Responses to the wildfires in Maui, more details in Trump indictment and "Blind Side" case, and more top news from the week

ATLANTA — A Georgia grand jury that has been investigating former President Donald Trump over his efforts to undo that state's 2020 election results arrived at a frenzied conclusion late Monday, returning indictments even as prosecutors offered no clarity about who had been charged and for what.

The existence of indictments became apparent around 9 p.m., when the Fulton County judge who for months has been presiding over the grand jury investigation was presented by courthouse officials with a set of papers in a courtroom packed with reporters anticipating news.

But neither the judge nor county officials revealed any details about the documents — though at least some of the indictments appeared to be for cases other than Trump. Even so, all signs pointed toward the grand jury moving toward an indictment in the Trump investigation: The panel worked late, some witnesses scheduled to appear Tuesday testified instead on Monday and the judge who's been handling the matter, Robert McBurney, encouraged reporters to stay late. Adding to the scene were live cameras following county officials inside the courthouse, hoping to glimpse signs of action.

If Trump is indicted in Georgia, it would mark the fourth time this year he's faced criminal charges. He's also been indicted by federal officials for allegedly hoarding classified documents and conspiring to overturn the 2020 election. But the Georgia case is unique for its sprawling nature and the potential that Trump could be charged alongside multiple associates and aides.

The Georgia prosecution is also notable for its chaotic conclusion. Even as prosecutors summoned as witnesses multiple former state officials, including the ex-lieutenant governor, the process hit an unexpected snag in the middle of the day, when Reuters reported on a document listing criminal charges to be brought against Trump. Those included state racketeering counts, conspiracy to commit false statements and solicitation of violation of oath by a public officer.

Reuters, which later published a copy of the document, said the filing was taken down quickly. A spokesperson for Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis said the report of charges being filed was “inaccurate,” but declined to comment further on a kerfuffle that the Trump legal team rapidly jumped on to attack the integrity of the investigation.

The office of the courts clerk later released a statement that seemed to only raise more questions, calling the posted document “fictitious,” but failing to explain how it got on the court's website. The clerk's office said documents without official case numbers “are not considered official filings and should not be treated as such.” But the document that appeared online did have a case number on it.

Asked about the “fictitious" document Monday evening, the courts clerk, Che Alexander, said: “I mean, I don’t know what else to say, like, grace. … I don’t know, I haven’t seen an indictment, right, so I don’t have anything.” On the question of whether the website had been hacked, she said, “I can't speak to that.”

Trump and his allies, who have characterized the investigation as politically motivated, immediately seized on the apparent error to claim the process was rigged. Trump’s campaign aimed to fundraise off it, sending out an email with the since-deleted document embedded.

“The Grand Jury testimony has not even FINISHED – but it’s clear the District Attorney has already decided how this case will end,” Trump wrote in the email, which included links to give money to his campaign. “This is an absolute DISGRACE.”

Trump’s legal team said it was not a “simple administrative mistake." Rather it was “emblematic of the pervasive and glaring constitutional violations which have plagued this case from its very inception,” the lawyers said.

Legal experts said it was likely a clerical error listing charges prosecutors were planning to ask the grand jury to vote on. Prosecutors draft indictments and present them to the grand jury, which ultimately decides whether to hand charges down.

“I think this tells us what they are planning to present to the grand jury, and the grand jury could say no,” said Clark Cunningham, a Georgia State University law professor. He said while the error will give Trump's legal team fodder to complain, “it will not scuttle the case.”

The posting may have prompted prosecutors to move more quickly to reach a conclusion Monday. Former Lt. Gov. Geoff Duncan, who over the weekend said he'd also been asked to testify Tuesday, instead appeared before the grand jury Monday. He told reporters outside the courthouse that the 2020 election had been “fair and legal” and said now was the “opportunity to get the real story out.”

The document listing criminal charges filed midday Monday listed more than a dozen felony counts, including Georgia’s Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations, or RICO. Willis has long been expected to levy that charge against Trump and his associates, accusing them of participating in a wide-ranging conspiracy to overturn the state’s 2020 election results.

Two counts — including solicitation of violation of oath by a public officer — listed the date of offense as Jan. 2, 2021, which was when Trump during a phone call with Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger said he wanted to “find” enough votes to overturn his loss in the state. Other counts listed the date of offense as Sept. 17, 2021, which is the same day Trump sent Raffensperger a message urging him to investigate “large scale voter fraud," decertify the election and “announce the true winner” if the investigation found the fraud.

