PARIS — The roads were dangerously slippery after heavy rain. A fourth Tour de France title was all but won anyway, so finishing safely in the pack would do fine for Tadej Pogačar. Especially considering the July 27 final stage had already been neutralized for safety reasons and he just had to complete the race.

Surely there was no need to launch a seemingly pointless attack and risk crashing?

But holding back or being cautious rarely appeals to Pogačar, the 26-year-old cycling star from Slovenia. He clinched his fourth Tour title in inimitably daring style on July 27 and further cemented his place among cycling’s greats.

Even though he really did not need to, and risked falling on oil slick-wet roads, Pogačar simply could not help himself. Against all logical opinion, he tried winning the 21st and final stage with trademark uphill attacks, only to fall short of the stage win itself.

“In the end I found myself in the front, even though I didn’t have the energy,” said Pogačar, who won the Tour last year and in 2020 and 2021.

“Just speechless to win the Tour de France, this one feels especially amazing,” Pogačar added. “Just super proud that I can wear this yellow jersey.”

Two-time Tour champion Jonas Vinegaard finished the overall race 4 minutes, 24 seconds behind Pogačar in second place and Florian Lipowitz was 11 minutes adrift in third.

Belgian rider Wout van Aert won the 21st and last stage, which broke with tradition and featured three climbs of Montmartre hill.

Because of heavy rain and the risk of crashes, organizers had earlier neutralized the times 50 kilometers (31 miles) from the end, effectively giving Pogačar the victory — providing he crossed the finish line.

He did the opposite of what almost every rider would do with victory a near certainty.

As the rain teemed down, he set a tremendous pace in the Montmartre climbs as fans cheered all along the cobbled Rue Lepic, with flags and fans hanging out of windows.

Only five riders were left with Pogačar on the third ascension of the 1.1-kilometer Montmartre hill.

After fending off American Matteo Jorgenson, he was caught cold near the top as Van Aert launched a stunning attack to drop — yes, drop! — Pogačar, the world’s best climber, on the steepest section.

“Hats off to Wout, he was incredibly strong,” Pogačar said.

Van Aert rolled back down for a prestigious stage win on the famed Champs-Élysées. Pogačar looked weary as he crossed the line in fourth place, 19 seconds behind.

‘Peace and some nice weather’

But then it was time to celebrate title No. 4. Although don’t expect Pogačar to make any headlines on that front.

“Everyone celebrates in their own way, I just want peace and some nice weather, not like here today,” Pogačar said. “Just to enjoy some quiet days at home.”

Only four riders have won the showcase race five times: Belgian Eddy Merckx, Spaniard Miguel Induráin and Frenchmen Jacques Anquetil and Bernard Hinault.

Pogačar won four stages this year to take his Tour tally to 21 and 30 at major races, including six at the Giro d’Italia and three at the Spanish Vuelta.

The UAE Team Emirates leader praised his teammates.

“I think the second week was the decisive moment,” Pogačar said. “We took more advantage.”

Lipowitz, meanwhile, secured his first career podium at a Grand Tour, the alternative name given to the three major races.

His performance, following his third-placed finish last month at the Critérium du Dauphiné, suggests the 24-year-old German rider could challenge in the near future.

Breaking with tradition

Traditionally, the last stage is largely processional with riders doing laps around Paris. The Tour broke with tradition after the success of the Paris Olympics road race, which also took in Montmartre, famous for its Sacré-Coeur basilica.

Five in a row

It was the fifth straight year where Pogačar and Vingegaard finished 1-2 at the Tour.

Vingegaard was second in 2021, before beating Pogačar the next two years with the Slovenian second. When Pogačar reclaimed his title last year, Vingegaard was runner-up.

“We’ve raised the level of each other much higher and we push each other to the limit,” Pogačar said. “I must say to him, big, big respect.”

Five major titles

Pogačar has also won the Giro d’Italia, doing so last year to become the first cyclist to secure the Giro and Tour double in the same season since the late Marco Pantani in 1998.

