The Headlines - What to Know About the Chaos in South Korea, and a Major Trans Rights Case

Episode Date: December 4, 2024

Plus, how money to protect pandas is really spent.   Tune in every weekday morning. To get our full audio journalism and storytelling experience, download the New York Times Audio app — available to Times news subscribers on iOS — and sign up for our weekly newsletter.Tell us what you think at: [e-mail]. On Today’s Episode:South Korea’s President Faces Impeachment Motion, by John Yoon, Victoria Kim, Minho Kim and Choe Sang-HunFor Families of Transgender Children, Tennessee’s Ban Forces Hard Choices, by Emily CochraneCalifornia Democrat Flips Seat in the Last House Race to Be Called, by Jill CowanTrump’s Pick to Lead D.E.A. Withdraws, Citing ‘Gravity’ of Job, by Alan FeuerTrump Team Signs Agreement to Allow F.B.I. Background Checks for Nominees, by Maggie Haberman, Charlie Savage and Jonathan SwanU.S. Zoos Gave a Fortune to Protect Pandas. That’s Not How China Spent It, by Mara Hvistendahl

From the New York Times, it's the headlines. I'm Tracy Mumford. Today is Wednesday, December 4th. Here's what we're covering. I'm Douglas Shoresman and I lead coverage of Asia for the New York Times. I'm based in our newsroom in Seoul, South Korea. And yesterday seemed to be a pretty calm day and pretty quiet, and then it really was not.

Around 10.30 p.m., all of a sudden, out of nowhere, the president, Yoon Seok-yul, was suddenly on national television declaring a state of martial law. And this wasn't aimed at a foreign power. It was aimed at his own political opponents at home in a very chilling way. In a shocking announcement, the highly unpopular president of South Korea, Yoon Suk-yul, accused his opponents of trying to overthrow the country's democracy, and he appointed an army general who banned protests and declared that he would take control of the media. overthrow the country's democracy, and he appointed an army general who banned protests and declared that he would take control of the media.

The timing of the decision has struck most as being impulsive and probably not fully baked before he made his move. My colleague, Choe Sung-hun, has talked to people who know President Yun and have been with him recently. And they describe him as a man who is becoming despondent as he grew more politically isolated in recent weeks. Demonstrations calling for his impeachment had been growing day by day. Scandals were piling up on him and his wife. Suddenly he steps to the mic and shocks nearly everyone.

The last time martial law was declared here was 1980. That was while the military was still ruling. It scarred a generation that is still very politically active now and suddenly for them it all seemed to be playing out again. Doug says that after the president's announcement came down it became a race to reach Seoul's National Assembly. Troops headed there, some by helicopter, and so did thousands of protesters, defying the army. Lawmakers, including some from Yoon's own party, rushed toward the building to try and overturn the martial law decree.

All they needed was a majority to do it, but they needed a quorum inside the National Assembly. The police were there trying to hold off protesters, but some lawmakers actually climbed barricades so they could get inside. And in the end, the soldiers didn't make it there until it was too late. The vote had happened before they could force their way all the way in.

And Yoon, he saw it was going against him. He called off the troops. He rescinded the martial law declaration. And now the assembly has already moved to impeach him. That process is underway. In the end, martial law only lasted for six hours, but it has tipped South Korea on its head. Protesters from around the country

have gathered in central Seoul to call on Yoon to resign. The official vote on whether to impeach him could come as soon as tomorrow. This morning, the Supreme Court will hear arguments over a Tennessee law that bans medical treatments for transgender youth. It's the first time the justices are considering the constitutionality of this kind of law, and it comes as Republican-led state legislatures across the country have pushed to limit transgender rights.

The Tennessee law in question prohibits several types of medical care for transgender minors, puberty blockers, hormone therapy, and gender transition surgeries. Supporters of the law say they're trying to protect minors from making choices they may not be able to fully grasp. But many American medical groups have endorsed youth gender treatments as evidence-based and necessary. The case reached the Supreme Court after three families and a doctor challenged Tennessee's ban, saying it discriminates against transgender people

based on sex. The justices ruling in the case, which isn't expected until June, could affect not only Tennessee, but about two dozen other states with similar bans. I've been speaking to families, parents, transgender children, and transgender adults over the last couple weeks. Many of the families wouldn't speak unless they were given some form of anonymity because some of the families have been called child abusers or groomers for trying to understand or seek out this care for their child. Others have received death threats and harassment. My colleague Emily Cochran has been reporting on how the law, which kicked in last year, has affected families with transgender children in Tennessee.

