." He called it a "really unfortunate situation" and said he paid her because he "had to," contending that her lawyers said they would "out him." He declined to reveal the amount paid, but said it was done to protect his wife, himself and his job. He said it is a "fair characterization" to call him a serial cheater, who cheated on all three of his wives. "Was I a perfect man, absolutely not," he said. Hegseth flatly denied having a drinking problem and said he wouldn't drink while defense secretary, vowing, "I'm not going to have a drink at all." He likened it to following the Pentagon's general order #1, which prohibits troops from drinking while deployed. GOP Sen. Markwayne Mullin, who joined Hegseth in a meeting with House Republicans, defended the nominee and said, "All of us, at least all of us, have a time to grow up. We're nominating Pete for who he is today not for what he did seven years ago or five years ago or whatever it was." Earlier, Hegseth's mother appeared on Fox News to address some of the allegations. Penelope Hegseth, on "Fox & Friends," discussed her son and a 2018 email she wrote him that was obtained by The New York Times, in which she confronted him about mistreating women after he impregnated his current wife while he was married to his second wife. That letter followed multiple allegations, reported by the New Yorker this week, of questionable conduct around female staffers, in addition to the 2017 allegation. On Tuesday, Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., said some of the reports were "disturbing," telling CBS News that he wants to "make sure that every young woman that joins the military feels respected and welcomed." Penelope Hegseth implored the lawmakers to listen to her son and give him a chance. "I think it can be overcome," Penelope Hegseth said. Hegseth is a former Fox News host and a former Army National Guard major and combat veteran who deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan. If confirmed by the Senate, he would lead a 2 million member strong military — more than 17% of whom are female. The revelations have concerned some members of Congress. Hegseth said in his interivew that he doesn't know how all this will turn out but is comfortable that he "took on the haters and the liars" and fought for it, adding, "the future's in God's hands."
‘Piano to Zanskar’ Conducts a Musical Journey Across the Himalayas on Documentary ShowcaseNoneRUKBAN CAMP, southern Syria — For almost a decade, thousands of displaced Syrians trapped in the desert struggled to survive in one of the most remote camps in the world; left without aid or medical care and largely forgotten by the outside world. The Syrians — some of them soldiers and relatives of the U.S. -backed Syrian Free Army forces against now-deposed President Bashar al-Assad — arrived fleeing ISIS when the militant group swept into Iraq and Syria in 2014. They massed in a desolate corner of southeastern Syria up against the Jordanian border and hemmed in by Syrian regime and Russian forces on the other side. With the fall of the Syrian regime this month, the more than 7,000 camp residents are finally free to leave. But the years of deprivation and isolation have taken a heavy toll. The existence of the community speaks to the complicated regional politics and the low-profile U.S. military role in Syria, as well as the possibility of dramatic transformation in seemingly unchanging conflicts. When Jordan sealed its border in 2016 after an ISIS attack killed six Jordanian soldiers, most of the Syrian civilians were trapped — unable to move forward or go back through roads controlled by the Syrian regime or even move through a desert laid with land mines. NPR traveled to the camp, about a five-hour drive from Damascus — the first journalists to ever go there, according to the main relief organization here, the U.S.-based Syrian Emergency Task Force . The camp is about 30 miles from the U.S. military's al-Tanf garrison , established in 2016. In January, Iran-backed Iraqi militia drones attacked a U.S. military support base — Tower 22 — just a few miles over a sand berm and across the border in Jordan, killing three American troops. Tanks abandoned by regime forces line the main M2 highway, the roadside dotted with cast-off uniforms. Past the U.S. base, the road turns into a rough desert trail of tracks through the black rock. "Before 2014 there were no people here at all," says Abu Mohammad Khudr, who dispenses medication from a tiny pharmacy established two years ago by Syrian Emergency Task Force. "We thought maybe the neighboring countries would help us but they didn't." The first residents came with tents, which were no match for the constant wind, searing heat and bitter cold of the desert. "After a while we decided we had to use the soil and water — so we made bricks and then we made walls and we built houses," he says. After the suicide bombing, Jordan sealed the border — preventing even aid agencies from delivering food to Rukban. Water though is still provided by UNICEF, pumped from Jordan. The sun-dried clay bricks, made by hand, are still the only building material for homes here. Instead of glass, small sheets of clear plastic cover the small window openings. With Syrian regime forces and Russian troops controlling the road out of the camp, food was in short supply and sometimes consisted only of dried bread or lentils and rice. "Most families ate just one or two meals a day," says Khudr. In one home, Afaf Abdo Mohammed says when her children were infants she used plastic bags instead of diapers. Her 