Podcasts about regulators

The crew discusses whether prediction markets enable “Bloomberg terminal espionage,,” wonder how to regulate markets that could be on anything, dive into why the OCC is saying no to stablecoin yield and more. The SEC has submitted guidance on how securities laws apply to crypto to the White House. DEX in the City hosts Jessi Brooks, Katherine Kirkpatrick Bos and TuongVy Le dig into what the proposal could mean for the crypto industry and whether it could be enough to provide developers regulatory clarity as anticipated market structure legislation stalls. Why is the agency submitting guidance to the White House? Plus, KK explains why current regulatory efforts could lead crypto to resort to more “come at me bro” legal tactics and Jessi covers why the industry may regret the U.S. Supreme Court's decision to overturn Chevron deference. Beyond the SEC's recent crypto regulatory move, the crew discusses the arrest of the son of a government contractor alleged to have stolen the U.S.'s bitcoin, what the DOJ's planned retrial of unresolved charges against Roman Storm suggests and why banks are up in arms over Kraken's “skinny” Fed master account. They also discuss why the crypto industry should tighten up security as Iranian groups target U.S. banking services and tech infrastructure. Hosts: ⁠⁠⁠⁠Jessi Brooks⁠⁠⁠⁠, General Counsel at Ribbit Capital ⁠⁠⁠Katherine Kirkpatrick Bos⁠⁠⁠, General Counsel at StarkWare ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠TuongVy Le⁠, General Counsel at Veda Links: Unchained: ⁠SEC Sends Crypto Securities Framework to the White House Blame Exchanges for Holding Up the Market Structure Bill? - DEX in the City DOJ Pushes for Retrial of Tornado Cash Developer Roman Storm Kraken Wins Direct Access to the Fed's Payment System Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

March 10, 2026- We dive into Gov. Kathy Hochul's plan to address car insurance costs, including utilizing the state's excess profit law, with the help of Kaitlin Asrow, acting superintendent for the state Department of Financial Services.

This Day in Legal History: Blue Sky LawsOn March 10, 1911, Kansas enacted the first “blue sky law” in the United States, marking a significant development in the regulation of securities markets. The statute was designed to protect investors from fraudulent investment schemes that had become increasingly common in the early twentieth century. At the time, promoters frequently sold speculative securities with little oversight and few consequences if the ventures failed. Kansas lawmakers responded by creating a system that required securities offerings to be reviewed before they could be sold to the public. State officials were given authority to examine proposed investments and determine whether they were legitimate.The name “blue sky law” reflected the legislature's concern that many promoters were selling investments backed by nothing more than empty promises. Lawmakers wanted to prevent the sale of securities that had no real value or financial foundation. Kansas banking commissioner Joseph Norman Dolley played a central role in advocating for the law and persuading the legislature to adopt stronger investor protections. His efforts reflected growing public concern about financial fraud and the need for government oversight of securities markets.The Kansas statute quickly became a model for other states. Within a few years, many states adopted their own versions of blue sky laws, creating a patchwork system of state-level securities regulation. These laws helped establish the principle that governments could require disclosure and review before securities were sold to the public. The idea later influenced the development of federal securities regulation during the New Deal era. In particular, the framework helped shape the Securities Act of 1933, which created nationwide disclosure requirements for securities offerings.Live Nation Entertainment has reached a proposed settlement with the U.S. Department of Justice in a major antitrust case challenging the company's dominance in concert promotion and ticketing. The agreement was disclosed during a court hearing and could resolve part of a lawsuit brought by federal regulators and more than two dozen states. Live Nation is also negotiating separately with state attorneys general in an effort to reach a broader nationwide resolution of related claims.Under the proposed deal, the company would pay roughly $200 million in damages to participating states and accept structural reforms aimed at reducing its market power. Regulators had argued that Live Nation's control of venues, artist promotion, and ticketing—particularly through Ticketmaster—allowed the company to inflate prices and limit competition. The lawsuit was filed in 2024 and initially sought to break up the company by forcing a sale of Ticketmaster.The settlement instead focuses on changing how the ticketing market operates. Ticketmaster would be required to open parts of its technology platform to competing ticket sellers, allowing third-party companies to list tickets directly through its system. The deal would also limit the length of Live Nation's exclusive contracts with venues to four years and permit venues to allocate some ticket inventory to rival platforms.The case gained political attention after widespread complaints about long online queues and high prices during the 2022 Taylor Swift Eras Tour ticket sales. A federal judge had allowed the antitrust case to proceed to trial after rejecting Live Nation's attempt to dismiss it earlier this year. If finalized, the settlement would impose oversight and competition requirements on the company rather than break it up.Live Nation reaches settlement with DOJ in antitrust case | ReutersDemocratic U.S. senators plan to introduce legislation that would extend the time prosecutors have to bring foreign bribery cases from five years to ten. The proposal, called the FCPA Reinforcement Act, is led by Senators Elizabeth Warren and Dick Durbin along with several other Democratic lawmakers. It responds to recent Justice Department decisions to scale back enforcement of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA), a 1977 law that prohibits companies operating in the United States from bribing foreign officials.Supporters of the bill argue that international corruption investigations are complex and often take years to uncover, making the current five-year statute of limitations too short. The proposed law would temporarily extend the deadline for bringing anti-bribery charges to ten years for an eight-year period. Lawmakers say the change is meant to ensure companies can still be held accountable for misconduct even if enforcement priorities shift.The proposal also signals to corporations that compliance obligations remain important despite the current enforcement slowdown. Some legal experts worry that reduced federal enforcement could lead companies to scale back anti-corruption compliance programs or stop voluntarily reporting violations. Although the bill may face difficulty passing in the current Congress, it indicates that some lawmakers want to preserve strong anti-bribery enforcement and may pursue stricter oversight in the future.US lawmakers plan bill allowing 10 years to bring bribery cases | ReutersA divided federal appeals court has refused to allow the Trump administration to end immigration protections for more than 350,000 Haitians living in the United States. In a 2–1 decision, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit declined to pause a lower court ruling that blocked the Department of Homeland Security from terminating Haiti's Temporary Protected Status (TPS). The ruling means the protections will remain in place while the administration continues its appeal.TPS is a humanitarian program that allows people from certain countries facing crises—such as armed conflict, natural disasters, or political instability—to remain in the United States temporarily and obtain work authorization. Haitians first received TPS after the devastating 2010 earthquake, and the designation has been repeatedly renewed because of ongoing instability in the country.The Trump administration sought to end Haiti's TPS designation as part of a broader effort to scale back the program, arguing that it was never intended to function as long-term legal status. But a federal district judge previously ruled that the government's attempt to terminate the protection likely violated both TPS procedures and constitutional equal-protection principles. The appeals court majority agreed that sending Haitian migrants back now could expose them to severe violence and humanitarian risks due to Haiti's deteriorating conditions.One judge dissented, arguing the case was legally similar to disputes where courts allowed the administration to end TPS protections for Venezuelans. The Department of Homeland Security said it plans to appeal the ruling to the U.S. Supreme Court. For now, the decision preserves legal status and work authorization for hundreds of thousands of Haitian immigrants while the litigation continues.Trump cannot end protections for 350,000 Haitians, US appeals court rules | ReutersMy column for Bloomberg this week examines the surprising milestone that renewable energy generated 26% of U.S. electricity in 2025—even as federal clean-energy incentives were being rolled back. At first glance, that record share might suggest the transition to renewables is unstoppable. In reality, much of the current growth reflects investment decisions made years earlier, when generous subsidies from the Inflation Reduction Act and related policies were still in place. Large wind and solar projects often take three to seven years to move from financing and permitting to full operation. That means many facilities coming online today were funded under a very different policy environment than the one developers face now.Recent changes to federal tax policy have scaled back or eliminated several incentives that previously supported renewable development and electric vehicle adoption. These changes do not immediately halt construction, but they alter the financial calculations for the next generation of projects. Renewable energy projects rely heavily on financing structures that incorporate tax credits, equity partnerships, and long-term debt. When incentives shrink or become uncertain, developers must either accept greater risk or secure more expensive capital. At the same time, unresolved federal rulemaking and regulatory uncertainty are adding another layer of caution for investors. Although wind and solar technology costs have declined and can remain competitive with fossil fuels, policy instability can still erode project margins.The key point is that energy statistics describe what is already built, while investment decisions determine what the energy system will look like years from now. Current renewable growth may therefore reflect past policy rather than present conditions. Financing data already shows signs of slowing investment in green energy. To maintain steady development, policymakers should avoid abrupt tax-credit expirations and instead adopt predictable, multi-year phaseouts that allow markets to adjust. Agencies could also reduce uncertainty by finalizing or withdrawing proposed energy regulations within clear timelines. Stable rules make it easier for investors to commit capital to projects designed to operate for decades. The next investment cycle will reveal whether today's policy environment supports continued energy expansion or discourages it. 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

March 9, 2026- The acting head of the state Office of Cannabis Management, John Kagia, talks about his short-term goals and addresses the new seed-to-sale tracking system and the struggling medical marijuana landscape.

