Dutch far-right populist Geert Wilders, who has vowed to stop all immigration to the Netherlands, was heading for a landslide victory in parliamentary elections on Wednesday, in one of the biggest political upsets in Dutch politics since the second world war. A win by Mr Wilders, sometimes dubbed the Dutch Donald Trump and who has previously urged his country to leave the EU, would send shockwaves through Europe. The result puts the anti-Islam politician in line to lead talks to form a new ruling coalition and possibly become the country’s prime minister at a time of political upheaval through much of Europe. As voting closed, the Ipsos poll put his Freedom party (PVV) at 35 out of 150 seats, nine seats ahead of the closest rival, Frans Timmermans’ Labour/Green Left combination, and more than double the 17 seats he won at the last election. The party of outgoing prime minister Mark Rutte, the conservative VVD, was in third place at 23 seats, the exit poll showed. Political parties from the left to the far-right PVV are competing to secure a leading position in the Dutch parliament. Immigration – the issue that triggered the collapse of Mr Rutte’s cabinet after 13 years in power – has been a key issue in the campaign. Mr Rutte was the country’s longest-serving prime minister, but has faced a decline in his popularity. Mr Wilders’ election programme calls for a referendum on the Netherlands leaving the European Union, a total halt to accepting asylum-seekers and migrant pushbacks at the Dutch borders. The populist with dyed blonde hair said in a television debate during the election campaign: “It’s been enough now. The Netherlands can’t take it any more. We have to think about our own people first now. Borders closed. Zero asylum seekers.” A self-proclaimed fan of Hungary’s far-right Victor Orban, Mr Wilders is also explicitly anti-EU, urging the Netherlands to significantly reduce its payments to the bloc, and to stop the entry of any new members. He has also repeatedly said the country should stop providing arms to Ukraine, saying it needs the weapons to be able to defend itself. However, none of the parties he could potentially form a government with shares these ideas. In 2016, he said he wanted to ban all Islamic symbols, mosques and the Quran, although in this election campaign he has been seeking to soften his image in the hope of entering government, which some voters said they liked. He said recently that opposing Islam remained at his party’s core but concerns over the cost of living, improving care for the elderly and limiting immigration were what he focused on now. His enduring popularity since he created PVV in 2006 has pushed ruling parties over the years to give the Netherlands one of Europe’s toughest immigration policies. Abroad, his comments about the prophet Mohammed and calls for the Quran to be banned led to sometimes violent protests in countries including Pakistan, Indonesia and Egypt. He was convicted of discrimination after insulting Moroccans at a campaign rally in 2014. Death threats against him mean he has lived under heavy police protection for years. Read More The top contenders to lead the Netherlands, from a former refugee to an anti-Islam populist An election to replace the longest-serving leader of the Netherlands gives voters a clean slate Netherlands election: Polls open in neck-and-neck race to decide next Dutch leader Dutch political leaders campaign on final day before general election that will usher in new leader Potential kingmaker in Dutch coalition talks comes out against anti-Islam firebrand Wilders Dutch election candidates make migration a key campaign issue in the crowded Netherlands

The British government has invited Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman to London with the visit expected to

Ukraine has claimed to have broken through the first line of Russia’s defences in several locations and made gains in the Zaporizhzhia region. “There is an offensive in several directions and in certain areas. And in some places, in certain areas, this first line was broken through,” Hanna Maliar, deputy defence minister, told local TV last night. Her comments were backed up the United States, which said on Friday that Kyiv had made notable progress on the southern front in the last 72 hours. Earlier the Russian defence ministry claimed that its forces have destroyed three unmanned boats “being used in an attempt to target the Crimea Bridge”. The ministry alleged Ukraine was behind the attack, the Kyiv Independent reported. Read More Putin’s forces pushed back in southern Ukraine – as Zelensky claims new long-range weapon The ‘Vampire’ rocket system helping Ukraine shoot down Russia’s kamikaze drones Ukraine pilot films moment drone flies into Russian truck

North Carolina's Republican-controlled legislature has advanced a bill that would ban certain gender-affirming care for minors to the governor's desk.

Tens of thousands of Hollywood actors on Wednesday anxiously awaited their union's decision on whether to strike, as last-ditch talks with the likes of Disney and Netflix appeared to sour...

By Daphne Psaledakis and Simon Lewis WASHINGTON Soldiers in Niger declared a military coup on Wednesday, overthrowing President

In a national first, New York City will implement a minimum pay rate for app-based food delivery workers

Victor Wembanyama made the tying basket with 20 seconds left in regulation, the opening basket in overtime and finished with 21 points and 12 rebounds in his first NBA victory, helping the San Antonio Spurs beat the Houston Rockets 126-122

The body of one of three men who had been missing after the partial collapse of an apartment building in Davenport, Iowa, has been found

Yelena Milashina had received threats from Chechnya's leader before, but went to hear a court verdict.

