logo
#

Latest news with #Republican

Tech industry group sues Arkansas over new social media laws
Tech industry group sues Arkansas over new social media laws

Winnipeg Free Press

time39 minutes ago

  • Business
  • Winnipeg Free Press

Tech industry group sues Arkansas over new social media laws

LITTLE ROCK, Ark. (AP) — A tech industry trade group sued Arkansas Friday over two new laws that would place limits on content on social media platforms and would allow parents of children who killed themselves to sue over content on the platforms. The lawsuit by NetChoice filed in federal court in Fayetteville, Arkansas, comes months after a federal judge struck down a state law requiring parental consent before minors can create new social media accounts. The new laws were signed by Republican Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders earlier this year. 'Despite the overwhelming consensus that laws like the Social Media Safety Act are unconstitutional, Arkansas elected to respond to this Court's decision not by repealing the provisions that it held unconstitutional but by instead doubling down on its overreach,' NetChoice said in its lawsuit. Arkansas is among several states that have been enacting restrictions on social media, prompted by concerns about the impact on children's mental health. NetChoice — whose members include TikTok, Facebook parent Meta, and the social platform X — challenged Arkansas' 2023 age-verification law for social media. A federal judge who initially blocked the law struck it down in March. Similar laws have been blocked by judges in Florida and Georgia. A spokesperson for Attorney General Tim Griffin said his office was reviewing the latest complaint and looked forward to defending the law. One of the new laws being challenged prohibits social media platforms from using a design, algorithm or feature it 'knows or should have known through the exercise of reasonable care' would cause a user to kill themself, purchase a controlled substance, develop an eating disorder, develop an addiction to the platform. Wednesdays Columnist Jen Zoratti looks at what's next in arts, life and pop culture. The lawsuit said that provision is unconstitutionally vague and doesn't offer guidance on how to determine which content would violate those restrictions, and the suit notes it would restrict content for both adults and minors. The suit questions whether songs that mention drugs, such as Afroman's 'Because I Got High,' would be prohibited under the new law. The law being challenged also would allow parents whose children have died by suicide or attempted to take their lives to sue social media companies if they were exposed to content promoting or advancing self-harm and suicide. The companies could face civil penalties of up to $10,000 per violation. NetChoice is also challenging another law that attempts to expand Arkansas' blocked restrictions on social media companies. That measure would require social media platforms to ensure minors don't receive notifications between 10 p.m. and 6 a.m. The measure also would require social media companies to ensure their platform 'does not engage in practices to evoke any addiction or compulsive behavior.' The suit argues that the law doesn't explain how to comply with that restriction and is so broadly written that it's unclear what kind of posts or material would violate it. 'What is 'addictive' to some minors may not be addictive to others. Does allowing teens to share photos with each other evoke addiction?' the lawsuit said.

Washington Post journalist busted by DC US Attorney Jeanine Pirro for allegedly possessing child porn
Washington Post journalist busted by DC US Attorney Jeanine Pirro for allegedly possessing child porn

New York Post

time41 minutes ago

  • Politics
  • New York Post

Washington Post journalist busted by DC US Attorney Jeanine Pirro for allegedly possessing child porn

