Here is some background information about affirmative action as well as a few notable court cases.
Affirmative action policies focus on improving opportunities for groups of people, like women and minorities, who have been historically excluded in United States’ society. The initial emphasis was on education and employment. President John F. Kennedy was the first president to use the term in an executive order.
Supporters argue that affirmative action is necessary to ensure racial and gender diversity in education and employment. Critics state that it is unfair and causes reverse discrimination.
Racial quotas are considered unconstitutional by the US Supreme Court.
The state of Texas replaced its affirmative action plan with a percentage plan that guarantees the top 10% of high-school graduates a spot in any state university in Texas. California and Florida have similar programs.
1954 – The US Supreme Court, in Brown v. Board of Education, rules that the “separate but equal” doctrine violates the Constitution.
1961 – President Kennedy creates the Council on Equal Opportunity in an executive order. This ensures that federal contractors hire people regardless of race, creed, color or national origin.
1964 – The Civil Rights Act renders discrimination illegal in the workplace.
1978 – In Regents of the University of California v. Bakke, a notable reverse discrimination case, the Supreme Court rules that colleges cannot use racial quotas because it violates the Equal Protection Clause. As one factor for admission, however, race can be used.
1995 – The University of Michigan rejects the college application of Jennifer Gratz, a top high school student in suburban Detroit who is white.
October 14, 1997 – Gratz v. Bollinger, et al., is filed in federal court in the Eastern District of Michigan. The University of Michigan is sued by white students, including Gratz and Patrick Hamacher, who claim the undergraduate and law school affirmative action policies using race and/or gender as a factor in admissions is a violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment or Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
December 3, 1997 – A similar case, Grutter v. Bollinger, is filed in federal court in the Eastern District of Michigan. Barbara Grutter, denied admission to the University of Michigan Law School, claims that other applicants, with lower test scores and grades, were given an unfair advantage due to race.
December 2000 – The judge in the Gratz v. Bollinger case rules that the University of Michigan’s undergraduate admissions policy does not violate the standards set by the Supreme Court.
March 2001 – The judge in the Grutter v. Bollinger case rules the University of Michigan Law School’s admissions policy is unconstitutional.
December 2001 – The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals hears appeals in both University of Michigan cases.
May 14, 2002 – The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals reverses the district court’s decision in Grutter v. Bollinger.
April 1, 2003 – The US Supreme Court hears oral arguments on the two cases. US Solicitor General Theodore Olson offers arguments in support of the plaintiffs.
June 23, 2003 – The Supreme Court rules on Grutter v. Bollinger that the University of Michigan Law School may give preferential treatment to minorities during the admissions process. The Court upholds the law school policy by a vote of five to four.
June 23, 2003 – In Gratz v. Bollinger, the undergraduate policy in which a point system gave specific “weight” to minority applicants is overturned six to three.
December 22, 2003 – The Supreme Court rules that race can be a factor in universities’ admission programs but it cannot be an overriding factor. This decision affects the Grutter and Gratz cases.
November 7, 2006 – The Michigan electorate strikes down affirmative action by approving a proposition barring affirmative action in public education, employment, or contracting.
January 31, 2007 – After the Supreme Court sends the case back to district court; the case is dismissed. Gratz and Hamacher settle for $10,000 in administrative costs, but do not receive damages.
2008 – Abigail Noel Fisher, a white woman, sues the University of Texas. She argues that the university should not use race as a factor in admission policies that favor African-American and Hispanic applicants over whites and Asian-Americans.
July 1, 2011 – An appeals court overturns Michigan’s 2006 ban on the use of race and/or gender as a factor in admissions or hiring practices.
November 17, 2014 – Students for Fair Admissions sues Harvard University, alleging Harvard intentionally discriminates against Asian-Americans. Students for Fair Admissions is run by Edward Blum, a conservative advocate, who sought Asian-Americans rejected by Harvard.
While at Harvard Law School, Cruz was an editor of the Harvard Law Review and founder of the Harvard Latino Law Review.
First Hispanic US Senator from Texas.
Was a dual citizen of Canada and the United States until he renounced his Canadian citizenship in 2014.
1996-1997 – Clerks for US Supreme Court Chief Justice William Rehnquist.
1997-1999 – Attorney with the Washington, DC-based law firm Cooper, Carvin & Rosenthal.
1999-2000 – Domestic policy adviser during George W. Bush’s first presidential campaign.
2001 – Associate Deputy Attorney General at the Department of Justice.
2001-2003 – Director of the Office of Policy Planning, with the Federal Trade Commission.
2003-2008 – Solicitor General of Texas. He is the first Hispanic to hold the position. He is also the longest serving solicitor general in Texas’ history.
2004-2009 – Adjunct law professor at the University of Texas School of Law.
2008-2012 – Attorney with Morgan, Lewis & Bockius in Houston.
May 29, 2012 – Wins enough votes in the Texas GOP senatorial primary to force a runoff.
July 31, 2012 – Defeats Texas Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst in the runoff election for the Republican Senate nomination, by a vote of 57% to 43%.
November 6, 2012 – Elected US senator from Texas by defeating Democrat Paul Sadler, 56% to 41%.
November 14, 2012 – Named vice chairman of the National Republican Senatorial Committee.
January 3, 2013 – Sworn in as the 34th US senator from Texas.
April 27, 2016 – Cruz formally names Carly Fiorina as his vice presidential running mate – a last-ditch move to regain momentum after being mathematically eliminated from winning the GOP presidential nomination outright.
September 23, 2016 –Cruz endorses Donald Trump for the presidency, surprising many after a contentious primary filled with nasty personal attacks and Cruz’s dramatic snub of Trump at the Republican National Convention, where he pointedly refused to endorse the nominee.
November 6, 2018 –Cruz defeats Democratic Rep. Beto O’Rourke 50.9% to 48.3% in the race for Senate in Texas, holding off the progressive online fundraising sensation.
February 17, 2021 – Cruz travels to Cancun, Mexico, for vacation as a winter disaster in his home state leaves millions without power or water. He later says the trip “was obviously a mistake” and that “in hindsight I wouldn’t have done it.”
September 30, 2021 – The Supreme Court agrees to hear a case concerning Cruz’s 2018 campaign and consider regulations that limit money that committees can raise after the election to reimburse loans made before the election. On May 16, 2022, the Supreme Court rules in favor of Cruz. The court says that a federal cap on candidates using political contributions after an election to recoup personal loans made to their campaign is unconstitutional.
U.S. stocks closed mostly higher Friday, with major U.S. equity indexes booking a seventh straight week in the green in the wake of the Federal Reserve’s policy meeting.
The S&P 500 saw its longest weekly winning streak since November 2017, according to Dow Jones Market Data.
