Yoon Suk Yeol removed as South Korea's president over short-lived martial law
SEOUL, South Korea (AP) — South Korea's Constitutional Court unanimously removed Yoon Suk Yeol from office Friday, ending his tumultuous presidency and setting up a new election, four months after he threw the nation into turmoil with an ill-fated declaration of martial law.
The verdict capped a dramatic fall for Yoon, a former star prosecutor who became president in 2022, just a year after he entered politics.
In a nationally televised hearing, the court's acting chief Moon Hyung-bae said the eight-member bench found Yoon's actions were unconstitutional and had a grave impact.
'By declaring martial law in breach of the constitution and other laws, the defendant brought back the history of abusing state emergency decrees, shocked the people and caused confusion in the society, economy, politics, diplomacy and all other areas,' Moon said.
'Given the negative impact on constitutional order caused by the defendant's violation of laws and its ripple effects are grave, we find that the benefits of upholding the constitution by dismissing the defendant far outweigh the national losses from the dismissal of the president,' the justice concluded.
Protesters erupt in jubilation and sorrow
Anti-Yoon protesters near the court erupted into tears and danced when the verdict was announced in the late morning. Two women wept as they hugged and an old man near them leapt to his feet and screamed with joy. The crowd later marched through Seoul streets.
Outside Yoon's official residence, many supporters cried, screamed and yelled at journalists when they saw the news of the verdict on a giant TV screen. But they quickly cooled down after their organizer pleaded for calm.
'We will absolutely not be shaken!' a protest leader shouted on stage. 'Anyone who accepts this ruling and prepares for an early presidential election is our enemy.'
No major violence has been reported by late afternoon.
'Political risks related to domestic polarization and policy instability remain,' Leif-Eric Easley, a professor at Ewha University in Seoul, said. 'But the Constitutional Court's unanimous ruling has removed a major source of uncertainty. Korean government institutions have withstood a volatile mix of legislative obstruction and executive overreach that posed the greatest challenge to democracy in a generation.'
Korea faces an election with deep divisions
An election will be held within two months for a new president. But a festering divide over Yoon's impeachment could complicate South Korea's efforts to deal with crucial issues like President Donald Trump's tariffs and other 'America First' policies, observers say.
Yoon said in a statement issued via his defense team that he deeply regrets failing to live up to the public's expectations, but stopped short of explicitly accepting the verdict. There have been fears he would incite efforts to resist his removal, as he earlier vowed to fight to the end.
He added that he will pray for the country and its people. 'It has been the greatest honor of my life to serve our nation,' Yoon said.
Yoon's ruling People Power Party said it would accept the decision, but one of Yoon's lawyers, Yoon Kap-keun, called the ruling 'completely incomprehensible' and a 'pure political decision."
Prime Minister Han Duck-soo, the country's acting leader, vowed to maintain public safety and order and ensure a smooth transition to the next administration.
Surveys show Lee Jae-myung, leader of the main liberal opposition Democratic Party, is the early favorite to win the upcoming presidential by-election, though he faces several trials for corruption and other charges.
'It will be an uphill battle for the conservative party to win a snap presidential election,' said Duyeon Kim, a senior analyst at the Center for a New American Security in Washington. 'If Lee wins, South Korea's foreign policy will likely look very different from what the U.S. and like-minded countries have enjoyed during Yoon's presidency because of the demands of the progressive base.'
Lee welcomed the ruling and credited the South Korean people for 'protecting our democratic republic.'
Crisis started with a night of chaos four months ago
Martial law lasted only six hours, but left behind a political crisis, rattling financial markets and unsettling the country's diplomatic partners.
After announcing martial law late at night on Dec. 3, Yoon, a conservative, sent hundreds of soldiers to the liberal opposition-controlled National Assembly, election offices and other sites. Special operations soldiers smashed windows at the assembly and scuffled with protesters, evoking traumatic memories of the country's past military rules among many South Koreans.
Enough lawmakers, including some from the ruling party, managed to enter the assembly to vote down Yoon's decree unanimously.
Some senior military and police officers sent to the assembly testified Yoon ordered them to drag out lawmakers to block the vote on his decree or to detain his political rivals. Yoon says the troops were deployed to the assembly simply to maintain order.
Yoon was impeached by the National Assembly on Dec. 14. The assembly accused him of violating the constitution and other laws by suppressing assembly activities, attempting to detain politicians, and undermining peace across the country.
In his final testimony at the Constitutional Court hearing, Yoon said his decree was a desperate attempt to draw public support of his fight against the 'wickedness' of the Democratic Party, which had obstructed his agenda, impeached top officials and slashed the government's budget bill. He earlier called the National Assembly 'a den of criminals' and 'anti-state forces.'
