May. 10, 2026, 1:03 PM EDT

Jack Smith has been speaking out. His words are welcome — even if they may be coming a little too late.

From the time he was appointed special counsel in 2022 until his resignation in January of 2025Smith conducted himself with the kind of stoic silence we expected of the Justice Department at the time. He spoke only at formal press conferences — during which he announced criminal charges against Donald Trump — and even then, scrupulously followed DOJ’s guidance to discuss only facts contained within the four corners of the indictments.

His conduct mirrored that of Robert Mueller, who was similarly silent when serving as the special counsel investigating Russian election interference just a few years prior. In stark contrast, Trump’s current acting Attorney General Todd Blanche routinely uses television news interviews to discuss pending cases, such as the recent indictments against former FBI Director James Comey and the Southern Poverty Law Center.

As Smith recently told an audience in Washington, D.C., “I grew up as a prosecutor in sort of the Robert Mueller mode of prosecutor. I speak in courtrooms. I do not speak on the courthouse steps. I don’t do media.”

But since leaving his post, Smith has begun to let those rigid prosecutorial walls come down a little, blasting Trump’s Department of Justice on multiple occasions. In April at a private event hosted by the Cosmos Club in Washington D.C., Smith stated that DOJ “targets people for criminal prosecution simply because the president doesn’t like them” and “fails to move on cases because they might uncover facts that are inconvenient to narratives the president would like to press.” Last fall, Smith told an audience at George Mason University: “My career has been about the rule of law, and I believe that today it is under attack like in no other period in our lifetimes.” And at an event in London in October of 2025, Smith spoke out specifically against the increasing attacks on public servantswarning that “it has a cost for our country that is incalculable.”

Mueller and Smith scrupulously followed DOJ’s press policyoften to a fault. They provided no updates on their work until charges were filed, consistent with DOJ’s practice to neither confirm nor deny the existence of an investigation, though everyone in America knew their assignments as special counsels. Even after announcing charges against Trump for election interference and unlawful retention of government documents, Smith did not comment on the evidence or the defendant’s potential guilt, lest he taint Trump’s due process rights to a fair trial. Then-Attorney General Merrick Garland gave an occasional speech about his department’s approach to significant cases, but he, too, largely abided by the traditional view that saying less is more.

The conduct of these men was commendable, but perhaps unnecessary and even counterproductive. While the Blanche model arguably runs afoul of Justice Department policy, future DOJ officials might reconsider whether silence is as golden as was once thought. When a special counsel says nothing, others fill the vacuum with their own narratives. Trump certainly had plenty to say about Mueller and Smith, constantly disparaging them and undermining confidence in their work with labels like “hoax” and “witch hunt.”

The next attorney general might be well served to reconsider the silent treatment. While it remains inappropriate to discuss ongoing investigations, DOJ officials should consider speaking out about their work, their processes and their standards, all of which are designed to treat defendants fairly.

For example, DOJ officials may find utility in making the rounds of the Sunday morning shows when a high-profile case is filed, not to opine on a defendant’s guilt, but to explain how grand juries make a finding of probable cause before returning an indictment. It would surely benefit public confidence to understand that DOJ policy directs prosecutors to provide even more protection than the law requires, such as sharing with grand jurors any evidence that might tend to refute a defendant’s guilt.

In other contexts, officials could discuss the training and policies it uses to ensure compliance with the Principles of Federal Prosecutionwhich forbid prosecutors bring cases unless they believe it probable that the evidence is sufficient to obtain and sustain a conviction. Most importantly, these principles prohibit prosecutors from making case decisions on the basis of partisan politics.

Rather than standing by in silence when critics like Trump disparage prosecutions, officials in the next DOJ should speak out, assuring the public that it has complied with legal standards, ethics rules and its own policies. Mueller, Smith and Garland followed the norms they had always known, but new challenges require new rules.

Barbara McQuade is a former Michigan U.S. attorney and legal analyst.

May. 10, 2026, 5:04 PM EDT

TENERIFE, Canary Islands (AP) — Passengers evacuated from the hantavirus-hit cruise shipbegan flying home Sunday aboard military and government planes after the vessel anchored in the Canary Islands, where travelers were escorted to shore by personnel in full-body protective gear and breathing masks.

Spanish passengers were the first to leave the MV Hondius following its arrival in Tenerife, the largest island in the Spanish archipelago off the West African coast. They were then flown to Madrid and taken to a military hospital. Hours later, a plane that evacuated French passengers landed in Paris, where it was met by emergency vehicles.

The planes arriving in Tenerife were to fly out passengers from more than 20 countries in an evacuation effort that was expected to last until Monday.

One of the five French passengers developed symptoms on the flight, French Prime Minister Sebastien Lecornu said in a statement, and all were put into strict isolation with plans to be tested.

Earlier, officials from the Spanish Health Ministry, the World Health Organization and the cruise company Oceanwide Expeditions had said none of the more than 140 people who were then on the Hondius had shown symptomsof the virus.

Three people have died since the outbreak began, and five passengers who left the ship earlier are infected with hantavirus.