How stock indexes traded
The Dow Jones Industrial Average DJIA
rose 56.81 points, or 0.2%, to close at a record 37,305.16.
The S&P 500 SPX
was about flat, slipping less than 0.1%, to finish at 4,719.19
The Nasdaq Composite COMP
gained 52.36 points, or 0.4%, to end at 14,813.92.
What drove markets
U.S. stocks finished mostly higher Friday, with the Dow Jones Industrial Average logging a third straight record close.
The “more optimistic tone of markets over the last several weeks has been justified,” Russell Price, chief economist at Ameriprise Financial, said in a Friday phone call. It’s “reasonable” for the stock market to be pricing in rate cuts by the Federal Reserve in 2024, with the recent drop in 10-year Treasury yields helping to lift equities, he said.
Price said he’s expecting the Fed may begin cutting rates in June and the U.S. economy will slow to a “sustainable” pace of growth in 2024. In his view, real gross domestic product may rise 1.8% to 1.9% next year.
Nearly all of the S&P 500’s 11 sectors finished with gains this week, while small-capitalization stocks saw a stronger rally than large-cap equities.
The small-cap Russell 2000 index RUT
posted a weekly gain of around 5.6%, FactSet data show. The S&P 500 rose around 2.5% this week.
At his press conference on Wednesday, Fed Chair Jerome Powell gave “a nod” that inflation was on the right path and lower rates were on the horizon next year, according to Price. But when it comes to the federal-funds futures, Price said that traders appear to have gotten “too far ahead” in their bets on rate cuts.
Fed-funds futures pointed to the central bank starting to reduce its benchmark rate as soon as March, according to the CME FedWatch Tool.
Stocks hit a speed bump in Friday’s trading session after New York Federal Reserve Bank President John Williams pushed back against those rate expectations during an interview with CNBC. “We aren’t really talking about cutting interest rates right now,” Williams said.
Inflation, as measured by the consumer-price index, slowed to a year-over-year rate of 3.1% in November, down significantly from last year’s peak of 9.1% in June. But “it’s too early to call ‘mission accomplished’ just yet” for the Fed’s goal of bringing inflation down to its 2% target, said Price.
Still, Powell was explicit during his press conference about not needing a recession to cut rates, according to Nationwide’s chief of investment research Mark Hackett. “That was code for a soft landing,” Hackett said by phone Friday.
On the economic news front Friday, the New York Fed’s Empire State manufacturing survey showed U.S. manufacturing activity continued to struggle as the gauge tumbled to a four-month low. Flash services and manufacturing PMIs from S&P affirmed that manufacturing activity remained weak, while services activity reached a five-month high.
Meanwhile, the yield on the 10-year Treasury note BX:TMUBMUSD10Y
fell 31.7 basis points this week to 3.927%, the largest weekly drop since November 2022, according to Dow Jones Market Data.
The S&P 500 ended Friday about flat, but just 1.6% below its record close, reached Jan. 3, 2022.
“The momentum in the market is undeniably incredibly strong right now,” said Nationwide’s Hackett, though on Friday investors appeared to be taking “a natural break.”
Companies in focus
Palantir Technologies Inc. shares PLTR, -0.05%
slipped about 0.1% on Friday after the company announced an extension to a U.S. Army contract.
Steel Dynamics Inc.’s shares STLD, +4.52%
jumped 4.5% after the company reported earnings, making it one of the S&P 500’s best performers in Friday’s trading session.
Costco Wholesale Corp. shares COST, +4.45%
climbed around 4.5% after reporting fiscal first-quarter earnings and revenue largely in line with expectations following the market’s close on Thursday, and announced a special dividend of $15 a share.
JD.com JD, +4.46%
gained 4.5% as fresh stimulus out of China helped boost shares of companies based in the world’s second-largest economy. Alibaba Group Holding Ltd.’s stock BABA, +2.76%
rose 2.8%.
Ever since the collapse of crypto currencies last year, the lawsuits have been flying.
But a series of class-action suits targeting celebrity endorsers of crypto exchanges like FTX and Binance have been piling up in federal court in Miami, all filed by the same group of south Florida lawyers.
The latest suit names global soccer superstar Cristiano Ronaldo for allegedly promoting “the mass solicitation of investments in unregistered securities” sold by Binance, the crypto exchange that was hit with a $4 billion fine last week after pleading guilty to violating the bank secrecy act.
The suit was filed in federal court in the southern district of Florida this week and centered around Ronaldo’s role in a global marketing campaign launched in 2022 for a series of Binance NFTs — or non-fungible tokens, a form of blockchain-backed art works that were, for a brief time, wildly popular.
A representative for Ronaldo didn’t immediately respond to a message seeking comment.
The filing against Ronaldo on Monday came alongside similar class action suits naming Major League Baseball, Formula 1 racing, Mercedes Benz and the advertising giants Dentsu and Wasserman, who created much of FTX’s global promotion campaign.
Messages left with representatives for MLB, Formula 1, Mercedes Benz, Dentsu and Wasserman weren’t immediately returned.
Those suits are the latest in a series of similar class action suits starting last year against celebrity endorsers of failed crypto exchanges such as Voyager and FTX, in which customers lost billions of dollars in deposits.
Over the past 18 months, a group of south Florida lawyers led by Adam Moskowitz have brought the suits on behalf of investors who lost money in last year’s crypto collapse, against paid celebrity endorsers including Shaquille O’Neal, Mark Cuban, Tom Brady, Gisele Bundchen, Shohei Ohtani, Larry David, Steph Curry and Naomi Osaka.
“All of these celebrities were paid hundreds of millions of dollars taken directly from customer deposits,” Moskowitz said in a statement. “Some of the most famous and wealthiest groups in the world may now be held responsible for the dramatic $20 billion dollar crypto collapse and biggest financial scandals in U.S. history.”
Moskowitz, who has been joined in the suits by lawyers with the firms Mark Migdal & Hayden and Boies Schiller and Flexner, headed by famed litigator David Boies, is seeking at least $5 billion in damages from those who helped promote the crypto exchanges.
The cases from last year are ongoing and each of the celebrities named have been fighting the suits in court.
Moskowitz, who specializes in class-action lawsuits, says issues revolving around crypto first got his attention more than two years ago, before the entire market crashed, when he came to believe that the special tokens each exchange was minting amounted to an unregistered security.
He first filed a lawsuit against Voyager early last year, before the exchange collapsed and the Securities and Exchange Commission began filing suits against many in the industry accusing them of dealing in unregistered securities.
“Right then what we were doing started to gain traction,” he said.
A series of favorable court rulings have allowed his cases to gain steam, he said, and has allowed to him to take the lead in such actions.
