Month: July 2021

Have The Social Media Companies Become Way Too Powerful?

Have The Social Media Companies Become Way Too Powerful?

Authored by Michael Snyder via TheMostImportantNews.com,

Do you remember the early days of the Internet?  It was like “the wild west”, and that could be bad, but in many ways it was also very good.  The Internet was very decentralized at that time, and information could flow very freely.  For the very first time, ordinary people could communicate with others all over the globe on a massive scale, and I believe that was an incredibly positive development for humanity.  Unfortunately, the elite were absolutely horrified by this free flow of information and they became obsessed with restricting it.  Today, highly advanced algorithms have been designed to shape our behavior online.  We are increasingly being funneled to just a handful of immensely powerful corporate-owned websites, and information on those sites is heavily monitored, controlled and censored.

In particular, the largest “social media websites” have undergone a radical transformation over the past several years.  At one time, if you had something interesting to say it was fairly easy to get something to go viral.  But now the largest social media websites systematically suppress certain groups, viewpoints and belief systems.  If you are opposed to the dominant narratives that they are trying to push, it is going to be exceedingly difficult for you to get much traction online.

Of course if you get frustrated with the extreme levels of censorship, you could always seek out other social media sites where the censorship is lighter.

But the largest social media websites are where all the people are.  As far as total Internet traffic is concerned, Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, Instagram and Reddit are all in the top 10.

I would consider Wikipedia to be a social media website too, and it is in the top 10 as well.

This gives the largest social media companies an extraordinary amount of influence over how people view the world, and one recent survey found that the vast majority of Americans believe that they have too much power…

While most Republicans and Democrats believe social media companies wield too much power, Republicans are more likely to hold this view, according to a new Pew Research Center survey.

A whopping 82 percent of Republicans and Republican-leaning independents think social media companies have too much power and influence in politics, compared with 63 percent of Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents, the survey said.

But even though we believe that they have too much power, we just keep going back.

In fact, most of us are deeply addicted.

One recent poll discovered that 73 percent of British adults “can’t even imagine going a full 24 hours without at least one screen to stare at”…

From computers and tablets to smartphones and TV sets, nowadays most people’s days consist of staring at one screen and then moving on to the next. As such, a recent poll of 2,000 British adults reports a whopping 73 percent can’t even imagine going a full 24 hours without at least one screen to stare at.

What about you?

Could you go a full day without the Internet?

The same poll found that adults are spending approximately six hours a day “in front of screens”…

How glued are we to our devices exactly? On average, researchers report adults spend about six hours daily in front of screens.

We are only awake for about 16 hours a day.

Needless to say, if you allow anyone to pump six hours of “programming” into your mind each day, it is going to radically alter how you view the world.

In addition to frying our minds, being addicted to the Internet can also have physical consequences.  For example, a different study found a direct link between Internet addiction and sleep problems in young people…

More evidence suggests the severity of internet addiction (IA) is directly related to the severity of sleep problems in youth.

Results from a study of more than 4000 adolescent students show IA severity was linked to less sleep and to daytime sleepiness. In addition, boys aged 12-14 years who were addicted to computer games vs social media networking were the most affected.

Experts have found that the Internet can even make you sick.  Medical professionals are telling us that some people can actually develop “cybersickness” if they use the Internet too much…

Cybersickness refers to a cluster of symptoms that occur in the absence of physical motion, similar to motion sickness. These symptoms fall into three categories: nausea, oculomotor issues and general disorientation. Oculomotor symptoms, like eye strain, fatigue and headaches, involve overworking the nerve that controls eye movement. Disorientation can manifest as dizziness and vertigo. And several cybersickness symptoms, such as difficulty concentrating and blurred vision, overlap categories. These issues can persist for hours and affect sleep quality.

So it is important to be careful.

As with so many other things in life, moderation is the key.

Without a doubt, there is still so much about the Internet that is very positive.  Personally, I have been using it to relentlessly share the truth for more than a decade.  The Internet has allowed me to touch millions upon millions of people all over the globe, and I am always encouraged when readers email me from the other side of the planet.

We should always remember that the Internet is simply a tool.

It can be used for great good, but it can also be used for great evil.

And right now, the elite are ruthlessly clamping down on free speech so that they can impose their “values” on everyone else.

They say that they are protecting us by restricting the flow of “disinformation”, but way too often they are the ones that are spreading “disinformation”.

For example, Joe Biden was accused of spreading disinformation about the COVID pandemic during his recent town hall on CNN.

Newsweek looked into that claim, and they rated it to be true…

True. Joe Biden spread misinformation about COVID vaccines at a CNN town hall on Wednesday.

It is not true that people vaccinated against COVID will not get the disease, be hospitalized, end up in an ICU, or die because of it.

So does this mean that we should censor Joe Biden’s speech and ban him from all social media platforms?

No.

I believe that everyone should be allowed to speak, because that is what our founders would have wanted.

Unfortunately, freedom of speech on the Internet is nearly dead, and with each passing day there are even more calls for stricter censorship.

These are very dark days, and they are getting darker all the time.

*  *  *

It is finally here! Michael’s new book entitled “7 Year Apocalypse” is now available in paperback and for the Kindle on Amazon.

