POPULARITY
35 episodes with us district court
4 episodes with us district court
3 episodes with us district court
4 episodes with us district court
5 episodes with us district court
2 episodes with us district court
2 episodes with us district court
2 episodes with us district court
7 episodes with us district court
In this episode of #Trending, host Jim Love discusses Google's recent legal defeat over its ad tech monopoly, with the US District Court ruling that Google violated antitrust laws. The show also examines a new paper by DeepMind researchers outlining a roadmap for AI to exceed human intelligence through experiential learning. Furthermore, it covers Microsoft and Western Digital's initiative to recycle hard drives and recover rare earth materials to combat electronic waste and supply chain dependencies. Lastly, the impact of polite language on ChatGPT's operational costs is highlighted, revealing significant financial and environmental implications. 00:00 Google's Ad Tech Monopoly Verdict 02:51 AI's Path to Surpassing Human Intelligence 07:32 Recycling Rare Earth Elements from Hard Drives 09:57 The Cost of Politeness in AI Interactions 11:42 Conclusion and Contact Information
Take a Network Break! We start with a red alert for the CVE program, which nearly lost government funding before CISA stepped in, and then raise an alert for a Dpanel vulnerability. Google makes its Cloud WAN available to enterprises and governments that want connectivity options, a US District Court rules Google’s ad business a... Read more »
Take a Network Break! We start with a red alert for the CVE program, which nearly lost government funding before CISA stepped in, and then raise an alert for a Dpanel vulnerability. Google makes its Cloud WAN available to enterprises and governments that want connectivity options, a US District Court rules Google’s ad business a... Read more »
Take a Network Break! We start with a red alert for the CVE program, which nearly lost government funding before CISA stepped in, and then raise an alert for a Dpanel vulnerability. Google makes its Cloud WAN available to enterprises and governments that want connectivity options, a US District Court rules Google’s ad business a... Read more »
California Gov. Gavin Newsom said Wednesday that his state will file a lawsuit challenging President Donald Trump's authority to impose sweeping tariffs that have set off a global trade war.加利福尼亚州州长加文·纽瑟姆周三表示，该州将提起诉讼，质疑唐纳德·特朗普总统征收全面关税的权力，此举已引发全球贸易战。The suit will argue that Trump's use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act to impose tariffs on certain countries or a 10-percent tariff on all imports is unlawful.该诉讼将辩称，特朗普利用《国际紧急经济权力法》对某些国家征收关税，或对所有进口产品征收10%的关税是非法的。The lawsuit, which will be filed in the US District Court for the Northern District of California, will also argue that enacting such tariffs requires approval from Congress, Newsom's office said in a news release.纽瑟姆办公室在一份新闻稿中表示，该诉讼将向加州北区联邦地区法院提起，诉讼还将辩称，颁布此类关税需要国会批准。Newsom says the tariffs in effect have resulted in inflated costs and billions of dollars in damage in California.纽瑟姆表示，这些关税实际上导致加州成本膨胀，并造成数十亿美元的损失。"President Trump's unlawful tariffs are wreaking chaos on California families, businesses, and our economy—driving up prices and threatening jobs," he said in a statement. "We're standing up for American families who can't afford to let the chaos continue." “特朗普总统非法加征的关税，正在给加州家庭、企业和我们的经济带来混乱——推高物价、威胁就业岗位，”纽森在一份声明中表示。“我们正在为那些无法承受持续混乱的美国家庭挺身而出。”lawsuit/ˈlɔːsuːt/n.诉讼enactv.制定（法律），通过（法案）inflate/ɪnˈfleɪt/v.使膨胀；使（价格）上涨wreakv.肆虐
PRESS REVIEW – Wednesday, March 19: We look at reactions in the press after US Supreme Court Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr issues a rare rebuke of Donald Trump. Also: cartoonists react to Trump and Vladimir Putin's phone call on Ukraine. Finally, we discover the best of the best in British wildlife photography. We begin with a very public spat between US Supreme Court Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr and US President Donald Trump. As The Washington Post reports, it dates back to events over the weekend. Last Saturday, Chief Judge for the US District Court for DC James Boasberg ordered the Trump administration to turn around an aircraft deporting alleged gang members to Venezuela. The Trump administration justified the flight by the Alien Enemies Act of 1798, previously invoked only during wartime. The planes continued to their destinations but the White House has said it did not defy the judge's directive. The order, though, prompted Trump to rant against Boasberg on social media, calling him a "radical left lunatic" who "should be impeached".Throwing around the word "impeached" did not go down well in the US Supreme Court. In a statement, Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr issued a sharp, rare rebuke that impeachment is not an appropriate response to disagreement concerning a judicial decision. It's the most public battle between the two since 2018, as Politico notes.The reaction in the press has been mixed, however. The Guardian'swriter argues that Judge Roberts, a conservative justice, has paved the way for the impunity that enabled Trump to run for and win a second term. Steven Greenhouse reminds us that Roberts, since becoming chief justice in 2005, has sought to boost corporate America and consolidate Republican power. He was also author of the "startling" ruling that gave presidents far-reaching immunity from prosecution last year. This also helped lay the groundwork for Trump's increasingly authoritarian presidency. Greenhouse asks: how could Roberts not realise that this would only serve to embolden Trump even more?The conservative US magazine National Review offers a different perspective, saying it's quite possible that Trump's alleged noncompliance with the Boasberg order on the planes could be evidence in a future Democrat-led impeachment trial of Trump. If that were to happen, the chief justice would be presiding but he has now destroyed his impartiality with this statement. For that reason, the Review says it would have been better to refrain from publicly scolding the president.We turn next to reaction from the illustrated press on Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin's Tuesday phone call on Ukraine peace talks. The announcement of a 30-day pause on bombing energy infrastructure is seen sceptically by Chapatte, the Swiss paper Le Temp's cartoonist, who sees Ukraine's President Volodymyr Zelensky being strangled by the telephone cord itself. Andy Bunday, meanwhile, sees a phone with limited options in the Oval Office. Press one to disarm Ukraine, press two to give away land, press three to give away power plants, press four to bar Ukraine from NATO.One of the most visual cartoons is from Pete Songi, who evokes the "art of the dealski". He sees Vladimir Putin in his bathtub with a bath mat emblazoned with MYKRAINE, and the coalition of the killing, with a hockey helmet in the corner. Among the agreements between the two leaders is, bizarrely, that Russia and the US play a game of ice hockey, prompting British tabloid The Sun to ask "What the puck?"Finally: we bring you the winners of the British Wildlife Photography awards. Simon Withyman won the Urban Wildlife category for his picture of a Bristol fox. Also in Bristol, John Waters won the Animal Behaviour category with a picture of fantastical speckled wood butterflies. One of the most striking snaps is from the winner of the Young Photographers category. Teenager Ben Lucas set up a GoPro camera inside an abandoned packet of chips and then waited to snap a gorgeous ground-view shot of pigeons approaching the leftover chips!You can catch our press review every morning on France 24 at 7:20am and 9:20am (Paris time), from Monday to Friday.
Jim talks with Bob Levy about presidential powers, their history, and their potential for abuse. They discuss the nature of the presidential pardon, recent controversial pardons by Trump & Biden, proposed reforms, 3 main purposes of the pardon, court blocks on executive actions, the firing of federal employees, the Impoundment Control Act, immigration & deportation under Trump, presidential power over tariffs, courts as guardrails, the timeline for legal challenges, potential constitutional crisis scenarios, Congress's abdication of power, the growth of the administrative state, options if Trump defies court orders, contempt powers, impeachment as the ultimate check, and much more. Episode Transcript JRS EP245 - Bob Levy on the Second Amendment and Supreme Court "The US needs to rein in presidential pardon power," by Bob Levy JRS EP275 - Rachel Winkler on Mass Deportation Bob Levy was, for 14 years, chairman of the board of directors at the Cato Institute. He is now chairman emeritus. Bob joined Cato as senior fellow in constitutional studies in 1997 after 25 years in business. The Institute's Robert A. Levy Center for Constitutional Studies is named in his honor. He has also served on boards of the Federalist Society, the Foundation for Government Accountability, and the Institute for Justice. Bob received his PhD in business from the American University in 1966, then founded CDA Investment Technologies, a major provider of investment information and software. At age 50, after leaving CDA in 1991, Bob went to George Mason law school, where he was chief articles editor of the law review and class valedictorian. He received his JD degree in 1994. The next two years he clerked for Judge Royce Lamberth on the US District Court and Judge Douglas Ginsburg on the US Court of Appeals, both in Washington, DC.
https://vimeo.com/1054799615?share=copy#t=0 https://www.currentfederaltaxdevelopments.com/podcasts/2025/2/8/2025-02-10-new-administration-pushes-foward-with-the-cta This week we look at: IRS issues letter ruling on IRA left to trust A taxpayer mistakenly believes the IRS had conceded that his income was not subject to self-employment tax, but it hadn't The Tax Court denies a taxpayer's deductions and claimed partnership losses due to incredibly disorganized and inadequate records Taxpayer runs afoul of the “pay first, litigate later” rule when attempting to sue the IRS for a refund in US District Court in response to an assessment A taxpayer's unprocessed claim for an ERTC refund doesn't justify CDP relief The BOI - new Administration continues litigation and proposes a new due date, potential filing relief
This week we look at: IRS issues letter ruling on IRA left to trust A taxpayer mistakenly believes the IRS had conceded that his income was not subject to self-employment tax, but it hadn't The Tax Court denies a taxpayer's deductions and claimed partnership losses due to incredibly disorganized and inadequate records Taxpayer runs afoul of the “pay first, litigate later” rule when attempting to sue the IRS for a refund in US District Court in response to an assessment A taxpayer's unprocessed claim for an ERTC refund doesn't justify CDP relief The BOI - new Administration continues litigation and proposes a new due date, potential filing relief
Blockchain DXB & Society X – LinkedIn Live Hosts: Markose Chentittha (Oort Foundation + Society X) RA George (Blockchain DXB) Guest: Neil Fitzhugh, Head of Marketing at Trac Systems/TAP Protocol Contact details LinkedIn https://short-link.me/OkAJ Website: https://trac.network/ Twitter: Neil: https://x.com/fitzyOG Twitter/ X https://x.com/trac_btc?mx=2 Discord: https://discord.com/invite/trac Telegram: TAP Protocol - https://t.me/tap_protocol GitHub: https://github.com/BennyTheDev Episode Details Trump Inauguration and $TRUMP Meme Coin BTC Hits New ATH: $109K $TRUMP Coin Highlights: Other Meme Coins: Stargate AI Infrastructure Project $500B investment from notable leaders, including Sam Altman, Larry Ellison, and Masayoshi Son. Focus: Artificial Super Intelligence. Tornado Cash Sanctions Overturned Sanctions imposed in 2022 by OFAC were overturned by a US District Court in Texas. Alexey Pertsev remains in custody for laundering $1.2B. Bitcoin Reserve Discussions Republican-led states (e.g., Texas, Ohio) are advocating for Bitcoin reserves. Switzerland may announce a BTC reserve. Concerns about underdeveloped countries being left behind. Tokenization Trends for 2025 VARA CEO Matthew White predicts $500B+ growth. Increasing adoption on permissioned blockchains. FOMC Meeting (Jan 29): Interest rate decision possibilities: Larry Fink's Prediction: Bitcoin heading towards $700K as a hedge against inflation. Introduction: Neil joined at 11:30 AM, sharing his background and experience as a speaker at Bitcoin Amsterdam. Bitcoin's Evolution: Tap Protocol Overview: Trac Systems & Tokenomics: Security Measures: Future Plans: Convincing Bitcoiners: Crypto Firm CLS Global: Dubai AI Seal: Solana Activity: Stablecoins: OpenAI Data Labeling Whistleblower Controversy: Beginner-Level Bitcoin LinkedIn Session: Live now! Spartan Race Discount: Use code George20 for January 25–26. Twitter X Spaces with Oort Foundation: Coming this week. Follow Us: For more updates, insights, and events, stay connected with Blockchain DXB & Society X. For more on Tap Protocol, visit their website and follow Neil Fitzhugh for the latest announcements. To support this channel: https://www.patreon.com/BlockchainDXB ⚡ Buy me Coffee ☕ https://www.buymeacoffee.com/info36/w/6987 ⚡ Advanced Media https://www.amt.tv/ ⚡Spartan Race Trifecta in Dubai https://race.spartan.com/en/race/detail/8646/overview For 20% Discount use code: George20 ⚡ The Race Space Podcast
In Today's episode of You Can Overcome Anything, Podcast Show! cesarRespino.com brings to you a special guest by the name of Vera McCoy.Vera McCoy is an attorney, investor, and author. She obtained her B.A. from Rutgers University, with honors, and her Juris Doctor from Rutgers School of Law. She's a member of the New Jersey State Bar and admitted to practice in both US Bankruptcy Court and US District Court.Vera began her entrepreneurial journey as co-owner, with her mother, Lela, of the Real McCoy Day Care Center in Marlton, NJ. She's a certified teacher with an endorsement in Early Childhood Education.She opened her law firm after her mother retired from the Real McCoy. The firm's primary areas of practice are real estate law and bankruptcy law.Since 2022 she is making a pivot to as a real estate investor, podcaster, business consultant and entrepreneur motivator through the Financial 1st Aid platform. This platform offers tools to entrepreneurs improving their personal and business finances to move them to financial freedom.To Connect with Vera McCoy go to:Facebook (Business): https://www.facebook.com/Financial1st-Aid-108554114941620Facebook (Personal): https://www.facebook.com/vera.mccoy.904YouTube (Financial 1st Aid) FINANCIAL 1st Aid With Vera McCoy - YouTubeLinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/vera-mccoy-62917967/Vera McCoy's message to you is:I am here to Motivation, inspiration and bring Education.To Connect with CesarRespino go to:
On this show, we talk with the Honorable Joe Webster, a Magistrate Judge in the US District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, about his judicial legal career and his recently published memoir, "Joe Webster: Dual Calling Of Law And Ministry."
On this show, we talk with the Honorable Joe Webster, a Magistrate Judge in the US District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, about his judicial legal career and his recently published memoir, "Joe Webster: Dual Calling Of Law And Ministry."
https://vimeo.com/1039255455?share=copy#t=0 https://www.currentfederaltaxdevelopments.com/podcasts/2024/12/14/2024-12-16-irs-expands-business-tax-accounts-features-and-access This week we look at: President signs the two tax bills Congress recently passed DOJ asks for stay of injunction issued by US District Court in Texas on enforcement of the CTA IRS expands Business Tax Account access and services that can be accessed via that account
This week we look at: President signs the two tax bills Congress recently passed DOJ asks for stay of injunction issued by US District Court in Texas on enforcement of the CTA IRS expands Business Tax Account access and services that can be accessed via that account
The decision came days ago from the US District Court for the Eastern District of Texas.
US District Court issues temporary injunction barrijng enforcement of BOI reporting regime, FinCEN responds and Congress passes two not terribly major tax bills.
IRS releases inflation-adjusted numbers, and another US District Court denies a request for an injunction barring enforcement of the BOI reporting requirements.
We do not always know what God has planned for us. Meet Char Claxton who grew up in a small rural town in Georgia and went on to become a Magistrate Judge for the US District Court in Tennessee. She always loved Jesus, but never dreamed that God might be calling her to become Catholic.
We do not always know what God has planned for us. Meet Char Claxton who grew up in a small rural town in Georgia and went on to become a Magistrate Judge for the US District Court in Tennessee. She always loved Jesus, but never dreamed that God might be calling her to become Catholic.
We do not always know what God has planned for us. Meet Char Claxton who grew up in a small rural town in Georgia and went on to become a Magistrate Judge for the US District Court in Tennessee. She always loved Jesus, but never dreamed that God might be calling her to become Catholic.
