1597: Honorifics

MIC no Ukraine money

Netanyahu needed cover for Supreme court controversey

Op against Biden's $6 Billion for Iran

Biden wants to allocate $100 billion in military aid to Ukraine

You'll need to translate from Greek. Yandex does this automatically.

Burning oil facilities in the USA: THE Turkey is bombing american and κουρδικούς targets in NORTHEAST Syria - Brain dead NATO - WarNews247

https://warnews247.gr/ektakto-flegontai-oi-egkatastaseis-petrelaiou-ton-ipa-i-tourkia-vomvardizei-amerikanikous-kai-kourdikous-stochous-stin-syria-egkefalika-nekro-to-nato

Slaughtered the Nato Allies: "the American F-16 shot down the Turkish UCAV ANKA in Syria," the official word of the united states. - WarNews247

https://warnews247.gr/sfazontai-oi-natoikoi-symmachoi-amerikaniko-f-16-katerripse-to-tourkiko-ucav-anka-sti-syria-lene-episima-oi-ipa

I have no ideas about what's happening or going to happen ... but it looks bad for NATO ... I can heard the fabric ripping!

I guess the amerikanikos stirred the shit too much!

Phone footage abundant (and now on TV)

Ukraine Phone footage is not the right kind

Pentagon Press Secretary Brig. Gen. Pat Ryder provided the following readout:

Secretary Austin spoke this morning with Israeli Minister of Defense Yoav Gallant to convey his condolences for the victims of this appalling, abhorrent terrorist attack by Hamas on Israel. He conveyed that his thoughts are with the families of the victims, and that he sends his best wishes for recovery to those who were injured. Secretary Austin made clear to Minister Gallant his ironclad support for the Israeli Defense Forces and the Israeli people. He reaffirmed that the Department’s commitment to Israel’s security and its absolute right to defend itself from acts of terrorism is unwavering. Secretary Austin has directed his team to ensure that DoD is closely consulting with all of our Allies and partners who share a commitment to peace and oppose terrorism. Secretary Austin will continue to consult with Minister Gallant in the coming days and weeks to ensure that Israel has the support it needs.

Link

While I was at the Roosevelt hotel migrant processing center. I spoke with a migrants who just arrived in NYC by plane. He told me he came from California, and the Salvation Army paid him and his migrants friends to come to NYC .

Here's one of the groups who are sending migrants besides Governor Abbott.

Link

Australian authors have been caught up in a major controversy around the data used to train large language models after an investigation uncovered 183,000 pirated books were included in a commonly used dataset called Books3.

Booker Prize winning novelist Richard Flanagan was among the Australian writers whose works were in the dataset that was reportedly used to train Meta’s open source large language model LLaMA.

He told the Guardian that it “felt as if [his] soul had been strip mined” when he learned 10 of his books had been used to train AI without his consent.

Link

Here's what your missing about bed bugs in France.

There is very few people who know more about bed bugs than me,

I have a business that helps, landlords, hotels, dorms, retirement communities, etc. monitor for infesting pests such as roaches and bed bugs. Early detection is key in sa

ving hassle, costs, and liability regarding these pests.

and due to our monitoring product we are the only ones with acess to real-time infestation rate data across the country.

Pestnotify.com

Here's what your missing about bed bugs in France.

Paris is not exclusive to this problem, in New York city almost one in 11 residences is hit with bed bugs last year.

In the US we nearly eradicated bed bugs back in the 50s with an excessive use of DDT.

DDT was banned in 1972.

As the persistence of residual ddt breaks down, and bed bugs gain pesticide resistance, populations have been gradually increasing.

In the US we still have easy access to pesticides that are effective in fighting back bed bugs. NA pro tip for anyone who gets bed bugs; pesticide called Crossfire can be picked up at nearly any hardware store over the counter, even Walmart or Amazon. It's the same pesticide the pros use.

In France, EU rules ban such pesticides. EU countries do not have the same access to effective pesticides we have here. There is a very lucrative black market smuggling pesticides available off the shelf from Homedepot into these countries, who are desperate to solve this problem.

EU rules leave the only effective solution for bed bugs to be heat treatments. Heating entire buildings upto 118 degrees F for 90 minutes, kills bed bugs and their eggs. This is very expensive, and sometimes impractical to do. Especially with old buildings. The high density living and aggressive movement of bed bugs just means it's a matter of time before reinfeststion occurs after heat treatment. Heat treatments offer no residual protections and so they just move right back in.

Bed bugs are not new to Paris, in 2020 Benjamin Griveaux ran for mayor under the idea to rid Paris of Bed Bugs in 100 days and then resign. He likley would have won if wasn't for a pesky sex tape scandal that ruined his run.

Future stories about EU countries will involve cockroaches, mice and rats as poison baits for these pests have also been banned.