Health officials say risk to public is low

WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus reiterated that the general public should not be worried about the outbreak.

“We have been repeating the same answer many times,” he said. “This is not another COVID. And the risk to the public is low. So they shouldn’t be scared, and they shouldn’t panic.”

Even so, those disembarking and workers at the port of Granadilla in Tenerife wore protective gear during the evacuation process, including hazardous materials suits, face masks and respirators. Video obtained by The Associated Press showed passengers on the tarmac donning similar suits and being sprayed down with disinfectant.

Passengers were relieved to be on their way home, another WHO official said.

“It’s been great seeing all the buses coming out and people really happy to be on land again and being repatriated,” said Diana Rojas Alvarez, the WHO health operations lead, who is on Tenerife.

Authorities have said the disembarking passengers and crew members will be checked for symptoms and will be forbidden from having any contact with the local population. They are to be taken off the ship only when evacuation flights are ready. Tedros and Spain’s health and interior ministers are supervising the operation in Tenerife.

Hantavirus usually spreads when people inhale contaminated residueof rodent droppings, and the disease not easily transmitted between people. But the Andes virusdetected in the cruise ship outbreak may be able to spread between people in rare cases. Symptoms usually show between one and eight weeks after exposure.

Passengers and disembarking crew members left behind their luggage and were allowed to take only a small bag with essentials, a cellphone, a charger and documentation.

Some crew, as well as the body of a passenger who died on board, will remain on the ship, which will sail on to Rotterdam, Netherlands, where it will undergo disinfection, Spanish authorities said.

The journey to Rotterdam takes about five days, the cruise company said.

Passengers will be monitored

The WHO is recommending that passengers’ home countries “have active monitoring and follow-up, which means daily health checks, either at home or in a specialized facility,” Van Kerkhove said.

“We are leaving this up to the countries themselves to actually develop their own policies,” she added. “But our recommendations are very clear, and this is really a cautionary approach to make sure that we don’t have any opportunities for this virus to pass from others.”

Numerous countries have said their people would be quarantined or hospitalized for observation. Earlier, for example, the French Foreign Ministry said its passengers would be hospitalized for 72 hours of monitoring, then would quarantine at home for 45 days.

After the passenger came down with symptoms, the prime minister said the five would be kept in the hospital “until further orders.”

Passengers and crew from the U.K. will be hospitalized for observation, British authorities said.

The acting director of the Centers for Disease Control, Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, said Americans would first be flown to the University of Nebraska, which has a federally funded quarantine facility, to assess whether they have been in close contact with any symptomatic people and their risk levels for spreading the virus.

After that, he told BLN’s “State of the Union,” they will be given the choice of staying in Nebraska or going home, where their conditions would be monitored by state and local health agencies.

He noted that seven Americans who left the cruise have been in the U.S. for roughly two weeks, and they are living across the country.

Australia is sending a plane, expected to arrive Monday, to evacuate its people and those from nearby countries, such as New Zealand, and unspecified Asian countries, said Spanish Health Minister Mónica García, who added that the evacuation flight was expected to be the last to leave Tenerife.

Norway sent an ambulance plane to the island with personnel trained to transport patients with high-risk infections, its Directorate for Civil Protection told public broadcaster NRK.

British medics parachute into remote territory

Elsewhere, British Army medics parachuted onto the remote South Atlantic territory of Tristan da Cunha, where one of the 221 residents has a suspected case of hantavirus.

The patient was a passenger on the MV Hondius and disembarked last month.

The U.K. Defense Ministry said a team of six paratroopers and two medical clinicians jumped Saturday from a Royal Air Force transport plane, which also dropped oxygen and medical equipment.

Tristan da Cunha is Britain’s most remote inhabited overseas territory, about 1,500 miles (2,400 kilometers) from the nearest inhabited island, St. Helena. The group of volcanic islands has no airstrip and is usually accessible only by a six-day boat voyage from Cape Town, South Africa.

Meanwhile, a Spanish woman in the southeastern province of Alicante suspected of being infected tested negative for hantavirus, Spanish health authorities said Saturday.

The woman was a passenger on the same flight as the Dutch woman who died in Johannesburg after traveling on the cruise ship.

May. 10, 2026, 9:15 AM EDT

ByHannah Holland

Netflix’s series adaptation of “Lord of the Flies,” which premiered this past week, begins with the character Piggy. He is lying on wet, soft earth, his glasses are askew and clouded. It’s shot from above with a fisheye lens, as if the viewer is leaning over him, hungry or paranoid, or both. The boy looks fragile, his cheeks are red — bloody or flushed with heat, we don’t yet know.

Then we meet the other boys, single-name references in their own right: Ralph, Jack, Simon, Roger.

Created by Jack Thorne, who also wrote and produced the 2025 award-winning series “Adolescence,” this mini series adaptation of “Lord of the Flies” stays close to author William Golding’s original source material.