Tyler Durden
Fri, 07/30/2021 – 17:00

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2V5Ud2y Tyler Durden

Sore Loser? American Swimmer Makes Veiled Allegation Of Doping After Losing To Russians

Sore Loser? American Swimmer Makes Veiled Allegation Of Doping After Losing To Russians

Perhaps taking a cue from the Washington political and pundit class, a prominent US Olympic athlete has managed to blame nefarious Russian underhanded actions for his losing a race he was the top contender for. Ryan Murphy raised the prospect in a post-race media interview after coming in 2nd for the men’s 200-meter backstroke on Thursday. He was beaten by Russian swimmer Evgeny Rylov – who like all other Russians at the games is competing at Tokyo under the “Russian Olympic Committee” name, or ROC, given the years-long ban on Russia stemming from the 2014 doping scandal.

“I’ve got about 15 thoughts, and 13 of them would get me into a lot of trouble,” Murphy told reporters after the race which he had barely lost. “It is a huge mental drain to go through the year knowing that I’m swimming in a race that’s probably not clean, and that is what it is.”

Murphy, left, won Silver, and Rylov (middle) won gold in the men’s 200m backstroke final. Getty Images/CNN

“The people that know a lot more about the situation made the decision that they did,” he added. “I don’t have the bandwidth to train for the Olympics at a very high level and try to lobby the people that are making the decisions that they’re making the wrong decisions.”

The comments sparked a storm of controversy given it sounded like a direct accusation, prompting the Russian gold medal winner Rylov to have to address it, issuing an assurance that: “I have always been for clean competition. I am always tested.” He added: “From the bottom of my heart, I am for clean sport. I am devoting my whole life to this sport. I don’t even know how to react to that. Ryan didn’t accuse me of anything so I’d rather not react to what he said.”

Murphy later attempted to deny it was accusation, but still suggested the “possibility” of Russian doping when asked by a reporter. The exchange was detailed in The Guardian as follows:

“To be clear, my intention is not to make any allegations, congratulations to Evgeny, congratulations to Luke, they did an incredible job and they’re both very talented swimmers who work very hard and have great technique,” Murphy said.

Asked again if he believed the race was clean, Murphy replied: “One of the things that’s frustrating is that you can’t answer that question with 100% certainty, and I think over the years that’s come out, so I can’t answer that question. I don’t know if it was 100% clean and that’s because of things that have happened in the past.”

A number of US journalists and pundits immediately rallied behind Murphy’s ‘indirect’ accusation, with some even invoking… who else but Putin! as somehow behind the US swimmer’s loss…

The Russian Olympic Committee hit back, releasing a rebuke on Twitter that essentially charged Murphy with being a sore loser:

“How unnerving our victories are for [some]. Yes, we are here at the Olympics. Absolutely right. Whether people like it or not.” it read in part. “But you have to be able to lose.”

Further, Russian officials in response have denounced the politicization of the Olympic games, with Director of Russia’s Foreign Intelligence Service, or SVR, Sergei Naryshkin cited in TASS as saying, “The sports world is tired of the biased and politicized pressure on Russian athletes.”

“We believe that the sports world has grown tired of this politicized Western campaign against global sports, in particular, of the biased and politicized pressure on Russian athletes,” he said.

Tyler Durden
Fri, 07/30/2021 – 16:40

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2WyKfXL Tyler Durden

Short Circuit: A Roundup of Recent Federal Court Decisions

Please enjoy the latest edition of Short Circuit, a weekly feature from the Institute for Justice.

Tired of billable hours? Want to litigate the kinds of cases that made you go to law school in the first place? Good news, IJ is hiring!

We are on the lookout for an energetic and entrepreneurial attorney with 3 or more years of litigation experience to work on cutting-edge constitutional cases, stop government abuses, and champion individual rights. We are also open to more junior level attorneys with clerkship experience.

For these and other job opportunities, visit the Careers section of our website, www.ij.org/jobs, to learn more and apply.

