A bill to legally prevent new sentencing guidelines on how ethnic minority criminals should be punished will be introduced today, the justice secretary said.
Shabana Mahmood told MPs in the House of Commons the Sentencing Guidelines (Pre-sentence reports) Bill would be presented on Tuesday to stop the guidance coming into effect.
The independent Sentencing Council said a pre-sentence report, the results of which are taken into account when considering a criminal’s sentence, will “usually be necessary” before handing out punishment for someone from an ethnic, cultural or faith minority.
However, Ms Mahmood called the guidance “unacceptable” and said it amounted to “differential treatment before the law” as she urged the council to reverse it.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:10
‘Blatant bias against straight, white men’
After Downing Street said on Monday the government planned to introduce legislation on Tuesday and to push it through quickly, the Sentencing Council suspended the guidance, due to come in today.
More on Robert Jenrick
Related Topics:
Ms Mahmood also announced on Tuesday the government would carry out a review of the Sentencing Council “in the coming months”.
“Should further legislation be required, I shall propose it as part of the upcoming Sentencing Bill,” she added.
The justice secretary acknowledged the council “holds an important position” within the justice system.
She also said pre-sentence reports are “an incredibly vital tool for judges before passing sentence”.
Conservative justice secretary Robert Jenrick claimed magistrates and judges were only informed of the guidance suspension at midday, so said some may have used the guidance in sentencing that morning.
He accused Ms Mahmood of having “completely lost control of the justice system” and said her “incompetence took this down to the wire”.
But she dismissed his criticisms, saying he had never raised these issues while in government and said communication of the suspension was up to the Sentencing Council.
Mr Jenrick had previously called the guidance “two-tier justice” as he said it would lead to “blatant bias” against Christians and straight white men.
He also argued that it would make “a custodial sentence less likely for those from an ethnic minority, cultural minority, and/or faith minority community” – something the council denied.
The two-child benefit cap has been a raw nerve for the Labour party since long before they came to power.
It’s become increasingly exposed amid internal party divisions over the government’s forthcoming welfare reforms, which are expected to push another 250,000 people into poverty, including 50,000 children.
Lifting the cap could raise up to 350,000 children out of poverty, according to the Institute for Fiscal Studies.
Image: The PM has previously suggested he’d like to lift the two-child benefit cap. Pic: Reuters.
But in a bid to show he was still committed to tackling the problem – while also kicking the ball down the road – Keir Starmerset up a child poverty taskforce, which promised to look at policies to tackle the “root causes” of the issue. That taskforce was due to report in the “spring” – which should be any day now.
But now, as first reported by the Guardian, the Department of Work and Pensions has confirmed it has decided to push back publication until later in the year, to ensure its “ambitious child poverty strategy” can deliver “fully funded measures”.
I understand that means the announcements will be made as part of the autumn statement – and it looks like the prime minister is now backing a change on the cap.
Image: Welsh First Minister Eluned Morgan met with Sir Keir on Friday. Pic: Eluned Morgan/X
Welsh First Minister Eluned Morgan told Sky News on Friday that the issue was brought up by “lots” of attendees of a meeting of regional mayors and first ministers, and the PM said they’d “like to see some movement – it’s about when and how”.
Scrapping the two-child benefit cap is seen by charities as the most effective way of pulling children out of poverty. But doing so will come at a cost, estimated to be some £2.5bn.
The prime minister has previously suggested he would like to lift the cap, but only when the fiscal situation allows. This promise was one of the government’s key public declarations of responsibility to the financial markets.
But this week he’s signalled he’s prepared to U-turn overthe other flashpoint policy – means testing the winter fuel allowance.
Under pressure from concerned MPs and activists riled up by thousands of angry doorstep conversations during their recent local election debacle, he is prepared to move.
He’s justified that change by arguing it was right to look again at the measure “as the economy improves”. But if that’s the case – why not do the same for children as for pensioners?
Charities estimate the two-child benefit cap pushes another 100 children into poverty every day, which would affect another 20,000 by the time of the budget.
Some Labour MPs are prepared to criticise the delay publicly. Neil Duncan-Jordan told me: “Millions of families will be devastated by the delay in tackling the scandal of child poverty… the need to act is now.”
But others, including Helen Barnard, from the Trussell Trust charity, have argued the delay might not be such a bad thing, posting on X: “This may be good news. Better a delayed child poverty strategy with measures to really protect children from hunger and hardship than one hitting the deadline but falling short on substance.”
It’s unclear how the government would fund such a change. This week, former PM Gordon Brown told Sky News’ Sophy Ridge they should be looking at a gambling tax to find the cash.
