Podcasts about Fair Credit Reporting Act

In this episode, HR thought leader Tim Sackett joins host David Turetsky to explore the current landscape of artificial intelligence in HR, talent acquisition, and broader workforce management. They discuss the gap between technological potential and real-world application, legal and ethical challenges, and how government regulation could shape the future of AI in HR.  In this episode:  The real vs. perceived capabilities of AI in HR based on recent conferences and practitioner understanding  The legal issues emerging from AI use in recruiting, including Fair Credit Reporting Act concerns and litigation risks  The influence of government and regulatory bodies, with insights into new appointments like Keith Sondralin at the Department of Labor  The analogy of AI's growth and adoption to consumer products, highlighting how HR leaders can start integrating AI effectively  The untapped potential of blockchain for employee data integrity and verification in the future workforce  Practical advice on how HR practitioners can educate themselves quickly on AI basics to avoid vendor confusion  The importance of embedding AI into business and HR strategy to genuinely solve problems rather than just automate tasks  The ethical and security concerns linked to identity fraud, insider threats, and malicious use of AI for employment fraud  Timestamps:   00:00 - Welcome and episode overview on AI's impact in HR 00:48 - Insights into Tim's recent conference experiences and the state of AI learning among HR professionals 02:35 - The hype versus the real application of AI in talent acquisition 02:57 - Fun facts about Tim Sackett: a Belieber and a Swiftie 03:48 - The quality and impact of recent Super Bowl performances and music preferences 05:02 - Discussing the upcoming Rush tour anniversary and nostalgia for classic rock 06:34 - The intersection of AI and HR conference trends, gap analysis between practitioners and tech providers 07:50 - The knowledge gap in HR regarding AI capabilities and the risk of vaporware marketing 09:01 - Foundations of HR's misunderstanding of existing HR tech systems and AI's rapid evolution 11:33 - Legal challenges with AI, including Wells Fargo and Workday litigations, and compliance risks 13:07 - The potential for AI to cause or prevent legal liabilities and litigation 15:00 - New leadership at the Department of Labor and its implications for AI regulation 17:10 - Political influences on regulatory approaches and the need for national AI legislation 19:54 - Blockchain's dormant potential for workforce data sovereignty and validation 22:07 - The future of digital identity verification and the use of blockchain for employee records 24:11 - Risks of identity fraud and the importance of robust verification methods 26:22 - How AI can both combat and exacerbate identity fraud and security vulnerabilities 28:25 - Insider threats, employment fraud, and the importance of vigilance in digital security 31:10 - Strategies for HR leaders to become AI literate with minimal time investment 33:24 - The importance of understanding what "agent" and "automation" truly mean in HR tech markets 35:23 - Aligning AI initiatives with business and HR strategies to solve real problems 37:07 - Cost considerations, the hidden expenses of AI, and the importance of planning for ROI 38:48 - The "free" AI myth and the real costs of tokens, processing, and hardware investments 40:08 - The impact of AI data quality on recommendations and organizational decision-making 41:04 - Closing remarks and appreciation for Tim Sackett's insights    Resources & Links:  Anthropic's Prompt Engineering Video  Keith Sondralin - Department of Labor  Claude AI by Anthropic  ChatGPT by OpenAI  Gemini AI by Google  The Fair Credit Reporting Act  Connect with Tim Sackett:  LinkedIn  Twitter  Note:   For HR leaders, gaining a foundational knowledge of AI is critical. Resources like Anthropic's short videos or AI primer courses can accelerate understanding and help avoid vendor hype and legal pitfalls. 

What seems like a simple request for records can quickly become a costly compliance failure. In this episode, we unpack the FTC's settlement with Amazon over alleged violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act's identity theft record requirements, highlighting how routine customer service practices, identity verification protocols, and privacy concerns can conflict with the FCRA's strict obligations. The case serves as a reminder that businesses handling consumer data must do more than adopt compliance policies—they must ensure frontline employees can execute them correctly and within the law's precise timelines. For companies managing fraud, identity theft, or consumer records, the settlement underscores that operational details can carry significant regulatory consequences. Hosted by Simone Roach. Based on a blog post by Laura Riposo VanDruff and Donnelly L. McDowell.

The 609 letter myth is one of the most sold and misunderstood ideas in credit repair, and in this episode Daniel Rosen explains why it fails and what real Credit Heroes do instead. Join Our FREE Start Repairing Credit Challenge: http://startrepairingcredit.com/?utm_source=podcast&utm_medium=audio&utm_campaign=343&utm_term=business Daniel has spent over 20 years in credit repair and helped thousands of people build businesses from nothing, so he has watched this myth cost people money and trust. The pitch is everywhere: pay $27 for a template that supposedly forces the bureaus to delete any debt, even real debt. It isn't true, and Daniel shows exactly where the idea breaks down. Section 609 of the Fair Credit Reporting Act is a disclosure right. It lets you ask what's in your file and where it came from, but it doesn't give you the power to dispute anything. The real leverage lives in Section 611, your right to dispute. When you challenge a genuine error, the bureau has about 30 days to investigate, and if it can't verify the item, it has to correct or delete it. Daniel also walks through the process that actually moves scores: pull all three reports, audit them line by line for real inaccuracies and Metro 2 reporting errors, dispute the specifics under 611, then rebuild, since payment history is 35% of the score. For anyone running a credit repair business, he explains why honest expectations protect you from chargebacks and complaints, and why trust is what turns clients into referrals and repeat business. Tune in!  P.S. Join the #1 event to grow your credit repair business: http://creditrepairexpo.com/   Key Takeaways: 00:00 The $27 Credit Repair Scam Going Viral Right Now 01:22 The Loophole That Isn't a Loophole 02:02 609 Is a Disclosure. Not a Dispute 02:32 The Part of the FCRA Nobody Sells You 03:08 Why Sometimes Items Do Come Off and What Really Happened 03:52 Why Honesty Is Your Biggest Competitive Advantage 05:44 The Four-Step Process That Actually Gets Results 07:08 There Are No Magic Letters. Only the Right Process Additional Resources: Get a free trial to Credit Repair Cloud Get my free credit repair training   8 Simple Steps for Removing Identity Theft from Credit Reports! Make sure to subscribe so you stay up to date with our latest episodes.

Cuando dos personas compran lo mismo y una termina pagando muchísimo más, no es solo cuestión de suerte o del vendedor. Detrás hay años de hábitos con tarjetas, créditos “fáciles” y compras de “compra ahora, paga después” que van dejando huella en un historial que casi nunca se ve, pero que decide si te suben la tasa, te niegan una promoción o te cierran la puerta. Entender esas reglas invisibles y cómo se está escribiendo ese historial puede ser la diferencia entre financiar tu vida… o financiar intereses que nunca tendrían que haberte tocado.Sé parte de la primer temporada de Fírmame el Cheque. Si eres emprendedor y buscas inversión, entra a la liga que te dejaré a continuación, llena el formulario con la información de tu negocio y ya estarás compitiendo por un lugar en el programa: https://firmameelcheque.com/00:00 - Comprar todo a crédito: el número oculto que decide cuánto terminas pagando por la misma casa o el mismo auto00:44 - En México, 37% ya tiene algún crédito formal, pero millones siguen fuera del sistema por rechazo o miedo a endeudarse01:35 - Dos amigos, mismo coche, mismo contrato… uno paga cientos de miles de pesos más solo por su historial crediticio03:11 - De chismes y rumores al algoritmo: cómo pasamos de “lo que dicen de ti” a bases de datos financieras masivas05:38 - Reportes que juzgaban tu vida privada: hábitos, bares, sexualidad y “mala moral” usados como focos rojos financieros07:19 - Fair Credit Reporting Act: el intento de limpiar prejuicios y permitir ver y corregir tus propios archivos08:20 - Nace el FICO Score: confianza convertida en fórmula estadística que domina el crédito en Estados Unidos09:17 - En México, el FOAPROA, las crisis bancarias y el nacimiento de TransUnion, Dun & Bradstreet y Círculo de Crédito10:49 - “Compra ahora, paga después”: fintechs, BNPL y jóvenes que financian su consumo sin ver que es crédito disfrazado12:20 - Dos personas con mismo sueldo, pero historias financieras opuestas: así el sistema las trata como riesgos distintos14:03 - El boom de las tarjetas: casi 2 billones de pesos en crédito y 9 de cada 10 registros en Círculo de Crédito son positivos14:46 - Puntajes de 400 a 850: pagar tarde, usar casi todo tu límite y abrir muchas cuentas hunde tu score aunque ganes bien16:25 - La paradoja del historial: si nunca usas crédito, luego el sistema desconfía porque no tiene nada que evaluar18:21 - El mismo ingreso, pero tasas y seguros muy distintos: cómo un número se traduce en miles de pesos extra a lo largo de años19:07 - Las “manchas” no son eternas: los registros negativos caducan, pero la deuda legal sigue existiendo hasta que la atiendes20:11 - Fraudes del buró: nadie puede borrar tu historial por arte de magia, solo aprovechan el miedo y la desinformación20:32 - Menos del 24% lleva presupuesto y solo 39% registra sus deudas: la educación financiera sigue siendo el gran ausente21:58 - Invisibles para el sistema: millones sin historial buscan apoyo en ahorros y familia porque el banco ni los ve23:22 - IA, código postal y tipo de empleo: nuevos algoritmos que pueden repetir viejos sesgos de discriminación financiera25:51 - El lado positivo posible: IA y fintech que usan pagos de servicios y huella digital para abrir puertas a quienes nunca tuvieron crédito27:35 - Crédito como motor y trampa: acceso a casa y auto vs. vidas atrapadas en intereses altos por no entender el juego28:24 - No eres solo un número, pero ese número sí impacta toda tu vida financiera; entender las reglas te da algo de control

In this episode of our Summer Edition series, we examine several of the biggest developments shaping advertising, privacy, and consumer protection law. We discuss state attorneys general's push for greater transparency around food delivery fees and personalized pricing, a federal court's analysis of growth claims in advertising, the FTC's latest action against deceptive subscription practices, and two new lawsuits highlighting the continued legal risks surrounding influencer marketing and endorsement disclosures. We also explore lessons from the FTC's recent settlement with Amazon over its handling of identity theft records under the Fair Credit Reporting Act and highlight on-demand Kelley Drye webinars covering pricing, DOJ enforcement, and state attorney general priorities. Hosted by Simone Roach. This episode features blog posts by Paul Singer, Abigail Stempson, Beth Chun, Andrea deLorimier, Gonzalo Mon, Laura Riposo VanDruff, and Donnelly McDowell. You can find these blog posts and much more at AdLawAccess.com. For webinar recordings, upcoming events, and additional thought leadership, visit KelleyDrye.com.