  • In 2017, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan visited Washington, D.C., where he was greeted by anti-Erdogan protestors, whom Turkish security officials beat the snot out of. D.C. Circuit: Neither foreign sovereign immunity, nor the political question doctrine, nor international comity is a valid defense to the said forcible snot extraction.
  • Wife of exiled Russian businessman sues playwright and director over Kleptocracy, a play in which she is portrayed, by name, as a prostitute and murderer. D.C. Circuit: The play also depicts Vladimir Putin reciting poetry to a stuffed Siberian tiger. It’s too fantastical for anyone to reasonably believe it portrays actual historical facts.
  • Plaintiffs: We can only get firearm permits in Connecticut if a government official takes our fingerprints for a background check, so it violated our Second Amendment rights when Connecticut agencies stopped taking fingerprints as part of the state’s COVID-19 emergency response. Second Circuit: They stopped, but then they started again, so everything’s moot.
  • Second Circuit criminal-defense pro tip #1: If your client, shoeless and disheveled, repeatedly bites a Border Patrol agent while purporting to arrest him (with his own handcuffs) for his participation in a “great cabal to eat babies,” effective assistance of counsel might—might—require you to introduce expert evidence in support of an insanity defense.
  • Second Circuit criminal-defense pro tip #2: If your client is going to confess to being a “sleeper” agent of an international terrorist organization pursuant to a promise of immunity from prosecution, make sure the government has, y’know, promised to give him immunity.
  • Second Circuit: Plaintiffs who entered into a contract with a “multi-level marketing” company may have agreed to arbitrate their disputes with the company, but that does not mean they must arbitrate their dispute with former President Donald Trump, who allegedly fraudulently induced them to sign the contracts.
  • If you had claim preclusion, Indian lands, and the subtle legal difference between “electronic bingo” and “slot machine” on your card, then this Second Circuit opinion is a bingo.
  • District court: The Second Amendment may protect an individual right to keep and bear arms, but that right really just protects against blanket bans on anyone owning firearms, not against the government forbidding you, personally, from doing so. Second Circuit: We’re pretty sure individual rights are about individuals.
  • OK, but does the Second Amendment protect undocumented immigrants and bar a federal law that prohibits them from possessing a gun? Second Circuit: We won’t categorically decide that today, but the law constitutionally applies to the defendant in this case, who illegally entered and stayed in the U.S., never filed federal tax returns, and was never employed on the books. Concurrence: The court should just say “that illegal aliens lack protection under the Second Amendment.”
  • Allegheny County, Pa. jailor is fired after he complains that a colleague called his biracial grand-niece a “monkey” and sent a series of racially offensive text messages about their coworkers. District court: A white jailor cannot maintain a retaliation claim under Title VII. Third Circuit: Not so. Harassing someone who associates with a person of another race may well create a hostile work environment, and Title VII protects all employees from retaliation for filing a complaint.
  • Third Circuit: Stop applying Rooker-Feldman!
  • In narrow circumstances, a federal prisoner can file a petition for habeas corpus if he is procedurally barred from filing another collateral attack on his sentence. But those circumstances, says the Fourth Circuit, don’t reach far enough to help this former corrections officer who was convicted in connection with the brutal death of an inmate.
  • Government agents’ seizure attorney-client privileged materials is a big deal, the Fifth Circuit reminds us, ordering a district court to reinstate a healthcare company’s motion for return of its property.
  • In this Fifth Circuit case, we once again observe the time-honored saying that a man who represents himself has a convicted felon for a client. (Is that the saying? We didn’t have time to look it up.)
  • In which the Sixth Circuit takes judicial notice of the fact that it does not have a time machine, which means plaintiffs’ requests for injunctions granting them greater access to the ballot in 2020 are moot.
  • Invoking the Public Health Service Act of 1944, the CDC imposes—and subsequently extends—a nationwide eviction moratorium. Owners of rental property sue, alleging the moratorium exceeds the CDC’s power. Sixth Circuit: And they’re right. The law gives the Surgeon General power to “provide for such inspection, fumigation, disinfection, sanitation, pest extermination, destruction of animals or articles found to be so infected or contaminated as to be sources of dangerous infection to human beings, and other measures, as in his judgment may be necessary.” The eviction moratorium goes too far. Concurrence: This is a textbook example of why we have separation of powers.
  • Asthmatic prisoner seeks compassionate release because of the risk of COVID-19. Seventh Circuit: Sorry, but the law requires prisoners to show “extraordinary and compelling” reasons for immediate release. Now that there’s an effective vaccine, that option is off the table.
  • Court: Are you sure you don’t want your lawyers to make a closing argument in the penalty phase of your quadruple murder trial?
    Defendant: Yes.
    Court: Really, really sure? Like, 100% sure?
    Defendant: Absolutely, unequivocally sure.
    Court: This is a death penalty case, you know.
    Defendant: Only Allah can decide whether I live or die.
    Jury: About that…
    Eighth Circuit: The defendant’s ineffective-assistance claim fails.
  • The Beef Promotion and Research Act of 1985 imposes a $1 per head fee on cattle sales. The money goes to “state beef councils,” which use the money on ad campaigns to “strengthen the beef industry’s position in the marketplace.” And there’s a similar program for pistachios, which directs the money to the California Pistachio Commission to promote pistachio sales. Ninth Circuit: Since the pistachio promotion was government speech, the beef promotion is too. The ranchers challenging the fee can’t bring a claim about being compelled to subsidize speech they dislike. [Your editors think this is a good place to mention the concept of public choice theory.]
  • California bans pork not produced according to certain animal-welfare requirements. Pork producers: But, practically speaking, everyone is going to have to follow California’s standards. That’s a dormant Commerce Clause violation. Ninth Circuit: We didn’t buy that theory for foie gras, and we’re not buying it now. Case dismissed.
  • Does a California order mandating remote school violate the fundamental right to attend public school? Private school? Ninth Circuit: No. Yes. Dissent: The state has resumed in-person instruction. The case is moot, and the majority overreads the Supreme Court’s private school decisions.
  • When police arrest someone driving a car, they may impound the car for public safety. Impounding demands inventory searches. Surely police wouldn’t impound a car as a pretext to search for evidence of a crime, right? Indeed they do, shows the Tenth Circuit, which reverses the convictions based on this evidence. Dissent: Police need only act reasonably in deciding to impound a car; they need not exhaust all other options, as the majority suggests.
  • Colorado website designer refuses to create websites celebrating same-sex marriage, which she believes conflict with God’s will. This runs afoul of state anti-discrimination law. Does the law run afoul of the First Amendment? Tenth Circuit: No. The law survives strict scrutiny under the Free Speech Clause and, as a neutral law of general applicability, it survives the Free Exercise Clause. Dissent: “[T]his case represents another chapter in the growing disconnect between the Constitution’s endorsement of pluralism of belief on the one hand and antidiscrimination laws’ restrictions of religious-based speech in the marketplace on the other.”
  • El Paso County, Colo. patrol sergeant vocally supports his boss’s opponent in upcoming sheriff election. He also shares with a local newspaper alleged misconduct in the sheriff’s office. Two days after the newspaper publishes its story, the sheriff fires the sergeant, who responds with a First Amendment lawsuit. Sheriff: Qualified immunity. Tenth Circuit: No. Every reasonable official in the sheriff’s position would’ve understood that they couldn’t fire someone for reporting misconduct to the newspaper.
  • Royal Caribbean Cruises offers no refunds for passenger cancelation within 14 days of a voyage, which means that passengers on a “cruise to nowhere” were forced to travel to Texas while a Category 4 hurricane was barreling down on the state. On the day of the cruise, Royal Caribbean canceled, leaving passengers stuck in hurricane conditions. Passengers sue. Eleventh Circuit: Remanded because of some jurisdiction thing. [Ed.: We only summarized this case as an excuse to link to this famous Harper’s article by David Foster Wallace.]

