#Smith v. United States Department of the Treasury
Explore tagged Tumblr posts
nationallawreview · 4 days ago
Text
It Lives: Trump Administration Defends Corporate Transparency Act; May Modify its Application
On February 5, 2025, the Trump administration added a new chapter to the saga that has been implementation of the Corporate Transparency Act (CTA), filing a notice of appeal and motion for stay against an Eastern District of Texas injunction in Smith v. United States Department of the Treasury on enforcement of the CTA’s filing deadline. In its filing, the Treasury Department stated that it would…
0 notes
dreaminginthedeepsouth · 3 years ago
Link
LETTERS FROM AN AMERICAN
August 18, 2021
Heather Cox Richardson
It is still early days, and the picture of what is happening in Afghanistan now that the Taliban has regained control of the country continues to develop.
Central to affairs there is money. Afghanistan is one of the poorest countries in the world, with about half its population requiring humanitarian aid this year and about 90% of its people living below the poverty line of making $2 a day.
The country depends on foreign aid. Under the U.S.-supported Afghan government, the United States and other nations funded about 80% of Afghanistan’s budget. In 2020, foreign aid made up about 43% of Afghanistan’s GDP (the GDP, or gross domestic product, is the monetary value of all the goods and services produced in a country), down from 100% of it in 2009.
This is a huge problem for the Taliban, because their takeover of the country means that the money the country so desperately needs has dried up. The U.S. has frozen billions of dollars of Afghan government money held here in the U.S. The European Union and Germany have also suspended their financial support for the country, and today the International Monetary Fund blocked Afghanistan’s access to $460 million in currency reserves.
Adam M. Smith, who served on the National Security Council during the Obama administration, told Jeff Stein of the Washington Post that the financial squeeze is potentially “cataclysmic for Afghanistan.” It threatens to spark a humanitarian crisis that, in turn, will create a refugee crisis in central Asia. Already, the fighting in the last eight months has displaced more than half a million Afghans.
People fleeing from the Taliban threaten to destabilize the region more generally. While Russia was happy to support the Taliban in a war against the U.S., now that its fighters are in charge of the country, Russia needs to keep the Taliban’s extremism from spreading to other countries in the area. So it is tentatively saying supportive things about the Taliban, but it is also stepping up its protection of neighboring countries’ borders with Afghanistan. Other countries are also leery of refugees in the region: large numbers of refugees have, in the past, led countries to turn against immigrants, giving a leg up to right-wing governments.
Canada and Britain are each taking an additional 20,000 Afghan women leaders, reporters, LGBTQ people, and human rights workers on top of those they have already volunteered to take, but Turkey—which is governed by strongman president Recep Tayyip Erdogan—is building a wall to block refugees, and French President Emmanuel Macron asked officials in Pakistan, Iran, and Turkey to prevent migrants reaching their countries from traveling any further. The European Union has asked its member states to take more Afghan refugees.
In the U.S., the question of Afghan refugees is splitting the Republican Party, with about 30% of it following the hard anti-immigrant line of former president Donald Trump. Others, though, especially those whose districts include military installations, are saying they welcome our Afghan allies.
The people fleeing the country also present a problem for those now in control of Afghanistan. The idea that people are terrified of their rule is a foreign relations nightmare, at the same time that those leaving are the ones most likely to have the skills necessary to help govern the country. But leaders can’t really stop the outward flow—at least immediately—because they do not want to antagonize the international community so thoroughly that it continues to withhold the financial aid the country so badly needs. So, while on the streets, Taliban fighters are harassing Afghans who are trying to get away, Taliban leaders are saying they will permit people to evacuate, that they will offer blanket amnesty to those who opposed them, and also that they will defend some rights for women and girls.
The Biden administration is sending more personnel to help evacuate those who want to leave. The president has promised to evacuate all Americans in the country—as many as 15,000 people—but said only that we would evacuate as many of the estimated 65,000 Afghans who want to leave as possible. The Taliban has put up checkpoints on the roads to the airport and are not permitting everyone to pass. U.S. military leaders say they will be able to evacuate between 5000 and 9000 people a day.
Today, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Mark A. Milley tried to explain the frantic rush to evacuate people from Afghanistan to reporters by saying: “There was nothing that I or anyone else saw that indicated a collapse of this army and this government in 11 days.” Maybe. But military analyst Jason Dempsey condemned the whole U.S. military project in Afghanistan when he told NPR's Don Gonyea that the collapse of the Afghan government showed that the U.S. had fundamentally misunderstood the people of Afghanistan and had tried to impose a military system that simply made no sense for a society based in patronage networks and family relationships.
Even with Dempsey’s likely accurate assessment, the statement that U.S. military intelligence missed that a 300,000 person army was going to melt away still seems to me astonishing. Still, foreign policy and national security policy analyst Dr. John Gans of the University of Pennsylvania speculated on Twitter that such a lapse might be more “normal”—his word and quotation marks—than it seems, reflecting the slips possible in government bureaucracy. He points out that the Department of Defense has largely controlled Afghanistan and the way the U.S. involvement there was handled in Washington. But with the end of the military mission, the Defense Department was eager to hand off responsibility to the State Department, which was badly weakened under the previous administration and has not yet rebuilt fully enough to handle what was clearly a complicated handoff. “There have not been many transitions between an American war & an American diplomatic relationship with a sovereign, friendly country,” Gans wrote. “Fewer still when the friendly regime disintegrates so quickly.” When things started to go wrong, they snowballed.
And yet, the media portrayal of our withdrawal as a catastrophe also seems to me surprising. To date, at least as far as I have seen, there have been no reports of such atrocities as the top American diplomat in Syria reported in the chaos when the U.S. pulled out of northern Syria in 2019. Violence against our Kurdish allies there was widely expected and it indeed occurred. In a memo made public in November of that year, Ambassador William V. Roebuck wrote that “Islamist groups” paid by Turkey were deliberately engaged in ethnic cleansing of Kurds, and were committing “widely publicized, fear-inducing atrocities” even while “our military forces and diplomats were on the ground.” The memo continued: “The Turkey operation damaged our regional and international credibility and has significantly destabilized northeastern Syria.”
Reports of that ethnic cleansing in the wake of our withdrawal seemed to get very little media attention in 2019, perhaps because the former president’s first impeachment inquiry took up all the oxygen. But it strikes me that the sensibility of Roebuck’s memo is now being read onto our withdrawal from Afghanistan although conditions there are not—yet—like that.
For now, it seems, the drive to keep the door open for foreign money is reining in Taliban extremism. That caution seems unlikely to last forever, but it might hold for long enough to complete an evacuation.
Much is still unclear and the situation is changing rapidly, but my guess is that keeping an eye on the money will be crucial for understanding how this plays out.
Meanwhile, the former president of Afghanistan, Ashraf Ghani, has surfaced in the United Arab Emirates. He denies early reports that he fled the country with suitcases full of cash.
—-
Notes:
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/08/18/world/asia/ashraf-ghani-uae-afghanistan.html
https://www.worldbank.org/en/country/afghanistan/overview
https://asiatimes.com/2021/08/the-root-of-russias-fears-in-afghanistan/
https://www.sigar.mil/pdf/quarterlyreports/2021-07-30qr-section2-economic.pdf#page=14
https://www.reuters.com/article/usa-afghanistan-funding-int/u-s-other-aid-cuts-could-imperil-afghan-government-u-s-watchdog-idUSKBN2B72WJ
https://www.dw.com/en/eu-will-have-to-talk-to-taliban-but-wary-of-recognition/a-58890698
https://www.washingtonpost.com/us-policy/2021/08/17/treasury-taliban-money-afghanistan/
https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2021/08/18/business/afghanistan-lithium-rare-earths-mining/index.html
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/russia-taliban-afghanistan-putin/2021/08/17/af53a9ec-ff4c-11eb-87e0-7e07bd9ce270_story.html
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2021/08/18/afghanistan-kabul-taliban-live-updates/
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/aid-groups-warn-of-possible-refugee-crisis-in-afghanistan-far-beyond-western-evacuation-plans/2021/08/18/0d7094fc-0058-11ec-825d-01701f9ded64_story.html
https://www.npr.org/2021/06/21/1008656321/how-does-the-u-s-help-afghans-hold-on-to-gains-while-withdrawing-troops
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2021/08/18/afghanistan-kabul-taliban-live-updates/
https://www.reuters.com/world/canada-accept-20000-vulnerable-afghans-such-women-leaders-human-rights-workers-2021-08-13
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/07/us/politics/memo-syria-trump-turkey.html
https://www.politico.com/news/2021/08/18/afghan-refugee-debate-fractures-gop-506135
​​https://www.cnn.com/2021/08/18/politics/us-must-rely-on-taliban-for-evacuation/index.html
John Gans @johngansjrFrom what I'm seeing and hearing, the reasons for the mess in Afghanistan might be far more 'normal' than many are suspecting/suggesting -- driven more by typical pathologies in government & Washington. More to be learned. But a few thoughts. 1/x
533 Retweets2,195 Likes
August 18th 2021
https://www.npr.org/2021/08/15/1027952034/military-analyst-u-s-trained-afghan-forces-for-a-nation-that-didnt-exist
LETTERS FROM AN AMERICAN
HEATHER COX RICHARDSON
8 notes · View notes
bountyofbeads · 5 years ago
Text
Congress Wants to Force Trump’s Hand on Human Rights in China and Beyond https://nyti.ms/3630SdZ
Congress Wants to Force Trump’s Hand on Human Rights in China and Beyond(This speaks volumes about the current occupant of the White House when you have to force his hand on human rights and basic human decency!!)
Lawmakers aim to pass veto-proof legislation in 2020 that would punish China over its treatment of ethnic Uighur Muslims.
By Edward Wong and Catie Edmondson | Published Dec. 27, 2019 Updated 3:54 PM ET | New York Times | Posted December 27, 2019 |
WASHINGTON — In a rare show of bipartisan unity, Republicans and Democrats are planning to try to force President Trump to take a more active stand on human rights in China, preparing veto-proof legislation that would punish top Chinese officials for detaining more than one million Muslims in internment camps.
The effort comes amid growing congressional frustration with Mr. Trump’s unwillingness to challenge China over human rights abuses, despite vivid news reports this year outlining atrocities, or to confront such issues globally.
To press Mr. Trump into action on China, lawmakers plan to move ahead with legislation that would punish Beijing for its repression of ethnic Uighur Muslims, with enough supporters to compel the president to sign or risk being overruled by Congress ahead of the 2020 election. A version of the legislation, known as the Uighur Human Rights Policy Act, passed both the House and Senate this year, but its path to the White House was stalled this month by a procedural process.
Human rights causes draw rare bipartisan support in Congress, and many Republican lawmakers have broken from Mr. Trump on the matter, even as they move in lock step with the president on nearly every other issue, including defending him against impeachment.
“There’s been a sense by some that the administration hasn’t prioritized human rights in its broader foreign policy,” said Senator Marco Rubio, Republican of Florida. “I don’t think that’s necessarily accurate — but that sense has grown. There’s been a sense that Congress needs to step up.”
Last month, Congress passed  legislation by unanimous consent supporting the Hong Kong protests, forcing Mr. Trump to sign the bill. Mr. Trump, who had previously said he was “standing with” Xi Jinping, the Chinese leader, risked being overruled by Congress and criticized as weak on China if he vetoed the measure. Still, when Mr. Trump signed the bill the night before Thanksgiving, he issued a statement saying he would “exercise executive discretion” in enforcing its provisions.
Lawmakers this year also passed legislation recognizing the 1915 killings of an estimated 1.5 million Armenians as a genocide over the objections of Mr. Trump. And they approved a resolution calling for the end of American military support of the war in Yemen, in which a Saudi Arabia-led coalition is bombing civilians. Mr. Trump vetoed the measure.
In October, after Mr. Trump withdrew American forces just inside Syria’s border, paving the way for a Turkish military operation against Kurdish forces, lawmakers voted to rebuke the administration for the decision and show support for the Kurds, a persecuted group in the Middle East that has fought with American troops against the Islamic State.
In the coming months, Congress is expected to try to pass legislation that would punish Turkey and Saudi Arabia for human rights abuses, though it is unclear whether those efforts would have a veto-proof majority. The effort includes a package of Turkey sanctions sponsored by Senator Robert Menendez, Democrat of New Jersey, and Senator Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina. The legislation, which would penalize those who commit human rights abuses in Syria, was approved by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in December.
Some human rights issues draw greater bipartisan support than others. China hawks have become ascendant across Congress and in the administration, and many Americans increasingly see China as a threat.