On May 12, 2026, we produced a 90-minute webinar in which we explored one of the most important and rapidly developing issues in consumer financial services law: coerced debt and the emerging legislative efforts designed to address it. The webinar has been re-purposed into a two-part podcast series, the first of which was released this past Thursday, June 11th, and the second of which is being released today, Thursday, June 18th. Alan Kaplinsky, Founder, former Chair for 25 years and now Senior Counsel of the Consumer Financial Services Group at Ballard Spahr, LLP hosted and moderated this discussion. The discussion examines the growing recognition that individuals, often survivors of domestic violence, elder abuse, human trafficking, or other forms of coercive control, can be manipulated, threatened, or deceived into incurring debt without meaningful consent. The program focuses in particular on New York's newly enacted coerced debt statute, which creates a framework allowing consumers to challenge the enforceability of debts incurred through coercion and requires creditors and debt collectors to investigate such claims. This topic was covered in Part 1. The episodes feature an outstanding panel of experts from academia, legal services organizations, consumer advocacy groups, and private practice. Professor Angela Littwin of the University of Texas School of Law discusses her groundbreaking research on coerced debt, including empirical studies demonstrating the prevalence of the problem and the inadequacy of traditional legal remedies such as divorce proceedings, bankruptcy, and fraud defenses. Representatives from CAMBA Legal Services, Brooklyn, New York, Divya Subramanyam and Naomi Young, explain how the New York statute is intended to operate in practice, including the evidentiary requirements imposed on survivors, creditor obligations upon receipt of a coerced debt claim, and the practical challenges survivors face in seeking relief. Part 2 of the program being released today begins with a discussion of the broader national landscape. Carla Sanchez-Adams of the National Consumer Law Center discusses similar legislative initiatives developing across the country, including laws enacted in states such as California, Texas, Connecticut, Minnesota, Maine, Illinois, and Vermont, as well as pending legislation elsewhere.  Carla and the panel further analyze the interaction between coerced debt claims and existing federal laws such as the Fair Credit Reporting Act and Truth in Lending Act, while also addressing ongoing efforts to expand federal protections. Finally, Ballard Spahr attorney, Dan Wilkinson, offers an industry perspective on the significant operational and compliance issues created by these laws for banks, finance companies, debt collectors, and other financial institutions. The discussion highlights the challenges of identifying coerced debt claims, conducting investigations while protecting survivor confidentiality, training frontline personnel, and balancing consumer protection concerns with fraud prevention and risk management obligations. Consumer Finance Monitor is hosted by Alan Kaplinsky, Senior Counsel at Ballard Spahr, and the founder and former chair of the firm's Consumer Financial Services Group. We encourage listeners to subscribe to the podcast on their preferred platform for weekly insights into developments in the consumer finance industry.

On May 12, 2026, we produced a 90-minute webinar in which we explored one of the most important and rapidly developing issues in consumer financial services law: coerced debt and the emerging legislative efforts designed to address it. The webinar has been re-purposed into a two-part podcast series, the first of which is being released today, June 11th, and the second of which is being released next Thursday, June 18th. Alan Kaplinsky, Founder, former Chair for 25 years and now Senior Counsel of the Consumer Financial Services Group at Ballard Spahr, LLP hosted and moderated this discussion.  The discussion examines the growing recognition that individuals, often survivors of domestic violence, elder abuse, human trafficking, or other forms of coercive control, can be manipulated, threatened, or deceived into incurring debt without meaningful consent. The program focuses in particular on New York's newly enacted coerced debt statute, which creates a framework allowing consumers to challenge the enforceability of debts incurred through coercion and requires creditors and debt collectors to investigate such claims. The episodes feature an outstanding panel of experts from academia, legal services organizations, consumer advocacy groups, and private practice. Professor Angela Littwin of the University of Texas School of Law discusses her groundbreaking research on coerced debt, including empirical studies demonstrating the prevalence of the problem and the inadequacy of traditional legal remedies such as divorce proceedings, bankruptcy, and fraud defenses. Representatives from CAMBA Legal Services, Brooklyn, New York, Divya Subrahmanyam and Naomi Young, explain how the New York statute is intended to operate in practice, including the evidentiary requirements imposed on survivors, creditor obligations upon receipt of a coerced debt claim, and the practical challenges survivors face in seeking relief. The program also examines the broader national landscape. Carla Sanchez-Adams of the National Consumer Law Center discusses similar legislative initiatives developing across the country, including laws enacted in states such as California, Texas, Connecticut, Minnesota, Maine, Illinois, and Vermont, as well as pending legislation elsewhere. Carla and the panel further analyze the interaction between coerced debt claims and existing federal laws such as the Fair Credit Reporting Act and Truth in Lending Act, while also addressing ongoing efforts to expand federal protections. Finally, Ballard Spahr attorney, Dan Wilkinson, offers an industry perspective on the significant operational and compliance issues created by these laws for banks, finance companies, debt collectors, and other financial institutions. The discussion highlights the challenges of identifying coerced debt claims, conducting investigations while protecting survivor confidentiality, training frontline personnel, and balancing consumer protection concerns with fraud prevention and risk management obligations. This podcast and the one we are releasing next week provide a comprehensive and balanced examination of a fast-evolving area of consumer finance law that is likely to have substantial implications for creditors, debt collectors, compliance professionals, consumer advocates, and policymakers nationwide. Part 1 of this discussion includes an introduction to the topic and the speakers by Alan Kaplinsky, an overview of coerced debt by Angela Littwin, and the analysis of the New York statute by Divya Subrahmanyam and Naomi Young.  Part 2 of the discussion, which is being released next Thursday, June 18th, will cover theories of liability under existing federal and state laws and bills pending in other states by Carla Sanchez-Adams, the Industry Perspective by Dan Wilkinson, and the key takeaways and closing by Alan Kaplinsky.  Consumer Finance Monitor is hosted by Alan Kaplinsky, Senior Counsel at Ballard Spahr, and the founder and former chair of the firm's Consumer Financial Services Group. We encourage listeners to subscribe to the podcast on their preferred platform for weekly insights into developments in the consumer finance industry.

Send us Fan MailDoes your community perform background checks on potential purchasers and potential renters? Do your community residents expect their neighbors to be screened for safety and financial capacity purposes?  Join Donna DiMaggio Berger and guest Robert Sanchez, a seasoned professional from SARMA, as they unravel the complex world of background checks. Donna and Robert dive into the intricacies of the Fair Credit Reporting Act, the cost of background checks, the challenges of screening foreign applicants, and the potential penalties if your background check is incomplete or inaccurate.  In this enlightening conversation, Donna and Robert unpack the evolution of background checks and debate the importance of credit scores. They debunk the myths surrounding FICO and Vantage scores and provide practical tips for building good credit. Shifting gears, Donna and Robert focus on the international arena, considering background checks for international applicants and data privacy concerns. They touch on the challenges of running background checks in different jurisdictions, the necessity of parental consent when screening juveniles, and the ever-looming threat to data security. They wrap up by considering the issues that blanket approval policies can pose and discuss about emerging technologies. Robert's valuable insights will surely equip you to better understand and navigate the world of background screening. Tune in as Donna and Robert explore this topic of such importance to so many mandatory community associations!Conversation highlights include:Screening potential renters and potential purchasersUnderstanding and utilizing background reports Understanding credit score ranges Screening costsTransmitting and storing sensitive informationUnderstanding the different entities found on a criminal backgroundRelated Links:Podcast: The Impact of Rentals on Community Associations with David Muller, Vice Chair of Becker's Community Association PracticeResource: Background Screening with SarmaArticle: A Rude Awakening: Your Board May Not Have the Right to Screen Leases and Sales at All!

Your DSCR loan will more than likely be sold to a new lender — and when it is, it could show up on your personal credit report even if you've never missed a single payment. In this episode, Ryan walks through a real investor situation, breaks down your rights under the Fair Credit Reporting Act, and gives you the exact steps to dispute errors and protect your credit before your next deal. Subscribe to Chasing Financial Freedom for weekly real estate investing strategies every Wednesday.