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/3feBPvn
via IFTTT

74% Of COVID-19 Cases From Massachusetts Outbreak Occurred In Fully Vaccinated People: CDC

74% Of COVID-19 Cases From Massachusetts Outbreak Occurred In Fully Vaccinated People: CDC

Authored by Zachary Steiber via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

A COVID-19 outbreak in a Massachusetts county in July primarily occurred among vaccinated people, sparking fears that a variant of the CCP virus can impact that population more than other strains.

Of the 469 cases detected in Barnstable County, 74 percent occurred among the fully vaccinated, according to a new study published on Friday.

Genomic sequencing of 133 patients showed most of them were infected with the Delta variant of the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) virus.

The bulk of the infected people did not require hospital care, but among the five that did, four were fully vaccinated.

The study, published by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), helped drive agency officials to change masking guidance.

CDC officials announced Tuesday that even vaccinated persons should wear masks indoors, an abrupt shift from under three months ago.

The CDC was unable to point to any published data at the time of its announcement, though an internal document leaked Thursday pointed to some published studies, as well as what was at the time unpublished data from Massachusetts.

The agency recommended that both the vaccinated and unvaccinated should don face coverings indoors in areas with high or substantial transmission of the CCP virus. More than half the counties in America meet one of those designations.

[ZH: And as Bloomberg notes, the CDC scaled back their hunt for breakthrough cases just as Delta emerged.

While the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention stopped comprehensively tracking what are known as vaccine breakthrough cases in May, the consequences of that choice are only now beginning to show.

At the time, the agency had identified only 10,262 cases across the U.S. where a fully vaccinated person had tested positive for Covid. Most people who got infected after vaccination showed few symptoms, and appeared to be at low risk of infecting others. 

But in the months since, the number of vaccine breakthrough cases has grown, as has the risk that they present. And while the CDC has stopped tracking such cases, many states have not. Bloomberg gathered data from 35 states and identified 111,748 vaccine breakthrough cases through the end of July, more than 10 times the CDC’s end-of-April tally.]

Researchers, though, said their investigation suggests people in any area should wear masks inside.

“Findings from this investigation suggest that even jurisdictions without substantial or high COVID-19 transmission might consider expanding prevention strategies, including masking in indoor public settings regardless of vaccination status, given the potential risk of infection during attendance at large public gatherings that include travelers from many areas with differing levels of transmission,” they wrote.

Some of the researchers are CDC officials. Others are with the Massachusetts Department of Public Health, which declined to facilitate an interview on the findings.

The cases in Barnstable County stemmed from summer events and large public gatherings held between July 3 and July 17, the researchers said in the study.

A graph from a new study published by the CDC shows that many of the COVID-19 cases linked to an outbreak in Barnstable County, Massachusetts, this month were among vaccinated people. (CDC)

The events attracted thousands of tourists to the area.

The average of COVID-19 cases in the county rose sharply from July 3 to July 17.

Using travel history from the state’s COVID-19 surveillance system, officials identified a cluster of cases among Massachusetts residents. Additional cases were pinpointed by local health officials.

The cluster cases were defined by a positive COVID-19 test within 14 days of travel or residence in Barnstable County since July 3.

By July 26, 469 COVID-19 cases were identified among state residents, with dates of positive specimens ranging from July 6 to July 25.

Researchers found that the bulk were fully vaccinated, a term that refers to people who have gotten two Moderna or Pfizer COVID-19 vaccines, or the single-shot Johnson & Johnson jab.

Initial data—chain reaction cycle threshold values from some of the specimens—indicate that the viral load of the vaccinated and unvaccinated cases are similar, researchers said. However, they said microbiological studies are required to confirm those findings.

Further, the Infectious Disease Society of America and the Association for Molecular Pathology earlier this year said that such values “should not be considered quantitative measures of viral load.”

Still, the findings were among those used by the CDC to justify the sudden shift this week. Where before vaccinated people were told they did not need to wear a mask anywhere, they are now being told to don a face covering inside.

The data demonstrate “that Delta infection resulted in similarly high SARS-CoV-2 viral loads in vaccinated and unvaccinated people,” Dr. Rochelle Walensky, the CDC’s director, said in a statement on Friday.