Although Vice President Mike Pence  and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo  have criticized China on the persecution of Muslims, Mr. Trump has said nothing. In July, Jewher Ilham, the daughter of Ilham Tohti, a Uighur professor whom China sentenced to life in prison in 2014, joined other victims of religious persecution to meet with Mr. Trump in the Oval Office. When she tried to explain the camps to Mr. Trump, he appeared ignorant of the situation and simply said, “That’s tough stuff.”
“It’s hard to find evidence of genuine personal interest,” said Sophie Richardson, China director at Human Rights Watch. “On China, at a minimum, President Trump should stop describing an authoritarian, abusive leader as a ‘terrific guy’; doing so gives Chinese authorities the opportunity to choose between that characterization and the far tougher ones offered up by other senior U.S. officials.”
Mr. Trump, who has criticized China over its economic practices, has  refrained from imposing sanctions  on Chinese officials responsible for the camps for fear of jeopardizing the chances of reaching a trade deal. Many top aides and lawmakers from both parties have pushed for sanctions, but the Treasury Department has opposed the penalties. The Uighur act, which had Mr. Rubio and Representative Christopher H. Smith, Republican of New Jersey, as sponsors, would compel Mr. Trump to impose sanctions on Chen Quanguo, the top Communist Party official in Xinjiang, where the camps are.
In October, the Trump administration placed a few Chinese businesses and security organizations on a commercial blacklist because of their suspected roles in Muslim abuses, but many analysts considered that a weak punishment.
Other countries are more complicated. Saudi Arabia has been a traditional American ally, and Iran hawks in Congress, who are generally Republican, argue Riyadh is a regional bulwark against Tehran. And Mr. Trump’s positive declarations about President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia have spurred a gradual shift from the anti-Russia views previously held by Republican politicians, conservative voters and right-wing news organizations.
Mr. Trump expresses open admiration for many authoritarian leaders, even those condemned by senior officials in his own administration for some of the world’s worst atrocities. They include Mr. Xi, Mr. Putin, Kim Jong-un, the leader of North Korea, Mohammed bin Salman, the crown prince of Saudi Arabia, President Recep Tayyip Erdogan of Turkey, President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi of Egypt, Prime Minister Viktor Orban of Hungary, and President Jair Bolsonaro of Brazil.
“He’s celebrating the leaders who are the worst human rights abusers,” Senator Christopher S. Murphy, Democrat of Connecticut, said in an interview. “It almost seems like the president’s support for you is directly proportional to how brutal you are to your citizenry.”
This month, the Trump administration blocked a move by members of the United Nations Security Council to discuss the human rights situation in North Korea for the second year in a row. Mr. Trump has expressed warmth for Mr. Kim of North Korea and has engaged in personal diplomacy, meeting him at two summits to try, without success, to end North Korea’s nuclear weapons program.
“The Trump administration has sent a clear message to Pyongyang and to the rest of the world that this administration doesn’t consider starvation, torture, summary executions and a host of other crimes to be a priority,” said Louis Charbonneau, United Nations director at Human Rights Watch.
On other prominent issues this year, Mr. Trump used his executive power to reject measures that would have either punished countries for human rights abuses or simply affirmed the abuses were happening.
Mr. Trump vetoed a bipartisan resolution that would have punished Saudi Arabia for its air war in Yemen and the killing of Jamal Khashoggi, a Washington Post columnist and permanent resident of the United States. Mr. Khashoggi’s death last year — a grisly killing that American intelligence officials have said was ordered by Prince Mohammed — reignited a long-simmering effort among a small group of lawmakers to cut off American support for the Saudi-led bombings in Yemen that have helped create the world’s worst man-made humanitarian crisis.
Four of the six vetoes Mr. Trump has issued in his presidency overturned legislative attempts to penalize the kingdom. In May, Mr. Trump and Mr. Pompeo sparked bipartisan fury by declaring an emergency over Iran that allowed the United States to sell weapons to Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Jordan, bypassing a congressional hold on the sales. This fall, in closed door negotiations, the White House blocked similar language from making it into the final version of the annual defense policy bill, a must-pass package of legislation.
“I’m a big fan of the president on many fronts, but on this, someone has to stand up,” Senator Rand Paul, Republican of Kentucky and a proponent of withdrawing the United States from wars, said in a floor speech in June before voting to cut off arms sales to the kingdom.
In another recent instance that privately confounded Republican lawmakers, the White House recruited multiple Republican senators to block attempts to pass legislation formally recognizing the Armenian genocide. The administration argued the timing of the bill would upend diplomatic relations with Turkey, including when Mr. Trump received Mr. Erdogan at the White House in November. Mr. Trump insisted on holding that meeting over the objections of some Republicans who have criticized Turkey, a NATO ally, for attacking the Kurds in Syria.
The legislation finally passed this month, days after the Senate advanced a package of sanctions related to Mr. Erdogan’s invasion of northern Syria and his purchase of a sophisticated Russian surface-to-air missile system.
2 notes · View notes
denim-south-posts · 7 years ago
Video
youtube
HEBREWS: A Letter From GOD Specifically to YOU!!!
Marcus Edmond Marcus Edmond Marcus Edmond I WENT IN PERSON TO RESOLVE THE PROBLEM ON CASE #180707-3298539 Print complaint OPEN Submitted STATUS Submitted to the CFPB on 7/7/2018 PRODUCT Mortgage ISSUE Trouble during payment process I SPOKE TO MR RICHARD FAIRBANKS ASSOCIATE ERIC AND ASK FOR A MEETING WITH CEO WHY CAPITAL ONE REFUSE TO SET UP A MEETING WITH THE DIVINE KING! I LIKE TO LOOK AT THE PERSON IN HIS EYES AND SEE IF WILL LIE TO THE DIVINE KING.. LIKE I TOLD ERIC. I'M NOT GOING ON THE WELFARE SYSTEM EVER AGAIN BECAUSE OF MY NET-WORTH OF $39.7 ZILLION HOLDINGS WITH CAPITAL ONE DISCOVER FIDELITY AND US BANK WHO HOLDS THE DIVINE ASSETS ON RECORD WITH OUR US TREASURY AND FEDERAL RESERVE BANK OUR GRANTOR. I WAS DENIED MY RIGHTS TO FILL OUT A POLICE REPORT WITH LOCAL PRIVATE DC METROPOLITAN POLICE DEPARTMENT WHY? DO THE BANKS OWN OUR JUDGES AND LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIALS? WHY WAS I REFUSE TO SCHEDULE A MEETING CONCERNS ON THE FUTURE OF AMERICA FINANCIAL SYSTEMS AND MY FATHER IS WATCHING EVERYTHING 3EYE VISION! SO WHY WAS I REFUSE A MEETING THE GIVEN $3 DOLLARS FOR TRAIN MONEY WHEN THE TRAIN COST $3.85 LUCKY THE HOMELESSNESS WILL FALL ON THE WHOLE CAPITAL ONE FRANCHISE FOR DEFRAUDING THE LIVING GOD LUCIFER LORD EAENKI MARCUS DWAYNE EDMOND SR Manage Like · Reply · 1m Marcus Edmond Marcus Edmond You have successfully submitted your complaint! A message has been sent to you with instructions on how to track your complaint. ID FOR COMPLAINT SENT TO FIDELITY ACCOUNT SERVICES LLC 180718-3326766 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TmkOrEZLEic Manage
YOUTUBE.COM Intel: SWIFT, ACH & FED Wire Transfer Completely Secured;… Like · Reply · Remove Preview · 4m Marcus Edmond Marcus Edmond We received your complaint.
07/18/2018 Hello, Thank you for your complaint 180718-3326766 about FIDELITY ACCOUNT SERVICES LLC. Keep this communication and your complaint number so you’ll be able to track your complaint throughout the complaint process. The complaint process involves 5 steps. Step 1 is complaint submitted. Step 2 is review and route. Step 3 is company review and response. Step 4 is complaint closed and published. Step 5 is consumer reviews response. Step 1: Complaint Submitted is currently selected. Summary of your complaint Complaint number: 180718-3326766 Date submitted to CFPB: 07/18/2018 Product: Credit card or prepaid card Issue: Trouble using your card do your job are you can turn in your badge Lucifer Yahawashi Lord EaEnki Marcus Edmond
Grateful to Senator Mitch McConnell for his strong support. As President Donald J. Trumpsaid last night, Judge Brett Kavanaugh is a man of impeccable credentials and character, and he is the most qualified and most deserving nominee to the Supreme Court of the United States.
See More Recent Stories
425 items for you to review
IntroA brethren AHMEN'RA sent from AHMEN our Lord God Almighty OF ISRAEL to watch over his people in 2017Editdenimsouth.weebly.comDenimSouth.commanta.com/c/mrngfq2/denim-south
Add PhotoPhotos
Find FriendsFriends · 4,610Sa'lasha Lee10 new postsLeonard Bob10 new postsAngel Robinson10 new posts Tammy Mathews10 new postsRichard Biodun Oshun9 new postsRaytellia James Oshun8 new posts Laura BroussardChirita Senegal1 new postTracie Henson icon of profile-discoverySee what you have in common with your friends.View
Add AnswerDid You Know
English (US) · Français (France) · Bahasa Indonesia · Español · Português (Brasil)Privacy · Terms · Advertising · Ad Choices · Cookies· MoreFacebook © 2018
Owner/CEO at Denim South Hustler Entertainment LLc
C.E.O. at Denim South.com
Studied Mechanical engineering at University of Louisiana at Lafayette
Studies Business management at University of Phoenix
Went to itt technical Institute
Went to Lafayette High School
Lives in Las Vegas, Nevada
From Lafayette, Louisiana
Divorced
Followed by 245 people
INSTANT GAMES
MORE
YOUR GAMES
MORE
2619
25
Chat with friendsYOUR PAGES
SEE ALL
Denimsouth.com1
Denim South Hustler Entertainment LLc9
Denim South and Denim South Hustlers Entertainment9
CONTACTS
Clarence Clipps
Richard Biodun Oshun
37mIrma Williams
Lacey Boudreaux
Rachael Helaire
Al DeLoach
Amanda Brooks Mitchell
GROUP CONVERSATIONS
Nickal, Rachael, Harvey, 6 others
Chris, ZiZina, John
MORE CONTACTS (256)
Adrienne Melancon-Angelle
Alana Jackson
Alexa Denae Alexander
Alexandre Gue Ibrahim Gondo
Allerick Citizen
Alton BongoRed Kilchrist
Amber Rollsdolo Carmouche
Andrea Williams
Angel Robinson
Angela Smith
Antoinette Celestine
Anutty Easty
April Aggison Sylvester
April Grimes Garner
April Young
Ashlee Harris
Ashley Go-getter Alfred
Audrena Austin
Autumn Lawrence
Barbara Tezeno
Bella Faulk
Blaire Williams
Brandon Davis
Brandon Francis
Brandon Nezey
Brandy Semien
Bre Martinez
Brenda Prejean Chassion
Brent Noble Lambert
Brittney Nicole Floyd
Broderick Gilmore
Carderral Jones
Carisa Elena
Carol Isia
Carolyn Coleman
Caron McCray Garel
Casandra Smith
Catina Honore- Hills
Chalania Joseph
Chance Jolivette
Chantell Hudson
Chase Chaisson
Chastity Bellard
Chelsie Smithson
Chermay StJulian
Chiquana Smith
Christiana Bamiejoko Thomason
Clarissa Felix
Corrie Gotch
Courtnie August
Curley Taylor
Curtticea Dewberry
Daliana Menefee Davis
Dalmir Júnior
Danielle Lewis
Danielle Richard
Darren Benoit
David Landry
Dawnnetta Richard
Debby Ann
Deidra Williams
Demetress Smith
Denaye Celestine
Derrick Beavers
Derrick Hill
Desaree M MsWright
Desiree Calais
Desireh Mccoy
Destinee Livings
Destiny Renee Thibodeaux
Dwayne Flugence
Eagle Hamilton
Ebony Fontenot
Ebony Landry
Elle M Lewis
Evelyn Turay
Evonna Ebony Sistaz ProvostPlaying Road Racer
Ferrin Roy
FrankoFrank NIcholas Majoria
Fred Bell
Fredreka Stillstandin Mouton
Gabrielle SidityKitty Marie
Gary Leon Jones
Gilbert Matthews
Golden Boy Andrus
Goldie Mouton
Greg Jones
Gwendolyn Perrault
Hillary Dixon Celestine
Isaac Clayton Wilkinson
Jade Cormier
Jakeri Zyiah'Moma Simon
Jasmine McCullough
Jasmine Morrison
JeNae Journet Britton
Jennifer Hubbard
Jennifer Jones
Jennifer Lynn
Jennifer Renee Williams Moody
Jerkerry Leopaul
JEsiah Gallien
Jocelyn Bush
John Benham
Johnathan Leblanc
Jojo Fisher
Jonee Tyra
Jonetta Sam-Gaudin
Kaitlin Ellee Greene
Kam Cherelle Isi
Kaneesha Nicole
Karen Angelle Sellers
Karen KP Parker
Kayla Msbossbytch Lively
Kaysha Jones
Keaty B Blackwell
Kei Renee
Keisha Fontenot
Kelly LeBlanc
Keneshia Thibodeaux
Kenfolk Pickens
Kevante Jenkins
Kevin Johnson
Khryztal Cadenas
Kiara Wesley
Kimberly Edmond
Kimberly Haylen'sMommy Alfred
Kirra LaShelle Sam
Kisa Trinette
Kristin Renae Ruffins
Kristina Hopkins
Laeisha Matthews
Lamarko Felix
Lana Rozay
Laquenta Victor
LaToya J. Hypolite
Lauren BlackGirl Babineaux
Leah Simon
Leandra Lele Dotson
Lexis Jackson-Clement
Linda Declouet
Lindsey Dugas Thomas
Lorenza Bruno
Lovelace Edmond
Lucille Ann Batiste
Machelle Gresham
Maginum Arclese
Mandylikecandy Francis
Mariama Ben Kanu
Markisha Edwards
Martha Mondain Bangura
Mary Reed
Matonya M Griffin
Matthew Pope
Meagon Laylaymommy Antoine
Mia Jacob
Michael DeShawn Moore Sr.