'Many believe and it is likely true' made my day 🤣 I am a South African millenial douche bag freeloader, and you deserve so much more. I hope I can be dedouched before the ZAR hyperinflates, but so far the rand seems to only get weaker. 🫠 Don't have much, but had to send you something for helping me wear a smile instead of a mask through the apocalypse. You guys are the definite quality and my all-time faves. 🥳

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sun, 08 Oct 2023 14:15

President of the United States of America Joe Biden plans to ask the US Congress for approval of the largest package of military and humanitarian assistance in favor of Ukraine, the British newspaper The Daily Telegraph reports, citing its sources. The amount of financial support could be about $100 billion and is designed until the beginning of 2025.

The package would be one of the most extensive the United States has ever provided to another country and would underscore increased American support for Ukraine. The funds expected to be allocated will be used to support military and defense initiatives of Ukraine, as well as to implement humanitarian projects.

Biden's proposal is likely to spark intense debate in Congress, where foreign aid and foreign relations remain widely debated among political groups. However, such an amount is unlikely to be allocated to Kyiv.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sun, 08 Oct 2023 13:48

The pain is not over yet for the podcast industry, with layoffs and cancellations continuing to pile up. Amrita covered the WNYC layoffs yesterday, which, thanks to negotiations between management and the union, were not as steep as initially expected (6 percent laid off versus 12 percent previously announced). Last week, Pushkin laid off another 30 percent of staff in its third round of cuts this year, with shakeups even targeting its C-suite. And live audio took another hit on Wednesday, with Amazon shutting down Amp.

I have been talking to people from the business side of podcasting about how the ad market has changed and why it is hitting podcasts so hard, especially when the economy seems to actually be doing'... fine? As I wrote about at the end of 2022, the ad market is really susceptible to uncertainty, and while layoffs have been mainly avoided in much of the economy, companies often cut marketing budgets before cutting jobs. But that trickles down and manifests as job cuts in ad-dependent industries like media. And podcast companies in particular, after riding a wave of growth and excitement, are facing additional pressure from ad agencies to deliver on their targets.

I'll have more on that soon, but also, feel free to email me your own questions about what is going on with the ad market. What do you want to know? Or, what do you think I and people in the industry should know? Hit me up at ariel.shapiro@theverge.com.

Start your free trial now to continue readingThis story is exclusively for subscribers of Hot Pod. Subscribe to a plan below for full access.

Already a subscriber?Sign inWe accept credit card, Apple Pay, and Google Pay. Having issues?Click here for FAQ

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sun, 08 Oct 2023 13:47

October 6, 2023

BY

ARIEL SHAPIRO

Podcasting's fallout continues

The Verge

To continue reading

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sun, 08 Oct 2023 04:28

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu suggested in a speech that Israel will strike Iran soon after defeating the Hamas invasion that launched on Saturday.

''We are at war, not in an operation or in rounds, but at war,'' Netanyahu said. ''This morning, Hamas launched a murderous surprise attack against the State of Israel and its citizens.''

''I convened the heads of the security establishment and ordered first of all '' to clear out the communities that have been infiltrated by terrorists. This currently is being carried out.''

''At the same time, I have ordered an extensive mobilization of reserves and that we return fire of a magnitude that the enemy has not known,'' Netanyahu stated.

''The enemy will pay an unprecedented price,'' he added.

Hamas, a militant Palestinian fundamentalist group, has been funded and equipped by Iran for decades to the tune of $100 million annually.

Footage from Iran's parliament shows Iranian politicians celebrating Hamas' attack on Israel.

Iranian scum in Majlis '' Iranian parliament '' celebrate the terror in #Israel today. The Islamic Republic of #Iran supports the terrorists of Hamas and Islamic Jihad ideologically, financially and with weaponry and should be fully held accountable. pic.twitter.com/ihLEn04bil

'-- Geert Wilders (@geertwilderspvv) October 7, 2023Notably, this surprise incursion by Hamas comes just days after the Biden regime unfroze $6 billion in funds to Iran.

NEW: Hamas is currently going on a killing spree, murdering men, women and children in Israel and parading dead bodies around.This is the most serious escalation between Israel and Hamas since the 10-day war in 2021.

The attack from Hamas, who is funded by Iran, comes just'... pic.twitter.com/Paxe5eyD27

'-- Collin Rugg (@CollinRugg) October 7, 2023The Biden regime is now facing widespread condemnation for that move in the wake of the Hamas invasion.

''Today, we are watching the culmination of Biden's absolutely irresponsible policies with respect to Israel. He has directed funds to Palestine. UN funds have gone to Palestine. He JUST handed $6 BILLION to Iran,'' wrote Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-Colo.).

Today, we are watching the culmination of Biden's absolutely irresponsible policies with respect to Israel.He has directed funds to Palestine.

UN funds have gone to Palestine.

He JUST handed $6 BILLION to Iran.

Now we see the results. Israel is our closest ally in the world.'...