Shares in
PDD Holdings soared Tuesday after the online retailer reported quarterly results that were far ahead of Wall Street’s expectations. The rival to both Alibaba and Amazon revealed staggering growth.
U.S. stocks ended modestly lower Friday, with the Dow Jones Industrial Average falling for a fourth consecutive day in its longest daily losing streak since June. The S&P 500 and Nasdaq each logged a third-straight weekly decline as rising bond yields rocked equities in the wake of the Federal Reserve meeting on Wednesday.
How stock indexes traded
The Dow Jones Industrial Average DJIA
fell 106.58 points, or 0.3%, to close at 33,963.84.
The S&P 500 SPX
shed 9.94 points, or 0.2%, to finish at 4,320.06.
The Nasdaq Composite COMP
dropped 12.18 points, or 0.1%, to end at 13,211.81.
For the week, the Dow fell 1.9%, the S&P 500 dropped 2.9% and the Nasdaq Composite slumped 3.6%. The S&P 500 and Nasdaq each booked their biggest weekly percentage drop since March, according to Dow Jones Market Data.
What drove markets
Stocks slipped after two days of selling sparked by the Federal Reserve projecting its policy interest rate would remain above 5% well into next year.
The notion in markets that the Fed would be cutting rates soon was “offsides,” leading to a “knee-jerk reaction” in bond markets that hurt stocks, said Michael Skordeles, head of U.S. economics at Truist Advisory Services, in a phone interview Friday. In his view, the central bank may cut its benchmark rate just once in the second half of next year, if at all, as inflation remains too high in a “resilient” U.S. economy with a “still fairly strong” labor market.
Rapidly rising Treasury yields have been blamed for much of the pain in stocks. The yield on the 10-year Treasury note BX:TMUBMUSD10Y
climbed 11.7 basis points this week to 4.438%, dipping on Friday after on Thursday rising to its highest level since October 2007, according to Dow Jones Market Data.
Senior Fed officials who spoke Friday voiced support for the more aggressive monetary policy path signaled by Fed Chair Jerome Powell on Wednesday.
Boston Federal Reserve President Susan Collins said rates are likely to stay “higher, and for longer, than previous projections had suggested,” while Fed Gov. Michelle Bowman said it’s possible the Fed could raise rates further to quell inflation. The latest Fed “dot plot,” released following the close of the central bank’s two-day policy meeting on Wednesday, showed senior Fed officials expect to raise rates once more in 2023.
Meanwhile, the S&P 500 finished Friday logging a third straight week of declines, with consumer-discretionary stocks posting the worst weekly performance among the index’s 11 sectors by dropping more than 6%, according to FactSet data.
“Markets weakened this week following an extended period of calm, as the hawkish tone adopted by Fed Chair Powell following the FOMC meeting caused the decline,” said Mark Hackett, Nationwide’s chief of investment research, in emailed comments Friday. “Bears have wrestled control of the equity markets from bulls.”
Economic data on Friday showed some weakness in the U.S. services sector, while manufacturing activity recovered slightly but remained in contraction, according to S&P U.S. purchasing managers indexes.
Still the U.S. economy has been largely resilient despite a hawkish Fed, with “strong economic growth driving fears of continued inflation pressure,” said Hackett. He also pointed to concerns that a “too strong” economy and “developing clouds” such as strikes, a potential government shutdown, and student loan repayments “will impact consumer activity.”
Jamie Cox, managing partner at Richmond, Virginia-based wealth-management firm Harris Financial Group, said by phone on Friday that he’ll become concerned about the impact of a government shutdown on markets if it stretches for longer than a month.
“I’m only worried if it goes past a month,” said Cox, explaining he expects “little” economic impact if a government shutdown lasts a couple weeks.
“We’re seeing strike after strike,” which overtime could fuel wage growth that’s already “robust,” said Truist’s Skordeles. That risks adding to inflationary pressures in the economy, he said. And while U.S. inflation has eased “dramatically,” said Skordeles, “it isn’t down to where it needs to be.”
Companies in focus
Activision Blizzard Inc. ATVI, +1.70%
rose 1.7% after the U.K. Competition and Markets Authority said that Microsoft Corp.’s MSFT, -0.79%
revised proposals to modify its Activision acquisition makes it possible for the $75 billion deal to be cleared. Under the revised deal, Activision would sell cloud-gaming rights to French videogame publisher Ubisoft Entertainment SA UBI, +4.47%,
whose shares rose in Paris.
priced its initial public offering at $51 a share. That’s at the top of the expected range of $47 to $51, giving the chip design company a valuation of $54.5 billion on a f…
Starbucks Corp. on Wednesday said former Chief Executive Howard Schultz is stepping down from its board of directors, capping a nearly 40-year career during which the company grew from a handful of stores in Seattle into a global coffee chain.
Schultz’s retirement from the board, which ends his involvement in the company’s leadership, took effect Wednesday and was part of a planned transition, the coffee chain said. Schultz stepped down as Starbucks SBUX, +0.72%
chief executive in March.
The company on Wednesday also said that it had elected Wei Zhang to its board of directors, effective Oct. 1. Zhang was most recently a senior adviser to Chinese e-commerce giant Alibaba Group BABA, -0.75%
and also held leadership positions at News Corp China and CNBC China.
Shares of Starbucks were down 0.7% after hours on Wednesday.
Starbucks said Schultz “will now turn his attention with his wife, Sheri, to focus on a range of philanthropic and entrepreneurial investments to create greater opportunity, accessible to all.” The company noted that the two were co-founders of the Schultz Family Foundation in 1996, and of the emes project.
Although he was not technically the founder of the coffee chain, Schultz became the modern face of it. Schultz joined Starbucks in 1982 as its director of operations and marketing. After a brief hiatus from the company, he returned in 1987 as chief executive and bought the business with backing from local investors, according to a biography on the Starbucks website. The chain went public in 1992.
As the chain’s footprint expanded beyond the U.S., Schultz stepped down from the CEO role in 2000 but returned in 2008. He retired from Starbucks in 2018, then came back as interim chief executive and board member last year.
Over those years, Starbucks has banked on China for international growth — even as that country’s economy remains turbulent following the postpandemic reopening. It also added food and cold and customizable drinks to its menus and built out its mobile-ordering infrastructure.
The company has branded itself as a progressive employer and a supporter of social justice. But over the past two years, the company, and Schultz in particular, have faced criticism over the handling of employees who were trying to unionize. Union members have accused the chain of unfair labor practices, retaliation for organizing and delaying contract negotiations, leading to deeper scrutiny from lawmakers.
“We hope this is an opportunity for Starbucks to change course and leave their union-busting behind them,” Starbucks Workers United, the union representing those workers, said Wednesday in a tweet.