Michael Maten
Mike Mattia
Milkk Mariee Narcisse
Millee Rob
Mimi Benjamin-Martin
Misha Sinegal
Miyoka Leblanc
Monica Rose Citizen
Naomia Howard
Natasha Wilridge
Nathan Williams Jr
NaToyia Robinson
Nebu Nezey
Neidra George
Neosha Robertson
Nicole Clark
Nicole MzIndependent Mouton
Niecy Levy
Nique Gallien
Noha La Légende Koné
Ordell D'Caine Onezine
Ozelia Marcelino
Patrick Edmond
Penny August LeJeune
Penny Jacobs
Perry Young
Petilson Tunechy Pilson
Precious Harrison
Precious Mouton
Quinterra Gabriel
Rachel Brackins
Ranasha Brown
Regina Moore
Remy Shane Francis
Residence El Machmoum
Richard James Walker II
Ricky Sigue
Robin Broussard
Roi Chip Anthony
Roshonda Bruno
Sandra Drayton
Sarah Everson
Sean Cutter Babineaux
Seannika Smothers
Shafonta Perry
Shaniqua Felix
Shanique Morson
Sharid Joseph
Shasta Solomon
Shavontay Hutchins
Shawanna Davis
Shayna Sam
Shelia Cormier
Shelia Green
Shelley Klassykountryriders Breaux
Shiquita FirstLady Levy
Shonna Sampy
Sierra Brooke
Sissybosslady Goodbeir
Sonnier Sammy
Sophia Meche
Soraia Gomes
Stephanie Gaspard
Sukie Bee
Sweetz Gutted
Sygourney Jackson
Tamika Caillier Thomas
Tammy M. DeSantis
Tammy Mathews
Tamyra Taylor
Tangela Elaire-Eaglin
Tasha Gogetta
Tayler Rivero
Terrance Mccray
Terrance StJulien
Terrence Francis
Thea Batiste
TieraRenee Pete
Tinia Alyce Collins Dugas
Tori Culmer
Tory Andrus
Tory Lynch
Tosha White
Tracey Zenon
Tracy Brown
Tracy Minor
Trameeka Jackson
Tresha Eaglin
Triscette KillinEm
Tristyan Vincent Garrett
Tya Martin
Vanessa Fuselier-Johnson
Veronica Garnett
Vicky StJulien Zenon
Vonda Ponce
Wayne Williams
Wendy Monet Ollier
Yanick Amei
Zeno Sadereia
Zy'sT-Lady Poydras
More stories loaded.
6 notes · View notes
brookstonalmanac · 3 years ago
Text
Events 8.25
19 – The Roman general Germanicus dies near Antioch. He was convinced that the mysterious illness that ended on his death was a result of poisioning by the Syrian governor Gnaeus Calpurnius Piso, whom he had ordered to leave the province. 766 – Emperor Constantine V humiliates nineteen high-ranking officials, after discovering a plot against him. He executes the leaders, Constantine Podopagouros and his brother Strategios. 1248 – The Dutch city of Ommen receives city rights and fortification rights from Otto III, the Archbishop of Utrecht. 1258 – Regent George Mouzalon and his brothers are killed during a coup headed by the aristocratic faction under Michael VIII Palaiologos, paving the way for its leader to ultimately usurp the throne of the Empire of Nicaea. 1270 – Philip III, although suffering from dysentery, becomes King of France following the death of his father Louis IX, during the Eighth Crusade. His uncle, Charles I of Naples, is forced to begin peace negotiations with Muhammad I al-Mustansir, Hafsid Sultan of Tunis. 1537 – The Honourable Artillery Company, the oldest surviving regiment in the British Army, and the second most senior, is formed. 1543 – António Mota and a few companions become the first Europeans to visit Japan. 1580 – War of the Portuguese Succession: Spanish victory at the Battle of Alcântara brings about the Iberian Union. 1609 – Galileo Galilei demonstrates his first telescope to Venetian lawmakers. 1630 – Portuguese forces are defeated by the Kingdom of Kandy at the Battle of Randeniwela in Sri Lanka. 1758 – Seven Years' War: Frederick II of Prussia defeats the Russian army at the Battle of Zorndorf. 1814 – War of 1812: On the second day of the Burning of Washington, British troops torch the Library of Congress, United States Treasury, Department of War, and other public buildings. 1823 – American fur trapper Hugh Glass is mauled by a grizzly bear while on an expedition in South Dakota. 1825 – The Thirty-Three Orientals declare the independence of Uruguay from Brazil. 1830 – The Belgian Revolution begins. 1835 – The first Great Moon Hoax article is published in The New York Sun, announcing the discovery of life and civilization on the Moon. 1875 – Captain Matthew Webb becomes the first person to swim across the English Channel, traveling from Dover, England, to Calais, France, in 21 hours and 45 minutes. 1883 – France and Viet Nam sign the Treaty of Huế, recognizing a French protectorate over Annam and Tonkin. 1894 – Kitasato Shibasaburō discovers the infectious agent of the bubonic plague and publishes his findings in The Lancet. 1898 – Seven hundred Greek civilians, 17 British guards and the British Consul of Crete are killed by a Turkish mob in Heraklion, Greece. 1914 – World War I: Japan declares war on Austria-Hungary. 1914 – World War I: The library of the Catholic University of Leuven is deliberately destroyed by the German Army. Hundreds of thousands of irreplaceable volumes and Gothic and Renaissance manuscripts are lost. 1916 – The United States National Park Service is created. 1920 – Polish–Soviet War: Battle of Warsaw, which began on August 13, ends with the Red Army's defeat. 1933 – The Diexi earthquake strikes Mao County, Sichuan, China and kills 9,000 people. 1939 – The United Kingdom and Poland form a military alliance in which the UK promises to defend Poland in case of invasion by a foreign power. 1940 – World War II: The first Bombing of Berlin by the British Royal Air Force. 1942 – World War II: Second day of the Battle of the Eastern Solomons; a Japanese naval transport convoy headed towards Guadalcanal is turned back by an Allied air attack. 1944 – World War II: Paris is liberated by the Allies. 1945 – Ten days after World War II ends with Japan announcing its surrender, armed supporters of the Chinese Communist Party kill U.S. intelligence officer John Birch, regarded by some of the American right as the first victim of the Cold War. 1945 – The August Revolution ends as Emperor Bảo Đại abdicates, ending the Nguyễn dynasty. 1948 – The House Un-American Activities Committee holds first-ever televised congressional hearing: "Confrontation Day" between Whittaker Chambers and Alger Hiss. 1950 – To avert a threatened strike during the Korean War, President Truman orders Secretary of the Army Frank Pace to seize control of the nation's railroads. 1961 – President Jânio Quadros of Brazil resigns after just seven months in power, initiating a political crisis that culminates in a military coup in 1964. 1967 – George Lincoln Rockwell, founder of the American Nazi Party, is assassinated by a former member of his group. 1980 – Zimbabwe joins the United Nations. 1981 – Voyager 2 spacecraft makes its closest approach to Saturn. 1985 – Bar Harbor Airlines Flight 1808 crashes near Auburn, Maine, killing all eight people on board including peace activist and child actress Samantha Smith. 1989 – Voyager 2 spacecraft makes its closest approach to Neptune, the last planet in the Solar System at the time, due to Pluto being within Neptune's orbit from 1979 to 1999. 1991 – Belarus gains its independence from the Soviet Union. 1991 – The Battle of Vukovar begins. An 87-day siege of Vukovar by the Yugoslav People's Army (JNA), supported by various Serb paramilitary forces, between August and November 1991 (during the Croatian War of Independence). 1991 – Linus Torvalds announces the first version of what will become Linux. 1997 – Egon Krenz, the former East German leader, is convicted of a shoot-to-kill policy at the Berlin Wall. 2001 – American singer Aaliyah and several members of her record company are killed as their overloaded aircraft crashes shortly after takeoff from Marsh Harbour Airport, Bahamas. 2006 – Former Prime Minister of Ukraine Pavlo Lazarenko is sentenced to nine years imprisonment for money laundering, wire fraud, and extortion. 2012 – Voyager 1 spacecraft enters interstellar space becoming the first man-made object to do so. 2017 – Hurricane Harvey makes landfall in Texas as a powerful Category 4 hurricane, the strongest hurricane to make landfall in the United States since 2004. Over the next few days, the storm causes catastrophic flooding throughout much of eastern Texas, killing 106 people and causing $125 billion in damage.
0 notes
freenewstoday · 4 years ago
Photo
Tumblr media
New Post has been published on https://freenews.today/2020/12/19/pompeo-blames-russia-for-massive-us-cyberattack-dw-19-12-2020/
Pompeo blames Russia for massive US cyberattack | DW | 19.12.2020
Tumblr media
Embedded malware found in US government networks and elsewhere “across the world” was “pretty clearly” the work of “the Russians,” US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has told conservative US talk show host Mark Levin.
Pompeo, who until Friday’s interview had avoided apportioning blame, while mentioning China and North Korea as parallel threats, told Levin “now we can say pretty clearly that it was the Russians that engaged in this activity.”
Private companies and governments “across the world as well” had been targeted using third party software to embed code, said Pompeo, adding: “This was a very significant effort.”
Pompeo told Levin the outgoing Trump administration had kept mute as a “wiser course of action” to allow investigations to unfold following theinitial alert made last Sunday. 
Russia has already denied involvement, with Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov dismissed the allegations.
US president-elect Joe Biden has expressed “great concern” over the hack attack.
18,000 accounts infected
Last Monday, the Texas firm SolarWinds disclosed that up to 18,000 users of its popular Orion network-management software had been unwittingly infected, blaming what it termed an “outside nation-state.”
Microsoft President Brad Smith, in a blog post Friday, said roughly 80% of affected customers were located inside the United States, but also extended to Britain, Belgium, Canada, Israel, Mexico, Spain and the United Arab Emirates.
Reuters, citing a British security source, said a small number of British organizations were compromised but “not in the public sector.”
“The scale is daunting,” said James Lewis, vice president of the US Center for Strategic and International Studies commenting on the disclosures. 
“We also don’t know what’s been left behind. The normal practice is to leave something behind so they can get back in, in the future,” said Lewis.
“This will be a long ride,” said Dmitri Alperovitch, former chief technical officer of cybersecurity firm CrowdStrike, adding networks would need to be redesigned. “Clean-up is just phase one.”
“Complex” intrusions as early as March
The US Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) said intrusions had begun as early as March this year, and the actor behind them had “demonstrated patience, operational security and complex tradecraft.”
CISA said the hack had not reached the USA’s nuclear arsenal but only “business networks” of the entrusted US Department of Energy, which have since been disconnected.
The US government agencies that were reportedly breached include the Department of Homeland Security, the Treasury Department and the State Department.