David Chami, Managing Partner of Consumer Justice Law Firm, joined us on “People in Transition” to shed light on an issue that quietly impacts millions of job seekers: background checks. With a legal career rooted in consumer protection and years of experience litigating under the Fair Credit Reporting Act, David has helped clients recover tens of millions of dollars from companies that reported inaccurate or misleading information. His work sits at the intersection of law, employment, and fairness—making him a powerful advocate for individuals navigating the hiring process.Even before founding his current firm, David Chami built a reputation for holding large institutions accountable, including insurance companies and credit reporting agencies. Today, his focus is on ensuring that everyday people are not unfairly denied opportunities because of errors, outdated records, or systemic flaws in background screening and credit reports. His insights offer both a legal and human perspective on what can often feel like an opaque and unforgiving system.In our conversation, we explored the realities of modern hiring, where background checks are used by nearly 95% of employers and are often handled by major background check companies. We talked about why employers generally cannot deny employment based solely on a charge without a conviction, and the many challenges within the system—such as dismissed charges that remain on records, mistaken identity issues (like data confusion caused by common names or hyphenated names), and inaccuracies caused by data vendors that don't rely on Social Security numbers. David also shared a compelling case involving a client who successfully sued Uber over incorrect background information, resulting in a $680,000 verdict. We discussed who actually pays for legal representation (the answer may surprise you), the differences between expungement and record sealing—and why neither fully guarantees your past won't resurface—and, most importantly, how the Fair Credit Reporting Act exists to protect employees and ensure their rights are upheld.This episode is a must-listen for anyone navigating today's job market. Whether you're actively searching, considering a career move, or simply want to understand your rights, David's insights could make a critical difference. Tune in to “People in Transition” and learn how to protect your future before a background check defines it.Listeners can get in touch with David Chami at:Consumer Justice Law Firmdchami@consumerjustice.com 844-808-2553 (firm) 480-626-2359 (direct)Consumerjustice.comSend us Fan Mail

In this episode of The Consumer Finance Podcast, Chris Willis is joined by Consumer Financial Services Partners Stefanie Jackman and Nicholas O'Conner to dissect the shifting risk landscape for servicers, collectors, and debt buyers as federal scrutiny eases and state regulators surge to the forefront. As a segment of the Year in Review and Look Ahead series, the trio talks about Reg F's post-Loper Bright staying power, the explosive growth of state medical debt restrictions and FCRA preemption battles, and the rapid spread of coerced debt/economic abuse statutes reshaping account handling. They also explore the evolving role of debt settlement companies and their use of AI, in addition to offering practical tips on building national policies and procedures to prepare for the next wave of litigation and enforcement. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

In a recent episode of the award-winning Consumer Finance Monitor podcast, Alan Kaplinsky was joined by Nick Bourke, Kate Griffin, and Ballard Spahr partner Joseph Schuster to discuss a groundbreaking new report from the Aspen Institute Financial Security Program: United We Stand: A National Strategy to Prevent Scams. The episode builds on Nick and Kate's prior appearance on the podcast last July, when the report was still in development. Now finalized, the report offers one of the most comprehensive frameworks to date for addressing what has become a systemic threat to American households and the broader financial system. The Scope of the Problem: A Systemic Threat Frauds and scams are no longer isolated consumer protection issues. According to the report, U.S. households are losing an estimated $196 billion annually to scams — roughly $1 billion every couple of days. One in five American adults reports having lost money to an online scam. As Nick Bourke explained, today's scams are: ·                 Technology-enabled ·                 Highly organized and industrialized ·                 Often operated by transnational criminal organizations ·                 Accelerating due to AI and faster payment systems The so-called scam "lifecycle" includes four stages: 1.     Lead – Hooking the victim 2.     Deceive – Building trust (often through impersonation or relationship-building) 3.     Bleed – Extracting funds 4.     Clean – Laundering proceeds, often through cryptocurrency or offshore channels Different sectors see only fragments of this lifecycle; social media platforms may see the "lead," financial institutions the "bleed," and law enforcement the "clean." That fragmentation allows criminals to scale operations while defenders remain siloed. Why Scams Are Rising Despite Heavy Investment As Kate Griffin noted, industry and government are investing heavily in prevention. Yet scams continue to grow. Why? ·                 Fragmentation across sectors: No single actor sees the entire attack sequence. ·                 Outdated reporting infrastructure: Federal systems at agencies like the FBI and FTC remain manual and technologically antiquated. ·                 Regulatory uncertainty: Financial institutions and technology platforms face unclear expectations about what data they can use and share. ·                 Speed of modern payments: Faster money movement means faster losses. Joseph Schuster emphasized that many financial institutions are strongly incentivized to prevent fraud as they often bear reputational and financial risk when scams succeed. But legal ambiguity, especially under statutes like the Fair Credit Reporting Act, can chill data-sharing and innovation. Core Recommendations from the Aspen Report The report outlines both high-level national reforms and granular operational improvements with more than 180 specific ideas. 1. Elevate Scam Prevention to a National Priority The report calls for: ·                 A designated federal lead (or "czar") to coordinate strategy ·                 A whole-of-government approach ·                 Clear national goals and metrics Without centralized leadership, enforcement and regulatory actions remain fragmented.  2. Modernize Law Enforcement Reporting Systems Federal reporting portals, including Suspicious Activity Reports (SARs), the FBI's complaint systems, and the FTC's databases, require modernization. The report recommends: ·                 Streamlined, automated reporting ·                 Backend data interoperability across agencies ·                 Advanced analytics and AI tools for enforcement 3. Establish Clear Duties to Act Paired with Safe Harbors One of the most important themes discussed was the need for: ·                 Clear expectations for banks, telecom companies, and digital platforms ·                 Safe harbors that protect companies when sharing scam intelligence in good faith Countries like Australia have already codified such frameworks. The U.S. has yet to establish similarly coordinated standards. 4. Build a Cross-Sector Information-Sharing Ecosystem Effective scam prevention requires: ·                 Exchange of scam indicators (malicious URLs, compromised phone numbers, device patterns) ·                 Interoperable information-sharing platforms ·                 Privacy-preserving architecture ·                 Legal clarity to mitigate antitrust and consumer reporting concerns Joseph noted that industry appetite for collaboration is strong but clarity and guardrails are essential. 5. Consider a U.S. National Anti-Scam Center The report explores the idea of a centralized "front door", potentially something like stopscams.gov, that would: ·                 Serve as a national reporting hub ·                 Provide victim resources ·                 Facilitate coordination among law enforcement ·                 Support public education campaigns Social Media and Platform Responsibility The discussion also addressed the evolving role of digital platforms. Scam activity frequently originates through: ·                 Paid advertisements ·                 Dating applications ·                 Direct messaging ·                 Fake investment websites Compared to banks, social media companies operate within a less clearly defined regulatory structure. Courts are increasingly developing theories of "platform liability," but statutory clarity is lacking. The report urges policymakers to define reasonable expectations for platforms — paired with safe harbors and practical tools that empower prevention rather than merely assign blame. What Happens Next? The key question: who implements this strategy? Kate Griffin emphasized that this is a whole-of-society problem requiring coordinated action by: ·                 Federal leadership ·                 Congress ·                 Financial institutions ·                 Telecom and digital platforms ·                 Law enforcement ·                 Civil society There have been encouraging developments, including: ·                 Treasury and State Department sanctions targeting transnational scam networks ·                 A joint DOJ–FBI–Secret Service initiative targeting Southeast Asian scam operations o   But much more remains to be done. Nick Bourke suggested that, one year from now, real success would include: ·                 A designated federal anti-scam lead ·                 A congressional commission ·                 Measurable national prevention goals ·                 Corporate adoption of formalized anti-scam strategies Joseph Schuster added that industry innovation is ongoing, particularly in artificial intelligence, biometrics, and authentication, but warned that fragmented state-level regulation could complicate progress. Key Takeaways Alan Kaplinsky closed the episode with several important observations: ·                 Fraud and scams are now a systemic threat, not a niche compliance issue. ·                 Prevention, not just reimbursement, must be the organizing principle. ·                 Coordination matters as much as authority. ·                 Good-faith companies need regulatory clarity, not just enforcement pressure. ·                 Reducing scams strengthens trust in the U.S. financial system and digital economy. The Aspen report reframes the debate. Rather than assigning blame, it calls for aligned incentives, shared responsibility, and coordinated national action. If the title of the report, United We Stand, becomes reality, the United States may finally begin to bend the curve on one of the most costly and fast-growing threats facing consumers today. For more insights on consumer financial services developments, visit Ballard Spahr's Consumer Finance Monitor blog and explore the full Aspen Institute report here. Consumer Finance Monitor is hosted by Alan Kaplinsky, Senior Counsel at Ballard Spahr, and the founder and former chair of the firm's Consumer Financial Services Group. We encourage listeners to subscribe to the podcast on their preferred platform for weekly insights into developments in the consumer finance industry.

In this special joint episode of The Consumer Finance Podcast and Payments Pros, Taylor Gess and Kim Phan discuss key privacy and data security risks in point-of-sale finance. They dive into regulators' growing view that every player in the payments chain shares responsibility for protecting data, highlighting best practices for vendor management, PCI DSS oversight, and incident response planning. The episode also touches on the shifting patchwork of state privacy and breach notification laws, GLBA exemptions, and the risks of data monetization, including when packaging and selling transaction data can trigger Fair Credit Reporting Act obligations. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