This Day in Legal History: The AmistadOn March 9, 1841, the U.S. Supreme Court decided United States v. The Amistad, ruling that a group of Africans who had seized control of the Spanish ship La Amistad were free individuals who had been illegally enslaved. The case began after the captives, led by Sengbe Pieh—often called Cinqué—revolted against the ship's crew while being transported from Cuba in 1839. They had originally been kidnapped in West Africa and sold into slavery in violation of international agreements banning the transatlantic slave trade. After the revolt, the ship was intercepted near Long Island and the Africans were taken into U.S. custody. Spanish officials demanded that the United States return both the ship and the captives to Cuba. The U.S. government supported Spain's request, arguing that the captives were property under Spanish law.Abolitionists rallied to the Africans' defense and secured legal representation for them in American courts. The case eventually reached the Supreme Court, where former President John Quincy Adams joined the legal team arguing for the captives' freedom. Adams delivered a lengthy and passionate argument emphasizing natural rights and the illegality of the slave trade that had brought the Africans to Cuba. Writing for the majority, Justice Joseph Story concluded that the captives had been unlawfully enslaved and were therefore not property. Because they were free individuals, the Court held that they had the legal right to resist their captivity and fight for their liberty. The Court ordered that the Africans be released rather than returned to Spanish authorities.The ruling was celebrated by abolitionists as an important moral and legal victory in the fight against slavery. Although it did not end slavery in the United States, the decision demonstrated that courts could recognize limits on the slave trade and acknowledge the legal claims of enslaved people.Thirteen major U.S. book publishers have filed a copyright lawsuit against Anna's Archive, a website they describe as one of the largest “shadow libraries” distributing pirated books and academic papers. The publishers—including HarperCollins, Wiley, McGraw Hill, and Cengage—filed the complaint in federal court in New York, alleging that the site hosts more than 63 million books and 95 million research papers without authorization. According to the lawsuit, Anna's Archive allows users to download these materials directly or through torrent networks, making copyrighted works widely available for free. The publishers claim the site openly presents itself as a pirate platform and intentionally violates copyright law.The complaint also alleges that Anna's Archive was created in 2022 after copying entire collections from other illegal book repositories and has continued expanding its database. The publishers say the site operates anonymously and frequently changes domain names across different countries to avoid enforcement efforts. They further claim the platform targets artificial intelligence developers by offering large datasets of books and papers. While free users can access files slowly, the complaint states that faster downloads are available to users who make donations through untraceable methods like cryptocurrency or gift cards. The publishers allege that these donations can reach roughly $200,000 for high-speed bulk access. In response, the plaintiffs are asking the court to shut down the site and award statutory damages of up to $150,000 for each infringed work.The lawsuit follows a separate case brought by Atlantic Recording Corp., which earlier obtained a preliminary injunction preventing Anna's Archive from distributing millions of music files allegedly copied from Spotify. That case resulted in a default after the site failed to respond to the complaint. However, the publishers argue that the earlier injunction does not cover books, allowing the alleged book piracy to continue. The Association of American Publishers has publicly supported the lawsuit, describing the scale of digital piracy as extremely large and urging legal action to stop the operation.Publishers Sue ‘Shadow Library' For ‘Staggering' Book Piracy - Law360Companies that operate in California are facing uncertainty as the state moves forward with major climate disclosure laws while a federal appeals court considers whether the rules should be blocked. The laws—California Senate Bills 253 and 261—require large companies doing business in the state to disclose information about greenhouse gas emissions and climate-related financial risks. In late February, the California Air Resources Board approved initial regulations explaining how the reporting system will be administered and how companies will pay implementation fees. At the same time, the Ninth Circuit has temporarily blocked enforcement of S.B. 261 and is reviewing a request from business groups to halt both laws entirely.Because of this parallel regulatory and legal process, many companies are unsure whether they should invest heavily in compliance or wait for the courts to rule. S.B. 253 applies to companies with more than $1 billion in annual revenue and requires reporting of Scope 1, Scope 2, and Scope 3 greenhouse gas emissions, which include direct emissions, energy-related emissions, and emissions from supply chains. S.B. 261 applies to companies with more than $500 million in revenue and requires disclosure of climate-related financial risks and mitigation strategies. Attorneys say collecting this data could be difficult, especially for companies that only have limited operations in California or that must gather information from suppliers and partners in other regions.The reporting requirements could also affect businesses outside California because companies subject to the law may need emissions data from their partners and vendors. Regulators have begun setting deadlines for initial reporting, including an August deadline for certain emissions data, but many details about how the system will function remain unresolved. Meanwhile, business groups including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce argue the laws violate the First Amendment by forcing companies to speak on controversial issues related to climate change. With rulemaking still underway and litigation ongoing, companies are left trying to prepare for possible compliance while waiting to see whether the courts ultimately uphold or invalidate the laws.Companies In Limbo Over Calif. Climate Disclosure Laws' Fate - Law360In a major California bellwether trial over claims that social media harms children's mental health, the plaintiff has finished presenting her case against Instagram and YouTube. The plaintiff, a 20-year-old referred to as Kaley G.M. to protect her identity, alleges that features on the platforms contributed to anxiety, depression, and body dysmorphia she experienced as a minor. Her attorney, Mark Lanier, chose not to call Kaley's mother to testify live, instead presenting a brief portion of her deposition to the jury. The decision appeared partly influenced by strict time limits imposed by the judge during the trial. In the deposition testimony, the mother acknowledged she had little knowledge of her daughter's social media use and did not monitor her phone because she viewed it similarly to a household landline.Defense attorneys have argued that Kaley's mental health problems were caused by difficulties at home rather than the platforms themselves. Evidence introduced at trial suggested the plaintiff had conflicts with her mother, including allegations of neglect, verbal abuse, and limited supervision of internet use. The defense also pointed to bullying and other personal issues as alternative explanations for the plaintiff's struggles. Meanwhile, a former Meta employee testified that internal company information suggested Instagram could be addictive and harmful to young users, although defense lawyers challenged his credibility and the extent of his involvement with safety issues.The plaintiff's final expert witness discussed ways social media companies could design safer platforms for children. After the plaintiff rested, Meta began presenting its defense with testimony from school administrators connected to the plaintiff. The case is the first bellwether trial among thousands of similar lawsuits consolidated in California, with outcomes potentially shaping settlement negotiations and future trials. TikTok and Snap previously settled with this plaintiff, but the broader litigation against social media companies continues.Meta, Google Begin Defense As Mental Harm Plaintiff Rests - Law360 UKThe U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) agency told a federal trade court that it expects to create a system within about 45 days to process refunds for tariffs that were previously imposed under President Donald Trump and later ruled unconstitutional by the U.S. Supreme Court. The tariffs generated roughly $166 billion in payments from about 330,000 importers, and the Court's decision did not specify how those funds should be returned. As a result, government lawyers and a judge from the U.S. Court of International Trade are working to establish a practical process for issuing refunds.Under the proposed plan, importers would submit a declaration through CBP's electronic system detailing the tariffs they paid. The agency would verify the information and then issue a single payment from the Treasury Department to each importer, including interest. Officials say this approach would avoid forcing businesses to file individual lawsuits to recover their money. The judge overseeing the matter recently modified an earlier order that required immediate refunds, acknowledging that the agency needs time to build a workable system.CBP explained that its current administrative system cannot automatically process refunds on the massive scale required. Importers paid tariffs on more than 53 million shipments, and manually reviewing each transaction could require millions of hours of labor. Several large companies, including affiliates of Nintendo and CVS, have already filed lawsuits seeking repayment, though the government hopes a broader refund system will resolve claims more efficiently.Business groups such as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce have supported the proposal, saying it could simplify the process for smaller companies. However, officials noted that relatively few importers have registered for the electronic refund system created earlier this year. The court continues to oversee the development of the refund process through a test case that could guide how payments are returned to all affected businesses.US customs agency expects tariff refund system to be ready in 45 days | Reuters 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

Send a textCannabis Legalization News (Mar 8, 2026): Texas Hemp Crackdown, SCOTUS & 2A, Missouri Rules, Michigan DramaThe hosts deliver a casual, no-prep cannabis legalization news roundup dated March 8, 2026, focusing on Texas moving to shut down much of the intoxicating hemp market (with rules nearing publication, limiting THCA flower and vapes), and discuss a Supreme Court case where several justices appeared skeptical of a law barring cannabis users from firearm possession due to a lack of evidence of “dangerousness.” They also cover Kansas Democrats pushing legalization but being blocked by GOP leadership, Nebraska tribe efforts to advance medical cannabis despite state pushback, Missouri's proposed rules targeting bad actors and ownership misconduct, Michigan's cannabis tax distributions and a city controversy involving companies paying legal bills, Virginia Tech research on cannabis and driving, Oregon's failed bill to cap edibles over 10mg THC, Afroman's lawsuit story, and Michigan guidance on restricted terms like “dispensary.”00:00 No Prep Cold Open01:30 Supreme Court Gun Case05:17 Texas Hemp Rules Crackdown08:48 Kansas Stalled Legalization10:38 Nebraska Tribe Pushback12:52 Smoke Break Sponsor Spot13:35 Name That Strain Game14:19 Missouri Targets Bad Actors16:25 Hemp Loophole Rant21:02 Michigan Cannabis Taxes21:41 Live Google Search Wrap22:27 Hemp Bill Jurisdiction Fight23:57 Access Limits And Supply26:05 Security Rules And Politics27:07 Michigan Legal Bills Scandal29:57 Virginia Tech Driving Data31:04 Afroman Raid And Lawsuit34:19 Oregon Edibles Cap Fails37:08 Seeds Genetics And Hemp Loopholes39:40 Michigan Provisioning Centers Meme42:13 Wrap Up And Sponsor PlugSupport the showGet our newsletter: https://bit.ly/3VEn9vu