Some breaches enabled emails to be monitored, but it was unclear what the hackers were seeking and what they did while infiltrating networks, said Reuters.
ipj/mm (Reuters, AFP, AP)
document.addEventListener("DOMContentLoaded", function (event) if (DWDE.dsgvo.isStoringCookiesOkay()) facebookTracking(); ); function facebookTracking() !function (f, b, e, v, n, t, s) if (f.fbq) return; n = f.fbq = function () n.callMethod ? n.callMethod.apply(n, arguments) : n.queue.push(arguments) ; if (!f._fbq) f._fbq = n; n.push = n; n.loaded = !0; n.version = '2.0'; n.queue = []; t = b.createElement(e); t.async = !0; t.src = v; s = b.getElementsByTagName(e)[0]; s.parentNode.insertBefore(t, s) (window, document, 'script', 'https://connect.facebook.net/en_US/fbevents.js'); fbq('init', '157204581336210'); fbq('track', 'ViewContent'); Source
0 notes
gywair · 6 years ago
Text
Hey! I got the honor of being on Historical Hotties. It’s a podcast about researching hot historical figures and ranking them. I was on the episode about crime fighters. Below are my notes and references about Mabel Walker Willebrandt.
Tumblr media
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mabel_Walker_Willebrandt
http://www.pbs.org/kenburns/prohibition/media_detail/2082505810-willebrandt/
https://themobmuseum.org/notable_names/mabel-willebrandt/
https://www.encyclopedia.com/women/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-and-maps/willebrandt-mabel-walker-1889-1963
https://www.loc.gov/item/mm82059618/
https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2000-jul-02-me-47028-story.html
http://www.anb.org/view/10.1093/anb/9780198606697.001.0001/anb-9780198606697-e-0600712
https://books.google.com/books?id=CfGHM9KU7aEC&pg=PA736&lpg=PA736&dq=dorothy+rae+willebrandt&source=bl&ots=Ot1Hr5r5jy&sig=ACfU3U1zTmlS6XVkw1QFXoWtYaMSk5dOWA&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwia_-fX5KLhAhUELa0KHdrfC3gQ6AEwDXoECAkQAQ#v=onepage&q=dorothy%20rae%20willebrandt&f=false
https://themobmuseum.org/blog/mabel-willebrandt-prolific-prosecutor-of-prohibition-laws/
http://articles.latimes.com/2000/jul/02/local/me-47028
https://sallyjling.org/2011/07/16/mabel-walker-willebrant-fascinating-women-of-prohibition/
https://www.britannica.com/biography/Mabel-Walker-Willebrandt
  https://books.google.com/books?id=55ctM_Uy6KgC&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false
    Mabel Walker Willebrandt
Born May 23rd, 1889
Died April 6th, 1963 at age 73
  She was born in Woodsdale, Kansas as Mabel Elizabeth Walker.
Her family were farmers
She spent her early years traveling between prairie towns from Oklahoma to Missouri
Her father David was a local newspaper editor
She used to help him set the type for print
She was expelled from Park College in Parksville (a Presbyterian college), Missouri for being outspoken
She questioned the validity of a “virgin birth”
Reportedly she won the debate
In 1906 she began teaching in Buckley, Michigan
During this time she
Was almost lost in a blizzard
Trapped by a forest fire
Was threatened by a student with a knife
In 1910 she married Arthur Willebrandt, the principal
Together they moved to Phoenix, Arizona while Arthur recovered from tuberculosis
Mabel graduated from Arizona State University in 1911
Around this time she became severely hearing impaired and wore a hearing aid in each ear
She supposedly fixed her hair to hide them.
In 1912, they moved to Los Angeles where Mabel taught school during the day and took law classes at night
In 1916, she graduated from the University of Southern California with a masters in law
While completing her degree, Mabel began pro bono work in local police courts for mostly prostitution cases
She argued 2,000 cases as the city’s first female public defender
Her efforts led to courts permitting testimony from both women and men in these cases
This meant the male clients had to appear in court (in front of the press) as well as the female defenders
She successfully campaigned for the enactment of a revised community property statue at the state level (which involves property rights in marriages)
She was instrumental in getting the police to stop nickelodeon owners from preying on young girls during the “Rosebud Baby Case”
Apparently, the men were taking advantage of young girls during the movies
After graduation, she opened her own practice in downtown Los Angeles with Fred Horowitz (he built the famous hotel Chateau Marmont)
During World War I, she served as head of the Legal Advisory Board for draft cases
John Shepherd, perhaps the only man she really loved, who was killed in World War I.
In 1920, she moved her folks out west to be closer to her
In 1921, at 32, she was recommended by Frank Doherty (her old law professor), Senator Hiram Johnson, and all the judges in Southern California for the position of Assistant Attorney General under President Harding
Making her the highest-ranking women in the US federal government at the time and the first woman to head the Tax Division.
However, part of the issue is that no one wanted the job
It had no political advantage
It was a position that had to enforce unpopular laws
Her duties included overseeing federal taxation, federal prisons, and matters relating to the Volstead Act (the Prohibition Act)
She established the first female federal prison, Alderson federal prison in West Virginia
At the time, female prisons were too full to hold all inmates
If there was not enough space they would be housed with male inmates or otherwise alternatively punished
Sexual exploitation of women in the prison system was very high at the time
The prison was modeled as a boarding school offering classes for work-oriented fields
It had no armed guards or fences
Weirdly, still segregated
Things weren’t all great, however
In her 1929 book, The Inside of Prohibition, she described her problems
The law was too weak to do the job
The man in charge was not up to the task
She was only given volunteers to help make arrests
Things were so bad, one of her early arrests was a group that actually fielded a baseball team called the BOOTLEGGERS
She helped convinced the state department to give her boats and crews to apprehend alcohol coming into the country by boat
Reportedly, she met with the Treasury’s Prohibition unit, the US Coast Guard, and the Customs Service once and weeks later Congress okayed $11 million dollars for speed boats and equipment
She might have been the only person working to enforce prohibition
She said, “At one time it was quite apparent that no real effort was being made to put an end to such open defiance of our laws. Liquor runners operated off Florida practically in the open, in broad daylight, with little or no interference. There for years the prosecuting office and the prohibition agents engaged equally in the game of evasion of responsibility.”
In 1923, she successfully brought down the ‘Big Four of Savannah’
Reportedly the largest bootlegging ring in the US
She brought in George Remus, nicknamed ‘King of the Bootleggers’ and supposedly the inspiration for Jay Gatsby
Mabel came under a lot of trouble at one point for arresting Helen Morgan, a popular singer who had been reportedly duped into running a speakeasy
She regularly made the society magazines as a bit of a villain
She also argued to reform prisons for young offenders
She is credited with starting the prison work programs for male prisons
She started the first record keeping system for federal inmate populations
In 1924, Mabel and her husband Arthur got divorced
They were separated in 1916
Her mother-in-law moved in with Mabel and Arthur but Mabel financially supported the whole family
Reportedly because after putting Arthur through law school, he was unwilling to pay his share of expenses
In 1925, she adopted a two-year-old daughter named Dorothy Rae
Whom she raised with her friends
Feminism, Sexuality, and Politics by Estella B. Freedman
The book mentions that this was a more common practice at the time for career women that wanted a family.
Her parents took over when she was in Washington
Back in Prohibition, however, Mabel prosecuted 48,734 cases between 1924 and 1925, of which resulted in 39,072 convictions
278 cases went to the Supreme Court
She argued 40 of those cases
In 1927, she devised the plan to catch gangsters with tax evasion and in 1931 successfully prosecuted Al Capone
She recommended J. Edgar Hoover to head the FBI
In 1928, she campaigned for Republican candidate Herbert Hoover
To do this, she would address Methodist ministers and slam Hoover’s Democrat opponent, Al Smith as a ‘wet’ candidate
She began timing speakeasy raids to coincide with the Democratic convention
She was recognized as a major force behind getting Hoover elected
She took political help anywhere she could get it including the Woman’s Christian Temperance Union and the Ku Klux Klan saying, “I have no objection to people dressing up in sheets if they enjoy that sort of thing.”
For her service, she expected to be appointed Attorney General but was snubbed
In 1928, she resigned her post and returned to private practice
Mabel’s first case outside of the government was for California Fruit Industries that made wine and went on to serve as a lobbyist for the industry
CFI’s first big product push with her was Vine-Glo
Which was a concentrate that if added to water and sugar and left alone for two months made wine at home
Her casework set the foundation for the basic interpretations of the 16th and 18th amendments
In 1930, Mabel successfully argued for Frederick Albert Cook’s release from prison
He had been falsely imprisoned when several of his business partners committed fraud
Because his lawyer, Joseph Weldon Bailey, had a personal problem with the judge, he lost the case
Mabel managed to get him off his 14-year sentence in 7
Cook claimed to be the first explorer to reach the North Pole
In 1950, she served as counsel to the Screen Directors Guild
She defended the studios during the “Red Scare” and Joe McCarthy
She represented Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer and Aviation Corp. of America
Her famous clients include
Louis B. Mayer
Jean Harlow
Clark Gable
Jeanette MacDonald
She also began defending bootleggers she had helped put away
She went on to pioneer the fields of aviation and radio law
She was the first woman to chair a committee for the American Bar Association for aeronautical law
She got her pilot’s license and promoted air travel with Amelia Earhart and Jacqueline Cochoran (created the Women’s Auxillary Army Corps and Women Airforce Service Pilot organizations and was the first woman to break the sound barrier)
She received an Honorary Doctorate from the Aeronautical Chamber of Commerce
Due to intense criticism of her role in Al Smith losing the presidency, as her rhetoric was seen as anti-Catholic, she converted to Catholicism
Later in life, she worked to destroy many of her personal records (especially from when she was Attorney General)
She, in fact, was overlooked by several early women’s history studies as she purposely erased many of her personal histories
Which is why much of what we know comes from her legal work
Mabel Walker Willebrandt died of lung cancer in Riverside, California
She was survived by her adopted daughter, Dorothy Rae (Van Dyke)
Her lifelong friend, Judge John J. Sirica, was quoted as saying, “If Mabel had worn trousers, she could have been president.”
Nicknames
“First Legal Lady of the Land”
“Prohibition Portia” (which is a joke from Julius Caesar–it’s Brutus’s wife)
“Deborah of the Drys”
“Mrs. Firebrand.”
Fun facts
She owned a farm in Gettysburg, Pennsylvania
Once advised a prostitute she worked for on “going straight”
Mabel looked over her books and said to keep working six more months
Then ended up footing the rest of the bill herself to get the woman and her sons into a nice home
Quotes
“Give me the authority and let me have my pick of 300 men and I’ll make this country as dry as it is humanly possible. There’s one way it can be done – get at the source of supply. I know them and I know how they could be cut off. I have no patience with this policy of going after the hip-pocket and speakeasy cases. That’s like trying to dry up the Atlantic Ocean with a blotter.”
In reference to herself “an instrument of God”
  Physical Hawtness: 2/5
Described as Comely
Sort of an Elisabeth Moss
More of the way she carries herself than her looks (substance over style)
Mental Hawtness: 5/5
She started school at age 13
was teaching at age 17
a principal at 22
Assistant Attorney General at 32
Social Impact: 3/5
For her time, she made a huge splash
Lots of firsts
Set a tone for the whole decade of the ‘20s
Je Ne Sais Quoi: 2/5
Problematic
Reformed?
Sounds too unbelievable for a movie
Historical Hotties – Mabel Walker Willebrandt Hey! I got the honor of being on Historical Hotties. It's a podcast about researching hot historical figures and ranking them.
0 notes
didanawisgi · 6 years ago
Link
The Effects of Background Checks
Background checks for gun purchases are designed to prevent access to guns by convicted felons and other prohibited possessors—such as minors, fugitives from justice, those who live in the United States illegally, users of controlled substances, those with certain histories of mental illness, those who have been dishonorably discharged from the military, those who have renounced their U.S. citizenship, those subject to a restraining order, and those convicted of domestic violence offenses (18 U.S.C. 922).
The Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act (the Brady Act), which went into effect in 1994, imposed federal requirements for background checks on sales by licensed dealers (18 U.S.C. 922) but not for private sales or transfers of firearms (such as gifts). Several states have expanded this federal requirement to mandate that background checks be conducted for all firearm sales and transfers, including those between private parties. Such laws are referred to as universal background check laws.
MORE ABOUT THE POLICY
OUTCOMES THAT MAY BE INCREASED BY BACKGROUND CHECKS
We found no qualifying studies showing that background checks increased any of the eight outcomes we investigated.
OUTCOMES THAT MAY BE DECREASED BY BACKGROUND CHECKS
Suicide
Violent Crime
Evidence that background checks may reduce firearm suicides is moderate, and evidence that such laws may reduce total suicides is limited.
Evidence that background checks may reduce violent crime and total homicides is limited, and studies provide moderate evidence that dealer background checks reduce firearm homicides. Evidence of the effect of private-seller background checks on firearm homicides is inconclusive.