A Pulitzer Prize-winning Washington Post journalist was arrested and charged after authorities allegedly discovered child porn on his work computer, DC US Attorney Jeanine Pirro announced Friday. Thomas Pham LeGro, a 48-year-old video editor at the news outlet, was taken into custody on Thursday after FBI agents raided his Washington, DC, home and discovered a folder on his work laptop which contained 11 videos depicting child sexual abuse material, according to Pirro's office. FBI agents also discovered 'fractured pieces of a hard drive in the hallway outside the room where LeGro's work laptop was found,' during the execution of the search warrant. Legro made his first appearance in District Court of Washington, DC, on Friday and has a detention hearing scheduled for next Wednesday. 3 LeGro was part of a team that won the Pulitzer Prize in 2017 for coverage of Alabama Senate candidate Roy Moore. Tom LeGro/LinkedIn The journalist, who has worked at the Washington Post for 18 years, faces a maximum of 20 years in prison if convicted. A heavily redacted FBI affidavit against LeGro claims the reporter was linked to multiple E-Gold accounts in 2005 and 2006. E-Gold was a digital payment service that ceased operations after the feds accused the company in 2007 of laundering money for child pornographers. The affidavit notes that the FBI received court approval to monitor LeGro's internet account in May. LeGro's worked in the Washington Post's sports department from 2000-2006 and then left to become a reporter and producer for 'PBS NewsHour' before returning to WaPo in 2013, according to his biography. 3 The charges were announced by Pirro on Friday. AFP via Getty Images 3 LeGro has worked at the Washington Post for 18 years. Christopher Sadowski As a member of WaPo's video department, he was part of a team of reporters that won a prestigious Pulitzer Prize in 2017 for coverage of former Alabama Republican Senate candidate Roy Moore. Moore threatened to sue the Washington Post that year after the outlet published allegations that he romantically pursued a 14-year-old girl when he was in his 30s, which he vehemently denied. A spokesperson for the Washington Post said Legro has been placed on leave. 'The Washington Post understands the severity of these allegations, and the employee has been placed on leave,' the outlet said in a statement.

High court ruling on injunctions could imperil many court orders blocking the Trump administration
High court ruling on injunctions could imperil many court orders blocking the Trump administration

Chicago Tribune

time41 minutes ago

  • Politics
  • Chicago Tribune

High court ruling on injunctions could imperil many court orders blocking the Trump administration

WASHINGTON — The U.S. Supreme Court's decision Friday limiting federal judges from issuing nationwide injunctions threatens to upend numerous lawsuits that have led to orders blocking Trump administration policies. Between the start of the new administration and mid-May, judges issued roughly 40 nationwide injunctions against the White House on topics including federal funding, elections rules and diversity and equity considerations. Attorneys involved in some of those cases are vowing to keep fighting, noting the high court left open other legal paths that could have broad nationwide effect. Here's a look at some of the decisions that could be impacted: Multiple federal judges have issued nationwide injunctions blocking President Donald Trump's order denying citizenship to U.S.-born children of people who are in the country illegally or temporarily. The high court's decision Friday came in a lawsuit over that order, but the justices left unclear whether the restrictions on birthright citizenship could soon take effect in parts of the country. Opponents went back to court within hours of the opinion, using a legal path the court left open to file class-action lawsuits that could have nationwide effect. On June 13, U.S. District Judge Denise J. Casper in Massachusetts blocked Trump's attempt to overhaul elections in the U.S. An executive order the Republican president issued in March sought to compel officials to require documentary proof of citizenship for everyone registering to vote for federal elections, accept only mailed ballots received by Election Day and condition federal election grant funding on states adhering to the new ballot deadline. California was one of the plaintiffs in that suit. The office of the state's attorney general, Rob Bonta, said in an email it was assessing the effect of Friday's Supreme Court decision on all of the state's litigation. A federal judge in California in April blocked the administration from cutting off funding for legal representation for unaccompanied migrant children. The administration has appealed. U.S. District Judge Araceli Martinez-Olguin in San Francisco said there was 'no practical way' to limit the scope of the injunction by party or by geography. 'Indeed, as discussed with the Government's declarants at the preliminary injunction hearing, there exists only one contract for the provision of the subject funding, and it applies to direct legal services nationwide,' Martinez-Olguin wrote. Plaintiffs' attorney Adina Appelbaum, program director for the Amica Center for Immigrant Rights, said she didn't think the Supreme Court's decision would significantly affect her case. But she blasted it, saying the high court had 'turned its back on its role to protect the people,' including immigrants. A federal judge in February largely blocked sweeping executive orders that sought to end government support for programs promoting diversity, equity and inclusion. U.S. District Judge Adam Abelson in Baltimore granted a preliminary injunction preventing the administration from terminating or changing federal contracts it considers equity-related. An appeals court later put the decision on hold. Attorneys for the group Democracy Forward represented plaintiffs in the case. The group's president and CEO, Skye Perryman, said she was disappointed by the Supreme Court's ruling, calling it another barrier to seeking relief in court. But she also said it was limited and could keep at least some decisions blocking the Trump administration in place. A federal judge in February stopped the administration from withholding federal funds from health care facilities that provide gender-affirming care to patients under the age of 19. Explaining his reasoning for a nationwide injunction, U.S. District Judge Brendan Abell Hurson in Maryland said a 'piecemeal approach is not appropriate in this case.' 'Significant confusion would result from preventing agencies from conditioning funding on certain medical institutions, while allowing conditional funding to persist as to other medical institutions,' he wrote. An appeal in the case was on hold as the Supreme Court considered similar issues about minors and transgender health care. The high court last week upheld a Tennessee law banning key health care treatments for transgender youth. Omar Gonzalez-Pagan, senior counsel for the Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund Inc., was one of the attorneys who secured Hurson's ruling. He said the plaintiffs' lawyers were still evaluating the possible impact of the Supreme Court's decision, but he believed the high court recognized that 'systematic, universal relief is sometimes appropriate.' In May, a judge in Rhode Island blocked an executive order that sought to dismantle federal agencies supporting libraries, museums, minority businesses and parties in labor disputes. The administration has appealed. Rhode Island was a plaintiff in the lawsuit. The state's attorney general, Peter F. Neronha, said in a statement Friday he would 'continue to pull every available legal lever to ensure that Americans, all Americans, are protected from the progressively dangerous whims of this President.'