This week: World Economic Forum's Annual Meeting in Davos is all over the news. Felix Salmon, Elizabeth Spiers, and Emily Peck, explain the moments that made headlines and why Davos feels so much more relevant this year. Then, Trump promised to address the affordability crisis at Davos but failed to say much. The hosts discuss what he did say, and how the ongoing crisis is being addressed overall. And finally, a new lawsuit claims that the AI screening tools that have taken over the job hunting landscape should be subject to the Fair Credit Reporting Act. The hosts get into what these tools do now and why this change could be beneficial.In the Slate Plus episode: Celebrities interviewing celebrities. It's an epidemic. Want to hear that discussion and hear more Slate Money? Join Slate Plus to unlock weekly bonus episodes. Plus, you'll access ad-free listening across all your favorite Slate podcasts. You can subscribe directly from the Slate Money show page on Apple Podcasts and Spotify. Or, visit slate.com/moneyplus to get access wherever you listen. Podcast production by Jessamine Molli and Cheyna Roth. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week: World Economic Forum's Annual Meeting in Davos is all over the news. Felix Salmon, Elizabeth Spiers, and Emily Peck, explain the moments that made headlines and why Davos feels so much more relevant this year. Then, Trump promised to address the affordability crisis at Davos but failed to say much. The hosts discuss what he did say, and how the ongoing crisis is being addressed overall. And finally, a new lawsuit claims that the AI screening tools that have taken over the job hunting landscape should be subject to the Fair Credit Reporting Act. The hosts get into what these tools do now and why this change could be beneficial.In the Slate Plus episode: Celebrities interviewing celebrities. It's an epidemic. Want to hear that discussion and hear more Slate Money? Join Slate Plus to unlock weekly bonus episodes. Plus, you'll access ad-free listening across all your favorite Slate podcasts. You can subscribe directly from the Slate Money show page on Apple Podcasts and Spotify. Or, visit slate.com/moneyplus to get access wherever you listen. Podcast production by Jessamine Molli and Cheyna Roth. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week: World Economic Forum's Annual Meeting in Davos is all over the news. Felix Salmon, Elizabeth Spiers, and Emily Peck, explain the moments that made headlines and why Davos feels so much more relevant this year. Then, Trump promised to address the affordability crisis at Davos but failed to say much. The hosts discuss what he did say, and how the ongoing crisis is being addressed overall. And finally, a new lawsuit claims that the AI screening tools that have taken over the job hunting landscape should be subject to the Fair Credit Reporting Act. The hosts get into what these tools do now and why this change could be beneficial.In the Slate Plus episode: Celebrities interviewing celebrities. It's an epidemic. Want to hear that discussion and hear more Slate Money? Join Slate Plus to unlock weekly bonus episodes. Plus, you'll access ad-free listening across all your favorite Slate podcasts. You can subscribe directly from the Slate Money show page on Apple Podcasts and Spotify. Or, visit slate.com/moneyplus to get access wherever you listen. Podcast production by Jessamine Molli and Cheyna Roth. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Hi there,Welcome back to Untangled. It's written by me, ​Charley Johnson​, and ​supported​ by members like you. This week I'm sharing my conversation with Miranda Bogen (Director, AI Governance Lab, Center for Democracy & Technology) about what happens when your AI assistant becomes an advertiser.As always, please send me feedback on today's post by replying to this email. I read and respond to every note.Don't forget to sign up for ​The Untangled Collective​ — it's my free community for tech & society leaders navigating technological change and changing systems, and ​the next event is coming up!

Use code IAM-ChrisRussell for your free pass to IAMPHENOM in Philly March 10-12. Click Here. TOP STORIES Eightfold AI, a venture capital-backed artificial intelligence hiring platform used by Microsoft, PayPal and many other Fortune 500 companies, is being sued in California for allegedly compiling ​reports used to screen job applicants without their knowledge. The lawsuit filed on Tuesday accusing Eightfold of ‌violating the Fair Credit Reporting Act  https://hrtechfeed.com/eightfold-is-being-sued-by-2-job-applicants/ Chandler, Ariz. — Vensure Employer Solutions (Vensure), a leading provider of HR/HCM technology, managed services and global business process outsourcing, serving more than 161,000 clients worldwide, recently acquired Distro, an AI-powered recruiting platform headquartered in Lehi, UT https://hrtechfeed.com/vensure-employer-solutions-acquires-ai-recruiting-platform/ NEW YORK — Payoneer (NASDAQ: PAYO), the global financial technology company powering business growth across borders, today announced it has acquired Boundless, an Ireland-based Employer of Record (EOR) platform that helps companies seamlessly and compliantly employ people around the world.  https://hrtechfeed.com/payoneer-acquires-eor-company/ Workday, Inc.  announced its plans to invest CAD $1 billion in Canada over the next five years. The multi-year investment demonstrates Workday's commitment to growing in Canada, including plans to further develop local tech talent, strengthen local customer support, and give back to Canadian communities https://hrtechfeed.com/workday-to-invest-cad-1-billion-in-canada-over-five-years/ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Send in your questions to hrask.org or leave your questions in the chat! In Episode 359 we welcome Beltway insider Jim Plunkett for a practical breakdown of how recent disruptions are shaping the year ahead for employers. The conversation explores where employment policy is really being made, why federal agencies may have more influence than Congress, and how shifts at the Department of Labor, NLRB, and EEOC could impact employers in 2026. The panel also takes a look at AI hiring risks, emerging discrimination lawsuits, a rare 27-pay-period year, and the growing divide between state and federal workplace rules. This episode is essential viewing for HR leaders and business executives who want to understand what is changing, why it matters, and how to prepare before the next wave hits. Timestamps:  00:00 – Welcome & what Congress did (and didn't) do for employers 01:31 – Opening banter & why keeping up with policy feels like tennis 03:38 – Lawyer on the Clock: AI hiring tools & Fair Credit Reporting Act risks 07:32 – Uber & Lyft gender-matching lawsuits: damned if you do, damned if you don't 10:27 – 2026 warning: Why some employers may face 27 pay periods 13:52 – Why 2025 felt so disruptive for employers 17:38 – When agencies drive employment policy, not Congress 19:03 – Independent contractor rules & OSHA heat regulations 23:15 – State vs. federal divide on AI and workplace laws 26:12 – What's coming from the NLRB, EEOC & DOL in 2026 Learn more about becoming a member of AAIM at https://aaimea

In this episode of The Consumer Finance Podcast, host Chris Willis is joined by his colleague Lou Manetti from the firm's Chicago office to unpack a significant new Illinois Supreme Court decision on standing in consumer cases based on federal statutes. Chris and Lou walk through the court's FCRA "receipt truncation" ruling, explaining how Illinois — long thought to have more generous standing rules than federal court — has now imported a "concrete injury" requirement for common-law standing where the statute does not expressly confer a right to sue. The discussion compares Illinois' approach to federal Article III jurisprudence and explores how the court distinguished between statutory and common-law standing, why FCRA did not qualify for statutory standing, and what counts (and doesn't count) as a concrete injury. Lou also outlines the practical implications for FCRA, FDCPA, TILA, and RESPA litigation in Illinois state courts, including the reduced payoff from forum shopping after federal standing dismissals and new avenues for defense motions challenging bare procedural violation cases that lack real-world harm. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

In this episode of The Rent Perfect Podcast, CEO David Pickron and co-host Scot Aubrey break down one of the most overlooked legal requirements in property management — the Adverse Action Letter.When you deny a rental applicant due to credit, income, criminal history, or false information, federal law requires that you send an adverse action notice. Skip it, and you could face penalties up to $11,000 plus attorney's fees.David and Scot explain:*What an adverse action letter is and when to send one.*Why it protects both you and your applicants.*How the Fair Credit Reporting Act affects landlords.*The easiest way to generate one instantly using RentPerfect.What to do if you're not yet a Rent Perfect user (hint: email us for a free sample)Whether you manage one property or one hundred, this episode will help you stay compliant, professional, and protected.

The Chrisman Commentary Daily Mortgage News Podcast delivers timely insights for mortgage lenders, loan officers, capital markets professionals, and anyone curious about the mortgage and housing industry. Hosted by industry expert Robbie Chrisman, each weekday episode breaks down mortgage rates, lending news, housing market trends, capital markets activity, and regulatory updates with insightful analysis, expert perspectives, and conversations with top professionals from across the mortgage industry. Stay informed, gain actionable insights, and keep up with developments in mortgage banking and housing finance. Learn more at www.chrismancommentary.com.In today's episode, we go through the the poor combination of labor and inflation data from this week. Plus, Robbie sits down with Polunsky Beitel Green's Peter Idziak for a discussion on takeaways from the bipartisan Home Buyers Privacy Protection Act (trigger leads bill), which amends the Fair Credit Reporting Act by shifting trigger leads to an opt-in system, mandates a study on text-based solicitations, and raises concerns about its impact on credit bureau revenue and market competition. And we close by looking at the demand at long-bond auctions over the past couple of days.Sponsored by Indecomm. Streamlining operations with the genius blend of automation, AI, and services. Achieve practical digital transformation and real operational impact with Indecomm's purpose-built mortgage solutions.

In today's digital world, security is more complex than ever. Whether it's financial information or personal identification, cyber threats are among the fastest-growing crimes in the country, according to FBI statistics. Join us in this episode as we explore these modern challenges with Thomas B. Christiano, an attorney at Blankingship & Christiano P.C.. Identity thieves can use stolen information to apply for credit, file taxes, receive medical services, or make frivolous purchases in someone else's name. This can devastate the victim's credit and finances — leaving crippling debt and lasting uncertainty in its wake.  Whether you've recently experienced identity theft or simply want to safeguard yourself against it, this episode will provide essential insights and practical steps to help you stay protected. This conversation explores: The different types of identity theft. Methods of defending and deferring attempts at identity theft.  How legal professionals help victims of identity theft. The benefits of checking your credit report regularly to detect potential incidents. Thomas is a consumer protection attorney with extensive experience in credit reporting cases under the Fair Credit Reporting Act. A graduate of the University of Virginia and William & Mary Law School, he has successfully represented clients against inaccurate credit reporting by major agencies and banks. His work helps victims recover damages for lost opportunities, financial harm, and emotional distress. He also shares insights on his blog at Yourfaircreditreportlawyernow.com.

Send us a textAs self-managing landlords, one of the toughest parts of the rental process is saying “no” to an applicant. In this episode, Kevin and I break down how to deny a rental application while staying compliant, ethical, and professional.We cover the legal side, including Fair Housing laws, the Fair Credit Reporting Act, and why an Adverse Action Notice is required when denials are tied to credit or background checks. We also explain the differences between straight denials, conditional acceptances, and partial denials—and when each applies.We'll share how to create clear written criteria, apply them consistently, and protect yourself with documentation. You'll also learn the common mistakes landlords make when denying applicants and how to avoid them.Denying an application isn't fun, but it's a necessary part of running your rental business. With the right systems, you can handle it fairly, confidently, and legally.