“High viral loads suggest an increased risk of transmission and raised concern that, unlike with other variants, vaccinated people infected with Delta can transmit the virus. This finding is concerning and was a pivotal discovery leading to CDC’s updated mask recommendation.”

The recommendation is not binding but the CDC’s advice is widely adopted by counties, states, and businesses.

The rise in cases in Provincetown, part of Barnstable County, prompted town officials earlier this week to adopt an indoor mask mandate.

The mandate will shift to an advisory when the daily positive testing rate stays below 3 percent for at least five days, according to Town Manager Alex Morse.

While vaccinated people must wear masks inside, unvaccinated people, including children under the age of 12, must wear face coverings in outdoor crowded areas as well as indoors.

As of July 29, 882 cases were linked to the Barnstable County cluster, 531 of whom are state residents. The percentage of breakthrough cases remained at 74 percent.

Follow Zachary on Twitter: @zackstieber
Follow Zachary on Parler: @zackstieber

Tyler Durden
Fri, 07/30/2021 – 16:20

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/3ffhki2 Tyler Durden

Short Circuit: A Roundup of Recent Federal Court Decisions

Please enjoy the latest edition of Short Circuit, a weekly feature from the Institute for Justice.

Tired of billable hours? Want to litigate the kinds of cases that made you go to law school in the first place? Good news, IJ is hiring!

We are on the lookout for an energetic and entrepreneurial attorney with 3 or more years of litigation experience to work on cutting-edge constitutional cases, stop government abuses, and champion individual rights. We are also open to more junior level attorneys with clerkship experience.

For these and other job opportunities, visit the Careers section of our website, www.ij.org/jobs, to learn more and apply.

