Connect with us

CBS News

Champagne found on 19th-century shipwreck off Sweden is declared off limits

Avatar

Published

on


What technology could change the way we learn about shipwrecks


What technology could change the way we learn about shipwrecks

05:06

No one will be allowed to fish out any of the nearly 100 bottles of 19th-century Champagne and mineral water nestled in a shipwreck off southern Sweden without proper authorization, officials said Wednesday.

Though the wreck’s location has been known since 2016 and is registered in Sweden’s National Antiquities Office’s cultural environment, it was only on July 11 that Polish scuba divers found the precious cargo.

The wreck, which sits at about 190 feet deep off the coast of the southern Sweden county of Blekinge, was found by the divers while they were checking spots of interest about 20 nautical miles south of the Swedish Baltic Sea island of Oeland.

399-1713.jpg
Bottles of centuries-old champagne on a shipwreck in the depths of the Baltic Sea

Tomasz Stachura


“I’ve been a diver for 40 years. From time to time, you see one or two bottles,” Tomasz Stachura, who leads the team, told CBS News’ partner network BBC News. “But I’ve never seen crates with bottles of alcohol and baskets of water like this.”

Wine and water experts have quickly contacted the divers and been vying to carry out laboratory tests on the contents of the bottles, according to Stachura. However, Swedish authorities have put their foot down and labeled the sunken ship “an ancient relic” which the county says requires “a clear and strong protection” to remain intact.

“You must not damage the ancient remains, which also includes taking items from the wreck, e.g. champagne bottles, without permission from the county,” Magnus Johansson, a county official told The Associated Press. “The champagne bottles are a fantastically well-preserved find that gives us a snapshot of shipping and life on board at the end of the 19th century,” he added.

Had the wreck been from before 1850, it would automatically have been listed as an ancient relic, local authorities said.

“But we have established that the cultural and historical values of the wreck were so high that it should be declared as an ancient relic,” Daniel Tedenlind, a county official in neighboring Kalmar.

Stachura, the diver, earlier said it was believed that the cargo could have been on the way to the royal table in Stockholm or the Russian tsar’s residence in St. Petersburg when the ship sank sometime in the second half of the 19th century.

Champagne has been discovered on historic shipwrecks before.

In 2011, a bottle of nearly 200-year-old champagne found in a shipwreck at the bottom of the Baltic Sea sold for 30,000 euros at an auction in Finland, the BBC reported. The year before, diving instructor Christian Ekstrom and his team discovered 30 or so bottles of bubbly on a sunken ship near the Aland Islands. Ekstrom said the bottles, found at a depth of 200 feet, were believed to be from the 1780s and likely were part of a cargo destined for Russia.



Read the original article

Leave your vote

CBS News

Biden’s immigration spouse program struck down

Avatar

Published

on


Biden’s immigration spouse program struck down – CBS News


Watch CBS News



A federal judge ruled President Biden’s program to provide unauthorized immigrants married to American citizens legal status and a path to U.S. citizenship is illegal. CBS News chief White House correspondent Nancy Cordes breaks down what’s next for the initiative.

Be the first to know

Get browser notifications for breaking news, live events, and exclusive reporting.




Read the original article

Leave your vote

Continue Reading

CBS News

Massive fires in both U.S coasts force evacuations, destroy homes

Avatar

Published

on


Massive fires in both U.S coasts force evacuations, destroy homes – CBS News


Watch CBS News



Brush fires in New Jersey’s Palisades area spread smoke across the Hudson River. CBS News New York’s Christine Sloan has the latest. In the West, California’s Mountain Fire is still roaring after weather conditions contributed to its growth. CBS News Los Angeles’ Kara Finnstrom reports. Also, CBS News Bay Area’s Jessica Burch has the latest weather forecast.

Be the first to know

Get browser notifications for breaking news, live events, and exclusive reporting.




Read the original article

Leave your vote

Continue Reading

CBS News

Despite pressure on Sotomayor, Supreme Court unlikely to change before Trump takes office. Here’s why.

Avatar

Published

on


Washington — President-elect Donald Trump’s victory Tuesday has stirred up whispers about whether Justice Sonia Sotomayor should step down from the Supreme Court to allow President Biden to nominate a successor before Republicans take control of Washington.

But any changes in the composition of the nation’s highest court are unlikely in the coming months, even as lawmakers return for a lame-duck session to finish their business before Trump is sworn in for a second term and the GOP assumes the Senate majority.

Sotomayor hasn’t responded publicly to the chatter about a retirement, and she did not return a request for comment about her future. She remains an active questioner during oral arguments and has become known for biting dissents in hotly contested cases. 