On episode 222, we welcome Jon Michaels and David Noll to discuss the alliance between vigilante groups and governments in the US, the four types of vigilantism and how they affect our lives, how vigilante groups utilize state laws to limit freedom of movement, the roots of vigilantism in the slavery era, the argument of individual liberty as a veil for tyranny, and the societal effects of the merger between business interests and right-wing cultural warriors. Jon Michaels is a UCLA professor of law specializing in constitutional, administrative, and national-security law. His award-winning scholarship has been published in The Yale Law Journal, the University of Chicago Law Review, the Columbia Law Review, and the Harvard Law Review; his popular essays have appeared in The New York Times, The Washington Post, Los Angeles Times, Foreign Affairs, The Guardian, and The Forward. A Yale Law graduate and former Supreme Court clerk, Michaels is a member of the American Law Institute, serves on the advisory board of UCLA's Safeguarding Democracy Project, and is a faculty affiliate of UCLA's Center on Reproductive Health, Law, and Policy. His first book, Constitutional Coup, was published by Harvard University Press. David Noll is the associate dean for faculty research and development and a professor of law at Rutgers Law School. His scholarly writings on civil procedure, complex litigation, and administrative law have appeared in the California Law Review, the Cornell Law Review, the New York University Law Review, the Michigan Law Review, and the Texas Law Review, among others, and his popular writing has appeared in venues including The New York Times, Politico, Slate, and the New York Law Journal. A graduate of Columbia University and New York University School of Law, Noll is an academic fellow of the National Institute for Civil Justice. He clerked on the US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit and the US District Court for the Southern District of New York. | Jon Michaels and David Noll | ► Website | http://www.jondmichaels.com/about ► Twitter 1| https://x.com/davidlnoll ► Twitter 2 | https://x.com/JonDMichaels ► Bluesky | https://bsky.app/profile/david.noll.org ► Vigilante Nation Book | https://amzn.to/3zEjQvM Where you can find us: | Seize The Moment Podcast | ► Facebook | https://www.facebook.com/SeizeTheMoment ► Twitter | https://twitter.com/seize_podcast ► Instagram | https://www.instagram.com/seizethemoment ► TikTok | https://www.tiktok.com/@seizethemomentpodcast
We're back with another episode of the Weekly Buzz with Helium 10's Senior Evangelist, Shivali Patel. Every week, we cover the latest breaking news in the Amazon, Walmart, and E-commerce space, talk about Helium 10's newest features, and provide a training tip for the week for serious sellers of any level. Amazon Multi-Channel fulfillment (MCF) can now automatically fulfill orders placed on social commerce channels like TikTok, Instagram, and Pinterest using your FBA inventory. You can now offer Subscribe & Save and Reorder coupons on an ASIN at the same time. With this change, you can now offer both Subscribe & Save and Reorder coupons on an ASIN at the same time. Effective September 30, 2024, if Amazon requires you to submit product compliance documents, these must be submitted and approved before you can list the product. Amazon Pharmacy customers can have their medications pre-sorted into packets using this new PillPack feature https://www.aboutamazon.com/news/retail/amazon-pharmacy-pillpack-feature Inbound shipping is now easier with the Amazon Partner Carrier Program's smart carrier options https://sell.amazon.com/blog/announcements/partner-carrier-program-smart-carrier-options Amazon marketplace sellers sue Walmart https://www.nwaonline.com/news/2024/oct/01/amazon-marketplace-sellers-sue-walmart/ Amazon seller-fulfilled heavy and bulky returns https://channelx.world/2024/10/amazon-seller-fulfilled-heavy-and-bulky-returns/ Amazon's recyclable packaging push https://www.packaging-gateway.com/news/amazons-recyclable-packaging-push/ Digital Domain Teams Up with AWS to Scale Autonomous Virtual Human Technology and Introduces Generative AI-Powered Features https://press.aboutamazon.com/aws/2024/9/digital-domain-teams-up-with-aws-to-scale-autonomous-virtual-human-technology-and-introduces-generative-ai-powered-features Amazon is launching its own Shark Tank where winners get to be Amazon sellers https://www.theverge.com/2024/9/30/24258276/amazon-buy-it-now-show-trailer-shark-tank-jb-smoove With the holiday season approaching, we arm you with strategic insights to capitalize on events like Prime Big Deals Day, including essential tips on using Cerebro for effective keyword research. Tune in and stay ahead with these buzzing news and strategies that help your business thrive in the competitive e-commerce landscape. In this episode of the Weekly Buzz by Helium 10, Bradley covers: 00:49 - MCF Expands to Social 02:04 - Dual Coupon Boosts Promotions 03:28 - Compliance Deadline Approaching 04:17 - Holiday Peak FBA Fees Set 05:48 - Pharmacy PillPack 07:00 - Smart Carrier Options Introduced 08:19 - Sellers x Walmart Lawsuit 09:54 - Updated Returns for Bulky Items 11:51 - Sustainable Packaging 12:58 - AWS Powers Autonomous Virtual Humans 15:04 - Shark Tank but for Prime 16:30 - Training: Finding Keywords Your Competitors Top Keywords ► Instagram: instagram.com/serioussellerspodcast ► Free Amazon Seller Chrome Extension: https://h10.me/extension ► Sign Up For Helium 10: https://h10.me/signup (Use SSP10 To Save 10% For Life) ► Learn How To Sell on Amazon: https://h10.me/ft ► Watch The Podcasts On YouTube: youtube.com/@Helium10/videos Transcript Shivali Patel: Amazon's MCF fulfilling orders for popular social channels, incoming holiday peak fulfillment fees and, finally, that dual coupon feature you've requested being implemented. This and more on this week's episode of the Weekly Buzz. Bradley Sutton: How cool is that? Pretty cool, I think. Hello everybody, and welcome to another episode of the Serious Sellers Podcast by Helium 10. I am your host, Bradley Sutton, and this is the show. That is our Helium 10 Weekly Buzz, where we give you a rundown of all the new stories that are going on in the Amazon, Walmart and e-commerce world. We highlight the latest new feature alerts from Helium 10, and we review a training tip of the week that will give you serious strategies for serious sellers of any level in the e-commerce world. Today, our host is going to be Shivali Patel and so Shivali, take it away and let us know what's buzzing. Shivali Patel: First up, we have a few news pieces directly from Seller Central News To start. An exciting enhancement to Amazon's Multi-Channel Fulfillment, or MCF. Amazon's MCF now enables sellers to automatically fulfill orders from popular social commerce platforms like TikTok, Instagram and Pinterest using your Fulfillment by Amazon inventory. This means, for those of you that were perhaps manually fulfilling orders up until now for TikTok shop can now transition to more effortlessly expanding your brands, maintaining accurate inventory tracking and quicker order processing. Or imagine just running a promotion on Instagram knowing that your orders are being handled seamlessly through Amazon's system. This can help you capture even more sales opportunities across different channels, keeping you ahead of your competitors. To streamline this process, amazon recommends that you utilize tools like Webby LingSing or Connector by Silk. These platforms can help you connect your social media accounts to your Amazon Seller Central with ease and, in my opinion, a great strategic move to enhance your order fulfillment capabilities, position your business for growth and encourage you to meet customers where they're most active, and that is social channels. Shivali Patel: Then we have Amazon actually just announced its new dual coupon feature that many of you have been requesting. You can now offer both subscribe and save and reorder coupons on the same ASIN. Previously, sellers could only use one coupon per ASIN, which limited promotional strategies, and now eligible customers can choose between a 10% off free order coupon for a one-time purchase or a 20% off subscribe and save coupon for those who want to subscribe for regular deliveries. I can see this making a dent in impacting the quantity of repeat purchases and facilitating brand loyalty, as well as, if you are a seller, the ability to now cater to different purchasing behaviors. This will help you effectively engage your audience. For instance, if a customer is hesitant to commit to a subscription, that reorder coupon can persuade them to try your product without long-term commitment. Meanwhile, customers who value convenience can opt for the subscribe and save option, benefiting from a greater discount. Remember, guys, at the end of the day, promotions are a really great way for you to attract new customers and retain existing ones. By leveraging these dual coupon offerings, you can enhance your marketing efforts, drive sustained sales growth and, at the end of the day, it's about making your customers feel valued and giving them the options that suit their needs. Shivali Patel: Okay, moving on, let's talk about an important compliance update that you need to be aware of, effective September 30th 2024, which is already passed, amazon will now require that any product needing compliance documentation to have these documents submitted and approved before it can be listed in order to uphold the highest safety standards for products sold on Amazon. This is just one additional way for them to ensure that customers are really receiving safe and compliant items. While existing product listings will remain unaffected, new listings cannot go live until the proper documentation has been approved. So make sure that you guys manage this process through your manage all inventory dashboard on seller central and, since they can ask for additional information to verify product safety and compliance at any time, you'll want to check back time to time. Shivali Patel: Speaking of time, as we gear up for the holiday shopping season specifically, there are upcoming 2024 holiday peak fulfillment fees for FBA that you will need to be aware of. From October 15th to January 14th of 2025, you're going to see these seasonal fees applied to all products, reflecting the increased fulfillment and transportation costs during this busy period. This fee structure is similar to what other major carriers charge and it will be consistent across items within the same size band, and this will affect US FBA, Canada FBA, north America remote fulfillment, us multi-channel fulfillment and buy with Prime. I recommend that you guys factor these fees into your pricing strategy. Okay, and especially during the holiday season, when consumer spending typically peaks. The average holiday peak fulfillment fee will remain consistent with last year. However, a new peak fee will apply to products priced below 10 USD. This is for US FBA specifically. While these fees might seem like a hurdle, I want you to keep in mind that Amazon's average FBA fulfillment fees are still about 70% lower than the comparable two-day shipping options offered by third-party logistic providers. And, if needed, the new section does have the detailed rates linked by size and weight on the relevant help pages. So check it out to plan out your inventory and maximize sales during the holiday rush, if you have not already. Shivali Patel: In other news and in an exciting expansion of its services, amazon Pharmacy is enhancing the way that customers manage their medications with the introduction of a new pill pack feature. This service allows customers to have their eligible medications three or more pre-sorted into convenient pill packets, which will then be delivered straight to their door. This updated offering continues the service from PillPackcom acquired by Amazon in 2018, but introduces new savings and a simplified sign of process. Each PillPack is organized and labeled by date and time, making it easier for individuals to adhere to their prescribed routines without the hassle of multiple pill bottles. I don't think any of us like that. Plus, customers can enjoy fast, free delivery right to their homes. I wanted to mention this as part of this week's buzz because, while perhaps it's not directly relevant to you as an e-com seller or service provider, this new service from Amazon Pharmacy could open avenues for partnership or product integration, especially if you offer health-related products. Later down the road, by keeping an eye on how the service evolves, perhaps you'll be able to identify opportunities to align your offerings with Amazon's growing healthcare initiatives. Shivali Patel: What else we also have? Amazon introducing new smart carrier options for sellers using FBA and Amazon Warehousing and Distribution, known as AWD, giving sellers more choice and flexibility when sending inventory to the Amazon network. Available through the Amazon Partner Carrier Program, these options allow sellers to choose their preferred partner carrier and transport method based on dynamic freight-ready dates and cost estimates. This update aims to help sellers like you and I optimize our logistics and expenses, and these new features are integrated into step four of both the send to Amazon workflow and send to Amazon warehousing and distribution workflow. That is a tongue twister when you're trying to say it all in one sentence For less than truckload and full truckload shipments. The Amazon partner carrier program, known for offering reliable shipping services, includes small parcel delivery, LTL, FTL and intermodal shipment options, with savings of up to 25% lower compared to alternatives. So sellers can benefit from lower costs, while those delivering to AWD received additional discounts of 25% on storage and 15% on processing and transportation. I hope that you guys can see this as a valuable opportunity to streamline your inventory management and reduce costs, improving efficiency. Shivali Patel: Okay, then, we have a significant legal development. Four Amazon Marketplace sellers have filed a class action lawsuit against Walmart, seeking $5 million in damages. The lawsuit alleges that Walmart has enabled organized retail crime and racketeering through its third-party vendors by not sufficiently vetting its Marketplace sellers. The complaint filed on September 17th, as written here in US District Court for the District of Delaware, claims that certain third-party sellers on Walmart's platform are engaging in fraudulent practices, buying and reselling products from Amazon vendors in a sophisticated scheme. This practice harms legitimate sellers and allows Walmart to profit from the fees that it collects from these sellers. So I think that this case really underscores the ongoing challenges in maintaining marketplace integrity and the responsibilities of platforms and managing selling ecosystems. So I hope that you're able to recognize, with this case, the importance of just being transparent and ethical in your business practices. It's vital that you guys keep up with the guidelines that these platforms have, and this way you can really protect your brand but also contribute to a healthier marketplace overall. Walmart has until October 10th to respond to a summons that was issued on September 19th and in their statement they indicated they're reviewing the complaint. So, regardless of the outcome, the lawsuit serves as a reminder of the potential risks and the need for the platform to maintain a robust vetting process. Shivali Patel: Reporting hot from channel x. Starting on October 30th 2024, we also have amazon updating the seller fulfilled returns policies for heavy and bulky items in Germany, France, Italy and Spain stores. This aligns with changes already implemented in the UK since August of 2024, and heavy and bulky items are defined as those that weigh over 31.5 kg or have a longest side exceeding 175 centimeters when packed. Sellers will now be required to offer a prepaid return label and home collection service for these returns, along with issuing refunds to customers, while the responsibility for covering return shipping costs remains unchanged. The refund amount will depend on the return reason and timeline, in line with Amazon's existing returns policy. So the introduction of home collection for heavy and bulky item returns aims to provide a consistent returns experience for customers across all those stores. As the service is already available for FBA and seller flex returns, amazon recommends that we review our carrier contracts to ensure that home collection is included and make any sort of necessary updates. Shivali Patel: As a seller, you may want to offer partial refunds or part replacements as an alternative to home collection, provided that it's shared the tracking ID of the replacement part with the customer and that you close out the return request with the reason code return request canceled. To avoid A to Z guarantee claims or impacts on order defect rates, sellers must authorize or deny return requests within 48 hours where the auto is not auto authorized. You also have these additional things to keep in mind, but as you can see here, you can just pause the screen and have a read. Otherwise you can reference this channel X article. I'd love to know do you guys think this will help reduce unnecessary customer claims and improve seller performance across amazon's European stores? Let me know in the chat. We do have just a few more things here. Shivali Patel: It's been a packed week of news as the e-commerce industry continues to expand. Concerns about packaging waste have come to the forefront, prompting amazon to take significant steps towards sustainability. And, in response to the mounting pressure from environmental groups and regulatory bodies, amazon's introduced various recyclable packaging initiatives, one of those being the Frustration-Free Packaging Initiative, designed to ship products in easy-to-open, recyclable packaging, often eliminating the need for additional boxes. Since its launch, amazon reports having removed over 1.5 million tons of waste. I mean that is impressive and it shows a tangible effort for them to reduce waste. Amazon has shifted towards recyclable materials, introducing paper-based mailers that can be easily recycled, curbside, and this shift is part of Amazon's broader commitment to achieve net zero carbon emissions by 2040. As a seller, you can adopt sustainable packaging practices to align with Amazon's initiatives, but also appeal to eco-conscious consumers who prioritize environmental responsibility. Shivali Patel: Up next, we have an article directly from Amazon. According to Amazon's press center, digital Domain, a leader in visual effects and virtual human technology, has announced a collaboration with Amazon Web Services, AWS, to migrate its autonomous virtual human AVH technology to the cloud. This partnership aims to expand the reach and capabilities of AVH technology across industries such as entertainment, gaming, healthcare, hospitality and commercial applications, leveraging AWS's advanced cloud infrastructure, including Amazon's Bedrock for high-performing foundation models, amazon Polly, amongst others, for voice enhancements and for facial recognition. Digital domain is really poised to enhance real-time interaction with virtual humans. Aws's robust security and compliance features will also ensure the integrity and scalability of the AVH platform. This collaboration represents a significant milestone for digital domain following the success of Zoe in 2022. And, with the support of AWS and its cloud infrastructure, I think it's really going to offer AVH technology greater speed, efficiency and global accessibility in many sectors. Shivali Patel: This collaboration does offer potential relevancy for Amazon sellers, particularly in enhancing customer engagement and support For sellers who operate in industries such as e-com, hospitality or any customer-facing business. Integrating virtual human technology can revolutionize how we interact with customers, and so Amazon sellers can really leverage AVH technology for real-time, ai-driven customer interactions, offering personalized and immersive experiences similar to virtual concierge services. This can help improve the efficiency, manage inquiries, provide product recommendations, offer after-sales support. Even so, by utilizing this advanced technology, we can really, as sellers, go in and enhance our brand experiences, boost customer satisfaction and stay competitive in this growing market where AI and machine learning are really taking on a very pivotal role in customer interaction. Lastly, I figured you guys could also appreciate some fun news how many of you have ever watched Shark Tank and how many of you have seen the new trailer for Amazon Prime videos, buy it Now, hosted by JB Smoove? Shivali Patel: The Verge reports that in this unique competition, you're going to have contestants having the opportunity to present their product ideas to a panel of investors and an audience known as the 100, representing potential customers. If a contestant's product is well-received, it's going to be featured in a new section of the Amazon store called Buy it Now. The panel actually includes celebrity guests like Gwyneth Paltrow, Jamie Siminoff, who's the CEO of Door.com, serving as the resident judge, and others. Each episode features a $20,000 prize for one contestant, adding an exciting incentive to the competition. Viewers can access the buy it now store via a QR code shown during the episodes, allowing them to purchase featured products directly. The first three episodes will premiere on October 30th, with a total of 13 episodes airing weekly until January 8th of 2025. Additionally, a companion podcast this is Small Business Behind the Buy will be available starting the day after the show's launch. This initiative not only engages viewers, but also aims to drive sales on Amazon, showcasing products with greater transparency about their origins, their names, their brand story, and creating buzz and excitement around new product launches as the holiday shopping season approaches. Shivali Patel: With that. That is it for this week's news. And, by the way while I didn't mention it, since Bradley's already talked about this in a previous episode Amazon's Prime Big Deals Day sale is also coming up on October 8th and 9th. So I hope that you guys are all squared away to rank at the top of all the keywords you hope to generate sales from. In case you're not, let's just run through one strategy that you can use to capitalize during this time. Let me show you how you can find keywords where your competitors are outranking you. Let's say you're ranked on one of the lower pages, like pages four, five or even just the bottom of page one. Sure, customers searching for niche specific items like coffin shelves underneath the keyword gothic decor may ignore irrelevant results and focus only on the similar products. But also, most people don't even really scroll to page two, which is a clear indicator of why you would want to pay attention to the keywords where your direct competitors might be outperforming you and where you may want to tweak your strategy if you care to be listed at the top half of page one, where all that traffic is. Here's how You're going to want to pay attention to your relative rank against competitors. You can find this metric inside of Cerebro, which is our reverse ASIN keyword research tool, and you are going to begin by putting in a multi-ASIN search. So find a bunch of the Amazon standard identification numbers inside of your niche and go ahead and click get keywords. Shivali Patel: The second thing you're going to do is set a minimum for search volume. I went ahead and inputted in 300. Now the product I'm looking at is actually this automatic chicken water cup. In doing so, I can now filter out those keywords that don't have a lot of search volume associated. There's no right or wrong number for search volume. You can put in something that you feel is good for your niche. The next thing I'll do is input in a relative rank. I went ahead and added in three for minimum, and this is telling me that and this is basically saying that I'm at least number three amongst my competitors. Then go ahead and input in anything else you want and click apply filters. I actually added in a minimum for word count as well as the phrases containing chicken, because I was seeing some additional terms here. Shivali Patel: In doing so, I had a output of 38 filtered keywords and you guys can scroll all the way over to the right hand side and check out the relative rank. If you hover over the number for relative rank, it's actually going to showcase to you where you are stacked up next to your competitors as well as what ranking you are at. For example, for this particular keyword, which is automatic chicken watering system, you can see that our relative rank is position number six compared to our competitors. This means that your product ranks sixth in relative rank for this keyword, and this is the sort of thing that can help you identify keywords where competitors are ahead and make adjustments like increasing sponsored ad spend to improve your ranking, or adding that keyword to your title to rank a lot faster, to prepare for a day like Prime big deals day, or even just put in a CPR campaign into motion where you're selling those products at a discounted rate to rank. Happy sales, you guys.