The boyfriend of a Navajo woman whose case was emblematic of a movement launched to draw attention to an epidemic of missing and slain Indigenous women was convicted of first-degree murder in her fatal shooting

A Christian website designer in Colorado did not want to provide her services to same-sex couples, potentially running afoul of state law that prohibits public-facing businesses from discriminating against LGBT+ people. The designer didn’t have any same-sex clients. She didn’t receive any requests from gay couples to work on their wedding websites. But in her legal challenge, supported by an influential right-wing legal group that backed a lawsuit ending Roe v Wade, she argued that Colorado’s law infringed on her First Amendment rights. In its final day of its current term, the US Supreme Court’s conservative supermajority agreed, potentially endangering already vulnerable rights of LGBT+ Americans and state governments’ abilities to protect them. But a crucial piece of evidence in the case appears to have been fabricated. A man who is named throughout the case, and whose phone number and email address were attached in court filings, claims he has nothing to do with it. In 2016, Lorie Smith claimed in filings that a man named “Stewart” contacted her website to help with his upcoming wedding to a person named “Mike”: “We are getting married early next year and would love some design work done for our invites, placenames etc. We might also stretch to a website.” The New Republic found “Stewart”. He said he is straight, married to a woman, and never contacted Ms Smith. His alleged request for services came within 24 hours after Ms Smith first filed her lawsuit in state court. “If somebody’s pulled my information, as some kind of supporting information or documentation, somebody’s falsified that,” he explained to The New Republic. “I’m married, I have a child – I’m not really sure where that came from? But somebody’s using false information in a Supreme Court filing document.” It remains unclear, even after the Supreme Court’s decision, how and why he is involved. In a statement to The Independent, attorneys for Ms Smith dismissed his reaction and claimed that the service request was genuine. A spokesperson for Colorado’s attorney general pointed to earlier claims that there was no proof that it was. Meanwhile, the statements “Stewart” claims to never have made, and arguments from attorneys who use his name and alleged statements, remain printed across several court documents. In a motion filed by attorneys for Colorado in 2016 to dismiss the case, they pointed out that Ms Smith had never received any request for services and had no standing to sue. A response from the Alliance Defending Freedom, the conservative Christian group representing Ms Smith, asserted that it was not necessary to have received any such inquiry before challenging state law. Months later, in February 2017, in an effort to bolster their challenge to state law, attorneys for the group said that Ms Smith received an inquiry, weeks before Colorado attorneys asked to dismiss the case. “Notably, any claim that Lorie will never receive a request to create a custom website celebrating a same-sex ceremony is no longer legitimate because Lorie has received such a request,” according to the filing. Later that year, following a court ruling in Colorado’s favour, the group mentioned “Stewart” and “Mike” in a press release. In a December 2021 filing with the Supreme Court, attorneys for Colorado responded to the alleged request again, noting that the inquiry “was not a request for a website at all, but just a response to an online form asking about ‘invites’ and ‘place-names,’ with a statement that the person ‘might also stretch to a website.’” The Alliance Defending Freedom fired back in a reply brief, once again mentioning a request that may not even exist: “Colorado’s claim – that a request from ‘Mike’ and ‘Stewart’ for a wedding website does not reflect a same-sex wedding request – blinks reality.” The Independent asked representatives for the Alliance Defending Freedom how “Stewart” became involved with the case. Senior counsel Kellie Fiedorek said The New Republic’s findings are a “last-minute attempt to malign Lorie [that] smacks of desperation to delegitimize her civil rights case and our judicial system.” “It’s undisputed that Lorie received this request through her website. She doesn’t do background checks on incoming requests to determine if the person submitting it is genuine,” she added. “Whether Lorie received a legitimate request or whether someone lied to her is irrelevant. No one should have to wait to be punished by the government to challenge an unjust law.” A spokesperson for the office of Colorado’s attorney general did not have a comment prior to the ruling but pointed The Independent to its brief with the Supreme Court noting that Ms Smith did not take “any steps to verify that a genuine prospective customer submitted the form.” The Supreme Court’s decision is a blow to LGBT+ advocates who fear the case could open the door for rollbacks to discrimination protections, with Justice Sonia Sotomayor noting that the ruling comes in the middle of a wave of state laws targeting LGBT+ people. “This case cannot be understood outside of the context in which it arises,” she wrote in her dissent. “In that context, the outcome is even more distressing. … In this pivotal moment, the Court had an opportunity to reaffirm its commitment to equality on behalf of all members of society, including LGBT people. It does not do so.” A statement from Kelley Robinson, president of the Human Rights Campaign, the nation’s largest LGBT+ civil rights organization, said the court’s decision “is a dangerous step backward, giving some businesses the power to discriminate against people simply because of who we are.” President Joe Biden, noting the decision’s arrival on the final day of Pride Month, said he is “deeply concerned that the decision could invite more discrimination” against LGBT+ Americans. “More broadly, today’s decision weakens long-standing laws that protect all Americans against discrimination in public accommodations – including people of color, people with disabilities, people of faith, and women,” he added. Read More Supreme Court allows Colorado designer to deny LGBT+ customers in ruling on last day of Pride Month The Supreme Court just made me a second-class citizen ‘It’s hard on our family’: For these lawmakers with trans children, Republican attacks are personal