A federal appeals court panel on Friday unanimously upheld a law that could lead to a ban on TikTok as soon as next month, handing a resounding defeat to the popular social media platform as it fights for its survival in the U.S.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit denied TikTok’s petition to overturn the law — which requires TikTok to break ties with its China-based parent company ByteDance or be banned by mid-January — and rebuffed the company’s challenge of the statute, which it argued had ran afoul of the First Amendment.
“The First Amendment exists to protect free speech in the United States,” said the court’s opinion, which was written by Judge Douglas Ginsburg. “Here the Government acted solely to protect that freedom from a foreign adversary nation and to limit that adversary’s ability to gather data on people in the United States.”
TikTok and ByteDance — another plaintiff in the lawsuit — are expected to appeal to the Supreme Court, though its unclear whether the court will take up the case.
“The Supreme Court has an established historical record of protecting Americans’ right to free speech, and we expect they will do just that on this important constitutional issue,” TikTok spokesperson Michael Hughes said in a statement.
“Unfortunately, the TikTok ban was conceived and pushed through based upon inaccurate, flawed and hypothetical information, resulting in outright censorship of the American people,” Hughes said. Unless stopped, he argued the statute “will silence the voices of over 170 million Americans here in the US and around the world on January 19th, 2025.”
Though the case is squarely in the court system, it’s also possible the two companies might be thrown some sort of a lifeline by President-elect Donald Trump, who tried to ban TikTok during his first term but said during the presidential campaign that he is now against such action.
“He wants to save TikTok,” Rep. Michael Waltz, Trump’s pick for national security adviser, said Friday during an interview on Fox Business.
The law, signed by President Joe Biden in April, was the culmination of a yearslong saga in Washington over the short-form video-sharing app, which the government sees as a national security threat due to its connections to China.
The U.S. has said it’s concerned about TikTok collecting vast swaths of user data, including sensitive information on viewing habits, that could fall into the hands of the Chinese government through coercion. Officials have also warned the proprietary algorithm that fuels what users see on the app is vulnerable to manipulation by Chinese authorities, who can use it to shape content on the platform in a way that’s difficult to detect. The European Union on Friday expressed similar concerns as it investigates intelligence that suggests Russia possibly abused the platform to influence the elections in Romania.
Drumming made the floor vibrate and singing filled the conference room of the Chinook Winds Casino Resort in Lincoln City, on the Oregon coast, as hundreds in tribal regalia danced in a circle.
For the last 47 years, the Confederated Tribes of Siletz Indians have held an annual powwow to celebrate regaining federal recognition. This month’s event, however, was especially significant: It came just two weeks after a federal court lifted restrictions on the tribe’s rights to hunt, fish and gather — restrictions tribal leaders had opposed for decades.
“We’re back to the way we were before,” Siletz Chairman Delores Pigsley said. “It feels really good.” The Siletz is a confederation of over two dozen bands and tribes whose traditional homelands spanned western Oregon, as well as parts of northern California and southwestern Washington state. The federal government in the 1850s forced them onto a reservation on the Oregon coast, where they were confederated together as a single, federally recognized tribe despite their different backgrounds and languages.
In the 1950s and ‘60s, Congress revoked recognition of over 100 tribes, including the Siletz, under a policy known as “termination.” Affected tribes lost millions of acres of land as well as federal funding and services.
“The goal was to try and assimilate Native people, get them moved into cities,” said Matthew Campbell, deputy director of the Native American Rights Fund. “But also I think there was certainly a financial aspect to it. I think the United States was trying to see how it could limit its costs in terms of providing for tribal nations.”
Losing their lands and self-governance was painful, and the tribes fought for decades to regain federal recognition. In 1977, the Siletz became the second tribe to succeed, following the restoration of the Menominee Tribe in Wisconsin in 1973.
But to get a fraction of its land back — roughly 3,600 acres (1,457 hectares) of the 1.1-million-acre (445,000-hectare) reservation established for the tribe in 1855 — the Siletz tribe had to agree to a federal court order that restricted their hunting, fishing and gathering rights. It was only one of two tribes in the country, along with Oregon’s Confederated Tribes of Grand Ronde, compelled to do so to regain tribal land.
The settlement limited where tribal members could fish, hunt and gather for ceremonial and subsistence purposes, and it imposed caps on how many salmon, elk and deer could be harvested in a year. It was devastating, tribal chair Pigsley recalled: The tribe was forced to buy salmon for ceremonies because it couldn’t provide for itself, and people were arrested for hunting and fishing violations.