This Day in Legal History: The Amsterdam Treaty Broadens the EUOn October 2, 1997, the Amsterdam Treaty was signed by European Union (EU) delegates, marking a significant step in the evolution of the EU's institutional framework and policy ambitions. The treaty aimed to enhance the efficiency, transparency, and democratic legitimacy of the Union, amending previous agreements like the Maastricht Treaty. One of its key features was strengthening the powers of the European Parliament, giving it greater legislative influence through the co-decision procedure, which allowed it to act as an equal legislator with the Council of the European Union.The Amsterdam Treaty also laid the groundwork for the EU's Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP), aiming for more coordinated diplomatic actions and international influence. It introduced the role of the High Representative for the CFSP to improve coherence in foreign policy. Additionally, the treaty made strides in areas such as justice and home affairs, addressing issues like asylum, immigration, and judicial cooperation across member states. The treaty was also a response to the anticipated enlargement of the EU, as post-Communist countries in Eastern Europe were expected to join, requiring institutional reforms to manage an expanded Union. The Amsterdam Treaty signaled a shift toward a more integrated and politically unified Europe, preparing the EU for the challenges of a growing membership and a more globalized world.Alphabet Inc.'s Google is facing a renewed antitrust lawsuit from Sensory Inc., a voice recognition technology company, accusing the tech giant of monopolistic practices in the voice assistant market. Sensory alleges that Google used its dominance in general search to create barriers preventing consumers from using alternative voice assistants and wakeword software to access non-Google search engines. This lawsuit revives a previous case from April 2022, which was paused to allow other antitrust litigation against Google to proceed. In August, the US District Court for the District of Columbia ruled that Google had illegally monopolized the search market through exclusivity agreements. Sensory claims Google extended this behavior by preventing hardware manufacturers from allowing consumers to choose competing voice assistants with non-Google search engines. Sensory also argues that Google imposes restrictions on wakeword technology in various devices, including smartphones, home electronics, and cars, ensuring competitors like Siri and Bixby default to Google's search engine. Google has not yet commented on the case.Google Hit With Renewed Antitrust Suit Over Voice AssistantsThe US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit has paused a National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) case involving Amazon, following claims that the agency violates constitutional principles. Amazon argues that the NLRB breaches the separation of powers by acting as both prosecutor and judge, after it rejected Amazon's objections to a union election at a Staten Island warehouse. Amazon sought an emergency injunction to halt the NLRB's internal litigation regarding its refusal to bargain with the union. When a lower court didn't rule on the request, Amazon appealed to the Fifth Circuit, which had recently blocked a similar case involving SpaceX. Amazon's lawsuit challenges the constitutional structure of the NLRB, claiming its members are unconstitutionally shielded from removal by the president and that the agency's quasi-judicial powers violate the Seventh Amendment's guarantee of a jury trial. This case is part of a broader wave of constitutional challenges to the NLRB's authority. Neither Amazon nor the NLRB have commented on the ruling.Fifth Circuit Halts Amazon NLRB Case Over Constitutional DisputeThe Biden administration is pressuring U.S. port employers to improve their offer to striking dockworkers from the International Longshoremen's Association (ILA). The strike, now in its second day, has disrupted shipping across dozens of ports from Maine to Texas, affecting goods from food to automobiles and causing significant economic strain. With over 38 ships waiting to dock, the strike could cost the U.S. economy $5 billion per day. Despite a 50% wage hike offer from the United States Maritime Alliance (USMX), the ILA, led by Harold Daggett, is demanding more, including a $5 hourly raise per year and a halt to port automation projects. President Biden has urged foreign ocean carriers, which profited during the pandemic, to agree to a fair contract, while the administration monitors for price gouging. Retailers have initiated backup plans to mitigate potential impacts on the holiday season. Economists warn that while the strike could raise inflation, the broader economic effects depend on its duration. The National Retail Federation and some Republicans are calling on Biden to halt the strike, but he has refused.US port strike backed by White House | 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
A man suspected in an apparent attempt to assassinate former US president Donald Trump at his Florida golf course hid out for nearly 12 hours beforehand, according to a court complaint.根据一份法院诉状，一名男子涉嫌暗杀美国前总统唐纳德·特朗普。该男子在特朗普位于佛罗里达州的高尔夫球场事先躲藏近 12 个小时。The suspect, Ryan Wesley Routh, 58, was charged with two federal gun crimes on Monday.嫌疑人瑞安·韦斯利·劳思现年58 岁，16日受控两项联邦涉枪罪名。The incident Sunday afternoon raised questions about how an armed person was able to get so close to Trump, the Republican presidential candidate in the Nov 5 election, two months after a gunman fired at Trump during a July 13 rally in Butler, Pennsylvania, cutting his ear with a bullet.这场发生在15日下午的事件引发疑问：7月13日，一名枪手在宾夕法尼亚州巴特勒市的竞选集会上向特朗普开枪，子弹擦伤了他的耳朵。两个月后，一名持枪者又为何能如此接近 11 月 5 日将参与大选的美国共和党总统候选人特朗普？Trump's visit to his golf course in West Palm Beach was not on his public schedule, US Secret Service Acting Director Ronald Rowe said Monday.美国特勤局代理局长罗纳德·罗16日表示，特朗普去西棕榈滩自家高尔夫球场打球并未列入其公开行程。A Secret Service agent who was "walking the perimeter" of the course, according to the criminal complaint, opened fire after seeing a rifle barrel poking out of bushes a few hundred yards away from Trump, who was on the fifth hole fairway.根据刑事起诉书，当时一名特勤局特工正在巡视球场，发现灌木丛中伸出一根步枪枪管，距当时在5号球洞球道的特朗普仅几百米，随后特勤局特工开了枪。The gunman fled in a Nissan sport utility vehicle "at a high rate of speed", according to the complaint filed in US District Court in West Palm Beach. Officers found a loaded SKS assault-style rifle with a scope, a digital camera and a plastic bag of food.根据提交给美国西棕榈滩地区法院的起诉书，枪手乘坐一辆日产运动型多功能车“高速”逃离。警察在现场发现了一支装有瞄准镜并带有子弹的半自动步枪、一部数码相机和一塑料袋食品。Records show a phone associated with Routh was located at the golf course starting at 1:59 am on Sunday EDT, according to the complaint. Federal agents had requested Routh's location data from his wireless provider.诉状显示，从美国东部时间15日凌晨1:59开始，劳思的手机在高尔夫球场被定位。联邦特工要求劳思的无线服务供应商提供他的位置数据。The suspect was on the public side of a fence along the course's boundary, Rowe said.罗纳德·罗说，嫌疑人当时在球场边界围栏公开的一侧。Routh was arrested about 40 minutes after the incident, driving north on Interstate 95. The license plate on his vehicle had been reported stolen from a Ford truck. Bodycam footage of Routh's arrest was released by the Martin County Sheriff's Office.事发约40分钟后，劳思在95号州际公路向北行驶时被捕。据报告，他的车牌是从一辆福特卡车上偷来的。马丁县警长办公室公布了劳思被捕时的车载摄像头录像。"There have been previous individuals who have taken pictures of the former president while he's golfing," Dave Aronberg, the state attorney for the district that covers Palm Beach County, told Fox News. "They've gone through the shrubs and been able to poke a camera through the fencing. You would think that perhaps maybe they would consider someone scoping the perimeter."“以前曾有人在前总统打高尔夫时拍下他的照片。”棕榈滩县州检察官戴夫·阿伦伯格告诉美国福克斯新闻，“他们穿过灌木丛，将摄像头从围栏中探出。你会认为，也许他们会考虑派人在周边进行勘察。”A 2019 tip to the FBI alleged that Routh was a convicted felon who illegally possessed a firearm, Jeffrey Veltri, the agent in charge of the FBI's Miami field office, told reporters.美国联邦调查局迈阿密办事处负责人杰弗里·维尔特里告诉记者，2019年联邦调查局收到的一条线索称，劳思是一名被定罪的非法持有枪支的重罪犯。In court on Monday, Routh was charged with possession of a firearm as a convicted felon and possession of a firearm with an obliterated serial number. He is expected back in court for a bond hearing on Sept 23 and an arraignment on Sept 30.在16日的庭审中，劳思被指控作为被定罪的重罪犯持有枪支以及持有序列号被抹去的枪支。预计他将于9月23日再次出庭接受保释听证会，并于9月30日接受传讯。In 2002, Routh pleaded guilty to possession of an unregistered fully automatic gun, which in North Carolina is defined as a weapon of mass destruction, according to the county district attorney's office. He was sentenced to probation.2002年，劳思承认持有未经注册的全自动枪支，被判缓刑。县地方检察官办公室称，在北卡罗来纳州，全自动枪支被定义为大规模杀伤性武器。Routh is a staunch supporter of Ukraine and has traveled there, seeking to recruit foreign fighters in the country's military conflict with Russia.劳思是乌克兰的坚定支持者，他曾前往乌克兰，试图在乌克兰与俄罗斯的军事冲突中招募外国战斗人员。Social media accounts linked to Routh's name showed posts on Ukraine as well as claims that Trump is a threat to American democracy.劳思的社交媒体账户曾发布关于乌克兰的帖子，以及声称特朗普是美国民主威胁的言论。On April 21, Routh directed a post on X to Elon Musk, owner of X and founder of SpaceX: "I would like to buy a rocket from you. I wish to load it with a warhead for Putins Black sea mansion bunker to end him. Can you give me a price please."4月21日，劳思在社交平台“X”（原推特）上向“X”的所有者、SpaceX的创始人埃隆·马斯克发布帖子：“我想向你购买一枚火箭。我希望在火箭上装载一枚弹头，发射到普京的黑海豪华别墅，终结他。请给我一个价格。”In another X post, Routh wrote to US President Joe Biden: "@POTUS Your campaign should be called something like KADAF. Keep America democratic and free. Trumps should be MASA ...make Americans slaves again master. DEMOCRACY is on the ballot and we cannot lose."在另一篇“X”平台的帖子中，劳思向美国总统拜登写道：“你的竞选活动应该叫‘保持美国的民主和自由'。特朗普的则应该叫‘让美国人重新成为奴隶'。民主就在选票上，我们不能输”。Public access to the Facebook and X profiles has been removed.公众现已无法访问其在脸书和“X”社交平台的个人资料。Trump has questioned the amount of aid the United States has provided to Ukraine and has vowed to end the war immediately if elected.特朗普对美国向乌克兰提供的援助数量提出质疑，并誓言如果当选将立即结束战争。Vice-President Kamala Harris, the Democratic presidential candidate, has promised continued support for Ukraine.美国民主党总统候选人、副总统卡玛拉·哈里斯承诺继续支持乌克兰。Trump claimed that Routh was acting on Democrats' "highly inflammatory language".特朗普声称，劳思是受到了民主党人“极具煽动性的语言”影响而采取了行动。"Their rhetoric is causing me to be shot at, when I am the one who is going to save the country, and they are the ones that are destroying the country — both from the inside and out," he said, according to Fox.据美国福克斯新闻报道，他说：“他们的言论让我遭到枪击，我是拯救这个国家的人，他们才是从内到外摧毁国家的人。”Biden and Trump had a "cordial conversation" on Monday, White House Senior Deputy Press Secretary Emilie Simons posted on X.白宫高级副新闻秘书埃米莉·西蒙斯在“X”上发布消息称，拜登和特朗普16日进行了“亲切的交谈”。The Secret Service has been under scrutiny since the July shooting. The agency needs more help, including possibly more personnel, Biden told reporters on Monday, adding: "Thank God the president's OK."自7月枪击事件发生以来，特勤局一直受到严格审查。拜登16日对记者说，特勤局需要更多帮助，包括可能需要更多人手，并补充道：“感谢上帝，总统没事”。suspectn.嫌疑犯 v.怀疑；猜想presidential candidaten.总统候选人convictn.囚犯 v.宣判有罪scopen.范围；视野 v.调查cordialadj.热情友好的
Today is Monday, September 9th. Today Judge Leonie Brinkema of the US District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia is presiding over the start of a trial in which the United States Department of Justice accuses Google of violating antitrust law, abusing its power in the market for online advertising. Google contests the allegations against it. To get a bit more detail on what to expect, Justin Hendrix spoke to two individuals covering the case closely who take a critical view of Google, the government's allegations about its power in the online advertising market, and the company's effect on journalism and the overall media and information ecosystem:Sarah Kay Wiley, director of policy at Check My Ads, which is running a comprehensive tracker on the case;Karina Montoya, a senior reporter and policy analyst at the Center for Journalism and Liberty, a program of the Open Markets Institute, who has covered the case extensively for Tech Policy Press.
"Google is a monopolist and it has acted as one to maintain its monopoly."Last month, Judge Amit P Mehta of of US District Court for the District of Columbia delivered a historic ruling against one of the biggest technology companies in the world. Google was accused of abusing its dominance by paying the likes of Apple and Samsung billions of dollars to make its search engine the default option on their smartphones and browsers. It is being called the biggest antitrust case of the century. And this is only the beginning. The Google ruling comes amid a growing anti-big tech sentiment. The general consensus is that this tiny group of companies — Google, Amazon, Apple, Meta and Microsoft — have grown too big and too powerful. These companies are deciding what we see on the internet — the news we consume, the information we have access to, what we buy and who we buy from. At some point, everyone got a little wary of these companies. They started seeing some real threats to their power in the form of antitrust lawsuits and regulations. Suddenly, their every move was being scrutinised. Have we gone too far? Manjushree RM, Senior Resident Fellow at Vidhi Centre for Legal Policy, weighs in on the pushback against big tech, and how India is keeping up with it all. P.S The Ken's podcast team is hiring! Here's what we're looking for.Daybreak is now on WhatsApp at +918971108379. Send us a hello with your name and since when you've been listening to us and be a part our community. Also, if you have any recommendations for this Thursday's Unwind segment, send them to us as texts or voice notes.Want to be part of the Daybreak community? Introduce yourself here.Daybreak is produced from the newsroom of The Ken, India's first subscriber-only business news platform. Subscribe for more exclusive, deeply-reported, and analytical business stories.