Victorian dairy farmers are continuing to push back against state government plans to merge commodity focused food safety bodies. The state government is establishing a broad, independent regulator called Safe Food Victoria, which will also oversee dairy products. Rural Editor Emily Minney spoke to United Dairy Farmers of Victoria Acting President Ian Morris about the dairy industry's concerns.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Summary   This conversation delves into the critical topic of online safety for children, featuring insights from experts in the field. The discussion covers the impetus behind the Online Safety Act, the roles of organizations like Ofcom and LGFL, and the importance of empowering parents and schools to foster safe online environments. The conversation also addresses the challenges posed by technology, including AI, and emphasizes the need for continuous communication between parents and children regarding online safety.   Takeaways The Online Safety Act was prompted by tragic incidents involving children. Empowering parents and schools is crucial for online safety. Children's experiences online often differ from their parents'. Continuous communication about online safety is essential. Technology is an integral part of children's lives today. AI poses new risks that need to be addressed. Schools should engage parents creatively in online safety discussions. Risk assessments are vital for companies serving children. Children need to be educated about the risks of online content. Regulators must hold companies accountable for user safety. key  topics Legislation and regulation of online safety (Online Safety Act, Ofcom's role) Impact of AI and algorithms on children's online experiences Parental and educational strategies for online safeguarding Chapters 00:00 Introduction to Online Safety and the Guests 03:51 The Impetus Behind the Online Safety Act 05:35 Support from LGFL for Schools and Parents 08:14 The Role of Parents in Online Safety 10:59 Ofcom's Regulatory Role and Responsibilities 13:34 Impact of Algorithms on Children's Online Experience 16:21 Engaging Parents in Online Safety Discussions 18:06 Children's Experiences and Parental Awareness 20:06 Overcoming Parental Barriers to Online Safety Conversations 22:30 The Future of Social Media Regulations 24:38 Empowering Parents and Educators for Online Safety 26:57 Empowering Parents with Resources 28:30 Regulatory Frameworks and Company Accountability 33:40 School Policies on Technology Use 41:45 Navigating the Challenges of AI in Education 47:39 Envisioning a Safer Digital Future 49:57 The Importance of Online Safety in Education 51:04 Navigating the Challenges of AI and Online Safety Resources Online Safety Act (UK) - https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2023/29/enacted  Ofcom's Online Safety Framework - https://www.ofcom.org.uk/online-safety  UN Rights of the Child in Digital - https://www.un.org/en/rights-of-the-child  UNICEF Digital Child Safety Initiatives - https://www.unicef.org/child-rights/digital-safety  LGFL Safeguarding Resources - https://www.lgfl.net/online-safety  Australian Online Safety Laws - https://www.ag.gov.au/rights-and-protections/children-and-teenagers/online-safety  Ofcom's Research on Children's Online Experiences - https://www.ofcom.org.uk/research/children-online  Global Regulatory Cooperation on Digital Safety - https://www.ituc-csi.org/global-cooperation-digital-safety The resource I referenced is the Parent Online Safety Toolkit for schools – available to download at https://parentonlinesafety.lgfl.net/  

The SCC deemed the project necessary for Virginia Natural Gas to reliably serve customers.

John is joined by Jonathan Graham, Executive Vice President and General Counsel and Secretary of Amgen, one of the world's largest biotech companies and one of the pioneers of the industry. They discuss in-house legal leadership in major biotech companies and how science, intellectual property, and regulation shape strategy. Jonathan began his practice clerking for the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, then became a litigator for a large firm. Later, his career shifted in-house. He believes that litigation training develops useful skills, including rapid issue spotting across unfamiliar domains, crisp written and oral advocacy, and an ability to understand stakeholders' incentives.The biotech industry is unusually purpose-driven because the output is medicine that can extend life and restore quality of life. That mission creates urgency across functions, as delays can mean patients wait longer for needed therapies. The sector is also highly regulated and fast-moving, which elevates the importance of legal teams that operate as strategic partners rather than as a “department of no.”Intellectual property is the economic lifeblood of biological drug development. Bringing a molecule to market often costs billions of dollars and requires years of lab work, clinical trials, and manufacturing scale-up. Without enforceable patents, competitors could free ride, undermining investment incentives. This reality drives frequent, high-stakes patent disputes that can be hard to settle because exclusivity is enormously valuable.Patent doctrines often lag behind technology, forcing courts to fit new technologies into older legal frameworks. Artificial intelligence is potentially a powerful tool for discovery and analysis of molecules, but not a substitute for wet-lab validation or human inventorship. Regulators still require clinical evidence before any medicine is approved and likely will for the foreseeable future.Biosimilars are currently a booming market with many parallels to generic drugs. A company may participate in the market as both innovator and biosimilar supplier by leveraging its research and manufacturing capabilities. Finally, government-driven drug pricing controls may slow innovation over time, even though scientific progress and therapeutic potential remain strong.Podcast Link: Law-disrupted.fmHost: John B. Quinn Producer: Alexis HydeMusic and Editing by: Alexander Rossi

This Day in Legal History: Boston MassacreOn March 5, 1770, a confrontation between British soldiers and American colonists in Boston turned deadly in what became known as the Boston Massacre. Tensions had been rising for months as British troops occupied the city to enforce parliamentary taxes that many colonists believed were unjust. On that evening, a crowd gathered near the Boston Custom House and began taunting a British sentry, shouting insults and throwing snowballs and debris. As the situation escalated, additional soldiers arrived to support the guard, but the crowd continued to press in. In the confusion and fear of the moment, the soldiers fired into the crowd. Five colonists were killed and several others were wounded, including Crispus Attucks, who is often remembered as the first casualty of the American Revolution.The incident quickly became a flashpoint in colonial politics, with patriot leaders using it as evidence of British tyranny. Yet the legal response that followed was notable for its commitment to due process despite intense public anger. British Captain Thomas Preston and eight soldiers were arrested and charged with murder. Future president John Adams agreed to defend the soldiers, arguing that the rule of law required even deeply unpopular defendants to receive a fair trial. During the proceedings, Adams emphasized the evidence suggesting the soldiers had been surrounded and threatened by a hostile crowd. The jury ultimately acquitted six soldiers and convicted two of the lesser charge of manslaughter.The trials demonstrated an early American commitment to the principle that legal judgments should be guided by evidence rather than public pressure, even during moments of political upheaval.The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that New Jersey cannot use sovereign immunity to protect New Jersey Transit from personal injury lawsuits filed by riders injured outside the state. The unanimous opinion, written by Sonia Sotomayor, resolved a conflict between the Pennsylvania Supreme Court and the New York Court of Appeals over whether the transit agency qualifies as an “arm of the state.” The dispute arose from two lawsuits filed by passengers injured in NJ Transit bus crashes that occurred outside New Jersey.The justices focused heavily on how the agency was structured. During oral argument, several members of the Court questioned why New Jersey created NJ Transit as a corporation with the ability to sue and be sued while also disclaiming responsibility for its debts. Some justices suggested those design choices undermined the state's argument that the agency should receive sovereign immunity protections.New Jersey's lawyers argued that the agency's independence is largely formal and that the governor maintains significant control over the system. They also warned that allowing such lawsuits could subject the state to litigation in other states' courts. However, the Court appeared unconvinced by those arguments and emphasized that the plaintiffs were private individuals seeking compensation rather than other states trying to regulate New Jersey.The ruling ultimately sided with the New York court's earlier decision and overturned the Pennsylvania ruling, allowing the personal injury lawsuits to proceed.Supreme Court Rejects NJ Immunity Defense In NY, Pa. SuitsRegulators are increasingly focusing on dynamic or algorithmic pricing, a practice that uses personal data—such as location, browsing history, and purchasing behavior—to set individualized prices for consumers. The approach has raised concerns among privacy and consumer protection regulators because it relies on large amounts of personal data and may affect price transparency. Although grocery pricing has drawn the most attention, the practice is also used in industries like travel, financial services, and online retail.The Federal Trade Commission has been studying the issue but has not clearly stated whether dynamic pricing violates any specific federal law. In 2024, the agency issued subpoenas to companies that develop pricing algorithms to learn how they collect consumer data, train their systems, and influence the prices consumers see. A preliminary research summary released in 2025 confirmed that these tools rely heavily on consumer data and can adjust prices in real time, but it did not identify specific legal violations.While the federal approach remains uncertain, state regulators are taking more direct action. The office of Rob Bonta, the California attorney general, launched an investigative sweep in January 2026 to examine how companies use consumer data to personalize prices. Investigators sent letters to retailers, grocery stores, and hotels requesting information about pricing algorithms, data sources, and disclosures to consumers.Meanwhile, the New York Attorney General's Office is investigating companies' compliance with the state's new Algorithmic Pricing Disclosure Act. The law requires businesses to clearly inform consumers when prices are generated using algorithms that rely on their personal data. Regulators have warned that disclosures hidden behind hyperlinks may not satisfy the law's requirement that notices be clear and conspicuous.Other states are considering similar legislation, including proposals targeting surveillance-based pricing or banning dynamic pricing in certain industries. As scrutiny increases, companies that use personalized pricing tools are being urged to review their data practices, pricing disclosures, and compliance with emerging state privacy laws.Amidst uncertainty from FTC, states zero in on dynamic and algorithmic pricing | ReutersThe U.S. civilian federal workforce decreased by about 12% between September 2024 and January 2026, according to newly released government data. The reductions reflect efforts by Donald Trump's administration to shrink federal agencies, a policy he promoted as a way to reduce government size and increase efficiency.Several major departments experienced significant staffing losses. The U.S. Department of the Treasury saw its workforce drop by roughly 24%, while the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services lost about 20% of its employees during the same period. These reductions represent some of the largest declines across federal agencies.One notable exception was the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, which slightly increased its workforce by less than 1%. The agency's growth reflects the administration's continued focus on immigration enforcement and deportation efforts.Overall, the data indicates that the administration's push to cut federal staffing has had a broad impact across much of the government, significantly reducing the number of civilian employees in many departments.US government workforce shrunk by 12% since September 2024 | Reuters 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 the Daily Compliance News. Each day, Tom Fox, the Voice of Compliance, brings you compliance-related stories to start your day. Sit back, enjoy a cup of morning coffee, and listen in to the Daily Compliance News. All, from the Compliance Podcast Network. Each day, we consider four stories from the business world, compliance, ethics, risk management, leadership, or general interest for the compliance professional. Top stories include: Regulators need to catch up on private credit risk. (WSJ) DOJ wants authority over state bar discipline. (NYT) Head of UK police union arrested for corruption. (TheGuardian) When part of compliance moves to protection. (FT) Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