US Senate rejects bid to curb Trump's Iran war powers
US Senate rejects bid to curb Trump's Iran war powers

Straits Times

time42 minutes ago

  • Politics
  • Straits Times

US Senate rejects bid to curb Trump's Iran war powers

A view shows the aftermath of an Israeli strike on a building on Monday, after the ceasefire between Israel and Iran, in Tehran, Iran, June 26, 2025. Majid Asgaripour/WANA (West Asia News Agency) via REUTERS/File Photo WASHINGTON - The Republican-led U.S. Senate rejected a Democratic-led bid on Friday to block President Donald Trump from using further military force against Iran, hours after the president said he would consider more bombing. The Senate vote was 53 to 47 against a war powers resolution that would have required congressional approval for more hostilities against Iran. The vote was along party lines, except Pennsylvania Democrat John Fetterman voted no, with Republicans, and Kentucky Republican Rand Paul voted yes, with Democrats. Senator Tim Kaine, chief sponsor of the resolution, has tried for years to wrest back Congress' authority to declare war from both Republican and Democratic presidents. Kaine said his latest effort underscored that the U.S. Constitution gives Congress, not the president, the sole power to declare war and requires that any hostility with Iran be explicitly authorized by a declaration of war or specific authorization for the use of military force. "If you think the president should have to come to Congress, whether you are for or against a war in Iran, you'll support Senate Joint Resolution 59, you'll support the Constitution that has stood the test of time," Kaine said in a speech before the vote. Lawmakers have been pushing for more information about weekend U.S. strikes on Iran, and the fate of Iran's stockpiles of highly enriched uranium. Earlier on Friday, Trump sharply criticized Iran's Supreme Leader, Ali Khamenei, dropped plans to lift sanctions on Iran, and said he would consider bombing Iran again if Tehran is enriching uranium to worrisome levels. He was reacting to Khamenei's first remarks after a 12-day conflict with Israel that ended when the United States launched bombing raids against Iranian nuclear sites. 'OBLITERATED' Members of Trump's national security team held classified briefings on the strikes for the Senate and House of Representatives on Thursday and Friday. Many Democratic lawmakers left the briefings saying they had not been convinced that Iran's nuclear facilities had been "obliterated," as Trump announced shortly after the raid. Opponents of the resolution said the strike on Iran was a single, limited operation within Trump's rights as commander-in-chief, not the start of sustained hostilities. Senator Bill Hagerty, a Tennessee Republican who served as ambassador to Japan during Trump's first term, said the measure could prevent any president from acting quickly against a country that has been a long-term adversary. "We must not shackle our president in the middle of a crisis when lives are on the line," Hagerty said before the vote. Trump has rejected any suggestion that damage to Iran's nuclear program was not as profound as he has said. Iran says its nuclear research is for civilian energy production. Under U.S. law, Senate war powers resolutions are privileged, meaning that the chamber had to promptly consider and vote on the measure, which Kaine introduced this month. But to be enacted, the resolution would have had to pass the Senate as well as the House of Representatives, where Speaker Mike Johnson, a close Trump ally, said this week he did not think it was the right time for such an effort. During Trump's first term, in 2020, Kaine introduced a similar resolution to rein in the Republican president's ability to wage war against Iran. That measure passed both the Senate and House of Representatives, with some Republican support, but did not garner enough votes to survive the president's veto. REUTERS Join ST's Telegram channel and get the latest breaking news delivered to you.