Today it's the story of Charles and Heather Maude, a young ranch family in Southwest South Dakota that have found themselves indicted for theft of federal property over 25 acres of National Grass Lands that had been a part of this 5th generation ranch family since 1910. Rachel Gabel, spokesperson for the Maude family, is my guest as we unpack this story. In 55 days from a normal and civil meeting on May 1st with a Forest Service District Ranger and a US Forest Service special agent over decades old boundary discrepancies, the Maudes, out of the blue, found themselves summoned to appear in US District Court. They were separately indicted with a maximum sentence of up to 10 years in prison and fined up to $250,000 each. So, what happened here? What are the details behind this story? Why has there been little to no information made available by the Forest Service as to why they escalated this issue quickly without trying to find resolution? Why is it alarming to all of us in production agriculture? Is this reflective of the US Forest Service or a rogue district office and agent in South Dakota? Financial Contributions: Maude Family Go Fund Me Page Maude Legal Fund c/o First Interstate Bank, P.O. Box 98, New Underwood, S.D. 57761 #workingranchmagazine #ranchlife #ranching #dayweather #weather #agweather #beef #cows #livestock #cattle #cowpunchercoffee #gelbvieh #HallandHall #TankToad #Maude
This Day in Legal History: Nixon ResignsOn this day in legal history, August 8, 1974, President Richard Nixon announced his resignation from the office of the President of the United States, becoming the first and only president to do so. This unprecedented event followed the Watergate scandal, a complex political affair that began with a break-in at the Democratic National Committee headquarters and led to a series of revelations about abuses of power by the Nixon administration. Facing almost certain impeachment by Congress on charges of obstruction of justice, abuse of power, and contempt of Congress, Nixon chose to resign rather than prolong the national crisis.In his televised resignation speech, Nixon acknowledged that he no longer had a sufficient political base in Congress to continue effectively governing. He expressed regret for any injuries caused by his actions and highlighted his achievements while in office, yet he did not admit to any wrongdoing in the Watergate affair. Vice President Gerald Ford was sworn in as President on August 9, 1974, and later granted Nixon a full pardon for any crimes he might have committed against the United States while in office.Nixon's resignation marked a significant moment in American legal and political history, underscoring the constitutional processes in place to address presidential misconduct. It also led to reforms aimed at increasing transparency and accountability in government, such as the Ethics in Government Act and amendments to the Freedom of Information Act. This event reshaped public trust in the presidency and highlighted the importance of upholding the rule of law at the highest levels of government.A federal judge indicated that the attorneys in a class action lawsuit against Google over Chrome's “Incognito” mode are unlikely to receive their full $217 million fee request. During a hearing in Oakland, Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers also showed skepticism towards Google's proposal to cut the plaintiffs' attorney fees by 25%. She criticized Google's legal team for suggesting she personally review thousands of time sheet entries.The case, which began four years ago, was settled in April with Google agreeing to delete billions of records from Incognito mode users and make some reforms, but without providing monetary damages to users. The plaintiffs' attorneys, from firms including Boies Schiller Flexner LLP, claimed their fees were justified by 78,880 hours of work and sought a “lodestar multiplier” of 3.5, bringing their total request to $217 million.Judge Rogers commented that she rarely awards multipliers above three and noted the case's partial success. Google's attorney, Andrew Schapiro, argued that the plaintiffs' fees were excessive, pointing out that Google spent only $40 million on the case. The lawsuit initially filed in 2020 alleged that Incognito mode improperly retained user data despite claims of privacy.The settlement requires Google to clarify data collection practices and allow Incognito users to block third-party cookies for five years. Individuals can also seek monetary damages in California state court. The plaintiffs originally sought $9 billion in damages, but Google's attorney argued the final settlement warranted a lower fee due to its limited success. The case is Brown v. Google LLC.Google ‘Incognito' Case Attorneys Unlikely to Win $217 MillionThomas Girardi concealed a $53 million settlement from a young man, Joseph Ruigomez, whose home exploded, and misled him about the funds' status, a Los Angeles federal jury heard. Ruigomez and his family, receiving inconsistent interest payments, repeatedly asked Girardi for settlement details after their 2013 agreement with Pacific Gas & Electric, but Girardi never complied. Girardi claimed he held the funds for Ruigomez's protection, citing his youth and alleged drug dependency, though Ruigomez clarified he was on narcotics for pain management due to extensive medical procedures.During the trial, the defense presented numerous financial documents, while the prosecution did not clarify the annuity terms or the full distribution of the $53 million settlement, which included a $25 million annuity and $12.7 million in legal fees. Kathleen Ruigomez, Joseph's mother, testified that she only learned of the full settlement amount two years later and didn't suspect the discrepancy initially. She later sued Girardi with the help of Robert Finnerty, a former Girardi Keese lawyer.Girardi faces charges of wire fraud for allegedly stealing $15 million in settlement funds meant for clients. He pleaded not guilty, with prosecutors claiming he delayed payments under false pretenses. Girardi, who avoided disciplinary action despite over 200 misconduct complaints, also faces fraud charges in Illinois federal court and multiple civil lawsuits. His firm, Girardi Keese, went bankrupt in 2020. Girardi's mental competency to stand trial is contested, yet he was seen taking organized handwritten notes during the proceedings. The case is USA v. Girardi, in the Central District of California.‘Kingpin' Girardi Hid $53 Million Settlement, Client Says (1)Delta Air Lines Inc. is facing a proposed class action lawsuit following a software outage on July 19 caused by CrowdStrike, which led to widespread flight delays and cancellations. The lawsuit, filed in the US District Court for the Northern District of Georgia, claims that Delta failed to adequately refund passengers or provide the promised meal, hotel, and transportation vouchers. Instead of issuing refunds, Delta allegedly offered e-credits without informing passengers of their legal right to cash refunds, resulting in many passengers accepting the e-credits.The plaintiffs argue that Delta did not fulfill its commitments to passengers affected by cancellations within the airline's control, leading to breaches of contract, fraud, unjust enrichment, and violations of state consumer protection laws. They are seeking class certification and damages, representing all passengers whose flights were canceled between July 19 and July 31, with specific subclasses for California, Colorado, Florida, and Washington state.The CrowdStrike software update that caused the outage disrupted millions of devices using Microsoft Windows, impacting thousands of flights globally. Delta, the official airline of Team USA, struggled particularly hard, affecting nearly 2,000 athletes and staff traveling to Paris for the Olympics. While other airlines recovered quickly, Delta continued to cancel flights into the following week, even though they announced normal operations by July 25.The US Department of Transportation is investigating Delta's response to the glitch after receiving 3,000 complaints from passengers. Delta has declined to comment on the lawsuit, which is being handled by Webb Klase & Lemond LLC and Sauder Schelkopf LLC. The case is Bajra v. Delta Air Lines Inc.Delta Sued Over Inadequate Refunds Following CrowdStrike OutageThe FCC's proposed rules for disclosing AI-generated content in political ads on radio and television have sparked a jurisdictional dispute with the Federal Election Commission (FEC). The FCC's rules, announced on July 25, would require broadcasters to announce when AI is used in political ads. FCC Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel emphasized the need for voter transparency, comparing the requirement to existing rules about disclosing ad sponsors.Supporters, including AI regulation advocates, see it as a positive step amidst increasing deepfake use in campaigns. However, critics, including the FCC's two Republican commissioners and their FEC counterparts, argue that regulating political disclosures should fall under the FEC's jurisdiction.The proposed FCC rules, now open for public comment until September 4, face uncertainty about whether they can be finalized before the upcoming election. This uncertainty is compounded by the US Supreme Court's decision in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, which limits federal agencies' regulatory powers.The FEC had already been considering similar AI content regulations since last year and recently sought public input on deepfakes in political ads. FCC critics argue that the FCC's efforts overlap and potentially conflict with the FEC's authority. Democratic FEC Vice Chair Ellen Weintraub, however, supports the FCC's initiative, suggesting that both agencies can complement each other.Despite the challenges, proponents believe the FCC's move will raise public awareness about AI in political ads, though the timeline for finalizing these rules remains unclear. The case's complexity is heightened by the evolving legal landscape and potential challenges to the FCC's authority following recent Supreme Court rulings.FCC Election Deepfake Ads Proposal Sparks Turf Fight With FECRipple Labs has been ordered by a Manhattan court to pay the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) approximately $125 million in penalties for the improper sale of XRP tokens. This decision follows the SEC's lawsuit against Ripple, CEO Brad Garlinghouse, and co-founder Chris Larsen, accusing them of raising over $1.3 billion through an unregistered securities offering by selling XRP. Although the SEC initially sought $2 billion in fines and penalties, the court's ruling resulted in a significantly lower amount.The SEC had dropped its claims against Garlinghouse and Larsen in October, but the case remained significant as one of the largest enforcement actions in the cryptocurrency sector. Ripple CEO Brad Garlinghouse acknowledged the court's decision, expressing respect and a commitment to continue the company's growth. The SEC emphasized that securities laws apply to investment contracts irrespective of the technology or labels used.This ruling marks a critical moment in the regulation of cryptocurrency sales and enforcement of securities laws within the digital asset space.By way of brief background, the determination of whether a cryptocurrency qualifies as an "investment contract" is pivotal in deciding its classification as a security. This central question hinges on the application of the Howey Test, which examines whether an investment is one of money in a common enterprise with the expectation of profits primarily from the efforts of others–if it is, it constitutes an investment contract. If a cryptocurrency meets these criteria, it falls under the regulatory purview of securities laws, significantly impacting its issuance and trading.Ripple ordered to pay $125 million in penalty for improperly selling XRP tokens | 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
This Day in Legal History: Ronald Reagan Fires Air Traffic ControllersOn August 5, 1981, President Ronald Reagan made a landmark decision to fire over 11,000 striking air traffic controllers. These federal employees, members of the Professional Air Traffic Controllers Organization (PATCO), had initiated a strike on August 3, demanding better pay, shorter working hours, and improved working conditions. The strike posed significant risks to national air travel safety and disrupted the aviation system.President Reagan responded with a firm stance, citing the controllers' sworn oath not to strike against the government. In a nationally televised address on August 3, Reagan warned that if the controllers did not return to work within 48 hours, they would face termination. When the deadline passed without compliance, Reagan followed through on his ultimatum, effectively dismantling PATCO.The mass firings had profound implications for labor relations and federal employment policies in the United States. It underscored the government's commitment to maintaining uninterrupted air traffic services and demonstrated a strict enforcement of federal labor laws. This event marked a pivotal moment in the Reagan administration, showcasing its determination to curb union influence and assert governmental authority. The firings also led to long-term changes in air traffic control, with the federal government embarking on extensive recruitment and training programs to replace the dismissed controllers.A political action committee (PAC) supported by Elon Musk is under investigation in Michigan for potential legal violations. The Michigan Secretary of State's office confirmed the inquiry on Sunday. The Musk-backed America PAC has been collecting detailed voter information through its website, prompting scrutiny from state authorities. Although America PAC is a federal entity, Michigan officials are reviewing its actions to determine if state laws have been breached. If violations are found, the case may be referred to the Michigan Attorney General. The investigation is in its early stages, and specific focuses have not been disclosed.Musk, CEO of Tesla and SpaceX, has previously stated he created a PAC to support candidates but denied making specific pledges. He has publicly supported Donald Trump and criticized various Democratic policies and initiatives.Neither the Michigan Attorney General's office nor America PAC has commented on the investigation. Musk also has not responded to requests for comment. The situation underscores concerns about how PACs use personal information collected from citizens, particularly in voter registration efforts.Musk-backed PAC under investigation for potential violations of Michigan laws | ReutersThomas V. Girardi, the famed attorney behind the landmark $333 million Pacific Gas & Electric settlement featured in the film "Erin Brockovich," faces a criminal trial for wire fraud in Los Angeles federal court. At 85, Girardi has been disbarred and bankrupt, charged with misappropriating $15 million in settlement funds intended for his clients over the past decade. This trial could mark the end of his distinguished legal career, tainted by allegations of unethical conduct and questionable ties to the state's lawyer disciplinary agency.Plaintiff's attorney Jay Edelson emphasizes the broader implications for the legal community, suggesting it could either prompt reform or be dismissed as an isolated incident. Girardi also faces additional fraud charges in Illinois, and numerous civil lawsuits. His once-celebrated career has become a cautionary tale of legal misconduct.Prosecutors allege that since 2010, Girardi diverted millions from his firm, Girardi Keese, for personal luxuries and to fund EJ Global, an entertainment company of his estranged wife, Erika Jayne. Girardi's defense argues that he was not responsible for financial mismanagement, attributing it to the firm's CFO, Christopher Kamon, whose trial has been separated. They also claim Girardi's cognitive decline impairs his ability to have intentionally defrauded clients.Girardi's case stands out not just for the legal drama but also for its celebrity connections, given his marriage to a reality TV star, influencing public and juror perception. The trial will focus on whether Girardi's cognitive state affects his culpability for the alleged crimes committed during his competent years. The court's ruling on his competency to stand trial, despite cognitive impairments, adds a layer of complexity to this high-profile case.Thomas Girardi's Legal Drama Approaches Its Hollywood EndingFormer Bed Bath & Beyond Inc. has sued GameStop CEO Ryan Cohen and his company, RC Ventures LLC, seeking to recover $47 million from alleged insider trading in 2022. Cohen, also the founder of Chewy Inc., allegedly used nonpublic information to trade Bed Bath & Beyond (BBBY) stock profitably between January and August 2022 while serving as a statutory director. The lawsuit, filed in the US District Court for the Southern District of New York, claims Cohen and RC Ventures made numerous profitable trades of BBBY securities, which were executed within a six-month period. Under Section 16(b) of the 1934 Securities Exchange Act, the company seeks to reclaim these short-swing profits because Cohen and RC Ventures owned more than 10% of BBBY's common stock and had access to inside information through their board appointees.This legal action is part of a broader effort by the bankrupt company and its plan administrator, Michael Goldberg, to recover funds for creditors. Goldberg has also filed a separate suit to reclaim $19 million in tax credits from a New Jersey agency and is pursuing over $300 million from Hudson Bay Capital Management for trading profits related to a failed financing plan.RC Ventures is GameStop's largest shareholder with an 8.7% stake. Bed Bath & Beyond, now operating as 20230930-DK-BUTTERFLY-1 Inc., is demanding monetary damages and legal costs. Cohen and RC Ventures have not commented on the lawsuit. The case is titled 20230930-DK-BUTTERFLY-I Inc. v. Cohen.GameStop CEO Sued by Bed Bath & Beyond for Insider Trading (1)The demand for transactional legal work is recovering after nearly three years of decline, according to the Thomson Reuters Institute's Law Firm Financial Index. The report shows a 2.2% increase in corporate transactional work, including contract drafting, real estate deals, and bank financing, in the second quarter of 2024 compared to the previous year. This rise contributed to a 2.4% overall increase in law firm demand.Additionally, U.S. law firms have seen a 6.6% increase in billing rates and a 5.3% rise in direct expenses, putting them in one of their strongest financial positions in the last decade. Profits per equity partner have increased by 8.8% over the past year.While transactional practices are rebounding, counter-cyclical practices like litigation and bankruptcy continue to drive significant demand. Litigation demand rose by 3.4% and bankruptcy by 2.4% in the same period. These trends provide law firms with greater stability by diversifying their revenue streams.However, the gains are not uniform across the industry. The Am Law 50 firms have not seen the same increase in litigation demand as other firms, and midsize firms have not experienced the same growth in transactional demand as Am Law 100 firms.Overall, the second quarter of 2024 has been positive for the legal sector, with significant improvements in demand and profitability.Law firm transactional work rebounds after 3-year slump, report 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
This week we look at: Tax bill fails to clear a procedural vote in the Senate, reducing the likelihood we'll see the bill enacted before this Congress leaves office US District Court declines to issue preliminary injunction requiring the IRS to terminate the ERC claim moratorium, but finds much the court liked in the plaintiff's arguments.
Non-competes: A tale of two lawsuits. Yesterday, in case no. 24-CV-01743, a US District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania denied a motion for preliminary injunction thereby paving the way for the FTC's ban on noncompetes. In a nutshell, the court believes that the FTC's rule banning noncompetes is enforceable. So noncompetes are done, right? Not so fast. Remember that on July 3rd, 2024, in case no 24-CV-00986, a US District Court for the Northern District of Texas reached the exact opposite conclusion. Instead, that court issued the injunction that prevents the rule from going into effect. In a nutshell, the court believes that the FTC's rule banning noncompetes is unenforceable. Sidebar, does it surprise you the learn that the judge in the Texas case was appointed by Trump & the judge in the Pennsylvania case was appointed by Biden? So what happens when federal district courts disagree? We're about to find out. Now it's important to note that the appellate courts, in this case the 3rd Circuit & the 5th Circuit have not examined the FTC's final rule or these two cases. Nor have they examined how the removal of Chevron Deference will impact their thinking. What is clear, is that we are just getting started.I have no doubt that more litigation against the FTC's rule will happen across the country. These lawsuits will find their way to the appellate courts. Those courts will issue opinions that will bind only the states within their jurisdiction. We could actually see noncompetes legal in some states at the federal level & illegal in others. This would be a truly wild outcome.Unless SCOTUS opines, we can expect a very fragmented labor market as it relates to noncompetes. If SCOTUS eventually does take the case, it will be among the most important labor decisions in our lifetimes. Until then, 30 million working Americans will be in limbo.This program is brought to you by DAT Freight & Analytics. Since 1978, DAT has helped truckers & brokers discover more available loads. Whether you're heading home or looking for your next adventure, DAT has the data! New users of DAT can save 10% off for the first 12 months by following the links below. For Truckers, DAT One Pro gives you access to tri-haul & 15-day rate as opposed to 30-day rate. For Brokers, DAT One Select gives you access to Market Conditions, Exact Match alarms & more. Even under the best circumstances, moving freight was never easy. But with DAT, we got your back!