Still, even as inflation has eaten into consumer savings, Schultz said coffee has remained an “affordable luxury” for many customers. And Starbucks management said that younger, loyal consumers and customizable drinks would help sustain demand.
According to a filing on Wednesday, Schultz will still be connected to the company in other ways. Starbucks said it would amend Schultz’s retirement agreement from 2018 and continue to provide him and his spouse with security services.
“The security services will be provided for a period of 10 years and will be evaluated on an annual basis,” the filing said. “In recognition of Mr. Schultz’s leadership as the company’s founder and chairman emeritus, the company will also provide Mr. Schultz with the reimbursement of his monthly healthcare insurance premiums.”
“Super apps” have never truly existed in the United States, and it is apparent at this point that they never will.
That isn’t stopping some executives and investment analysts from still dreaming of becoming one-stop shops for their users’ needs, something only a small handful of apps in Asia have managed to do. The most prominent is Elon Musk, the Tesla Inc. TSLAchief executive who purchased Twitter last year and has proclaimed that he will turn it into an “everything app” called X that resembles super apps in China.
Shares of Alibaba Group Holding Ltd. were rallying more than 2% in Thursday’s premarket trading after the Chinese e-commerce giant topped expectations with its latest revenue and earnings.
The company notched fiscal first-quarter net income of RMB34.3 billion ($4.6 billion), or RMB13.30 per American depositary share, compared with net income of RMB22.7 billion, or RMB8.51 per ADS, in the year-before period.
On an adjusted basis, Alibaba BABA, +0.67%
earned RMB17.37 per ADS, while the FactSet consensus was RMB14.59 per share. Revenue rose to RMB234.2 billion from RMB205.6 billion, where analysts had been modeling RMB224.7 billion.
Chief Executive Daniel Zhang said the company’s reorganization was “beginning to unleash new energy across our businesses.” Alibaba recently realigned into six units with their own CEOs and boards of directors, and the ability to pursue independent fundraising.
“Through this self-driven transformation, we aim to catalyze innovation, promote vitality in our organization and enable businesses to focus on long-term growth,” Zhang continued. “We look forward to positive impacts on our business, including strengthening competitiveness, sustainable growth and shareholder value creation.”
Overall revenue for the company’s Taobao and Tmall Group, which represents the company’s core e-commerce marketplaces in China, rose to RMB115.0 billion from RMB102.5 billion.
Within that group, customer management revenue was up 10% to RMB79.7 billion, “primarily due to the increase in merchant’s willingness to invest in advertising” and an increase in the volume of online physical goods generated on the platforms.
Alibaba bought back $3.1 billion worth of ADRs during the June quarter, “which is supported by our continuous generation of strong free cash flow,” Chief Financial Officer Toby Xu said in the release. Free cash flow was RMB39.1 billion in the quarter, up 76% from a year earlier.
U.S.-listed shares of Alibaba are up about 8% so far this year.
Federal district Judge Steve Jones of the Northern District of Georgia will hear requests from three of the 19 defendants hoping to move their Georgia election subversion cases out of state court.
The group, which includes former Trump White House chief of staff Mark Meadows, is trying to get the case dismissed under federal law – a determination that may impact Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis’ case against former President Donald Trump and others. Meadows and others will present evidence about whether to move the case, while the judge has allowed the state court case to proceed in the meantime.
Jones, a Barack Obama appointee, was confirmed by the US Senate in 2011 by a 90-0 vote. A former Superior Court judge, he grew up in Athens, Georgia, and graduated from the University of Georgia School of Law in 1987.
So far, Jones has shown that he would like to avoid a circus while not giving short shrift to Meadows’ arguments, said Steve Vladeck, a CNN Supreme Court analyst and professor at the University of Texas School of Law. The orders Jones has already issued have hewed tightly to the relevant statutes and case law, and he has moved the proceedings along very efficiently.
Jones is “by the book, which includes quickly and quietly,” Vladeck said.
Jones has overseen high-profile cases before.
In July, he declined to toss three lawsuits claiming that Georgia’s congressional and legislative districts were drawn in a way that discriminates against Black voters. He slated a trial on the matter for September.
In 2020, Jones blocked the state’s six-week abortion ban, which later took effect after the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade. In 2019, he rejected an attempt by a voting rights group to restore to the rolls 98,000 Georgia voters who had been removed after being classified as “inactive” after a new state law took effect.
In that case, Jones found that the 11th Amendment of the Constitution and the principles of sovereign immunity “do not permit a federal court to enjoin a state (or its officers) to follow a federal court’s interpretation of the State of Georgia’s laws.” Jones also determined that the group, Fair Fight Action, failed to show that its claim had a substantial likelihood of success.
Next, Jones will weigh movement in the case in which Trump is accused of being the head of a “criminal enterprise” that was part of a broad conspiracy to overturn his electoral defeat in Georgia. Trump, who faces 13 charges, is also expected to try to move the case to federal court, according to multiple sources familiar with his legal team’s thinking.
Digital Menu Boards Seamlessly Integrate With Table Needs Point of Sale to Increase Restaurant Efficiency and Sales
MOBILE, Ala., July 31, 2023 (Newswire.com)
– Table Needs, Inc., a leading provider of restaurant technology and business services for food trucks, cafes, and quick service restaurants, announced today the launch of digital menu boards to its growing suite of services.
In alignment with Table Needs’ commitment to providing comprehensive technology built to enhance restaurant operations, the addition of digital menu boards offers a simple, cost-effective way for quick-service restaurants, coffee shops, and drive-thru restaurants to increase sales, improve customer satisfaction, and streamline menu management.
“With the addition of digital menu boards, Table Needs offers an even more comprehensive restaurant POS solution that’s intentionally designed to help restaurants increase profits and streamline their operations,” said Ben Simmons, CEO of Table Needs. “This is an important part of our mission to be the complete profitability solution to restaurants.”
TABLE NEEDS DIGITAL MENU BOARDS INCREASE PROFITS FOR COUNTER-SERVICE RESTAURANTS AND DRIVE-THRU RESTAURANTS
100% ROI within six weeks plus an increase in average ticket sales. That’s just a glimpse into the power of digital menu boards.
Between the cost savings of not having to continuously replace plastic or paper menus and the increase in average tickets, restaurants using digital menu boards see a return on their investment within 2-3 months.
Average tickets skyrocket after the installation of digital menu boards because people buy with their eyes. Restaurants using digital menu boards are able to showcase their most profitable menu items in vivid color, making them irresistible to customers.
In addition to higher average tickets, digital menu boards also encourage a higher volume of tickets. Digital menu boards make it easier and faster for customers to place orders and greatly reduce miscommunication – saving your staff a tremendous amount of time per order.