The Constitutional Court ruled Yoon infringed upon the assembly's right to demand martial law be lifted, the freedom of political party activities and the neutrality of the military. It also said Yoon's political impasse with the opposition wasn't the type of emergency situation that required martial law and that Yoon's decree lacked required legal procedures such as deliberation by a formal Cabinet meeting.
Yoon still faces criminal charges
Yoon has been indicted on charges of rebellion in connection with his decree, a charge that carries the death penalty or a life sentence if convicted. He became the first South Korean president to be arrested or indicted while in office.
Yoon was released from jail in March after a Seoul district court cancelled his arrest. That allows him to stand trial without detention.
His removal from office also costs Yoon the presidential immunity that protected him from most criminal prosecutions. This means he could face other criminal charges, such as abuse of power, in connection with his martial law decree, some observers say.
___
Associated Press writer Foster Klug contributed to this report.
Hyung-jin Kim And Kim Tong-hyung, The Associated Press
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Time Magazine
an hour ago
- Time Magazine
Breaking Down the Escalating Feud Between Trump and Tucker Carlson Amid Divide Over Israel-Iran Conflict
As the active conflict between Israel and Iran enters its sixth day, and with the latter issuing new grave warnings to the United States, divides are starting to show across the political spectrum as to what U.S. President Donald Trump should do next. Trump's openness to a possible U.S. involvement has led to schisms within the Republican community and beyond, and has notably impacted his allyship with a certain former Fox News host. Tucker Carlson—who was fired from Fox News in 2023 and has since gone on to host his own podcast, The Tucker Carlson Show —has shared a friendly relationship with Trump over the years. Trump sat down with Carlson for an exclusive interview during the 2024 election, and they even hit the campaign trail together. But on June 13, Carlson made it clear that he opposed any potential U.S. military intervention in the Israel-Iran conflict, arguing that the 'real divide' is between 'those who casually encourage violence, and those who seek to prevent it—between warmongers and peacemakers.' 'Who are the warmongers? They would include anyone who's calling Donald Trump today to demand air strikes and other direct U.S. military involvement in a war with Iran,' Carlson said via social media. The podcast personality listed several Republicans and high-profile businesspeople and media persons, including Sean Hannity, Mark Levin, Rupert Murdoch, Ike Perlmutter, and Miriam Adelson. "At some point they will all have to answer for this, but you should know their names now," Carlson signed off. Trump was dismissive of Carlson's viewpoint when reporters asked him to comment during the 2025 G7 Summit. 'I don't know what Tucker Carlson is saying. Let him go get a television network and say it so that people listen,' the President said. Later that same day, Trump took to Truth Social to take another jab at Carlson. 'Somebody please explain to kooky Tucker Carlson that IRAN CANNOT HAVE A NUCLEAR WEAPON," he urged. Other Republican commentators and lawmakers—those who have typically supported Trump's 'America First' policies—have come to Carlson's defense amid Trump's escalation, including far-right Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene from Georgia. Greene said that Carlson is one of her "favorite people ' and he 'unapologetically believes the same things" she does. '[F]oreign wars/intervention/regime change put America last, kill innocent people, are making us broke, and will ultimately lead to our destruction,' Greene said. "That's not kooky. That's what millions of Americans voted for. It's what we believe is America First." Carson doubled down on his stance on fellow right-wing commentator Steve Bannon's podcast, The War Room, on Monday, in which he warned that involvement in the Middle East could 'weaken' the U.S. 'I think we're going to see the end of the American empire,' he said. Bannon, who served as the White House's chief strategist during the first few months of Trump's first term, has also called for the U.S. to stay out of conflict in the Middle East. Carlson, meanwhile, has broken away from other notable Republicans over the Israel-Iran argument. Notably, he and Texas Sen. Ted Cruz rowed over the Senator's knowledge of Iran during an interview on his podcast, released in full on Wednesday. 'How could you not know that?' Carlson asked in disbelief, after Cruz was unable to answer when asked to list the population of Iran (something Carlson identified as around 92 million). After Cruz said that he does not 'sit around and memorize population tables,' Carlson replied: 'Well, it's kind of relevant, because you're calling for the overthrow of the government.' The two continued to argue over about their respective knowledge of the Middle Eastern country, the alleged Iranian Trump assassination plot, and the level of potential U.S. involvement in the current conflict and how that might look. 'We're carrying out military strikes today,' Cruz said. Carlson then pointed out that Cruz and other U.S. officials had stated that the strikes were being carried out by Israel, making Cruz's "we" a curious choice of wording. Cruz clarified: 'With our help. I said 'we.' Israel is leading, but we're supporting them.' 'You just said 'we' were,' Carlson said. 'This is high stakes. You're a Senator. If you're saying the United States government is at war with Iran right now, people are listening.' Cruz took to social media after the interview with Carlson, arguing that Carlson's question was a 'silly game' and that the former Fox News host had 'attacked' Trump and the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) during their sit-down. Trump has echoed Cruz's 'we' in his own Truth Social posts. 'We now have complete and total control of the skies over Iran. Iran had good sky trackers and other defensive equipment, and plenty of it, but it doesn't compare to American made, conceived, and manufactured 'stuff,'" he said on Tuesday. 'Nobody does it better than the good ol' USA.'


