That may prove to be the understatement of the summer. For clues as to why, just take a glance at what the Home Office's own lawyer told the court on Tuesday. Granting the injunction "runs the risk of acting as an impetus for further violent protests", the barrister said - pointing out that similar legal claims by other councils would "aggravate pressures on the asylum estate". Right on cue and just hours after the ruling came in, Broxbourne Council - over the border in Hertfordshire - posted online that it was urgently seeking legal advice with a view to taking similar court action. The risks here are clear. Recent figures show just over 30,000 asylum seekers being housed in hotels across the country. If they start to empty out following a string of court claims, the Home Office will struggle to find alternative options. After all, they are only in hotels because of a lack of other types of accommodation. There are several caveats though. This is just an interim injunction that will be heard in full in the autumn. So the court could swing back in favour of the hotel chain - and by extension the Home Office. Read more:Who says what on asylum hotels? We have been here before Remember, this isn't the first legal claim of this kind. Other councils have tried to leverage the power of the courts to shut down asylum hotels, with varying degrees of success. In 2022, Ipswich Borough Council failed to get an extension to an interim injunction to prevent migrants being sent to a Novotel in the town. As in Epping, lawyers argued there had been a change in use under planning rules. But the judge eventually decided that the legal duty the Home Office has to provide accommodation for asylum seekers was more important. So there may not be a direct read across from this case to other councils. Home Office officials are emphasising this injunction was won on the grounds of planning laws rather than national issues such as public order, and as such, each case will be different. Failing Labour approach or Tory tricks? But government sources also smell dirty tricks from Epping Council and are suggesting that the Tory-led local authority made the legal claim for political reasons. Pointing to the presence of several prominent Tory MPs in the Essex area - as well as the threat posed by Reform in the county - the question being posed is why this legal challenge was not brought when asylum seekers first started being sent to the hotel in 2020 during the Conservatives' time in government. Epping Council would no doubt reject that and say recent disorder prompted them to act. But that won't stop the Tories and Reform of seizing on this as evidence of a failing approach from Labour. So there are political risks for the government, yes, but it's the practicalities that could flow from this ruling that pose the bigger danger.

In a post on X in the early hours of Tuesday, Ms Gabbard said the UK had withdrawn its demand to access global Apple users' data if required. She wrote: "The UK has agreed to drop its mandate for Apple to provide a 'back door' that would have enabled access to the protected encrypted data of American citizens and encroached on our civil liberties." The US spy chief said it was the result of months of working closely with partners in the UK, US President Donald Trump and vice president JD Vance. In February, there were reports the government had ordered Apple to create a way for UK security services to access its encrypted user data. Such orders, called Technical Capability Notices (TCN), are not public and legally, neither of the parties can publicly confirm their existence. Apple soon withdrew its "advanced data protection" feature for UK users, which offered end-to-end encryption for cloud data storage, meaning only the account holder could see any stored data. Apple has not responded to a Sky News request for comment on Ms Gabbard's post. A UK government spokesperson told Sky News it does not comment on operational matters. They did say, however, that it had long had "joint security and intelligence arrangements with the US to tackle the most serious threats such as terrorism and child sexual abuse, including the role played by fast-moving technology in enabling those threats". "Those arrangements have long contained safeguards to protect privacy and sovereignty: for example, the Data Access Agreement includes critical safeguards to prevent the UK and US from targeting the data of each other's citizens," they said. "We will continue to build on those arrangements and we will also continue to maintain a strong security framework to ensure that we can continue to pursue terrorists and serious criminals operating in the UK. We will always take all actions necessary at the domestic level to keep UK citizens safe," they added. When Apple withdrew its advanced data protection in February, a spokesperson said it had "withdrawn the feature given the continuing rise of data breaches and other threats to customer privacy". The US government soon stepped in, with Ms Gabbard saying she had "grave concerns" about the UK or any other country "requiring Apple or any company to create a 'backdoor' that would allow access to Americans' personal encrypted data". She added: "This would be a clear and egregious violation of Americans' privacy and civil liberties, and open up a serious vulnerability for cyber exploitation by adversarial actors." She asked the CIA, NSA and multiple other US intelligence agencies to examine the reported TCN. Read more from technology:Backlash against new online safety rulesMusk's X wants 'significant' changes to OSA On Tuesday, civil rights groups cautiously welcomed Ms Gabbard's post. "If true, this decision is hugely welcome," said Sam Grant, director of external relations at human rights organisation Liberty, who are challenging the government's use of the TCN in court. "Creating any back door into our private data would be a reckless and potentially unlawful move from the government. "As long as this power exists within the Investigatory Powers Act, it remains a risk that any future government might also try to use it to create a back door into other end-to-end encrypted services we all use. "The safest thing for the UK Government to do is repeal this law, and commit to safeguarding our privacy by protecting end-to-end encryption." Open Rights Group executive director Jim Killock said: "While the UK may have dropped its demands for Apple to backdoor all of its users across the globe, UK users may still be banned from benefiting from ADP encryption. "And if Apple does restore ADP to UK users, there will be serious questions of trust. "The UK's powers to attack encryption are still on the law books, and pose a serious risk to user security and protection against criminal abuse of our data."