OUTCOMES WITH INCONCLUSIVE EVIDENCE FOR THE EFFECT OF BACKGROUND CHECKS
Mass Shootings
Evidence for the effect of background checks on mass shootings is inconclusive.
OUTCOMES WITH NO STUDIES THAT MET OUR INCLUSION CRITERIA
Defensive gun use
Gun industry
Hunting and recreation
Officer-involved shootings
Unintentional injuries and deaths
Review the inclusion criteria and methodology
Notes
The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (2002, p. A-3) defined crime gun as “any firearm that is illegally possessed, used in a crime, or suspected to have been used in a crime. An abandoned firearm may also be categorized as a crime gun if it is suspected it was used in a crime or illegally possessed.” Return to content⤴
California, Colorado, Delaware, Nevada, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, and Washington. See Calif. Penal Code §§28220; Colo. Rev. Stat. § 18-12-112; 11 Del.C. § 1448A; Nev. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 202.254; N.Y. Gen. Bus. Law §§ 897, 898; O.R.S. § 166.435; R.I. Gen. Laws §§ 11-47-35; Wash. Rev. Code Ann. § 9.41.113; D.C. Code Ann. §§ 7-2502.01, 7-2502.03. Return to content⤴
Calif. Penal Code §§ 27545, 27875; Colo. Rev. Stat. § 18-12-112; 24 Del.C. § 904A; Nev. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 202.254; N.Y. Gen. Bus. Law § 898; Wash. Rev. Code Ann. § 9.41.113; D.C. Code Ann. § 7-2505.02. Return to content⤴
O.R.S. §§ 166.435, 166.436. Return to content⤴
18 Pa. Cons. Stat. Ann. § 6111; Md. Code Ann., Pub. Safety § 5-124. In Pennsylvania, the checks must be processed through a licensed dealer. In Maryland, the seller may go through a dealer or contact the law enforcement agency personally. Return to content⤴
Connecticut, Hawaii, Illinois, Massachusetts, and New Jersey. See Conn. Gen. Stat. §§ 29-33, 28, 36f, 36g; Hawaii Rev. Stat. Ann. § 134-2; 430 Ill. Comp. Stat. 65/2, 65/4; Mass. Gen. Laws Ch.140 §§ 129B, 129C; N.J. Stat. Ann. § 2C: 58-3. Return to content⤴
Iowa, Michigan, Nebraska, and North Carolina. See Ia. Code § 724.15; Mich. Comp. Laws § 28.422; Neb. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 69-2404 69-2405; N.C. Gen. Stat. § 14-402, 14-404. Return to content⤴
Hawaii Rev. Stat. Ann. § 134-2. But note that long-gun permits last for one year and can be used for multiple purchases. Return to content⤴
430 Ill. Comp. Stat. 65/7. Return to content⤴
For example, individuals purchasing a firearm in Massachusetts must obtain a firearm identification card, which lasts three years; however, there is an exception for holders of permits to carry, which last up to six years (Mass. Gen. Laws Ch. 140 §§ 122, 129C). In Illinois, there is an exception for holders of concealed-carry permits, but those last only five years (compared with the ten years for the permit to purchase), so the exception does not typically extend the permit period for gun purchases (430 Ill. Comp. Stat. 65/2). Return to content⤴
References
Buchanan, Larry, Josh Keller, Richard A. Oppel, Jr., and Daniel Victor, “How They Got Their Guns,” New York Times, June 12, 2016. As of March 22, 2017: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/10/03/us/how-mass-shooters-got-their-guns.html?_r=0
Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms, Crime Gun Trace Reports (2000): Memphis, Tennessee, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of the Treasury, July 2002.
Campbell, J. C., D. Webster, J. Kozio-McLain, C. Block, D. Campbell, M. A. Curry, F. Gary, N. Glass, J. McFarlane, C. Sachs, P. Sharps, Y. Ulrich, S. A. Wilt, J. Manganello, X. Xu, J. Schollenberger, V. Frye, and K. Laughon, “Risk Factors for Femicide in Abusive Relationships: Results from a Multisite Case Control Study,” American Journal of Public Health, Vol. 93, No. 7, 2003, pp. 1089–1097.
Cook, Philip J., J. Ludwig, and A. A. Braga, “Criminal Records of Homicide Offenders,” JAMA, Vol. 294, No. 5, 2005, pp. 598–601.
Cook, Philip J., Stephanie Molliconi, and Thomas B. Cole, “Regulating Gun Markets,” Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, Vol. 86, No. 1, 1995, pp. 59–92.
Cook, Philip J., Susan T. Parker, and Harold A. Pollack, “Sources of Guns to Dangerous People: What We Learn by Asking Them,” Preventive Medicine, Vol. 79, 2015, pp. 28–36.
Cooper, Alexia, and Erica L. Smith, Homicide Trends in the United States 1980–2008, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, November 2011.
Everytown for Gun Safety Support Fund, “Mass Shootings in the United States: 2009–2016,” April 11, 2017b. As of May 3, 2017: http://everytownresearch.org/reports/mass-shootings-analysis/
FBI—See Federal Bureau of Investigation.
Federal Bureau of Investigation, “Active Records in the NICS Index,” April 30, 2017. As of May 8, 2017: https://www.fbi.gov/file-repository/active_records_in_the_nics-index.pdf/view
Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, “Universal Background Checks,” web page, undated-g. As of October 18, 2017: http://lawcenter.giffords.org/gun-laws/policy-areas/background-checks/universal-background-checks/
Hahn, Robert A., Oleg Bilukha, Alex Crosby, Mindy T. Fullilove, Akiva Liberman, Eve Moscicki, Susan Snyder, Farris Tuma, and Peter A. Briss, “Firearms Laws and the Reduction of Violence: A Systematic Review,” American Journal of Preventive Medicine, Vol. 28, No. 2, 2005, pp. 40–71.
Joshi, M., and S. B. Sorenson, “Intimate Partner Violence at the Scene: Incident Characteristics and Implications for Public Health Surveillance,” Evaluation Review, Vol. 34, No. 2, 2010, pp. 116–136.
Juodis, Marcus, Andrew Starzomski, Stephen Porter, and Michael Woodworth, “A Comparison of Domestic and Non-Domestic Homicides: Further Evidence for Distinct Dynamics and Heterogeneity of Domestic Homicide Perpetrators,” Journal of Family Violence, Vol. 29, No. 3, 2014, pp. 299��313.
Kleck, G., and D. J. Bordua, “The Factual Foundation for Certain Key Assumptions of Gun Control,” Law and Policy, Vol. 5, No. 3, 1983, pp. 271–298.
Kopel, D. B., “Background Checks for Firearms Sales and Loans: Law, History, and Policy,” Harvard Journal on Legislation, Vol. 53, 2016, pp. 303–367.
McFarlane, J., J. C. Campbell, S. Wilt, C. Sachs, Y. Ulrich, and X. Xu, “Stalking and Intimate Partner Femicide,” Homicide Studies, Vol. 3, 1999, pp. 300–316.
Miller, M., L. Hepburn, and D. Azrael, “Firearm Acquisition Without Background Checks: Results of a National Survey,” Annals of Internal Medicine, Vol. 166, 2017, pp. 233–239.
National Research Council, Firearms and Violence: A Critical Review, Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press, 2004.
NRC—See National Research Council.
Swanson, Jeffrey W., Michele M. Easter, Allison G. Robertson, Marvin S. Swartz, Kelly Alanis-Hirsch, Daniel Moseley, Charles Dion, and John Petrila, “Gun Violence, Mental Illness, and Laws That Prohibit Gun Possession: Evidence from Two Florida Counties,” Health Affairs, Vol. 35, No. 6, 2016, pp. 1067–1075.
Swanson, J. W., A. G. Robertson, L. K. Frisman, M. A. Norko, H. Lin, M. S. Swartz, and P. J. Cook, “Preventing Gun Violence Involving People with Serious Mental Illness,” in D. W. Webster and J. S. Vernick, eds., Reducing Gun Violence in America: Informing Policy with Evidence and Analysis, Baltimore, Md.: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2013, pp. 33–51.
United States Code, Title 18, Section 922, Unlawful Acts.
Vittes, K. A., J. S. Vernick, and D. W. Webster, “Legal Status and Source of Offenders’ Firearms for States with the Least Stringent Criteria for Gun Ownership,” Injury Prevention, Vol. 19, No. 1, June 23, 2012, pp. 26–31.
Webster, Daniel W., Jon S. Vernick, and Maria T. Bulzacchelli, “Effects of State-Level Firearm Seller Accountability Policies on Firearm Trafficking,” Journal of Urban Health: Bulletin of the New York Academy of Medicine, Vol. 86, No. 4, 2009, pp. 525–537.
Wright, M. A., and G. J. Wintemute, “Felonious of Violent Criminal Activity that Prohibits Gun Ownership Among Prior Purchasers of Handguns: Incidence and Risk Factors,” Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery, Vol. 69, No. 4, 2010, pp. 948–955.
View the full project bibliography
0 notes
harrythegreekblr · 5 years ago
Text
U.S. deports Butina Friday
Vesti is the largest state-controlled media source in Russia (above)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-PGvW4Og7qc
Mariia (Maria) Butina is being deported to Russia Friday.
At taxpayer expense.
Yes , “Mariia” is spelled with two “i’s”.
Butina pled guilty to being a Russian spy.
She is being released from a federal prison in Florida.
Mariia was jailed there for 18-months.
Butina spent another six months in federal detention center awaiting trial in Washington, D.C.
Source is the Federal Bureau of Prisons:
https://www.bop.gov/inmateloc/
According to her handler, Alexander Torshin, Butina upstaged Anna Chapman as the most successful spy in Russian history.
Torshin retired as head of Russia’s Central Bank.
https://nypost.com/2018/07/18/maria-butina-was-praised-as-anna-chapman-2-0/
Butina began working for Russian President, Vladimir Putin, in 2011.
The sources are the FBI and Justice Department.
Their court documents submitted into evidence are linked here:
https://www.scribd.com/document/408586354/Partial-diary-entries-by-Maria-Mariia-Butina-released-by-FBI-after-her-sentencing-three-pages-dated-May-1st-2019
Butina was an interpreter for Vadim Mikerin.
He pled guilty to laundering $2 million in one of the Uranium One cases.
https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/russian-nuclear-energy-official-pleads-guilty-money-laundering-conspiracy-involving
Tomorrow starts the trial of Mark T. Lambert.
He is a defendant in another Uranium One case.
https://brassballs.blog/home/uranium-one-trial-starts-october-24-24th-theodore-chuang-maryland-greenbelt-mark-t-tutt-lambert-tenex-hillary-clinton-foundation-mikerin-condrey-fisk-rod-daren-tonya-chutkan-rosenstein-kavanaugh-brett-bill-rod-campbell-william-d-day
https://brassballs.blog/home/maria-mariia-butina-russian-spy-worked-for-putin-and-dnc-since-2011-said-fbi-in-59-pages-of-public-evidence-exhibits-ratted-out-george-d-oneill-jr-reduced-sentence-six-months-rockefeller-heir-great-grand-son-gtmo-dhs-bop-truesdale
Butina helped Torshin sell Russian-made weapons for CIA operations through the:
NRA
NATO
World Bank
Central Reserve of Russia (Sberbank)
She was Torshin’s interpreter and executive assistant.
Since the case is over, the evidence is about to be destroyed.
It includes:
thumb drives of 102,000 hours of audio
one and a half million documents seized from two FBI raids on Butina’s apartment
50-hours of testimony to the FBI and Congress
diaries
notebooks
appointment calendars
and other files found in packed boxes
https://www.scribd.com/document/408289263/Mariia-Maria-Butina-evidence-collected-by-FBI-in-eleven-page-document-filed-April-21st-2019
This evidence is big enough to include all the Russian/CIA compromise operations in the U.S. since 2010.
By comparison, there are 22,000 documents in the Mike Flynn case.
Who is charge of the evidence?
Attorney General William Barr.
He took over the Butina investigation.
https://brassballs.blog/home/attorney-general-william-bill-barr-starts-his-own-probe-to-takedown-trump-obstruction-of-justice-donald-mark-tutt-lambert-paul-erickson-cia-uranium-one-iran-contra-peter-strzok-cia-george-bush-robert-mueller-report-summary
No one else has been charged in the conspiracy even though Butina admitted in court documents all sort of alleged criminal activity.
For instance, she received $125,000 from Russian Oligarch Oleg Deripaska.
https://brassballs.blog/home/oleg-deripaska-paid-mariia-butina-125-thousand-dollars-to-sabotage-trump-campaign-and-sell-guns
Butina’s Russian spy network included 72 of her classmates at American University (AU).
They were sponsored through the State Department.