TABLE NEEDS DIGITAL MENU BOARDS INCREASE EFFICIENCY & CUSTOMER SATISFACTION
With Table Needs, restaurant owners can manage all digital menus – online menus, QR code menus, digital menu boards – from a single platform. Menu modifications, pricing changes, and availability can be adjusted and reflected on all or just one digital menu in real time with just a few clicks. This eliminates the need to painstakingly update static, plastic signs or have to redesign and reprint paper menus, saving restaurant owners thousands of dollars.
Because digital menu boards integrate seamlessly with the Table Needs Point of Sale system, all orders, no matter where they originate, are processed, routed, and reported through a single platform.
“Creating simple, effective systems that improve a restaurant’s efficiency and profits is what we’re about here at Table Needs,” said David Frahm, COO of Table Needs. “We make it possible for restaurant owners to manage everything, from menus and ordering to expediting, reporting, and beyond, from a single platform.”
Digital menu boards also increase order accuracy. Customers can see their orders appear on the digital menu board’s screen in real time, allowing them to confirm or make changes before firing.
TABLE NEEDS PARTNERS WITH STREAM TO PROVIDE DIGITAL MENU BOARDS
“We decided to partner with Stream, LLC to provide digital menu boards to our restaurant partners because they offer a great product but also because they’re outstanding people,” said Simmons. “The team at Stream truly cares about their customers and their customers’ businesses.”
Stream is a cutting-edge provider of digital signage products based in Salt Lake City, Utah. In addition to digital signage products, the team at Stream offers graphic design, video design, and photography services. https://explorestream.com
TO LEARN MORE ABOUT TABLE NEEDS PRODUCTS AND SERVICES Products
Services
Resources
ABOUT TABLE NEEDS
Table Needs, Inc. is a fast-growing provider of restaurant technology and business services for quick-service restaurants, coffee shops, and food trucks. Built to grow with your business without requiring disruptive updates or hardware overhauls, restaurants can start where they are and add on features, like commission-free online ordering, sales tax automation, cash discount program, staff management, digital marketing, bookkeeping, and more, as goals and growth develop. For more information about Table Needs Needs, visit https://tableneeds.com/.
Donald Trump’s defense lawyers and special counsel Jack Smith met Thursday in Washington, DC, without the former president’s team getting any guidance about timing of a possible indictment, sources familiar with the matter told CNN.
The meeting happened on the same day that the grand jury hearing evidence from the special counsel’s probe into election subversion efforts by Trump and his allies was seen at the federal courthouse.
A court official said that there will not be any grand jury indictment returns on Thursday. Grand jury proceedings are secret and it’s unclear what Thursday’s developments mean for Smith’s investigation.
Since receiving a letter from Smith indicating he’s a target of the investigation earlier this month, Trump had argued against a meeting between his attorneys and Smith’s team because the former president believed the indictment was already a done deal, two sources familiar with his thinking said.
In seeking a meeting with Smith’s team, Trump’s lawyers hoped to at least delay any potential plans for the grand jury to hand up an indictment Thursday, people briefed on the plans said.
Another source familiar with the legal team’s thinking told CNN they also expected to discuss the logistics of how a potential indictment and arraignment of the former president would work.
“My attorneys had a productive meeting with the DOJ this morning, explaining in detail that I did nothing wrong, was advised by many lawyers, and that an Indictment of me would only further destroy our Country,” Trump said on Truth Social.
Trump’s political and legal strategy has been to delay any possible trials – including until potentially after the 2024 election – and to put the Justice Department in an uncomfortable position where they are pursuing a prosecution of President Joe Biden’s chief 2024 rival even as primary voters are beginning to have their say.
Every day they can push back an indictment is a day that pushes back an ultimate trial date.
The members of Trump’s legal team who attended Thursday’s meeting with Smith were John Lauro and Todd Blanche, sources familiar with the matter told CNN. Lauro recently joined the team to handle matters related to the 2020 election and the run-up to the January 6, 2021, attack on the US Capitol.
Blanche has represented Trump in the Mar-a-Lago classified documents case and the Manhattan criminal case stemming from a hush-money scheme.
This is the second time Trump is facing potential charges brought by Smith’s team. Before Trump was charged in Florida in Smith’s probe into the mishandling of classified documents from his White House, he also was notified by prosecutors that he was a target of that investigation.
Prosecutors aren’t required to give investigatory targets such a warning. Around the time Trump was given the heads up about the potential classified documents charges against him, his lawyers also met in early June with prosecutors for Smith’s team. The classified documents indictment was brought against him later that month.
This story has been updated with additional developments.
This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use only. To order presentation-ready copies for distribution to your colleagues, clients or customers visit http://www.djreprints.com.
U.S. stock index futures slipped lower Tuesday after a three-day break, with Chinese equities wilting on disappointment over the monetary stimulus efforts in the world’s number-two economy.
What’s happening
Dow Jones Industrial Average futures YM00, -0.31%
fell 109 points, or 0.3%, to 34,495.
S&P 500 futures ES00, -0.26%
dropped 11 points, or 0.2%, to 4,442.
Nasdaq 100 futures NQ00, -0.16%
decreased 28 points, or 0.1%, to 15,239.
On Friday, the Dow Jones Industrial Average DJIA, -0.32%
fell 109 points, or 0.32%, to 34299, the S&P 500 SPX, -0.37%
declined 16 points, or 0.37%, to 4410, and the Nasdaq Composite COMP, -0.68%
dropped 93 points, or 0.68%, to 13690.
What’s driving markets
Investors were in a cautious mood following the U.S. long weekend in honor of the Juneteenth federal holiday, but that’s after a strong run. The S&P 500 gained 2.6% last week, its fifth week in a row of gains, as the tech-heavy Nasdaq Composite took its winning run to eight weeks.
Mike Wilson, Morgan Stanley’s chief U.S. equity strategist, said both retail and institutional investor sentiment are at their highest levels in over two years.
“We note that the consensus is right about 80% of the time, which means such shifts in sentiment and positioning can often be right as the collective intelligence of the market knows best,” he said. “However, given our fundamental view on growth, we find it hard to get on board with the current excitement and narrative supporting it. In other words, if second half growth re-accelerates as expected, then the bullish narrative being used to support equity prices will be proven correct.”
One event that investors have to weigh is the resumption this fall of student loan payments, and what that may mean for consumers’ disposable income. Student loan payments have been paused since the start of the pandemic in March 2020.
China cut its 1- and 5-year lending rates by 10 basis points, which investors viewed to be modest, particularly after a Friday state council meeting didn’t result in other concrete measures. According to Societe Generale, there were expectations the 5-year rate, the benchmark for mortgages, would be cut by 15 basis points.
