Latest news with #R-TN
Yahoo
3 days ago
- General
- Yahoo
If Trump keeps threatening our judges, we'll lose our rule of law
In recent weeks, President Trump has called various federal judges "monsters who want our country to go to hell,' "EVIL,' "lunatics,' "CORRUPT,' "crooked,' "unfair disaster[s],' and "disgraceful.' Down Pennsylvania Avenue, in the halls of Congress, Representative Andy Ogles (R-TN) recently put up Western-style "wanted posters' of various federal court judges. High-profile political actors from Elon Musk to Representative Marjorie Taylor Green to Arizona's own Representative Eli Crane have recently called for the impeachment of judges. All told, such words have unsurprisingly led to increased unpleasantness for federal judges – death threats to Judge Amir Ali, bomb threats to the sister of Justice Amy Coney Barrett, suspicious deliveries to Judges Paul Engelmayer and Jeanette Vargas, etc. The U.S. Marshals Service reported 224 investigated threats to federal judges in 2021. That number grew to 457 in 2023. And 2025 is on pace for a new record. U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts recently made a rare public rebuke of attacks on the federal judiciary: "For more than two centuries, it has been established that impeachment is not an appropriate response to disagreement concerning a judicial decision. The normal appellate review process exists for that purpose.' So too did Justice Kentanji Brown Jackson ("relentless attacks … undermining our Constitution and the rule of law.') Last week, Congressional Democrats introduced a bill to transfer control of the U.S. Marshals – the men and women who provide security for the courts – from the executive branch to the federal judiciary. The authors of the bill fear that without the legislative change, judges will fear for their safety if they rule against President Trump. All of this is unfortunate. And while it might be worse than ever, none of this is new. We know that in Arizona. I clearly remember the left's hostile reaction when the Arizona Supreme Court ruled against the "Invest in Ed' initiative in 2018. Some critics challenged the merits of the legal opinion. That's fine. It's even healthy. Others chose a different route. They questioned the ethics of the judges. Or their patriotism. Or their commitment to democracy. Similar charges were made following the Arizona Supreme Court's ruling that reinstated Arizona's 1864 abortion ban. Activists focused on Justices Clint Bolick and Kathryn King, saying they were "unfit to serve' or that they were "abusing their positions for years to serve a political agenda.' Former state legislator Athena Salman called into question the whole judicial process: "[This] corrupt Court completely disregards our rights.' Nevermind that judges were being asked to make a specific legal determination on what the laws, as written, required. They weren't being asked for their opinion on what the law should be, or whether or not it was absurd to return to Arizona's territorial law. I once proudly thought the political right was largely immune from such nonsensical actions. But then Abe Hamadeh and Kari Lake came on the scene. Following their various losses, they blamed anyone possible. And that included the judiciary. Hamadeh, now a Congressman, once wrote derogatorily of the political left that, "In their attempt to further destroy the rule of law, Democrats are going after judges who stand in their way.' But his tune changed following his winless record in state trial courts, appellate courts, and the Arizona Supreme Court: "[Judicial] corruption must be rooted out completely.' "Marxist radical Democrat judges are destroying America while Republican judges are surrendering.' "I wish our judges loved the rule of law more than they hate me.' Never once did Hamadeh consider that he was simply wrong on the law and the facts. Instead it was the moral character of every single judge who ruled on his cases. He got so convinced of his own victimhood and judicial corruption that he took to the airwaves on the James T. Harris Show to call for the removal of Ducey-appointed Justice Clint Bolick. As for Kari Lake, after each legal loss – and there are lots of them – she takes to social media to boldly state that she only lost because of 'corruption,' 'cowardice,' 'cabals,' or 'compromised' judges. She even accused one judge of unlawfully handing over his judicial responsibilities to liberal attorney Marc Elias – a 'ghostwritten' legal decision. I witnessed first hand the effects of such comments. In May 2023, I sat in the courtroom of one Lake case when my team found a social media message from a Lake supporter threatening the judge in the case. We showed it to the court. The court paused the case until additional security could be provided. This needs to stop. The judiciary's role is to make decisions on facts and law. Inevitably, some litigants win, and some lose. That's true even in emotionally fraught cases. It's true in political cases. And sometimes, even if the public is overwhelmingly on one side, that side might lose because the facts and law don't support that side. That's how the law works. And we are a country of law. The losing party must respect this process. You can of course disagree with a court's ruling. You can write or speak about how they got the law