From bright fishing lures to bold financial claims, this episode reveals why some private offers look irresistible and how retail investors get pulled into high-risk waters without realising it. Tim and Nick shed light on wholesale certifications, liquidity traps, and explore how behavioural biases like greed and familiarity are exploited. Find out the questions every investor should ask before they sign and the simple due diligence habits that protect everyday investors.(00:01:46) Identifying modern investment lures (00:02:01) Moving up the risk curve without realising (00:03:00) Regulator warnings and real-world examples (00:03:19) Liquidity traps and investor misconceptions (00:04:54) Behavioural biases in investing (00:05:39) Return chasing and historical lessons (00:06:22) Wholesale investor certifications (00:08:53) Private equity risks and lack of recourse (00:09:16) Due diligence essentials for private offers (00:10:41) Recognising too good to be true offers (00:10:54) Fiduciary standards like Cefex (00:13:11) Ignoring environmental and insurance risk (00:13:25) Boringly effective investing habitsNick's book recommendation: Jerusalem by Simon Sebag Montefiore | Paper PlusMusic: No Telling When The Muttonbirds The Adviser Talk is available on all major streaming platforms, including Spotify and Apple Music.Nick Stewart (Ngāi Tahu, Ngāti Huirapa, Ngāti Māmoe, Ngāti Waitaha) is a Financial Adviser and CEO at Stewart Group, a Hawke's Bay and Wellington-based CEFEX-certified financial planning and advisory firm. Stewart Group provides personal fiduciary services, Wealth Management, Risk Insurance and KiwiSaver solutions.The information provided, or any opinions expressed in this show, are of a general nature only and should not be construed or relied on as a recommendation to invest in a financial product or class of financial products. You should seek financial advice specific to your circumstances from an Authorised Financial Adviser before making any financial decisions. A disclosure statement can be obtained free of charge by calling 0800 878 961 or visit our website, www.stewartgroup.co.nz Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Continuing the ICH Q series with ICH Q5. This episode explains why Q5 exists, how to read it, and what it means for combination products. Q5 addresses quality challenges unique to biologics made in living systems where products cannot be fully characterized by physical and chemical testing alone and show inherent variability. It harmonizes expectations for viral safety, cell substrate controls including master and working cell banks, stability, and comparability after manufacturing changes. For combination products, Q5 mainly applies to the biologic drug constituent through stability and change impact rather than device requirements.00:00 Intro to ICH Q500:25 Meet the Host00:32 Why Biologics Need Q500:56 Key Risks Explained02:11 What Q5 Covers02:40 Scope and Structure03:19 Q5 A to E Breakdown04:19 How to Read Q505:05 Q5 for Combination Products05:59 Wrap Up and Next EpisodeSubhi Saadeh is the Founder and Principal at Let's Combinate. With a background in Quality, Manufacturing Operations and R&D he's worked in Large Medical Device/Pharma organizations to support the development and launch of Hardware Devices, Disposable Devices, and Combination Products for Vaccines, Generics, and Biologics. Subhi serves currently as the International Committee Chair for the Combination Products Coalition(CPC) and as a member of ASTM Committee E55 and also served as a committee member on AAMI's Combination Products Committee.For questions, inquiries or suggestions please reach out at letscombinate.com or on the show's LinkedIn Page.

Officers from a UK medicine regulator raided two sites in February during an ongoing investigation into a criminal network that manufactures and distributes unlicensed weight-loss medicines, also known as “skinny jabs.”The Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) stated that the operation, which targeted farm and residential properties in Lincolnshire and Nottinghamshire, resulted in the seizure of nearly 2,000 doses of unauthorized weight-loss medicines, including retatrutide, tirzepatide and peptide products. The agency added that officers also confiscated manufacturing equipment, suspected pharmaceutical ingredients, packaging and commercial vehicles. #MHRA #WeightLossDrugs #SkinnyJabs #IllegalMedicines #DrugSafety #PublicHealth #Tirzepatide #Retatrutide #GLP1 #PharmaceuticalCrime #HealthcareNews #MedicalRegulation #CounterfeitDrugs #FDA #UKNews #DrugEnforcement #HealthRisks #RegulatoryAction #LawEnforcement #MedicineSafety

In episode 18 of The Sports Law Podcast, Nick De Marco KC is joined by Dame Tracey Crouch DBE, managing director of sport at Hanover Communications, for a special in-depth episode. Tracey was previously Sports Minister in the UK and Chair of the Independent Fan-Led Review of Football Governance, often referred to as the Crouch Report, which led to the new Independent football Regulator, the first of its kind in the world.In this insightful episode, Tracey discusses her career and life in politics and sport, the Fan-Led Review, challenges for the new Football Regulator, women's sport and the wider role of sport in society.

In Episode 262, Cole plays clips from a wide-ranging interview with Illinois cannabis regulator Vaughn Bentley of IDFPR, digging into how the state oversees dispensaries, what regulators say they prioritize, and why Illinois does things differently than most states. Along the way, Cole shares commentary on testing, recalls, product safety, privacy protections at dispensaries, and the ongoing debate over limited licenses and the so-called race to the bottom. You will also get quick legislative updates, including Cole's latest on Illinois's odor-proof packaging requirement and what listeners should expect next when it comes to witness slips and committee movement. Watch the video or read full show notes here: https://thecolememo.com/2026/02/27/e262/

This Day in Legal History: Grand Teton National ParkOn February 26, 1929, Congress officially established Grand Teton National Park, preserving one of the most striking mountain landscapes in the American West. While today the park is known for its natural beauty and wildlife, its creation was rooted in significant legal and political conflict. The legislation reflected a growing national commitment to conservation during the early twentieth century. At the same time, it sparked fierce opposition from local ranchers and residents who feared federal control over land they had long used for grazing and settlement. Many critics argued that expanding federal ownership infringed upon traditional property rights and state authority.The controversy centered on Congress's constitutional power to regulate and manage federal lands under the Property Clause. Supporters of the park maintained that the federal government had clear authority to preserve land for public use and environmental protection. Opponents viewed the move as an overreach that disrupted local economies and private land expectations. The debate highlighted tensions between national conservation goals and regional economic interests. It also illustrated how public land policy can serve as a testing ground for broader constitutional principles.Ultimately, the establishment of the park signaled an expanding federal role in environmental stewardship. It marked a shift toward long-term preservation over short-term private development. The legal battles surrounding the park foreshadowed future disputes over land use, resource management, and federal regulatory power. February 26, 1929, thus stands as a reminder that conservation law has often advanced through conflict as much as consensus.The Trump administration has filed a lawsuit against the University of California system, alleging that Jewish and Israeli employees at UCLA were subjected to an antisemitic hostile work environment. The complaint, brought by the Justice Department in Los Angeles, claims UCLA failed to respond adequately to discrimination complaints following the October 2023 Hamas-led attack on Israel. Federal officials argue that the university ignored or even enabled antisemitic conduct during a period marked by intense campus protests over the war in Gaza. The lawsuit seeks a court order requiring UCLA to investigate the allegations, improve anti-discrimination training, and pay unspecified damages to two professors who say they experienced antisemitism.This legal action is part of a broader effort by President Trump to challenge universities over pro-Palestinian protests, diversity programs, and other policies. The administration previously attempted to freeze significant federal funding for UCLA, though a judge ordered that funding restored. UCLA has responded by pointing to institutional reforms, including restructuring its civil rights office and launching initiatives aimed at combating antisemitism. Large demonstrations took place on campus in 2024, with protesters calling for divestment from companies linked to Israel and an end to U.S. support for the war in Gaza. Some demonstrators, including Jewish groups, have argued that criticism of Israeli policy is being wrongly labeled as antisemitism.The University of California system receives more than $17 billion annually in federal funding, heightening the stakes of the dispute. The administration has reached financial settlements in similar investigations involving other universities, prompting concerns among academic experts about the impact on academic freedom. Notably, the administration has not pursued comparable investigations into allegations of Islamophobia or anti-Palestinian discrimination.Trump administration alleges antisemitic work environment at UCLA | ReutersAttorneys general from 11 Republican-led states have asked the U.S. Department of Justice to closely examine Netflix's proposed $82.7 billion acquisition of studio and streaming assets from Warner Bros. The state officials argue that the deal could harm competition and weaken the United States' leadership in the film industry. In a letter to federal regulators, they urged careful scrutiny of how the merger might affect streaming subscribers and the theatrical movie market.Warner Bros. has accepted Netflix's offer, but its board is also weighing a competing proposal from Paramount Skydance, which has suggested that Netflix's bid may face greater antitrust challenges. The state attorneys general contend that combining the companies' assets could lead to excessive market concentration. They warn that reduced competition might result in higher prices, diminished service quality, and fewer innovative offerings for consumers.The officials emphasize that the entertainment industry is a significant part of the American economy and cultural influence, making regulatory oversight especially important. Their request signals potential legal and political resistance to the transaction as federal antitrust authorities evaluate the proposed merger.11 US States urge DOJ to thoroughly probe Netflix-Warner Bros. deal | ReutersSpain's competition regulator has determined that Apple and Amazon failed to promptly remove anti-competitive clauses from their distribution agreements, despite being ordered to do so. The watchdog, known as the CNMC, had fined the companies 194 million euros in 2023 and instructed them to immediately eliminate contract terms that limited the number of Apple resellers on Amazon's Spanish platform. Regulators said those provisions unfairly restricted competition and affected how rival products were promoted on the site.According to the CNMC, the companies did not fully comply with the cease-and-desist order until May 2025, well after the directive was issued. This delay could expose them to additional penalties. The regulator had also alleged that the agreements reduced advertising space for competing brands and blocked marketing efforts targeting Apple customers with alternative products.Both companies dispute the findings. Apple stated that it respects the regulator but disagrees with the ruling and maintains it has followed official instructions, emphasizing efforts to protect customers from counterfeit goods. Amazon likewise rejected the regulator's conclusions and said it plans to appeal, arguing that its business model depends on supporting third-party sellers, many of whom are small and medium-sized businesses. The original 2023 fine remains suspended while the case is under review by Spain's High Court.Apple and Amazon took too long to remove anti-competitive clauses, Spanish watchdog says | Reuters 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