By giving ground now on winter fuel and hints on child benefit, Sir Keir may be hoping to head off the fermenting rebellion on his planned welfare cuts.
But those MPs angry about welfare cuts are also incensed about child poverty – and today’s news will likely only embolden their resistance.
President Donald Trump is facing scrutiny after speaking at a private event for top investors in his $TRUMP memecoin while standing behind a lectern emblazoned with the official presidential seal — a move that may violate federal law.
According to US law, the presidential seal cannot be used in any manner that could imply government approval or sponsorship. Violators can face fines or up to six months in prison.
Trump, who arrived at the club aboard a military helicopter, praised attendees and took aim at the Biden administration’s crypto stance.
When asked about potential conflicts of interest, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said the president’s involvement was personal. “It is not a White House dinner,” she told reporters. “It’s not taking place here at the White House.”
Trump features presidential seal at private properties
This isn’t the first time Trump has featured the presidential seal at his private properties. Forbes has previously reported its use as golf markers at several Trump-owned clubs.
In a May 22 letter to the Justice Department, 35 House members asked the public integrity section acting chief, Edward Sullivan, to launch an inquiry over the memecoin dinner to determine whether it violated the federal bribery statute or the foreign emoluments clause of the US Constitution.
Under the emoluments clause, a US president is barred from accepting any gift from a foreign state without the approval of Congress.
Bloomberg reported that a majority of the attendees at the memecoin dinner were likely foreign nationals based on their connections to crypto exchanges.
“US law prohibits foreign persons from contributing to US political campaigns,” said the letter. “However, the $TRUMP memecoin, including the promotion of a dinner promising exclusive access to the President, opens the door for foreign governments to buy influence with the President, all without disclosing their identities.”
Trump’s embrace of crypto marks a sharp turn from his skepticism during his first term. The $TRUMP memecoin, launched earlier this year, peaked at $74.34 before falling to $14.44 by May 22.
Sun, who reportedly invested over $40 million in $TRUMP tokens and spoke at the dinner, also has deep ties to Trump’s crypto ventures. He’s the top backer of World Liberty Financial, a Trump-affiliated firm currently under regulatory scrutiny.
A US federal judge has vacated key fraud and manipulation convictions against Avraham Eisenberg, the trader at the center of the case involving a $110 million exploit of the decentralized exchange Mango Markets.
On Friday, US District Judge Arun Subramanian ruled that the evidence presented at trial failed to support the jury’s conclusion that Eisenberg made materially false representations to Mango Markets.
The decision vacates Eisenberg’s convictions for commodities fraud and market manipulation and acquits him of a third charge, significantly weakening the government’s case.
Eisenberg, a self-proclaimed “applied game theorist,” was convicted in 2024 for artificially inflating the price of Mango’s MNGO token by over 1,300% in a matter of minutes and using the resulting gains as collateral to withdraw $110 million in crypto assets from the platform.
The Justice Department argued that he deceived Mango’s smart contract-based lending system, but Eisenberg’s defense maintained that he merely exploited poorly designed, permissionless code — without making any false representations.
Judge Subramanian agreed, writing that “Mango Markets was permissionless and automatic,” meaning the system couldn’t be deceived in a legal sense. “There was insufficient evidence of falsity,” the judge added, siding with Eisenberg’s interpretation of DeFi mechanics.
US judge siding with Eisenberg on nature of the exploit. Source: Bwbx.io
The judge also rejected prosecutors’ argument that the case should be heard in New York. Eisenberg was in Puerto Rico at the time of the trades, and the court found that no meaningful activity tied to the alleged crime occurred in New York.
The DOJ had cited a Poughkeepsie-based Mango user and a third-party vendor in Manhattan, but the judge ruled these were not enough to establish proper venue.
The US government must now decide whether to refile the vacated charges, though the Trump administration has recently signaled a reduced focus on crypto enforcement. Eisenberg still faces civil suits from both the SEC and CFTC.
While this ruling clears Eisenberg in the Mango Markets case, he remains behind bars.
In a separate case, Eisenberg was sentenced to nearly four years in prison on May 1 after pleading guilty to possessing child pornography — a charge stemming from unrelated evidence uncovered during his arrest.
In December 2022, US federal law enforcement authorities arrested Eisenberg in Puerto Rico. FBI officials charged the hacker with one count of commodities fraud and one count of commodities manipulation.
A jury found Eisenberg guilty of wire fraud, commodities fraud, and commodities manipulation in April 2024. The defense argued that the exploit was not a cybercrime and represented a “successful and legal trading strategy.”