But Pogačar has not yet won the Spanish Vuelta, whereas Anquetil, Hinault and Merckx won all three major races.

A century of success

When Pogačar won the hilly fourth stage of this year’s race, it was the 100th professional victory of his stellar career, all events combined.

Pogačar is also the world road race champion.

His dominant victory at the Critérium continued his excellent form the spring classics.

After winning stage 4 of the Tour, Pogačar added three more stage wins, including an emphatic uphill time trial.

What’s left to win?

He would love to win the Paris-Roubaix classic and Milan San-Remo.

The 259.2-kilometer (161-mile) Roubaix race is called “The Hell of the North” because of its dangerous cobblestone sections.

Pogačar debut appearance at the one-day classic this year saw him seeking to become the first Tour champion to win it since Hinault in 1981. But powerful Dutch rider Mathieu van der Poel won it for the third straight year.

Pogačar has also yet to win Milan-San Remo, with Van der Poel also beating him there this year.

Expect a fired-up Pogačar next year at Roubaix and Milan-San Remo.

But it’s unsure whether he’ll tackle the Vuelta.

Scheffler began with a shot into 10 inches for birdie. One hour into the final round, his lead already was seven shots and no one got closer than four the rest of the way at Royal Portrush.

He closed with a 3-under 68 for a four-shot victory, sending him to the U.S. Open next year with a chance to make it a clean sweep of golf’s biggest titles.

Scheffler won the Masters by three shots in 2022 and by four shots last year. He won the PGA Championship by five shots in May.

And then he arrived in Northern Ireland and shared some extraordinary insight when he said celebrating tournament wins doesn’t last but a few minutes before it was on to the next one. He loves the work required to be the best. He thrives on competition. But in terms of fulfillment, he often questions why he wants to win so badly when the thrill of winning is fleeting.

He tapped in for par on the final hole, making it all look so routine. But then he saw his family, thrust both arms into the air, pumped both fists and tossed his cap in the air. That’s what it was all about for the 29-year-old from Texas.

And he gets to keep the silver claret jug for a year.

Rory McIlroy referred to the outcome as “inevitable” when Scheffler built a four-shot lead going into the final round, and it was every bit of that.

The tap-in birdie on the first hole. A brilliant approach between two knobs to 7 feet for birdie on the fourth. A 15-foot birdie on No. 5. Most telling was his biggest celebration, a powerful fist pump when he made a 15-foot par putt on No. 6.

It was reminiscent of when Tiger Woods saved his biggest fist pump for a par on the 16th hole of his historic 15-shot victory at Pebble Beach in the 2000 U.S. Open, when it was clear Woods was competing mainly against himself.

That’s what it felt like until Scheffler’s one wobble. His tee shot on the par-4 eighth found a bunker, and Scheffler got too aggressive. The shot hit the top of the vetted side and rolled back into the sand. He got the next one out safely into the fairway, hit wedge to 18 feet and took two putts for a double bogey.

That ended his streak of 32 consecutive holes without a bogey, remarkable control of his golf ball. The lead was down to four shots when Scottish Open winner Chris Gotterup birdied the ninth.

And then Scheffler drilled a drive, hit wedge to 5 feet for birdie and he was back on his horse. He played the back nine with eight pars and a birdie because that’s all he needed. No one could catch him.

“I played with him the first two days, and honestly I thought he was going to birdie every hole. It was incredible to watch,” Shane Lowry said. “If Scottie’s feet stayed stable and his swing looked like Adam Scott’s, we’d be talking about him in the same words as Tiger Woods. … His bad shots are really good. That’s when you know he’s really good.”

Scheffler, who finished at 17-under 267, won for the fourth time this year. He is the first player in the last century to win his first four majors by at least three shots.

He has won 20 times worldwide since February 2022, and this was the 11th straight time he turned a 54-hole lead into a victory.

This is the second straight year for a player to win two majors, after Xander Schauffele won the PGA Championship and British Open last year.

“I don’t think we thought the golfing world would see someone as dominant as Tiger come through so soon, and here’s Scottie sort of taking that throne of dominance,” said Schauffele, who tied for seventh.