Hugo Blankingship III is a highly respected attorney based in Washington, D.C., specializing in identity theft and false credit reporting issues. With over 30 years of experience, he has built a strong reputation for advocating on behalf of consumers who are struggling with inaccurate credit information. His mission is to help clients get incorrect data removed from their credit reports, allowing them to move forward with their financial lives. A graduate of the University of Virginia (B.A., 1982) and the Marshall-Wythe School of Law at the College of William & Mary (J.D., 1986), Hugo began his career as a law clerk to the Honorable Albert V. Bryan, Jr., former chief judge of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia. This foundation shaped his career and led him to become a passionate consumer rights advocate. Throughout his career, Hugo has fought tirelessly against major credit reporting agencies like Experian, TransUnion, and Equifax, ensuring they adhere to the rules. In 2004, he argued the case Nigh v. Koons Buick Pontiac GMC before the U.S. Supreme Court, and has represented clients before the Supreme Court of Virginia and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. Hugo's clients know him as a tenacious attorney who won't back down in the pursuit of justice. Thomas B. Christiano received a B.A. from the University of Virginia in 1993 and a J.D. from the Marshall-Wythe School of Law at the College of William & Mary in 1999. Mr. Christiano has handled numerous consumer protection cases and specializes in cases involving inaccurate credit reporting under the Fair Credit Reporting Act. He has reviewed the credit reporting procedure process from the major credit reporting agencies and the dispute investigation procedures of many banks who have furnished inaccurate credit information. As an experienced credit report lawyer, he can identify the actual damages associated with credit report problems, including emotional distress damages, the loss of employment opportunities, inability to obtain a mortgage, and loss of use of credit., Mr. Christiano also publishes a blog at yourfaircreditreportlawyernow.com, which is an excellent informational resource on the subject. Thomas B. Christiano has decades of experience helping clients who have been the victim of credit fraud and identity theft. Discover how he can help you!   During the show we discussed: Common credit report errors and their impact on consumers Effects of identity theft on credit and first steps to take Challenges in disputing false credit report information Overview of the dispute process with credit bureaus How bureaus respond to disputes and what to do if ignored Consumer rights under the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) Role of Equifax, Experian, and TransUnion in disputes What to do when bureaus don't fix errors and how attorneys help Issues with mixed/merged credit files and how to resolve them Fraud tactics in credit manipulation and identity theft prevention Importance of checking credit reports and common review mistakes Steps to fix credit scores after finding report errors How bad credit affects loans, housing, and employment Benefits of working with a credit report attorney vs. doing it alone   Resources: https://www.yourfaircreditlawyer.com/  

In this special crossover episode between FCRA Focus and The Consumer Finance Podcast, Kim Phan, Dave Gettings, Chris Willis, and Cindy Hanson explore the recent withdrawal of Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) guidance affecting the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA). This episode provides a comprehensive analysis of how these changes impact key areas such as preemption, background screening, permissible purpose, artificial intelligence, and state attorneys general enforcement actions. The discussion highlights the implications for consumer reporting agencies, furnishers, end-users, and the broader regulatory landscape, offering valuable insights for professionals navigating these evolving challenges. Tune in to understand the potential shifts in compliance and enforcement.

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is set to withdraw a Biden-era rule aimed at cracking down on data brokers and their selling of Americans' personal and financial information. In a notice in the Federal Register, the CFPB said legislative rulemaking on the data broker industry “is not necessary or appropriate at this time,” and the agency does not plan to “take any further action” on the proposal. The notice was issued by Russell Vought, acting director of the agency, head of the Office of Management and Budget and a Project 2025 architect. The withdrawal of the rule, which was first reported by Wired, comes after President Donald Trump's initial nominee to lead the CFPB signaled to Congress in February an openness to continuing Biden administration data-broker rules. Jonathan McKernan, a former Treasury Department and Federal Housing Finance Agency staffer, told the Senate Banking Committee that Rohit Chopra — President Joe Biden's CFPB director — “was onto something” with his policies targeting data brokers and data aggregators. The CFPB's withdrawal notice took particular issue with the rule's focus on the Fair Credit Reporting Act, saying that the proposal was “not aligned with the Bureau's current interpretation of the FCRA, which it is in the process of revising.” The Senate on Wednesday voted 54-43 to confirm businessman Emil Michael as undersecretary of defense for research and engineering and the Pentagon's chief technology officer. In that position, Michael will serve as the primary advisor to the secretary of defense and other Defense Department leaders on tech development and transition, prototyping, experimentation, and management of testing ranges and activities. He'll also be in charge of synchronizing science and technology efforts across the DOD. Michael comes to the job from the private sector, where he's been a business executive, advisor and investor. He told members of the Senate Armed Services Committee that he's been involved with more than 50 different tech companies during his career. Perhaps most notable, from 2013 to 2017, he was chief business officer at Uber. In government, he previously served as special assistant to the secretary of defense when Robert Gates was Pentagon chief. The Daily Scoop Podcast is available every Monday-Friday afternoon. If you want to hear more of the latest from Washington, subscribe to The Daily Scoop Podcast  on Apple Podcasts, Soundcloud, Spotify and YouTube.

This podcast segment covers the CFPB proposing two changes to the Fair Credit Reporting Act: one to regulate data brokers by requiring consumer consent for data use, and another to classify coerced debt under identity theft protections.------------------------------------------------------------------Alice Alvey, Master CMBVice President Partner Education and Training at Union Home MortgageShe handles development of their World Class Training program designed to support UHM partners and organizational effectiveness.Prior to UHM, Alice served as Senior Vice President at Indecomm leading the Indecomm-Mortgage U division, Internal QA and Compliance and SaaS technologies. Indecomm acquired Mortgage U in 2013, where Alice was President/Co-founder, providing training and consulting since 1996. Prior to MU she served as SVP of Operations at a national bank overseeing operations for wholesale, retail and correspondent from underwriting through servicing, and compliance.She has been in the trenches of mortgage lending operations from application through servicing for over 30 years. Her authoring work in training content, policies and procedures and the FHA/VA Practical guides illustrates her ability to bridge regulatory requirements with day-to-day operations.Alice has been a weekly contributor to the Lykken on Lending show since its beginning in April 2009 and has made her weekly contributions to 450+ episodes!

Join Our FREE Start Repairing Credit Challenge!Is it possible that the credit bureau Experian acted illegally when it dealt with your dispute letters?The CFPB certainly thinks so, and they just sued Experian for its shady practices in handling dispute investigations! This lawsuit is a huge deal for anyone looking to dispute errors on their credit report, and today, I will explain everything you need to know about this case and how it could affect your credit score. Plus, I'll share the 5 best ways to make your dispute letters more effective. Ready to fight back against shady credit bureaus? Tune in! P.S. Don't forget to add THIS to your dispute letters:“In light of the recent lawsuit filed against Experian by the CFPB, I am requesting a thorough and fair investigation of the disputed information on my credit report. The lawsuit highlights concerns regarding compliance with federal consumer protection laws and the accuracy of credit reporting practices. As a consumer, I trust Experian will uphold its responsibility under the Fair Credit Reporting Act to ensure that all information reported is accurate, complete, and verifiable. If the disputed information cannot be verified as accurate after a fair investigation, I request its prompt deletion from my credit file. This request is made in good faith to ensure my credit report reflects truthful and accurate information.” Key Takeaways:00:00 Intro 01:02 CFPB Sues Experian03:01 Shady Credit Bureau Practices Exposed06:59 5 Ways to Make Your Dispute Letters More Effective 11:41 AI Tool for Generating Dispute Letters 12:29 My Final Point13:07 OutroAdditional Resources:Get a free trial to Credit Repair CloudGet my free credit repair training  How Credit Repair Millionaires Fight Stall LettersMake sure to subscribe so you stay up to date with our latest episodes.

In this episode of The Consumer Finance Podcast, host Chris Willis and Michael Lacy, Consumer Financial Services Practice Group leader, introduce Troutman Pepper Locke's annual Year in Review and Look Ahead publication. The publication covers 17 critical areas, including the Fair Credit Reporting Act, the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, and FinTech. This concise and accessible report offers valuable insights for clients, practitioners, and regulators. Tune in to stay informed and ahead of the curve.

In today's episode, we discuss the CFPB's recent proposed data broker rule—a proposal that would greatly expand the reach of the Fair Credit Reporting Act. On December 3, the CFPB issued a proposed rule promoted as one that would require companies that sell data about income or financial tier, credit history, credit score or debt payments to comply with the Fair Credit Reporting Act. The proposal would make it clear that when data brokers sell certain sensitive consumer information, they are “consumer reporting agencies” under the FCRA. That would require them to comply with accuracy requirements. It also would require them to provide consumers access to their information. However, the proposal is much broader than a data broker rule, and the podcast explores the significant breadth of the proposal. The rule might face an uncertain future, since it was issued by current CFPB Director Rohit Chopra and pushes beyond the boundaries of the FCRA. Chopra's aggressive regulatory regime is opposed by the Trump Administration. Joining us today is Dan Smith, president and CEO of the Consumer Data Industry Association, which represents the consumer data reporting industry. The host of the discussion is Alan Kaplinsky, the former practice group leader for 25 years, and now senior counsel of the Consumer Financial Services Group at Ballard Spahr. Joining the discussion are two Ballard Spahr partners: Richard Andreano, the practice leader of our mortgage banking group at Ballard Spahr and John Culhane. In this episode, we will discuss the key aspects of the landmark proposed rule, such as: 1.    The proposal being much broader than one addressing the sale of personal information to various parties, including stalkers, spies and scammers.  2.    The fact that the proposal does not even define what is a data broker.  3.    How the proposal would significantly change the concept of what constitutes a consumer report, including the proposal to treat credit header information as a consumer report.  4.    How the proposal would change the concept of what constitutes a consumer reporting agency.  5.    Requirements that the proposal would add to the written authorization permissible purpose to obtain a consumer report, including requirements regarding revocation of the authorization.  6.    How the proposal would modify the requirements to rely on the legitimate business need permissible purpose to obtain a consumer report.  7.    Whether the CFPB actually has legal authority to essentially rewrite the FCRA.