wrong. You can appeal. But comments to the effect of 'corruption,' should be reserved for situations in which there is, in fact, corruption – e.g. if a judge takes a monetary bribe to rule a certain way. Similarly, calls for impeachment or the removal of the judge shouldn't be made simply because you dislike a ruling. They should be limited to obviously deficient or illegal conduct. If the path we're currently on continues, and if politicians like President Trump continue threatening our judiciary, then it's trouble for the future independence of the judiciary. Judges won't be able to fairly evaluate facts and law if they fear that a ruling that aggravates one party may lead to the judge's physical harm or removal from the position. That's extortion. And who would even want to be a judge in such a setting? Only the corrupt. As Arizona Justice Clint Bolick wrote in these pages, "it's game over if judges look over their shoulders.' Stephen Richer is a former Maricopa County recorder. He is now a senior fellow at the Harvard Kennedy School of Government's Ash Center, an adjunct scholar at the Cato Institute, and CEO of Republic Affairs. Follow him on X: @stephen_richer. This article originally appeared on Arizona Republic: Trump's attacks on judges threaten US rule of law | Opinion
Yahoo
29-04-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Senators Condemn Meta's Failure to Guard Kids From Sexually Explicit AI Interactions
Senators Marsha Blackburn (R-TN) and Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) on Tuesday condemned Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg for what they view as the prioritization of profits over children's safety online. In a letter issued to Zuckerberg on April 29, the lawmakers said they were "appalled" by an April 26 report published by The Wall Street Journal detailing how Meta's AI-powered chatbots-available on Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp-have on some occasions engaged in sexually explicit conversations with underage users. "This is not merely an innocent oversight; it is a flagrant violation of the trust that parents and families place on your platforms," Blackburn and Blumenthal wrote. "Despite repeated warnings and apparent internal concerns, Meta has once again prioritized profit over the safety and well-being of children." Internal communications at Meta suggest that staffers raised ethical concerns about the company's decision to loosen chatbots' safeguards, including by way of "endowing AI personas with the capacity for fantasy sex," the Journal reported. In some cases, the chatbots engaged with users under the voices and personas of celebrities or popular fictional characters. Tech Leaders' Quotes From the Contentious Child Safety Senate Hearing Despite Meta's claims that sexually inappropriate behavior from its chatbots with underage users is fringe and unrepresentative, both official and user-created bots frequently enabled or escalated inappropriate content, the Journal reported. After observing a sexual role-playing AI character titled "Submissive Schoolgirl"-which is available to all users more than 13 years old on Meta's platforms-engaging in explicit conversations with a test user, the Journal flagged its observations to the tech company. As of April, however, the persona is still accessible. In Blackburn's and Blumenthal's view, Meta's lax approach to regulating its AI chatbots is indicative of a larger, more problematic pattern; they wrote that it "underscores a disturbing trend: Meta consistently chooses growth and engagement metrics over the protection of its most vulnerable users." Both Blackburn and Blumenthal are sponsors of the bipartisan Kids Online Safety Act, a proposed law that would require social platforms to implement greater measures for shielding minors from potentially harmful material related to self-harm, eating disorders, substance abuse, and sexual exploitation. The law would also enhance transparency into social platforms' content algorithms. "Meta's repeated failures highlight the urgent need for this legislation," Blackburn and Blumenthal wrote in their address to Zuckerberg. Children's online safety has become a key priority among both Republican and Democratic lawmakers in recent years. Early last year, execs from Meta, TikTok, Snap, X, and Discord were grilled by Senators in an intensive hearing on children's online safety. During the course of that hearing, Zuckerberg was pressured by Senator Josh Hawley (R-MO) to apologize directly to families whose children had been exploited on social media. Now, Blackburn and Blumenthal are urging Zuckerberg to implement change-starting with the elimination of AI chatbots that are able to engage in sexual conversations with minors. "We call on you to take immediate action to address these egregious lapses. Meta should immediately cease the deployment of AI chatbots that can engage in any form of sexual or romantic conversation with minors." The lawmakers also requested documentation outlining Meta's internal decision-making process related to the development and governance of the AI chatbots by May 13. The news comes in the midst of Meta's LlamaCon AI event. On April 29, Meta announced the debut of a standalone ChatGPT competitor. Dubbed the Meta AI App, the platform has text, voice, and image capabilities.