The AU students were CIA and FBI contractors working for the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and former Ambassador Susan Rice.
They worked with CrowdStrike.
https://brassballs.blog/home/mariia-butinas-plea-hearing-forces-american-university-to-reveal-72-classmates-who-are-spies
Butina campaigned to get Hillary Clinton elected as President.
Hillary lost to Donald J. Trump.
According to Federal D.C. Judge Rosemary Collyer, the American University students violated FISA regulations by spying on 30,055 American citizens.
FISA is the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.
https://brassballs.blog/home/fisa-court-rules-obamas-team-approved-illegal-intel-on-30055-citizens-during-2016-presidential-election
Thursday Judge Tonya Chutkan ruled that the names and photos of Butina’s classmates at American University are “voided”.
Suppressed.
Quashed.
The judge’s order is linked here:
https://www.scribd.com/document/431713005/Judge-Tonya-Chutkan-order-in-Mariia-Butina-case-Oct-16th-2019-Seven-Pages-quashing-American-University-subpoena-for-records-of-Maria-s-classmates-foI
Butina entered the U.S. through a work visa sponsored by NATO’s Potomac Institute in 2010.
She worked there as an intern.
Mariia Butina (above right) pictured Oct. 26th, 2010 working at the Potomac Institute in Arlington, Virginia. The Institute is sponsored by NATO. The person on the left is unidentified.
The Potomac Institute’s Russian student spy network remains intack through the Institute’s Academic Centers imaged here:
The network includes Gettysburg College and its Eisenhower Institute.
It includes Fiona Hill’s Russian working group.
https://brassballs.blog/home/russian-spy-cia-fiona-hill-testifies-impeachment-chemonics-bruce-nellie-ohr-tom-firestone-baker-mckenzie-moscow-state-pipes-richard-mi6-dni-mifsud-link-american-university-gru-spies-svr-team-b-nbc-shriver-maria-will-smith-gemini-man
Other programs bring in student spies from places like Ukraine.
Congress pays for it.
https://brassballs.blog/home/george-soros-uses-funds-from-congress-to-recruit-russian-spies-through-spygate-through-open-world-program-michael-ohr-professor-james-goldgeier-soros-bruce-and-nellie-ohr-council-of-foreign-affairs
Mariia had a direct hand in Uranium One, the sale of uranium to Russia.
Butina was the interpreter for Vadim Mikerin.
He pled guilty to money laundering.
Mikerin lives now in Russia.
https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/russian-nuclear-energy-official-pleads-guilty-money-laundering-conspiracy-involving
What about Butina’s former roommate, Paul Erickson?
He goes on trial in South Dakota :Federal Court on Dec. 3rd.
It is alleged Erickson cheated Dakota pipeline investors out of their money.
Butina was Erickson’s partner.
They sold Dakota limited oil and gas partnerships.
How did Butina pay her attorney $438,000?
Vladimir Shapovalov is a Senior Official of the Central Bank of Russia.
And Mariia Butina’s cousin.
Cuz Vladimir took care of it.
https://brassballs.blog/home/maria-mariia-butinas-438-thousand-dollar-legal-fees-retainer-paid-by-cousin-at-central-bank-of-russia-vladimir-shapovalov-go-undetected-by-treasury-department-fincen-financial-investigations-enforcement-unit-strzok-mrs-melissa-hodgman
0 notes
cleopatrarps · 7 years ago
Text
As Summit Nears, NATO Allies Have One Main Worry: Trump
BRUSSELS — NATO has been preparing for its July summit meeting for a year now, but there is one wild card: President Trump.
Nobody knows which president will show up — the truculent one railing about inadequate military spending by the allies or the boastful one taking credit for recent spending increases.
Either way, NATO members say they fear that all the preparation and the desire to show solidarity in the face of a new Russian threat will be overshadowed, if not undone, by a divisive encounter followed by Mr. Trump’s prospective summit meeting with the Russian president, Vladimir V. Putin.
The European allies are deeply worried that they will confront the Trump who was on display at the meeting in June in Canada of the seven major economies, known as the Group of 7, or G-7. Those in the room described him as angry, mocking, wandering and rude, especially to the host, Canada’s prime minister, Justin Trudeau, and to Chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany.
There, Mr. Trump focused on two of his fixed ideas: the unfairness of trade with European allies and their inadequate level of military spending. He then departed early for Singapore, where he met with and praised the North Korean dictator, Kim Jong-un.
The Trump administration regards Western European nations as free-riders on an American-funded, postwar peace that enabled them to build lavish social benefit systems because they spent so little on defending themselves. He has also made clear that he thinks the European Union as a trading bloc, has taken advantage of American generosity.
European and some American officials say they dread the same pattern — a noisy, divisive NATO summit, damaging deterrence, followed by a chummy meeting with a dictator, in this case Mr. Putin, whose long-term goals are to destabilize the European Union, undermine NATO and restore Russian influence over Eastern Europe, the Baltic States and the Balkans.
Whatever the organization has prepared, “the only real deliverable for NATO summits is solidarity and cohesion,” said Douglas Lute, a former American general and ambassador to the organization. “But that is at risk because the odds are that Trump will deliver a G-7 performance. And I fear that we will come out of this summit with symbols of division.”
R. Nicholas Burns, a former NATO ambassador and career diplomat who served both Republican and Democratic administrations, asked: “Which Trump will show up?”
The headline for the summit meeting, he said, “should be about NATO’s containment of Russia in Eastern Europe, but Trump might blow it all up for Putin.” If Mr. Trump “arrives pushing dialogue with Russia with no clear deliverables from Moscow in return, it will make a mess in NATO.”
Even senior American officials said they had no clarity on Mr. Trump’s intentions for this meeting. They have told senior European officials that a lot will depend on Mr. Trump’s mood as he arrives and what is being highlighted on his favorite American news media outlets such as Fox News. And no one expects him to sit quietly through nearly two days of normally mind-numbing speeches by at least 28 other leaders.
For its two-day meeting on July 11 and 12 in its new headquarters (which Mr. Trump has disparaged), NATO has prepared significant steps to enhance deterrence against Russia.
Defense Secretary Jim Mattis has built support for a plan to fill the gap between the small “spearhead” forces now deployed in Poland and the Baltic States and what would be a slow reinforcement of troops. His plan, known as “30-30-30-30,” would require NATO to assemble a fighting force of 30 land battalions, 30 aircraft squadrons and 30 warships within 30 days.
Who would deploy those forces is still to be decided, but NATO is also planning to sign off on a revised command structure, including two new commands, one devoted to troop mobility and one to maritime security. There will be agreement on an enhanced NATO training mission in Iraq and on putting more effort into cyber warfare and counterterrorism.
But if there is a repeat of the Group of 7 haranguing, with public criticism of the allies, the Europeans will be caught, one NATO official said, between smiling as they are attacked or choosing to challenge Mr. Trump, which they know will almost surely go badly and make them the target of his next Twitter blast.
Julianne Smith, director of the Trans-Atlantic Security Program at the Center for a New American Security, said that “European officials are thinking about how to respond, about what it costs them politically at home and what it costs them bilaterally, with Washington.”
The Europeans are also anxious about the fate of Mr. Mattis, who is an outspoken supporter of the NATO alliance and an aggressive stance toward Russia.
With John Bolton as national security adviser and Mike Pompeo as secretary of state, Mr. Trump has rejected the defense secretary’s advice on North Korea and on preserving the Iran nuclear deal.
At the Group of 7 meeting, Mr. Trump approached some European leaders and asked them for their thoughts on Mr. Mattis, said Ms. Smith, who was deputy national security adviser to Vice President Biden.
“It was awkward for them and might be the kiss of death,” if they praised him, she said, “so they said deliberately that he is being so tough on us on 2 percent defense spending, to try to save the guy.”
Everyone understands that Mr. Trump will want a discussion about “burden-sharing” and the commitment of all NATO allies, made at their Wales summit in 2014, to aspire to spend 2 percent of their gross domestic product on defense and 20 percent of military spending on equipment by 2024.
But they worry about how heated, and how public, it might get. Mr. Trump’s past comments suggest that he thinks that there is some NATO treasury to which members owe dues, and that allies are behind on their payments.
In fact, what happens is that each country decides its own military spending. And as the secretary general of NATO, Jens Stoltenberg, keeps pointing out, the level of non-American allied military spending has gone up some $87 billion since 2014 and continues to grow.
In a speech last week, the United States assistant secretary of state for European affairs, A. Wess Mitchell, acknowledged progress in military spending, while urging greater efforts.
“Since January of last year, every member of NATO but one has increased defense spending,” he said.
“The number that will spend 2 percent of GDP on defense by 2024 has more than tripled (from five to 18). The number allocating at least 20 percent of their military spending to major equipment purchases has more than doubled (from 14 to 26). And the alliance as a whole has increased military spending by 5.2 percent (or $14.4 billion) — the largest one-year surge in defense spending in a generation.”
But there are European concerns that Mr. Trump will try to tie military spending to trade issues at the meeting, especially with Ms. Merkel.
“If Germany needed another wakeup call about Trump, the G-7 was it,” said Daniela Schwarzer, director of the German Council on Foreign Relations. “With potential tariffs on European cars and the NATO summit, the pressure on Germany is growing,” she said.
Berlin is also concerned about potential American sanctions aimed at the Nord Stream II pipeline from Russia to Germany, bypassing Ukraine and Poland, new tariffs on foreign cars, and American secondary sanctions against European companies that might invest in Iran to try to save the Iran nuclear deal.
So there are discussions in Germany and France about how to increase leverage on Washington, a new concept.
“How do we deal with an incalculable if not hostile and problematic partner?” Ms. Schwarzer asked, noting a Twitter message from Mr. Trump that appeared to call for Ms. Merkel’s overthrow.
“We’ve been allies and partners, but now with Trump we are competitors, and he is implementing policies aimed against Europe,” she added. That made it harder for politicians to sell increased military spending, she said, because it would look like giving in to Mr. Trump.
Mr. Trump’s apparent admiration for Mr. Putin is also raising concerns, said François Heisbourg, president of the International Institute for Strategic Studies and a French defense analyst.
Mr. Trump “may act on his instincts and try to do a bilateral deal with strongman Putin and sacrifice NATO interests — he might lift sanctions on Crimea, cancel military exercises or withdraw American troops from the Baltics,” Mr. Heisbourg said. “We saw it with Kim Jong-un.”
There is also concern that because Mr. Putin objects to any new NATO member, Mr. Trump may try to block an invitation for the newly named Republic of North Macedonia.
Ian Lesser, director of the German Marshall Fund and a former American diplomat, said that “meeting Putin in the wake of a symbolic and successful NATO summit is one thing, but a meeting against the backdrop of a summit that goes badly is quite another.”
Burden-sharing was important, Mr. Lesser said, “but it’s wrong to suggest that the U.S. has no interest of its own in European security, as if it were some charitable gift. We’re stakeholders in European security, with our own interests and reasons to spend money,” he said, especially in the light of Russia’s efforts to destabilize Western democracies and NATO.
As ever, plans are for a long final communiqué, essentially drafted, about the accomplishments of the meeting. But given Mr. Trump’s angry, last-minute withdrawal of his approval of the Group of 7 final communiqué, because he did not like Mr. Trudeau’s closing news conference, some think that NATO would be safer not having a final statement.
“The irony is that this should be a good NATO summit, with consequential improvements of deterrence,” said Tomas Valasek, a former Slovak ambassador to NATO who now runs Carnegie Europe. “But with the memories of the G-7 fresh, the headlines will be all about the leaders and the mood of Donald Trump.”
The post As Summit Nears, NATO Allies Have One Main Worry: Trump appeared first on World The News.
from World The News https://ift.tt/2tHjbnd via News of World
0 notes
dani-qrt · 7 years ago
Text
As Summit Nears, NATO Allies Have One Main Worry: Trump
BRUSSELS — NATO has been preparing for its July summit meeting for a year now, but there is one wild card: President Trump.
Nobody knows which president will show up — the truculent one railing about inadequate military spending by the allies or the boastful one taking credit for recent spending increases.
Either way, NATO members say they fear that all the preparation and the desire to show solidarity in the face of a new Russian threat will be overshadowed, if not undone, by a divisive encounter followed by Mr. Trump’s prospective summit meeting with the Russian president, Vladimir V. Putin.
The European allies are deeply worried that they will confront the Trump who was on display at the meeting in June in Canada of the seven major economies, known as the Group of 7, or G-7. Those in the room described him as angry, mocking, wandering and rude, especially to the host, Canada’s prime minister, Justin Trudeau, and to Chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany.
