STOCKHOLM (AP) — Finland prevailed against Canada 2-1 in a penalty shootout to hand the title favorite its first loss at the ice hockey world championship on Monday.
Patrik Puistola and Eeli Tolvanen converted penalty shots in the shootout, and Kent Johnson for Canada.
Canada outshot Finland 38-22 in the hardest test for the Canadians at the tournament. Canada scored 28 goals in its previous five games while conceding two.
Canada is second in Group A, trailing leader Sweden by two points. The two will meet on Tuesday in their last group game. They have already qualified for the quarterfinals.
Finland is third and plays Slovakia on Tuesday.
Ryan O’Reilly broke the deadlock with 2:03 left in the middle period with a short-handed goal on a rush, as Canada had to apply its most physical game yet at the worlds.
Puistola tied it 7:01 into the final period after he used his stick to take control of the puck flying in the air and netted from close range.
In Herning, Denmark, defending champion the Czech Republic shut out Germany 5-0 to stay unbeaten.
The sixth win lifted the Czechs to the top of Group B, one point ahead of Switzerland and three more than the United States in third.
The Czechs complete the group stage against the Americans on Tuesday.
Germany and Denmark also meet on Tuesday and will decide the fourth team from the group to reach the quarterfinals.
The Czechs' Jakub Flek scored twice and David Pastrnak rifled a one-timer from the left circle and set up Lukas Sedlak in the middle period. Jakub Lauko added a short-handed goal.
Daniel Vladar shut out the Germans with 19 saves.
In Stockholm, newcomer Slovenia beat France 3-1 to avoid relegation at the expense of the French.
In Herning, Norway beat Hungary 1-0 also to avoid relegation.
AP sports: https://apnews.com/sports
Canada's Adam Fantilli, left, reacts after missing his penalty shot against Finland's Juuse Saros during an IIHF Ice Hockey World Championship Group A match between Canada and Finland at Avicii Arena in Stockholm, Sweden, Monday, May 19, 2025. (Fredrik Sandberg/TT News Agency via AP)
WASHINGTON (AP) — Days before the U.S. military operation that removed Venezuela’s Nicolás Maduro from power, Trump administration lawyers blessed the action by saying it would “not rise to the level of war in the constitutional sense” and would serve “important national interests,” according to a legal opinion that articulates a muscular view of presidential power.
The heavily redacted version of the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel opinion, released this week, sheds new light on how the administration came to conclude that it was legally permitted to oust Maduro as Venezuela's president in a stunning middle-of-the-night military operation Jan. 3.
The opinion, dated Dec. 23, was prepared for the legal adviser for the White House National Security Council. The 22-page document was drafted by lawyers at the Office of Legal Counsel, which is historically called upon to resolve thorny questions of law for the executive branch.
In this instance, the opinion wrestles with the question of whether President Donald Trump could order the military to aid law enforcement in removing Maduro from power so he could face criminal prosecution in the United States.
The answer, the opinion said, was yes. It cited five separate reasons, including what it said were “severe” allegations against Maduro contained in a drug-trafficking conspiracy indictment; the “numerous other highly dangerous activities" that he and his associates were alleged to be involved in; the possible need of military force to protect civilians in Venezuela and abroad from Venezuela; and the potential that U.S. personnel would encounter an “armed resistance” protecting Maduro.
“Here, we were told to assume that there were as many as 200 armed guards in a literal fort who have been sent from and armed by another country purely to ensure Maduro’s safety,” the opinion said. “This level of expected armed resistance supports the need for military forces to provide security for law enforcement personnel carrying out the rendition.”
Though the opinion does identify what it said were significant risks in the military operation, depending in part on Maduro's precise location at the time of the action, administration lawyers judged a low likelihood that it would lead to an all-out war that would require congressional approval.
Republican leaders have said they had no advance notification of the raid to seize Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores. Facing pressure from Trump, Senate Republicans voted to dismiss a resolution Wednesday that would have limited his ability to conduct further attacks against Venezuela.
“While we cannot speculate as to any presidential decision in response to the significant loss of U.S. servicemembers, we were assured that there is no contingency plan to engage in any substantial and sustained operation that would amount to a constitutional war,” the opinion said.
“We were further assured that there is no contingency plan that would involve using U.S. forces occupying Venezuela should the removal of Maduro result in civil unrest in that country. Based on that assessment of U.S. intentions, we do not currently plan any action that would amount to a constitutional war,” it added.
The legal opinion also says the fact that a president “can lawfully authorize the operation does not by itself render any and all use of force in its completion lawful.” The personnel involved, the opinion said, “must implement his lawful order in a reasonable way.”
President Donald Trump, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Dan Caine listen as Secretary of State Marco Rubio speaks during a news conference at Mar-a-Lago, Saturday, Jan. 3, 2026, in Palm Beach, Fla. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon)