The California climate export catching fire in Trump's D.C.
The California climate export catching fire in Trump's D.C.

Politico

timean hour ago

  • Business
  • Politico

The California climate export catching fire in Trump's D.C.

With help from Alex Nieves and Jordan Wolman CATCHING FIRE: California's wildfire tech companies are seizing their D.C. moment as Congress and President Donald Trump eye sweeping fire reforms. Representatives from Truckee-based forest mapping company Vibrant Planet and Earth Fire Alliance, a nonprofit coalition working on wildfire-tracking satellites that includes Google and MuonSpace, backed the bipartisan Fix Our Forests Act in a House Natural Resources subcommittee hearing in Washington D.C. on Thursday focused on wildfire policy and technology. They had a receptive audience, with both Rep. Bruce Westerman, the Republican chair of the committee, and Rep. Jared Huffman, the Democratic ranking member, enthusiastically encouraging everything from drones to artificial intelligence to mapping software. 'There is no downside to scaling new technologies across the federal government, especially innovative technologies that improve wildfire suppression and response and facilitate more proactive land management,' said Westerman. To be sure, there are still cracks. Though the bill passed the House, it's cooling its heels in the Senate, where Sen. Alex Padilla is co-sponsoring it, amid broader budget talks. And on Thursday, while Westerman praised Trump's executive order seeking to consolidate federal wildfire agencies and encourage the use of privately developed technology, Huffman lambasted the Trump administration's jobs cuts that are hampering those same wildfire agencies ('This is where I feel like sometimes we must be living on different planets,' Huffman told his Republican counterparts.) But the growing bipartisan embrace of fire technology gives California's climate exports an easy and rare win in the age of Trump — and the companies that stand to benefit are leaning in. They engaged 'from the very start' to shape provisions of the bill, including a fire intelligence center and a pilot tech-testing program, said Matt Weiner, the CEO of nonprofit Megafire Action, which has allied with tech companies. 'This is an industry that was largely grown in California, and that's expanding nationwide now,' said Weiner. 'What you're seeing is policymakers nationwide seeing the potential and the need here…it's an exciting time.' They might actually be having more success in D.C. than at home. The Los Angeles fires triggered a wave of state legislative proposals focused primarily on immediate financial relief for victims and boosting Cal Fire staffing, but tech input has been sparse (the exception being Vibrant Planet's support for Sen. Josh Becker's SB 326, which bolsters wildfire planning and coordination among state agencies and utilities.) And last month, a bill by Assemblymember Cottie Petrie-Norris to set up an autonomous firefighting helicopter pilot stalled in the appropriations committee amid the broader budget deficit. Part of the D.C.-Sacramento split-screen is because California's been taking small bites out of wildfire policy as wildfires began shattering records over the past seven years, spending billions to boost its firefighting force — including more than $4 billion for Cal Fire in this year's budget — and tweaking laws to improve prescribed burning and forest management. And partly it's because no one in Sacramento has attempted the type of sweeping reform gaining traction in D.C. Dan Munsey, the San Bernardino County fire chief, testified at Thursday's hearing that he liked the spending on Cal Fire. But he also said that local agencies like his are ahead of the rest of government in embracing technology like firefighting drones. And he said tech can only go so far. 'The answer to this isn't the technology that is broadly available. The answer is leadership,' Munsey said. 