There, Mr. Trump focused on two of his fixed ideas: the unfairness of trade with European allies and their inadequate level of military spending. He then departed early for Singapore, where he met with and praised the North Korean dictator, Kim Jong-un.
The Trump administration regards Western European nations as free-riders on an American-funded, postwar peace that enabled them to build lavish social benefit systems because they spent so little on defending themselves. He has also made clear that he thinks the European Union as a trading bloc, has taken advantage of American generosity.
European and some American officials say they dread the same pattern — a noisy, divisive NATO summit, damaging deterrence, followed by a chummy meeting with a dictator, in this case Mr. Putin, whose long-term goals are to destabilize the European Union, undermine NATO and restore Russian influence over Eastern Europe, the Baltic States and the Balkans.
Whatever the organization has prepared, “the only real deliverable for NATO summits is solidarity and cohesion,” said Douglas Lute, a former American general and ambassador to the organization. “But that is at risk because the odds are that Trump will deliver a G-7 performance. And I fear that we will come out of this summit with symbols of division.”
R. Nicholas Burns, a former NATO ambassador and career diplomat who served both Republican and Democratic administrations, asked: “Which Trump will show up?”
The headline for the summit meeting, he said, “should be about NATO’s containment of Russia in Eastern Europe, but Trump might blow it all up for Putin.” If Mr. Trump “arrives pushing dialogue with Russia with no clear deliverables from Moscow in return, it will make a mess in NATO.”
Even senior American officials said they had no clarity on Mr. Trump’s intentions for this meeting. They have told senior European officials that a lot will depend on Mr. Trump’s mood as he arrives and what is being highlighted on his favorite American news media outlets such as Fox News. And no one expects him to sit quietly through nearly two days of normally mind-numbing speeches by at least 28 other leaders.
For its two-day meeting on July 11 and 12 in its new headquarters (which Mr. Trump has disparaged), NATO has prepared significant steps to enhance deterrence against Russia.
Defense Secretary Jim Mattis has built support for a plan to fill the gap between the small “spearhead” forces now deployed in Poland and the Baltic States and what would be a slow reinforcement of troops. His plan, known as “30-30-30-30,” would require NATO to assemble a fighting force of 30 land battalions, 30 aircraft squadrons and 30 warships within 30 days.
Who would deploy those forces is still to be decided, but NATO is also planning to sign off on a revised command structure, including two new commands, one devoted to troop mobility and one to maritime security. There will be agreement on an enhanced NATO training mission in Iraq and on putting more effort into cyber warfare and counterterrorism.
But if there is a repeat of the Group of 7 haranguing, with public criticism of the allies, the Europeans will be caught, one NATO official said, between smiling as they are attacked or choosing to challenge Mr. Trump, which they know will almost surely go badly and make them the target of his next Twitter blast.
Julianne Smith, director of the Trans-Atlantic Security Program at the Center for a New American Security, said that “European officials are thinking about how to respond, about what it costs them politically at home and what it costs them bilaterally, with Washington.”
The Europeans are also anxious about the fate of Mr. Mattis, who is an outspoken supporter of the NATO alliance and an aggressive stance toward Russia.
With John Bolton as national security adviser and Mike Pompeo as secretary of state, Mr. Trump has rejected the defense secretary’s advice on North Korea and on preserving the Iran nuclear deal.
At the Group of 7 meeting, Mr. Trump approached some European leaders and asked them for their thoughts on Mr. Mattis, said Ms. Smith, who was deputy national security adviser to Vice President Biden.
“It was awkward for them and might be the kiss of death,” if they praised him, she said, “so they said deliberately that he is being so tough on us on 2 percent defense spending, to try to save the guy.”
Everyone understands that Mr. Trump will want a discussion about “burden-sharing” and the commitment of all NATO allies, made at their Wales summit in 2014, to aspire to spend 2 percent of their gross domestic product on defense and 20 percent of military spending on equipment by 2024.
But they worry about how heated, and how public, it might get. Mr. Trump’s past comments suggest that he thinks that there is some NATO treasury to which members owe dues, and that allies are behind on their payments.
In fact, what happens is that each country decides its own military spending. And as the secretary general of NATO, Jens Stoltenberg, keeps pointing out, the level of non-American allied military spending has gone up some $87 billion since 2014 and continues to grow.
In a speech last week, the United States assistant secretary of state for European affairs, A. Wess Mitchell, acknowledged progress in military spending, while urging greater efforts.
“Since January of last year, every member of NATO but one has increased defense spending,” he said.
“The number that will spend 2 percent of GDP on defense by 2024 has more than tripled (from five to 18). The number allocating at least 20 percent of their military spending to major equipment purchases has more than doubled (from 14 to 26). And the alliance as a whole has increased military spending by 5.2 percent (or $14.4 billion) — the largest one-year surge in defense spending in a generation.”
But there are European concerns that Mr. Trump will try to tie military spending to trade issues at the meeting, especially with Ms. Merkel.
“If Germany needed another wakeup call about Trump, the G-7 was it,” said Daniela Schwarzer, director of the German Council on Foreign Relations. “With potential tariffs on European cars and the NATO summit, the pressure on Germany is growing,” she said.
Berlin is also concerned about potential American sanctions aimed at the Nord Stream II pipeline from Russia to Germany, bypassing Ukraine and Poland, new tariffs on foreign cars, and American secondary sanctions against European companies that might invest in Iran to try to save the Iran nuclear deal.
So there are discussions in Germany and France about how to increase leverage on Washington, a new concept.
“How do we deal with an incalculable if not hostile and problematic partner?” Ms. Schwarzer asked, noting a Twitter message from Mr. Trump that appeared to call for Ms. Merkel’s overthrow.
“We’ve been allies and partners, but now with Trump we are competitors, and he is implementing policies aimed against Europe,” she added. That made it harder for politicians to sell increased military spending, she said, because it would look like giving in to Mr. Trump.
Mr. Trump’s apparent admiration for Mr. Putin is also raising concerns, said François Heisbourg, president of the International Institute for Strategic Studies and a French defense analyst.
Mr. Trump “may act on his instincts and try to do a bilateral deal with strongman Putin and sacrifice NATO interests — he might lift sanctions on Crimea, cancel military exercises or withdraw American troops from the Baltics,” Mr. Heisbourg said. “We saw it with Kim Jong-un.”
There is also concern that because Mr. Putin objects to any new NATO member, Mr. Trump may try to block an invitation for the newly named Republic of North Macedonia.
Ian Lesser, director of the German Marshall Fund and a former American diplomat, said that “meeting Putin in the wake of a symbolic and successful NATO summit is one thing, but a meeting against the backdrop of a summit that goes badly is quite another.”
Burden-sharing was important, Mr. Lesser said, “but it’s wrong to suggest that the U.S. has no interest of its own in European security, as if it were some charitable gift. We’re stakeholders in European security, with our own interests and reasons to spend money,” he said, especially in the light of Russia’s efforts to destabilize Western democracies and NATO.
As ever, plans are for a long final communiqué, essentially drafted, about the accomplishments of the meeting. But given Mr. Trump’s angry, last-minute withdrawal of his approval of the Group of 7 final communiqué, because he did not like Mr. Trudeau’s closing news conference, some think that NATO would be safer not having a final statement.
“The irony is that this should be a good NATO summit, with consequential improvements of deterrence,” said Tomas Valasek, a former Slovak ambassador to NATO who now runs Carnegie Europe. “But with the memories of the G-7 fresh, the headlines will be all about the leaders and the mood of Donald Trump.”
The post As Summit Nears, NATO Allies Have One Main Worry: Trump appeared first on World The News.
from World The News https://ift.tt/2tHjbnd via Online News
0 notes
party-hard-or-die · 7 years ago
Text
As Summit Nears, NATO Allies Have One Main Worry: Trump
BRUSSELS — NATO has been preparing for its July summit meeting for a year now, but there is one wild card: President Trump.
Nobody knows which president will show up — the truculent one railing about inadequate military spending by the allies or the boastful one taking credit for recent spending increases.
Either way, NATO members say they fear that all the preparation and the desire to show solidarity in the face of a new Russian threat will be overshadowed, if not undone, by a divisive encounter followed by Mr. Trump’s prospective summit meeting with the Russian president, Vladimir V. Putin.
The European allies are deeply worried that they will confront the Trump who was on display at the meeting in June in Canada of the seven major economies, known as the Group of 7, or G-7. Those in the room described him as angry, mocking, wandering and rude, especially to the host, Canada’s prime minister, Justin Trudeau, and to Chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany.
There, Mr. Trump focused on two of his fixed ideas: the unfairness of trade with European allies and their inadequate level of military spending. He then departed early for Singapore, where he met with and praised the North Korean dictator, Kim Jong-un.
The Trump administration regards Western European nations as free-riders on an American-funded, postwar peace that enabled them to build lavish social benefit systems because they spent so little on defending themselves. He has also made clear that he thinks the European Union as a trading bloc, has taken advantage of American generosity.
European and some American officials say they dread the same pattern — a noisy, divisive NATO summit, damaging deterrence, followed by a chummy meeting with a dictator, in this case Mr. Putin, whose long-term goals are to destabilize the European Union, undermine NATO and restore Russian influence over Eastern Europe, the Baltic States and the Balkans.
Whatever the organization has prepared, “the only real deliverable for NATO summits is solidarity and cohesion,” said Douglas Lute, a former American general and ambassador to the organization. “But that is at risk because the odds are that Trump will deliver a G-7 performance. And I fear that we will come out of this summit with symbols of division.”
R. Nicholas Burns, a former NATO ambassador and career diplomat who served both Republican and Democratic administrations, asked: “Which Trump will show up?”
The headline for the summit meeting, he said, “should be about NATO’s containment of Russia in Eastern Europe, but Trump might blow it all up for Putin.” If Mr. Trump “arrives pushing dialogue with Russia with no clear deliverables from Moscow in return, it will make a mess in NATO.”
Even senior American officials said they had no clarity on Mr. Trump’s intentions for this meeting. They have told senior European officials that a lot will depend on Mr. Trump’s mood as he arrives and what is being highlighted on his favorite American news media outlets such as Fox News. And no one expects him to sit quietly through nearly two days of normally mind-numbing speeches by at least 28 other leaders.
For its two-day meeting on July 11 and 12 in its new headquarters (which Mr. Trump has disparaged), NATO has prepared significant steps to enhance deterrence against Russia.
Defense Secretary Jim Mattis has built support for a plan to fill the gap between the small “spearhead” forces now deployed in Poland and the Baltic States and what would be a slow reinforcement of troops. His plan, known as “30-30-30-30,” would require NATO to assemble a fighting force of 30 land battalions, 30 aircraft squadrons and 30 warships within 30 days.
Who would deploy those forces is still to be decided, but NATO is also planning to sign off on a revised command structure, including two new commands, one devoted to troop mobility and one to maritime security. There will be agreement on an enhanced NATO training mission in Iraq and on putting more effort into cyber warfare and counterterrorism.
But if there is a repeat of the Group of 7 haranguing, with public criticism of the allies, the Europeans will be caught, one NATO official said, between smiling as they are attacked or choosing to challenge Mr. Trump, which they know will almost surely go badly and make them the target of his next Twitter blast.
Julianne Smith, director of the Trans-Atlantic Security Program at the Center for a New American Security, said that “European officials are thinking about how to respond, about what it costs them politically at home and what it costs them bilaterally, with Washington.”
The Europeans are also anxious about the fate of Mr. Mattis, who is an outspoken supporter of the NATO alliance and an aggressive stance toward Russia.
With John Bolton as national security adviser and Mike Pompeo as secretary of state, Mr. Trump has rejected the defense secretary’s advice on North Korea and on preserving the Iran nuclear deal.
At the Group of 7 meeting, Mr. Trump approached some European leaders and asked them for their thoughts on Mr. Mattis, said Ms. Smith, who was deputy national security adviser to Vice President Biden.
“It was awkward for them and might be the kiss of death,” if they praised him, she said, “so they said deliberately that he is being so tough on us on 2 percent defense spending, to try to save the guy.”
Everyone understands that Mr. Trump will want a discussion about “burden-sharing” and the commitment of all NATO allies, made at their Wales summit in 2014, to aspire to spend 2 percent of their gross domestic product on defense and 20 percent of military spending on equipment by 2024.
But they worry about how heated, and how public, it might get. Mr. Trump’s past comments suggest that he thinks that there is some NATO treasury to which members owe dues, and that allies are behind on their payments.
In fact, what happens is that each country decides its own military spending. And as the secretary general of NATO, Jens Stoltenberg, keeps pointing out, the level of non-American allied military spending has gone up some $87 billion since 2014 and continues to grow.