At 70, she is not the oldest member of the Supreme Court — Justice Clarence Thomas is 76 and Justice Samuel Alito is 74 — and she is newly into her tenure as the senior-most member of its liberal wing, a position she assumed following the retirement of Justice Stephen Breyer in 2022.

Sotomayor, the first Hispanic justice, is also a decade younger than Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg was when she faced pressure to step down from the Supreme Court in 2013 and 2014.

Ginsburg, who was treated for early-stage colon cancer in 1999 and pancreatic cancer in 2009, rejected any suggestion that she retire to allow then-President Barack Obama to name a successor while Democrats had control of the Senate. She remained on the Supreme Court until her death in September 2020, after which Trump, nearing the end of his first term, selected Justice Amy Coney Barrett to fill her seat. Barrett’s confirmation by the GOP-led Senate widened the Supreme Court’s conservative majority to 6-3.

With a second term for Trump on the horizon, and Democrats losing control of the Senate come January, when Republicans will hold at least 52 seats, progressives are fearful of a repeat of what happened with Ginsburg’s seat.

“We have no idea how long it will be until somebody who shares Justice Sotomayor’s jurisprudence, her values will be in a position to be nominated again,” Molly Coleman, executive director of the People’s Parity Project, a progressive judicial group, told CBS News. “Of course we all want to hope for the best, but unfortunately we’ve been left in a position where that’s all we can do.”

The circumstances of more than a decade ago are different from today, making it far from a sure thing that even if Sotomayor were to retire, the Senate would confirm her replacement before the GOP takes over. For one, Democrats currently have a narrow 51-49 majority, which includes the four independent senators who vote with the party. 

One of those senators, Joe Manchin of West Virginia, told Politico in March that he would not support nominees who do not have GOP support.

“Just one Republican. That’s all I’m asking for. Give me something bipartisan. This is my own little filibuster. If they can’t get one Republican, I vote for none. I’ve told [Democrats] that. I said, ‘I’m sick and tired of it, I can’t take it anymore,'” Manchin, who is retiring from the Senate, said.

He later appeared to slightly reverse course, voting in September to advance the nomination of a candidate for a federal appeals court. A spokesperson for the senator told Axios at the time that Manchin learned opposition to the nominee was based on how the White House handled the process, not qualifications.

Erwin Chemerinsky, the dean of the University of California Berkeley Law School, said there is not enough time for a successor to be nominated and confirmed by the Senate by early January. Incoming House and Senate members will be sworn in on Jan. 3, and the results of the election will be reaffirmed by Congress on Jan. 6.

“Joe Manchin made clear he would not vote for any nominee without Republican support and no Republican would vote for a Biden nominee to replace Sotomayor. Sotomayor retiring now would likely just give Trump a vacancy to fill. It is totally different from whether Ginsburg should have retired in summer 2014 before the election,” he told CBS News in an email.

Chemerinsky wrote in September 2014 that Ginsburg should have retired that summer and warned her decision not to “could end up hurting her legal legacy.” Democrats had control of the Senate at that time, but lost it following the November 2014 midterm elections.

Even some progressive groups that called for open discussions about Sotomayor’s future on the court months ago are recognizing that the window has closed.

“The reality is it’s too late. It’s too late for Democrats to be having this conversation. It’s too late to be launching a pressure campaign. The ship has sailed,” Coleman, of the People’s Parity Project said. 

She said discussions should have happened earlier this year and warned the consequences of waiting may be “catastrophic.”

Instead, liberal judicial advocacy groups are turning their focus to the confirming Mr. Biden’s remaining nominees to the federal district and appeals courts. There are currently 47 open seats on the federal bench, and 17 nominees are awaiting Senate action. There will be another 20 vacancies in the coming weeks, and 11 nominees are pending for those seats.

“Hand wringing about the unknown doesn’t help anyone right now,” said Maggie Jo Buchanan, managing director of the judicial group Demand Justice. “Right now, we are firmly focused on the fact that there are still 30 pending Biden nominees before the Senate that deserve, and need, confirmation. The Senate should be focused on working late, working weekends to get these talented individuals on the bench.”

Trump saw immense success with judicial confirmations during his first term, appointing 234 jurists to the Supreme Court, federal courts of appeals, district courts and U.S. Court of International Trade. But Mr. Biden is closing in on that number, with 213 appointments so far.



Read the original article

Leave your vote

Continue Reading

Copyright © 2024 Breaking MN

Log In

Forgot password?

Forgot password?

Enter your account data and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Your password reset link appears to be invalid or expired.

Log in

Privacy Policy

Add to Collection

No Collections

Here you'll find all collections you've created before.