'We lack interagency department collaboration. It's very bifurcated. I fully support President Trump's creation of the U.S. wildfire agency. We have to break down the barriers. We're slowly innovating. We are burdened by the regulatory process.' — CvK Did someone forward you this newsletter? Sign up here! GRID GAMES: Everyone from Microsoft to Rivian to IBEW is trying to save a proposal to create a West-wide electricity grid after state lawmakers tried to wrestle back control for California. A broad coalition of business, environmental and utility groups urged state lawmakers to pass legislation to set up the regional grid in a letter to Gov. Gavin Newsom, Senate President Pro Tem Mike McGuire and Speaker Robert Rivas on Wednesday. Their fear is that amendments taken earlier this month to Sen. Josh Becker's SB 540 could alienate utilities in other states. The amendments aim to give state lawmakers more oversight of the regionalization effort, but according to the companies and groups, they risk turning off other states that fear giving California too much control over a unified grid. 'Without California's collaborative action on this policy, its partners will leave the current markets, making energy more expensive, less reliable, and making the state's climate goals more challenging and expensive to achieve,' they wrote. Opponents of the bill, including some environmental groups and ratepayer advocates, fear regionalizing California's grid will cede control over its clean energy goals to less environmentally friendly forces. The bill is still waiting for its first policy hearing in the Assembly. — CvK START NEGOTIATING: The clock is ticking for the seven Western states fighting over their share of the dwindling Colorado River. The Trump administration has told the states that border the critical water source that they have until November 11 to reach an 'agreement in principle,' or tell the Interior Department that a deal is unlikely, POLITICO's Annie Snider reports. Scott Cameron, acting assistant secretary for Water and Science at the Interior Department, told state negotiators during a meeting of the Upper Colorado River Commission Thursday that the federal government prefers a state-led deal, but isn't afraid to impose unilateral cuts. States have struggled for more than a year to agree on new rules governing water deliveries to replace those set to expire at the end of 2026. The fight has pitted California, Arizona and Nevada against the Upper Basin states of Colorado, New Mexico and Utah over how to divvy up water from a river that has shrunk by 20 percent over the past quarter century thanks to drought and climate change. — AN RARE EARTH TROUBLE: The Trump administration's fight with China over rare earth minerals is sending a shock through automakers' electric vehicle supply chains. China's tightening restrictions on the critical minerals used in electronics and heavy-duty motors found in electric vehicles and hybrids are already causing reduced parts supply for car companies, Hannah Northey and Mike Lee report for POLITICO's E&E news. Not all automakers are in the same tenuous position. Ford was forced to shut down a plant in Chicago that makes Explorer SUVs for a week, while BMW and Suzuki have reported disruptions. General Motors, meanwhile, has found itself buffered from the growing trade war after stocking up on rare earth minerals early. The disruption to rare earth supply chains comes as automakers warn that Trump's 25 percent tariff on imported cars and parts — and his threat to increase that levy — will lead to shortages and higher prices at dealerships. — AN — 2024 was the hottest year on record, but it's only likely to get hotter this year. — Longtime Elon Musk ally and top Tesla executive Omead Afshar has left the struggling automaker. — Malaysia, a top destination for California plastic waste, says it will no longer accept shipments from the U.S.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store