This Day in Legal History: District of Columbia Suffrage ActOn this day in legal history, January 8, 1867, the U.S. Congress overrode President Andrew Johnson's veto to enact the District of Columbia Suffrage Act. This landmark legislation granted African American men the right to vote in the nation's capital, making it the first federal law to extend voting rights to Black men. This milestone occurred three years before the ratification of the 15th Amendment, which would prohibit racial discrimination in voting nationwide.  The Act was a significant step during the Reconstruction era, as the United States grappled with integrating millions of formerly enslaved individuals into its civic life. By enfranchising Black men in Washington, D.C., Congress set an example for the expansion of voting rights elsewhere in the country. However, the process was not without contention. President Andrew Johnson, a Southern Democrat, opposed the bill, reflecting his broader resistance to Reconstruction policies that aimed to promote racial equality.  Congress's decision to override Johnson's veto demonstrated its determination to lead Reconstruction efforts and address the injustices of slavery. This vote also highlighted the tensions between the legislative and executive branches over how best to rebuild the nation after the Civil War.  The District of Columbia Suffrage Act stands as a pivotal moment in the fight for civil rights, symbolizing the beginning of federal measures to ensure greater political inclusion for African Americans during a transformative period in American history.The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) has filed a lawsuit against Experian Plc, alleging the credit reporting company failed to properly investigate consumer disputes and ensure the accuracy of information on credit reports. According to the CFPB, Experian did not adequately collect or relay dispute information to data furnishers, sometimes accepting illogical or unreliable responses from credit card companies and debt collectors. These practices led to inaccurate information on credit reports, which negatively impacted consumers' credit scores, potentially resulting in higher loan interest rates, limited housing opportunities, and employment challenges.  The CFPB accused Experian of violating the Fair Credit Reporting Act and the Consumer Financial Protection Act by conducting inadequate dispute investigations. Director Rohit Chopra criticized Experian for "sham investigations" and emphasized the importance of compliance with federal laws.  Experian has denied the allegations, calling the lawsuit an example of regulatory overreach and claiming the agency did not respond to prior communications. The company highlighted its history of working with the CFPB to improve dispute processes.  The lawsuit builds on prior CFPB actions against Experian, including a $3 million fine in 2017 for misleading consumers about its credit scores. The current case alleges persistent systemic failures in Experian's dispute handling and reporting processes.Experian Sued by CFPB for Botching Consumer Data Disputes (2)A Supreme Court case this week could determine TikTok's future in the United States, pitting national security concerns against free speech rights. President-elect Donald Trump has asked the Court to block a pending U.S. ban on the app, citing First Amendment concerns, while many Republican lawmakers and state attorneys general argue for upholding the ban. The law, passed by Congress and signed by President Joe Biden, requires TikTok's parent company, ByteDance, to sell the app or face a ban by January 19, over fears of Chinese government access to American user data.TikTok and ByteDance contend the law infringes on free speech, warning that it could set a dangerous precedent for banning platforms with foreign ties. Trump, in a reversal of his earlier stance, now opposes a ban and sees TikTok as politically valuable. The Justice Department defends the law, citing national security risks, while Republican attorneys general argue that TikTok's ties to China pose significant dangers.The Court's decision could have far-reaching implications for digital platform regulation and internet freedom in the U.S. and beyond. If upheld, experts warn other foreign-backed platforms, such as Telegram, could face similar scrutiny. Meanwhile, tech giants Apple and Google have been asked to prepare for TikTok's removal from app stores, potentially rendering the app obsolete over time without updates.TikTok's fate divides Trump and fellow Republicans as Supreme Court action looms | ReutersThe state of Alaska has filed a lawsuit against the Biden administration, alleging violations of a Congressional mandate to permit oil and gas development in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR). The lawsuit challenges the Interior Department's December 2024 decision to impose restrictive conditions on drilling leases in the refuge's coastal plain, arguing the limits make development impractical on the 400,000 acres set for auction. Alaska seeks to overturn the decision and prevent the leases from being issued with the restrictions.Governor Mike Dunleavy criticized the Biden administration's stance, claiming it undermines U.S. energy independence by restricting access to domestic resources. Alaska argues the restrictions, combined with the administration's earlier cancellations of leases granted during Donald Trump's presidency, significantly reduce expected revenue from ANWR development.  The Biden administration has prioritized environmental protection for the 19.6-million-acre refuge, home to species like polar bears and caribou. This legal dispute is the latest in a series of lawsuits from Alaska opposing federal efforts to limit drilling in ANWR. The battle reflects ongoing tensions between environmental priorities and energy development in the region, a long-standing political flashpoint.Alaska sues Biden administration over oil and gas leases in Arctic refuge | ReutersIn my column for this week, I talk about a facility fee charged for nonresident performers and athletes in Pittsburgh. The Pennsylvania Supreme Court is set to rule on the constitutionality of Pittsburgh's so-called “jock tax,” a 3% fee imposed on income earned by nonresident athletes and entertainers at publicly funded venues. This case raises complex questions about tax uniformity under the state constitution, as opponents argue the fee unfairly targets a specific group of workers.  The city contends the fee achieves fairness by equalizing tax burdens between nonresidents and residents, who already pay a combined 3% in local taxes. Without this fee, nonresident performers would enjoy a tax advantage over residents, who contribute to funding public infrastructure and services that benefit everyone using the city's venues.  Critics claim the tax violates uniformity principles by singling out nonresidents in certain professions, and asking them to pay 3% despite not receiving access to services ostensibly paid for by the tax like the local school system. But taxation has never operated strictly as a direct exchange for services rendered. Much like H.L.A. Hart's “No Vehicles in the Park” thought experiment, interpreting “uniformity” in taxation requires considering intent. The fee's purpose is to ensure nonresidents contribute their fair share for the public resources they use, aligning with broader fairness goals rather than rigid formalism.  Rejecting the fee would create an inequitable system where nonresidents effectively have their use of public resources subsidized by residents. For Pittsburgh and other cities balancing local budgets, the facility fee represents a practical, equitable solution that respects the principles of shared responsibility.Pittsburgh 'Jock Tax' Facilitates Parity and Should Be Upheld This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

Welcome to Supreme Court Opinions. In this episode, you'll hear the Court's opinion in Department of Agriculture Rural Development Rural Housing Service v Kirtz. In this case, the court considered this issue: Do the civil-liability provisions of the Fair Credit Reporting Act unequivocally and unambiguously waive the sovereign immunity of the United States? The case was decided on February 8, 2024. The Supreme Court held that the civil-liability provisions of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) waive the sovereign immunity of the United States. Justice Neil Gorsuch authored the unanimous opinion of the Court. As a sovereign entity, the United States is generally immune from suits seeking money damages—under the doctrine known as “sovereign immunity”—unless Congress chooses to waive that immunity. Courts understand Congress to have so chosen only if they find “the language of the statute” is “unmistakably clear” in allowing such suits. One way a statute may have such “unmistakably clear” language is when it creates a cause of action and explicitly “authorizes suit against a government on that claim.” The FCRA satisfies this stringent test. The FCRA's requirements apply to “persons” who, like the federal government here, furnish information to consumer reporting agencies. Sections 1681n and 1681o create a cause of action for money damages to consumers injured by “any person” who willfully or negligently fails to comply with the statute's directive. Section 1681a provides a definition of “person” that includes government agencies, which applies to the entire Act. In the presence of such “unmistakably clear” language, no separate waiver provision is needed. The opinion is presented here in its entirety, but with citations omitted. If you appreciate this episode, please subscribe. Thank you. --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/scotus-opinions/support