“You can’t even say he’s on a run. He’s just been killing it for over two years now,” he said. “He’s a tough man to beat, and when you see his name up on the leaderboard, it sucks for us.”

English capped off a memorable two weeks in the United Kingdom. His caddie of eight years couldn’t get a new travel visa because of a 10-year prison term he served two decades ago. English had a replacement last week at the Scottish Open and another this week. It didn’t stop him.

English, who shot a 66, was runner-up in a major for the second time this year — both times to Scheffler — and strengthened his case for the Ryder Cup in September.

“The only guy to beat me at the PGA and this week. I’m playing some good golf,” English said. “I wasn’t playing professional golf when Tiger was at his peak. But it’s pretty incredible, just how good of a front-runner he is.”

The only stumble from Scheffler came from his 15-month-old son Bennett, who tried to walk up a slope to the 18th green toward his dad and the claret jug, only to face-plant.

Li Haotong of China (70), Matt Fitzpatrick (69) and Wyndham Clark (65) tied for fourth. That gets Li into the Masters next year.

LONDON — For years, Iga Swiatek never quite felt comfortable on Wimbledon’s grass courts, never thought she could add a trophy there to her other Grand Slam triumphs. Oh, did that turn out to be wrong. And how.

Not only is Swiatek now the champion of the All England Club, she did it with a 6-0, 6-0 victory over Amanda Anisimova on Saturday in the first women’s final at the tournament in 114 years in which one player failed to claim a single game.

“It seems,” said Swiatek, a 24-year-old from Poland who is now 6-0 in major title matches, “super surreal.”

That’s also a good way to describe the way things unfolded at a sunny, breezy Centre Court against the 13th-seeded Anisimova, a 23-year-old American who was participating in her first Slam final.

With Kate, the Princess of Wales, sitting in the Royal Box and on hand to present the trophies, the whole thing took just 57 minutes. The previous 6-0, 6-0 Wimbledon women’s final was all the way back in 1911.

“Honestly, I didn’t even dream (of this), because for me, it was just, like, way too far, you know?” Swiatek said. “I feel like I’m already an experienced player after winning the Slams before, but I never really expected this one.”

She won 55 of Saturday’s 79 points despite needing to produce merely 10 winners. Anisimova was shaky from the start and made 28 unforced errors.

“You’re such an incredible player. It obviously showed today,” Anisimova told Swiatek. “You’ve been such an inspiration to me. Just an unbelievable athlete.”

Swiatek already owned four titles from the French Open’s red clay and one from the U.S. Open’s hard courts, but this is first one of her professional career at any grass-court tournament. And it ended a long-for-her drought: Swiatek last won a trophy anywhere more than a year ago, at Roland-Garros in June 2024.

Swiatek is the eighth consecutive first-time women’s champion at Wimbledon, but this stands out because of just how stunningly dominant it was.

Anisimova won her first-round match less than two weeks ago by a 6-0, 6-0 score and eliminated No. 1-ranked Aryna Sabalenka in the semifinals on Thursday, but she never looked like she was the same player this time. Not at all.

“No matter what happened today,” Swiatek told Anisimova, “you should be proud of the work you’re doing.”

When it was over, while Swiatek climbed into the stands to celebrate with her team, Anisimova sat on the sideline in tears.

Swiatek never had been past the quarterfinals of the All England Club and her only other final on the slick surface came when she was the runner-up at a tuneup event in Germany right before Wimbledon began.

Swiatek spent most of 2022, 2023 and 2024 at No. 1 in the WTA rankings but was seeded No. 8 at Wimbledon. She served a one-month doping ban last year after failing an out-of-competition drug test; an investigation determined she was inadvertently exposed to a contaminated medical product used for trouble sleeping and jet lag.

Anisimova, who was born in New Jersey and grew up in Florida, was a semifinalist at age 17 at the 2019 French Open. Her father died soon after that. On Saturday, Anisimova’s mother flew to England, a rare instance of her attending one of her daughter’s matches.