The premise, for those few who may not remember from high school assigned reading: A plane carrying British schoolboys, from young children aged five or six to pre-teenagers, crash-lands on an uninhabited tropical island, with the boys as the only survivors. Without the moral and social guidance of adults, the boys are reduced to their worst impulses. They are careless and reckless, and then violent and cruel.

“Lord of the Flies” has remained an enduring classic because of its commentary on leadership, the fragility of society, and human nature. Thorne’s version is episodic, broken down into four parts, four perspectives, centering on our primary characters: Piggy (David McKenna), Jack (Lox Pratt), Simon (Ike Talbut), and Ralph (Winston Sawyers).

The boys, particularly the power-hungry and ruthless Jack, are afforded more dimension than in the original text. Jack is often portrayed, and therefore analyzed, in a single note: as a sociopathic villain. The show takes interest in the motivations behind his behavior and his relationships with the other boys.

It is impossible to encounter “Lord of the Flies” in 2026 and not consider the current conversations about masculinity and the crisis men and boys are facing: where so-called men’s rights activist lay regressive and violent blame on women and feminists for the lack of community, disenfranchisement, and the personal struggles of modern men. There’s a temptation to reduce the story, including Thorne’s adaptation, as an examination of a certain toxicity inherent in all men and boys.

But I think that misses an important point about this series, and about the reality of where so many young men find themselves today. Thorne told Esquire“I don’t think this is about boys in a state of nature. I don’t buy any of those sorts of arguments. […] It’s about a group of kids that come with a culture and a socialization that they then reenact on the island.”

I watched Thorne’s adaptation of “Lord of the Flies” as a nuanced yet universal story of the importance of vulnerability, the perils of social conditioning and the fragility of coming-of-age.

Thorne’s “Lord of the Flies” and “Adolescence” could almost be treated as companion pieces, equally emotionally demanding, equally painful to witness. Although both are works of fiction, “Lord of the Flies” exists in the grey, in the symbolic, where “Adolescence” exists in the black and white, taken straight from news headlines. They’re both devastating, but for different reasons: “Lord of the Flies” because it makes you wonder what others truly are capable of, “Adolescence” because it shows you exactly that.

Although the cultural markers of manhood have shifted since the 1950s, vulnerability has consistently been seen as antithetical to masculinity. Simon, almost Christ-like in his adherence to morality, collapses to the ground in the first few minutes of the first episode. Jack scoffs and proclaims him “the least capable.” Piggy, the arbiter of intelligence and practicality, is ridiculed for being overweight, bespectacled, and frequently coughing from asthma. As in the book, both boys are murdered.

Their deaths are meant to be outrageous and profoundly emotional. For much of the audience, they are. But in a world increasingly culturally and politically dominated by President Donald Trump, his cult of personality, and men like self-described “misogynist” Andrew Tatefringe streamer Sneako, and their hordes of manosphere imitators and followers, it isn’t hard to consider an audience who would sooner align themselves with a Jack or a sadist like Roger, than with a Piggy or a Simon.

At its core, “Lord of the Flies” is a compressed coming-of-age story, a rapid loss of innocence. Nick Cutter, author of “The Dorians” and a stirring modern adaptation of “Lord of the Flies” called “The Troop,” described this to me as “a crucible.”

“It is a time when you would consider [boys] to be generally innocent. The idea is, you put the [boys] in a crucible, that forces them to take on adult decisions at a point when they really shouldn’t have to.” Here, there is a failure of moral guidance, emotional permission, as well as safety.

I consider my own adolescence, my own coming-of-age experience as a heteronormative girl. No one ever asked me to cleave any parts of myself away to fit into the restrictive space of accepted womanhood. Even now, in my early 30s, I am allowed to express myself in ways that feel as intuitive today as they did at seven, at 13. I wonder if my brothers, my friends, and my husband, most of whom were raised in households as loving and as charmed as my own, were permitted the same. Were they allowed to hold on to skipping rocks and face paint and sleepover parties and glitter glue and asking their mothers for help?

An island is not required for these young men to find themselves in a place without empathy, vulnerability or kindness. It doesn’t take a crucible for young men to adopt violent and backward notions about women, about their own identity and self-worth, about what it means to be a man. All they need to do is scroll their TikTok feeds.

My best friend is pregnant with a boy, due in the middle of summer. We talk about who he will become all of the time: the curious toddler, the brave child, the fair-minded adult, the loyal friend, the loving dad. We talk about the person that she and her husband intend to raise him to be and how they will do that.

I suppose, if nothing else, Golding, Thorne and their pack of boys are a reminder of the importance of providing moral guidance, nurturing empathy and a willingness to speak up. We must demand men stand up to other men, boys to other boys. We must demand men and boys take an active part in stopping the systemic violence against women and girls.  Pollyannaish? Maybe. For now, though, these lessons, the work of parents, and community and peers, are our best antidote for the worst-case scenarios that Thorne explores in his work.

I think, when you finish the series or close your worn copy of “Lord of the Flies,” you’re left with two fundamental questions: Would you rather raise a Simon, a Jack, a Piggy or a Ralph? And does your answer scare you?