The Hill
an hour ago
- The Hill
X sues New York over social media disclosure law
Elon Musk's X sued the state of New York on Tuesday over a law requiring social media sites to detail how they moderate hate speech, extremism, misinformation and other types of content on their platforms. X argues the law, which is set to go into effect Thursday, violates the First Amendment by compelling companies to disclose 'highly sensitive and controversial speech.' 'The law thus impermissibly interferes with the First Amendment-protected editorial judgments of companies such as X Corp. to remove, demonetize, or deprioritize such speech on their platforms,' the lawsuit reads. The measure, known as the Stop Hiding Hate Act, requires social media platforms to publicly post their terms of service, as well as to submit a report to the New York attorney general about their moderation of hate speech, racism, extremism, radicalization, disinformation, misinformation, harassment and foreign political interference. Companies are subject to fines of up to $15,000 a day for failing to comply with the law. Musk's social media site, which he bought as Twitter in 2022, contends the reporting requirements are a 'carbon copy' of provisions of a California law that were blocked in court last year. California ultimately agreed to drop the provisions as part of a settlement with X. New York state Sen. Brad Hoylman-Sigal (D) and assemblymember Grace Lee (D), who sponsored the measure, argued Tuesday that it does not infringe on social media firms' First Amendment rights and instead requires 'narrowly-tailored' disclosures to help consumers decide between platforms. 'We were proud to sponsor the Stop Hiding Hate Act, in partnership with the Anti-Defamation League, because social media companies, including X, are cesspools of hate speech consisting of antisemitism, racism, Islamophobia and anti-LGBTQ bias, yet those platforms have consistently failed to inform the public about their policies regarding hatred and misinformation,' they said in a joint statement. 'We're confident that the court will reject this attempt by X to use the First Amendment as a shield against providing New Yorkers with much needed transparency around their conduct,' the lawmakers added. New York has passed several measures in recent years taking aim at the potential harms associated with social media platforms. Last June, New York Gov. Kathy Hochul (D) signed into law a bill requiring platforms to restrict addictive feeds for kids. State lawmakers also approved a measure Tuesday requiring warning labels for social media platforms. The bill now heads to Hochul's desk for signing.


San Francisco Chronicle
an hour ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
'Nobody knows:' Trump won't say whether he will move forward with US strikes on Iran
WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump would not say Wednesday whether he has decided to order a U.S. strike on Iran, a move that Tehran warned anew would be greeted with stiff retaliation if it happens. 'I may do it, I may not do it," Trump said in an exchange with reporters at the White House . 'I mean, nobody knows what I'm going to do.' Trump added that it's not 'too late' for Iran to give up its nuclear program as he continues to weigh direct U.S. involvement in Israel's military operations aimed at crushing Tehran's nuclear program. 'Nothing's too late,' Trump said. 'I can tell you this. Iran's got a lot of trouble." 'Nothing is finished until it is finished,' Trump added. But 'the next week is going to be very big— maybe less than a week." Trump also offered a terse response to Iran Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei's refusal to heed to his call for Iran to submit to an unconditional surrender. 'I say good luck,' Trump said. Khamenei earlier Wednesday warned that any United States strikes targeting the Islamic Republic will 'result in irreparable damage for them' and that his country would not bow to Trump's call for surrender. Trump said Tuesday the U.S. knows where Iran's Khamenei is hiding as the the Israel-Iran conflict escalates but doesn't want him killed — 'for now.' 'He is an easy target, but is safe there - We are not going to take him out (kill!), at least not for now," Trump said. Trump's increasingly muscular comments toward the Iranian government come after he urged Tehran's 9.5 million residents to flee for their lives as he cut short his participation in an international summit earlier this week to return to Washington for urgent talks with his national security team.