“My mom is the most selfless person I know, and she’s done everything to get me to this point in my life,” Anisimova said through tears, then spoke to her mother directly, saying: “Thank you for being here and breaking the superstition of flying in.”

And then, with a chuckle, Anisimova added: “It’s definitely not why I lost today.”

She took time away from the tour a little more than two years ago because of burnout. A year ago, she tried to qualify for Wimbledon, because her ranking of 189th was too low to get into the field automatically, but lost in the preliminary event.

Now she’ll break into the top 10 in the rankings for the first time.

“It’s been an incredible fortnight for me. Even though I ran out of gas a bit today, and I wish that I could put on a better performance for all of you,” Anisimova told the crowd, “you guys have still been there for me and lifted me up today.”

The cause of death was dementia, Philbin’s family told ESPN.

Philbin spent nine seasons with the Jets and was a two-time All-AFL selection.

In the third Super Bowl on Jan. 12, 1969, the Jets and quarterback Joe Namath brought legitimacy to the AFL and turned the game into a must-watch event when they beat the NFL champion Baltimore Colts 16-7. Philbin led a defense that forced five turnovers and held the Colts to their lowest point total of the season. The NFL and AFL merged in 1970.

A native of Pawtucket, Rhode Island, Philbin was a three-year starter at the University of Buffalo and was selected by the Detroit Lions in the third round of the 1964 NFL draft. He chose to play for the AFL’s Jets instead and played 110 games over nine seasons for New York from 1964-72.

Although sacks did not become an official statistic until 1982, the Jets credit Philbin with 64 1/2 sacks, the fourth most in franchise history. He became part of the Jets’ Ring of Honor in 2011.

Philbin played his last season for the Philadelphia Eagles in 1973.

Ujiri joined the Raptors in 2013 as executive vice president and general manager. He was promoted to president in 2016 and surrendered his responsibilities as GM in 2017, when Bobby Webster took over.

The 54-year-old Ujiri, who was heading into the final year of his contract, led the Raptors to their only NBA title in 2019.

“During his 13 seasons with the Raptors, Masai has helped transform the organization on the court and has been an inspirational leader off it,” Maple Leaf Sports & Entertainment president and CEO Keith Pelley said in a statement. “He brought an NBA championship to Toronto and urged us to believe in this city, and ourselves. We are grateful for all he has done and wish him and his family the very best.”

The move was announced one day after the conclusion of the NBA draft. The Raptors said a search for Ujiri’s successor will begin immediately.

Webster was given a contract extension, the Raptors said. Terms of that deal were not disclosed.

The Raptors finished 30-52 last season and missed the playoffs.

“We are confident that the Raptors organization, under the guidance of Bobby and his team, is in a great place,” Pelley said. “They have a plan in place for next season and beyond as the team continues its rebuild, and we have confidence in their ability to execute and ultimately, to excel.”

The Supreme Court has blocked, for now, the deportations of any Venezuelans held in northern Texas under an 18th-century wartime law. In a brief order early Saturday, the court directed the Trump administration not to remove Venezuelans held in the Bluebonnet Detention Center “until further order of this court.” Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito dissented.

The high court acted in an emergency appeal from the American Civil Liberties Union, contending that immigration authorities appeared to be moving to restart removals under the Alien Enemies Act of 1798.

The Supreme Court on Saturday blocked, for now, the deportations of any Venezuelans held in northern Texas under an 18th-century wartime law.

In a brief order, the court directed the Trump administration not to remove Venezuelans held in the Bluebonnet Detention Center “until further order of this court.”

Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito dissented.

The high court acted in an emergency appeal from the American Civil Liberties Union, contending that immigration authorities appeared to be moving to restart removals under the Alien Enemies Act of 1798. The Supreme Court had said earlier in April that deportations could proceed only if those about to be removed had a chance to argue their case in court and were given “a reasonable time” to contest their pending removals.