'-- Lauren Boebert (@laurenboebert) October 7, 2023''If you are horrified by what is happening in #Israel right now, you can thank @JoeBiden. Iran is spending the $6 BILLION Joe Biden just gave them,'' journalist Laura Loomer wrote on X.

If you are horrified by what is happening in #Israel right now, you can thank @JoeBiden.Iran is spending the $6 BILLION Joe Biden just gave them.

'-- Laura Loomer (@LauraLoomer) October 7, 2023Former President Donald Trump even predicted this attack shortly after Biden gave the $6 billion to Iran.

1 month ago Trump predicted the $6 Billion that Biden gave Iran would be used for terror attacks across the Middle East and specifically kidnappingThis is exactly what we are seeing in Israel this morning pic.twitter.com/ao2avPQrll

'-- Jack Poso 🇺🇸 (@JackPosobiec) October 7, 2023''These Hamas attacks are a disgrace and Israel has every right to defend itself with overwhelming force,'' Trump wrote Saturday on Truth Social. ''Sadly, American taxpayer dollars helped fund these attacks, which many reports are saying came from the Biden Administration. We brought so much peace to the Middle East through the Abraham Accords, only to see Biden whittle it away at a far more rapid pace than anyone thought possible. Here we go again.''

pic.twitter.com/Stj0ut9ymS

'-- Trump War Room (@TrumpWarRoom) October 7, 2023Like Netanyahu, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R), who's running for president, called for retaliation against Iran in the wake of Hamas' surprise attack.

Israel is now under attack by Iranian-backed Hamas terrorists. Iran has helped fund this war against Israel and Joe Biden's policies that have gone easy on Iran have helped fill their coffers.We are going to stand with Israel as they root out Hamas and we need to stand up to'... pic.twitter.com/FENQtAxiDE

'-- Ron DeSantis (@RonDeSantis) October 7, 2023RINO Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) issued a similar statement, declaring that ''there must be consequences for those who conduct or support such terror.''

McConnell compares Hamas attacks on Israel to Russia's assault on Ukraine, noting both Hamas/Russia are backed by Iran''Failure to support friends under attack '' in Kyiv or Tel Aviv '' will only embolden the world's largest state sponsor of terrorism & fellow authoritarians'...'' pic.twitter.com/c7e3j3DfuK

'-- Andrew Desiderio (@AndrewDesiderio) October 7, 2023The establishment is gearing up for a new war as public sentiment sours on the protracted Ukraine conflict.

Understanding the Hamas attack on Israel:Iran is aiming for a confrontation with Israel and the US. The success of Russia in Ukraine is encouraging Iran to undo decades of hostile US foreign policy in the Middle East. A bankrupt US Govt has just been invited to another war.'...

'-- Kim Dotcom (@KimDotcom) October 7, 2023 Follow Jamie White on X | Truth | Gab | Gettr | Minds

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sat, 07 Oct 2023 16:51

Pentagon Press Secretary Brig. Gen. Pat Ryder provided the following readout:Secretary Austin spoke this morning with Israeli Minister of Defense Yoav Gallant to convey his condolences for the victims of this appalling, abhorrent terrorist attack by Hamas on Israel. He conveyed that his thoughts are with the families of the victims, and that he sends his best wishes for recovery to those who were injured. Secretary Austin made clear to Minister Gallant his ironclad support for the Israeli Defense Forces and the Israeli people. He reaffirmed that the Department's commitment to Israel's security and its absolute right to defend itself from acts of terrorism is unwavering. Secretary Austin has directed his team to ensure that DoD is closely consulting with all of our Allies and partners who share a commitment to peace and oppose terrorism. Secretary Austin will continue to consult with Minister Gallant in the coming days and weeks to ensure that Israel has the support it needs.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sat, 07 Oct 2023 16:08

Executive Summary

On June 15, the House of Representatives passed the Separation of Powers Restoration Act of 2023 (SOPRA), which would permit courts to decide de novo questions of statutory interpretation and administrative rulemaking when federal agencies promulgate regulations.SOPRA would obviate the decision in Chevron v. NRDC, in which the Supreme Court ruled that courts should defer to agencies' ''reasonable'' interpretations of ambiguous statutes.Although SOPRA is unlikely to pass the Senate, it brings attention to how Chevron deference enables regulatory overreach '' a decades-long trend that could be arrested when the Supreme Court decides Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo next term.IntroductionOn June 15, 2023, the House of Representatives passed the Separation of Powers Restoration Act of 2023 (SOPRA), or H.R. 288, with all but one Republican voting in favor and all but one Democrat voting against passage. The legislation, sponsored by Representative Scott Fitzgerald (R-WI), expands the set of circumstances under which courts can apply judicial review to actions of administrative agencies. In particular, SOPRA would enable courts to decide de novo questions of statutory interpretation and administrative rulemaking when federal agencies promulgate regulations, instead of deferring to the conclusion of any party in the dispute. This includes but is not limited to disputes over how to interpret ambiguous statutory provisions, rules, policy statements, and informal guidance documents.