Raffensperger and Gabriel Sterling, a fellow Republican who is also a top official in the secretary of state's office, forcefully pushed back against allegations of widespread problems with Georgia's election.

Read the full story: 

Scene: Trump in DC for historic 2020 election charges

RICHMOND, Va. — An upcoming concert for viral sensation Oliver Anthony sold out in three minutes.

The concert featuring the “Rich Men North of Richmond” singer is being held on Aug. 23 at burger restaurant and music space North Street Press Club in Farmville, his hometown.

Tickets, which were $10, went online Tuesday and sold out within minutes. The venue has a capacity for 300.

Music

Virginia singer Oliver Anthony goes viral with ‘Rich Men North of Richmond’

• COLLEEN CURRAN Richmond Times-Dispatch

“Our phone has been ringing off the hook,” Jessica Dowdy, manager for the restaurant, said.

An acoustic performance of Anthony’s blue-collar anthem “Rich Men North of Richmond” was posted by user radiowv on YouTube on Friday — and took off over the weekend. It now has over 17 million views and generated write-ups on Rollingstone.com and Billboard.com.

The song is also being embraced by political figures, such as U.S. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Fla., Virginia Attorney General Jason Miyares and former attorney general of Virginia Ken Cuccinelli. The song is also receiving an audience with national right-wing social media figures, including John Rich, Joe Rogan and Matt Walsh.

Anthony himself posted to North Street’s Facebook post: “I'm sorry this sold so fast. This was planned before things blew up. I have much larger shows in the works to accommodate everyone. Thanks for your patience.”

Anthony was already scheduled to perform at North Street Press Club for an open mic, but after his video of “Rich Men North of Richmond” went viral on YouTube, the restaurant changed his slot to 7 p.m.

The concert will be followed by a meet and greet, a poster signing and more performances from local musicians.

Some fans are coming from as far away as Ohio and New Hampshire to hear Anthony perform, Dowdy said.

“One guy said he’s driving 10 hours,” she added.

Half of the tickets were reserved for locals only, as per Anthony’s request, Dowdy said.

“He’s a local guy. He’s performed here before. He’s from here,” Dowdy said. “People are happy for him.”

Brian Vincent, mayor of Farmville, said that although he doesn't know Anthony personally, "He appears to be having a moment. His working class anthem is resonating with folks." He said that he would be meeting with the chief of police to discuss potential traffic increases the night of the concert.  

North Street Press Club also posted, “If you do not get tickets for this event, don't worry because Oliver will be performing another show here in Farmville later this fall with plenty of tickets available! Stay tuned to our social media for future announcements.”

Over the weekend, Anthony performed at a North Carolina farmers market and drew a large crowd, including an impromptu performance from country musician Jamey Johnson.

Anthony has described himself on social media as a farmer living off the grid with his three dogs.

Organizers said, “In his own words, Oliver is about writing songs and petting dogs. Let that be the vibe you bring with you should you choose to attend this historic event. It is the biggest thing to hit Farmville since the rail road arrived.”

The fourth indictment of former President Donald Trump may be the most sweeping yet.

The sprawling, 98-page case unveiled late Monday night opens up fresh legal ground and exposes more than a dozen of Trump's allies to new jeopardy.

But it also raises familiar legal issues of whether the First Amendment allows a politician to try to overturn an election. Already, Trump and his supporters are alleging the indictment is the product of a politicized, corrupt process to hobble him as he competes for the GOP nomination to face President Joe Biden next year.

Here are some takeaways from Monday's indictment:

1. THE BIG ONE

This may be the last of the Trump indictments, but it was the big one. The indictment lists 18 defendants in addition to Trump, all joined together by Georgia's unusual anti-racketeering, or RICO, law.

Many of the defendants aren't even based in Georgia. The better-known defendants include former New York Mayor Rudolph Giuliani and attorney Sidney Powell, who appeared in numerous hearings and on television spreading false claims about unfounded incidents of purported election fraud. Giuliani and Powell were among the unnamed co-conspirators in the federal indictment against Trump for his push to overturn the election that was released earlier this month.

You can read the full indictment here:

Others, however, had to date escaped mention in charging documents, like Trump's then-chief of staff Mark Meadows, who was on the call during which Trump urged Georgia election officials to "find" him the votes he needed to be declared winner of the state.