“We are deeply relieved that the Court has temporarily blocked the removals. These individuals were in imminent danger of spending the rest of their lives in a brutal Salvadoran prison without ever having had any due process,” ACLU lawyer Lee Gelernt said in an email.

On Friday, two federal judges refused to step in as lawyers for the men launched a desperate legal campaign to prevent their deportation, even as one judge said the case raised legitimate concerns. Early Saturday, the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals also refused to issue an order protecting the detainees from being deported.

The administration is expected to return to the Supreme Court quickly in an effort to persuade the justices to lift their temporary order.

The ACLU had already sued to block deportations of two Venezuelans held in the Bluebonnet facility and sought an order barring removals of any immigrants in the region under the Alien Enemies Act.

In an emergency filing early Friday, the ACLU warned that immigration authorities were accusing other Venezuelan men held there of being members of the Tren de Aragua gang, which would make them subject to President Donald Trump’s use of the act.

The act has only been invoked three previous times in U.S. history, most recently during World War II to hold Japanese-American civilians in internment camps. The Trump administration contended it gave them power to swiftly remove immigrants they identified as members of the gang, regardless of their immigration status.

Following the unanimous high court order on April 9, federal judges in Colorado, New York and southern Texas promptly issued orders barring removal of detainees under the AEA until the administration provides a process for them to make claims in court.

But there had been no such order issued in the area of Texas that covers Bluebonnet, which is located 24 miles north of Abilene in the far northern end of the state.

U.S. District Judge James Wesley Hendrix, a Trump appointee, this week declined to bar the administration from removing the two men identified in the ACLU lawsuit because Immigration and Customs Enforcement filed sworn declarations that they would not be immediately deported. He also balked at issuing a broader order prohibiting the removal of all Venezuelans in the area under the act because he said removals hadn’t started yet.

Van Hollen reveals what Abrego Garcia told him in El Salvador

But the ACLU’s Friday filing included sworn declarations from three separate immigration lawyers who said their clients in Bluebonnet were given paperwork indicating they were members of Tren de Aragua and could be deported by Saturday. In one case, immigration lawyer Karene Brown said her client, identified by initials, was told to sign papers in English even though the client only spoke Spanish.

“ICE informed F.G.M. that these papers were coming from the President, and that he will be deported even if he did not sign it,” Brown wrote.

Gelernt said in a Friday evening hearing before District Judge James E. Boasberg in Washington, D.C., that the administration initially moved Venezuelans to its south Texas immigration facility for deportation. But since a judge banned deportations in that area, it has funneled them to the Bluebonnet facility, where no such order exists. He said witnesses reported the men were being loaded on buses Friday evening to be taken to the airport.

With Hendrix not agreeing to the ACLU’s request for an emergency order, the group turned to Boasberg, who initially halted deportations in March. The Supreme Court ruled the orders against deportation could only come from judges in jurisdictions where immigrants were held, which Boasberg said made him powerless Friday.

“I’m sympathetic to everything you’re saying,” Boasberg told Gelernt. “I just don’t think I have the power to do anything about it.”

Boasberg this week found there’s probable cause that the Trump administration committed criminal contempt by disobeying his initial deportation ban. He was concerned that the paper that ICE was giving those held did not make clear they had a right to challenge their removal in court, which he believed the Supreme Court mandated.

Drew Ensign, an attorney for the Justice Department, disagreed, saying that people slated for deportation would have a “minimum” of 24 hours to challenge their removal in court. He said no flights were scheduled for Friday night and he was unaware of any Saturday, but the Department of Homeland Security said it reserved the right to remove people then.

ICE said it would not comment on the litigation.

Also Friday, a Massachusetts judge made permanent his temporary ban on the administration deporting immigrants who have exhausted their appeals to countries other than their home countries unless they are informed of their destination and given a chance to object if they’d face torture or death there.

Some Venezuelans subject to Trump’s Alien Enemies Act have been sent to El Salvador and housed in its notorious main prison.

BOSTON (AP) — The federal government says it’s freezing more than $2.2 billion in grants and $60 million in contracts to Harvard University, after the institution said it would defy the Trump administration’s demands to limit activism on campus.