SOPRA would overturn Chevron v. Natural Resources Defense Council, in which the Supreme Court ruled that courts should defer to an agency's ''reasonable'' interpretation of an ambiguous statute. The bill is unlikely to become law, but it demonstrates that judicial deference has empowered executive agencies to balloon in size and scope and implement more, and more burdensome, regulations. Notwithstanding the Senate's probable inaction on SOPRA and other bills to curb the regulatory state, the Supreme Court could overturn Chevron next term when it hears arguments in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, a decision that could play an outsized role in reversing the accelerating growth of federal bureaucracy.

Chevron DeferenceSOPRA would be a legislative remedy to regulatory bloat, which is a result of excessive acquiescence to executive branch rulemaking, enabled by various types of judicial deference. Foremost among the deference doctrines is Chevron deference, named after the Supreme Court's 1984 decision in Chevron v. Natural Resources Defense Council. In its unanimous decision, the Court set forth a two-part test to determine whether agencies should be afforded deference in their interpretations of a statute that was enacted by Congress. First, if Congress has clearly addressed the precise question at issue, then the agency must abide by the legislature's stated interpretation thereof. If, however, the statute does not address the precise question or if its treatment thereof is ambiguous, courts must defer to the agency's interpretation of the statute provided that its interpretation is ''reasonable.''

What meets the thresholds for statutory ambiguity and for reasonability raises more questions than it answers, however, and courts have struggled to determine which agency interpretations pass muster. Moreover, the procedure laid out in Chevron stands in apparent contravention to the Administrative Procedure Act, which instructs courts to ''decide all relevant questions of law, interpret constitutional and statutory provisions, and'...hold unlawful and set aside agency'...conclusions found to be'...not in accordance with law; in excess of statutory jurisdiction, authority, or limitations, or short of statutory right.''

SOPRA would legislatively override Chevron v. NRDC, as well as other pro-deference decisions in Skidmore v. Swift & Co., Auer v. Robbins, and Kisor v. Wilkie, which affirmed the validity of judicial deference for agencies' informal documents and regulations in addition to ambiguous statutory provisions. (See table below.)

Supreme Court Cases That Would Be Overridden by SOPRACaseYearImplications for judicial deference to agenciesSkidmore v. Swift & Co.1944Courts may defer to an agency's interpretation of informal documents '' though they should typically be less deferential than for statutes or regulation. The degree of deference ''depend[s] upon the thoroughness evident in [the agency's] consideration, the validity of its reasoning, its consistency with earlier and later pronouncements, and all those factors which give it power to persuade.''Chevron U.S.A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., et al.1984If Congress has not directly addressed a particular question of statutory interpretation or if the statute is silent or ambiguous about such a question, courts should defer to an agency's interpretation thereof if the interpretation is reasonable '' that is, it is ''based on a permissible construction of the statute.''Auer et al. v. Robbins et al.1997Courts should defer to an agency's interpretation of its own ambiguous regulation unless the interpretation is ''plainly erroneous or inconsistent with the regulation.''Kisor v. Wilkie, Secretary of Veterans Affairs2019Auer and Seminole Rock, its 1945 forerunner, are not overruled. But Auer deference has a limited scope and should not be applied in all circumstances. Judicial deference to administrative agencies is justified after courts exhaust traditional tools of construction, the rule in question is truly ambiguous, the interpretation is reasonable, and ''the character and context of the agency interpretation entitles it to controlling weight'' '' that is, the interpretation should reflect the agency's authoritative or official (rather than ad hoc) position, must implicate the agency's substantive expertise, and must reflect the agency's ''fair and considered judgment.''''A Tombstone No One Can Miss''Chevron deference has ramifications for the separation of powers, legislative compromise, and regulatory expansion.

First, the American constitutional order is founded on Congress producing legislation in service of the national interest and the executive swiftly and appropriately administering the resulting law. Administrative agencies should avoid veering away from Congress' intentions as much as practicable. Chevron deference flips this framework on its head. Agencies ask not what Congress has clearly authorized them to do, but what interpretations of statutes could achieve deference and elude courts' scrutiny. As then-Judge Brett Kavanaugh explained, everything, ''unless it is clearly forbidden,'' becomes fair game. Agencies risk seizing powers properly understood to belong to the legislative branch, and Chevron deference limits judicial remedies. As Justice Clarence Thomas has noted, Chevron conflates Congress' neglect to meticulously spell out the precise statutory bounds of an agency's mandate with an affirmative delegation of expansive authority to the bureaucracy. Chevron deference has allowed the executive to arrogate power from the legislative branch because it enables agencies to unilaterally enact policy, often without regard for Congress' original intent in crafting legislation. By interpreting ambiguous statutes for the purpose of formulating policy, executive agencies may be unconstitutionally usurping Article I legislative powers.