Other defendants include Mike Roman, a Trump campaign official who the indictment alleges helped arrange slates of fake Trump electors whose votes Congress could count rather than those of the actual appointed ones for the winner of the election, President Joe Biden. Another person charged is Jenna Ellis, who has become a prominent conservative legal personality after working on the Trump campaign and helping spread Trump's false allegations of widespread fraud.

The charges also fall upon several Georgia players, including Ray Smith and Robert Cheeley, lawyers working for Trump in Georgia, and David Shafer, then the state GOP chairman, for serving as a fake Trump elector along with fellow co-defendants Shawn Still, then the state GOP finance chairman, and Cathleen Alston Latham.

Take a closer look at the 19 defendants in a list at the end of this story

2. A WIDER APPROACH

Critics may argue this is an overreach for a local prosecutor's office. But the Georgia RICO statute gives Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis' office the ability to construct a wide-ranging narrative by citing and charging other players in the alleged wrongdoing, even those out of state.

Some legal analysts think that Jack Smith, the federal prosecutor who filed the earlier charges against Trump for trying to overturn the election, didn't charge people identified as co-conspirators in his case, like Giuliani, because he is aiming for a trial as quickly – and with as much time as possible before the 2024 presidential election — as feasible.

Willis on Monday night said she hoped for a trial date in six months. But her office is taking a notably different, more sweeping approach from the more streamlined federal indictment. She vowed that she would seek to try all 19 defendants together.

3. THE FIRST AMENDMENT ARGUMENT

Trump is expected to employ a similar defense in both the earlier federal indictment and the Fulton County case. He and his supporters contend he's being charged simply for speaking up against what he saw as an unfair election and practicing politics as usual.

But it's not clear that defense will work.

Indeed, some of the 161 acts that prosecutors contend were part of the conspiracy to overturn may sound like protected political machinations in isolation – emails and texts about meetings of people contending to be Trump electors, tweets about alleged voter fraud, even the filing of a lawsuit in Georgia challenging the election outcome.

But the indictment argues they were all steps in what it calls "a conspiracy to unlawfully change the outcome of the election in favor of Trump." For example, it alleges that those fake elector meetings were part of an attempt to convince Georgia state lawmakers to "unlawfully" appoint the phony Trump electors, rather than the Biden ones they were bound to by law.

The indictment contends the tweets about phony voter fraud and even the lawsuit were part of a similar scheme. And, finally, it says some of the lies trying to persuade Georgia's top election official, Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, and Gov. Brian Kemp to declare Trump the victor could be considered another crime under state law, solicitation of violation of oath by a public officer.

4. DOCUMENT DRAMA

A document briefly posted to the Fulton County Clerk's Office website earlier Monday snagged the day's proceedings and gave Trump a window to further disparage the case against him.

People were still waiting to testify before the grand jury when Reuters reported on a document listing criminal charges to be brought against Trump, including state racketeering counts, conspiracy to commit false statements and solicitation of violation of oath by a public officer.

Reuters, which later published a copy of the document, said the filing was taken down quickly. A spokesperson for Willis said the report of charges being filed was "inaccurate," but declined to comment further. A statement subsequently released by the Fulton County courts clerk called the posted document "fictitious," but failed to explain how it got on the court's website.

Trump and his allies immediately seized on the apparent error to claim that the process was rigged. Trump's campaign aimed to fundraise off it, sending out an email with the since-deleted document embedded.

"The Grand Jury testimony has not even FINISHED — but it's clear the District Attorney has already decided how this case will end," Trump wrote in the email, which included links to give money to his campaign. "This is an absolute DISGRACE."

Trump's legal team said it was not a "simple administrative mistake." Rather, it was "emblematic of the pervasive and glaring constitutional violations which have plagued this case from its very inception," said lawyers Drew Findling, Jennifer Little and Marissa Goldberg.

5. TRUMP'S MOUNTING LEGAL BILLS

The sheer number of investigations, criminal cases and lawsuits brought against Trump are unprecedented for a former president. The same could be said for the tens of millions of dollars in legal fees paid out to attorneys representing him and his allies, straining the finances of his campaign.

An Associated Press analysis of recent fundraising disclosures shows Trump's political committees have paid out at least $59.2 million to more than 100 lawyers and law firms since January 2021.

The threat posed by this colossal drain of resources has led Trump's allies to establish a new legal defense fund, the Patriot Legal Defense Fund.

***

MORE COVERAGE

***

THE 19 DEFENDANTS

A Montana district court judge ruled Monday that a state law barring its agencies from considering the impacts of climate change when issuing permits is a violation of the state Constitution’s right to a “clean and healthful environment.”