The hold on Harvard’s funding marks the seventh time President Donald Trump’s administration has taken the step at one of the nation’s most elite colleges, in an attempt to force compliance with Trump’s political agenda. Six of the seven schools are in the Ivy League.

It sets the stage for a showdown between the federal government and America’s oldest and wealthiest university. With an endowment of more than $50 billion, Harvard is perhaps the best positioned university to push back on the administration’s pressure campaign.

In a letter to Harvard Friday, Trump’s administration had called for broad government and leadership reforms at the university, as well as changes to its admissions policies. It also demanded the university audit views of diversity on campus, and stop recognizing some student clubs.

The federal government said almost $9 billion in grants and contracts in total were at risk if Harvard did not comply.

On Monday, Harvard President Alan Garber said the university would not bend to the government’s demands.

“The University will not surrender its independence or relinquish its constitutional rights,” Garber said in a letter to the Harvard community. “No government — regardless of which party is in power — should dictate what private universities can teach, whom they can admit and hire, and which areas of study and inquiry they can pursue.”

Hours later, the government froze billions in Harvard’s federal funding.

The first university targeted by the Trump administration was Columbia, which acquiesced to the government’s demands under the threat of billions of dollars in cuts. The administration also has paused federal funding for the University of Pennsylvania, Brown, Princeton, Cornell and Northwestern.

Trump’s administration has normalized the extraordinary step of withholding federal money to pressure major academic institutions to comply with the president’s political agenda and to influence campus policy. The administration has argued universities allowed antisemitism to go unchecked at campus protests last year against Israel’s war in Gaza.

Harvard, Garber said, already has made extensive reforms to address antisemitism. He said many of the government’s demands don’t relate to antisemitism, but instead are an attempt to regulate the “intellectual conditions” at Harvard.

Withholding federal funding from Harvard, one of the nation’s top research universities in science and medicine, “risks not only the health and well-being of millions of individuals but also the economic security and vitality of our nation.” It also violates the university’s First Amendment rights and exceeds the government’s authority under Title VI, which prohibits discrimination against students based on their race, color or national origin, Garber said.

The government’s demands included that Harvard institute what it called “merit-based” admissions and hiring policies and conduct an audit of the study body, faculty and leadership on their views about diversity. The administration also called for a ban on face masks at Harvard — an apparent target of pro-Palestinian campus protesters — and pressured the university to stop recognizing or funding “any student group or club that endorses or promotes criminal activity, illegal violence, or illegal harassment.”

Harvard’s defiance, the federal antisemitism task force said Monday, “reinforces the troubling entitlement mindset that is endemic in our nation’s most prestigious universities and colleges — that federal investment does not come with the responsibility to uphold civil rights laws.

“The disruption of learning that has plagued campuses in recent years is unacceptable. The harassment of Jewish students is intolerable.”

Trump has promised a more aggressive approach against antisemitism on campus, accusing former President Joe Biden of letting schools off the hook. Trump’s administration has opened new investigations at colleges and detained and deported several foreign students with ties to pro-Palestinian protests.

The demands from the Trump administration had prompted a group of Harvard alumni to write to university leaders calling for it to “legally contest and refuse to comply with unlawful demands that threaten academic freedom and university self-governance.”

“Harvard stood up today for the integrity, values, and freedoms that serve as the foundation of higher education,” said Anurima Bhargava, one of the alumni behind the letter. “Harvard reminded the world that learning, innovation and transformative growth will not yield to bullying and authoritarian whims.”

The government’s pressure on Harvard also sparked a protest over the weekend from the campus community and residents of Cambridge and a lawsuit from the American Association of University Professors on Friday challenging the cuts.

In their lawsuit, plaintiffs argue that the Trump administration has failed to follow steps required under Title VI before it starts cutting funds, including giving notice of the cuts to both the university and Congress.

“These sweeping yet indeterminate demands are not remedies targeting the causes of any determination of noncompliance with federal law. Instead, they overtly seek to impose on Harvard University political views and policy preferences advanced by the Trump administration and commit the University to punishing disfavored speech,” plaintiffs wrote.