Going back to college means it's time to evaluate credit cards and financing options for students and families. We break down the different tools available (and their short- and long-term impacts) in this episode of Making Cents of Money. Show Notes: Unbiased sources of consumer education from the CFPB: - Student banking and college credit card marketing agreements: https://www.consumerfinance.gov/data-research/student-banking/ - Your Money, Your Goals toolkit (p. 121 of the downloadable toolkit has a comparison of paying for the costs of an unexpected car repair with emergency savings, a credit card, or a payday loan): https://www.consumerfinance.gov/consumer-tools/educator-tools/your-money-your-goals/toolkit/ Previous Making Cents of Money episodes on Credit: - Credit Reports Update (ep. 74): https://blogs.uofi.uillinois.edu/view/7550/1222872163 - What's a Credit Report Anyway? (ep. 67): https://blogs.uofi.uillinois.edu/view/7550/171138189 - Credit Scores (ep. 51): https://blogs.uofi.uillinois.edu/view/7550/343469214 - Choosing a Credit Card (ep. 43): https://blogs.uofi.uillinois.edu/view/7550/295268937 - Credit Access (ep. 42): https://blogs.uofi.uillinois.edu/view/7550/203994282 - Conscious Credit (ep. 15): https://blogs.uofi.uillinois.edu/view/7550/1450729729 - Understanding Credit (ep. 5): https://blogs.uofi.uillinois.edu/view/7550/270248943 Get Savvy Webinars - Your Financial Tool Chest – We discussed Buy Now, Pay Later tools starting at 45:35 in the YouTube video: https://youtu.be/XdUgsotxCqE?feature=shared&t=2735 - Build Credit to Your Advantage: https://youtu.be/FZGqbTavfsY?feature=shared - Mastering the Consumer Credit Game on December 5, 2024, at 12 PM – Register at https://go.uillinois.edu/getsavvywebinars Legislation related to Credit Cards: - Credit Card Accountability Responsibility and Disclosure Act of 2009 (Credit CARD Act): https://www.ftc.gov/legal-library/browse/statutes/credit-card-accountability-responsibility-disclosure-act-2009-credit-card-act - Fair Credit Reporting Act: https://www.ftc.gov/legal-library/browse/statutes/fair-credit-reporting-act Research on Credit Use: - Blankson, C., Paswan, A., & Boakye, K. G. (2012). College students' consumption of credit cards. International Journal of Bank Marketing, 30(7), 567-585. https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/02652321211274327/full/html - D'innocenzio, A., & Lewis, C. (2024, July 30). Stores lure back-to-school shoppers with deals and “buy now, pay later” plans. AP News. https://apnews.com/article/backtoschool-shopping-deals-inflation-c7fc6041e4d34cabc2edbfbc556ef667 - Hayhoe, C., Leach, L. J., Allen, M., & Edwards, R. (2005). Credit cards held by college students. Journal of Financial Counseling and Planning, 16(1). https://www.researchgate.net/publication/253767760_Credit_Cards_Held_by_College_Students - Shupe, C., Li, G., & Fulford, S. (2023). Consumer Use of Buy Now, Pay Later Insights from the CFPB Making Ends Meet Survey. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Office of Research Reports Series, (23-1). https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4399626

On May 16, 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the CFPB's funding mechanism does not violate the Appropriations Clause of the U.S. Constitution. This two-part episode repurposes a recent webinar. In Part II, we first discuss the CFPB's launch of Fair Credit Reporting Act rulemaking, proposed rule to supervise larger payment providers, proposed rule on personal financial data rights, and interpretive rule on buy-now-pay-later.  We next discuss the operation of the Congressional Review Act and its potential impact on final CFPB rules if the November 2024 election results in a change in Administrations. We then discuss the impact of the SCOTUS decision on pending CFPB enforcement actions, the expected proliferation of new CFPB investigations and enforcement actions, and the CFPB's announced hiring binge. We conclude by sharing our thoughts on what companies can do to prepare for an uptick in CFPB activity and how the CFPB's increased staffing is likely to impact which companies will be targeted. Alan Kaplinsky, Senior Counsel in Ballard Spahr's Consumer Financial Services Group, moderates the discussion joined by John Culhane and Joseph Schuster, Partners in the Group, and Kristen Larson, Of Counsel in the Group.

Dear Dash Hounds, join Beth and Kelly as we try to pull the curtain open on the Wonderful Wizard of credit scores. Do you know your credit score? Do you care? Has it ruined your life? We talk about many things on Strange Country from periods to sex to murder and now, the most secretive of things–money. ‘Mericans don't talk openly about their money issues, and surprise! That is not good practice. We are stressed and worried and in debt, and there's a reason why. Find out today on Strange Country. Thanks for listening. It is an act of love, and sometimes all you need is love. Theme music: Big White Lie by A Cast of Thousands. Works Cited Campisi, Natalie. “From Inherent Racial Bias to Incorrect Data—The Problems With Current Credit Scoring Models.” Forbes, 26 February 2021, https://www.forbes.com/advisor/credit-cards/from-inherent-racial-bias-to-incorrect-data-the-problems-with-current-credit-scoring-models/. Accessed 18 March 2024. “Fair Credit Reporting Act.” Wikipedia, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_Credit_Reporting_Act. Accessed 18 March 2024. Fiano, Liane. “Common errors people find on their credit report - and how to get them fixed.” Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, 5 February 2019, https://www.consumerfinance.gov/about-us/blog/common-errors-credit-report-and-how-get-them-fixed/. Accessed 18 March 2024. Frazier, Mya. “The High Cost of Bad Credit.” The New York Times, 7 June 2023, https://www.nytimes.com/2023/06/07/magazine/bad-credit-repair.html. Accessed 18 March 2024. Furletti, Mark. “Secret History Of The Credit Card - More To Explore | FRONTLINE.” Secret History Of The Credit Card - More To Explore | FRONTLINE | PBS, 23 November 2004, https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/credit/more/scores.html. Accessed 18 March 2024. Johnson, Holly. “8 Ways You're Hurting Your Credit Score Without Knowing It.” Forbes, 28 June 2021, https://www.forbes.com/advisor/credit-score/8-ways-youre-hurting-your-credit-score-without-knowing-it/. Accessed 18 March 2024. Nova, Annie. YouTube: Home, 3 June 2009, https://www.cnbc.com/2019/09/25/bernie-sanders-wants-to-overhaul-the-countrys-credit-reporting-system.html. Accessed 18 March 2024. Trainor, Sean. “Your Credit Score's Long History, From Espionage to Algorithms.” Time, 22 July 2015, https://time.com/3961676/history-credit-scores/. Accessed 18 March 2024. White, Alexandria. “90% of Americans Stress About Money, According to Study Results.” CNBC, https://www.cnbc.com/select/why-americans-are-stressed-about-money/. Accessed 18 March 2024. Wilbers, Pippin. “How Inflation Affects Car Loan Rates.” Bankrate, 31 January 2024, https://www.bankrate.com/loans/auto-loans/how-inflation-affects-auto-loan-rates/#why. Accessed 18 March 2024.

EXPLAINED: LAWSUIT Against The New York for 1099, Independent Contractors And Workers. (c)Copyright, 2021-2030Announcement: Legal Options for 1099 Workers and Independent Contractors in New YorkTo all 1099 workers and independent contractors in New York, listen up! You have the chance to take legal action concerning child support issues in the state.Introducing our initiative, Child Support Lawsuit Simplified. Our goal is to provide you with the tools and knowledge needed to effectively maneuver the legal landscape. We recognize the hurdles you might encounter, including instances of judicial misconduct at both state and federal levels.Our program isn't just about offering advice – it's about empowerment. We aim to empower you with strategies and techniques to advocate for your rights and navigate the complexities of child support disputes with confidence.Join us as we work to ensure fairness and justice in child support matters. Your voice matters, and we're here to support you every step of the way.Child Support Lawsuit Simplified. We teach you strategies and techniques to free yourself of judicial misconduct from the State and Federal. The guarantee is YOURS.

                                                          Avoid License Suspension:                                         Use This New Jersey Case in Any State!Child Support Lawsuit Simplified. We teach you strategies and techniques to free yourself of judicial misconduct from the State and Federal. The guarantee is YOURS.Facing a driver's license suspension due to unpaid child support can feel like an insurmountable obstacle, especially when the ability to work or attend school hangs in the balance. In this crucial video, I delve into how a landmark New Jersey case, Kavas vs. DMV of Mercer County, has set a precedent that can aid you in contesting similar suspensions across all 50 states. This case underscores the violation of due process and fundamental fairness in the automatic suspension of driver's licenses, a vital issue for anyone struggling with child support payments due to unemployment or illness.We explore the intricate balance between enforcing child support obligations and ensuring individuals retain their ability to earn a living. The ruling by Judge Mary Jacobson in 2019 has opened a pathway for fathers and families nationwide to challenge unjust suspensions, emphasizing the importance of due process and the right to a fair hearing. This video is not just a summary of the case but a comprehensive guide on applying its principles to fight for your rights in any state, offering a beacon of hope for those feeling trapped by the system. I also provide a detailed breakdown of child support as a federal program, highlighting the massive financial implications and the states leading in child support collections.Your support fuels our research and content creation, helping us bring these invaluable insights to you. If you find this video educational, please consider donating to our channel. Every contribution, no matter the size, makes a significant difference. For personalized guidance, don't hesitate to schedule a consultation, and for more empowering content, subscribe to our channel. Together, we can navigate the complexities of family law, advocating for fairness and justice in the child support system.Support the Show.Login into our => https://childsupport.newzenler.com

                                            Lawsuit Against New York for Child Support.                       ATTENTION, 1099 Workers and Independent Contractors.Legal Action against New York: A Vital Message for 1099 Workers and Independent Contractors.Attention all 1099 workers and independent contractors! You now have the opportunity to pursue legal action against the state of New York regarding child support matters.Our program, Child Support Lawsuit Simplified, aims to equip you with the necessary strategies and techniques to navigate through the complexities of the legal system. We understand the challenges you may face, including judicial misconduct from both state and federal levels.Our guarantee is simple: empowerment. We empower you to assert your rights and seek justice in child support disputes. With our guidance, you can liberate yourself from unfair treatment and ensure that your rights are upheld throughout the legal process.Take control of your situation today and join us in our mission to advocate for fair and just child support practices. Your rights matter, and we're here to help you protect them.

                                     Season 6 Episode 9 -   Essential Information for Fathers.In "Child Support vs. TANF: What Fathers Must Know," we dive into the intricate world of family law, focusing on the distinctions and connections between Child Support and Temporary Aid for Needy Families (TANF). If you're a father navigating these waters, understanding these concepts isn't just beneficial—it's crucial. Our discussion brings clarity to how federal assistance impacts child support obligations, and we detail historical legislation like the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act to elucidate the evolution of welfare and child support.Our exploration is not just theoretical; we ground our insights in real-world applications and legislative frameworks, such as Title 4D of the Social Security Act and specific Supreme Court cases like Blessing vs. Freestone. We aim to empower you with knowledge, whether you're facing judicial challenges or seeking to understand your rights and responsibilities in the realm of family law.For those seeking deeper engagement, we invite you to connect with us via email at Chris_h29@protonmail.com and explore further content on our website. Together, let's navigate the complexities of child support and empower ourselves with the knowledge and confidence to advocate for our rights and responsibilities.Remember, understanding your legal standing and options is the first step towards effective self-representation and achieving the best possible outcomes for you and your family. Join us on this journey, and let's unlock the doors to legal empowerment and self-advocacy.