Regulators are no longer asking about AI principles — they want proof. Legal teams must show how their controls work, withstand scrutiny, and protect privilege.In this episode, I speak with Adria Perez about the evolving landscape of AI policy and what it means for corporate compliance. Our conversation focuses on the U.S. Department of Justice's AI Litigation Task Force and the growing expectation that organizations demonstrate real oversight, documented controls, and responsible use of AI. Adria shares practical insight into the challenges and opportunities AI presents for legal departments, as well as how governance frameworks can help companies adopt these tools with confidence.Adria Perez is a partner in Reed Smith's Global Regulatory Enforcement Group and a former member of the Volkswagen AG Independent Compliance Monitor and Auditor team. With deep experience at the intersection of enforcement, compliance, and monitorship expectations, she brings a perspective that in-house counsel and compliance leaders increasingly need as AI oversight rises to the board level.During our discussion, we cover:Artificial intelligence as both a strategic asset and a compliance challengeThe DOJ's AI Litigation Task Force and what it signals for corporate oversightBest practices for responsible AI use, governance, and internal controlsAI's growing role in whistleblower complaints and internal investigationsWorkflow efficiencies and operational advantages AI can deliverProtocols and employee training essential for safe, effective adoptionCommunicating AI initiatives, safeguards, and successes to corporate boardsIf you're responsible for compliance, investigations, or AI governance, this episode offers a clear look at how legal teams can adapt and lead in a rapidly changing environment.Special thanks to Adria Perez for sharing her insights and making the time to join us.Tom HagyHost | The Emerging Litigation Podcast______________________________________ Thanks for listening! If you like what you hear please give us a rating. You'd be amazed at how much that helps. If you have questions for Tom or would like to participate, you can reach him at Editor@LitigationConferences.com. Ask him about creating this kind of content for your firm -- podcasts, webinars, blogs, articles, papers, and more. Tom on LinkedIn Emerging Litigation Podcast on LinkedIn Emerging Litigation Podcast on the HB Litigation site

Regulators probe high NIPSCO bills full 51 Wed, 25 Feb 2026 16:08:09 +0000 94MSw6GNOMRPAm6Emg8R17SbGvqG7RZq news Chicago All Local news Regulators probe high NIPSCO bills A dive into the top headlines in Chicago, delivering the news you need in 10 minutes or less multiple times a day from WBBM Newsradio. 2024 © 2021 Audacy, Inc. News False https://player.amperwavepodcasting.com?feed-link=https%3A%

Regulators probe high NIPSCO bills full 51 Wed, 25 Feb 2026 16:08:09 +0000 94MSw6GNOMRPAm6Emg8R17SbGvqG7RZq news Chicago All Local news Regulators probe high NIPSCO bills A dive into the top headlines in Chicago, delivering the news you need in 10 minutes or less multiple times a day from WBBM Newsradio. 2024 © 2021 Audacy, Inc. News False https://player.amperwavepodcasting.com?feed-link=https%3A%

Regulators probe high NIPSCO bills full 51 Wed, 25 Feb 2026 16:08:09 +0000 94MSw6GNOMRPAm6Emg8R17SbGvqG7RZq news Chicago All Local news Regulators probe high NIPSCO bills A dive into the top headlines in Chicago, delivering the news you need in 10 minutes or less multiple times a day from WBBM Newsradio. 2024 © 2021 Audacy, Inc. News False https://player.amperwavepodcasting.com?feed-link=https%3A%

Hello and welcome to Episode 210 of the Ska Geek Podcast! Happy New Year, Valentine's Day, etc. Glad to be able to bring you some new ska for 2026. Thanks to all the bands from around the world for sending in these sweet tracks. Enjoy some awesome tunes and as usual check out my store and show your support! https://www.teepublic.com/stores/volpedesign – 01 The Scrub Up by The Scrub Ups • 02 Onwards and Upwards by Culture Shock • 03 Send in the Clowns by Stockholm Ska Syndrome • 04 Send In the Clowns by Fox & Hopton • 05 Wonder Woman by Brad Pittance and the Pirates • 06 Groove Is In The Heart by Donnoya Drake • 07 ¡AY SEÑOR! by Kultura Infame • 08 Mannish Water by The Regulators • 09 Harmonic Convergence by Mega Infinity • 10 Dub Prophecy by Dubmatix • 11 Touchdown The Way It Goes by Predator Dub Assassins. Enjoy. Skank on.

In July 2020, New York state regulators fined Deutsche Bank $150 million for its failure to properly monitor its relationship with Jeffrey Epstein, along with other high-risk clients. The New York Department of Financial Services (DFS) determined that the bank ignored clear warning signs while maintaining Epstein as a client from 2013 to 2018, years after his 2008 sex-crime conviction. Regulators found that Deutsche Bank processed millions in suspicious transactions for Epstein, including payments to women with Eastern European surnames and large cash withdrawals that should have triggered scrutiny. The DFS concluded that the bank chose profit over compliance, prioritizing Epstein's business despite internal concerns that he posed legal and reputational risks.The fine was the first major enforcement action against a financial institution for its role in facilitating Epstein's activities. Regulators detailed how Deutsche Bank repeatedly failed to file Suspicious Activity Reports (SARs) despite obvious red flags tied to Epstein's network of shell companies and payments structured to look like consulting or tuition expenses. The settlement required Deutsche Bank to improve oversight and compliance systems, but it also underscored a larger problem: financial institutions were essential enablers of Epstein's empire, allowing him to move money and maintain access to elite circles even after his conviction. The $150 million penalty was significant in size, yet critics argued it was still a slap on the wrist for a global bank that had enabled Epstein's financial maneuvering for years.To contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:https://www.cnbc.com/2020/07/07/jeffrey-epstein-case-deutsche-bank-fined-150-million-penalty-for-relationship.html

Thursday February 19 2026 Republican State Legislators Rush to Limit Their Own Regulators

In July 2020, New York state regulators fined Deutsche Bank $150 million for its failure to properly monitor its relationship with Jeffrey Epstein, along with other high-risk clients. The New York Department of Financial Services (DFS) determined that the bank ignored clear warning signs while maintaining Epstein as a client from 2013 to 2018, years after his 2008 sex-crime conviction. Regulators found that Deutsche Bank processed millions in suspicious transactions for Epstein, including payments to women with Eastern European surnames and large cash withdrawals that should have triggered scrutiny. The DFS concluded that the bank chose profit over compliance, prioritizing Epstein's business despite internal concerns that he posed legal and reputational risks.The fine was the first major enforcement action against a financial institution for its role in facilitating Epstein's activities. Regulators detailed how Deutsche Bank repeatedly failed to file Suspicious Activity Reports (SARs) despite obvious red flags tied to Epstein's network of shell companies and payments structured to look like consulting or tuition expenses. The settlement required Deutsche Bank to improve oversight and compliance systems, but it also underscored a larger problem: financial institutions were essential enablers of Epstein's empire, allowing him to move money and maintain access to elite circles even after his conviction. The $150 million penalty was significant in size, yet critics argued it was still a slap on the wrist for a global bank that had enabled Epstein's financial maneuvering for years.To contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:https://www.cnbc.com/2020/07/07/jeffrey-epstein-case-deutsche-bank-fined-150-million-penalty-for-relationship.htmlBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

State regulators have struck a deal with environmental groups and the utility that owns the Green River Reservoir Dam that they say allows the facility to be relicensed.