The change in policy at the Annapolis school was made in February by Vice Adm. Yvette Davids, the academy’s superintendent, according to a court filing by the U.S. Justice Department in the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

The president’s order on Jan. 27 said that “every element of the Armed Forces should operate free from any preference based on race or sex.” It also directed the secretary of defense to conduct an internal review with respect to all “activities designed to promote a race- or sex-based preferences system,” including reviews at the service academies.

“Under revised internal guidance issued by the Superintendent on Feb. 14, 2025, neither race, ethnicity, nor sex can be considered as a factor for admission at any point during the admissions process, including qualification and acceptance,” according to the court filing made public Friday.

Cdr. Ashley Hockycko, an academy spokesperson, declined further comment Friday on the policy.

U.S. Rep. Sarah Elfreth, a Democrat representing Maryland’s 3rd Congressional District which includes Annapolis, called the decision “disastrous” and said it will hurt the military’s recruitment and retention for decades. Elfreth, a member of the House Armed Services Committee, said diversity and inclusion are critical to national security and mission readiness.

“The divisive culture wars that President Trump and [Defense] Secretary [Pete] Hegseth are choosing to foment don’t make our country any more safe — they only serve to divide,” Elfreth said.  “A Navy and Marine Corps that reflect the diversity of our country is our strongest Navy and Marine Corps.”

The decision comes after a federal judge ruled in December that the academy could continue considering race in its admissions process. In that case, the judge found that military cohesion and other national security factors mean the school should not be subjected to the same standards as civilian universities.

During a two-week bench trial in September, attorneys for the academy argued that prioritizing diversity in the military makes it stronger, more effective and more widely respected.

The case against the policy was brought by the group Students for Fair Admissions, which was appealing the judge’s decision.

The group “welcomes the announcement that the U.S. Naval Academy will end its unfair and illegal race-based admissions policies,” Edward Blum, president of the nonprofit group, in an email. “Racial discrimination is wrong and racial classifications have no place at our nation’s military academies.”

The Justice Department asked in the filing on Friday to suspend the current briefing schedule in the case while the parties consider the change in the academy’s policy.

“The parties require a reasonable amount of time to discuss the details of the Academy’s new policy and to consider the appropriate next steps for this litigation, including whether this litigation is now moot and, if so, whether the district court judgment should be vacated,” the Justice Department wrote.

Students for Fair Admissions also brought the lawsuit challenging affirmative action that resulted in a landmark U.S. Supreme Court ruling in 2023.

The high court’s conservative majority broadly prohibited the consideration of race and ethnicity in college admissions, ending a long-standing practice meant to boost opportunities for historically marginalized groups and sending shock waves through higher education. But it carved out a potential exemption for military academies, suggesting that national security interests could affect the legal analysis.

Students for Fair Admissions later sued the Naval Academy, challenging the exemption. But Judge Richard Bennett rejected their arguments, saying that the school had “established a compelling national security interest in a diverse officer corps.”

Attorneys for the group argued during the trial that prioritizing minority candidates is unfair to qualified white applicants and that cohesion should arise from other sources, such as training and command structure.

The academy argued in that case that its admissions process considers many factors, including grades, extracurricular activities, life experience and socioeconomic status, according to court testimony. Race often played no role in the process, but sometimes it came under consideration in a “limited fashion,” attorneys for the academy wrote in court papers.

The academy has been reviewing its curriculum to comply with Trump’s executive orders. It reviewed 870 courses and removed two, “Gender sexuality studies,” an English course, and “Gender Matters,” a leadership course, Davids said during a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing Wednesday. Eighteen others were modified.

Reporter Lorraine Mirabella contributed to this article.

The 13th-seeded Draper will face 12th-seeded Holger Rune on Sunday (2 p.m. PT). Rune beat fifth-seeded Daniil Medvedev, 7-6, 6-4, in the first semifinal for his 150th tour-level victory.