Second, Chevron deference has proven deleterious to legislative compromise, especially across partisan lines. The comparative ease of agency rulemaking has discouraged compromise because it gives legislators an easy out: implementing preferred policy without going through the hard yards of negotiation with colleagues. As former Solicitor General Paul Clement put it, ''half the people in Congress can get their friends in the executive branch to do what they want just through an administrative rule. So why compromise? If you can get the immediate objective through an administrative rule, why compromise for a long-term solution that's in legislation?''

Third, Chevron has enabled the vast expansion of the regulatory bureaucracy. Especially since the 1980s, both the number of federal regulations and the expenditures attributed to regulatory agencies have grown significantly. (See graphs below.) Judicial deference to the administrative state has abetted this trend. Justice Neil Gorsuch has lambasted deference doctrines for creating ''systematic judicial bias in favor of the federal government, the most powerful of parties, and against everyone else.'' By giving agencies the final word over how to interpret various statutes, rules, documentation, and guidance, it is difficult for stakeholders affected by their regulations to mount successful legal challenges. As a result, agencies are empowered to reach beyond their statutory mandate and are likely to promulgate more rules.

Although the Supreme Court has avoided using Chevron deference in recent years '' perhaps signaling unease with the doctrine '' a majority of federal appellate court judges continue to faithfully apply Chevron as a binding precedent of the high court. Research indicates that circuit courts frequently use the doctrine to uphold interpretations of ambiguous statutes, invoking Chevron 74.8 percent of the time in such cases, with an agency win rate of 77.4 percent. This exceeds the agency win rate when the court declines to invoke any deference doctrine, utilizes Skidmore deference, or applies de novo judicial review. Moreover, there is a 23.8 percentage point increase in the agency win rate when Chevron is applied compared to when it is not. (See graphs below.) Bureaucrats and administrators within the executive branch recognize these facts and trends. A 195-question survey of 128 rule drafters representing seven federal departments and two independent agencies found that Chevron deference was the most well-known interpretive tool of the 22 included in the questionnaire and was recognized by 94 percent of respondents. Furthermore, 90 percent of the agency rule drafters reported that Chevron plays a significant role in formulating regulations '' a figure that outstrips the percentages for other forms of deference (such as Skidmore and Auer/Seminole Rock), canons of statutory construction (such as the whole act rule, ordinary meaning, and noscitur a sociis), and other legal norms and presumptions. (See graph below.)The data show that deference to federal agencies remains one of the most significant facets of administrative law, and burdens businesses and individuals with hefty regulatory costs. A wealth of research shows that federal regulatory accumulation encumbers small businesses, slows economic growth, distorts markets, increases prices for consumers, and has a disproportionate impact on the poor. A Mercatus Institute working paper analyzed the cumulative effects of regulations and found that regulatory expansion since 1980 slowed economic growth by 0.8 percentage points annually, causing the U.S. economy to be $4 trillion smaller in 2012 than it otherwise would have been. Another study concluded, ''Federal regulations added over the past 50 years have reduced real output growth by about 2 percentage points on average over the period 1949''2005. That reduction in the growth rate has led to an accumulated reduction in GDP of about $38.8 trillion [about $277,100 per household] as of the end of 2011.'' These ramifications are especially concerning given the Biden Administration's regulatory spree. From January 20, 2021, to July 28, 2023, the administration has finalized 620 rules with an aggregate cost of $395.5 billion and 232.4 million paperwork hours according to data from the American Action Forum. It is easy to see why Justice Gorsuch remarked that Chevron ''deserves a tombstone no one can miss.''

''Chevron Step Zero'' and the Major Questions DoctrineMichigan Law Professor Christopher J. Walker has argued that the very legal doctrine of Chevron has morphed and become more context specific, varying in application by the issue in question. He points to Chief Justice John Roberts' dissent in City of Arlington v. FCC, as well as his majority opinion in King v. Burwell, wherein the court declined to defer to the Internal Revenue Service's interpretation of a statutory phrase. The Court still upheld the IRS rule in question '' which concerns tax credits to federal exchanges under the Affordable Care Act '' as a permissible exercise of the agency's authority. In so doing, the Court added a so-called ''Chevron Step Zero'' '' an inquiry into whether the facts of the case justify applying the doctrine's two-step test in the first place. As Chief Justice Roberts noted in King v. Burwell, Chevron ought to be applied to major questions '' those of ''deep 'economic and political significance''' '' only in cases in which a court can ascertain clear congressional intent to delegate the relevant power to the agency. By ''ground[ing] his major questions doctrine as a threshold, Step Zero inquiry,'' the Chief Justice transformed Chevron's purview from its relatively broad origins to a doctrine whose applicability varies according to the context.