Some families decided they needed to leave right away as a way of ensuring that they could continue to get care for their child or even have the option of considering care for their child. There are some families who have chosen to stay. They feel that if they use airplane miles or maybe trim the Christmas budget a little bit, they can cover the expenses of going to a state where it is still possible to receive gender-affirming care for minors. One family told me they waited months just to get appointments in Ohio, and then that state passed a similar ban to the one in Tennessee, forcing them to move their care a second time, this time

to the East Coast. And with the Supreme Court hearing today, I think a lot of these families are worried that a ruling upholding the ban could further embolden state legislatures and the incoming Trump administration to pass even tougher laws aimed at transgender people and where they're getting care. In political news this morning, the last House race of the 2024 election has now been called. Democrat Adam Gray beat out a Republican incumbent in California's Central Valley by just 187 votes. With that seat flipped for Democrats, the final count in the House starting next year

will be 215 Democrats to 220 Republicans. Looking at Donald Trump's picks for his administration, his choice to lead the DEA, the Drug Enforcement Administration, has withdrawn his name from consideration only three days after getting picked. Chad Chronister, a county sheriff in Florida, had come under attack from some of Trump's own supporters for his vigorous enforcement of COVID-19 rules during the pandemic. And DEA agents have been circulating a video of Chronister's son rapping about a stabbing that he served prison time for.

In a statement, Chronister said he changed his mind about accepting the nomination after, quote, the gravity of this very important responsibility set in. Also yesterday, Trump's transition team announced that it had belatedly signed an agreement to allow the FBI to conduct background checks on Trump's picks for senior rules in his administration. They'd previously floated bypassing the FBI altogether and doing background checks through private investigators instead.

Still, the FBI background checks that they've agreed to are voluntary, so Trump's picks will get to choose if they want to go through one. It will likely be up to the Republican majority in the Senate to decide if they'll insist on seeing completed background checks before they vote to confirm a nominee. And finally, for decades, one of the most popular attractions at American zoos has been the pandas. They're objectively the country's cutest diplomats, and they're officially now on

U.S. soil. Three-year-old Bao Li walking into his new home for the first time. Qing Bao also three years old in her new pool with a big yawn after her long journey from China. The zoos get pandas from China through what's billed as a conservation program. Zoos pay millions of dollars for the opportunity to host the charming mammals. And that money is specifically designated for conservation efforts in China. The U.S. has a federal law requiring that. But the Times has discovered that is not what's happening.

What I found shocking was how often the money was spent on things that really had very little connection to conservation in the wild. My colleague Mara Vistendahl tracked the money and how it's been spent. Money was going to things like apartment buildings and museums and office supplies, computers, fax machines, copy machines, and also infrastructure, roads, bridges. Some of these were on reserves, but a lot of them were nowhere near nature reserves. In total, Mara reviewed over 10,000 pages of records, including documents American zoos submitted to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, which is responsible for regulating panda

exchanges. You know, from looking through these, it became clear that even as zoo administrators had no idea where the money was going, they were keen on keeping the pandas. You know, pandas. You know, pandas really put zoos on the map. They bring them a lot of prestige. And the regulators did make some effort to check where funding went. But ultimately, they kind of gave up.

And, you know, in talks in China, they agreed to weaken their oversight. This is an issue that's come up with other species, with tigers and elephants, where animal rights groups allege that the US Fish and Wildlife Service does not do enough to check that conservation money is going where it's supposed to. But pandas are supposed to be kind of the flagship conservation program.

And yet, we found the regulators passed the buck. Those are the headlines. Today on The Daily, how the team that Trump has handpicked to slash government spending, Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy actually plan to do it. That's next in the New York Times audio app, or you can listen wherever you get your podcasts. I'm Tracy Mumford. The headlines will be back tomorrow with my colleague,

Amelia Nurenberg.