This Day in Legal History: Province of Canada CreatedOn July 23, 1840, the British Parliament passed the Act of Union, a pivotal piece of legislation that led to the creation of the Province of Canada. This act merged the colonies of Upper Canada (present-day Ontario) and Lower Canada (present-day Quebec) into a single entity. The Act of Union was a response to the political unrest and demands for reform that had been growing in both colonies, particularly after the Rebellions of 1837-1838.The Act of Union aimed to unify the administrative structures of the two colonies, addressing inefficiencies and fostering a more cohesive government. It established a single legislative assembly, with equal representation from both regions, despite significant differences in their populations and cultural backgrounds. This structure was intended to assimilate the French-speaking population of Lower Canada into the English-speaking majority of Upper Canada, though it often led to tension and conflict.Taking effect on February 10, 1841, the Act marked the beginning of a new political era in Canadian history, laying foundational governance structures that would influence future developments leading up to Canadian Confederation in 1867. The Province of Canada would eventually split into the separate provinces of Ontario and Quebec, but the Act of Union remains a significant moment in the evolution of Canada's political landscape.The Ninth Circuit's updated case management system is being used as a model for the federal judiciary's administrative office to modernize its electronic filing program, according to Chief Judge Mary Murguia. The US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit is collaborating with the Administrative Office of the US Courts to replace the CM/ECF system with a new cloud-based system by the end of 2025. This modernization effort aims to enhance the efficiency of filing legal documents and accessing case information.Since October, the Ninth Circuit has processed all new cases through its Appellate Case Management System, with older reopened cases still using the previous system. This development was a joint effort with the Second Circuit. Judge Murguia noted a significant decline in case filings over the past five years, with the Ninth Circuit now having fewer than 7,000 pending cases—a 23% reduction from 2019 and the lowest number in decades.Ninth Circuit's Case Filing System Used as Model for JudiciaryA New York appellate judge has affirmed that individuals who file complaints against attorneys in disciplinary cases have a First Amendment right to attend related hearings, view pertinent documents, and access some final decisions. This ruling emphasizes the importance of public scrutiny in holding judges accountable, particularly those serving fourteen-year terms appointed by elected governors. The decision, issued by Judge Victor Marrero of the US District Court for the Southern District of New York, specifically impacts the New York Supreme Court's Second Appellate Department, which disciplines attorneys based on recommendations from the Attorney Grievance Committee.Judge Marrero asserted that transparency is essential for public trust in the judicial process. However, he allowed an exception for dispositions made by the chief attorney, whose role involves preliminary investigations. These do not need to be public to maintain investigation flexibility and protect attorneys from baseless accusations.The case originated from complaints filed in 2021 against attorneys in the Queens County District Attorney's Office. Despite these complaints being publicized online, none resulted in public discipline. The plaintiffs argued that public access was necessary, while New York City's former corporation counsel claimed it was a misuse of the process for political gain.Marrero dismissed Presiding Justice Hector LaSalle's defense of legislative immunity, ruling that withholding information is not considered policymaking. He also refuted the state's claim that providing access to certain records would necessitate a substantial overhaul of court operations, stating that procedural adjustments, even if cumbersome, are not illegal.New York Judge Peels Back Curtain on Attorney Misconduct CasesThe First Circuit appears likely to uphold a noncompete agreement against a former DraftKings executive, Michael Hermalyn, who sought to join rival sports-betting firm Fanatics. During oral arguments, Judge O. Rogeriee Thompson questioned why California's worker-friendly policies should outweigh Massachusetts' business protections. Hermalyn, who relocated to California, argued for the state's ban on noncompete clauses to apply. However, the contract stipulates Massachusetts law, as DraftKings is based there.DraftKings accused Hermalyn of violating the agreement by joining a competitor and stealing company secrets. Hermalyn's legal team contended that California's interest in attracting workers should take precedence. Conversely, DraftKings' counsel argued that state laws are equal and California's stance should not override Massachusetts' policies.A federal district judge previously prohibited Hermalyn from working for competitors, dismissing his reliance on California law. This case arises amid the Federal Trade Commission's broader move to ban most noncompete agreements, although senior executives are currently exempt.Hermalyn's attempts to establish California residency involved leasing an apartment, buying a car, and other actions. Massachusetts law typically enforces contract terms unless they violate public policy. Hermalyn's counsel asserted California has the most substantial interest in this matter, urging respect for its policies. However, Judge William Kayatta expressed concerns about prioritizing one state's laws over others in similar circumstances.DraftKings' attorney warned that ruling in favor of Hermalyn could enable others to evade contractual obligations by relocating to California, stressing the need to protect Massachusetts businesses from such tactics. DraftKings also alleged Hermalyn's residency claim was a ploy and accused him of downloading sensitive files before departing.DraftKings' Noncompete Clause Meets Supportive First CircuitElon Musk's social media platform, X (formerly Twitter), is being sued by the PR firm Multiply for trademark infringement. Filed in a California federal court, the lawsuit claims that X's use of the "X" trademark for social-media marketing services causes consumer confusion and infringes on Multiply's established trademark rights. Multiply's spokesperson accused Musk of stealing their established identity and stated the necessity to protect their mark in court.X rebranded from Twitter to X last year under Musk's ownership. This rebranding has already resulted in confusion among Multiply's clients, who overlap with X Corp's clientele. Multiply, which has worked with brands like Arizona, Corona, and Liquid Death, adopted the "X" branding in 2019 and holds a federal trademark for its "X" logo. Multiply is seeking an injunction to stop X Corp from using the "X" trademark and is asking for monetary damages. This lawsuit is one among several, as other companies, including X Social Media, have also filed infringement claims against Musk's rebranded platform. The case is DB Communications LLC d/b/a Multiply v. X Corp, U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, No. 3:24-cv-04402.X Corp hit with lawsuit from PR firm over 'X' trademark | ReutersIn my column this week, I discuss the pressing need for the IRS to bolster its cryptocurrency compliance measures to close the crypto tax gap and combat illicit activities. Cryptocurrencies are often used for illegal activities, and many tax evaders in the crypto space prefer to remain anonymous to distance themselves from their actions.A recent report from the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA) highlights significant gaps in the IRS's cryptocurrency tax enforcement. By improving compliance, the IRS can enhance transparency in financial transactions, address the crypto tax gap, and reduce illegal activities facilitated by digital currencies.Enforcing cryptocurrency taxes could yield substantial revenue and mitigate black market activities that harm the economy. Despite the potential benefits, the IRS's current efforts are inadequate. The TIGTA report notes that the IRS investigated only 390 cases involving digital currency between 2018 and 2023, with just 224 cases recommended for prosecution. The IRS's broader operation, “Hidden Treasure,” has focused more on training and tool acquisition than on actively pursuing crypto tax evaders.The use of digital currencies has exploded, with over 26,000 different types and a total market value exceeding $1.7 trillion. Estimates suggest that 21% to 40% of US adults have owned some form of virtual currency. Yet, auditing just 390 files is like pulling a few blades of grass from an acre and assuming a complete understanding of the field.Enhanced cryptocurrency compliance can significantly disrupt illicit activities reliant on digital currency anonymity. Cryptocurrencies are linked to crimes such as drug and human trafficking, ransomware, and terrorism. The IRS's $625,000 bounty for cracking the anonymity of Monero underscores the value of identifying cryptocurrency tax cheats.The IRS needs a coordinated approach to data sharing and analysis, leveraging artificial intelligence to handle vast data sets and uncover patterns. Financial or asset tracing, previously unfeasible on a large scale, becomes possible with advanced technology. Form 1040 already asks filers about digital assets; this data should be cross-referenced with information from exchanges and audits, focusing on high-income individuals for maximum audit returns.The TIGTA report emphasizes the urgency for the IRS to develop comprehensive compliance strategies, employing advanced data analytics and collaborating with blockchain analytics firms. The IRS must also work with other agencies to curb illegal cryptocurrency activities. While individual cryptocurrencies may remain untraceable, large transactions leave traces in the traditional banking system, providing crucial data points for analysis.The IRS has ample information on digital currency holders but may lack the context needed to connect taxes owed to individual taxpayers. Contextualizing existing data is key to closing the crypto tax gap and disrupting criminal enterprises reliant on cryptocurrency anonymity.To Improve Crypto Tax Gap, IRS Must Enhance Compliance Efforts 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
On Thanksgiving Day 1934, police in Tulsa, Oklahoma found the dead body of John Gorrell Jr., a Kansas City dental student, slumped behind the wheel of his car, which had come to a stop at a downtown intersection. Gorrell had been shot in the head twice with his own gun and his wallet and other valuables were missing, leading police to conclude he had been killed in a botched robbery. Just one day later, the residents of Tulsa were shocked to learn that Gorrell hadn't been killed by a robbery, but by his friend Phil Kennamer, and his motive wasn't robbery.At the peak of the Great Depression, newspaper reports of violent crime were nothing new. In this case, however, the victim was the son of a prominent local physician and his killer the son of a well-known US District Court judge. The privileged backgrounds of the victim and killer were enough to captivate the residents of Tulsa, but as the strange details of the story slowly emerged in the days that followed, the case quickly grew from local sensation to national fascination. In the weeks and months that followed, countless front pages (and then some) were dedicated to the lurid details of what the press soon dubbed the “Society Gang Killing;” a story of disaffected youth who, bored with their wealth and privilege, turned to crime and violence for the sake of entertainment and excitement.Thank you to the incredible Dave White of Bring Me The Axe Podcast for Research!ReferencesBiscup, Walter. 1935. "Verdict of jury leaves punishment of Gorrell's slayer to Judge Hurst." Tulsa World, February 22: 1.Frates, Kent. 2014. "The Society Gang Killingg." This Land, July 15.Freese, Jim. 2016. Murder in the Name Of Love: The Phil Kennamer Trial. Tulsa, OK: Freese Publishing .Miami Daily News-Record. 1934. "Sheriff refuses to act on Phil Kennamer's version of case, involving associates." Miami Daily News-Record, December 13: 1.—. 1934. "Doubt cast on gang theory in Tulsa slaying." Miami Daiy News-Record, December 3: 1.Morrow, Jason. 2015. Deadly Hero: The High Society Murder that Created Hysteria in the Heartland. Tulsa, OK: Independent.Muskogee Daily Phoenix and Times-Democrat. 1935. "Counsel declares he could not tell right from wrong." Muskogee Daily Phoenix and Times-Democrat, February 15: 1.New York Times. 1934. "Death car driver a suicide in Tulsa." New York Times, December 10: 38.—. 1935. "Girl takes stand to Aid Kennamer." New York Times, February 16: 30.—. 1935. "Kennamer reveals 'extortion letter'." New York Times, January 27: 15.—. 1935. "Kennamer tells of fatal shooting." New York Times, February 19: 10.Phillips, Harmon. 1935. "Kennamer Case goes on aftwer threat of mistrial." Tulsa Tribune, February 13: 1.—. 1935. "Phil Kennamer back to jail with 25 years in prison as penalty for Gorrell killing." Tulsa Tribune, February 24: 1.—. 1935. "State blocks quick opinion by doctor that Kennamer shot youth while insane." Tulsa Tribune, February 16: 1.Tulsa Tribune. 1934. "Anderson tells plan of Kennamer Trial." Tulsa Tribune, December 15: 1.—. 1935. "New clues seen in notes from Phil Kennamer." Tulsa Tribune, January 3: 3.—. 1934. "Phil Kennamer inisists slaying his own actions." Tulsa Tribune, December 2: 5.—. 1934. "Police call Born suicide." Tulsa Tribune, December 10: 1.—. 1935. "Opposing Kennamer case legal batteries promise fiery clash of courtroom tactics." Tulsa Trribune, January 23: 7.Tulsa World. 1935. "Judge Kennamer weeps as he describes Phil's abnormalities." Tulsa World, February 16: 1.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.
This Day in Legal History: Carlin's Seven Dirty Words Get to SCOTUSOn July 3, 1978, the US Supreme Court delivered a landmark decision in FCC v. Pacifica Foundation, affirming the Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) authority to reprimand New York radio station WBAI for airing George Carlin's "Seven Dirty Words" comedy routine. The 5-4 ruling centered on Carlin's sketch, which listed words inappropriate for public broadcast. The Court held that the FCC could regulate indecent material on public airwaves during times when children might be listening. Justice John Paul Stevens, writing for the majority, emphasized that broadcast media have unique accessibility to children and thus require special considerations. This ruling underscored the government's role in safeguarding public morality on airwaves, distinguishing broadcast media from other forms of communication due to its pervasive presence and accessibility. The decision sparked ongoing debates about free speech and government regulation, influencing policies on broadcasting standards and the permissible content on public airwaves.A federal district court in Kansas has preliminarily blocked an Education Department rule that protects children from discrimination based on gender identity in schools receiving federal funding. Judge John W. Broomes issued the injunction, affecting Alaska, Kansas, Utah, and Wyoming. This rule, which extends Title IX protections to include sexual orientation and gender identity, has now been blocked in 14 states, following similar injunctions last month.Judge Broomes, appointed by Trump, found that the states are likely to succeed in their claim that the Biden Administration exceeded its authority by expanding the definition of sex discrimination. The states argued that the regulation's definition of sexual harassment would suppress the speech of students who believe sex is immutable and binary, and who use biologically accurate pronouns. Broomes agreed, stating that the rule's definition of sex-based harassment is impermissibly vague under the Administrative Procedure Act.This decision is a setback for the Biden Administration's efforts to enhance LGBTQ rights. Since the Supreme Court's 2015 Obergefell v. Hodges decision, which guaranteed same-sex marriage, conservative legal efforts have focused on issues such as transgender bathroom bans, athlete bans, and restrictions on gender-affirming care for minors.The Department of Justice has not yet commented on the ruling. The case, Kansas v. Dep't of Education, is represented by the Kansas Attorney General's Office.Biden's Title IX Transgender Protections Blocked by Kansas JudgeIn light of a recent Supreme Court ruling narrowing a criminal obstruction law, lawyers for Jan. 6 Capitol rioters are preparing to challenge convictions and seek reduced sentences. The Supreme Court's decision requires prosecutors to prove that defendants destroyed or altered documents to convict them under the obstruction statute, impacting over 200 cases related to the Capitol riot.Attorneys have indicated plans to file motions in the US District Court for the District of Columbia to dismiss charges or seek resentencing for clients who did not handle documents, particularly those linked to the Oath Keepers. This move will significantly affect cases where the obstruction charge was the sole felony. Carmen Hernandez, a criminal defense lawyer, anticipates various creative legal arguments in response to the ruling.The Supreme Court's 6-3 decision on June 28, which favored Capitol rioter Joseph Fischer, has set a new precedent for interpreting the obstruction statute, originally enacted to address evidence destruction post-Enron scandal. This ruling is a setback for federal prosecutors who had heavily relied on the statute to charge participants in the Capitol attack. Elizabeth Franklin-Best, appealing for Oath Keepers' leader Stewart Rhodes, expects the ruling to substantially impact his sentence, as he was also convicted of seditious conspiracy.Several attorneys for other Jan. 6 defendants have indicated intentions to seek relief based on the Fischer ruling. The DC courts will likely face an influx of filings for years. The broader immediate impact is somewhat limited as only 249 out of over 1,400 charged individuals were affected by the statute, with 52 cases having obstruction as the only felony.The Justice Department is still evaluating the ruling's implications, and early signals suggest prosecutors might not concede in all cases. Some defense lawyers are preparing to argue that the initial indictments were flawed under the new interpretation. However, outcomes will likely vary, with hurdles for those who pled guilty before the ruling, and effectiveness depending on individual judges and defendants.The Supreme Court's re-interpretation of the obstruction statute, requiring proof of document destruction or alteration, is critical. This change affects the foundation of many convictions and challenges the prosecutorial approach, necessitating a reassessment of cases and potentially leading to significant legal revisions and reductions in sentences.Jan. 6 Rioters to Request Relief After Supreme Court RulingUS law firms are quickly capitalizing on recent Supreme Court decisions that limit federal agency powers. Within hours of these rulings, firms began sending updates and hosting webinars to explain the implications to their clients. The Supreme Court's decisions, made over three days, restrict agencies' use of internal judges, overturn the Chevron deference principle (which required courts to defer to agency interpretations of ambiguous laws), and revive challenges related to statute limitations, potentially leading to more lawsuits over old regulations.Experts believe these rulings will significantly boost administrative law challenges, particularly benefiting firms that frequently contest federal regulations. Many lawyers have reported a surge in client inquiries, noting that the end of Chevron deference might lead businesses to pursue more litigation due to increased chances of success. The statute of limitations decision is also expected to result in more legal actions, though some attorneys predict a gradual increase rather than an immediate surge in new cases.Some attorneys highlight that the post-Chevron landscape is creating uncertainty and questions among clients across various industries. There is an expectation that while some companies may adopt a more aggressive litigation strategy, others might prefer lobbying to challenge regulations, as many corporate clients are cautious about escalating legal expenses.Overall, the Supreme Court's rulings are reshaping the legal environment, prompting law firms to guide clients through this evolving landscape and capitalize on emerging opportunities.US law firms smell opportunity as Supreme Court guts agency powers | ReutersIn my column, I argue that the IRS's shift to a broader audit mandate for all high-income taxpayers could undermine tax compliance improvements. The IRS needs to reassess and refine its audit strategies to optimize resources and maximize compliance, particularly among the wealthiest individuals. I propose a hybrid audit strategy that ensures nearly 100% audit coverage for the top 1% of income earners, with progressively lower rates for lower high-income brackets. This approach would be more effective than the current broad mandate, which lacks specific metrics for measuring success and could fail to capture significant non-compliance.Previously, the IRS had a directive to audit at least 8% of returns for individuals with incomes over $10 million, which was a focused and measurable effort. The new policy, however, aims for broader scrutiny without clear methods to gauge effectiveness, raising concerns about its impact on audit rates and overall compliance. My suggested hybrid approach would combine the precision of the former directive with a progressive audit threshold system, concentrating IRS resources where they can yield the highest return.Focusing on high-income taxpayers with the greatest potential for avoidance ensures better deterrence of tax evasion. The Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration's report supports this, showing that audits of high-income individuals are more productive. By defining specific audit coverage thresholds for the highest income brackets, the IRS can optimize its efforts and expand compliance audits down the income brackets.The critical legal element here is the need for targeted and measurable audit strategies. Specific metrics are essential to ensure the IRS's audit efforts are efficient and effective, allowing the agency to allocate resources where they can achieve the greatest impact on revenue and compliance.IRS Hybrid Audit Approach Best Bet to Scrutinize Rich Taxpayers 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
Jim talks with Bob Levy about the Second Amendment, the right to keep and bear arms, in the Supreme Court. They discuss Bob's late-career move to law, never being too old to reinvent yourself, how Bob got involved in a pivotal Supreme Court case in establishing the modern interpretation of the Second Amendment, the text of the Second Amendment, District of Columbia v. Heller, United States v. Miller, United States v. Emerson, the scholarship around framing the Second Amendment as an individual right, the state of play of gun control in D.C. at the time, the handgun ban, handguns in the home for self-defense, the NRA case & a rookie error by the NRA's lawyers, legal strategy in the Heller case, sufficient vs necessary conditions for exercising the right, the meaning of "well-regulated," the specific holdings in Heller, the meaning of fundamental rights, Breyer's dissent against Scalia's opinion, the rational basis standard, McDonald v. City of Chicago, New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen, "good moral character," the murky precedent of striking down laws that weren't present during the framing era, a strict scrutiny approach, speculations on the future of Second Amendment jurisprudence, ghost guns, and much more. Episode Transcript The Dirty Dozen: How Twelve Supreme Court Cases Radically Expanded Government and Eroded Freedom, by Robert Levy & William Mellor "The Peculiar Story of United States v. Miller," by Brian L. Frye Bob Levy was, for 14 years, chairman of the board of directors at the Cato Institute. He is now chairman emeritus. Bob joined Cato as senior fellow in constitutional studies in 1997 after 25 years in business. The Institute's Robert A. Levy Center for Constitutional Studies is named in his honor. He has also served on boards of the Federalist Society, the Foundation for Government Accountability, and the Institute for Justice. Bob received his PhD in business from the American University in 1966, then founded CDA Investment Technologies, a major provider of investment information and software. At age 50, after leaving CDA in 1991, Bob went to George Mason law school, where he was chief articles editor of the law review and class valedictorian. He received his JD degree in 1994. The next two years he clerked for Judge Royce Lamberth on the US District Court and Judge Douglas Ginsburg on the US Court of Appeals, both in Washington, DC.
Bill Murphy & Danny Boy recap the 2024 NBA Draft, discuss some major struggles with the Yankees, and review a huge ruling in the US District Court involving the NFL and its Sunday Ticket Package. *NOTE: Recorded on 06/28/24* --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/sports-insanity-podcast/support
This Day in Legal History: Regents of the University of California v. BakkeOn June 28, 1978, the US Supreme Court delivered a landmark decision in the case of Regents of the University of California v. Bakke, shaping the future of affirmative action in university admissions. The case centered around Allan Bakke, a white applicant who was twice denied admission to the University of California, Davis Medical School, despite having higher test scores than some minority candidates who were admitted under a special admissions program. Bakke argued that he was a victim of racial discrimination.The Court's ruling was complex, resulting in a split opinion. By a narrow 5-4 margin, the Supreme Court held that the university's use of rigid racial quotas, specifically reserving 16 out of 100 seats for minority students, violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and the Civil Rights Act of 1964. This decision invalidated the quota system used by the university.However, the Court also ruled, in a separate 5-4 vote, that race could be considered as one of many factors in the admissions process. This part of the decision, delivered by Justice Lewis Powell, emphasized that while quotas were unconstitutional, affirmative action programs aimed at increasing diversity and providing opportunities for historically disadvantaged groups could be constitutionally permissible.The Bakke decision was a pivotal moment in the ongoing debate over affirmative action, setting a precedent that continues to influence educational policies and the broader discourse on racial equality in the United States. The case highlighted the delicate balance between prohibiting racial discrimination and promoting diversity and inclusion in higher education.Despite repeated reversals from the Supreme Court, the US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit has continued to push conservative legal boundaries. This term, the Supreme Court reversed or vacated six out of nine Fifth Circuit decisions, yet still made significant rulings in favor of conservative positions, including limiting the Securities and Exchange Commission's (SEC) enforcement power and rejecting a federal bump stock ban. Observers note that while the Supreme Court often overturned Fifth Circuit rulings, it also aligned with the circuit's conservative ideology in key cases.A notable example was the Supreme Court's decision that people subject to civil penalties for alleged securities fraud have a constitutional right to a jury trial, significantly impacting the SEC's adjudication process. Another major case saw the Supreme Court upholding the Fifth Circuit's rejection of the bump stock ban, a regulation initially issued by the Trump administration. The Fifth Circuit also won a case involving incomplete deportation hearing notices, which, though technical, reflected the court's influence. However, the Supreme Court criticized the Fifth Circuit for overreaching, particularly on issues like the abortion pill mifepristone and social media censorship, emphasizing the importance of standing.The Fifth Circuit's decisions are often driven by judges appointed by former President Donald Trump, whose influence reshaped the court. Legal experts suggest that despite some setbacks, the Fifth Circuit's conservative rulings continue to shape national policies, revealing a complex interplay between the circuit and the Supreme Court.Conservatives Gain Despite Fifth Circuit Setbacks at High CourtThe home health industry is preparing to refile its lawsuit against Medicare payment cuts after a recent unfavorable court ruling. William A. Dombi, president of the National Association for Home Care & Hospice (NAHC), stated that the organization will first complete the necessary administrative appeals before returning to court. This legal battle could significantly impact Medicare home health providers and beneficiaries.The US District Court for the District of Columbia dismissed NAHC's initial lawsuit because it was filed before exhausting all administrative remedies. Instead of appealing, NAHC will follow the court's directive and refile the case. Meanwhile, industry groups are lobbying Congress to pass legislation to block a proposed 1.7% cut to home health payments in 2025.The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) proposed a 2.5% payment increase but also a 3.6% cut due to a “permanent behavior adjustment” and a 0.6% cut for outlier payments. This is the third consecutive year of proposed cuts, which, according to Joanne Cunningham, CEO of the Partnership for Quality Home Healthcare, make it difficult for providers to meet the growing care demands of an aging population. High labor costs and workforce shortages exacerbate these challenges, and Katie Smith Sloan of LeadingAge noted that the cuts make it harder to recruit nurses.Senators Debbie Stabenow and Susan Collins, along with Representatives Terri Sewell and Adrian Smith, have introduced legislation to block the CMS proposal and restrict its authority over payment adjustments based on provider behavior. Dombi emphasized ongoing efforts with lawmakers, indicating that CMS is unlikely to change its stance.The Medicare Payment Advisory Commission (MedPAC) has consistently recommended reductions in home health payments, citing that current payments are significantly higher than costs. Their latest report projects a profit margin of 18% for 2024, arguing that excess payments diminish the value of home health care. However, Dombi countered that MedPAC's estimates don't account for lower payments from private Medicare Advantage plans, which now cover a majority of Medicare beneficiaries.Home Health Agencies to Renew Suit Over Medicare Payment RatesA California federal jury has ordered the National Football League (NFL) to pay over $4.7 billion in damages for overcharging subscribers of its "Sunday Ticket" telecasts. The jury found that the NFL conspired with member teams to inflate the price of "Sunday Ticket" for millions of residential and commercial subscribers. This decision followed more than a decade of litigation. The plaintiffs, who were DirecTV subscribers, argued that the NFL's agreements with broadcast partners allowed DirecTV to charge higher prices by monopolizing distribution. A judge may triple the damages under U.S. antitrust law, potentially bringing the total to over $14 billion. The NFL plans to contest the verdict.NFL hit with $4.7 billion verdict in 'Sunday Ticket' antitrust trial | ReutersThis week's closing theme is by Ludwig van Beethoven, once again, and still a composer of some note.As we close out this week, we turn to the life and music of Ludwig van Beethoven, one of classical music's most iconic figures. On June 28, 1802, Beethoven penned a poignant letter to his friend Franz Wegeler, revealing his deep struggles with his worsening deafness. Despite the profound personal challenge this posed, Beethoven's determination to overcome his condition fueled some of his most extraordinary compositions.In light of this story, our closing theme is Beethoven's "Symphony No. 3 in E-flat major, Op. 55," commonly known as the "Eroica Symphony." This symphony, composed between 1803 and 1804, epitomizes Beethoven's resilience and innovation. Originally dedicated to Napoleon Bonaparte, whom Beethoven admired for his democratic ideals, the dedication was famously retracted when Napoleon declared himself emperor. The "Eroica" is renowned for its emotional depth and groundbreaking structure, marking a significant shift from classical to romantic symphonic form.Beethoven's ability to compose such a powerful and transformative piece while grappling with the despair of impending deafness is a testament to his genius and perseverance. The "Eroica Symphony" not only reflects Beethoven's personal triumphs but also serves as an enduring symbol of human resilience in the face of adversity.As you listen to the stirring movements of this symphony, remember the indomitable spirit of Beethoven. Let his story and music inspire you as we conclude this week, reminding us all of the power of determination and the beauty that can emerge from our greatest challenges. Thank you for joining us, and we look forward to sharing more with you next week.Once again and without further ado, Ludwig van Beethoven's Symphony No. 3 in E-flat major, Op. 55, the “Eroica Symphony” – enjoy! 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
Wednesday, June 26th, 2024Today, we'll get some Supreme Court decisions starting this morning at 10 AM ET; Jack Smith files his response to Trump's ridiculous evidence tampering claims in the Mar a Lago case; Julian Assange reaches a plea deal with the US for his 2011 espionage; a conservative backed group is compiling a list of civil servants who are traitors to Trump; the Florida Department of Law Enforcement has an active investigation involving state Rep. Carolina Amesty and her family's nonprofit school; Israel's high court orders the army to draft ultra-Orthodox men; rattling Netanyahu's government; former North Dakota lawmaker to plead guilty to traveling to pay for sex with minor (we call that rape), 16 nobel economists warn of a trump inflation, and president biden will pardon veterans convicted under a military law banning gay sex; plus Allison delivers your Good News.Tickets and LIVE show dates https://allisongill.comSubscribe for free to MuellerSheWrote on Substackhttps://muellershewrote.substack.com Biden expected to pardon veterans convicted under military law banning gay sex, officials say (CNN)Scoop: 16 Nobel economists see a Trump inflation bomb (Axios)FDLE confirms investigation involving Orlando-area Rep. Amesty (Orlando Sentinel)Julian Assange agrees to plea deal with Biden administration that will allow him to avoid imprisonment in US (CNN)Former North Dakota lawmaker to plead guilty to traveling to pay for sex with minor (AP News)Conservative-backed group is creating a list of federal workers it suspects could resist Trump plans (AP News)Israel's military must enlist the ultra-Orthodox. What will that mean for Netanyahu and the war? (AP News) Subscribe to Lawyers, Guns, And MoneyAd-free premium feed: https://lawyersgunsandmoney.supercast.comSubscribe for free everywhere else:https://lawyersgunsandmoney.simplecast.com/episodes/1-miami-1985Check out other MSW Media podcastshttps://mswmedia.com/shows/Follow AG and Dana on Social MediaDr. Allison Gill Follow Mueller, She Wrote on Posthttps://post.news/@/MuellerSheWrote?utm_source=TwitterAG&utm_medium=creator_organic&utm_campaign=muellershewrote&utm_content=FollowMehttps://muellershewrote.substack.comhttps://twitter.com/MuellerSheWrotehttps://www.threads.net/@muellershewrotehttps://www.tiktok.com/@muellershewrotehttps://instagram.com/muellershewroteDana Goldberghttps://twitter.com/DGComedyhttps://www.instagram.com/dgcomedyhttps://www.facebook.com/dgcomedyhttps://danagoldberg.comHave some good news; a confession; or a correction to share?Good News & Confessions - The Daily Beanshttps://www.dailybeanspod.com/confessional/From The Good NewsFact Sheet: The Biden-Harris Administration Urges Congress to Lower Drug Costs for Americans with Commercial Insurance (HHS.gov) Live Show Ticket Links:https://allisongill.com (for all tickets and show dates)Wednesday July 10th – Portland OR – Polaris Hall(with Dana!)Thursday July 11th – Seattle WA – The Triple Door(with Dana!)Thursday July 25th Milwaukee, WI https://tinyurl.com/Beans-MKESunday July 28th Nashville, TN - with Phil Williams https://tinyurl.com/Beans-TennWednesday July 31st St. Louis, MO https://tinyurl.com/Beans-STLFriday August 16th Washington, DC - with Andy McCabe, Pete Strzok, Glenn Kirschner https://tinyurl.com/Beans-in-DCSaturday August 24 San Francisco, CA https://tinyurl.com/Beans-SF Listener Survey:http://survey.podtrac.com/start-survey.aspx?pubid=BffJOlI7qQcF&ver=shortFollow the Podcast on Apple:The Daily Beans on Apple PodcastsWant to support the show and get it ad-free and early?Supercasthttps://dailybeans.supercast.com/OrPatreon https://patreon.com/thedailybeansOr subscribe on Apple Podcasts with our affiliate linkThe Daily Beans on Apple Podcasts
This Day in Legal History: Pivotal LGBTQ+ Rights DecisionsOn this day, June 26th, in legal history, two pivotal Supreme Court decisions significantly advanced the cause of marriage equality in the United States.On June 26, 2013, the Supreme Court delivered its decision in United States v. Windsor. In a 5-4 ruling, the Court struck down Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), which had defined marriage for federal purposes as the union between a man and a woman. Edith Windsor, the plaintiff, had been denied a spousal tax exemption after her same-sex spouse's death, prompting her to challenge the law. The Court held that DOMA's definition of marriage was unconstitutional as it violated the principles of due process and equal protection guaranteed by the Fifth Amendment. This landmark decision allowed same-sex couples to receive the same federal benefits as heterosexual couples, marking a significant step forward for LGBTQ+ rights and equality.Two years later, on June 26, 2015, the Supreme Court issued another historic ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges. In another closely divided 5-4 decision, the Court declared that same-sex marriage is a constitutional right under the 14th Amendment. The case consolidated several challenges from same-sex couples who had been denied the right to marry or have their marriages recognized by their home states. Justice Anthony Kennedy, writing for the majority, stated that the right to marry is a fundamental right inherent in the liberty of the person, and under the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the 14th Amendment, same-sex couples cannot be denied that right. This ruling effectively legalized same-sex marriage across the United States, ensuring that all states must perform and recognize marriages between individuals of the same sex.These decisions on June 26th were monumental in affirming the rights of same-sex couples and dismantling legal barriers to marriage equality, marking significant victories for the LGBTQ+ community and setting precedents for future civil rights advancements.Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson recently surprised defense attorneys with her unexpected votes against criminal defendants, despite her background as a former federal defender. In two cases decided at the end of the term, Jackson broke from her liberal colleagues. She joined the majority in a case broadening expert witness testimony and dissented in another that reinforced the right to a jury trial.President Joe Biden highlighted Jackson's unique experience as a public defender when nominating her in 2022. In Diaz v. United States, a 6-3 decision, the Court sided with prosecutors on expert witness testimony, allowing experts to discuss what most defendants generally know. Jackson joined Justice Clarence Thomas's majority opinion and wrote separately, suggesting the rule could benefit both prosecutors and defendants.In Erlinger v. United States, the Court ruled 6-3 to apply the Apprendi v. New Jersey precedent broadly, requiring juries to decide facts that could increase sentences. Jackson dissented, arguing that Apprendi limits legislative efforts to create fairer sentencing systems. She suggested overturning Apprendi, which surprised many in the defense community given its importance to defendants' rights.Some notable defense attorneys have expressed disappointment in her positions, though acknowledging that public defender views are not monolithic.Justice Jackson Takes Unexpected Positions in Criminal CasesA recent study by Georgetown University's Center on Education and Workforce revealed that law school graduates earn a median salary of $72,000 after debt payments four years into their careers. However, this figure varies significantly depending on the law school attended. Graduates from seven elite law schools, including Columbia, University of Pennsylvania, and Harvard, have median earnings of over $200,000 after debt. In contrast, graduates from 33 lower-ranking law schools earn $55,000 or less.The report, titled "A Law Degree Is No Sure Thing: Some Law School Graduates Earn Top Dollar, but Many Do Not," shows that law graduates typically leave school with a median debt of $118,500. Columbia Law School offers the highest return on investment with net median earnings of $253,800 after four years, followed by other top-tier schools. These elite institutions account for about 20% of law students and tend to send over half their graduates to high-paying jobs at large law firms.Conversely, 20 law schools have graduates with median net earnings of $50,000 or less after debt payments, including Cooley Law School and Atlanta's John Marshall Law School. The study utilized data from various sources, such as the U.S. Census Bureau and the American Bar Association, to assess employment outcomes, salaries, bar passage rates, and debt.The report underscores a significant disparity in financial outcomes between graduates of top-ranked law schools and those from lower-ranked institutions.Law grads' median earnings of $72,000 after debt show 'vast gulf' in pay, study finds | ReutersLawmakers in the United States are pushing for the first major federal data privacy legislation, the American Privacy Rights Act, which has bipartisan support. The bill, sponsored by Democratic Senator Maria Cantwell and Republican Representative Cathy McMorris Rodgers, aims to establish a national data privacy standard. This would allow individuals to access, delete, and opt out of their data being used for targeted advertising, and would create a national data broker registry.The U.S. has lagged behind other regions like the European Union, which implemented the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) in 2018. Industry groups, including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and TechNet, argue that the bill lacks safeguards to prevent states from adding their own regulations, which could complicate compliance for businesses. They advocate for a unified national standard without additional state-level regulations.Privacy advocates, however, contend that the bill would hinder states from addressing new technological developments and responding to emerging privacy issues. They fear that federal pre-emption could stifle the progressive influence of states like California, which often leads in privacy regulations. Ashkan Soltani, from the California Privacy Protection Agency, warned against setting static regulations given the rapid pace of technological advancements.Democratic Representative Suzan DelBene supports the bill, citing the current "patchwork" of state laws as problematic for small businesses. The bill will undergo a markup hearing on Thursday, a crucial step before potentially advancing to a House vote.US lawmakers push for federal data privacy law; tech industry and critics are wary | ReutersA federal judge has ruled that Walt Disney Co. must face an antitrust class action lawsuit filed by 25 subscribers to YouTube TV and DirecTV Stream. The subscribers allege that Disney's agreements with rival streaming TV providers, which included access to ESPN content, restrained trade and led to higher prices. Judge Edward J. Davila of the US District Court for the Northern District of California found that the plaintiffs plausibly alleged Disney's conduct harmed competition in the streaming live pay TV market (SLPTV).The lawsuit claims Disney's agreements prevented other streamers from offering lower-priced bundles excluding ESPN, thus raising subscription costs and protecting Disney-owned Hulu from competition. Despite partially dismissing the initial complaint, the judge allowed an amended complaint to proceed, alleging violations of the federal Sherman Act and state antitrust laws. While the court dismissed claims for damages under the Sherman Act, limiting potential relief to an injunction, it allowed most state antitrust claims to continue, except for those under the Illinois Antitrust Act and Tennessee Trade Practices Act.The decision follows the Justice Department's plans to review a proposed new streaming service by Disney, Fox Corp., and Warner Bros. Discovery Inc. for potential consumer harm. The case, Biddle et al v. Walt Disney Co., continues to highlight concerns over anticompetitive practices in the streaming industry.Disney Must Face Antitrust Class Suit by TV Streaming Consumers 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
This Day in Legal History: Engel v. Vitale DecidedOn June 25, 1962, the United States Supreme Court made a landmark decision in the case of Engel v. Vitale. The Court ruled that the recitation of a state-sponsored prayer in public schools violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. This case arose from a New York State law that required public schools to start the day with a non-denominational prayer drafted by the state education board.The plaintiffs, led by Steven Engel, argued that this practice amounted to an unconstitutional endorsement of religion. The Supreme Court, in a 6-1 decision, agreed and held that government-directed prayer in public schools was inherently coercive and an infringement on the separation of church and state.Justice Hugo Black, writing for the majority, emphasized that the government should remain neutral on religious matters to ensure freedom of belief for all citizens. This ruling sparked considerable controversy and debate, reflecting broader tensions over the role of religion in public life. Many supporters of school prayer viewed the decision as an attack on religious traditions, while opponents saw it as a vital protection of individual rights.Engel v. Vitale set a significant precedent for subsequent rulings on the issue of prayer and religious activities in public schools. It reinforced the principle that public education should be free from religious influence, shaping the interpretation of the First Amendment in relation to religious freedom and governmental neutrality. This case remains a cornerstone of American constitutional law concerning the separation of church and state.Federal judges on trial and appeals courts have received gifts such as private flights, football tickets, and substantial cash gifts, according to a report by Fix the Court, a judicial transparency watchdog. This report comes amid increased scrutiny over gift acceptance by federal judges, following revelations of undisclosed gifts to Supreme Court justices like Clarence Thomas.The most notable gift was a $24,000 cash gift in 2022 to Chief Judge Timothy Batten of the Northern District of Georgia from Medicraft Enterprises, a medical device company owned by a close friend. Batten also received a $4,000 gift from Medicraft in 2021. These cash gifts are rare on judges' financial disclosures, as noted by Gabe Roth, executive director of Fix the Court.The judicial code of ethics prohibits judges from accepting gifts from those with court business or interests affected by court action. Judges can accept travel, lodging for educational or legal events, books, resource materials, and gifts from friends or family, provided they do not preside over related legal matters. Gifts over $480 must be reported in annual disclosures, but the judiciary's slow posting has caused delays.The Fix the Court analysis also found judges commonly received free tickets, including football tickets from alma maters and local teams. Judge Charles Wilson reported football tickets from Notre Dame, while Judges Steve Jones, Lisa Wood, and Julie Carnes received tickets from the University of Georgia Athletic Association.Judges also reported gifted vacations. Judge Aleta Trauger disclosed a private flight and hotel stay for a Christmas dinner, and Judge Daniel Crabtree reported travel and golf outings worth $4,100. Congress members face stricter gift limits, capped at $100 per donor annually, with exceptions for close friends and special events.Judges Disclosed Gifts Include $24,000 Cash, Football TicketsTwo federal judges issued temporary halts to parts of President Biden's student loan debt relief program on Monday. Judge Daniel D. Crabtree of the US District Court for the District of Kansas ruled that large-scale student debt cancellation should be decided by Congress, partially granting a preliminary injunction requested by a coalition of states. Crabtree stated that the Biden administration's plan represented a significant regulatory expansion without clear congressional authorization.In a separate case, Judge John A. Ross of the US District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri also granted an injunction, stating that the states have a fair chance of proving that the administration overstepped its authority by including loan forgiveness. These rulings challenge the Department of Education's July 2023 rule aimed at reducing monthly student loan payments based on income and canceling loans after ten years for borrowers with up to $12,000 in debt.The relief plan, known as the Saving on a Valuable Education Plan, was set to take effect on July 1 and is estimated to cost $475 billion over ten years. This legal setback occurs as President Biden faces pressure to fulfill his campaign promise of student debt relief ahead of the November 2024 election. The Supreme Court had previously struck down a plan to forgive up to $20,000 in student loans for 40 million people.Crabtree's nationwide injunction does not affect parts of the plan already in effect, while Ross's ruling limits the injunction to the loan forgiveness component. The cases involved are State of Missouri v. Biden and State of Kansas v. Biden.Biden's Student Loan Debt Relief Program Halted in Two CourtsSpotify's recent reclassification of its premium subscription service has sparked significant controversy in the music industry, leading to lawsuits, legislative pushes, and an FTC complaint. The conflict centers around Spotify's attempt to include audiobooks in its premium plan, reducing its royalty payments to songwriters. This move, seen as a "bait-and-switch," has led to accusations from the National Music Publishers Association (NMPA) and the Mechanical Licensing Collective (MLC) that Spotify is attempting to underpay songwriters.The Music Modernization Act (MMA) of 2018 was designed to simplify royalty payments by creating the MLC, which issues blanket licenses to streaming services. However, dissatisfaction with the MLC's effectiveness is growing. Critics argue that the MLC's song matching process is inadequate, leaving many royalties unpaid. The NMPA has responded by lobbying for legislative changes to allow songwriters to negotiate royalties directly, outside the MLC's framework.This dispute comes amid a broader debate over the fairness of the current music licensing system. Songwriters and publishers feel squeezed by shrinking revenues from streaming services, and are seeking greater control over their royalties. The FTC complaint against Spotify represents a novel approach in this ongoing battle, highlighting the lengths to which industry players are willing to go to secure fair compensation.The MLC, up for its first five-year evaluation, faces scrutiny over its handling of unmatched royalties, which amount to significant sums. Despite some support for the MLC, there is a push for more transparency and improvements in its operations. As the industry grapples with these issues, the outcome of this multi-pronged conflict could reshape the landscape of music royalties and streaming.Spotify Royalty Drama Casts Shadow Over Songwriter ConsensusJulian Assange, the founder of WikiLeaks, is set to plead guilty to violating U.S. espionage law, ending his 14-year legal saga and allowing his return to Australia. Assange will plead guilty to conspiring to obtain and disclose classified U.S. national defense documents. He will be sentenced to 62 months of time already served during a hearing in Saipan, chosen for its proximity to Australia.Assange left the UK's Belmarsh prison after being bailed by the UK High Court. This resolution follows a global campaign involving grassroots organizers, press freedom advocates, and political leaders. The Australian government has been pressing for Assange's release, and his wife expressed immense gratitude for the support they received.The espionage charges stem from WikiLeaks' 2010 release of hundreds of thousands of classified U.S. military documents, the largest security breach of its kind. The documents, leaked by Chelsea Manning, included sensitive diplomatic cables and battlefield reports. Assange's prosecution has been controversial, with press freedom advocates arguing that charging him threatens free speech.Assange's legal troubles began in 2010 when he was arrested in the UK on a European arrest warrant related to later-dropped sex-crime allegations in Sweden. He sought asylum in Ecuador's embassy in London for seven years to avoid extradition. In 2019, he was arrested and has since been fighting extradition from Belmarsh prison.The plea deal marks the end of a long ordeal for Assange, who has been compared to other whistleblowers like Reality Winner, who received a similar sentence for leaking classified information.WikiLeaks' Julian Assange to be freed after pleading guilty to US espionage charge | ReutersSales tax compliance in the US is fraught with challenges, largely due to the lack of transparency and a reliable system for reporting and calculating owed taxes. Unlike income tax, where employer reports help bridge gaps, sales tax relies heavily on businesses to self-report, leading to significant discrepancies in what is collected versus what is owed.A recent example highlighting this issue is GitHub's announcement that it will begin collecting and remitting sales tax in August. This move underscores a broader problem: the inconsistency in sales tax compliance across corporations. GitHub, a Microsoft subsidiary with $1 billion in revenue and over 1.3 million paid subscribers in 2023, should have been complying all along, which raises questions about the transparency and enforcement of sales tax laws.The administrative burden on businesses to comply with varied state policies is substantial. For smaller businesses, this burden can be overwhelming and costly, often requiring them to spend a significant portion of their operating capital on compliance. A survey by Avalara/Potentiate found that small and medium-sized businesses spend an average of $2,455 per month on sales tax calculations alone.The Supreme Court's 2018 decision in South Dakota v. Wayfair, which allowed states to require businesses to collect sales tax regardless of physical presence, aimed to level the playing field between physical stores and online retailers. However, the decision has led to a patchwork of state-specific policies, further complicating compliance, especially for smaller businesses.To address these challenges, states should not wait for corporations to voluntarily comply with sales tax laws. Instead, they should proactively enforce compliance among major corporations and allocate resources to support small businesses. This proactive approach could include targeted audits of large corporations, increased penalties for non-compliance, and providing tools to help small businesses calculate and remit sales tax accurately.For example, the creation of state databases of tax rates and an application programming interface for automated calculations could significantly reduce the compliance burden on small businesses. Ensuring compliance among large corporations like GitHub would also help level the playing field, making it fairer for small businesses that are struggling to comply.In summary, a more transparent and enforced sales tax system is needed. Large corporations should be held accountable, and small businesses should be supported in their compliance efforts. This dual approach can create a more equitable business environment and increase state revenues, ultimately benefiting all parties involved.States' Corporate Sales Tax Enforcement Doesn't Go Far Enough 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
Late spring/early summer is always a busy time for the Supreme Court, but this year, it's not just the controversial decisions that are making news. The justices themselves have been in headlines — for all the wrong reasons. Kara and an expert panel discuss the ethical lapses, refusals the recuse, and of course, the cases themselves — including the big one, over Trump's claim to “complete and total” immunity. The panelists are: Judge Nancy Gertner (retired), a lecturer at Harvard Law School and former US District Court judge for the District of Massachusetts who served on the Presidential Commission on the Supreme Court; Kedric Payne, vice president, general counsel, and senior director for ethics at the Campaign Legal Center; and Judge David Tatel (retired), a former judge on the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit and author of the new book Vision: A Memoir of Blindness and Justice. This interview was recorded on Tuesday June 18. Questions? Comments? Email us at on@voxmedia.com or find Kara on Instagram/Threads as @karaswisher Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
This Day in Legal History: Patent Cooperation Treaty SignedOn June 19, 1970, the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) was signed, marking a significant milestone in international intellectual property law. The PCT established a unified procedure for filing patent applications to protect inventions in multiple countries. Prior to the PCT, inventors needed to file separate patent applications in each country where they sought protection, a costly and time-consuming process.The PCT streamlined this by allowing inventors to file a single international application, which could then be pursued in each contracting state. Managed by the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), the treaty aimed to simplify and reduce the cost of obtaining multinational patent protection.The system introduced by the PCT has two main phases: the international phase and the national phase. During the international phase, the application is reviewed for formal requirements and subjected to an international search and preliminary examination. In the national phase, the application enters the national jurisdictions of the chosen countries for further examination according to local laws.The PCT has been crucial in promoting innovation and technological advancement by providing a more efficient path for securing patent rights internationally. Today, over 150 countries are members of the PCT, reflecting its global acceptance and importance in the realm of intellectual property.Senate Democrats canceled a procedural vote to advance President Biden's nominee, Mustafa Kasubhai, for a federal district court judge in Oregon. Majority Leader Chuck Schumer cited attendance issues as the reason for postponing the cloture vote, which will be rescheduled soon. With a narrow 51-49 majority, Democrats face challenges in confirming controversial nominees. Kasubhai, currently a magistrate judge, would be among the few Muslim Americans to serve as a life-tenured federal judge.His nomination has faced strong GOP opposition, with Republicans questioning his views on diversity, equity, inclusion, and the use of preferred pronouns in his courtroom. They have also scrutinized his past writings, some dating back to his time as a law student, and accused him of holding radical views, including Marxism. The absence of Sen. Robert Menendez, due to his bribery trial, and potential opposition from Sen. Joe Manchin, who demands bipartisan support for nominees, complicate Kasubhai's confirmation prospects.Senate Democrats Pull Vote on Trial Court Nominee Kasubhai (1)A banking industry challenge to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau's (CFPB) rule capping credit card late fees at $8 will remain in Texas after the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals blocked a transfer to Washington, D.C. The case, filed by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and several banking associations, was initially moved by Judge Mark Pittman, who argued it was better suited for the District of Columbia due to the lack of affected banks in Texas. However, the appellate court halted the transfer, noting the nationwide impact of the CFPB's rule.Judge Don Willett emphasized that the case's broad implications extended beyond Texas, making it inappropriate to consider it a localized issue. The CFPB and the plaintiffs will continue to argue over the venue. This decision comes amidst broader concerns about venue shopping, with industry groups favoring Texas courts perceived as more sympathetic to their challenges against federal regulations. The CFPB's credit card late fee rule, introduced on March 5, aims to reduce so-called junk fees and could significantly impact banks' revenue, potentially costing them $10 billion annually. The banking industry quickly filed a lawsuit to block the rule, reflecting its substantial financial stakes. The Fifth Circuit's ruling highlights the ongoing tension between regulatory efforts and industry pushback.Credit Card Late Fee Suit Kept in Texas Again by 5th Cir. (1)A San Francisco federal judge has sanctioned Apple Inc. in a privacy class action lawsuit by barring certain defenses due to the deletion of audio recordings from its Siri voice assistant. Magistrate Judge Sallie Kim of the US District Court for the Northern District of California ruled that Apple failed to halt its data retention policy after the lawsuit was filed, resulting in the destruction of electronically stored information (ESI) central to the case.Apple had argued that the deleted data was irrelevant, but the court disagreed. As a result, Apple is prohibited from making several defenses, including claims that plaintiffs lack standing due to insufficient evidence of false Siri triggers, arguments against class-wide damages based on the number of false recordings, and defenses regarding Apple's intent based on repeated false recordings.The lawsuit, initiated in 2019, accuses Apple of violating wiretap laws by intercepting and misusing private conversations through Siri without users' intentional activation. Plaintiffs alleged that Apple continued deleting relevant recordings years after the litigation began, thus deliberately interfering with the case.Judge Kim indicated that a jury must decide whether Apple's deletion of information was intentional, which could lead to further sanctions. The plaintiffs are represented by Lexington Law Group LLP, Lowey Dannenberg PC, and Scott & Scott LLP, while Apple is represented by DLA Piper LLP and Morrison & Foerster LLP. The case is Lopez v. Apple, Inc.Apple Restricted on Siri Trial Defenses for Deleting RecordingsThe U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has referred a complaint against TikTok and its parent company, ByteDance, to the Justice Department over potential violations of children's privacy laws. This action stems from an investigation that found reasons to believe TikTok might be violating the law, prompting the FTC to seek legal proceedings in the public interest. The FTC typically keeps such referrals confidential but made an exception in this case.The complaint follows earlier reports from 2020 that the FTC and the Justice Department were investigating TikTok for allegedly failing to comply with a 2019 agreement to protect children's privacy. TikTok expressed disappointment over the FTC's decision to pursue litigation instead of seeking a settlement, claiming that many of the allegations are outdated or inaccurate.This investigation is separate from ongoing Congressional concerns about the potential misuse of data from TikTok's 170 million U.S. users by the Chinese government, an allegation TikTok denies. Additionally, TikTok is preparing to file a legal brief against a law requiring ByteDance to divest TikTok's U.S. assets by January 19 or face a ban.The FTC's actions highlight the heightened scrutiny TikTok faces regarding privacy and national security issues in the U.S.Child privacy complaint against TikTok referred to US Justice Dept | 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