The ruling comes two months after the conclusion of a seven-day trial in Helena that attracted national attention as one of the first to challenge a state’s fossil fuel policies on constitutional grounds. A group of 16 young Montanans filed the lawsuit in 2020, alleging that Montana’s laws supporting fossil fuel development are contributing to climate change, the impacts of which are violating the plaintiffs’ constitutional rights.

“Montana’s (greenhouse gas) emissions and climate change have been proven to be a substantial factor in causing climate impacts to Montana’s environment and harm and injury to the youth plaintiffs,” Lewis and Clark County District Court Judge Kathy Seeley wrote in the order.

She continued, “Plaintiffs have a fundamental constitutional right to a clean and healthful environment, which includes climate as part of the environmental life-support system.”

The state Legislature is specifically tasked with protecting that “environmental life-support system” under Montana’s Constitution. In the legislative session that concluded earlier this year, Republican lawmakers amended the Montana Environmental Policy Act, or MEPA, to prohibit consideration of greenhouse gas emissions and climate change in permitting decisions. MEPA guides the environmental review process for permits, such as those granted for coal mine expansions or new power plants.

That prohibition within MEPA, passed as Senate Bill 557, is now invalid, under Seeley’s decision.

The youth plaintiffs were represented by Our Children's Trust, an environmental organization that has filed dozens of similar lawsuits in other states. The lawsuit names Montana, the governor, attorney general and several state agencies as defendants.

Download PDF

Photos: Youth climate change lawsuit, Held vs. Montana, gets its day in court

KABUL, Afghanistan — The Taliban have settled in as rulers of Afghanistan, two years after they seized power as U.S. and NATO forces withdrew from the country following two decades of war.

The Taliban face no significant opposition that could topple them. They have avoided internal divisions by falling in line behind their ideologically unbending leader. They have kept a struggling economy afloat, in part by holding investment talks with capital-rich regional countries, even as the international community withholds formal recognition. They have improved domestic security through crackdowns on armed groups such as the Islamic State, and say they are fighting corruption and opium production.

But it's their slew of bans on Afghan girls and women that dominated the Taliban's second year in charge. They barred them from parks, gyms, universities, and jobs at nongovernmental groups and the United Nations – all in the space of a few months – allegedly because they weren't wearing proper hijab — the Islamic head covering — or violated gender segregation rules. These orders followed a previous ban, issued in the first year of Taliban rule, on girls going to school beyond sixth grade.

Here is a closer look at Taliban rule and where they are headed.

WHY DID THEY EXCLUDE WOMEN FROM HIGHER EDUCATION, MOST JOBS AND PUBLIC SPACES?

The Taliban say they are committed to implementing their interpretation of Islamic law, or Sharia, in Afghanistan. This leaves no space for anything they think is foreign or secular, such as women working or studying. It's what drove them in the late 1990s, when they first seized power in Afghanistan, and it propels them now, ever since they took control again on Aug. 15, 2021.

Their supreme leader Hibatullah Akhundzada has praised the changes imposed since the takeover, claiming life improved for Afghan women after foreign troops left and the hijab became mandatory again.

WHAT WAS THE RESPONSE TO THESE BANS?

Foreign governments, rights groups, and global bodies condemned the restrictions. The U.N. said they were a major obstacle to the Taliban gaining international recognition as the legitimate government of Afghanistan. Overseas aid is drying up as major donors stop their funding, pulled in different directions by other crises and worried their money might fall into Taliban hands.

The lack of funds, as well as the exclusion of Afghan women from delivering essential humanitarian services, is hitting the population hard, pushing more people into poverty.

WHAT ARE LIVING CONDITIONS LIKE IN AFGHANISTAN?

Nearly 80% of the previous, Western-backed Afghan government's budget came from the international community. That money — now largely cut off — financed hospitals, schools, factories and government ministries. The COVID-19 pandemic, medical shortages, climate change and malnutrition have made life more desperate for Afghans. Aid agencies have stepped into the breach to provide basic services like health care.

Afghanistan is struggling with its third consecutive year of drought-like conditions, the ongoing collapse in families' income, and restrictions on international banking. It's also still suffering from decades of war and natural disasters.

HOW IS THE ECONOMY DOING?

The World Bank said last month that the local currency, the afghani, gained value against major currencies. Customers can withdraw more money from individual deposits made before August 2021 and most civil servants are being paid. The World Bank described revenue collection as "healthy" and said most basic items remained available, although demand is low.