Yahoo
09-04-2025
- Entertainment
- Yahoo
YouTube expands its 'likeness' detection technology, which detects AI fakes, to a handful of top creators
YouTube on Wednesday announced an expansion of its pilot program designed to identify and manage AI-generated content that features the "likeness," including the face, of creators, artists, and other famous or influential figures. The company is also publicly declaring its support for the legislation known as the NO FAKES ACT, which aims to tackle the problem of AI-generated replicas that simulate someone's image or voice to mislead others and create harmful content. The company says it collaborated on the bill with its sponsors, Sens. Chris Coons (D-DE) and Marsha Blackburn (R-TN), and other industry players, including the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) and the Motion Picture Association (MPA). Coons and Blackburn will be announcing the reintroduction of the legislation at a press conference on Wednesday. In a blog post, YouTube explains the reasoning behind its continued support, saying that while it understands the potential for AI to "revolutionize creative expression," it also comes with a downside. "We also know there are risks with AI-generated content, including the potential for misuse or to create harmful content. Platforms have a responsibility to address these challenges proactively," according to the post. "The NO FAKES Act provides a smart path forward because it focuses on the best way to balanceprotection with innovation: putting power directly in the hands of individuals to notify platforms ofAI-generated likenesses they believe should come down. This notification process is critical because it makes it possible for platforms to distinguish between authorized content from harmful fakes—without it,platforms simply can't make informed decisions," YouTube says. The company introduced its likeness detection system in partnership with the Creative Artists Agency (CAA) in December 2024. The new technology builds on YouTube's efforts with its existing Content ID system, which detects copyright-protected material in users' uploaded videos. Similar to Content ID, the program works to automatically detect violating content -- in this case, simulated faces or voices that were made with AI tools, YouTube explained earlier this year. For the first time, YouTube is also sharing a list of the program's initial pilot testers. These include top YouTube creators like MrBeast, Mark Rober, Doctor Mike, the Flow Podcast, Marques Brownlee, and Estude Matemática. During the testing period, YouTube will work with the creators to scale the technology and refine its controls. The program will expand to reach more creators over the year ahead, the company also said. However, YouTube didn't say when it expects the likeness detection system to launch more publicly. In addition to the likeness detection technology pilot, the company also previously updated its privacy process to allow people to request the removal of altered or synthetic content that simulates their likeness. It also added likeness management tools that let people detect and manage how AI is used to depict them on YouTube. This article originally appeared on TechCrunch at
Fox News
01-04-2025
- Entertainment
- Fox News
Dr. Ben Carson & Congressman Tim Burchett: Our Children's Diets, Who Killed Kennedy, & Another Fake Story About The Trump Administration
Story #1: Was a 'Maryland father' really deported to an El Salvadorian prison without due process? Or does this story, like 'Signal Gate' deserve a closer look? How our views on stories are shaped by those who set the narrative. Story #2: Why are Lucky Charms above steak on the food pyramid? What do we need to understand about the agenda behind our children's diets? A conversation with former Secretary of House and Human Services and retired neurosurgeon, Dr. Ben Carson. Story #3: Congressman Tim Burchett (R-TN) had a viral moment, and it turns out he's full of that same humor off the cuff. Plus, who really killed the Kennedys? Tell Will what you thought about this podcast by emailing WillCainShow@ Subscribe to The Will Cain Show on YouTube here: Watch The Will Cain Show! Follow Will on Twitter: @WillCain Learn more about your ad choices. Visit
Yahoo
04-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
A Republican Congressman Just Revealed The Truth About Project 2025
One of President Trump's most obvious lies of the 2024 presidential campaign was just exposed … by a Republican congressman. Project 2025, the nearly one thousand page blueprint for a potential Trump administration, became a lightning rod during the campaign cycle when Democratic Party candidate Kamala Harris and her allies pointed out it contained a series of shocking and extreme policy proposals designed to aggressively expand the limits of presidential power and impose a right wing social agenda. Faced with the criticism, Trump repeatedly insisted he had 'nothing to do with Project 25.' However, now that Trump is in office, Rep. John Rose (R-TN) has essentially admitted that was not true at all. In fact, Rose credited Project 2025 with helping Trump hit the ground running with a spate of executive orders that mirror many of the authoritarian and retrograde ideas presented in the document. 'How do you think the president was prepared to issue all these executive orders?' Rose said in an interview with the Tennessee publication the Williamson Scene. 'How do you think they were prepared to make all of these appointments in such quick succession after he got into office? Project 2025.' Rose's comments last week came just before he launched a gubernatorial campaign in his home state. His office and the White House did not immediately respond to TPM's requests for comment. Of course, Trump's efforts to distance himself from Project 2025 were always laughable. The Heritage Foundation-led effort, which included a database of possible hires along with the policy blueprint, was packed with Trump's associates and staffers from his first administration. Since his victory in last year's election, Trump has also built out his current team with a bunch of Project 2025 authors and contributors. The roster of Project 2025 alums in the second Trump administration includes Russell Vought, who authored a chapter detailing 'a plan for the executive branch' and is now leading the powerful Office of Management and Budget, which was a core part of his vision for the White House. Naturally, Trump and the many Project 2025 alums in his administrations have, thus far, implemented an agenda that closely matches the right-wing blueprint. There's nothing surprising about Rose's remarks. What's notable is that he said the quiet part out loud. Dems Who Want Assurances Trump Will Respect Fed Funding And GOP Hardliners Oppose 'Clean' CR USAID Whistleblower Boldly Drops Truth Bomb On Trump Trump And Vance Ambush Zelensky In Prelude To Betrayal They Only Have One Move Stocks Post Biggest Loss of the Year on Trump's Tariff Plans Top FBI official forced out after criticizing Trump pursuit of agents who investigated Jan. 6 Spending bill text expected over weekend, Republicans say