  • In 2017, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan visited Washington, D.C., where he was greeted by anti-Erdogan protestors, whom Turkish security officials beat the snot out of. D.C. Circuit: Neither foreign sovereign immunity, nor the political question doctrine, nor international comity is a valid defense to the said forcible snot extraction.
  • Wife of exiled Russian businessman sues playwright and director over Kleptocracy, a play in which she is portrayed, by name, as a prostitute and murderer. D.C. Circuit: The play also depicts Vladimir Putin reciting poetry to a stuffed Siberian tiger. It’s too fantastical for anyone to reasonably believe it portrays actual historical facts.
  • Plaintiffs: We can only get firearm permits in Connecticut if a government official takes our fingerprints for a background check, so it violated our Second Amendment rights when Connecticut agencies stopped taking fingerprints as part of the state’s COVID-19 emergency response. Second Circuit: They stopped, but then they started again, so everything’s moot.
  • Second Circuit criminal-defense pro tip #1: If your client, shoeless and disheveled, repeatedly bites a Border Patrol agent while purporting to arrest him (with his own handcuffs) for his participation in a “great cabal to eat babies,” effective assistance of counsel might—might—require you to introduce expert evidence in support of an insanity defense.
  • Second Circuit criminal-defense pro tip #2: If your client is going to confess to being a “sleeper” agent of an international terrorist organization pursuant to a promise of immunity from prosecution, make sure the government has, y’know, promised to give him immunity.
  • Second Circuit: Plaintiffs who entered into a contract with a “multi-level marketing” company may have agreed to arbitrate their disputes with the company, but that does not mean they must arbitrate their dispute with former President Donald Trump, who allegedly fraudulently induced them to sign the contracts.
  • If you had claim preclusion, Indian lands, and the subtle legal difference between “electronic bingo” and “slot machine” on your card, then this Second Circuit opinion is a bingo.
  • District court: The Second Amendment may protect an individual right to keep and bear arms, but that right really just protects against blanket bans on anyone owning firearms, not against the government forbidding you, personally, from doing so. Second Circuit: We’re pretty sure individual rights are about individuals.
  • OK, but does the Second Amendment protect undocumented immigrants and bar a federal law that prohibits them from possessing a gun? Second Circuit: We won’t categorically decide that today, but the law constitutionally applies to the defendant in this case, who illegally entered and stayed in the U.S., never filed federal tax returns, and was never employed on the books. Concurrence: The court should just say “that illegal aliens lack protection under the Second Amendment.”
  • Allegheny County, Pa. jailor is fired after he complains that a colleague called his biracial grand-niece a “monkey” and sent a series of racially offensive text messages about their coworkers. District court: A white jailor cannot maintain a retaliation claim under Title VII. Third Circuit: Not so. Harassing someone who associates with a person of another race may well create a hostile work environment, and Title VII protects all employees from retaliation for filing a complaint.
  • Third Circuit: Stop applying Rooker-Feldman!
  • In narrow circumstances, a federal prisoner can file a petition for habeas corpus if he is procedurally barred from filing another collateral attack on his sentence. But those circumstances, says the Fourth Circuit, don’t reach far enough to help this former corrections officer who was convicted in connection with the brutal death of an inmate.
  • Government agents’ seizure attorney-client privileged materials is a big deal, the Fifth Circuit reminds us, ordering a district court to reinstate a healthcare company’s motion for return of its property.
  • In this Fifth Circuit case, we once again observe the time-honored saying that a man who represents himself has a convicted felon for a client. (Is that the saying? We didn’t have time to look it up.)
  • In which the Sixth Circuit takes judicial notice of the fact that it does not have a time machine, which means plaintiffs’ requests for injunctions granting them greater access to the ballot in 2020 are moot.
  • Invoking the Public Health Service Act of 1944, the CDC imposes—and subsequently extends—a nationwide eviction moratorium. Owners of rental property sue, alleging the moratorium exceeds the CDC’s power. Sixth Circuit: And they’re right. The law gives the Surgeon General power to “provide for such inspection, fumigation, disinfection, sanitation, pest extermination, destruction of animals or articles found to be so infected or contaminated as to be sources of dangerous infection to human beings, and other measures, as in his judgment may be necessary.” The eviction moratorium goes too far. Concurrence: This is a textbook example of why we have separation of powers.
  • Asthmatic prisoner seeks compassionate release because of the risk of COVID-19. Seventh Circuit: Sorry, but the law requires prisoners to show “extraordinary and compelling” reasons for immediate release. Now that there’s an effective vaccine, that option is off the table.
  • Court: Are you sure you don’t want your lawyers to make a closing argument in the penalty phase of your quadruple murder trial?
    Defendant: Yes.
    Court: Really, really sure? Like, 100% sure?
    Defendant: Absolutely, unequivocally sure.
    Court: This is a death penalty case, you know.
    Defendant: Only Allah can decide whether I live or die.
    Jury: About that…
    Eighth Circuit: The defendant’s ineffective-assistance claim fails.
  • The Beef Promotion and Research Act of 1985 imposes a $1 per head fee on cattle sales. The money goes to “state beef councils,” which use the money on ad campaigns to “strengthen the beef industry’s position in the marketplace.” And there’s a similar program for pistachios, which directs the money to the California Pistachio Commission to promote pistachio sales. Ninth Circuit: Since the pistachio promotion was government speech, the beef promotion is too. The ranchers challenging the fee can’t bring a claim about being compelled to subsidize speech they dislike. [Your editors think this is a good place to mention the concept of public choice theory.]
  • California bans pork not produced according to certain animal-welfare requirements. Pork producers: But, practically speaking, everyone is going to have to follow California’s standards. That’s a dormant Commerce Clause violation. Ninth Circuit: We didn’t buy that theory for foie gras, and we’re not buying it now. Case dismissed.
  • Does a California order mandating remote school violate the fundamental right to attend public school? Private school? Ninth Circuit: No. Yes. Dissent: The state has resumed in-person instruction. The case is moot, and the majority overreads the Supreme Court’s private school decisions.
  • When police arrest someone driving a car, they may impound the car for public safety. Impounding demands inventory searches. Surely police wouldn’t impound a car as a pretext to search for evidence of a crime, right? Indeed they do, shows the Tenth Circuit, which reverses the convictions based on this evidence. Dissent: Police need only act reasonably in deciding to impound a car; they need not exhaust all other options, as the majority suggests.
  • Colorado website designer refuses to create websites celebrating same-sex marriage, which she believes conflict with God’s will. This runs afoul of state anti-discrimination law. Does the law run afoul of the First Amendment? Tenth Circuit: No. The law survives strict scrutiny under the Free Speech Clause and, as a neutral law of general applicability, it survives the Free Exercise Clause. Dissent: “[T]his case represents another chapter in the growing disconnect between the Constitution’s endorsement of pluralism of belief on the one hand and antidiscrimination laws’ restrictions of religious-based speech in the marketplace on the other.”
  • El Paso County, Colo. patrol sergeant vocally supports his boss’s opponent in upcoming sheriff election. He also shares with a local newspaper alleged misconduct in the sheriff’s office. Two days after the newspaper publishes its story, the sheriff fires the sergeant, who responds with a First Amendment lawsuit. Sheriff: Qualified immunity. Tenth Circuit: No. Every reasonable official in the sheriff’s position would’ve understood that they couldn’t fire someone for reporting misconduct to the newspaper.
  • Royal Caribbean Cruises offers no refunds for passenger cancelation within 14 days of a voyage, which means that passengers on a “cruise to nowhere” were forced to travel to Texas while a Category 4 hurricane was barreling down on the state. On the day of the cruise, Royal Caribbean canceled, leaving passengers stuck in hurricane conditions. Passengers sue. Eleventh Circuit: Remanded because of some jurisdiction thing. [Ed.: We only summarized this case as an excuse to link to this famous Harper’s article by David Foster Wallace.]

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/3feBPvn
via IFTTT

July Jolt: Small Caps & Bond Yields Plunge Most Since March 2020 COVID Crash

July Jolt: Small Caps & Bond Yields Plunge Most Since March 2020 COVID Crash

Small Caps end the month with a loss for the first time since March 2020, and only the 2nd monthly loss since then (Trannies were also down on the month, its 2nd monthly loss in a row). Nasdaq 100 outperformed on the month but was ‘only’ up 2.5%…

Source: Bloomberg

Diving into this week, Amazon saw no bounce at all today after crashing from earnings last night…

Which pushed AMZN below GOOGL in market cap…

Source: Bloomberg

Energy stocks were ugly in July while Healthcare outperformed…

Source: Bloomberg

Intramonth, the markets got a scare from Delta and then shrugged it off just as the Biden admin ramped up their fearmongering…

Source: Bloomberg

Still, it was China that was really monkeyhammered in July with the Shanghai Comp suffering its worst month since Oct 2018 (that’s even with The National Team’s rescue this week)…