As a result, not all disputes about statutory interpretation are treated equally in the courts or by the bureaucracy. Data from the aforementioned survey of more than 100 agency rule drafters show that a vast majority believe that federal agencies have the prerogative to resolve statutory ambiguities relating to implementation details (99 percent), the agency's substantive expertise (92 percent), the scope of the agency's jurisdiction (75 percent), omissions in statutes (72 percent), and the division of labor between federal and state agencies (65 percent). By contrast, a markedly lower proportion of respondents expressed the belief that agencies were empowered to address major policy (56 percent), economic (49 percent), political (32 percent), or constitutional (24 percent) questions. Moreover, a vast majority of agency rule drafters believe that whether Chevron applies depends on whether Congress has authorized rulemaking or formal adjudication (84 percent), whether the agency interpretation is made by rulemaking or formal adjudication (80 percent), and whether the agency has issue expertise that implicates the statutory provision (79 percent). (See graphs below.) The major questions doctrine has become especially pertinent in recent years. With the decision in West Virginia v. Environmental Protection Agency '' its most potent and forthright defense of the doctrine yet '' the Supreme Court has signaled its willingness to cabin the administrative state by determining whether Congress has clearly authorized agencies to pursue sweeping regulations regarding matters of vast significance. Regardless of whether the utilization of the major questions doctrine should be seen as a harbinger of the outright end of Chevron or rather as an exception by which the court incrementally chips away at deference, it is a noteworthy development.

Which Parts of the Administrative State Are Most Likely To Be Affected?It would be difficult to overstate what effect the circumscription or end of Chevron deference would have on the size and powers of the regulatory state. It is likely, however, that agencies would take greater pains to act in accordance with the powers Congress explicitly delegates to them, rather than straying beyond that territory when ambiguity arises. Yet if the courts were required to decide relevant questions de novo, instead of deferring to agencies, such a development would have uneven consequences across the regulatory landscape. It is likely that regulatory bloat in certain issue areas and promulgated by certain executive agencies would be at greater risk of critical judicial review than regulations in other areas and promulgated by other agencies.

Two tables from a study by administrative law scholars Kent Barnett and Christopher J. Walker are reproduced below. The figures therein are based on a review of relevant federal court cases and reflect the average of three statistics: the agency's overall win rate, the rate at which Chevron deference was applied as a proportion of the total number of cases in the dataset, and the agency's win rate conditional on Chevron being applied. The resultant figure was subsequently normalized onto a zero-to-10 scale, with larger numbers indicating a higher frequency of agencies being afforded deference. The first table disaggregates the data by substantive issue area, and the second by agency. Federal courts have been the most deferential to agencies when the subject matter at issue relates to telecommunications, followed by Indian affairs, the federal government, pensions, education, health and safety, and entitlements. The issue area in which agencies have been afforded the least deference is civil rights, followed by housing, prisons, tax, employment, energy, and immigration.

The analogous data for agencies show that the agencies afforded the most deference were the Surface Transportation Board (STB), Federal Communications Commission (FCC), Department of the Treasury, National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), Department of Commerce, Department of Defense, Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and Department of Education. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) had the lowest rate of deference, followed by the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Department of Energy, Federal Trade Commission (FTC), Department of Justice, Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Bureau of Prisons, and Social Security Administration. By examining how Chevron deference has been applied by courts in the recent past, we can gain a workable, albeit imperfect, understanding of which issue areas and agencies are most likely to be impacted should Congress or the Supreme Court pull the plug on Chevron.

Looking AheadSOPRA would play a critical role in restraining the excesses of the administrative state. Yet given that the Senate is controlled by Democrats, cloture requires 60 votes, and the White House has threatened to veto the bill, SOPRA '' which cleared the House of Representatives in June '' is unlikely to become law. Perhaps more modest legislative efforts to rein in the administrative state may be possible. In the meantime, Congress should take care to write statutes with greater specificity so that agencies can focus on administration. As Adam J. White, the Co-Executive Director of the Antonin Scalia Law School's C. Boyden Gray Center for the Study of the Administrative State, said in response to a question at a House Committee on Oversight and Accountability hearing about red tape, ''Congress needs to write more standards itself so that the agencies can focus on enforcement because'...enforcement is often sorely lacking. '...Congress should write the policies. Agencies should enforce them.'' Moreover, members of Congress should treat any legislation that delegates power to agencies with a dose of skepticism and recognize that agency administrators and bureaucrats may attempt to interpret legislative grants of authority expansively in the future. Statutes should be tailored to foreclose this possibility as much as reasonably possible.