The leaders and senior politicians from parties in Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales said they are "united in our deep concern and opposition to your government's ongoing support for the actions of the Israeli government in Gaza". In a letter sent to Sir Keir on Monday, they urged him to recall parliament so MPs could vote to impose "immediate sanctions" on Israel and to "immediately end all arms sales" to the country. Politics latest: Stephen Kinnock's message to dad over wealth tax demands Claire Hanna, SDLP leader, Sinn Fein's vice president Michelle O'Neill, Stephen Flynn, the SNP's Westminster leader and Rhun ap Iorwerth, Plaid Cymru's leader in Wales, are among the politicians to have signed the letter, in an unusual joint agreement. They also called on the PM to support a ceasefire and "meaningful diplomatic intervention" to protect civilians and secure a just, lasting peace, and to back an independent, international investigation into alleged war crimes, genocide and crimes against humanity in Gaza. The group of leaders urged him to use the UK's diplomatic influence to press for the "unimpeded" delivery of food, water, medicine and humanitarian aid to the people of Gaza. They called Hamas' killing of about 1,200 people in Israel and taking more than 250 hostages on 7 October 2023 "indefensible" and said they support all "legitimate diplomatic" efforts to secure their safe and unconditional return. However, they criticised Sir Keir for saying his government will recognise Palestine as a state in September, unless Israel takes "substantive steps to end the appalling situation in Gaza". "Given the urgency of the crisis, this is far too late," they wrote. "Every day of delay means more children starve, more families are torn apart, and more lives are lost. "You must act now. The UK cannot be complicit in prolonging this tragedy." A spokesperson for the Foreign Office said: "Since day one, this Government has been clear that we need to see an immediate ceasefire, the release of all hostages cruelly detained by Hamas, better protection of civilians, significantly more aid consistently entering Gaza, and a path to long-term peace and stability. "We are working with partners to ensure there is a framework in place for what comes next in Gaza, and to turn a ceasefire into lasting security and peace for both Palestinians and Israelis. "The framework is centred on creating the conditions for a lasting peace in Gaza, as the basis for a wider process to find a long-term political solution in the Middle East." The group of leaders said as a signatory to the Genocide Convention, the UK has a binding obligation to prevent acts that may amount to genocide and ensure accountability. They warned that continued "political, diplomatic and military support" to a government accused of committing such acts risks placing the UK in breach of its international legal duties. The politicians "unequivocally" condemned the recent killing of Al Jazeera journalists in Gaza. They also criticised the government's attempts to "restrict, criminalise or delegitimise" peaceful protest against government policy in Gaza, after hundreds of people supporting the recently proscribed group Palestine Action were arrested earlier in August. Other signatories of the letter are: Matthew O'Toole, SDLP opposition leader in the NI AssemblyNaomi Long, Northern Ireland's Alliance Party leaderGerry Carroll, Northern Ireland's People Before Profit party leaderStuart McMillan, convener of the Holyrood SNP GroupLorna Slater, co-leader of the Scottish GreensAlistair Carmichael, Scottish Lib DemsChristine Jardine, Scottish Lib Dems

The Molly Rose Foundation - set up by Ian Russell after his 14-year-old daughter took her own life after viewing harmful content on social media - commissioned analysis of hundreds of posts on the platforms, using accounts of a 15-year-old girl based in the UK. Politics Hub: Follow latest updates The charity claimed videos recommended by algorithms on the For You pages continued to feature a "tsunami" of clips containing "suicide, self-harm and intense depression" to under-16s who have previously engaged with similar material. One in 10 of the harmful posts had been liked at least a million times. The average number of likes was 226,000, the researchers said. Mr Russell told Sky News the results were "horrifying" and showed online safety laws are not fit for purpose. 'This is happening on PM's watch' He said: "It is staggering that eight years after Molly's death, incredibly harmful suicide, self-harm, and depression content like she saw is still pervasive across social media. "Ofcom's recent child safety codes do not match the sheer scale of harm being suggested to vulnerable users and ultimately do little to prevent more deaths like Molly's. "The situation has got worse rather than better, despite the actions of governments and regulators and people like me. The report shows that if you strayed into the rabbit hole of harmful suicide self-injury content, it's almost inescapable. "For over a year, this entirely preventable harm has been happening on the prime minister's watch and where Ofcom have been timid it is time for him to be strong and bring forward strengthened, life-saving legislation without delay." After Molly's death in 2017, a coroner ruled she had been suffering from depression, and the material she had viewed online contributed to her death "in a more than minimal way". Researchers at Bright Data looked at 300 Instagram Reels and 242 TikToks to determine if they "promoted and glorified suicide and self-harm", referenced ideation or methods, or "themes of intense hopelessness, misery, and despair". They were gathered between November 2024 and March 2025, before new children's codes for tech companies under the Online Safety Act came into force in July. Instagram The Molly