Watch the full video interview here Annual sustainability and ESG reporting is now becoming a necessity for many businesses, whether driven by region specific regulations and legislation, industry expectations or client demand.  However, doing so is definitely easier said than done. It requires a complex network of data being gathered from multiple sources which then needs to be collated, analysed and summarised in a cohesive report for leadership and possible public publication. Thankfully, there have been developments in new AI driven technology that can help ease this annual burden, allowing you to focus on utilising the results to make meaningful sustainability impacts. In this episode Mel Blackmore is joined by Darayush Mistry, Head of Product at Pulsora, to discuss how AI can make a difference in ESG and sustainability reporting, including its benefits, pitfalls and the balance of utilising AI while considering its environmental impact. You'll learn ·      Who is Darayush? ·      Who are Pulsora? ·      When did Darayush realise how AI could be utilised for ESG and sustainability reporting? ·      What are the positives of AI in this space? ·      Why is AI for ESG and sustainability reporting becoming more necessary? ·      What are the risks involved in using AI for ESG and sustainability reporting? ·      Where is AI making a real difference in reporting? ·      What parts of ESG and sustainability reporting need human judgement? ·      How does AI help collate data from multiple sources? ·      How might regulators react to AI being utilised in reporting? ·      How can businesses utilise AI while still considering it's environmental impact? ·      Darayush's advise to sustainability leaders looking to explore AI solutions   Resources ·      Pulsora ·      Darayush Mistry ·      Carbonology   In this episode, we talk about: [00:25] Episode Summary – Mel is joined by Darayush Mistry, Head of Product at Pulsora to discuss the use of AI tools in ESG and Sustainability reporting, how you can leverage this technology and what risks you need to be aware of before doing so. [02:40] Who is Darayush Mistry? Darayush has been working with enterpirise software for the past 2 decades. This technology is used by companies to help operationalise their business. He began his career at a company called Siebel Systems, which operated in the CRM space, spending 10 years there before moving onto the world of sustainability. Darayush recalls how everyone was so used to working from a set of spreadsheets just 20 years ago, whereas now most will use a central CRM for business operations. This is an area that sustainbilty reporting seems to have lagged behind, with many still trying to collate their data from multiple spreadsheets and other external sources rather than having a dedicated central system. This is why he was eager to work with Pulsora, to bring similar solutions to businesses as he once had with CRM's in the past. [05:25] Who are Pulsora? Pulsora are an AI-forward SaaS (software as a service) platform. The Pulsora platform helps businesses to operationalise their sustainability initiatives, which includes data collation, calculation and reporting features. This is set up for scope 1, 2 and 3 level reporting, with considerations for climate related goals, waste water monitoring, biodiversity and policy oriented information. Darayush's role as Head of Product means he sits at the intersection between customers and Pulsora's engineering and design teams. His job is to ensure that whatever Pulsora created ultimately provides value to their customers in the form of successful sustainability outputs. [07:50] When did Darayush realise how AI could be utilised for ESG and sustainability reporting? Darayush can pinpoint a time four years prior when he first stepped into a more sustainability focused role, speaking to the co-founders of Pulsora back in 2021 they were sharing experiences of using the then early versions of AI tools such as ChatGPT and Gemini. It clicked for them then that they could do something similar for sustainability reporting, making it as easy as possible while still being accurate. It wasn't until 2 years later that they had a product to launch with Pulsora AI in late 2024. This initial product allowed users to write long from narrative responses for carbon disclosures. Regulations like CSRD require a comprehensive disclosure, but not everyone is an expert in parsing the data to write that, so Pulsora AI helped get past that writers block, to give people the building blocks for that professional disclosure. [11:55] What are the positives and negatives of AI in this space? The biggest benefits include: ·      Giving professionals and sustainability teams more time back to achieve their desired outcomes. ·      Cutting down on spending time in spreadsheets and on calculations on an annual basis. ·      Reduction of repetitive tasks ·      Ease of data collection from multiple sources and locations ·      Ease of data calculation ·      Allowing for pre-audit of data using AI tools ·      Highlighting data gaps when rationalizing the data [17:20] Why is AI for ESG and sustainability reporting becoming more necessary? People are starting to move on from the mindset of 'Let's try AI' to 'Let's use AI'. Time is one of the most precious resources we have, and any tool that can help accelerate more mundane tasks so that people can focus on making results happen should be a priority. Sustainability teams are under increasing pressure to produce tangible results, something that can be made easier with the help of AI tools. [20:06] What are the risks of using AI in ESG and Sustainability reporting? Don't treat AI as this magic wand, it's a tool you can leverage. At the moment, it's good at certain tasks, but it cannot act on its own.    In order to progress, sustainability teams need to push on the initiatives to produce results. People know their business best, and though AI can infer certain information and produce a result, it may not always be the best solution for you. You still need that human input into areas such as strategy and action planning. Darayush reminds us of Amara's Law: "We as humans severely overestimate technology outcomes in the short-term, and severely underestimate that in the long-term" Don't fall into the trap of thinking AI can do everything. [22:30] Where is AI making a real difference in reporting? Data collection, ad-hoc sustainability reporting and providing insights into the data provided. It can also help with providing a starting point for carbon disclosures or options for various strategies that you could explore. Currently, the biggest one is data collection, as it can help do this efficiently and consistently, allowing for improved accuracy in your overall sustainability data. [25:20] What parts of ESG and sustainability reporting need human judgement? Darayush states that these are complementary to each other, it should never be all of one and none of the other. There will be elements that need more human in the loop and areas where it's required less. It's applicable in degrees. One example of where the human input will be higher is in completing a materiality assessment and figuring out how to execute your decarbonisation strategy, which will require your knowledge and experience of how the business operates, it's core values and what your ultimate goals are. AI can do the heavy lifting in areas such as sustainability reporting, as it can collate all the data and create initial reports very fast. But, at the end of the day, humans still need to understand these outputs and provide their own judgement. 'AI' today isn't true AI, they're LLM's with a great capacity to collect data, analyse it and provide outputs that can be starting points. It cannot replace human judgement, as we provide the nuance in context and experience needed to apply those results effectively. AI responses operate in a perfect world where everything is an easy step by step process, which we all know does not reflect reality. [29:40] How does AI help collate data from multiple sources? Older technologies like OCR (optical Character Recognition) was the go to years ago when scanning various different documents like spreadsheets, PDF's, receipts etc. This required specific code to be written to read these docs accurately, this would then feed into pipelines to bring this data together. This code was quite rigid, so any changes to document layouts would cause things to break. AI in comparison is much more adaptable, it's capable of reading much more natural language and extracting what's required for its designated task. It also provides a much more friendly UI (user interface), meaning you don't need an IT specialist to utilise the technology. [33:15] How might regulators react to AI being utilised in reporting? Based on Darayush's previous experience in the finance sector when people were using dedicated platforms for financial reporting, the regulators didn't care where the data came from or how it was collated, they just card if it was accurate.  Regulators want transparency, accuracy and a big part of this is providing an audit trail so they can see where the data came from. They simply want businesses to follow their guidelines, the how you get from A to B is of little importance so long as the result is accurate. If anything, the existence of these tools will raise the bar of expectations from regulators, as businesses should be able to provide the required information with these tools readily available. [36:30] How can businesses utilise AI while still considering it's environmental impact? – AI can certainly aid the sustainability industry in certain areas, such as reporting, but it's a resource intensive tool. It consumes a lot of energy and water. Like with most emerging technology, the sustainability impact usually isn't addressed until much later. Much like with mobile phones, which create tonnes of E-waste every year, not to mention the mined material required to make them. It's factors like this which eventually get regulators involved to help reduce the overall harm caused. AI is yet to go through this evolution, but both regulator and consumer pressure is building to reduce the impact of AI. This will inevitably lead to innovation as companies seek to find more sustainable ways to cool data centres and reduce the resource burden. On the flip side, AI can help save energy in other ways, such as time taken to complete the tasks for a human, which will include travelling to an office and amount of time they use a device for the task. This also has its own carbon footprint, which can comparatively be reduced by using AI to complete the tasks in minutes as opposed to hours or days. The bottom line as of the start of 2026 is, we know there is a resource issue when it comes to AI, and companies are looking at better ways to address it as the technology develops. [42:20] Darayush's advise to sustainability leaders looking to explore AI solutions – Identify a problem space where you can apply AI in a measured way an start using it. The only way you can find out how it impacts you is to use the technology.   Currently, AI shines is areas such as collating data from multiple sources and locations, so if that's an issue you're tackling where sustainability reporting is concerned, that's a good place to start with utilising AI.   If you'd like to learn more about Pulsora, check out their website.   We'd love to hear your views and comments about the ISO Show, here's how: ●     Share the ISO Show on Twitter or Linkedin ●     Leave an honest review on iTunes or Soundcloud. Your ratings and reviews really help and we read each one. Subscribe to keep up-to-date with our latest episodes: Stitcher | Spotify | YouTube |iTunes | Soundcloud | Mailing List

Regulators tightened banking rules after the Great Recession. At a conference yesterday, Federal Reserve Vice Chair Michelle Bowman said the Fed is looking into easing rules for banks in hopes that this may mean more mortgage loans. But it also means banks may be more vulnerable to the next financial crisis. So why now? Plus, we take you on a tour of some of the physical infrastructure powering the AI boom.

Regulators tightened banking rules after the Great Recession. At a conference yesterday, Federal Reserve Vice Chair Michelle Bowman said the Fed is looking into easing rules for banks in hopes that this may mean more mortgage loans. But it also means banks may be more vulnerable to the next financial crisis. So why now? Plus, we take you on a tour of some of the physical infrastructure powering the AI boom.

Regulators are stepping up scrutiny of AI chatbots and companion AI technologies, with state attorneys general pushing companies to strengthen safety measures for kids and California advancing the Leading Ethical AI Development (LEAD) for Kids Act, which would restrict how companion chatbots interact with minors. At the same time, AGs urged OpenAI to “amplify safety” in response to concerns about inappropriate content and risks to youth, highlighting how AI oversight is moving beyond traditional privacy and consumer protection frameworks. Hosted by Simone Roach. Based on a blog post by Laura Riposo VanDruff, Alexander I. Schneider, and Joseph Cahill.

In July 2020, New York state regulators fined Deutsche Bank $150 million for its failure to properly monitor its relationship with Jeffrey Epstein, along with other high-risk clients. The New York Department of Financial Services (DFS) determined that the bank ignored clear warning signs while maintaining Epstein as a client from 2013 to 2018, years after his 2008 sex-crime conviction. Regulators found that Deutsche Bank processed millions in suspicious transactions for Epstein, including payments to women with Eastern European surnames and large cash withdrawals that should have triggered scrutiny. The DFS concluded that the bank chose profit over compliance, prioritizing Epstein's business despite internal concerns that he posed legal and reputational risks.The fine was the first major enforcement action against a financial institution for its role in facilitating Epstein's activities. Regulators detailed how Deutsche Bank repeatedly failed to file Suspicious Activity Reports (SARs) despite obvious red flags tied to Epstein's network of shell companies and payments structured to look like consulting or tuition expenses. The settlement required Deutsche Bank to improve oversight and compliance systems, but it also underscored a larger problem: financial institutions were essential enablers of Epstein's empire, allowing him to move money and maintain access to elite circles even after his conviction. The $150 million penalty was significant in size, yet critics argued it was still a slap on the wrist for a global bank that had enabled Epstein's financial maneuvering for years.To contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:https://www.cnbc.com/2020/07/07/jeffrey-epstein-case-deutsche-bank-fined-150-million-penalty-for-relationship.htmlBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