Although a legislative override of Chevron seems unlikely in this Congress, the Supreme Court may take matters in its own hands. Next term, the Court will consider Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, in which the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit deferred to the National Marine Fisheries Service's interpretation of a provision of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act of 1976. The question before the Supreme Court will be whether to maintain, sharply curtail, or overrule Chevron v. NRDC. Justices Neil Gorsuch and Clarence Thomas have indicated their desire for the Court to disavow Chevron deference, and the fact that Loper Bright Enterprises was granted cert means that at least four justices are interested in considering the merits of judicial deference to the administrative state. Moreover, the Supreme Court has refrained from using Chevron to favor agencies in recent years. An amicus brief filed by the Cato Institute and Liberty Justice Center notes that since the end of the 2015 term, agencies have lost 70 percent of cases that addressed Chevron, which could portend the doctrine's impending demise. The Supreme Court can resolve Chevron deference's ''descent into muddy indeterminacy'' '' to borrow the words of University of South Carolina Associate Professor Nathan D. Richardson '' and simultaneously offer clarity to lower courts by directly grappling with the validity of Chevron v. NRDC as a matter of precedent and perhaps overturning that 1984 ruling. It appears that the end of Chevron deference is a veritable '' but not inevitable '' possibility.

ConclusionAgencies undoubtedly have a great deal of substantive expertise in their issue areas. Yet their aggrandizement of power has allowed mission creep to go unaddressed, raised costs for individuals and businesses, and imbalanced the constitutional separation of powers. If Chevron deference is eliminated or restricted, agencies will have to abide by Congress' words and intent in framing legislation and will be required to think more carefully about whether proposed rules fall within their duly granted authority. The Supreme Court has the opportunity in Loper Bright Enterprises to arrest the decades-long and accelerating trend of regulatory expansionism. It would be no exaggeration to say that the end of Chevron would be the biggest change to regulatory policy in years.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sat, 07 Oct 2023 14:02

A scheduled ''picnic'' sponsored by the University of Nevada Las Vegas law school's Environmental Law Society has been renamed ''Lunch by the Lake'' due to ''diversity and inclusion'' concerns.

According to a memo obtained by Libs of TikTok, the law group informed members that the word ''picnic'' has ''historical and offensive connotations,'' and apologized for ''any harm or discomfort'' caused by its use.

The group's view mirrors that of the University of Michigan's IT department from several years ago: ''Picnic'' was included in a ''Words Matter Task Force's'' list of offensive words and phrases along with ''brown bag,'' ''blacklist'' and ''long time, no see'' among others.

At the time, Reuters did a fact check on the alleged offensiveness of ''picnic''; its verdict: It ''does not originate from racist lynchings'' but instead comes from the 300-plus-year-old French word ''pique-nique,'' meaning a potluck-like social gathering.

The UNLV event memo even uses ''potluck'' (pictured).

Still, Reuters claimed 19th and 20th-century lynchings of black Americans ''often occurred in gatherings that could be referred to as picnics.'' But a PolitiFact article noted the term historians actually use is ''spectacle lynchings'' '-- where people ''took photographs and looked for souvenirs.''

Ferris State University's David Pilgrim, curator of the Jim Crow Museum of Racist Memorabilia, said ''it's possible someone used the word 'picnic' to refer to lynchings, but 'what we know for a fact is that's not where the word 'picnic' came from.'''

In 2021, a student group at Brandeis University ended up deleting ''picnic'' from a list of ''oppressive'' words and phrases in response to massive mockery.

The College Fix asked UNLV Environmental Law Society President Julianna Ness precisely how ''picnic'' is offensive; she did not respond.

The Fix has long documented universities' word policing; other terms considered offensive over the last few years include ''chief,'' ''step,'' ''ladies and gentlemen,'' ''snowflake,'' ''brainstorm'' and ''American.''

MORE: UCI language guide: Avoid 'kill two birds with one stone,' use 'feed two birds with one scone'

IMAGES: Krakenimages/Shutterstock.com; Libs of TikTok/X

Like The College Fix on Facebook / Follow us on Twitter

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sat, 07 Oct 2023 13:54

Earlier this week President Biden's German Shepherd, Commander, was booted from the White House after a dozen documented biting incidents involving Secret Service officers and White House staffers.

The move caused some people to wonder if Biden is mistreating his dogs.

We already know Biden broke his ankle pulling his dog's tail after a shower (and we already know he takes 'probably inappropriate' showers with family members).

Now, footage has emerged of Biden kicking his dog amid a Judicial Watch report that he abuses them. Some have suggested that it isn't a 'kick' in anger, rather, Biden is either tripped up, or is using his leg to herd the dog into the vehicle.

Watch:

REPORT: President Biden has ''mistreated'' his dogs by punching and kicking them according to sources close with Judicial Watch.Biden's dogs are just like his son: Poorly trained.

Documents from the United States Department of Homeland Security, reveal injuries from attacks'... pic.twitter.com/dDGRuYxc1P

'-- Collin Rugg (@CollinRugg) October 6, 2023According to a Judicial Watch source "President Biden has mistreated his dogs. Judicial Watch has learned he has punched and kicked his dogs."