16-year-old daughter, She'ala Hjab Khaled, was born with a spinal defect and spends the entire day sitting in a battered wheelchair. Syrian Emergency Task Force opened eight schools here two years ago, staffed with volunteer teachers from the camp. But She'ala has never been. "I can't get there," she says. Now free to leave, with the fall of the Syrian regime, very few residents have money for transportation to leave. Many are not sure if their homes still exist. Among Syria's many and complex tragedies, the camp has been a particular preoccupation of Mouaz Moustafa, an activist and the director of the Syrian Emergency Task Force. Two years ago he began organizing aid shipments for al-Tanf through a provision that allows humanitarian aid to be carried in unused space on U.S. military aircraft. He started bringing in American medical volunteers on two-week missions and persuaded the base commander at the time to visit the camp. Since then he says, U.S. forces have been involved in distributing aid there and when they are able, providing emergency medical care. "It really brought everyone together more," says Moustafa. Syrian Emergency Task Force is funded by donations and staffed largely by volunteers. He says some of the soldiers who helped with the aid missions came back to Rukban to volunteer after being discharged. That humanitarian assistance is not something the U.S. military publicizes. The U.S. military command over the years has declined to bring in visiting journalists to its nearby base — the only access route before the fall of the regime. Syrian fighters funded and trained by the United States raised families in Rukban, according to a senior U.S. military commander. He requested anonymity to be able to speak about the camp because he was not authorized to speak publicly about it. He said doctors on the base had delivered at least 100 of their babies at the base in the case of high-risk pregnancies. The al-Tanf garrison, originally a special forces base, is now part of the anti-ISIS mission in Iraq and Syria. The presence of the U.S. military there helped protect residents from potential attacks by regime forces, he said. Near the water pipes that supply the camp, boys come to fill up smaller tanks and to chase each other in the desert. The environment here is filled with snakes and scorpions — but no trees. Some of the children have never tasted fruit. They've never seen in real life bright flowers or butterflies like the ones painted on the walls of the mud-brick schools set up by the Syrian American organization. Winter here is particularly cruel. Those who can afford to buy sticks of wood to burn in small metal stoves for heat. In one of the clay houses, Fawaz al-Taleb, a veterinarian in his home city of Homs, said he couldn't afford to buy wood this year. "We burn plastic bags, bottles, strips of old tires," he says. "This has been our life for years." Respiratory and other diseases are rampant here. For almost a decade, without a single physician in this camp, when children died, their parents often didn't know why. Outside Taleb's home, there are the beginnings of a garden started with seeds distributed by Moustafa's organization to camp residents. There isn't much that grows in the barren ground here, but Taleb points out fledgling mint, garlic and potato plants. Next to them are lillies and a rose bush. "I've been trying to plant hope," he says. "We want to live, we don't want to say 'we were born here and might die here.' No matter how bad the situation, we still want to live." Copyright 2024 NPR
Redefining JusticeTexas spotlights unaccompanied migrant children ahead of Trump deportation pushProtesters stage a rally to demand South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol to step down in front of the National Assembly in Seoul, South Korea, Wednesday, Dec. 4, 2024. The signs read “Punish.” (Associated Press Photo/Ahn Young-joon) SEOUL, South Korea — South Korea’s opposition parties moved Wednesday to impeach President Yoon Suk Yeol over the shocking and short-lived declaration of martial law that drew heavily armed troops to encircle parliament before lawmakers climbed walls to reenter the building and unanimously voted to lift his order. Impeaching Yoon would require the support of two-thirds of parliament, and at least six justices of the nine-member Constitutional Court would have to endorse it to remove him. The motion to impeach, submitted jointly by the main liberal opposition Democratic Party and five smaller opposition parties, could be put to a vote as early as Friday. Yoon’s senior policy advisers and Defense Minster Kim Yong Hyun offered to resign as the nation struggled to make sense of what appeared to be a poorly conceived stunt. The Democratic Party submitted a separate motion to impeach Kim, who allegedly recommended the martial law declaration to Yoon. In his speech announcing the abrupt order Tuesday night, Yoon vowed to eliminate “anti-state” forces and continued to criticize the Democratic Party’s attempts to impeach key government officials and senior prosecutors. But martial law lasted only about six hours, ending after the National Assembly voted to overrule Yoon and his Cabinet formally lifted it before daybreak Wednesday. READ: South Korea’s opposition parties hint at immediate impeachment of Yoon Democratic Party lawmakers, who hold a majority in the 300-seat parliament, called on Yoon to quit immediately or they would take steps to impeach him. Yoon’s martial law declaration “was a clear violation of the constitution. It didn’t abide by any requirements to