Source: Bloomberg

July saw the biggest yields drop in the belly of the curve since March 2020. Bonds were consistently bid in July with the 7Y/10Y outperforming (-24bps)…

Source: Bloomberg

The Yield curve (2s10s) tumbled 18bps (its 4th straight month of flattening)…

Source: Bloomberg

The Dollar ended the month flat – after quite a roller-coaster…

Source: Bloomberg

Cryptos also had a rollercoaster month but Bitcoin and Ethereum ended significantly higher…

Source: Bloomberg

Commodities were mixed on the month with gold up, silver down; and copper up and crude flat…

Source: Bloomberg

Coffee rollercoastered too amid Brazil Frost concerns (today was biggest drop since 2010 as freeze fears subsided)…

Source: Bloomberg

Finally, real yields collapsed in July to record, negative lows, suggesting gold has room to run here…

Source: Bloomberg

And just in case you think everything is tickittyboo because stocks are near record highs, investors parked more than $1 trillion at The Fed overnight!!! Think we aren’t over-liquidified?

Source: Bloomberg

US Economic Surprise data turned negative this week and is at its weakest since June 2020…while stocks levitate along with The Fed’s balance sheet…

Source: Bloomberg

So, real economic data is slumping, the virus is re-emerging in a more “dangerous” variant, and China’s Capital Markets are collapsing… but US stocks are at record highs…

Phew!

Tyler Durden
Fri, 07/30/2021 – 16:00

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/3rHvxtb Tyler Durden

Parents Challenging “Anti-Racism” Curriculum Can Litigate Pseudonymously, to Shield Their Children

From Menders v. Loudoun County School Bd., decided Wednesday by Judge Theresa Carroll Buchanan (E.D. Va.) (and you can also read the Complaint):

Plaintiffs Patti H. Menders, Scott Mineo, Jane Doe #1, Jane Doe #2, and Jane Doe #3 … are parents of children enrolled in Loudoun County schools suing Defendant Loudoun County School Board … on behalf of themselves and their minor children. Specifically, Plaintiffs challenge Defendant’s Action Plan to Combat Systemic Racism, which provides for the creation of a Student Equity Ambassador Program designed to identify incidents of racial bias. Plaintiffs allege this program violates their Fourteenth Amendment right to equal protection and First Amendment right to freedom of speech….

[The Doe] Plaintiffs request to proceed anonymously to protect themselves and their schoolchildren from harassment and retaliation. In support of this request, Plaintiffs cite a myriad of news articles from sources ranging from Fox News to the New York Post, which they argue the Court should judicially notice as evidence of the politically charged nature of this dispute….

It is well-established that the public has a right to know the identities of the parties in a lawsuit. This notion, however, “operates only as a presumption and not as an absolute, unreviewable license to deny [a request to proceed anonymously].” Rather, courts, in their discretion, may determine “privacy or confidentiality concerns are sometimes sufficiently critical that parties or witnesses should be allowed this rare dispensation.” Moreover, the Fourth Circuit has identified the following factors that the Court should consider when determining whether to permit a party to proceed anonymously:

  1. Whether the justification asserted by the requesting party is merely to avoid the annoyance and criticism that may attend any litigation or is to preserve privacy in a matter of sensitive and highly personal nature;
  2. Whether identification poses a risk of retaliatory physical or mental harm to the requesting party or even more critically, to innocent non-parties;
  3. The ages of the persons whose privacy interests are sought to be protected;
  4. Whether the action is against a governmental or private party; and
  5. The risk of unfairness to the opposing party from allowing an action against it to proceed

These non-exhaustive factors are meant only to guide a court’s review and the Court need not address every factor in making its determination.

Considering the above standards, the Court … finds that Plaintiffs may proceed anonymously in this case….. [I]t is abundantly evident that the issues in this case are a matter of highly charged political debate. The extreme emotions on both sides of this debate make likely the risk of ridicule and mental or physical harm to the parents in this suit—but more concerning—to their minor children.

Although parents’ names may not always be protected in similar politically charged cases, in this instance, publishing their names will automatically lead to identification of their children’s identities….

Finally, there is little risk of unfairness to Defendant in allowing Plaintiff to proceed anonymously. Defendant knows Plaintiffs are parents of children in their schools. If Defendant believes in good faith that it needs to dispute whether Plaintiffs have standing, they can address that in a separate motion, which the court will determine without disclosing Plaintiffs’ identities….

Courts are indeed generally more willing to allow varying degrees of anonymity and pseudonymity (sometimes including for parents) in order to shield minors.

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/3ya3QeR
via IFTTT

Is the Free State Project a Better Idea than the Libertarian Party?


PorcFest_Angela_McArdle_6_25_2021_LowRes_v3

Founded in 1971, the Libertarian Party was created to elect libertarians to public office, including the presidency of the United States. 

Founded in 2001, the Free State Project is an effort to turn New Hampshire—the “Live Free or Die” state—into a libertarian paradise of minimal government, with the ultimate aim of electing a libertarian to the governorship.

Which is the more realistic path to creating a freer society? That was the question debated by Jeremy Kauffman, a member of the board of the Free State Project, and Angela McArdle, candidate for chair of the National Libertarian Party and current chair of the L.P. of Los Angeles County.

Kauffman defended the resolution, “The Free State Project is a more realistic path to liberty than the Libertarian Party,” and McArdle took the negative.