The Texas Supreme Court on Friday ruled that a legislative subpoena cannot stop an execution after Republican and Democratic lawmakers who say Robert Roberson is innocent used the novel maneuver to pause his execution at the last minute.
The ruling clears the way for Roberson’s execution to move forward, weeks after a bipartisan group of state House lawmakers bought him more time by subpoenaing Roberson as he waited to be taken to the nation’s busiest death chamber.
Roberson was sentenced to death in 2003 for killing his 2-year-old daughter, Nikki Curtis. He would be the first person in the United States to be executed over a conviction tied to “shaken baby syndrome,” a diagnosis that has been questioned by some medical experts.
A new execution date for Roberson has not been set, but it is certain to proceed unless Republican Gov. Greg Abbott grants a 30-day reprieve. Abbott did not move to do so before Roberson’s original execution date and his office challenged the subpoena tactic used by lawmakers, accusing them of overstepping their power.
The state’s all-Republican high court agreed, ruling that “under these circumstances the committee’s authority to compel testimony does not include the power to override the scheduled legal process leading to an execution,” wrote Republican Justice Evan Young, issuing the opinion of the court.
The ruling addressed a subpoena issued for Roberson by the Texas House Criminal Jurisprudence Committee. Roberson was scheduled to die by lethal injection on Oct. 17 when lawmakers, in a last-ditch effort, issued a subpoena to have him testify at the Texas Capitol days after his planned execution.
This spurred a legal conundrum between the state’s criminal and civil courts, which ultimately led to the Texas Supreme Court temporarily ruling in Roberson’s favor while it considered the matter. Roberson has gained bipartisan support from lawmakers and medical experts who say he was convicted on faulty evidence of “shaken baby syndrome,” which refers to a serious brain injury caused when a child’s head is hurt through shaking or some other violent impact, like being slammed against a wall or thrown on the floor.
Rep. Joe Moody, who has led the effort to stop Roberson’s execution, said delaying the execution with the subpoena was “never our specific intention” and added that the court “rightly agreed” that the subpoena and lawsuit were valid.
A former drugstore worker in the small Indiana community of Delphi was found guilty of murder on Monday in the killings of two teenage girls who vanished during an afternoon hike.
Jurors convicted Richard Allen of two counts of murder and two additional counts of murder while committing or attempting to commit kidnapping in the 2017 killings of Abigail Williams, 13, and Liberty German, 14.
Allen wasn’t arrested for five more years, while the case drew outsized attention from true-crime enthusiasts. His trial followed repeated delays, a leak of evidence, the withdrawal of Allen’s public defenders and their reinstatement by the Indiana Supreme Court.
Reporters inside the courtroom said Allen, 52, showed no reaction as the verdict was delivered, but he looked back at his family at one point. Allen is scheduled to be sentenced on Dec. 20. He could face up to 130 years in prison.
Outside the courthouse, people on the sidewalk began to cheer as word of the verdict spread.
Indiana State Police spokesman Capt. Ron Galaviz told The Associated Press that the judge’s gag order remains in place and he believes it will until Allen is sentenced. Allen’s lawyers left the courthouse Monday without making statements.
A special judge oversaw the case — Superior Court Judge Fran Gull who along with the jurors, came from northeastern Indiana’s Allen County. The seven women and five men were sequestered throughout the trial, which began Oct. 18 in the Carroll County seat of Delphi, the girls’ hometown of about 3,000 residents in northwest Indiana where Allen also lived and worked.
Carroll County Prosecutor Nicholas McLeland noted in his closing argument that Allen had repeatedly confessed to the killings — in person, on the phone and in writing. In one of the recordings he replayed for the jury, Allen could be heard telling his wife, “I did it. I killed Abby and Libby.”
McLeland also said Allen is the man seen following the teens in a grainy cell phone video recorded by one of the girls as they crossed an abandoned railroad trestle called the Monon High Bridge.
“Richard Allen is Bridge Guy,” McLeland told jurors. “He kidnapped them and later murdered them.”
McLeland said it was Allen’s voice that could be heard on the video telling the teens, “ Down the hill ″ after they crossed the bridge on Feb. 13, 2017. Their bodies were found the next day, their throats cut, in a nearby wooded area.
An investigator testified that Allen told him and another officer that on the day the teens vanished, he was wearing a blue or black Carhartt jacket, jeans and a beanie — clothing similar to what the man recorded on the bridge wore.