Tuesday’s economic data include housing starts data, which showed a 21.7% rise in May after a revised 2.9% drop in April. Building permits also climbed 5.2% in May.
A panel later Tuesday will include both New York Federal Reserve President John Williams and Fed Vice Chair for Supervision Michael Barr. On Wednesday Fed Chair Jerome Powell is due to deliver semi-annual congressional testimony.
How a retired Pennsylvania couple changed the lives of hundreds of struggling residents of affluent Chester County by challenging inflated real estate tax assessments on their mobile homes.
Chester County, Pennsylvania, with its rolling farmland and proximity to both Philadelphia and the corporate haven of Wilmington, has the highest median income (nearly $110,000) and percentage of college graduates (55%) in the state. It’s also home to billionaire Campbell Soup heir Mary Alice Dorrance Malone and her Iron Spring Farm horse breeding and training operation.
So it might seem an unlikely spot for a project dedicated to righting a little known tax wrong that can crush those living in mobile homes (a.k.a. trailer parks) in a handful of states. But each year, Chester County’s farmers produce 500 million pounds of mushrooms (roughly half the nation’s crop) and 130,000 tons of hay (an essential element in mushroom compost). And that requires farm workers. With the median home price in Chester almost $570,000, agricultural workers and others at the bottom of the pay scale have a hard time finding affordable housing. The result: Chester County’s 213,000 housing units include about 6,000 mobile homes.
That’s not so unusual. According to the Manufactured Housing Institute, a trade group, 22 million Americans, the majority of them with incomes of less than $40,000, live in such housing and 71% say their primary reason is affordability. Although Congress substantially strengthened construction and safety standards for “manufactured housing” in 1976, the price per square foot is still as much as 50% less than for site-built houses. The nonprofit Lincoln Institute for Land Policy has for years promoted manufactured housing—and zoning changes that would allow more of it—as one solution to the nation’s housing affordability crisis. Even the Biden Administration has gotten on the bandwagon as part of its Housing Supply Action Plan.
In 2018, retired scientists Debbie and Randy Blough didn’t know much about mobile homes. But they were volunteering together at the Honey Brook Food Pantry in a poorer part of Chester County, when pantry leader Ken Ross introduced them to a young family who owned a mobile home and was being pushed over the edge financially by a jaw-droppingly high real estate tax bill. “We’re going to do something about this,” Debbie told Randy as they left the pantry that day.
Retired scientists Debbie and Randy Blough, shown with their daughter, Kelly Blough, after receiving the Pennsylvania Legal Aid Network’s 2022 Excellence Award for Lay Advocacy.
Legal Aid of Southeastern PA
Randy, a federal nuclear safety inspector for 27 years, and Debbie, a chemist, both now 71, began researching the problem. What they discovered and what they did about it has already helped nearly a thousand Pennsylvania families. It turned out other pantry users had the same problem—at the extreme, one pantry client had purchased a used trailer for $800 that carried a $1,300 a year tax bill. (By comparison, the average real estate taxes paid by homeowners in Pennsylvania come to 1.49% of their properties’ value, according to the Tax Foundation.)
What the Bloughs learned was the outsized tax bills burdening pantry clients were the result of a flawed state tax assessment system being applied in a ham-handed fashion to mobile housing, without regard for its unique characteristics.
While traditional site-built or stick-built houses typically increase in value over time (assuming they’re properly maintained), mobile homes tend to do the opposite—like cars and trucks they often depreciate. For example, a brand new three-bedroom, two-bath, “The Breeze” model mobile home manufactured by Clayton Homes, and sold in Paradise, Pennsylvania, would set you back about $140,000, before options. The same model from 2013, in good condition (and also without upgrades) can be had for $69,620 in southeastern Pennsylvania, according to an estimate from J.D. Power. (The average price for a new factory-built house was $128,300 last year, although that doesn’t include the land to put it on.)
What about the land under mobile homes? Doesn’t that appreciate? It may, but about half of mobile home dwellers don’t own the land that sits under their houses. Instead, they rent a pad in a dedicated park. Almost all states consider a mobile home personal property–the same as a car–at original purchase, but the tax treatment typically changes once the home is moved to its final destination, even if the mobile homeowner doesn’t own the land. In the Keystone State, mobile homes are subject to real estate tax so long as they are permanently attached to land or connected with water, gas, electric, or sewage. (If the homeowner doesn’t own the land, that’s taxed separately to the landowner.)
Here’s why that can turn into a tax nightmare for mobile homeowners. Best practice is to reassess properties at least every three years—that’s what neighboring Maryland does, for example. But Pennsylvania, and a handful of other states don’t require counties to reassess properties on any fixed schedule. The typical period between reassessments in Pennsylvania has been 20 to 25 years. That ends up rewarding homeowners whose property values are rising faster than average and punishing mobile homeowners and those who live in declining neighborhoods. Indeed, in 2020, neighboring Delaware’s Chancery Court ruled the lack of mandatory reassessments there—one county hadn’t done reassessments since 1973—violated the state constitution’s requirement that taxpayers be treated equally. (A court ordered reassessment is underway, while a bill that would require reassessments every five years has passed Delaware’s House and is pending in its Senate.)
True, property owners who believe the assessed value of their property is too high can file an appeal—commercial property owners routinely do this, to great effect. But the process can be intimidating for homeowners. In addition to completing paperwork and meeting deadlines (by law, the filing deadline for appeals in Pennsylvania is May 1st through the first business day in August), there’s the specter of a hearing before a County Board of Assessment; in some counties, the county has the opportunity to cross-examine a property owner, which to an average citizen may feel like being put on trial. That’s why entire departments at law firms are dedicated to helping well-heeled homeowners appeal property taxes.
When they first learned about the assessment problem in 2018, the Bloughs were already helping pantry clients to apply for food stamps and deal with utility shut-offs. So they jumped into filing real estate appraisal appeals too. That year they filed 22 appeals, with Randy appearing at the hearings to argue cases. They won them all, saving those households a total of $20,000 in just that year. The Bloughs’ work was featured in a Philadelphia Inquirer story, which caught the eye of a local United Way official, Chris Saello, who connected them with Legal Aid of Southeastern, Pa., a not-for-profit which provides help in civil matters to low income and vulnerable people in the suburban counties around Philadelphia: Bucks, Chester, Delaware and Montgomery.
LASP took over their ad hoc appeals operation, launching the Chester County Mobile Home Tax Reassessment Project, with funding from United Way, which pays the $25 appeal filing fee for each homeowner. From 2019 through 2022, the project lodged 903 successful tax appeals, saving homeowners an average of $872 a year each on their taxes—-or more than $8 million over the next decade.