The debate was moderated by Soho Forum director Gene Epstein and held in front of a live audience at the Free State Project’s annual Porcupine Freedom Festival (Porcfest). It was an Oxford-style debate, so the audience voted on the proposition before and after the proceedings, with the winner being the person who moved more people to his or her side.

Narrated by Nick Gillespie.

Photo: Brett Raney

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/3BXcwYg
via IFTTT

‘Up In Smoke:’ Tesla Megapack Battery Catches Fire In Australia 

‘Up In Smoke:’ Tesla Megapack Battery Catches Fire In Australia 

It’s not just Tesla cars that “spontaneously” combust. Reports indicate a 13 ton Tesla Megapack caught fire in Australia’s Victoria state on Friday morning. 

The Megapack battery unit is one of the world’s largest energy storage projects, operated by France’s Neoen SA, and uses Tesla batteries. 

Dubbed “Victorian Big Battery,” it was recently commissioned by local authorities “to boost the state’s energy reliability, drive down electricity prices and support Victoria’s transition to renewable energy – as well as creating local jobs as we take steps towards a COVID normal.”

Fire and Rescue Victoria released a statement Friday indicating fire crews were “responding to a large battery fire” at the plant located in Moorabool. Toxic fumes from the battery fire sparked air quality warnings for surrounding suburbs and advised people to move indoors and close windows. 

Seven News Melbourne reported, “fire crews are currently on the scene of a battery fire at Moorabool, near Geelong. Firefighters are working to contain the fire and stop it spreading to the nearby batteries.”

Seven News said the battery plant was “undergoing testing” when the blaze broke out. So far, no injuries were reported, and the site has been evacuated. The site has been disconnected from the grid and will not impact the electricity supply. 

Tesla CEO Elon Musk recently touted the company’s increasing energy storage business but may have to explain why a lithium-ion battery the size of a shipping container spontaneously caught on fire. 

Drone footage shows Tesla was quick to deliver a replacement battery following the fire. 

The whole ESG push for “green technology” to power the electricity grid of tomorrow sounds wonderful but comes at a price. If a fire breaks out, the lithium-ion battery produces intense heat and considerable gas and highly toxic smoke. 

Tyler Durden
Fri, 07/30/2021 – 15:39

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/3BVIwfn Tyler Durden

Parents Challenging “Anti-Racism” Curriculum Can Litigate Pseudonymously, to Shield Their Children

From Menders v. Loudoun County School Bd., decided Wednesday by Judge Theresa Carroll Buchanan (E.D. Va.) (and you can also read the Complaint):

Plaintiffs Patti H. Menders, Scott Mineo, Jane Doe #1, Jane Doe #2, and Jane Doe #3 … are parents of children enrolled in Loudoun County schools suing Defendant Loudoun County School Board … on behalf of themselves and their minor children. Specifically, Plaintiffs challenge Defendant’s Action Plan to Combat Systemic Racism, which provides for the creation of a Student Equity Ambassador Program designed to identify incidents of racial bias. Plaintiffs allege this program violates their Fourteenth Amendment right to equal protection and First Amendment right to freedom of speech….

[The Doe] Plaintiffs request to proceed anonymously to protect themselves and their schoolchildren from harassment and retaliation. In support of this request, Plaintiffs cite a myriad of news articles from sources ranging from Fox News to the New York Post, which they argue the Court should judicially notice as evidence of the politically charged nature of this dispute….

It is well-established that the public has a right to know the identities of the parties in a lawsuit. This notion, however, “operates only as a presumption and not as an absolute, unreviewable license to deny [a request to proceed anonymously].” Rather, courts, in their discretion, may determine “privacy or confidentiality concerns are sometimes sufficiently critical that parties or witnesses should be allowed this rare dispensation.” Moreover, the Fourth Circuit has identified the following factors that the Court should consider when determining whether to permit a party to proceed anonymously:

  1. Whether the justification asserted by the requesting party is merely to avoid the annoyance and criticism that may attend any litigation or is to preserve privacy in a matter of sensitive and highly personal nature;
  2. Whether identification poses a risk of retaliatory physical or mental harm to the requesting party or even more critically, to innocent non-parties;
  3. The ages of the persons whose privacy interests are sought to be protected;
  4. Whether the action is against a governmental or private party; and
  5. The risk of unfairness to the opposing party from allowing an action against it to proceed

These non-exhaustive factors are meant only to guide a court’s review and the Court need not address every factor in making its determination.

Considering the above standards, the Court … finds that Plaintiffs may proceed anonymously in this case….. [I]t is abundantly evident that the issues in this case are a matter of highly charged political debate. The extreme emotions on both sides of this debate make likely the risk of ridicule and mental or physical harm to the parents in this suit—but more concerning—to their minor children.

Although parents’ names may not always be protected in similar politically charged cases, in this instance, publishing their names will automatically lead to identification of their children’s identities….

Finally, there is little risk of unfairness to Defendant in allowing Plaintiff to proceed anonymously. Defendant knows Plaintiffs are parents of children in their schools. If Defendant believes in good faith that it needs to dispute whether Plaintiffs have standing, they can address that in a separate motion, which the court will determine without disclosing Plaintiffs’ identities….

Courts are indeed generally more willing to allow varying degrees of anonymity and pseudonymity (sometimes including for parents) in order to shield minors.

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/3ya3QeR
via IFTTT