McLeland said an unspent bullet found between the teens’ bodies “had been cycled through” Allen’s .40-caliber Sig Sauer handgun. An Indiana State Police firearms expert told the jury her analysis tied the round to Allen’s handgun.
But a firearms expert called by the defense questioned the analysis, and attorney Bradley Rozzi dismissed it as a “magic bullet,” saying investigators had made an “apples to oranges” comparison of the unspent round to one fired from Allen’s gun.
Allen was arrested in October 2022. He had become a suspect after a retired state government worker who volunteered to help police in the case found paperwork in September 2022 showing that Allen had contacted authorities two days after the girls’ bodies were found. That paperwork indicated that Allen had told an officer he had been on the hiking trail the afternoon the girls went missing, according to testimony.
Allen’s defense argued that his confessions are unreliable because he was facing a severe mental health crisis while under the pressure and stress of being locked up in isolation, watched 24 hours a day and taunted by people incarcerated with him. A psychiatrist called by the defense testified that months in solitary confinement could make a person delirious and psychotic.
But Dr. Monica Wala, Allen’s psychologist at the Westville Correctional Facility, said Allen shared details of the crime in some of the confessions, including telling her he slashed the girls’ throats and put tree branches over their bodies. She wrote in a report that Allen told her he abandoned his plans to rape the teens when a van passed nearby. A man whose driveway passes under the Monon High Bridge testified that he was driving home from work in his van around that time.
That van, McLeland told jurors in his closing, was a detail “only the killer would know.”
During cross-examination, Wala acknowledged that she had followed Allen’s case with interest during her personal time even while treating him and that she was a fan of the true-crime genre.
Rozzi said in his closing arguments that Allen is innocent. He said no witness explicitly identified Allen as the man seen on the hiking trail or the bridge the afternoon the girls went missing. And he said no fingerprin
“He had every chance to run, but he did not because he didn’t do it,” Rozzi told the jurors.
Allen’s lawyers had sought to argue before the trial that the girls were killed in a ritual sacrifice by members of a white nationalist group known as the Odinists who follow a pagan Norse religion, but the judge ruled against that, saying the defense “failed to produce admissible evidence” of such a connection.t, DNA or forensic evidence links Allen to the murder scene.
The judge overseeing Donald Trump’s 2020 election interference case canceled any remaining court deadlines Friday while prosecutors assess the “the appropriate course going forward” in light of the Republican’s presidential victory.
Special Counsel Jack Smith charged Trump last year with plotting to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election and illegally hoarding classified documents at his Mar-a-Lago estate. But Smith’s team has been evaluating how to wind down the two federal cases before the president-elect takes office because of longstanding Justice Department policy that says sitting presidents cannot be prosecuted, a person familiar with the matter told The Associated Press.
Trump’s victory over Vice President Kamala Harris means that the Justice Department believes he can no longer face prosecution in accordance with department legal opinions meant to shield presidents from criminal charges while in office.
Trump has criticized both cases as politically motivated, and has said he would fire Smith “within two seconds” of taking office.
In a court filing Friday in the 2020 election case, Smith’s team asked to cancel any upcoming court deadlines, saying it needs “time to assess this unprecedented circumstance and determine the appropriate course going forward consistent with Department of Justice policy.”
U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan quickly granted the request, and ordered prosecutors to file court papers with their “proposed course for this case” by Dec. 2.
Trump had been scheduled to stand trial in March in Washington, where more than 1,000 of his supporters have been convicted of charges for their roles in the Capitol riot. But his case was halted as Trump pursued his sweeping claims of immunity from prosecution that ultimately landed before the U.S. Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court in July ruled that former presidents have broad immunity from prosecution, and sent the case back to Chutkan to determine which of the the allegations in the indictment can move forward.
The classified documents case has been stalled since July when a Trump-appointed judge, Aileen Cannon, dismissed it on grounds that Smith was illegally appointed. Smith has appealed to the Atlanta-based 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, where the request to revive the case is pending. Even as Smith looks to withdraw the documents case against Trump, he would seem likely to continue to challenge Cannon’s ruling on the legality of his appointment given the precedent such a ruling would create.
The Supreme Court on Tuesday rejected an emergency appeal to remove Robert F. Kennedy Jr. from the presidential ballot in two battleground states.