The project is now run by Sara Planthaber, a 28-year-old staff attorney at LASP, with pro bono help from local lawyers and students from nearby law schools, including the University of Pennsylvania, Drexel, Villanova, and Temple. Planthaber herself had no interest in tax law—while earning her law degree at the University of Pittsburgh, she picked up a masters in social work, focusing on older adults. But the reassessment project appealed to her sense of fairness; clients aren’t asking for special tax breaks, just to be treated equally under the existing tax laws.
Sara Planthaber, who runs the Chester County assessment appeals program, and Brian Doyle, a Legal Aid attorney who coordinates pro bono efforts, confer with a tax appeal client.
LASP
“These homeowners have been overpaying for years and years,” Planthaber says, noting that the tax savings aren’t limited to one year. “The first year [after the appeal] is a huge relief. But over time, you really see the difference.” Saving several hundred dollars every year can have a significant impact on a family’s financial future. For those families, Planthaber stresses, “That’s a lot of money.”
Plus, as Planthaber runs it, the tax assessment program can be a gateway to help clients in wider ways. She cites the case of a recently widowed woman in her 80s, whose 1970s mobile home hadn’t been reassessed since its original purchase and appeared to be over-assessed by 300%. She couldn’t afford to pay for needed repairs to her plumbing and roof, let alone her taxes, but was adamant that she wanted to continue to live independently in her own home. The team got the assessment slashed and got the widow into a program that makes home repairs for a sliding fee, based on her ability to pay. “Thank you,” she told the team, “for allowing me to live in my home.”
With results like those, you’d expect that clients would be lining up to ask for help. That isn’t the case, Planthaber says. Some homeowners aren’t aware of the program, while others are suspicious. Older adults worry that they might have to add any real estate savings to their income tax return (they don’t), while those who might have a newly granted status as an immigrant, or a status that remains in limbo, fear that filing a petition in court could subject them to immigration proceedings. Others worry that a filing could spark interest in an old parking ticket or other outstanding legal issues. And still others fear that the whole program might be a scam—an understandable reaction when anyone asks for personal information these days. (Some actually come by the Legal Aid office just to check if it’s for real, she says.)
To spread the word, the program posts flyers in mobile home parks and community centers and does in-person outreach at places potential clients trust, like libraries and the food pantry where it all started. The program is currently limited to Chester County homeowners who do not own the land where the mobile home is located and those who haven’t appealed their taxes in five years—the latter marks the spot on the depreciation curve where appealing makes sense. If a case is accepted, the program gathers information about the home, including the year it was purchased, the size and dimensions of the home, the model, and the manufacturer. If the home was purchased within the last three years, the homeowner is asked to provide evidence of the purchase price since that tends to be most reflective of value.
Outreach: Even during the height of the Covid-19 pandemic, officials from Legal Aid of Southeastern PA and United Way went out to recruit mobile homeowners for the assessment appeal program.
LASP
That information is used to build a case for the home’s value. Sometimes, however, records are scarce and Planthaber gets creative. When clients don’t know the dimensions of their home, for example, she turns to Google Maps where she can use a tool to estimate the size of the home from photos. Clients who need help identifying the make and model of their home can typically find that information on the title. If they can’t find their title, Planthaber suggests contacting their homeowner’s insurance company or the park where they lease the land (the information might be on the lease agreement). And if that doesn’t work, staff members or volunteers sometimes stop by the mobile home to look for model information—it can usually be found on a metal plate outside the house or in the kitchen cabinets.
This information is fed into a third-party program that can provide a current value for the mobile unit, typically with data from the National Automobile Dealers Association, which offers a Kelley Blue Book-like estimate for mobile homes for a fee. (That fee, too, is paid by the program.)
Armed with this information, Planthaber and her team file a petition with the Chester County Board of Appeals. The homeowner is given a hearing date, but since they’re represented by legal counsel, they don’t have to appear in person—a huge relief for those who fear the court system. Typically, within a month, the homeowner has a new lower assessment for the coming year; the relief is not retroactive.
Planthaber praises Chester County’s Board of Appeals as being generally receptive to her team’s requests. There’s even a specific form at the county level for mobile home assessments, a nod to the idea that they may function differently from other home value appeals. The form is relatively new and went into effect after the mobile home appeal project got started. It wasn’t however, created completely from scratch–staffers at LASP say that it’s based on a pre-existing form out of Franklin County, PA.
Last year, the program lodged a record high 246 appeals. It feels like the natural expansion of the program would be to push into surrounding counties. Planthaber says they’ve tried, but it hasn’t gotten off the ground. Philadelphia County, for example, has historically struggled with property assessments, but the overall property tax bill for the typical owner-occupied residence there was just $1,131 in 2021, as the city relies heavily on a wage and net profits tax. In comparison, Chester County has one of the highest median property taxes in the country at $5,722—more than twice the national average.
But Planthaber doesn’t think the program will run out of work: once they’ve reached all who qualify, they intend to double back and file new assessment appeals for those they helped in the program’s early days. By then, their homes will have depreciated further in value—-enough to make a new appeal worth the effort.
As for the Bloughs? They’ve been pleased to see United Way and LASP take over financing and filing reassessment appeals, but still want to see the broader inequity addressed. “I’d like to see the system fixed for all Pennsylvania mobile homeowners,’’ says Randy. “That’s a mighty task that will surely require new champions to take up the cause.”
Things move quickly in the world of artificial intelligence. It is easy to sit back and complain about developments that could be disruptive, but sometimes investors are best served by putting emotions aside and observing new developments and how they affect markets. Could AI developments and related trends make you a lot of money?
Below is a new screen showing a group of AI-oriented companies expected to increase their sales most rapidly through 2025, based on consensus estimates among analysts polled by FactSet. Then we show expected revenue growth rates for the largest AI-oriented companies in the screen.
Over the long haul, many businesses might perform more efficiently by employing AI. Maybe this technology can create an economic revolution similar to the one that moved the majority of the working population away from agricultural labor during the 19th and 20th centuries.
Back in February, we screened 96 stocks held by five exchange-traded funds focused on AI and related industries and listed the 20 that analysts thought would rise the most over the following 12 months.
Three months is a long time for AI, and the shakeout hasn’t even started.
There is no way to predict how politicians will react to perceived or real threats of AI and machine learning. And the largest U.S. tech players are doing everything they can to employ the new technology and remain dominant. But that doesn’t mean they will grow more quickly than smaller AI-focused players.
A new AI stock screen
Once again we will begin a screen with these five ETFs:
The Global X Robotics & Artificial Intelligence ETF BOTZ, +0.97%
BOTZ was established 2016 and has $1.8 billion in assets under management. The fund tracks an index of companies listed in developed markets that are expected to benefit from the increased utilization of robotics and AI. There are 44 stocks in the BOTZ portfolio, which is weighted by market capitalization and rebalanced once a year. Its largest holding is Intuitive Surgical Inc. ISRG, +0.53%,
which makes up 10% of the portfolio, followed by Nvidia Corp. NVDA, +3.30%
at 9.4%.