It was almost without peer the single most authoritarian and capricious executive action ever taken against our economy. The Obama era "Endangerment Rule" was rolled back by President Trump and EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin and predictably all the right heads exploded. Daniel Turner from Power the Future explains what it was and why it must never be allowed to return. This also gives Stigall the chance to revisit what you've likely heard before. "Trump's a fascist! Trump's an authoritarian!" It's worth remembering words matter and so do resumes. You'll want to hear this one to arm yourself the next time you hear those charges. Speaking of Obama, don't look now but his top White House attorney was VERY VERY cozy with ol' Jeffery Epstein. So much so she's just stepped down from her current job. The AG of Minnesota gets raked over the coals in the Senate. And as usual, the Democrats are WAY too left leaning for the American pubic. The new polls are in. Speaking of polls - they're mostly dead. It's about tracking real time moods online now. One of the early adopters of the technology explains how the game has changed in political messaging and public sentiment measuring. -For more info visit the official website: https://chrisstigall.comInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/chrisstigallshow/Twitter: https://twitter.com/ChrisStigallFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/chris.stigall/Listen on Spotify: https://tinyurl.com/StigallPodListen on Apple Podcasts: https://bit.ly/StigallShowSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Sign up for Practi, a new platform that helps law firms use subscription billing.Here are the top 5 takeaways from this episode:1. Start Early for Maximum Lifestyle Benefits. Chris started his subscription model in 2008 during the Great Recession, which allowed him to build his practice alongside his family life. The timing meant he never missed his sons' games or important moments – a work-life balance that would be much harder to achieve if transitioning from big law partnership later in your career.2. Niche + Brand Name = Credibility. FFL Guard (Federal Firearms License Guard) became the gold standard in its niche. The trade name made Chris's solo practice appear larger and more established than it was, while his deep specialization in federal firearms law created a defensible market position. Regulators even recommend his services off-the-record.3. Monetize Your Work Product Repeatedly. Chris built an online library, training courses (via Thinkific), and client portal where the same legal knowledge gets sold multiple times. As he learned from a mentor: “No man ever made millions billing by the hour.” The key is creating systems that generate revenue while you sleep.4. Annual Subscriptions with Payment Flexibility Work. Chris requires minimum one-year engagements but offers clients the choice to pay annually (at a discount) or monthly. This SaaS-style approach provides cash flow flexibility while ensuring enough time to build proper compliance infrastructure for clients. He ethically provides opt-out notices before renewal.5. Selling Prevention is Harder Than Selling Cures. The biggest challenge is convincing clients to pay $2,500/year proactively rather than $25,000 when disaster strikes. Chris positions himself as an “exterminator” – the reason clients don't see problems is because he's preventing them. This requires strong sales skills, public speaking, and building long-term trust and reputation.Bonus insight: Chris's tech stack evolved from Salesforce to Zoho (CRM), uses Grasshopper for phones, Thinkific for courses, and even adapted a debt collection tool (CHAX) for recurring check payments - proving you don't need perfect systems to succeed, just functional ones that work for your practice.__________________________Want your question to be answered on a future show? Fill out this short survey.Check out FFLGuard.Sign up for Paxton, my all-in-one AI legal assistant, helping me with legal research, analysis, drafting, and enhancing existing legal work product.Get Connected with SixFifty⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠, a business and employment legal document automation tool.Sign up for ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Gavel⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠, an automation platform for law firms.Visit ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Law Subscribed⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ to subscribe to the weekly newsletter to listen from your web browser.Prefer monthly updates? Sign up for the Law Subscribed Monthly Digest on LinkedIn.Check out ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Mathew Kerbis'⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ law firm ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Subscription Attorney LLC⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠.Want to use the subscription model for your law firm? Click here to sign up for a new platform that helps law firms use subscription billing. Get full access to Law Subscribed at www.lawsubscribed.com/subscribe

News and Updates: Firefox adds a "kill switch" on February 24th to disable all AI features. This "AI control" menu offers granular settings for chatbots, translations, and summaries. Microsoft is reevaluating Windows 11 AI after user backlash. Underutilized features like Copilot in Paint/Notepad may be cut, while the "Recall" feature faces repositioning. xAI loosened Grok's guardrails to boost engagement, causing a surge in sexualized content. Regulators are investigating reports of nonconsensual imagery and lack of safety staff. French authorities raided X's Paris office and summoned Elon Musk. The probe investigates Grok's deepfakes, child safety violations, and alleged algorithmic bias in content delivery. SpaceX acquired xAI in a share-exchange deal, valuing the combined entity at $1.25 trillion. Musk plans to build orbital AI data centers powered by solar.

LISTEN and SUBSCRIBE on:Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/watchdog-on-wall-street-with-chris-markowski/id570687608 Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/2PtgPvJvqc2gkpGIkNMR5i WATCH and SUBSCRIBE on:https://www.youtube.com/@WatchdogOnWallstreet/featured  It's the same con, over and over: flashy influencers, easy money promises, no real financials—and investors getting wiped out. Monthly checks create trust, then they stop. Regulators arrive late. The influencer keeps selling.The rule never changes: real wealth takes time, work, and transparency. If someone says otherwise, you're not investing—you're being played.

AI and data centers are driving electricity demand higher just as Americans are feeling the pressure of rising energy bills. Meanwhile, utilities are seeking approval for unprecedented levels of grid investment. As state regulators gather this week for their annual Winter Policy Summit, the question is front and center: how do we keep the lights on without breaking the bank? In this episode, Ann Rendahl—who leads state utility regulators nationwide as president of NARUC and serves as a utility commissioner in Washington State— discusses how regulators balance reliability and affordability, the tools they use to decide which investments are truly needed, and where the biggest cost pressures are emerging. Drawing on her experience working with organized wholesale power markets in the West and Midwest, she explains how competition, private investment, and early collaboration between industry and regulators can help manage costs and deliver the reliable infrastructure customers expect. Liked this episode? Share it on X @EPSANews or LinkedIn at Electric Power Supply Association. Want more competitive power updates? Sign up for our monthly Power Moves newsletter.

Feb. 10, 2026- New York State Office of Cannabis Management Chief Equity Officer Simone Washington discusses an effort to create a more level playing field for marijuana dispensary owners coming from marginalized communities.

Regulators in the European Union are looking to clamp down on TikTok's addictive features, amid a larger global push to restrict minors' access to social media. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

A new paper argues that the real action inside multimember commissions isn't in public votes or partisan balance; it's in the internal mechanics that shape every regulatory outcome. Here to unpack how these bodies actually function, why their design matters more than ever, and what's at stake as legal and political pressures mount is assistant professor of law in the Robinson College of Business at Georgia State University, Todd Phillips.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

New financial data indicates the freight market may finally be flipping as shippers pay significantly more to move the same volume of goods. This shift in pricing power is creating a painful squeeze for brokers like RXO, who saw their margins crushed to just 1.2% this quarter. The pressure is also forcing legitimate capacity out of the market, with recent Chapter 11 filings from Quickway Transportation and Robert Bearden Trucking removing hundreds of drivers from the road. While honest fleets fold, a deadly chameleon carrier network has been exposed for dodging regulations and operating dangerous equipment under multiple identities. Regulators are attempting to close safety loopholes, including a review of foreign trucker commercial driver's licenses currently pending at the OMB. Amidst the chaos, innovation offers some relief, as Truck Parking Club hits a major milestone in unlocking safe spaces for drivers to rest. Follow the FreightWaves NOW Podcast Other FreightWaves Shows Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Send us a textWelcome to the Serious Privacy podcast, where Paul Breitbarth, Dr. K Royal, and Ralph O'Brien meet with Tom Kemp of the California Privacy Protection Agency. We talk about the new DROP system, priorities, history, and coordination with other agencies and lawmakers. Tom was previously on Serious Privacy, before his CPPA days. If you have comments or questions, find us on LinkedIn and Instagram @seriousprivacy, and on BlueSky under @seriousprivacy.eu, @europaulb.seriousprivacy.eu, @heartofprivacy.bsky.app and @igrobrien.seriousprivacy.eu, and email podcast@seriousprivacy.eu. Rate and Review us! From Season 6, our episodes are edited by Fey O'Brien. Our intro and exit music is Channel Intro 24 by Sascha Ende, licensed under CC BY 4.0. with the voiceover by Tim Foley.

What could the future of U.S. crypto regulation look like from the CFTC—and how should regulators approach tokenization, prediction markets, and stablecoins as digital finance moves on-chain?Chris Giancarlo is Senior Counsel for Corporate and Financial Services at Willkie Farr & Gallagher and the former Chair of the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission, where he oversaw the regulation of futures, options, and swaps markets, including the launch of Bitcoin futures.Timestamps:➡️ 1:15 — Advice for new CFTC Chair Mike Selig➡️ 3:06 — Why crypto inverts the CFTC's traditional regulatory model➡️ 6:53 — How the SEC and CFTC should divide authority over digital assets➡️ 8:54 — Why the commodity vs. security distinction still matters➡️ 15:13 — DTCC's no-action relief and the future of tokenized market infrastructure➡️ 19:27 — Will TradFi absorb crypto—or will crypto reshape TradFi?➡️ 21:46 — Prediction markets, federal preemption, and state resistance➡️ 27:40 — Why prediction markets need regulation, not suppression➡️ 29:42 — Stablecoins, privacy, and exporting U.S. values through digital dollarsSponsor: This episode is brought to you by the Decentralization Research Center (DRC), a nonprofit think tank advocating for decentralization in emerging technologies. Learn more at thedrcenter.org.Resources

The Electricity Authority expects to launch the new power price comparison website this month.

Meta has reported strong quarterly results, highlighting AI-driven shifts to the company's business. The SEC and CFTC are hosting a joint conference to underscore collaboration on crypto and the digital assets market structure bill. SEC Chair Paul Atkins and CFTC Chair Mike Selig discuss the dynamic between the crypto and finance industries and making America competitive for crypto business. President Trump has warned Iran that it should make a nuclear deal with the U.S., or face a large-scale American attack. Former senior advisor on energy policy in the Biden administration's State Department Amos Hochstein discusses the prospect of an attack on Iran over the weekend. Plus, Accuweather's Bernie Rayno considers the likelihood of another winter storm over the weekend. Paul Atkins & Mike Selig - 8:27Amos Hochstein - 20:15Bernie Rayno - 30:20 In this episode:Paul Atkins, @SECPaulAtkinsMike Selig, @MichaelSeligAmos Hochstein, @amoshochsteinBrian Sullivan, @SullyCNBCBecky Quick, @BeckyQuickAndrew Ross Sorkin, @andrewrsorkinKatie Kramer, @Kramer_Katie Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Amid internal strife at the Montana Public Service Commission, a legislative committee will study reshaping the state's utility oversight board.