Kennedy wanted to get off the ballot in Wisconsin and Michigan after dropping his independent bid and endorsing Republican Donald Trump in the tight contest. He argued that keeping him on violated his First Amendment rights by wrongly implying he still wanted to be elected president.
Michigan and Wisconsin said removing his name now, with early voting underway days before the election, would be impossible. More than 1.5 million people in Michigan have already returned absentee ballots, and another 264,000 have voted early, state attorneys wrote in court documents. In Wisconsin, over 858,000 people have returned absentee ballots.
The justices did not detail their reason in an order rejecting the emergency appeal, as is typical. One justice, Neil Gorsuch, publicly dissented in the Michigan case.
The presence of independent and third-party candidates on the ballot in swing states could be a key factor in the close presidential race. The high court previously rejected Kennedy’s separate effort to stay on the ballot in New York, a state where his presence is unlikely to make a difference in the race between Trump and Democrat Kamala Harris.
Kennedy has been working to get off the ballot in the seven key swing states since endorsing Trump. Wisconsin and Michigan are the last two where his name is expected to appear.
In Michigan, he notched an appeals court win but courts ultimately found he couldn’t withdraw as the candidate of the Natural Law Party, which had wanted him to stay on.
In his dissent, Gorsuch pointed to lower court judges who wrote that the timing of Kennedy’s original request to be removed wasn’t so unreasonable that it should be denied.
In Wisconsin, courts rejected Kennedy’s argument that major parties unfairly get more time to switch nominees. Judges there found candidates who miss deadlines to change nomination papers must remain on the ballot unless they die, and a plan to cover Kennedy’s name with stickers was unworkable.
A recent Supreme Court decision doesn’t mean New York can’t enforce laws banning firearms from “sensitive” places such as public transportation, hospitals and schools, a federal appeals court said Thursday, repeating findings it made a year ago.
The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Manhattan wrote that it had complied with a high court request that it review its December 2023 decision in light of a June ruling by the Supreme Court in another gun case.
The Supreme Court also asked seven other state and federal courts to reexamine their decisions, the 2nd Circuit noted.
The appeals court said the Supreme Court case involved a regulation of firearms “quite different” than New York’s.
Last December, a three-judge panel of the 2nd Circuit said New York could continue enforcing laws banning firearms in 20 categories of “sensitive” locations and could require handgun owners to be of “good moral character.”
It also disallowed a requirement that handgun license applicants reveal their social media accounts and blocked a ban on concealed weapons in places such as shops, supermarkets and restaurants.
In 2022, the Supreme Court struck down New York’s old rules, which had restricted guns being carried outside the home to people who could show they had a special need for protection.
A New York gun law passed after that decision made it easier for more people to get handgun licenses but also restricted where guns could be carried. The law, which was passed after a white supremacist killed 10 Black people at a supermarket in Buffalo, also banned guns in places such as zoos, playgrounds, schools, theaters, bars, voting locations, buses and airports.
In a footnote, the 2nd Circuit said its ruling comes “at a very early stage of this litigation.”
It said its decision does not determine the ultimate constitutionality of the challenged aspects of the law because the provisions must now be subjected to further argument by lawyers along with historical analysis and any evidence unearthed as the case proceeds.
Gov. Kathy Hochul said in a statement that the appeals court upheld the “common-sense measure” she signed into law two years ago.
She said the law was “saving lives across New York” and was a factor in New York having one of the nation’s lowest firearm mortality rates.
Gun Owners of America, a lobbying organization involved in the litigation, called Thursday’s decision “an incredibly frustrating ruling.”
“The Second Circuit got it wrong the first time, SCOTUS told them so and said try again, and this nearly identical ruling is a slap in the face to the Justices and every gun owner across New York,” Erich Pratt, the group’s senior vice president, said in a statement.
Sam Paredes, speaking on behalf of the group’s board, said it might again ask the Supreme Court to intercede.
“This ruling will continue to leave innocent New Yorkers, who simply want the ability to protect themselves and their loved ones, defenseless,” he said.
New York Attorney General Letitia James said in a statement that the ruling was “another victory in our effort to protect all New Yorkers from the scourge of gun violence.”
She added: “After repeated attempts to weaken our gun safety regulations, once again we have prevailed.”
David Pucino, legal director of the Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, a gun safety group that also submitted papers in the case, said the ruling shows that the “Second Circuit had it right before and the Second Circuit has it right now.”
“Gun safety laws remain constitutional since they are consistent with our history and tradition,” he added.
Breaking Legal News - POSTED: 2024/12/07 15:42