The Taliban have held investment talks with countries in the region, including China and Kazakhstan. They want sanctions removed and billions of dollars in frozen funds to be released, saying these measures will alleviate the suffering of Afghans. But the international community will only take such steps once the Taliban take certain actions, including lifting restrictions on women and girls.

HOW LIKELY ARE THE TALIBAN TO CHANGE DIRECTION?

It's largely up to the Taliban leader, Akhundzada. The cleric counts like-minded government ministers and Islamic scholars among his circle. He is behind the decrees on women and girls. His edicts, framed in the language of Islamic law, are absolute. The bans will only be lifted if Akhundzada orders it. Some Taliban figures have spoken out against the way decisions are made, and there has been disagreement about the bans on women and girls. But the Taliban's chief spokesman Zabihullah Mujahid slammed these reports as propaganda.

"The secret of their success is that they are united," Abdul Salam Zaeef, who served as the Taliban envoy to Pakistan when they ruled Afghanistan in the 1990s, said. "If someone expresses his opinion or his thoughts, it doesn't mean someone is against the leadership or will go to another side," said Zaeef who spent several years at the Guantanamo Bay detention center after the 2001 U.S. invasion. "Disagreements are put in front of the emir (Akhundzada) and he decides. They follow his word."

WHAT ABOUT INTERNATIONAL RECOGNITION?

Aid officials say the Taliban view recognition as an entitlement, not something to be negotiated. The officials also cite high-level meetings with powerful states like China and Russia as signs that the Taliban are building bilateral relations in their own way. Qatar's prime minister met Akhundzada in the southwestern Afghan city of Kandahar in June, the first-such publicly known meeting between the supreme leader and a foreign official.

Even though the Taliban are officially isolated on the global stage, they appear to have enough interactions and engagement for ties with countries to inch toward normalization. Cooperation with the Taliban on narcotics, refugees and counter-terrorism is of interest globally, including to the West. Countries like China, Russia and neighboring Pakistan want an end to sanctions.

"The political interactions are such that no country in the region is thinking of bringing Afghanistan under their power or control," said Zaeef. He said the Taliban's foreign outreach is hampered by blacklists preventing officials from traveling, and by lacking common ground with the rest of the world.

WHAT OPPOSITION IS THERE TO THE TALIBAN?

There's no armed or political opposition with enough domestic or foreign support to topple the Taliban. A fighting force resisting Taliban rule from the Panjshir Valley north of Kabul is being violently purged. Public protests are rare.

The Islamic State has struck high-profile targets in deadly bombings, including two government ministries, but the militants lack fighters, money and other resources to wage a major offensive against the Taliban.

While rescue and emergency operations continued Friday at the deadly wildfires that swept across the Hawaiian island of Maui, many people are already looking for ways to support the response and provide relief to those affected.

The full extent of the damage and the recovery needs may not be known for up to a week, said Regine Webster, vice president of the Center for Disaster Philanthropy, and she urged people to be patient before deciding where to give their support.

"You literally have to wait for the firefighters to complete their work before that damage assessment can be fully realized," she said.

Philanthropy experts recommend giving to experienced organizations that are well-situated to respond to a specific disaster. Major disaster response organizations like the American Red Cross have said they are already communicating with local and federal governments to provide assistance.

Webster also urged potential donors to support organizations with deep local ties and knowledge of the effected communities.

"To the extent that we can all slow down, wait a week, wait two weeks, to understand where the greatest needs are, and then look toward organizations that are really meeting those needs, again, prioritizing organizations with specific disaster expertise and organizations that are local in nature," Webster said.

The Council for Native Hawaiian Advancement pledged to match donations — up to $100,000 initially, now increased to $1 million — for a campaign they began Wednesday, with initial support from the Alakaʻina Foundation Family of Companies. An online tracker shows that more than $750,000 has been given from 5,200 people as of Friday.

The crowdfunding site, GoFundMe, has vetted fundraisers for individuals and families who lost property or were injured in the fires. That means the site has taken steps to verify the identity of the organizer and has collected those campaigns on a hub on its website. GoFundMe will take additional verification steps before releasing the funds to the organizer, as well as deduct a transaction fee.

Direct donations to individuals or families can be a powerful way to make an impact, but potential donors should be careful in responding to appeals on social media for donations to individuals, through electronic payment apps like Venmo or Cash App, experts say.

Potential donors should also consider if it's important to them to claim a tax benefit for their donation. Only tax-exempt nonprofit organizations will provide a receipt that people who itemize their taxes can use to claim a deduction.