In the women’s final on Sunday, top-seeded Aryna Sabalenka will play 17-year-old Mirra Andreeva at 11 a.m. They won semifinal matches Friday night in chilly conditions.

Draper ended Alcaraz’s 16-match winning streak in the ATP Masters 1000 event in the desert. The 23-year-old English left-hander – set to break into the top 10 in the world for the first time Monday – won last year in Vienna and Stuttgart for his lone tour titles. He’s 2-3 against Alcaraz.

“It was a strange match in all honesty,” Draper said “Carlos came out a little flat, I sensed that. I had a chance in the first game of the second, and he came up with an ace. … What happened to him happened to me, I got tight, I had low energy.

“Against the top players in the world, they can change their momentum very quickly. I got lost out there for 25 minutes, but in the third, I was really proud of my competitiveness, my attitude and I somehow managed to get over the line.”

Alcaraz, seeded second, missed a chance to become the youngest player to win three consecutive singles titles at any ATP Tour event – and just the third to do it at Indian Wells. The 21-year-old Spanish star won in Rotterdam in February for his 17th ATP Tour title.

The 21-year-old Rune, from Denmark, snapped a seven-match losing streak in semifinals. He’s 2-2 against Medvedev.

“It means everything,” Rune said. “The job is not over yet, but it feels amazing. Playing Daniil is one of the toughest challenges for me on tour. I managed to beat him the first time (we played), but we know each other well. I obviously had the right tactics, but it was still so difficult because he puts in great effort and is super solid. So, I’m very proud of myself.”

Rune has four ATP Tour titles. His biggest victory came in Paris in 2022 in another ATP Masters 1000 tournament.

Medvedev won the last of his 20 ATP Tour titles in 2023. The 29-year-old Russian lost to Alcaraz last year in the Indian Wells final.

The 17-year-old Andreeva, seeded ninth, will face top-seeded Aryna Sabalenka in the final. Sabalenka routed fifth-seeded Madison Keys, 6-0, 6-1, in the second semifinal, a rematch of their Australian Open final earlier this year.

After a tight first set, Andreeva was flawless in the tiebreak, letting out a roar when she enticed a forehand error from Swiatek on set point. The Polish No. 2 seed stormed back, however, breaking in the first game en route to running away with the second set.

Andreeva, who was studying handwritten notes during the changeovers, regained the momentum by breaking to open the third set as temperatures in the desert plummeted and the wind picked up.

Andreeva and Swiatek both finished the match wearing pullovers, with the temperature dipping into the 50s in the final set. It was in the mid-50s when Sabalenka finished off Keys.

“After she literally killed me in the second set, I thought, OK, I’ll just try to fight,” Andreeva said on court. “There is not much I could do about it; she was playing amazing. I just decided to fight for every point.

“It doesn’t matter how I put the ball in, but I have to put it in. In the end, it wasn’t too bad.”

Andreeva ran her tour winning streak to 11 matches and ended Swiatek’s 10-match run at Indian Wells. Andreeva won her first WTA Tour title last month in Dubai to become the youngest player to capture a WTA 1000 event.

Andreeva is coached by former Wimbledon champion Conchita Martinez, who reached the Indian Wells final twice during her playing days.

“I know that my coach lost in the finals, so I’m going to try to be better than her,” Andreeva said with a laugh.

Kim Clijsters was 17 in 2001 when she lost to Serena Williams in the final.

Swiatek, also the 2022 Indian Wells champion, was bidding to become the first woman to win the tournament three times.

Sabalenka ended Keys’ 16-match winning streak and got some revenge for her loss to the American in Australia. Keys beat Sabalenka in three sets in January at Melbourne Park, denying Sabalenka a third consecutive title.

“I didn’t expect this match to be that fast,” Sabalenka said. “I’m super happy with the way I played today – much-needed revenge.”

On Saturday in the men’s semifinals, two-time defending champion Carlos Alcaraz – the No. 2 seed – will face 13th-seeded Jack Draper, and fifth-seeded Daniil Medvedev will play No. 12 Holger Rune.