In a speech last week, the United States assistant secretary of state for European affairs, A. Wess Mitchell, acknowledged progress in military spending, while urging greater efforts.
“Since January of last year, every member of NATO but one has increased defense spending,” he said.
“The number that will spend 2 percent of GDP on defense by 2024 has more than tripled (from five to 18). The number allocating at least 20 percent of their military spending to major equipment purchases has more than doubled (from 14 to 26). And the alliance as a whole has increased military spending by 5.2 percent (or $14.4 billion) — the largest one-year surge in defense spending in a generation.”
But there are European concerns that Mr. Trump will try to tie military spending to trade issues at the meeting, especially with Ms. Merkel.
“If Germany needed another wakeup call about Trump, the G-7 was it,” said Daniela Schwarzer, director of the German Council on Foreign Relations. “With potential tariffs on European cars and the NATO summit, the pressure on Germany is growing,” she said.
Berlin is also concerned about potential American sanctions aimed at the Nord Stream II pipeline from Russia to Germany, bypassing Ukraine and Poland, new tariffs on foreign cars, and American secondary sanctions against European companies that might invest in Iran to try to save the Iran nuclear deal.
So there are discussions in Germany and France about how to increase leverage on Washington, a new concept.
“How do we deal with an incalculable if not hostile and problematic partner?” Ms. Schwarzer asked, noting a Twitter message from Mr. Trump that appeared to call for Ms. Merkel’s overthrow.
“We’ve been allies and partners, but now with Trump we are competitors, and he is implementing policies aimed against Europe,” she added. That made it harder for politicians to sell increased military spending, she said, because it would look like giving in to Mr. Trump.
Mr. Trump’s apparent admiration for Mr. Putin is also raising concerns, said François Heisbourg, president of the International Institute for Strategic Studies and a French defense analyst.
Mr. Trump “may act on his instincts and try to do a bilateral deal with strongman Putin and sacrifice NATO interests — he might lift sanctions on Crimea, cancel military exercises or withdraw American troops from the Baltics,” Mr. Heisbourg said. “We saw it with Kim Jong-un.”
There is also concern that because Mr. Putin objects to any new NATO member, Mr. Trump may try to block an invitation for the newly named Republic of North Macedonia.
Ian Lesser, director of the German Marshall Fund and a former American diplomat, said that “meeting Putin in the wake of a symbolic and successful NATO summit is one thing, but a meeting against the backdrop of a summit that goes badly is quite another.”
Burden-sharing was important, Mr. Lesser said, “but it’s wrong to suggest that the U.S. has no interest of its own in European security, as if it were some charitable gift. We’re stakeholders in European security, with our own interests and reasons to spend money,” he said, especially in the light of Russia’s efforts to destabilize Western democracies and NATO.
As ever, plans are for a long final communiqué, essentially drafted, about the accomplishments of the meeting. But given Mr. Trump’s angry, last-minute withdrawal of his approval of the Group of 7 final communiqué, because he did not like Mr. Trudeau’s closing news conference, some think that NATO would be safer not having a final statement.
“The irony is that this should be a good NATO summit, with consequential improvements of deterrence,” said Tomas Valasek, a former Slovak ambassador to NATO who now runs Carnegie Europe. “But with the memories of the G-7 fresh, the headlines will be all about the leaders and the mood of Donald Trump.”
The post As Summit Nears, NATO Allies Have One Main Worry: Trump appeared first on World The News.
from World The News https://ift.tt/2tHjbnd via Breaking News
0 notes
maxwellyjordan · 7 years ago
Text
Monday round-up
At CNN, Ariane de Vogue reports that as the justices take the bench this morning for what is likely the last Monday of the term, “[s]ix opinions remain, including on the travel ban, public sector unions and redistricting, and one looming question that could change the future direction of the court: Will there be a retirement?” Steven Mazie takes a quick look at the remaining cases for The Economist’s Espresso blog. Additional coverage of the final lap of the term comes from Lawrence Hurley and Andrew Chung at Reuters.
OnFriday the Supreme Court decided four cases, including a closely watched Fourth Amendment case, Carpenter v. United States, in which the justices held 5-4 that the government ordinarily needs a warrant to access historical cell-site location information. At Good Judgment, Ryan Adler assesses the crowd’s forecast in the case. At NPR, Nina Totenberg reports that “until now, the prevailing legal theory was that if an individual voluntarily shares his information with a third party — for instance, by signing up for cellphone service — police can get that information without a search warrant,” but that “[o]n Friday, the Supreme Court blew a hole in that theory.” Additional coverage comes from Louise Matsakis at Wired and from Lyle Denniston at Constitution Daily, who reports that “[e]ven as it insisted it was acting narrowly, and spoke of some limits on the reach of the ruling, the Court definitely gave a modern cast to the Fourth Amendment, now 227 years old.” Commentary and analysis come from Curt Levey in an op-ed for Fox News, Krebs on Security, Jon Schuppe at NBC News, Erica Goldberg at PrawfsBlawg, and Garrett Epps at The Atlantic.
The justices also held 5-4 on Friday in Currier v. Virginia that a defendant who consents to sequential trials for multiple, overlapping offenses waives his right to make an issue-preclusion claim under the Constitution’s double jeopardy clause after an acquittal in the first trial. Lissa Griffin analyzes the opinion for this blog, and Subscript Law has a graphic explainer. At Constitution Daily, Scott Bomboy reports that the case involved “the legal idea that a defendant can’t be tried for the same issue in more than one criminal trial.” Kent Scheidegger discusses the ruling at Crime and Consequences.
In Ortiz v. United States, the justices held 7-2 that a judge’s simultaneous service on two military courts does not violate the dual-officeholder ban. This blog’s opinion analysis comes from Amy Howe and was first published at Howe on the Court. At PrawfsBlawg, Howard Wasserman notes that “[t]he dispute leaves open whether SCOTUS could review decisions by modern administrative agencies (something Congress has never purported to do).”
Friday’s final opinion was in WesternGeco LLC v. ION Geophysical Corp., in which the justices ruled 7-2 that damages for overseas infringement of a domestic patent include lost profits for overseas contracts the patentholder would have obtained if the infringement had not occurred. Ronald Mann analyzes the opinion for this blog. Subscript Law’s graphic explainer is here. At PrawfsBlawg, Cassandra Robertson calls the decision “an interesting departure from its recent trend toward limiting litigation with foreign dimensions.”
At Governing, Liz Farmer reports that South Dakota v. Wayfair, in which the justices voted last week to overrule two prior cases that prohibited states from requiring out-of-state retailers who don’t have a store or warehouse in the state to collect tax on sales to state residents, “is one of the most significant state and local finance rulings in the modern era and comes at a time when sales tax revenues have been steadily shrinking thanks in part to more purchases being made online.” Law360 (subscription required) offers comprehensive coverage of the decision. For The Wall Street Journal, Jess Bravin reports that the decision “culminated a yearslong campaign by state governments and big-box stores determined to close a loophole they argued was draining state treasuries and disadvantaging brick-and-mortar shops,” “underscor[ing] that Supreme Court cases don’t always arise by happenstance.” At The Economist’s Democracy in America blog, Steven Mazie remarks that in Chief Justice John Roberts’ dissent, “[t]he point of contention was not whether the 50-year-old physical presence rule was the right one, constitutionally—all nine justices seem to agree it wasn’t—but whether the court in 2018 should overrule a decision that has been standing since 1967.” Commentary comes from Will Baude at PrawfsBlawg, who wonders what the debate between the majority and the dissent about the principles governing the application of stare decisis in the case “implies about other judge-made doctrines that might hit the Court’s docket in the future.”  [Disclosure: Goldstein & Russell, P.C., whose attorneys contribute to this blog in various capacities, is among the counsel to the petitioner in this case.]
At Slate, Mark Joseph Stern suggests that Justice Elena Kagan’s majority opinion in Lucia v. Securities and Exchange Commission, in which the court held last week that SEC administrative law judges are “officers of the United States” within the meaning of the appointments clause, who have to be appointed by the president, a court or a department head, is an example of the justice’s “wrestling the court’s far-right justices to a draw in order to forestall disaster.” Commentary comes from Arthur Sapper at Ogletree Deakins, Coates Lear at The National Law Review, and Carlton Smith at Procedurally Taxing. Counting to 5 (podcast) looks at the decisions in Lucia and Wayfair.
For this blog, Jennifer Chacon analyzes last week’s decision in Pereira v. Sessions, in which the court held that a notice ordering a noncitizen to appear for deportation proceedings without specifying a time or place does not stop the clock on the noncitizen’s accrual of continuous presence in the U.S. Subscript has a graphic explainer for the decision. At PrawfsBlawg, Chris Walker looks at Justice Anthony Kennedy’s “solo concurrence, in which he added his voice to the judicial chorus for reconsidering Chevron deference.” [Disclosure: Goldstein & Russell, P.C., whose attorneys contribute to this blog in various capacities, is among the counsel on an amicus brief in support of the petitioner in this case.]
At The George Washington Law Review’s On the Docket blog, Alan Morrison finds “more good news than bad in [last] week’s redistricting decisions”  in two partisan-gerrymandering cases, Gill v. Whitford and Benisek v. Lamone, both of which the justices sent back to the lower courts without reaching the merits, “even though they are a temporary setback in ending the practice.” Additional commentary comes from Kenneth Jost at Jost on Justice. Counting to 5 (podcast) features a discussion of the case.
At The National Law Review, Kim Rinehart and others discuss Lozman v. City of Riviera Beach, in which the justices revived a First Amendment retaliatory-arrest claim and “remanded his case for consideration of whether retaliation was in fact a but-for cause of [Lozman’s] arrest and whether the arrest constituted an official act on the part of the City.” At The Scoop News, Francesco Abbruzzino hopes the ruling “will be an eye opener for the local government institutions, when it comes to conducting meetings.” At First Mondays (podcast), Dan Epps and Ian Samuel interview “two-time Supreme Court winner Fane Lozman” – “the man, the myth, the legend.”
Briefly:
At Cleveland.com, Sabrina Eaton reports that “[d]ays after the U.S. Supreme Court upheld Ohio’s process for removing inactive voters from its rolls [in Husted v. A. Philip Randolph Institute], U.S. Sen. Sherrod Brown on Wednesday introduced a bill that would make that process illegal.”
The Heritage Foundation’s SCOTUS 101 podcast features discussions of “the decisions in Carpenter, Lucia, and Wayfair and whether Justice Kennedy is dropping hints that he won’t retire,” as well as a “chat with the newest addition to the D.C. Circuit, Judge Greg Katsas.”
At Ogletree Deakins, Matthew Wholey and Hanna Raanen look at China Agritech v. Resh, in which the court held that the rule suspending the statute of limitations for individual claims filed after a failed class action does not apply to subsequent class actions. [Disclosure: Goldstein & Russell, P.C., whose attorneys contribute to this blog in various capacities, is among the counsel on an amicus brief in support of the respondents in this case.]
At News, Joel Dodge argues that the court’s decision in Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission, in which the court held that, because it did not exhibit religious neutrality, the commission violated the free-exercise rights of a baker who refused to make a cake for a same-sex wedding, “could actually make it harderfor President Donald Trump’s administration to carry out its assault on access to contraception.”
At the Election Law Blog, Rick Hasen suggests that Abbott v. Perez, two complex redistricting cases from Texas, “could well … end[] not with a major decision, but with a punt (as in Benisek) on the standards for issuing injunctions.”
At The George Washington Law Review’s On the Docket blog, Naomi Cahn looks at Sveen v. Melin, in which the court that retroactive application of a state law providing that divorce automatically nullifies the designation of a former spouse as a life-insurance beneficiary does not violate the Constitution’s contracts clause.
Commentary on WesternGeco LLC v. ION Geophysical Corp., in which the justices ruled last week that damages for overseas infringement of a domestic patent include lost profits for overseas contracts the patentholder would have obtained if the infringement had not occurred. comes from Michael Renaud at The National Law Review.
At Slate, Steve Vladeck writes that the Supreme Court has been asked to review a decision by “the 5thS. Circuit Court of Appeals (the federal appeals court with jurisdiction over Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas) [holding] that, even if a CBP agent at the U.S.-Mexico border commits what one judge described as a ‘cold-blooded murder,’ the victim’s family cannot sue him for damages.”
We rely on our readers to send us links for our round-up.  If you have or know of a recent (published in the last two or three days) article, post, podcast, or op-ed relating to the Supreme Court that you’d like us to consider for inclusion in the round-up, please send it to roundup [at] scotusblog.com. Thank you!
The post Monday round-up appeared first on SCOTUSblog.
from Law http://www.scotusblog.com/2018/06/monday-round-up-398/ via http://www.rssmix.com/
0 notes