The Hawaii Community Foundation said it has raised $3 million for its Maui Strong Fund in 24 hours and is not collecting any fees on gifts to the fund.

"Funding is focused on basic necessities, including sheltering families who have lost homes, food and clothing. We are humbled by the support and aloha shared locally and across the globe for Maui families," said Michelle Kauhane, the foundation's senior vice president, in a statement.

The foundation is collaborating with other nonprofits and government officials to assess immediate needs, she said.

The Center for Disaster Philanthropy will launch a fund specific to the Hawaii wildfires that prioritizes equity in recovery, Webster said.

"We actually will wait several months before we understand the full range of needs that exist on Maui and other islands that are also facing wildfires," she said. "And we will not invest our funds until such time as we understand what those medium- and long-term needs are."

___

Associated Press coverage of philanthropy and nonprofits receives support through the AP's collaboration with The Conversation US, with funding from Lilly Endowment Inc. The AP is solely responsible for this content. For all of AP's philanthropy coverage, visit https://apnews.com/hub/philanthropy.

___

NASHVILLE, Tenn. — Michael Oher, the former NFL tackle known for the movie "The Blind Side," filed a petition Monday in a Tennessee probate court accusing Sean and Leigh Anne Tuohy of lying to him by having him sign papers making them his conservators rather than his adoptive parents nearly two decades ago.

In the petition filed Monday in Shelby County Probate Court, Oher asks for the conservatorship to be terminated along with asking for a full accounting of the money earned off the use of his name and story.

He also asks to be paid what he is due along with interest. Oher, who has never been a fan of the movie of his life, also asks in the petition that the Tuohys be sanctioned and required to pay both compensatory and punitive damages determined by the court.

ESPN.com first reported the petition.

Steve Farese, a lawyer for the Tuohys, told The Associated Press that they will file an answer to the allegations in court but he declined to comment further. He was among three attorneys served on behalf of the Tuohys on Monday.

Leigh Anne Tuohy did not immediately respond to an email sent to her personal website.

The movie was nominated for an Oscar, and Sandra Bullock won the Academy Award for her portrayal of Leigh Anne Tuohy.

In the petition, Oher says he only learned in February that the Tuohys remain his conservators.

Oher accuses the Tuohys of never trying to take legal action to assume custody from the Tennessee Department of Human Services before he turned 18. The conservatorship paperwork was filed Aug. 4, 2004 — after Oher turned 18 in May that year.

He was the 23rd overall pick in the 2009 draft out of Mississippi, and he spent his first five seasons with the Baltimore Ravens. He wound up playing eight NFL seasons, including 2014 when he started 11 games for the Tennessee Titans. Oher finished his career with two years in Carolina.

He started 110 career games and won a Super Bowl with the Ravens. He also finished second in the voting to Percy Harvin of Minnesota for The Associated Press NFL Offensive Rookie of the Year after starting all 16 games his first season at right tackle.

Oher, who turned 37 in May, last played in the NFL in 2016 before being released in 2017 by Carolina.

Nearly two years ago, supporters cheered when Britney Spears was freed from her conservatorship. The ruling came after Spears publicly demanded the end of the arrangement, which had prevented her from making her own medical, financial and personal decisions since 2008.

Spears' high-profile battle put a spotlight on efforts advocates across the United States have launched raising questions that such strict controls result in more harm than protection.

___

Associated Press Writer Adrian Sainz in Memphis, Tennessee, contributed to this report.

___

Best sports movies

Best sports movies

#25. Rocky (1976)

#24. Hoosiers (1986)

#23. Warrior (2011)

#22. The Big Lebowski (1998)

#21. I, Tonya (2017)

#20. Rush (2013)

#19. Waves (2019)

#18. The Damned United (2009)

#17. The Fighter (2010)

#16. The Bad News Bears (1976)

#15. Creed (2015)

#14. The Black Stallion (1979)

#13. Offside (2006)

#12. The Wrestler (2008)

#11. Horse Feathers (1932)

#10. Fat City (1972)

#9. Ford v Ferrari (2019)

#8. Moneyball (2011)

#7. Searching for Bobby Fischer (1993)

#6. Lagaan: Once Upon a Time in India (2001)

#5. Rocco and His Brothers (1960)

#4. Million Dollar Baby (2004)

#3. Breaking Away (1979)

#2. The Hustler (1961)

#1. Raging Bull (1980)