              What Is The difference? Understanding Custody and Child Support.Email: Chrish289@protonmail.com            (c)Copyright, 2021-2030Child support is the financial aid one parent provides to the other for the upbringing of their child. It encompasses various expenses essential for the child's well-being, including education, healthcare, and basic living needs. Custody, on the other hand, entails both legal and physical responsibility for the child's care and decision-making. It determines where the child resides primarily and who holds the authority to make important decisions regarding their upbringing.While child support primarily deals with financial contributions, custody arrangements dictate the practical aspects of the child's daily life and upbringing. Both child support and custody are crucial components of ensuring the overall welfare and stability of the child's upbringing.

                                            Sue Credit Agencies for Child Support Errors: Discover the groundbreaking Supreme Court ruling that empowers consumers to take legal action against credit bureaus for inaccuracies in child support reporting! In this pivotal video, I delve into the monumental decision by Justice Neil Gorsuch, revealing how individuals can now challenge federal agencies like TransUnion and Equifax, ensuring their child support records are accurate. This ruling, stemming from the case Department of Revenue vs. Kertz, dated February 8, 2024, marks a significant victory for consumer rights under the Fair Credit Reporting Act. Learn the critical steps to file a lawsuit against credit agencies, the essentials of PRO SE litigation, and how this Supreme Court judgment could affect your child support case. Whether you're battling errors on your credit report or seeking a refresh on child support procedures, this video offers a wealth of knowledge aimed at empowering you to navigate the complexities of family law and judicial misconduct confidently.Don't let inaccuracies tarnish your financial reputation. Understand your right to dispute child support errors and the pathway to holding credit bureaus accountable. I also share insights into self-representation, emphasizing the importance of constitutional laws in protecting your rights. For further support and detailed guides on tackling child support challenges, consider donating to our research efforts or scheduling a discussion. Stay connected with our community on social media and access exclusive resources tailored to aid your journey through family law intricacies.

The Eighth Circuit upheld the dismissal of Corner Post's lawsuit challenging a Federal Reserve regulation, ruling that the six-year statute of limitations to challenge the rule had already expired. However, Corner Post did not exist until more than six years after the rule issued, and it filed suit less than four years after opening for business. NCLA filed an amicus curiae brief in Corner Post, Inc. v. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, urging SCOTUS to allow the lawsuit to go forward in such circumstances and protect judicial review. NCLA Litigation Counsel Kara Rollins joins Mark and Vec to go over the oral argument at the Supreme Court last week in Corner Post, Inc. v. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

“There are 18 common types of background checks employers use to verify a new hire. The checks can include: Criminal history Past employment verification Education verification Reference check Drug screening Sexual offenses check Credit background check Social media behavior check Driving record Professional license and certifications check Social security number trace/identity check Global sanctions check Civil offenses check Bankruptcy check Financial regulations check Psychometric tests International background check Gamer profile check Each check is briefly explained along with its purpose and how it helps employers make informed hiring decisions.[1] A background check is a process a person or company uses to verify that an individual is who they claim to be, and this provides an opportunity to check and confirm the validity of someone's criminal record, education, employment history, and other activities from their past. The frequency, purpose, and legitimacy of background checks vary among countries, industries, and individuals. An employment background check typically takes place when someone applies for a job, but it can also happen at any time the employer deems necessary. A variety of methods are used to complete these checks including comprehensive database search and personal references. Regulation edit [18] The Financial Services Authority states in their Training & Competence guidance that regulated firms should have: Adequacy of procedures for taking into account knowledge and skills of potential recruits for the role Adequacy of procedures for obtaining sufficient information about previous activities and training Adequacy of procedures for ensuring that individuals have passed appropriate exams or have appropriate exemptions Adequacy of procedures for assessing competence of individuals for sales roles The Financial Services Authority's statutory objectives: Protecting consumers Maintaining market confidence Promoting public awareness Reducing financial crime. Restriction and laws on Background Check Arrest and conviction records: Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964; Cal. Lab. Code § 432.7; Cal. Lab. Code § 432.8; Cal. Pen. Code § 290.46(k)(2); 775 ILCS 5/2-103; Job Opportunities for Qualified Applicants Act, 820 ILCS 75/15; N.Y. Correct. Law § 752; N.Y. Exec. Law § 296 (15), (16); 18 Pa.C.S. § 9125 Credit/financial checks: Consumer Credit Reporting Agencies Act, Cal. Civ. Code § 1785.13; Cal. Lab. Code § 1024.5; 820 ILCS 70/10 Health checks/medical screening: Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. § 12101, et seq.; Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act, 42 U.S.C. § 2000ff, et seq.; Cal. Lab. Code § 132a Social media: Cal. Lab. Code § 980; 820 ILCS 55/10(a) Record disposal: 16 CFR Part 682 Record keeping: 29 CFR Part 160 Records/information obtained from consumer reporting agencies, including but not limited to education and employment records, credit and financial records, and social media: Fair Credit Reporting Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1681, et seq.; Consumer Credit Reporting Agencies Act, Cal. Civ. Code § 1785.13(a)(6); Investigative Consumer Reporting Agencies Act, Cal. Civ. Code § 1786.18(a)(7); Cal. Civ. Code § 1786.53 Political affiliation: D.C. Code § 2–1402.11; Wis. Stat. Ann. § 111.321 Polygraph tests: Employee Polygraph Protection Act, 29 U.S.C. §§ 2002, 2006; Cal. Lab. Code § 432.2; 225 ILCS 430/14.1; N.Y. Lab. Law §§ 733–739; 18 Pa.C.S. § 7321. Many employers choose to search the most common records such as criminal records, driving records, and education verification. Other searches such as sex offender registry, credential verification, skills assessment, reference checks, credit reports and Patriot Act searches are becoming increasingly common.[22] Many commercial sites will offer specific searches to employers for a fee. Services like these will actually perform the checks, supply the company with adverse action letters, and ensure compliance throughout the process.” -Wikipedia. --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/antonio-myers4/support

The brand-new, unanimous opinion of the Court in Dept. of Agriculture Rural Development Rural Housing Service v. Kirtz, decided February 8, 2024.   Listen to What SCOTUS Wrote Us anywhere you get your podcasts

Whether the civil-liability provisions of the Fair Credit Reporting Act, 15 U.S.C. 1681 et seq., unequivocally and unambiguously waive the sovereign immunity of the United States.

On Legal Docket, oral arguments about veteran benefits and whether the US government can be sued under the Fair Credit Reporting Act; on the Monday Moneybeat, the board behind OpenAI's tumultuous coup and counter coup ; and on the World History Book, 60 years ago, President John F. Kennedy is shot. Plus, the Monday morning newsSupport The World and Everything in It today at wng.org/donate.Additional support comes from Ambassadors Impact Network. Unlocking the power of faith-based financing for your startup. More at ambassadorsimpact.comFrom Samaritan Ministries. It's not insurance, it's a community of Christians paying one another's medical bills. More at samaritanministries.org/worldpodcast.And from WaterStone, helping believers transform non-cash assets—including real estate—into tax-deductible donations to preferred charities. More on how charitable giving can make a bigger impact at WaterStone.org.

Civil Procedure: Do the civil-liability provisions of the Fair Credit Reporting Act waive the sovereign immunity of the United States? - Argued: Mon, 06 Nov 2023 21:7:11 EDT

A case in which the Court will decide whether the civil-liability provisions of the Fair Credit Reporting Act unequivocally and unambiguously waive the sovereign immunity of the United States.

Each month, a panel of constitutional experts convenes to discuss the Court's upcoming docket sitting by sitting. The cases covered in this preview are listed below.Culley v. Marshall (October 30) - Due Process; What test should district courts apply to determine whether a state or local government must provide a hearing to someone who has had property seized under a civil asset forfeiture law?Lindke v. Freed (October 31) - Civil Rights, First Amendment; Whether a public official's social media activity can constitute state action only if the official used the account to perform a governmental duty or under the authority of his or her office.O'Connor-Ratcliff v. Garnier (October 31) - Civil Rights, First Amendment; Are public officials acting as government officials, so that they can violate the First Amendment, when they block people on their personal social media accounts that they use to communicate with the public?Vidal v. Elster (November 1) - First Amendment, Intellectual Property; Does Section 2(c) of the Lanham Act, which bars the registration of a trademark which uses the name of another living person without that person's permission, violate the Constitution when used to reject a trademark that contains criticism of a government official or public figure?Department of Agriculture Rural Development Rural Housing Service v. Kirtz (November 6) - Fair Credit Reporting Act, Sovereign Immunity; Whether the civil-liability provisions of the Fair Credit Reporting Act clearly waive the sovereign immunity of the United States.United States v. Rahimi (November 7) - Second Amendment; Whether a federal ban on the possession of guns by individuals who are subject to domestic violence restraining orders violates the Second Amendment.Rudisill v. McDonough (November 8) - GI Bill; Whether a veteran who has served two separate periods of qualifying service under the Montgomery GI Bill and the Post-9/11 GI Bill is entitled to receive a total of 48 months of education benefits as between both programs.Featuring: Braden Boucek, Director of Litigation, Southeastern Legal FoundationProf. Christa Laser, Professor, Cleveland State University of Law Gary Lawkowski, Counsel, Dhillon Law GroupAmy Swearer, Senior Legal Policy Analyst, Meese Center for Legal and Judicial Studies, The Heritage FoundationModerator: Laura Stanley, Judicial Law Clerk, US Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit