ReportWire

Tag: Courts

  • GOP targets a Biden executive order on voter registration ahead of the fall election

    GOP targets a Biden executive order on voter registration ahead of the fall election

    [ad_1]

    ATLANTA — Republicans and conservative activists have increasingly been targeting an executive order issued three years ago by the Biden administration that is intended to boost voter registration, claiming it’s unconstitutional and an attempt to interfere in the November election.

    A recent fundraising email sent by a GOP political action committee is an example of how they are framing the order, saying it compels federal agencies “to act as Biden’s personal ‘Get-Out-The-Vote’ machine.”A Republican-led House committee recently issued subpoenas to agency directors and a group of GOP secretaries of state asked the Supreme Court to take up a case challenging the order.

    Despite the pushback on the right, there has been no indication the order favors voters of one party over another.

    White House spokesperson Robyn Patterson said the administration will continue to protect the voting rights of eligible citizens regardless of political affiliation. Biden issued the order in 2021 as Republican legislatures across the country were debating a wave of state voting restrictions amid the false claims that widespread fraud had cost former President Donald Trump reelection.

    “These are baseless claims brought by the very people who spread debunked lies about the 2020 elections and have used those same debunked lies to advance laws across the nation that make it harder to vote and easier to undermine the will of the people,” Patterson said in a statement.

    Here’s a look at what the order does, what federal agencies have done so far to comply with it and what Republicans are saying about it.

    Biden issued the executive order on March 7, 2021, noting the federal government’s “duty to ensure that registering to vote and the act of voting be made simple and easy for all those eligible to do so” and that it would be implemented “consistent with applicable law.” Agency leaders were asked to submit a strategic plan within 200 days.

    The order directed updates to the federal website vote.gov, including ensuring that voting information be made available in more than a dozen languages. The site is not engaged in registering voters directly, but instead connects visitors with state and local election offices to begin the registration process.

    The order specifically mentions the Department of Defense and asks it to establish procedures to provide active-duty military personnel the opportunity each year to register, update their voter registration information or request an absentee ballot.

    It also directs the Department of Justice to provide educational materials about registration and voting to those in federal custody as they prepare to be released, along with information about rules that might prohibit them from voting.

    A year after the order was issued, congressional Republicans sent a letter to the White House raising concerns that the administration had exceeded its authority and was directing federal agencies to engage in activities beyond their mission.

    Republicans said the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Food and Nutrition Service had informed state agencies that the costs of providing voter registration services were allowable administrative expenses under the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program and could be “reimbursed at the 50 percent level.”

    “Using the nation’s multi-billion-dollar nutrition program to implement the Biden Administration’s voter registration scheme is not only a cause for concern, but one that necessitates further scrutiny,” the Republicans wrote.

    What the letter didn’t say, according to a former White House official who helped implement the order, is that states administer the food assistance program and that states were specifically directed to provide voter registration information under a federal law passed years ago.

    Justin Levitt, who served as a senior policy adviser at the White House, also said the agency was only reiterating previous guidance that those expenses were reimbursable.

    A few months later, Republicans sent letters to federal agencies requesting information about their plans to comply with the order. They also included repealing the executive order in a broad elections bill they introduced last year.

    Last month, the chairman of the Committee on House Administration sent letters requesting documents related to the order and set a two-week deadline to comply. The chairman, Wisconsin Republican Rep. Bryan Steil, then issued subpoenas. He called the federal order “another attempt by the Biden Administration to tilt the scales ahead of 2024.”

    A White House official said the Office of Management and Budget had sent an initial response and other agencies were working on responding to the committee when it issued the subpoenas.

    While federal agencies have not published their proposals, they have announced steps they’ve taken to comply with the order.

    Levitt, a lawyer and expert on constitutional law, described the order as groundbreaking but limited in scope. Although federal law allows agencies to help with voter registration, he said military recruitment offices were the only ones doing it before Biden issued the executive order. He also said a federal agency can do this only if a state requests it.

    “Most of what the agencies have done is directly what states have asked them to do or clarified the rules to make sure people know what the rules are,” Levitt said.

    Kansas and New Mexico designated two Native American colleges run by the U.S. Department of Interior as voter registration agencies. Kentucky and Michigan have said they will designate Veterans Administration offices in their states. Michigan also plans to add offices of the federal Small Business Administration.

    A group of Republicans, who serve as their state’s top election officials, also has been critical of the order, calling it federal overreach into states’ administration of elections.

    West Virginia Secretary of State Mac Warner sent a letter in May 2022 asking Biden to rescind it and spoke against it when testifying before Congress last year. A few months ago, he issued a statement saying his state would refuse to accept any voter registration forms collected by federal agencies.

    “Adding federal agencies to an already complex administrative process will make it even more challenging for election officials to ensure timely and accurate registration services before the election,” he said in a statement in April.

    In May, Warner joined eight other GOP secretaries of state to file a brief in the U.S. Supreme Court asking the justices to take a case challenging the order. The others were from Arkansas, Indiana, Louisiana, Mississippi, Montana, New Hampshire, Tennessee and Wyoming.

    The court rebuffed a plea to take up and decide the case by the end of June, and won’t consider it for the first time until the justices’ first private conference in early fall. In the unlikely event the court agrees to hear the case, arguments wouldn’t take place before early next year.

    Republicans who oppose the executive order have labeled it “Bidenbucks,” an apparent reference to the controversy that erupted after the 2020 election when Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg provided more than $350 million to a nonprofit that was later distributed to election offices. Republicans have claimed the “Zuckerbucks” effort was an attempt to benefit Democrats.

    David Becker, a former Justice Department lawyer who leads the Center for Election Innovation & Research, said the timing of the ramped-up criticism — years after Biden issued the executive order and just months before the presidential election — is noteworthy.

    “It’s being portrayed as some deep-state power grab, when in reality it’s an effort to ensure that eligible citizens who are engaging with the federal government can easily register or have their registration updated,” Becker said. “It is as innocuous as an order gets.”

    He said an important benefit of the federal order is that voters already registered are provided opportunities to update their information. That ensures more accurate voter rolls, something Republicans have said is needed.

    “It’s good for election integrity. It’s good for participation,” Becker said. “This didn’t used to be controversial.”

    ___

    Associated Press writer Mark Sherman in Washington contributed to this report.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Reality TV’s Julie Chrisley must be resentenced in bank fraud, tax evasion case, appeals judges rule

    Reality TV’s Julie Chrisley must be resentenced in bank fraud, tax evasion case, appeals judges rule

    [ad_1]

    ATLANTA — Reality TV star Julie Chrisley’s sentence for bank fraud and tax evasion was thrown out Friday by federal appeals judges, who ordered a lower court to redo her punishment over what the appellate panel called a “narrow issue.”

    Julie Chrisley and her husband, Todd Chrisley, who earned fame for the show “Chrisley Knows Best” that chronicled the exploits of their tight-knit family, were convicted in 2022 of conspiring to defraud community banks out of more than $30 million in fraudulent loans. The Chrisleys were also found guilty of tax evasion by hiding their earnings while showcasing an extravagant lifestyle.

    The couple’s accountant, Peter Tarantino, stood trial with them and was convicted of conspiracy to defraud the United States and willfully filing false tax returns.

    A three-judge panel of 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the convictions of the Chrisleys and Tarantino in a ruling that found a legal error only in how the trial judge calculated Julie Chrisley’s sentence by holding her accountable for the entire bank fraud scheme. So the appellate panel sent her case back to the lower court for re-sentencing.

    “We’re pleased that the Court agreed that Julie’s sentence was improper, but we’re obviously disappointed that it rejected Todd’s appeal,” Alex Little, an attorney for the couple, said in an email message. He added that the Chrisley family was “hopeful for more good news in the future.”

    Before the Chrisleys became reality television stars, they and a former business partner submitted false documents to banks in the Atlanta area to obtain fraudulent loans, prosecutors said during the trial. They accused the couple of spending lavishly on luxury cars, designer clothes, real estate and travel, and using new fraudulent loans to pay off old ones. Todd Chrisley then filed for bankruptcy, according to prosecutors, walking away from more than $20 million in unpaid loans.

    Julie Chrisley was sentenced to seven years in federal prison, and Todd Chrisley got 12 years behind bars. The couple was also ordered to pay $17.8 million in restitution.

    Their defense attorneys argued unsuccessfully on appeal that at an IRS officer lied at the trial when he testified about the couple still owing taxes and that prosecutors knowingly failed to correct that false testimony. They also asserted that prosecutors failed to show enough evidence to convict the Chrisleys of tax evasion and conspiracy, or that Julie Chrisley participated in bank fraud.

    Tarantino’s lawyer argued that the accountant was harmed by being tried with the Chrisleys. His request for a new trial was denied.

    The appellate judges found only one error with the case. They ruled that the trial judge at sentencing held Julie Chrisley responsible for the entire bank fraud scheme starting in 2006. The panel ruled neither prosecutors nor the trial judge cited “any specific evidence showing she was involved in 2006.”

    The panel found sufficient evidence tying her to fraud from multiple years starting in 2007.

    “We must vacate Julie’s sentence so the district court can address the narrow issue of what the proper loss amount attributable to Julie is” so that her sentence can be re-calculated, the appeals panel wrote.

    Todd Chrisley, 56, is at a minimum security federal prison camp in Pensacola, Florida, with a release date in September 2032, while Julie Chrisley, 51, is at a facility in Lexington, Kentucky, and is due for release in July 2028, according to the Federal Bureau of Prisons website.

    Tarantino, 61, s being held in a minimum security federal prison camp in Montgomery, Alabama, with a release date in August of next year.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Denver truck driver sentenced to 11 years in prison for Interstate 25 crash that killed Wyoming family

    Denver truck driver sentenced to 11 years in prison for Interstate 25 crash that killed Wyoming family

    [ad_1]

    A 28-year-old Denver truck driver was sentenced to 11 years in prison Friday for a deadly Interstate 25 crash that killed a Wyoming family of five.

    Jesus Puebla was sentenced to 11 years in the Colorado Department of Corrections by 19th Judicial District Judge Allison Esser, according to court records and the Weld County district attorney’s office.

    Puebla was convicted of five counts of vehicular homicide after a jury trial in April for the deaths of Emiliano and Christina Godines, 51 and 47; their son Aaron, 20; his wife, Halie Everts, 20; and their 3-month-old daughter, Tessleigh Godinez.

    Puebla also was convicted of vehicular assault, careless driving, reckless driving and two commercial traffic violations.

    [ad_2]

    Katie Langford

    Source link

  • It Took Decades, But Tyler’s Kerry Max Cook Has Finally Been Exonerated

    It Took Decades, But Tyler’s Kerry Max Cook Has Finally Been Exonerated

    [ad_1]

    Kerry Max Cook, 68, spent 20 years on death row for the 1977 murder of Linda Jo Edwards in Tyler. Now, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals has formally exonerated him of the crime…

    [ad_2]

    Jacob Vaughn

    Source link

  • Newly appointed special prosecutor will handle crimes on SEPTA

    Newly appointed special prosecutor will handle crimes on SEPTA

    [ad_1]

    A new special prosecutor will focus on crimes aboard SEPTA vehicles and stations after a court ruling Friday cleared the way for their appointment.

    Attorney General Michelle Henry announced that Michael Untermeyer, an attorney currently in private practice, assume the role. Untermeyer has 15 years of prosecutorial experience, with long stints at the attorney general’s and Philadelphia district attorney’s offices.

    MORE: UArts students get few answers about school’s closing during virtual meeting hosted by accreditor

    His role was created under Act 40, a law empowering the Pennsylvania attorney general to select a prosecutor to “investigate and institute criminal proceedings” for crimes in the SEPTA transit system. DA Larry Krasner sought to block this appointment, alleging in a lawsuit that Act 40 was unconstitutional. But the Commonwealth Court ruled against him, allowing Untermeyer’s appointment to proceed.

    In a statement, Krasner called the decision “deeply disappointing” and vowed to appeal the ruling to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court.

    “As violent crime continues to drop nationwide and even more so in Philly, according to recent data, we continue to believe that this matter is fundamentally an attack on democracy and on Philadelphia voters, not about public safety,” he said. “Make no mistake: Act 40, an unconstitutional and arbitrary law, is a grave danger to the power Philadelphia voters wield, an orchestrated power play by certain officials in Harrisburg to disenfranchise Philadelphians.”

    At a news conference Friday afternoon, Krasner claimed that those who supported Act 40 did so for political reasons rather than public safety. 

    “If they cared about public safety here, then they would be letting us do some things with gun regulation,” he said. “If they cared about public safety here, they would fund our public schools. If they cared about public safety here, we wouldn’t have to beg them to fund SEPTA properly.”

    Follow Kristin & PhillyVoice on Twitter: @kristin_hunt
     | @thePhillyVoice
    Like us on Facebook: PhillyVoice
    Have a news tip? Let us know.

    [ad_2]

    Kristin Hunt

    Source link

  • Woman killed in domestic violence shooting that began outside Westminster hotel

    Woman killed in domestic violence shooting that began outside Westminster hotel

    [ad_1]

    A 36-year-old man forced a woman into an SUV outside a hotel and fatally shot her as they argued, according to an arrest affidavit from the Westminster Police Department.

    Jesse Aaron Gladney is charged with first-degree murder in the domestic violence shooting death of 36-year-old Valarie Garcia on Saturday.

    A witness called 911 at 8:07 p.m. after seeing a man grab a woman by the neck and tell her to get into a Chevy Equinox at the Super 8 at 12055 N. Melody Dr., according to Gladney’s arrest affidavit. The witness also told police there was another person in the front seat.

    Ten minutes later, a witness reported a man shot a woman and she was unconscious near 120th Avenue and Colorado Boulevard in Thornton. Police later found the woman, Garcia, at Platte Valley Hospital in Brighton.

    The woman driving the Equinox during the shooting later contacted police and told them Gladney had asked her to pick him up from a hotel in Brighton and told her to keep driving. When they reached the Super 8, he went inside and came out with Garcia.

    Garcia and Gladney were arguing and he was pushing her against the car, the woman told police. The argument continued as they got in the car, until Gladney told Garcia to “Shut up or I’ll shoot you.”

    A few moments later, the woman reported hearing and smelling a gunshot while she was driving. Gladney told her he shot Garcia and started slapping Garcia and telling her not to fall asleep, according to the affidavit.

    [ad_2]

    Katie Langford

    Source link

  • Warren Democrat aims to unseat scandal-plagued Macomb County Prosecutor Lucido

    Warren Democrat aims to unseat scandal-plagued Macomb County Prosecutor Lucido

    [ad_1]

    Christina Hines is fed up with the never-ending scandals from the Macomb County Prosecutor’s Office, and she’s determined to do something about it.

    The Warren Democrat, who spent nearly a decade as a professional prosecutor in Wayne and Washtenaw counties, is aiming to unseat Macomb County Prosecutor Peter Lucido in the general election in November.

    The Macomb County Prosecutor’s Office has been marred by scandals since 2020, when Eric Smith resigned as prosecutor after being charged with 10 criminal counts alleging he embezzled money and committed misconduct in office.

    Then came Lucido, a Trump-supporting Republican and former state lawmaker who has been a polarizing presence since taking office in 2021. In his first term, Lucido has been accused of violating election laws, sexually harassing employees, firing a whistleblower, signing off on a “shady backroom deal” with a child abuser, surrounding himself with sexual abusers, and failing to alert the public about high-profile charges against two Warren cops.

    Hines, a 34-year-old native of Macomb County and a Wayne State University Law School graduate, finally decided to run against Lucido after his Facebook and Twitter accounts quoted Confederate Gen. Robert E. Lee, just days after Martin Luther King Jr. Day in January 2023.

    Her husband is Black, and their three children are biracial.

    “It was truly a lightbulb moment for me,” Hines tells Metro Times. “I realized I needed to run to protect my kids and everyone else’s kids. I walked into my kitchen and told my husband, ‘I’m ready to do this.’ And he said, ‘I’ve been waiting to hear that.’”

    Since graduating from law school in 2014, Hines has wasted no time making an impact. So far, she has spent most of her legal career advocating for victims of crime and putting predators behind bars.

    After starting her work as a prosecutor in the Wayne County Prosecutor’s General Trials Unit, which prosecutes felonies like armed robbery, home invasions, and homicide, Hines handled crimes involving sexual assault and child abuse.

    At the Washtenaw County Prosecutor’s Office, she was promoted to chief of the Special Victims Unit Division, which focuses on sexual assault, child sexual abuse, and child pornography cases, and chief of the Appeals Division. She led the county’s Sexual Assault Kit Initiative (SAKI) and started a restorative justice program.

    Her early success led to her being recognized as a Notable Women in Law by Crain’s Detroit Business, a 30 in Their 30s by D Business, and a Future Leader by the Detroit Regional Chamber.

    Hines attributes her early accomplishments to her commitment to protecting victims of crimes, especially children and women. It’s what inspired her to pursue a career in law.

    “I didn’t know exactly what field of law I wanted to practice, but I wanted to advocate for women and children,” Hines says. “I had already known over a dozen women who had been sexually assaulted.”

    Hines distinguished herself from Lucido, saying he’s a career politician who’s driven by self-interest and is a magnet for controversy.

    “The prosecutor’s office needs to have integrity, and you need a professional prosecutor there, not just a politician,” Hines says. “There are a lot of people across the county who are sick of what has happened in that office under Lucido and Smith. Macomb County is really special. There are a lot of amazing things we can do here, but it requires people solving problems together.”

    During Lucido’s first term, the prosecutor’s office has had a 50% turnover rate, and an unprecedented number of criminal cases are ending in plea agreements, according to Hines.

    “Everything is being resolved by plea deals,” Hines says. “That has very negative consequences. There are wrongful convictions that result from plea deals, and there are people who are a danger to the community who are getting very lenient offers.”

    Hines also emphasizes the importance of rehabilitation and addressing the root causes of crime. Punitive measures alone don’t reduce crime, she says.

    “I see public safety as making sure we have good jobs, affordable housing, child care, education, and public transit,” Hines says. “We can do better. If we as a society were dedicated to funding child care so that mothers who are trying to work could actually take their child to a safe place that is affordable, that in and of itself would reduce child sexual abuse by the thousands a year.”

    Hines also emphasizes the importance of educating the public and building partnerships. For example, she says, prosecutors need to do a better job combating sextortion, a form of cybercrime that is rapidly on the rise.

    “In Washtenaw and Wayne counties, I really focused on keeping kids safe online,” she says. “We worked with teachers and administrators and local law enforcement. We have to keep spreading information to help people understand that this is really serious, and if you give your kids access to social media without making sure you are still talking to them and protecting them, there can be terrible, terrible consequences. We need to be better about getting information out there because it’s only going to get worse.”

    Before deciding to run, Hines wondered if she was too young to serve as a county prosecutor, but she was inspired to make the leap after being encouraged by Macomb County Executive Mark Hackel and state Rep. Donavan McKinney, both of whom were elected at young ages.

    “They told me that being young was not a good reason not to run,” Hines says.

    A lot of high-profile elected leaders are supporting her. Hines has received dozens of endorsements from elected officials, from Attorney General Dana Nessel to Wayne County Prosecutor Kym Worthy.

    Defeating Lucido won’t be easy. He’s a prolific fundraiser and relies on wealthy donors, Hines says. She’s taking a grassroots approach to her campaign, and in the past month, she says she’s knocked on 2,000 doors.

    “I love it; it’s my favorite part of the campaign,” she says about door knocking. “I’m getting people’s perspective, and I’m meeting people I would never have met without this experience. It’s powerful, and it’s a blessing for me to do this. I wish I could do it all day, every day.”

    The most common concern among residents, she says, is protecting children.

    “This is a critically important race,” Hines says. “The county prosecutor is the highest law enforcement official in any county. They have the ability to determine who gets charged, what they get charged with, and they have a great deal of power and influence on sentencing and how people are held accountable.”

    But to be successful, she says, the prosecutor needs to have integrity.

    More information about Hines and her platform is available at christinahinesformacomb.com.

    [ad_2]

    Steve Neavling

    Source link

  • Disputed mail-in ballots in Democratic primary for N.J.’s 2nd District must be counted, judge rules

    Disputed mail-in ballots in Democratic primary for N.J.’s 2nd District must be counted, judge rules

    [ad_1]

    An Atlantic County Superior Court judged ruled Friday that 1,909 vote-by-mail ballots in Tuesday’s primary election must be counted despite having been opened too early by election officials. The outstanding ballots have delayed the resolution of the Democratic primary for U.S. House in the 2nd District. Unofficial results have Joseph Salerno leading Tim Alexander by 412 votes.

    Judge Michael J. Blee’s order argues that state laws for mail-in ballots were designed to leave as much room as possible to ensure that votes be counted, ABC News reported.

    “It is well settled in the state of New Jersey that election laws should be construed liberally,” Blee said.

    The status of the mail-in ballots came into question because it was discovered that the Atlantic County Board of Elections had opened them prematurely in early May, well before the legally required window of within five days of an election. The purpose of opening them had been to put timestamps on the outer and inner envelopes of the ballots, but the machines used for this processes sliced open both ballots.

    Democrats in Atlantic County argued that it was a mistake and said none of the actual ballots were removed from their envelopes. Republican officials questioned whether the ballots had been opened to speed up the vote count. GOP leaders were not requesting the votes be abandoned, but instead sought an investigation and a requirement to inform the voters whose ballots were affected. The number of outstanding ballots is slightly higher than what initially had been reported — at least 1,100 Democratic ballots and 700 Republican ballots.

    Blee was assigned to resolve the matter to break a 2-2 deadlock among Republicans and Democrats on the county Board of Elections.

    “Admittedly what happened this election was sloppy,” Blee said. “It was an inadvertent error. It was an inexcusable error.”

    RELATED: Results of the Democratic and Republican primaries for Senate in New Jersey | Republican primary results in N.J.’s 1st District U.S. House seat | Results for Democratic and Republican in N.J.’s 3rd District U.S. House race

    Salerno, a businessman and attorney, leads Alexander, a civil rights attorney, in a race with four candidates who ran to challenge Republican Jeff Van Drew, a former Democrat who switched parties in 2019. Earlier this week, the Press of Atlantic City reported Alexander had tallied more mail-in ballots by about eight percentage points. If the only outstanding votes left are the ballots that were opened too early, their inclusion likely still leaves Alexander shy of Salerno. Alexander was the Democratic nominee in 2022 and lost to Van Drew in the general election.

    Election officials have not indicated how soon a winner will be declared in the Democratic primary now that Blee’s ruling will allow the ballots to be counted.

    The irregularity is a possible signal of the scrutiny that will be exercised around mail-in ballots nationwide for the general election in November.

    [ad_2]

    Michael Tanenbaum

    Source link

  • Judge rather than jury will render verdict in upcoming antitrust trial

    Judge rather than jury will render verdict in upcoming antitrust trial

    [ad_1]

    ALEXANDRIA, Va. — A judge rather than a jury will decide whether Google violated federal antitrust laws by building a monopoly on the technology that powers online advertising.

    The decision Friday by U.S. District Judge Leonie Brinkema was a defeat for the Justice Department, which sought a jury trial when it filed the case last year in federal court in Alexandria, Virginia.

    But the government’s right to a jury trial was based largely on the fact that it sought monetary damages to compensate federal agencies that purchased online ads and claimed they were overcharged as a result of Google’s anticompetitive conduct. The dollar values associated with those claims, though, were relatively small — less than $750,000 — and far less significant than other remedies sought by the government, which might include forcing Google to sell off parts of its advertising technology.

    As a result, Google last month took the extraordinary step of writing the government a check for more than $2 million — the $750,000 in damages claimed by the government multiplied by three because antitrust cases allow for trebled damages.

    Mountain View, California-based Google argued that writing the check rendered moot any government claim of monetary damages and eliminated the need for a jury trial.

    At a hearing Friday in Alexandria, Justice Department lawyers argued that the check Google wrote was insufficient to moot the damages claim, prompting a technical discussion over how experts would try to quantify the damages.

    Brinkema ruled in favor of Google. She said the amount of Google’s check covered the highest possible amount the government had sought in its initial filings. She likened receipt of the money, which was paid unconditionally to the government regardless of whether the tech giant prevailed in its arguments to strike a jury trial, as equivalent to “receiving a wheelbarrow of cash.”

    Google said in a statement issued after Friday’s hearing it is “glad the Court ruled that this case will be tried by a judge. As we’ve said, this case is a meritless attempt to pick winners and losers in a highly competitive industry that has contributed to overwhelming economic growth for businesses of all sizes.”

    In its court papers, Google also argued that the constitutional right to a jury trial does not apply to a civil suit brought by the government. The government disagreed with that assertion but said it would not seek a ruling from the judge on that constitutional question.

    The antitrust trial in Virginia is separate from a case in the District of Columbia alleging Google’s search engine is an illegal monopoly. A judge there has heard closing arguments in that case but has not yet issued a verdict.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Should Donald Trump have been convicted?

    Should Donald Trump have been convicted?

    [ad_1]

    In this week’s The Reason Roundtable, editors Matt Welch, Katherine Mangu-Ward, Nick Gillespie, and Peter Suderman debrief in the wake of former President Donald Trump’s conviction on 34 counts of falsifying business records last week in New York City.

    00:33—Donald Trump’s conviction

    27:37—Weekly Listener Question

    42:11—Recent undercovered stories

    50:48—This week’s cultural recommendations

    Send your questions to roundtable@reason.com. Be sure to include your social media handle and the correct pronunciation of your name.

    Mentioned in this podcast:

    “Does Donald Trump’s Conviction in New York Make Us Banana Republicans?” by J.D. Tuccille

    “Trump’s Conviction Requires Him To Surrender His Guns. Civil Libertarians Should Be Troubled.” by Jacob Sullum

    “The Prosecution’s Story About Trump Featured Several Logically Impossible Claims,” by Jacob Sullum

    “First Felon,” by Liz Wolfe

    “Trump’s Conviction Suggests Jurors Bought the Prosecution’s Dubious ‘Election Fraud’ Narrative,” by Jacob Sullum

    “Trump Jury Instructions Invite Conviction Based on a Hodgepodge of Dubious Theories,” by Jacob Sullum

    “Prosecutors Say Trump Tried To ‘Hoodwink the American Voter,’ Which Is Not a Crime,” by Jacob Sullum

    “The Felon,” by Matt Labash

    “Chase Oliver: What Does the Libertarian Presidential Candidate Really Believe?” by Zach Weissmueller and Liz Wolfe

    “Chase Oliver Is the Libertarian Party’s Presidential Pick,” by Eric Boehm

    “$7.5 Billion in Government Cash Only Built 8 E.V. Chargers in 2.5 Years,” by Joe Lancaster

    “Biden’s Tariffs Are a Bad Idea,” by Eric Boehm

    “Fauci to Congress: 6-Foot Social Distancing Guidance Likely Not Based on Data,” by Christian Britschgi

    “’15 Days To Slow the Spread’: On the Fourth Anniversary, a Reminder to Never Give Politicians That Power Again,” by John Stossel

    “The CDC Made America’s Pandemic Worse,” by Peter Suderman

    “The CDC’s Guidance for Summer Camps Is Insane,” by Robby Soave

    “CDC’s New ‘Reopening’ Guidance Will Keep Schools Closed in the Fall,” by Matt Welch

    “What Ken Burns’ New Film Gets Right—and Wrong—About the Roosevelts,” by Damon Root

    Upcoming Reason Events:

    Today’s sponsor:

    • Hello, liberty lovers! Are you passionate about preserving civil liberties and individual freedom? Do you want to support organizations that uphold these principles but struggle to navigate the complex world of charitable giving? Well, fear not! We have the perfect solution for you: a giving account with DonorsTrust. A giving account, also known as a donor-advised fund, is a simple, secure, and tax-advantaged way for libertarian givers like you to support the causes you care about most. With a donor-advised fund, you can make a contribution, receive an immediate tax deduction, and then recommend grants to your favorite charities over time. Plus, you retain control over how your charitable dollars are invested, ensuring they align with your values and goals. Whether you’re passionate about defending free speech, protecting property rights, or promoting limited government, a donor-advised fund with DonorsTrust empowers you to make a meaningful impact. So, join us in preserving liberty for future generations by opening a donor-advised fund at DonorsTrust today. To learn more and get started, visit our sponsor, DonorsTrust, at www.donorstrust.org/roundtable. Take control of your giving and make a difference in the fight for freedom. That’s www.donorstrust.org/roundtable. Remember, every dollar counts in the battle to safeguard our civil liberties. Let’s make our voices heard together!

    Audio production by Ian Keyser; assistant production by Hunt Beaty.

    Music: “Angeline,” by The Brothers Steve

    [ad_2]

    Matt Welch

    Source link

  • Southwest Airlines back in court over firing of flight attendant

    Southwest Airlines back in court over firing of flight attendant

    [ad_1]

    NEW ORLEANS — Southwest Airlines is set to return to federal court Monday in hopes of reversing an $800,000 award to a flight attendant who said she was fired for her anti-abortion views and a judge’s related order that the airlines’ lawyers take religious liberty training from a conservative Christian legal group.

    Southwest argues flight attendant Charlene Carter was fired because she violated company rules requiring civility in the workplace by sending “hostile and graphic” anti-abortion messages to a fellow employee, who also was president of the local union.

    Carter called the union leader “despicable” for attending the 2017 Women’s March in Washington, D.C., where participants protested the inauguration of then-President Donald Trump and called for protecting abortion rights.

    Carter’s attorneys argue in briefs that she made clear to management she sent the material “because she was a pro-life Christian, and as a Christian she believes she must get the word out to anyone who touches the issue of abortion.”

    They argued firing her violated federal law shielding employees from religious-based discrimination and that Southwest management and the union, which complained about Carr’s messages, should be held liable for her firing.

    After the trial, U.S. District Judge Brantley Starr, a Trump nominee who joined the bench in 2019, ordered the airline to tell flight attendants that under federal law, it “may not discriminate against Southwest flight attendants for their religious practices and beliefs.”

    Instead, the Dallas-based airline told employees that it “does not discriminate,” and told flight attendants to follow the airline policy that it cited in firing Carter.

    Starr found Southwest in contempt in August for the way it explained the case to flight attendants. He ordered Southwest to pay Carter’s most recent legal costs and he dictated a statement for Southwest to relay to employees.

    He also ordered three Southwest lawyers to complete at least eight hours of religious liberty training from the Alliance Defending Freedom, which offers training on compliance with federal law prohibiting religious discrimination in the workplace.

    The conservative group has played a high-profile role in multiple legal fights. They include defending a baker and a website designer who didn’t want to work on same-sex marriage projects, efforts to limit transgender rights and a challenge to longstanding federal approval of a medication used in the most common way to end a pregnancy.

    Lawyers for Carter said in briefs that the type of training ordered “is a commonplace civil contempt sanction” and denied that it impinges on the airline’s free speech rights.

    The initial monetary award against Southwest and the union was $5.1 million, the bulk to be paid by Southwest. The judge, citing federal limits on punitive damages, later reduced it to about $800,000, including $450,000 in damages and back pay from Southwest, $300,000 in damages from the union and about $60,000 in interest.

    ___

    The story has been updated to correct the amount of the award to $800,000, from $8 million.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Oregon defendants without a lawyer must be released from jail, US appeals court says

    Oregon defendants without a lawyer must be released from jail, US appeals court says

    [ad_1]

    PORTLAND, Ore. — A federal appeals court on Friday upheld a ruling that Oregon defendants must be released from jail after seven days if they don’t have a defense attorney.

    In its decision, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals called Oregon’s public defense system a “Sixth Amendment nightmare,” OPB reported, referring to the part of the U.S. Constitution that guarantees people accused of crimes the right to a lawyer. The opinion said Oregon is responsible for upholding legal protections for criminal defendants.

    Oregon has struggled for years to address its public defender crisis. As of Friday, more than 3,200 defendants did not have a public defender, a dashboard from the Oregon Judicial Department showed. Of those, about 146 people were in custody, but fewer people were expected to be impacted by Friday’s ruling, according to OPB.

    An Office of Public Defense Services draft report from March found that Oregon needs 500 additional attorneys to meet its obligations, OPB reported. State officials have sought to address the issue, including by taking such steps as providing additional funding, but structural issues remain.

    Next year, the Oregon Public Defense Commission will move from the judiciary to the executive branch under the governor. State lawmakers hope the move will provide more support to the agency.

    The 9th Circuit’s decision upheld a preliminary injunction issued by U.S. District Court Judge Michael McShane last year. The case came from Washington County, where 10 people charged with crimes and held at the county jail while not having court-appointed attorneys filed a class action habeas corpus petition through the state’s federal public defender’s office.

    Oregon’s federal public defender, Fidel Cassino-DuCloux, said Friday’s decision “breathes life into the Sixth Amendment right to counsel, which have been an empty promise for too many presumptively innocent Oregonians charged with crimes.”

    “We hope that the state authorities heed the Ninth Circuit’s instruction that no one remains in jail without counsel and implements the decision without delay,” Cassino-DuCloux wrote in a statement.

    When asked by OPB whether the state would appeal, a spokesperson for the Oregon Department of Justice said they’re reviewing the decision.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Clerk over Murdaugh trial spent thousands on bonuses, meals, gifts: ethics complaint

    Clerk over Murdaugh trial spent thousands on bonuses, meals, gifts: ethics complaint

    [ad_1]

    COLUMBIA, S.C. — South Carolina officials have filed 76 counts of ethics violations against the court clerk who handled the Alex Murdaugh murder trial.

    The 25 pages of allegations accuse former Colleton County Clerk of Court Becky Hill of allowing a photo of Murdaugh in a holding cell to be taken to promote her book on the trial, giving herself bonuses, and using county money to buy dozens of lunches for her staff, prosecutors and a vendor.

    Hill also struck a deal with a documentary maker to use the county courtroom in exchange for promoting her book on the trial, which later she admitted had plagiarized passages, according to the South Carolina Ethics Commission complaint earlier this month.

    The commission will hold a hearing similar to a trial in December on the accusations unless Hill and her lawyer settle the case before then. Hill could have to reimburse the expenses and face thousands of dollars or more in fines. And if the commission thinks she broke any laws, they can forward the information to prosecutors.

    A criminal investigation into whether Hill tampered with the Murdaugh jury or misused her office continues, the State Law Enforcement Division said Thursday.

    Hill resigned in March during the last year of her four year term, citing the public scrutiny of Murdaugh’s trial and wanting to spend time with her grandchildren. She hasn’t publicly addressed the ethics allegations and her lawyer didn’t return a message Thursday.

    Murdaugh was convicted of killing his wife and younger son after a six-week trial in Colleton County last year. The case involved power, danger, money and privilege and an attorney whose family lorded over his small South Carolina county for nearly a century.

    Murdaugh is appealing his conviction and life without parole sentence in part accusing Hill of trying to influence jurors to vote guilty and being biased against Murdaugh for her book. Murdaugh is also serving decades in prison for admitting to stealing millions of dollars from settlements for clients who suffered horrible injuries or deaths and from his family’s law firm.

    An initial appeal was denied, but the judge said she wasn’t sure Hill told the truth about her dealings with jurors and was “attracted by the siren call of celebrity.”

    The ethics allegations against Hill say she bought lunches for prosecutors and then paid herself back with county money. One count said she spent $543.89 for food and alcohol for a going away lunch for an employee in a local prosecutor’s office.

    None of the allegations mention spending for public defenders or defense attorneys.

    Hill gave herself nearly $10,000 in bonuses from federal money that is meant to improve child support collection but has few rules on how it is spent, according to the complaint.

    The former clerk used public money to buy meals for her staff, her family, judges, court employees and others 36 times. She reimbursed herself for gifts bought for jurors and her staff on Valentine’s Day and for her employees on Mother’s Day, Father’s Day and Easter, the complaint said.

    Expenses included $481 for a 50th birthday party for a staffer and dog food, bones and a pet bed for another, ethics officials said.

    In all, Hill is accused of spending nearly $20,000 in county money in ways she shouldn’t, according to the complaint.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Today in History: May 26, Obama nominates Sotomayor to Supreme Court

    Today in History: May 26, Obama nominates Sotomayor to Supreme Court

    [ad_1]

    Today is Sunday, May 26, the 147th day of 2024. There are 219 days left in the year.

    Today’s Highlight in History:

    On May 26, 2009, President Barack Obama nominated federal appeals judge Sonia Sotomayor to the U.S. Supreme Court.

    On this date:

    In 1864, President Abraham Lincoln signed a measure creating the Montana Territory.

    In 1865, Confederate forces west of the Mississippi surrendered in New Orleans.

    In 1938, the House Un-American Activities Committee was established by Congress.

    In 1940, Operation Dynamo, the evacuation of some 338,000 Allied troops from Dunkirk, France, began during World War II.

    In 1954, explosions rocked the aircraft carrier USS Bennington off Rhode Island, killing 103 sailors. (The initial blast was blamed on leaking catapult fluid ignited by the flames of a jet.)

    In 1971, Don McLean recorded his song “American Pie” at The Record Plant in New York City (it was released the following November by United Artists Records).

    In 1972, President Richard M. Nixon and Soviet leader Leonid Brezhnev signed the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty in Moscow. (The U.S. withdrew from the treaty in 2002.)

    In 1981, 14 people were killed when a Marine jet crashed onto the flight deck of the aircraft carrier USS Nimitz off Florida.

    In 1994, Michael Jackson and Lisa Marie Presley were married in the Dominican Republic. (The marriage ended in 1996.)

    In 2004, nearly a decade after the Oklahoma City bombing, Terry Nichols was found guilty of 161 state murder charges for helping carry out the attack. (Nichols later received 161 consecutive life sentences.)

    In 2009, California’s Supreme Court upheld the Proposition 8 gay marriage ban but said the 18,000 same-sex weddings that had taken place before the prohibition passed were still valid.

    In 2011, Ratko Mladic, the brutal Bosnian Serb general suspected of leading the massacre of 8,000 Muslim men and boys, was arrested after a 16-year manhunt. (Mladic was extradited to face trial in The Hague, Netherlands; he was convicted in 2017 on genocide and war crimes charges and is serving a life sentence.)

    In 2020, Minneapolis police issued a statement saying George Floyd had died after a “medical incident,” and that he had physically resisted officers and appeared to be in medical distress; minutes after the statement was released, bystander video was posted online. Protests over Floyd’s death began, with tense skirmishes developing between protesters and Minneapolis police. Four police officers who were involved in Floyd’s arrest were fired.

    In 2022, it was revealed that the gunman who massacred 19 children and two teachers at a Texas elementary school was inside for more than an hour before he was killed in a shootout with police. The amount of time that elapsed stirred anger and questions among family members, who demanded to know why authorities did not storm the place and put a stop to the rampage more quickly.

    Today’s Birthdays: Sportscaster Brent Musburger is 85. Musician Garry Peterson (Guess Who) is 79. Singer Stevie Nicks is 76. Actora Pam Grier and Philip Michael Thomas, country singer Hank Williams Jr. and former British Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn are 75. Actor Margaret Colin is 66. Actor Doug Hutchison is 64. Actor Genie Francis and comedian Bobcat Goldthwait are 62. Singer-actor Lenny Kravitz is 60. Actor Helena Bonham Carter and distance runner Zola Budd are 58. Rock musician Phillip Rhodes is 56. Actor Joseph Fiennesis 54. Singer Joey Kibble (Take 6) and actor-producer-writer Matt Stone are 53. Singer Lauryn Hill is 49. Contemporary Christian musician Nathan Cochran is 46. Actors Elisabeth Harnois and Hrach Titizian are 45.

    Copyright 2024 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without permission.

    [ad_2]

    By The Associated Press

    Source link

  • Today in History: May 24, first night game in Major League Baseball

    Today in History: May 24, first night game in Major League Baseball

    [ad_1]

    The Associated Press

    Today is Friday, May 24, the 145th day of 2024. There are 221 days left in the year.

    Today’s Highlight in History:

    On May 24, 1935, the first Major League Baseball game to be played at night took place at Cincinnati’s Crosley Field as the Reds beat the Philadelphia Phillies, 2-1.

    On this date:

    In 1844, Samuel F.B. Morse transmitted the message “What hath God wrought” from Washington to Baltimore as he formally opened America’s first telegraph line.

    In 1937, in a set of rulings, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the Social Security Act of 1935.

    In 1941, the German battleship Bismarck sank the British battle cruiser HMS Hood in the North Atlantic, killing all but three of the 1,418 men on board.

    In 1961, a group of Freedom Riders was arrested after arriving at a bus terminal in Jackson, Mississippi, charged with breaching the peace for entering white-designated areas. (They ended up serving 60 days in jail.)

    In 1962, astronaut Scott Carpenter became the second American to orbit the Earth as he flew aboard Aurora 7.

    In 1974, American jazz composer and bandleader Duke Ellington, 75, died in New York.

    In 1976, Britain and France opened trans-Atlantic Concorde supersonic transport service to Washington.

    In 1980, Iran rejected a call by the World Court in The Hague to release the American hostages.

    In 1994, four Islamic fundamentalists convicted of bombing New York’s World Trade Center in 1993 were each sentenced to 240 years in prison.

    In 1995, former British Prime Minister Harold Wilson died in London at age 79.

    In 2006, “An Inconvenient Truth,” a documentary about former Vice President Al Gore’s campaign against global warming, went into limited release.

    In 2011, Oprah Winfrey taped the final episode of her long-running talk show.

    In 2017, Ariana Grande suspended her Dangerous Woman world tour and canceled several European shows due to the deadly bombing at her concert in Manchester, England, two days earlier.

    In 2018, Jerry Maren, the last surviving Munchkin from the 1939 film “The Wizard of Oz,” died at a San Diego nursing home; he was 99.

    In 2022, an 18-year-old gunman opened fire at an elementary school in Uvalde, Texas, killing 19 children and two teachers. The gunman, Salvador Ramos, a former student at the school, was also killed. It was the deadliest shooting at a U.S. grade school since the attack in Sandy Hook, Connecticut, almost a decade earlier.

    In 2023, Tina Turner died at age 83. She teamed with husband Ike Turner for a dynamic run of hit records and live shows and survived her horrifying marriage to triumph in middle age with the chart-topping “What’s Love Got to Do With It.”

    Today’s Birthdays: Actor-comedian-impressionist Stanley Baxter is 98. Jazz musician Archie Shepp is 87. Comedian Tommy Chong is 86. Singer Bob Dylan is 83. Actor Gary Burghoff is 81. Singer Patti LaBelle is 80. Actor Priscilla Presley is 79. Country singer Mike Reid is 77. Actor Jim Broadbent is 75. Actor Alfred Molina is 71. Singer Rosanne Cash is 69. Actor Cliff Parisi is 64. Actor Kristin Scott Thomas is 64. Actor John C. Reilly is 59. Actors Dana Ashbrook and Eric Close are 57. Actor Carl Payne and rock musician Rich Robinson are 55. Former MLB pitcher Bartolo Colon is 51. Actor Dash Mihok is 50. Actor Bryan Greenberg is 46. Actors Owen Benjamin and Billy L. Sullivan are 44. Actor-rapper Jerod Mixon (aka Big Tyme) is 43. Musician Cody Hanson (Hinder) is 42. Dancer-choreographer-singer Mark Ballas is 38. Country singer Billy Gilman is 36. Rapper/producer G-Eazy and actor Brianne Howey are 35. Actor Cayden Boyd is 30.

    Copyright 2024 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without permission.

    [ad_2]

    By The Associated Press

    Source link

  • Government sues Ticketmaster owner and asks court to break up company’s monopoly on live events

    Government sues Ticketmaster owner and asks court to break up company’s monopoly on live events

    [ad_1]

    WASHINGTON — WASHINGTON (AP) — The Justice Department sued Ticketmaster and its parent company Thursday, accusing them of running an illegal monopoly over live events in America and asking a court to break up the system that squelches competition and drives up prices for fans.

    Filed in federal court in Manhattan, the sweeping antitrust lawsuit was brought with 30 state and district attorneys general and seeks to dismantle the monopoly they say is squeezing out smaller promoters, hurting artists and drowning ticket buyers in fees. Ticketmaster and its owner, Live Nation Entertainment, have a long history of clashes with major artists and their fans, including Taylor Swift and Bruce Springsteen.

    “It’s time for fans and artists to stop paying the price for Live Nation’s monopoly,” Attorney General Merrick Garland said. “It is time to restore competition and innovation in the entertainment industry. It is time to break up Live Nation-Ticketmaster.”

    The government accused Live Nation of tactics — including threats and retaliation — that Garland said have allowed the entertainment giant to “suffocate the competition” by controlling virtually every aspect of the industry, from concert promotion to ticketing. The impact is seen in an “endless list of fees on fans,” the attorney general said.

    “Live music should not be available only to those who can afford to pay the Ticketmaster tax,” said Assistant Attorney General Jonathan Kanter of the Justice Department’s Antitrust Division.

    Ricky Palitti and Jacob DeLong of Detroit said they recently spent about $1,200 for three tickets to a Shania Twain concert using Ticketmaster and about $370 to see RuPaul’s Drag Race Live.

    “I think tickets have definitely gone up in price, but I also think that all the different fees that Ticketmaster places on an order definitely hikes the price up, for sure,” Palitti said.

    DeLong said that while he respects an artist’s work, the added fees make the costs to see a show “ridiculous.”

    “Where can we get a break?” he said.

    Live Nation, which has for years denied that it is violating antitrust laws, said the lawsuit “won’t solve the issues fans care about relating to ticket prices, service fees and access to in-demand shows.”

    “Calling Ticketmaster a monopoly may be a PR win for the DOJ in the short term, but it will lose in court because it ignores the basic economics of live entertainment,” Live Nation added. It said most service fees go to venues and that outside competition has ”steadily eroded” Ticketmaster’s market share. The company said it would defend itself against the “baseless allegations.”

    The Justice Department said Live Nation’s anti-competitive practices include using long-term contracts to keep venues from choosing rivals, blocking venues from using multiple ticket sellers and threatening venues that they could lose money if they don’t choose Ticketmaster.

    In 2021, the concert giant threatened to financially retaliate against a firm if one of its portfolio companies didn’t stop competing with Live Nation for artist promotion contracts, the Justice Department alleged. Live Nation has also scooped up smaller promoters it viewed as a threats, officials said.

    Michael Carrier, a professor at Rutgers Law School who specializes in antitrust litigation, said the Justice Department has a strong case. He expects Live Nation to “try to cast blame elsewhere,” such as arguing that prices are set by artists or venues, but he said those explanations are weak.

    “The DOJ showed how Live Nation really has its tentacles in each element of the supply chain, which means that it has a lot more control than it is letting on,” he said. “And, in terms of justifications, there is really very little that (Live Nation) can offer in terms of how they’re helping the consumer.”

    The complaint said a breakup between Live Nation and Ticketmaster is on the table. That, combined with other remedies such as preventing some exclusive deals that shackle competition, could potentially help fans see lower ticket prices, give artists more agency in choosing venues and boost smaller promoters’ success in the long run, Carrier said.

    Ticketmaster, which merged with Live Nation in 2010, is the world’s largest ticket seller across live music, sports, theater and more. During its annual report last month, the company said Ticketmaster distributed more than 620 million tickets through its systems in 2023.

    Around 70% of tickets for major concert venues in the U.S. are sold through Ticketmaster, according to data in a federal lawsuit filed by consumers in 2022. The company owns or controls more than 265 of North America’s concert venues and dozens of top amphitheaters, according to the Justice Department.

    Live Nation’s footprint has grown substantially over the past 10 years, according to the company’s annual financial reports. Between the end of 2014 and the end of 2023, Live Nation reported a worldwide increase of more than 136% in terms of venues the company “owned, leased, operated, had exclusive booking rights for or had an equity interest over which we had a significant influence.”

    The ticket seller sparked outrage in November 2022 when its site crashed during a presale event for a Taylor Swift stadium tour. The company said the site was overwhelmed by both fans and attacks from bots, which were posing as consumers to scoop up tickets and sell them on secondary sites. The debacle prompted congressional hearings and bills in state legislatures aimed at better protecting consumers.

    The Justice Department allowed Live Nation and Ticketmaster to merge as long as Live Nation agreed not to retaliate against concert venues for using other ticket companies for 10 years. In 2019, the department investigated and found that Live Nation had repeatedly violated that agreement. The government then extended the prohibition on retaliating against concert venues to 2025.

    “It’s a failure of past antitrust. And it’s something that rips customers off every day,” said John Kwoka, a professor of economics at Northeastern University who was also a consultant for the states that ran a 2009 investigation in parallel with the Justice Department into Live Nation and Ticketmaster’s original merger.

    Kwoka, who is among those who have long advocated for a breakup, notes that Live Nation and Ticketmaster have remained “largely unchecked” over the last 15 years.

    Ticketmaster’s clashes with artists and fans date back three decades. Pearl Jam took aim at the company in 1994, years before the Live Nation merger, although the Justice Department ultimately declined to bring a case. More recently, Bruce Springsteen fans were enraged over high ticket costs because of the platform’s dynamic pricing system.

    Live Nation has maintained that artists and teams set prices and decide how tickets are sold. The company’s executive vice president of corporate and regulatory affairs, Dan Wall, said in a statement Thursday that factors such as increasing production costs, artist popularity and online ticket scalping are “actually responsible for higher ticket prices.”

    The Justice Department lawsuit filed Thursday is the latest example of the Biden administration’s aggressive antitrust enforcement. The effort has targeted companies accused of engaging in illegal monopolies that box out competitors and drive up prices. In March, the Justice Department filed a lawsuit against Apple alleging that the tech giant has monopoly power in the smartphone market. The Democratic administration has also taken on Google, Amazon and other tech giants.

    ___

    Grantham-Philips reported from New York. Associated Press reporters Michelle Chapman and Maria Sherman in New York, Christopher L. Keller in Albuquerque, New Mexico, and video journalist Ty O’Neil in Las Vegas contributed.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Judge Hints at Plans to Rein In Google’s Illegal Play Store Monopoly

    Judge Hints at Plans to Rein In Google’s Illegal Play Store Monopoly

    [ad_1]

    A jury in December found that Google broke US antitrust laws through deals and billing rules that gave an unfair boost to its Google Play app store. On Thursday, a judge began laying out how Google could be forced to change its business as a penalty. The remedies under consideration could drive the most consequential shakeup ever to Google’s dominance over the Android universe.

    Fortnite video game developer Epic Games, which beat Google in the trial that saw a jury declare the Play store an illegal monopoly, is demanding that federal judge James Donato ban Google from contracts that deter competition. Epic also wants Google to be forced to help competing stores list more apps, giving them a competitive boost. The changes could enable Epic to realize its long-held plan to increase revenue by processing in-game purchases in Fortnite and other titles without using Google’s payment system, and marketing games via its own app store.

    Google contends that Epic’s demands would threaten its users’ security and impair the businesses of partners, including Android device makers and app developers. The search company is appealing the jury’s verdict, which could delay the rollout of any penalties for many years—or void them altogether. But Google over the past few years already has had to make some costly changes in Europe and Asia due to court losses and new laws affecting the Play store, and a trial with Epic is currently underway in Australia.

    “I want to be clear: Google as an illegal monopolist will have to pay some penalties,” Donato told Epic and Google at a hearing in San Francisco on Thursday. He explained that Google’s loss requires him to pry open the company’s grip on the Android ecosystem in a way that ends Google’s illegal monopoly and also removes its ill-gotten gains from years of unfair dominance.

    That would mean major changes for the industry that has built up around Google’s Android operating system—and potentially more choices for consumers. It could require Google investing cash into new projects to make things right, Donato said.

    Donato expressed frustration with Google’s claims that any changes would be bad for consumers and other businesses. “To jump up and down and say the new way is going to be a world no one wants to live in, it’s unfounded,” he said. But he also spent hours in the hearing quizzing two economists, one appearing on behalf of each company, about how to craft penalties for Google without being unreasonable.

    Among Epic’s requests is that Google be barred from striking deals that prevent or discourage companies from working with alternatives to its app store. In the past the company has required hardware companies that want to offer Google Play on their devices to agree not to work with or promote alternative app stores. That prevented most consumers from ever seeing other app stores, since most device makers want to offer Google’s app store, because it is the largest.

    Rival app stores such as those from Amazon and Samsung also have struggled to persuade developers to list their apps outside of Google Play, because maintaining apps in multiple stores takes extra work. To even the playing field, Epic proposes that Google be required for six years to provide rival stores a way to list apps that are hosted on Google Play. That would allow people to browse alternative stores without feeling they are missing out on popular apps, giving the store a better chance of success in the long term.

    [ad_2]

    Paresh Dave

    Source link

  • ICC prosecutor seeks arrest warrant for Israeli and Hamas leaders, including Netanyahu

    ICC prosecutor seeks arrest warrant for Israeli and Hamas leaders, including Netanyahu

    [ad_1]

    JERUSALEM — JERUSALEM (AP) —

    The Hamas militant group has denounced the International Criminal Court prosecutor’s request to seek the arrests of its leaders.

    In a statement, Hamas accused the prosecutor of trying to “equate the victim with the executioner.”

    It said it has the right to resist Israeli occupation, including “armed resistance.”

    It also criticized the court for seeking the arrests of only two Israeli leaders and said it should seek warrants for other Israeli leaders.

    THIS IS A BREAKING NEWS UPDATE. AP’s earlier story follows below.

    The chief prosecutor of the International Criminal Court said Monday he is seeking arrest warrants for Israeli and Hamas leaders, including Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, in connection with their actions during the seven-month war between Israel and Hamas.

    Karim Khan said that he believes Netanyahu, his defense minister Yoav Gallant and three Hamas leaders — Yehia Sinwar, Mohammed Deif and Ismail Haniyeh — are responsible for war crimes and crimes against humanity in the Gaza Strip and Israel.

    The prosecutor must request the warrants from a pre-trial panel of three judges, who take on average two months to consider the evidence and determine if the proceedings can move forward.

    Israel is not a member of the court, and even if the arrest warrants are issued, Netanyahu and Gallant do not face any immediate risk of prosecution. But Khan’s announcement deepens Israel’s isolation as it presses ahead with its war, and the threat of arrest could make it difficult for the Israeli leaders to travel abroad.

    Israeli Foreign Minister Israel Katz said the chief prosecutor’s decision to seek arrest warrants against Israel’s leaders is “a historic disgrace that will be remembered forever.”

    He said he would form a special committee to fight back against any such action and would work with world leaders to ensure that any such warrants are not enforced on Israel’s leaders.

    Both Sinwar and Deif are believed to be hiding in Gaza as Israel tries to hunt them down. But Haniyeh, the supreme leader of the Islamic militant group, is based in Qatar and frequently travels across the region.

    Benny Gantz, a former military chief and member of Israel’s War Cabinet with Netanyahu and Gallant, harshly criticized Khan’s announcement, saying Israel fights with “one of the strictest” moral codes and has a robust judiciary capable of investigating itself.

    “The State of Israel is waging one of the just wars fought in modern history following a reprehensible massacre perpetrated by terrorist Hamas on the 7th of October,” he said. “The prosecutor’s position to apply for arrest warrants is in itself a crime of historic proportion to be remembered for generations.

    Israel launched its war in response to an Oct. 7 cross-border attack by Hamas that killed some 1,200 people, mostly civilians, and took 250 others hostage. The Israeli offensive has killed over 35,000 Palestinians, at least half of them women and children, according to the latest estimates by Gaza health officials. The Israeli offensive has also triggered a humanitarian crisis in Gaza, displacing roughly 80% of the population and leaving hundreds of thousands of people on the brink of starvation, according to U.N. officials.

    Speaking of the Israeli actions, Khan said in a statement that “the effects of the use of starvation as a method of warfare, together with other attacks and collective punishment against the civilian population of Gaza are acute, visible and widely known. … They include malnutrition, dehydration, profound suffering and an increasing number of deaths among the Palestinian population, including babies, other children, and women.”

    The United Nations and other aid agencies have repeatedly accused Israel of hindering aid deliveries throughout the war. Israel denies this, saying there are no restrictions on aid entering Gaza and accusing the United Nations of failing to distribute aid. The U.N. says aid workers have repeatedly come under Israeli fire, and also says ongoing fighting and a security vacuum have impeded deliveries.

    Of the Hamas actions on Oct. 7, Khan, who visited the region in December, said that he saw for himself “the devastating scenes of these attacks and the profound impact of the unconscionable crimes charged in the applications filed today. Speaking with survivors, I heard how the love within a family, the deepest bonds between a parent and a child, were contorted to inflict unfathomable pain through calculated cruelty and extreme callousness. These acts demand accountability.”

    After a brief period of international support for its war, Israel has faced increasing criticism as the war has dragged on and the death toll has climbed.

    Israel is also facing a South African case in the International Court of Justice accusing Israel of genocide. Israel denies those charges.

    Khan’s request for warrants in the Israel-Gaza conflict comes 14 months after the court issued an arrest warrant for Russian President Vladimir Putin for war crimes, accusing him of personal responsibility for abductions of children from Ukraine.

    ——

    Molly Quell in Delft, Netherlands, and Mike Corder in Ede, Netherlands, contributed.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Slovak prime minister still in serious condition as suspect appears in court

    Slovak prime minister still in serious condition as suspect appears in court

    [ad_1]

    PEZINOK, Slovakia — The man accused of attempting to assassinate Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico was ordered to remain behind bars Saturday. Fico is in serious but stable condition after surviving multiple gunshots, officials said.

    Slovakia’s Specialized Criminal Court ordered the detention of the suspect after prosecutors said they feared he could flee or carry out other crimes if set free, a court spokesperson said. The suspect can appeal the order to the Supreme Court.

    Fico, 59, was shot in the abdomen as he greeted supporters following a government meeting Wednesday in the former coal mining town of Handlova, officials said. The suspect fired five rounds before being tackled to the ground and arrested.

    Prosecutors told police not to publicly identify the man or release other details about the case, but unconfirmed media reports said he was a 71-year-old retiree known as an amateur poet who may have once worked as a mall security guard in the country’s southwest.

    Government authorities gave details that matched that description. They said the suspect didn’t belong to any political groups, though the attack itself was politically motivated.

    The courthouse in Pezinok, a small town outside the capital, Bratislava, was guarded by police wearing helmets and balaclavas and carrying rifles. News media were not allowed in and reporters were kept behind a gate outside.

    The suspect left the courthouse just hours after government ministers announced that Fico’s condition looked promising after two hours of surgery Friday to remove dead tissue from multiple gunshot wounds. But he still is not healthy enough to travel to a hospital in the capital, Bratislava.

    “Several miracles have occurred … in the past few days, coming from the hands of the doctors, nurses and entire medical staff,” Defense Minister Rober Kalinak said outside University F. D. Roosevelt Hospital in Banská Bystrica, where Fico was taken by helicopter after the shooting. “I can’t find words of gratitude for the fact that we are steadily approaching that positive prognosis.”

    Police on Friday took the suspect to his home in the town of Levice and seized a computer and some documents, Markiza, a Slovak television station, reported. Police didn’t comment.

    With police remaining largely silent about the case, it was not clear how the suspect came to possess a firearm.

    Slovakia has strict rules on firearms and gun owners must have a good reason to possess one and are required to pass a test.

    As a consequence, Slovakia has one of the lowest gun ownership rates in Europe. It was ranked 23rd out of 27 European Union countries with a gun ownership rate of 6.5 per 100 people, according to the Association of Accredited Public Policy Advocates to the EU.

    World leaders have condemned the attack and offered support for Fico and Slovakia.

    Fico has long been a divisive figure in Slovakia and beyond. His return to power last year on a pro-Russia, anti-American platform led to worries among fellow European Union and NATO members that he would abandon his country’s pro-Western course, particularly on Ukraine.

    At the start of Russia’s full-scale invasion in February 2022, Slovakia was one of Ukraine’s staunchest supporters, but Fico halted arms deliveries to Ukraine when he returned to power, his fourth time serving as prime minister.

    Fico’s government has also made efforts to overhaul public broadcasting — a move critics said would give the government full control of public television and radio. That, coupled with his plans to amend the penal code to eliminate a special anti-graft prosecutor, have led opponents to worry that Fico will lead Slovakia down a more autocratic path.

    Thousands of demonstrators have repeatedly rallied in the capital and around the country of 5.4 million to protest his policies.

    Fico said last month on Facebook that he believed rising tensions in the country could lead to the killing of politicians, and he blamed the media for fueling tensions.

    Before Fico returned to power last year, many of his political and business associates were the focus of police investigations, and dozens have been charged.

    His plan to overhaul the penal system would eliminate the office of the special prosecutor that deals with organized crime, corruption and extremism.

    Despite nobody being named as temporary leader, there was nothing imminent that needed the premier’s attention and the government was operating as planned and moving forward with Fico’s agenda, Kalinak said.

    Communication with Fico was limited given his condition, Kalinak said.

    The next government session is planned for Wednesday and Kalinak will be in charge, the Slovak government office said.

    ___

    Associated Press reporters Karel Janicek in Vsetin, Czech Republic, and Brian Melley in London contributed to this report.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • UN resolution to commemorate the Srebrenica genocide in Bosnia sparks opposition from Serbs

    UN resolution to commemorate the Srebrenica genocide in Bosnia sparks opposition from Serbs

    [ad_1]

    UNITED NATIONS — A U.N. resolution sponsored by Germany and Rwanda to establish an annual day to commemorate the 1995 genocide of more than 8,000 Bosnian Muslims by Bosnian Serbs has sparked protests and a strong lobbying campaign against its adoption by Serbia’s president and the Bosnian Serb leadership.

    The U.N. General Assembly has scheduled a debate on the resolution on the morning of May 23 to be followed by a vote in the 193-member world body.

    The final draft of the resolution would designate July 11 as the “International Day of Reflection and Commemoration of the 1995 Genocide in Srebrenca,” to be observed annually starting in two months. The massacres started on July 11, 1995.

    The draft asks the United Nations to prepare an outreach program and invites countries, organizations, civil society and others to observe the day with special observances and activities in memory and honor of the victims as well as “appropriate education and public awareness-raising activities.”

    The Srebrenica killings were the bloody crescendo of Bosnia’s 1992-95 war, which came after the breakup of Yugoslavia unleashed nationalist passions and territorial ambitions that set Bosnian Serbs against the country’s two other main ethnic populations, Croats and Muslim Bosniaks.

    On July 11, 1995, Bosnian Serbs overran a U.N.-protected safe area in Srebrenica. They separated at least 8,000 Muslim Bosniak men and boys from their wives, mothers and sisters and slaughtered them. Those who tried to escape were chased through the woods and over the mountains around the ill-fated town.

    The International Court of Justice, the U.N.’s highest tribunal, determined in 2007 that the acts committed in Srebrenica constituted genocide, and the court’s determination is included in the draft resolution. It was Europe’s first genocide since the Nazi Holocaust in World War II, which killed an estimated 6 million Jews and people from other minorities.

    Serbia’s populist President Aleksandar Vucic as well as the Bosnian Serb leadership have vehemently opposed the adoption of the Srebrenica resolution, saying it brands all Serbs as a “genocidal nation” although the draft does not mention Serbs as culprits.

    Vucic and his government have been campaigning both at the U.N. and among developing countries to win support for a “No” vote. They say they have already gained a majority against the resolution. Approval requires a majority of those voting.

    Vucic as well as Bosnian Serb leader Milorad Dodik have mentioned several times the possibility of having to pay war damages if the resolution is adopted. Local analysts say Serb leaders, including Vukic, also fear they could be put on trial for active participation in the bloodshed.

    The draft resolution condemns “without reservation any denial of the Srebrenica genocide as a historical event.” It also “condemns without reservation actions that glorify those convicted of war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide by international courts, including those responsible for the Srebrenica genocide.”

    Bosnian Serb wartime political leader Radovan Karadzic and his military commander, Ratko Mladic, were both convicted of genocide in Srebrenica by a special U.N. war crimes tribunal in The Hague, Netherlands. In all, the tribunal and courts in the Balkans have sentenced close to 50 Bosnian Serb wartime officials to lengthy prison terms.

    However, most Serbian and Bosnian Serb officials still celebrate Karadzic and Mladic as national heroes. They continue to downplay or even deny the Srebrenica killings, which has deeply offended relatives of the massacre victims and survivors.

    At a meeting with Dodik in Budapest on Wednesday, Hungary Foreign Minister Péter Szijjártó said his country will vote against the resolution. He called the genocide the “Srebrenica tragedy” and said the resolution “intentionally or unintentionally would demonize the entire Serbian nation” and inflame tensions in the surrounding region.

    The upcoming vote was also raised at a regular U.N. Security Council meeting on political and economic developments in Bosnia on Wednesday.

    U.S. Deputy Ambassador Robert Wood said, “Dodik’s dangerous actions and secessionist rhetoric threaten peace and stability in the region” and “genocide denial also prevents reconciliation.”

    “Commemorating historical truths and accepting facts is important and moves the region forward on a path towards reconciliation,” Wood said. ”And honoring the victims of genocide reinforces the values reflected in the U.N. Charter.”

    But Russian U.N. Ambassador Vassily Nebenzia, whose country has strong ties to Serbia and the Bosnian Serbs, said the introduction of the resolution without the consent of all Bosnian parties was a violation of the country’s constitution and the 1995 Dayton peace agreement which ended the war.

    “We view this provocative text as a threat to peace and security in the country and in the region as a whole,” he said, accusing Germany and Rwanda of sparking protests instead of promoting reconciliation.

    Chinese Deputy U.N. Ambassador Geng Shuang reiterated Beijing’s call for the sponsors to engage with key parties and member states to reach consensus on the draft resolution. He said there are still “major differences” and “forcing it through is inconsistent with the spirit of promoting reconciliation” within Bosnia and among countries in the region.

    Germany and Rwanda have said they would seriously consider proposals by Serbia to change the text.

    ___

    Associated Press writers Dusan Stojanovic in Belgrade and Justin Spike in Budapest, Hungary, contributed to this report.

    [ad_2]

    Source link