About Our GuestMs. Brodzki is a founding partner at Brodzki Jacobs. She is Florida Bar Board Certified in Marital and Family Law, and a renowned expert and frequent lecturer on LGBT family law, where she was a pioneer in filing and obtaining the first same-sex divorce in Florida in 2014. She is a member of the Florida Bar, the US District Court for the Southern District of Florida Bar and the United States Supreme Court Bar. Ms. Brodzki is also a certified family law Mediator and trained Collaborative Family Lawyer. Originally from Savannah, Georgia, Ms. Brodzki received her Bachelor of Science in Psychology from Newcomb College of Tulane University in New Orleans, Louisiana in 1982 and her Doctor of Jurisprudence from the University of Miami School of Law, cum laude, in 1985. She has lived in the Coral Springs/Parkland area since 1991 where she has raised her blended family of six children. Ms. Brodzki is a Past President of the Collaborative Family Law Professionals of South Florida, served on the boards of the Florida Academy of Collaborative Professionals and of SAVE, Florida's oldest LGBTQ advocacy organization, currently serves on the board of the Broward County Bar Association, and is a member of numerous other professional organizations. Notable Links: Official website: https://www.bjblawyers.com/nancy-brodzki.htmlFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/bjblawyersInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/bjblawyers/LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/nancy-brodzki-74606217/ ********** "Women Winning Divorce" is a radio show and podcast hosted by Heather Quick: Attorney, Entrepreneur, Author and Founder of Florida Women's Law Group, the only divorce firm for women, by women. Each week Heather sits down with innovative professionals and leaders who are focused on how you can be your best self, before, during or after divorce. In these conversations, we are looking at how women can win at life. With our guests, we enjoy the opportunity to explore ways all women can win and enhance their life, no matter where they are in their journey, because divorce is just point in life, not the end and not what defines you, rather it can be a catalyst for growth. Come join the conversation on social media, and join our Facebook group, Women Winning Divorce and send comments and suggestions, we want to bring you content that helps move your life forward.Women Winning Divorce Podcast Series https://www.womenwinningdivorce.com/Women Winning Divorce Facebook Group https://www.facebook.com/groups/685277376560289Florida Women's Law Grouphttps://www.floridawomenslawgroup.com/Divorce 101 Online Course: https://heather-quick.mykajabi.com/ Thank you for listening. Please share the podcast with your friends and colleagues. Send your questions, comments, and feedback to marketing@4womenlaw.com Women Winning Divorce is supported by Florida Women's Law Group Disclaimer: This podcast is for informational purposes only and is not an advertisement for legal services. The information provided on this podcast is not intended to be legal advice. You should not rely on what you hear on this podcast as legal advice. If you have a legal issue, please contact a lawyer. The views and opinions expressed by the hosts and guests are solely those of the individuals and do not represent the views or opinions of the firms or organizations with which they are affiliated or the views or opinions of this podcast's advertisers. This podcast is available for private, non-commercial use only. Any editing, reproduction, or redistribution of this podcast for commercial use or monetary gain without the expressed, written consent of the podcast's creator is prohibited.
When the US Senate confirmed Judge Melissa DuBose in March, she broke two barriers. She became the first person of color and the first openly LGBTQ Judge to serve on the US District Court for Rhode Island. She officially starts that job in January, but she joined us in the studio for a preview of what's to come. Tips and ideas? Email us at rinews@globe.com.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.
Meaghan Luster focuses her practice at Wolf Greenfield on patent litigation. Meaghan's experience includes conducting pre-suit diligence, fact and expert discovery, claim construction, and motion practice in US district courts and the US International Trade Commission (ITC). Prior to joining Wolf Greenfield, Meaghan served as a judicial law clerk for Judge George O'Toole, Jr. of the US District Court for the District of Massachusetts.In this edition of IP Talk with Wolf Greenfield, Meaghan Luster discusses her first year working in patent litigation.00:49 - Highlights from Meaghan's first year at Wolf Greenfield01:26 - The most rewarding and challenging aspects of patent litigation02:18 - The advantages of working every day with top clients and new areas of technology and law02:49 - Meaghan's work spans a range of technologies from pharmaceuticals to medical devices to software03:25 - Communicating with jury members that are often not technical people05:18 - How time as a judicial law clerk prepared Meaghan for her current practice06:19 - Meaghan's involvement in diversity and inclusion initiatives07:27 - How Wolf Greenfield's commitment to diversity and inclusion is unique###
This Day in Legal History: Kansas-Nebraska Act PassedOn May 30, 1854, the U.S. Congress passed the Kansas-Nebraska Act, a significant piece of legislation that allowed the territories of Kansas and Nebraska to decide for themselves whether to allow slavery through popular sovereignty. This act, introduced by Senator Stephen A. Douglas, effectively repealed the Missouri Compromise of 1820, which had prohibited slavery north of the 36°30′ parallel except within the boundaries of the proposed state of Missouri.The Kansas-Nebraska Act led to a violent struggle between pro-slavery and anti-slavery settlers in Kansas, a period known as "Bleeding Kansas." This conflict highlighted the deep divisions within the United States over the issue of slavery and pushed the nation closer to civil war. The act's passage demonstrated the growing power of the pro-slavery faction in American politics and underscored the weaknesses of legislative compromises in addressing the moral and political challenges posed by slavery.By allowing the possibility of slavery's expansion into new territories, the Kansas-Nebraska Act intensified the sectional conflict and contributed to the rise of the Republican Party, which was founded on an anti-slavery platform. The law's implications continued to reverberate throughout the nation, setting the stage for the eventual secession of the Southern states and the outbreak of the Civil War in 1861.Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito has declined to recuse himself from cases involving Donald Trump and the January 6 Capitol riot, despite calls from Democratic lawmakers. These calls followed reports that far-right-associated flags were flown over Alito's homes in Virginia and New Jersey. Alito attributed the flag displays to his wife, Martha-Ann Alito, emphasizing her independent decision-making.In his letters to lawmakers, including Senator Dick Durbin and Representative Hank Johnson, Alito explained that his wife flies various flags and was responsible for the flagpoles at their residences. He mentioned that the upside-down American flag was flown during a neighborhood dispute and that he requested its removal, which his wife initially resisted. He also noted that the "Appeal to Heaven" flag flown at their beach house was meant to express a patriotic and religious message.Alito's response has intensified discussions about the need for an enforceable code of conduct for the Supreme Court. Johnson criticized Alito's explanation, calling for congressional action to ensure accountability. This controversy comes as the Supreme Court prepares to rule on significant cases related to Trump's alleged efforts to overturn the 2020 election and the January 6 Capitol riot.Alito, a key figure in the court's conservative wing, previously authored the opinion that overturned Roe v. Wade, ending the constitutional right to abortion.Alito Rejects Democrats' Calls to Step Away From Trump Cases (3)Jurors in Donald Trump's hush money trial have begun their second day of deliberations, focusing on testimony from key witnesses, including Michael Cohen and David Pecker. Trump, charged with falsifying business records to cover up a payment to Stormy Daniels during the 2016 election, has pleaded not guilty. Cohen, who facilitated the $130,000 payment, testified that Trump reimbursed him through disguised legal fees. The jurors requested transcripts of Cohen's testimony and Pecker's account of working with Trump to suppress damaging stories.The outcome of this trial could impact Trump's 2024 presidential campaign, though a conviction would not bar him from running or serving if elected. Jurors must reach a unanimous verdict, and a mistrial could be declared if they fail to agree. Manhattan prosecutors must prove Trump's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Polls indicate a tight race between Trump and President Biden, with a potential conviction possibly affecting Trump's supportJurors to begin second day of deliberations in Trump hush money trial | ReutersQuarterback Jaden Rashada's lawsuit against the University of Florida highlights significant risks in the evolving landscape of name-image-likeness (NIL) deals in college athletics. Rashada alleges that Florida boosters and football coach Billy Napier reneged on a $13.8 million contract promised to him to play for the Florida Gators instead of the University of Miami. According to the complaint filed in the US District Court for the Northern District of Florida, the payment never materialized, leaving Rashada without the promised compensation.This lawsuit is the first of its kind, addressing fraudulent recruiting tactics involving NIL agreements and third-party collectives. These collectives pool alumni donor money for NIL deals, often resulting in unregulated and problematic agreements for young athletes. Attorney Janet Moreira highlighted the dangers of such unregulated collectives, calling for greater oversight to protect student-athletes.The case also comes at a time when the NCAA has agreed to a nearly $2.8 billion settlement to end antitrust lawsuits, including provisions for direct revenue sharing with athletes. This settlement marks a significant shift in the financial landscape of college sports, which has historically prohibited athlete compensation until recent legal changes.Rashada's suit claims that he was lured away from Miami by false promises, with payments from Florida boosters never materializing. The complaint points to long-time Gators booster Hugh Hathcock and Florida's NIL director, who allegedly made misleading assurances about the financial rewards Rashada would receive. This case underscores the ongoing challenges and complexities in the NIL era, where student-athletes must navigate a new and often treacherous financial landscape.Ex-Recruit's Fraud Suit Against Florida Coach Exposes NIL RisksJenna Ellis, former legal adviser to Donald Trump's 2020 campaign, has had her Colorado law license suspended for three years following an agreement with state legal regulators. This decision, approved by a Colorado Supreme Court disciplinary judge, stems from Ellis' indictment in Georgia for her involvement in efforts to overturn the 2020 election results. Ellis pleaded guilty to aiding and abetting false statements and received five years probation. Her suspension begins on July 2.Ellis admitted to spreading baseless claims about election fraud and expressed remorse for her actions, acknowledging that she had been misled by senior Trump campaign lawyers. She emphasized the importance of election integrity and accepted her suspension, recognizing the harm caused by her actions.Jenna Ellis, ex-Trump campaign legal adviser, has Colorado law license suspended for 3 years - CBS News Get full access to Minimum Competence - Daily Legal News Podcast at www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe
OA1036 Two great stories for you today - following OA1034 on how much Alito sucks, the Law Dork himself, Chris Geidner, is on to discuss the flag habits of Samuel Alito, as well as the exclusive story he broke regarding Alito's stock activity immediately after Libs of TikTok called for a boycott against Bud Light because…transphobia. After we vent about Alito for a bit, Chris walks us through what an Alabama judge threatened to do to a group of LGBTQ+ lawyers and it's even worse than you could imagine. Be sure to follow Chris (@chrisgeidner/@chrisgeidner.bsky.social) and subscribe to his Substack to support independent legal journalism! Law Dork's coverage of Judge Liles Burke's orders out of the US District Court for the Northern District of Alabama If you'd like to support the show (and lose the ads!), please pledge at patreon.com/law!
The scheduled execution of Thomas Creech, Idaho's longest-serving death row prisoner, faced a startling delay on Wednesday morning as prison officials struggled to find a suitable vein to administer the lethal injection. Creech, 73, convicted of five murders spanning three states, was set to face his sentence at 10 am PST, but the execution was abruptly called off due to complications with the procedure. Josh Twalt, Director of the Idaho Department of Corrections, announced the delay, stating, "The medical team could not establish an IV line, rendering the execution unable to proceed." Despite attempts by a team of three medical personnel to locate a vein in Creech's arms and legs, including ten separate tries, the procedure proved unsuccessful. Creech's arms and legs were strapped to the table as the attempts were made. In a statement, the department confirmed, "The State will consider next steps," as Creech's death warrant expired due to the failed execution attempt. Witnesses reported seeing Creech interacting with family members and even waving at various points during the process. However, upon the halt of the execution, a warden approached Creech and engaged in a private conversation with him. Creech's attorneys swiftly filed a motion for a stay in the US District Court, condemning the execution attempt's botched nature. They had previously filed multiple appeals on grounds including an unfair clemency hearing and ineffective counsel, all of which were denied by the US Supreme Court just hours before the scheduled execution. The convicted serial killer's story is one of infamy, with convictions for murders in Idaho, Oregon, and California, dating back to 1974. Creech confessed to additional murders, although his attorneys dispute the number, claiming it to be "grossly exaggerated." Despite attempts by supporters to argue for a sentence reduction to life without parole, Creech's history of violence has left a legacy of fear and mourning in the communities affected by his crimes. As the delay unfolded, protesters gathered outside the Idaho Maximum Security Institution, where Creech is incarcerated, adding to the tension surrounding the case. Creech, who had been joined by his wife for a last meal the night before, faces an uncertain future as legal proceedings continue. The failed execution attempt raises questions about the efficacy and humanity of the death penalty, reigniting debates surrounding its implementation and the potential for cruel and unusual punishment in its application. For now, Thomas Creech remains on death row, awaiting further legal proceedings to determine his fate. Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, Justice for Harmony Montgomery, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com
Hidden Killers With Tony Brueski | True Crime News & Commentary
The scheduled execution of Thomas Creech, Idaho's longest-serving death row prisoner, faced a startling delay on Wednesday morning as prison officials struggled to find a suitable vein to administer the lethal injection. Creech, 73, convicted of five murders spanning three states, was set to face his sentence at 10 am PST, but the execution was abruptly called off due to complications with the procedure. Josh Twalt, Director of the Idaho Department of Corrections, announced the delay, stating, "The medical team could not establish an IV line, rendering the execution unable to proceed." Despite attempts by a team of three medical personnel to locate a vein in Creech's arms and legs, including ten separate tries, the procedure proved unsuccessful. Creech's arms and legs were strapped to the table as the attempts were made. In a statement, the department confirmed, "The State will consider next steps," as Creech's death warrant expired due to the failed execution attempt. Witnesses reported seeing Creech interacting with family members and even waving at various points during the process. However, upon the halt of the execution, a warden approached Creech and engaged in a private conversation with him. Creech's attorneys swiftly filed a motion for a stay in the US District Court, condemning the execution attempt's botched nature. They had previously filed multiple appeals on grounds including an unfair clemency hearing and ineffective counsel, all of which were denied by the US Supreme Court just hours before the scheduled execution. The convicted serial killer's story is one of infamy, with convictions for murders in Idaho, Oregon, and California, dating back to 1974. Creech confessed to additional murders, although his attorneys dispute the number, claiming it to be "grossly exaggerated." Despite attempts by supporters to argue for a sentence reduction to life without parole, Creech's history of violence has left a legacy of fear and mourning in the communities affected by his crimes. As the delay unfolded, protesters gathered outside the Idaho Maximum Security Institution, where Creech is incarcerated, adding to the tension surrounding the case. Creech, who had been joined by his wife for a last meal the night before, faces an uncertain future as legal proceedings continue. The failed execution attempt raises questions about the efficacy and humanity of the death penalty, reigniting debates surrounding its implementation and the potential for cruel and unusual punishment in its application. For now, Thomas Creech remains on death row, awaiting further legal proceedings to determine his fate. Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, Justice for Harmony Montgomery, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com
© 2020-2025 Ivy Podcast Discovery LLC