Rose Foundation claimed Instagram "continues to algorithmically recommend appallingly high volumes of harmful material". The researchers said 97% of the videos recommended on Instagram Reels for the account of a teenage girl, who had previously looked at this content, were judged to be harmful. Some 44% actively referenced suicide and self-harm, they said. They also claimed harmful content was sent in emails containing recommended content for users. A spokesperson for Meta, which owns Instagram, said: "We disagree with the assertions of this report and the limited methodology behind it. "Tens of millions of teens are now in Instagram Teen Accounts, which offer built-in protections that limit who can contact them, the content they see, and the time they spend on Instagram. "We continue to use automated technology to remove content encouraging suicide and self-injury, with 99% proactively actioned before being reported to us. We developed Teen Accounts to help protect teens online and continue to work tirelessly to do just that." TikTok TikTok was accused of recommending "an almost uninterrupted supply of harmful material", with 96% of the videos judged to be harmful, the report said. Over half (55%) of the For You posts were found to be suicide and self-harm related; a single search yielding posts promoting suicide behaviours, dangerous stunts and challenges, it was claimed. The number of problematic hashtags had increased since 2023; with many shared on highly-followed accounts which compiled 'playlists' of harmful content, the report alleged. A TikTok spokesperson said: "Teen accounts on TikTok have 50+ features and settings designed to help them safely express themselves, discover and learn, and parents can further customise 20+ content and privacy settings through Family Pairing. "With over 99% of violative content proactively removed by TikTok, the findings don't reflect the real experience of people on our platform which the report admits." According to TikTok, they not do not allow content showing or promoting suicide and self-harm, and say that banned hashtags lead users to support helplines. Read more:Backlash against new online safety rulesMusk's X wants 'significant' changes to OSA 'A brutal reality' Both platforms allow young users to provide negative feedback on harmful content recommended to them. But the researchers found they can also provide positive feedback on this content and be sent it for the next 30 days. Technology Secretary Peter Kyle said: "These figures show a brutal reality - for far too long, tech companies have stood by as the internet fed vile content to children, devastating young lives and even tearing some families to pieces. "But companies can no longer pretend not to see. The Online Safety Act, which came into effect earlier this year, requires platforms to protect all users from illegal content and children from the most harmful content, like promoting or encouraging suicide and self-harm. 45 sites are already under investigation." An Ofcom spokesperson said: "Since this research was carried out, our new measures to protect children online have come into force. "These will make a meaningful difference to children - helping to prevent exposure to the most harmful content, including suicide and self-harm material. And for the first time, services will be required by law to tame toxic algorithms. "Tech firms that don't comply with the protection measures set out in our codes can expect enforcement action." 'A snapshot of rock bottom' A separate report out today from the Children's Commissioner found the proportion of children who have seen pornography online has risen in the past two years - also driven by algorithms. Rachel de Souza described the content young people are seeing as "violent, extreme and degrading", and often illegal, and said her office's findings must be seen as a "snapshot of what rock bottom looks like". More than half (58%) of respondents to the survey said that, as children, they had seen pornography involving strangulation, while 44% reported seeing a depiction of rape - specifically someone who was asleep. The survey of 1,020 people aged between 16 and 21 found that they were on average aged 13 when they first saw pornography. More than a quarter (27%) said they were 11, and some reported being six or younger. Anyone feeling emotionally distressed or suicidal can call Samaritans for help on 116 123 or email jo@samaritans.org in the UK. In the US, call the Samaritans branch in your area or 1 (800) 273-TALK.

In the aftermath of the Alaska meeting, the US president's deal-making skills came under question when he seemingly walked away empty-handed. But it was clear he had retained his ability to catch everyone off guard, as a meeting between him and President Volodymyr Zelenskyy unexpectedly became a last-minute White House peace summit. The invitation to European leaders drifted out, and within hours, the cast list had grown to include six more, as world leaders dropped everything to fit in with Mr Trump's unpredictable timetable. There were signs of disorganisation behind the scenes. When the British Prime Minister's spokesman was asked who the invite had come from - the White House or the Ukrainian president - they replied: "A bit of both." Read more:The land Ukraine could be told to give upKey takeaways from Alaska summit Meanwhile, the meeting of the coalition of the willing - a Starmer and Macron-led group of Ukraine's European allies - had a nervous feel to it as members resolved to stand firm with Ukraine - even if it puts them at odds with the US. At times, it sounded like they were trying to convince themselves they could do it. And as all of this frantic diplomatic reaction played out, the man in the middle of it all headed to the golf course - calm at the centre of the diplomatic storm he created as his allies swirl around him.