Here we go again – Tariffs and retaliatory tariffs DAVOS – Elitists are Meeting Suicide Coaches? Hedge funds – finally a good year! PLUS we are now on Spotify and Amazon Music/Podcasts! Click HERE for Show Notes and Links DHUnplugged is now streaming live - with listener chat. Click on link on the right sidebar. Love the Show? Then how about a Donation? Follow John C. Dvorak on Twitter Follow Andrew Horowitz on Twitter   Warm-Up - Here we go again - Tariffs and retaliatory tariffs - DAVOS - Elitists are Meeting - Suicide Coaches? - Hedge funds - finally a good year! Markets - Silver and Gold - ATH - Selling off after Greenland threat - Netflix - Saga continues Davos - 2026 - Economic Confab that often brings out the elite (elitists) - Many watch for their key points and do the opposite - Trump going, Xi Jinping and Narendra Modi not - Why is Zelensky going? - Kushner, Bessent, Little Marco will be attending with Trump - Did you know - Larry Fink is the interim Co-Chair. - The CEOs that you would expect that love the limelight ) (Jensen, Nadella etc) World Economic Forum Report (Davos) - Due out Wednesday - expected to show that geopolitical confrontation is the top concern this year - Rising Inflation - Economic Downturn - Asset Bubbles - High debt burdens - Any of those could be any year and anyone in the world that is breathing could have made that list WEF List NEXT - Greenland - Sell or Else! - Trump promises 100% that he will impose tariffs and follow through - The tariffs will start at 10% on Feb. 1 and shoot up to 25% on June 1, Trump said. - Denmark, Norway, Sweden, France, Germany, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands and Finland - Supposedly in response to EU allies moving troops into Greenland - Greenland protests with - Make America Go Away hats - 200% tariff threatened in champagne and wines (Mad at Macron) Oh - and Gaza - The new Board of Peace - Trump names himself 'Board of Peace' chair under October plan - Marco Rubio, special envoy Steve Witkoff, former British prime minister Tony Blair and Trump's son-in-law, Jared Kushner. - Supposedly Putin has said he was also invited to be on the board. - Purpose? Officially, the Board is mandated to “promote stability, restore dependable and lawful governance, and secure enduring peace in areas affected or threatened by conflict... Saks - bankrupt - Chapter 11 - Problems really got worse after they agreed to purchase Needless Markup (aka Neiman Marcus) - Amazon filed an objection to Saks Global's bankruptcy financing plan on the grounds it could harm creditors and push the tech company further down the repayment pecking order. - Amazon The tech company invested $475 million into Saks' acquisition of Neiman Marcus in December 2024,  a stake it said is now effectively “worthless.” - Amazon threatened more “drastic remedies” if Saks doesn't heed its concerns, including the appointment of an examiner or a trustee. - Amazon initially invested because it thought Saks would start selling its products on Amazon's website and the tech company would offer technology and logistics expertise.| - Amazon's attorneys: “Saks continuously failed to meet its budgets, burned through hundreds of millions of dollars in less than a year, and ran up additional hundreds of millions of dollars in unpaid invoices owed to its retail partners.” Suicide Coaches - “This year, you really saw something pretty horrific, which is these AI models became suicide coaches,” Benioff told CNBC's Sarah Eisen on Tuesday at the World Economic Forum's flagship conference in Davos, Switzerland. - In 2018, Benioff said social media should be treated like a health issue, and said the platforms should be regulated like cigarettes: “They're addictive, they're not good for you.” - “Bad things were happening all over the world because social media was fully unregulated,” he said Tuesday, “and now you're kind of seeing that play out again with artificial intelligence.” China - China 2025 new yuan loans 16.27 trln yuan, lowest since 2018 - Dec new yuan loans beat forecast - PBOC announces targeted monetary policy easing - "From the asset side, amid the property market adjustment, the private sector including households and firms showed insufficient willingness to add leverage, while government bond issuance was ramped up to stabilize leverage and the economy." - Now what is happening is that $ that used to go into real estate is heading for stocks/risk assets. - Chinese authorities tightened rules on margin financing, signaling unease over the pace of a rally. - - Under the new rule, investors must now provide margin equal to the full value of the securities they buy on credit, up from the previous 80% threshold. - - - Regulators made the move to rein in potential froth in financial markets, with a fund manager saying it sends a clear signal that they want a slow bull market, not an overheated one. --- Under the new rule, investors must now provide margin equal to the full value of the securities they buy on credit, up from the previous 80% threshold, according to a Shenzhen Stock Exchange statement. The move, which applies to Shenzhen, Shanghai and Beijing bourses, underscores regulators' efforts to rein in potential froth in financial markets. More China - China's population of 1.4 billion continued to shrink, marking the fourth straight year of decrease, new government statistics show. The total population in 2025 stood at 1.404 billion, which was 3 million less than the previous year. - After the one-child policy - now government is pushing or more births - Measured another way, the birth rate in 2025 — 5.63 per 1,000 people — is the lowest on record since 1949 - Government tactics range from cash subsidies to taxing condoms to eliminating a tax on matchmakers and day care centers. Bank Earnings - Generally pretty good! - Yield curve is helping in a big way - steepening - Goldman beats, BAC beast Morgan Stanley bets etc. etc. - Goldman: The company said profit jumped 12% from a year earlier to $4.62 billion, or $14.01 per share, on gains across its capital markets businesses. - Morgan Stanley: Last Thursday reported fourth-quarter results that exceeded Wall Street expectations on the back of strong revenue from wealth management. Fed Chair - Over the weekend, Hassett thinks Trump is right not to have him in that position (What a sap! Good he is not in running anymore) - Rick Reider and Warsh are front-runners - Who ever kisses the most ass should win - Warsh would actually be a good pick - experience and smart guy that is level headed - Meanwhile - all of a sudden Trump says he is not looking to fire Powell (maybe h wants him to resign) Netflix/Warner Brothers Update - Netflix now plans to pay $27.75 per WBD share entirely in cash to acquire WBD's streaming platform HBO Max and the Warner Bros. film studio. - In reaction tot he hostile takeover bid from Paramount/Skydance - The last offer was unanimously approved by the BOD - NFLX Earnings ..... --- Earnings per share: 56 cents vs. 55 cents, estimated ------Revenue: $12.05 billion vs $11.97 billion, estimated - Stock down AH Inflation (Did we talk about this?) - Even though we are told there is little inflation... - Consumer Price Index increases 0.3% in December - Food, rents were the main drivers of consumer inflation - Underlying inflation rises a moderate 0.2% - Food prices surged 0.7% Planes! - Boeing outsold Airbus last year - First time since 2018 - BA stock made an ATH last week Bond Vigilantes - Danish pension operator AkademikerPension said it is exiting U.S. Treasurys over finance concerns tied to America's budget shortfall. - The move comes amid increasing tensions with the U.S. over Greenland as President Donald Trump pushes for control of the island. - AkademikerPension said it plans to have closed its position of around $100 million in U.S. Treasurys by the end of the month. - 10 YR yields moved up again to 4.3% - What if.....??? (Mutual assured destruction?) Hedgies - Hedge fund investors posted gains of about 12.6% last year, the best returns since 2009, according to data compiled by Hedge Fund Research Inc. - Funds run by industry giants such as D.E. Shaw & Co. and Millennium Management posted double-digit returns, with Bridgewater Associates' Pure Alpha II fund scoring a 34% gain. - Hedge funds secured net inflows of $71 billion during the first three quarters of last year, a major reversal after a decade of outflows, with the industry's giants being among the major beneficiaries.     Love the Show? Then how about a Donation? ANNOUNCING THE WINNER OF THE THE CLOSEST TO THE PIN CUP 2025 Winners will be getting great stuff like the new "OFFICIAL" DHUnplugged Shirt!     FED AND CRYPTO LIMERICKS   See this week's stock picks HERE Follow John C. Dvorak on Twitter Follow Andrew Horowitz on Twitter

From October 9, 2024: For today's episode, Loyaan Egal, the Chief of the Enforcement Bureau at the Federal Communications Commission (“FCC”), sat down with Lawfare Senior Editor and General Counsel Scott R. Anderson and Lawfare Contributing Editor and Morrison Foerster partner Brandon Van Grack to discuss the FCC's growing but often underappreciated role in advancing U.S. national security. They covered how the FCC's mandate intersects with U.S. national security concerns, how the FCC is tackling cutting-edge issues ranging from undersea cables to artificial intelligence-enabled election interference, and what other national security challenges the FCC is looking out for on the horizon. This episode is part of our special series, “The Regulators,” co-sponsored with Morrison Foerster, in which Brandon and Scott sit down with senior U.S. officials working at the front lines of U.S. national security and economic statecraft.To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/lawfare-institute.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

What happens when ordinary people decide the legal system isn't enough — and to take justice into their own hands? From real-life “superheroes” to tragic misfires, from folk-hero avengers to catastrophic citizen's arrests, this episode explores the wild, messy, often dangerous world of vigilante justice. Sometimes inspiring, sometimes horrifying, sometimes darkly hilarious, these stories reveal just how quickly “doing the right thing” can go very wrong.Merch and more: www.badmagicproductions.com Timesuck Discord! https://discord.gg/tqzH89vWant to join the Cult of the Curious PrivateFacebook Group? Go directly to Facebook and search for "Cult of the Curious" to locate whatever happens to be our most current page :)For all merch-related questions/problems: store@badmagicproductions.com (copy and paste)Please rate and subscribe on Apple Podcasts and elsewhere and follow the suck on social media!! @timesuckpodcast on IG and http://www.facebook.com/timesuckpodcastWanna become a Space Lizard? Click here: https://www.patreon.com/timesuckpodcast.Sign up through Patreon, and for $5 a month, you get access to the entire Secret Suck catalog (295 episodes) PLUS the entire catalog of Timesuck, AD FREE. You'll also get 20% off of all regular Timesuck merch PLUS access to exclusive Space Lizard merch Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.