declare it,” a party statement said. The order “was originally invalid and a grave violation of the constitution. It was a grave act of rebellion and provides perfect grounds for his impeachment.” Impeaching him would require support from 200 National Assembly members. The Democratic Party and other small opposition parties together have 192 seats. But they could seek additional votes from Yoon’s ruling conservative People Power Party. The 190-0 vote that rejected martial law included the votes of 18 lawmakers from the PPP, according to National Assembly officials. Party leader Han Dong-hun and Seoul Mayor Oh Se-hoon, also a member, criticized Yoon’s martial law declaration. If Yoon is impeached, he will be stripped of his constitutional powers until the Constitutional Court rules. Prime Minister Han Duck-soo, who holds the No. 2 position in the South Korean government, would take over presidential responsibilities. Han issued a public message pleading for patience and calling for Cabinet members to “fulfill your duties even after this moment.” The Constitutional Court has only six incumbent justices following three retirements. That means all six must approve the impeachment motion for it to succeed. The court includes justices appointed after Yoon took office, so the Democratic Party is expected to speed up the process of exercising its right to recommend two of the three new justices. Yoon’s martial law declaration , the first of its kind in more than 40 years, harkened back to South Korea’s past military-backed governments when authorities occasionally proclaimed martial law and other decrees that allowed them to station soldiers, tanks, and armored vehicles on streets or at public places such as schools to prevent anti-government demonstrations. Until Tuesday night and Wednesday morning, such scenes of military intervention had not been seen since South Korea achieved a democracy in the late 1980s. People hold candles during a candlelight vigil against South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol in Seoul, South Korea, Wednesday, Dec. 4, 2024. (Associated Press Photo/Lee Jin-man) After Yoon’s declaration of martial law , troops carrying full battle gear, including assault rifles, tried to keep protesters away from the National Assembly as military helicopters flew overhead and landed nearby. One soldier pointed his assault rifle at a woman who was among protesters outside the building demanding that the martial law be lifted. It wasn’t clear how the 190 lawmakers were able to enter a parliamentary hall to vote down Yoon’s martial law decree . Opposition leader Lee Jae-myung and National Assembly Speaker Woo Won Shik were seen climbing over walls. As troops and police officers blocked some from entering, they didn’t aggressively restrain or use force against others. No major violence was reported. The troops and police personnel were later seen leaving the grounds of the National Assembly after the parliamentary vote to lift the martial law. Woo said: “Even with our unfortunate memories of military coups, our citizens have surely observed the events of today and saw the maturity of our military.” READ: What next for South Korea’s Yoon after failed martial law attempt? Under South Korea’s constitution, the president can declare martial law during “wartime, war-like situations or other comparable national emergency states” that require the use of military force to restrict the freedom of press, assembly and other rights to maintain order. Many observers question whether South Korea is currently in such a state. The constitution also states that the president must oblige when the National Assembly demands the lifting of martial law with a majority vote. A presidential official said Yoon decided to impose martial law to resolve a political deadlock and did it in the middle of night to minimize its effect on the economy. The official spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitive nature of the issue. Some experts say Yoon clearly violated the constitution. While martial law allows “special measures” to restrict individual freedoms and the authority of agencies and courts, the constitution does not permit the functions of parliament to be restricted. But in following Yoon’s martial law declaration on Tuesday, the South Korean military proclaimed that parliamentary activities were suspended and deployed troops to try to block lawmakers from entering the National Assembly. READ: Full text of South Korean President Yoon agreeing to lift martial law Park Chan-dae, the Democratic Party’s floor leader, called for Yoon to be immediately investigated on charges of rebellion over the way he deployed troops to the parliament. While the president mostly enjoys immunity from prosecution while in office, the protection does not extend to allegations of rebellion or treason. In Seoul, the streets were busy Wednesday, like a normal weekday. Tourist Stephen Rowan, from Brisbane, Australia, who was touring Gyeongbokgung Palace, said he was not concerned. He heard about calls for the president’s resignation and expected demonstrations. “I would have been concerned if martial law had stayed enforced,” he said. Subscribe to our daily newsletter By providing an email address. I agree to the Terms of Use and acknowledge that I have read the Privacy Policy . Natalia Slavney, research analyst at the Stimson Center’s 38 North website, which focuses on Korean affairs, said Yoon’s imposition of martial law was “a serious backslide of democracy” that followed a “worrying trend of abuse” since he took office in 2022.