The iShares Robotics and Artificial Intelligence Multisector ETF IRBO, +1.64%
holds 116 stocks that are equal-weighted, as it tracks a global index of companies that derive at east 50% of revenue from robotics or AI, or have significant exposure to related industries. This ETF was launched in 2018 and has $304 million in assets.
The $246 million First Trust Nasdaq Artificial Intelligence & Robotics ETF ROBT, +1.83%
has 107 stocks in its portfolio, with a modified weighting based on how directly companies are involved in AI or robotics. It was established in 2018.
The Robo Global Artificial Intelligence ETF THNQ, +1.81%
has $26 million in assets and was established in 2020. I holds 69 stocks and isn’t concentrated. It uses a scoring system to weight its holdings by percentage of revenue derived from AI, with holdings also subject to minimum market capitalization and liquidity requirements.
The newest ETF on this list is the WisdomTree Artificial Intelligence and Innovation Fund WTAI, +2.42%,
which was established in December and has $13 million in assets and holds 73 stocks in an equal-weighted portfolio. According to FactSet, stocks are handpicked and selected companies “generate at least 50% of their revenue from AI and innovation activities, including those related to software, semiconductors, hardware technology, machine learning and innovative products.”
Altogether and removing duplicates, the five ETFs hold 270 stocks of companies in 23 countries. We first narrowed the list to 197 covered by at least nine analysts and for which consensus sales estimates are available through calendar 2025. We used calendar-year estimates because some companies have fiscal years that don’t match the calendar.
Here are the 20 screened AI-related companies expected by analysts to have the highest compound annual growth rates (CAGR) for sales from 2023 through 2025. Sales estimates are in millions of U.S. dollars. The list also shows which of the above five ETFs holds each stocks.
Click the tickers for more about each company or ETF.
Click here for Tomi Kilgore’s detailed guide to the wealth of information for free on the MarketWatch quote pages.
We have screened for expected revenue growth, rather than for earnings or cash flow, because in a newer tech-oriented business area, investors are most likely to consider the top line as companies sacrifice profits to build market share.
It is important to do your own research if you consider purchasing any individual stock, to form your own opinion about a company’s ability to remain competitive over the long term. Starting from the top of the list, BioXcel Therapeutics Inc. BTAI, -2.47%
is expected to show exponential sales growth, but that is from a low expected baseline this year.
What about the largest AI-related companies held by these ETFs?
Here are the largest 20 companies in the screen by market capitalization, ranked by expected sales CAGR from 2022 through 2025. Once again the sales estimates are in millions of U.S. dollars, but the market caps are in billions.
The White House initially reacted with anxiety toward a decision by Hunter Biden’s lawyer to pursue an aggressive legal strategy against increasing Republican attacks on him, sources familiar with the matter told CNN.
Much of the tension centered around Kevin Morris, the lawyer, bringing on attorney Abbe Lowell, who is known for his aggressive style and litigious nature. Since joining Hunter Biden’s legal team, Lowell has fired off letters demanding investigations into Biden’s opponents, filed a federal lawsuit in his defense and been involved in a child support dispute.
According to multiple sources, senior White House officials and Democrats held a meeting late last year with Lowell, who was expected to be handling GOP-led congressional investigations into the president’s son but whose portfolio has since expanded.
While some of the reticence at the White House around the new legal strategy has abated, sources told CNN, the initial anxiety about publicly pushing back against Hunter Biden’s detractors underscores some of the thorny issues that President Joe Biden must contend with as he runs for reelection.
The president affirmed his support for his son in an interview that aired Friday on MSNBC, saying that the Justice Department’s investigation would not affect his presidency. “First of all, my son has done nothing wrong. I trust him. I have faith in him,” Biden told Stephanie Ruhle. “It impacts my presidency by making me feel proud of him.”
A source close to Hunter Biden’s legal team said one reason the anxiety has died down is because the strategy has been successful. It’s also been assuaged in part thanks to the more open lines of communication between Lowell, the White House and President Biden’s personal attorney Bob Bauer, according to a person familiar with the matter.
A senior Biden adviser insisted that the president’s advisers “don’t direct or advise” Hunter Biden’s legal team on what to do. The senior adviser stressed that Hunter Biden is a private citizen who has the right to make his own decisions about how to handle his legal strategy.
A spokeswoman for Lowell declined to comment.
Hunter Biden’s legal team also has been weighing the possibility of setting up a legal defense fund to help defray his legal bills, according to a person familiar with the matter. A key hurdle is whether they could create a fund with enough guardrails to protect against ethical conflicts for the Biden family.
House Republicans have already launched an investigation into the Biden family’s business dealings, and a legal defense fund soliciting outside donations would be yet another target for congressional scrutiny.
Late last year, shortly after Republicans won control of the House, Hunter Biden made it clear to the White House that he wanted to take a more aggressive approach in responding to attacks against him, according to a source familiar with this legal strategy.
At the time, Republicans had made clear that the younger Biden was going to be their top target for congressional investigations. Hunter Biden was also still staring down a long-running federal criminal investigation focused on tax- and gun-related issues. And when there appeared to be no movement in the criminal probe for months, his lawyer Morris believed it was time to go on the offensive.
As Hunter Biden and Morris moved ahead with their approach, a source familiar with the behind-the-scenes conversations described the White House as having a very negative reaction to the more aggressive strategy and surprise that Morris brought on Lowell.
Multiple sources familiar with the legal strategy said the addition of Lowell caused tension even within the legal team. Josh Levy, one of Hunter Biden’s attorneys who had long been aligned with the Biden White House, resigned as Lowell joined the team.
Since coming on board, Lowell has fired off letters calling for investigations into various officials. In one sent to the Office of Congressional Ethics, he requested an independent ethics review of GOP Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene’s conduct for her public statements that “sound and read like school-yard insults rather than the work of a Member of Congress.”
Another, sent to the Treasury Department’s inspector general, asked for a review of a former Donald Trump aide who allegedly acquired and published online financial activities of Hunter Biden, known as Suspicious Activity Reports (SARs). Hunter Biden’s legal team also recently filed a lawsuit accusing the aide of harassing Biden’s team.
Earlier this week, Lowell traveled to Arkansas to represent Biden in a child support dispute that has become a proxy for Republican investigations, underscoring his wide-reaching involvement in his client’s legal troubles.
Lowell also filed a lawsuit in March that accused a Delaware computer repair shop owner who worked on a laptop of trying to invade Biden’s privacy and wrongfully sharing his personal data for political purposes.