Judicial Watch has also obtained records from the US Department of Homelands Security in which Secret Service officers discuss Biden's dogs after a November 3 biting incident.

"Doing alright [redacted]? That's freaking crazy that stupid dog '' rolling my eyes [redacted]," asked the first officer.

"My leg and arm still hurts. He bit me twice and ran at me twice," the victim replied.

To which the first officer responded: "What a joke [redacted] '' if it wasn't their dog he would already have been put down '' freaking clown needs a muzzle '' hope you get to feeling better [redacted]."

Unsurprisingly, while being highly critical of former President Trump, PETA has defended Biden's dog, saying Commander was just trying to "protect his family."

Let's see what they say about this... if anything.

This story reads VERY differently given the @JudicialWatch report today that Biden kicks and hits his dogs. Wow. Very sick! pic.twitter.com/sQFFfbb5lC

'-- Robby Starbuck (@robbystarbuck) October 5, 2023probably euthanizing dogs

'-- 🐧 (@_sexypenguin) October 6, 2023Loading...

Link to Article

Archived Version

Fri, 06 Oct 2023 22:06

Authors are upset their hard work was copied and ingested into AI training data. Image: Shutterstock

Australian authors have been caught up in a major controversy around the data used to train large language models after an investigation uncovered 183,000 pirated books were included in a commonly used dataset called Books3.

Booker Prize winning novelist Richard Flanagan was among the Australian writers whose works were in the dataset that was reportedly used to train Meta's open source large language model LLaMA.

He told the Guardian that it ''felt as if [his] soul had been strip mined'' when he learned 10 of his books had been used to train AI without his consent.

''This is the biggest act of copyright theft in history,'' Flanagan said.

This week, the Atlantic published details about Books3, which was easily accessible until an anti-piracy group shut it down.

Journalist Alex Reisner got his hands on Books3 and wrote a program to extract ISBNs and run them through an online database of books.

Reisner's findings have been turned into non-paywalled searchable database that shows the massive extent of copyrighted material contained in Books3 '' enter the name of any well-known living author and you are bound to find their novels were part of the dataset.

Generative AI is creating all sorts of problems for copyright as tech companies race to create models using data from the internet, often with a disregard to its providence.

Crime writer Dervla McTiernan told the ABC the use of her work in to train data was tantamount to theft and epitomised the Silicon Valley motto of 'move fast and break things'.

''They knew they were using pirated books, and they did so with gross indifference, and I think that's characteristic of the mentality of people who work in this industry,'' she said.

John Marsden, author of the series Tomorrow, When the War Began, told the Australian Financial Review that generative AI trained on a vast corpus of works from established writers would create ''frightening and a horrifying kind of tsunami of imitations which would do incredible, incalculable damage to the creative powers and efforts of human beings''.

The Australian Society of Authors (ASA) described the revelations as ''horrifying'' and noted the opacity with which AI systems had been trained made it nearly impossible to know just how much copyrighted material they contained.

''Tech companies will charge the end user of their products but will not pay for the labour that enabled it,'' said ASA CEO Olivia Lanchester.

''It's a supply chain that stops short of the primary producer. Like paying the supermarket for your fruit and vegetables without any of that revenue going back to the farmers who grew the produce.''

In the US, the Authors Guild and 17 well known authors including Jodi Picoult, George RR Martin, and John Grisham have filed a lawsuit against ChatGPT creator OpenAI for what they claim is ''flagrant and harmful infringements'' of copyright.

At the heart of that complaint is the way writers' labour has been co-opted to create technology systems that seeks to replace the people whose work was stolen.

''Already, writers report losing income from copywriting, journalism, and online content writing '' important sources of income for many book authors,'' the complaint said.

Hollywood writers went on strike earlier this year in response to the change in compensation wrought by streaming services and the impending disruption caused by AI.

Last week, the union successfully struck a deal to better control the use of AI in writers rooms.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Fri, 06 Oct 2023 21:18

Adenovirus (highly contagious virus causing lymphadenopathy symptomatizing swelling of the glands in the neck, accompanied by a cold, or pharyngitis, or bronchitis, sometimes also conjunctivitis, keratitis, or a combination of the two (keratoconjunctivitis).

Bsip | Universal Images Group | Getty Images

LONDON '-- A U.K. study showed that symptoms of a cold can linger well beyond the main period of illness, suggesting that rather like "long Covid," "long colds" can also exist.

The study, published Friday in scientific journal The Lancet, showed that non-Covid infections can be associated with a range of illnesses more than four weeks after the initial infection.

After studying 10,171 participants, scientists at the Queen Mary University of London concluded that there may be long-lasting health impacts from other respiratory infections, such as the common cold, that are unrecognized.

They were unable to say whether the symptoms of "long colds" would last as long as those of "long Covid."

"Post-acute infection syndromes are not a new phenomenon; indeed, many cases of chronic fatigue syndrome are reported to follow an infection-like episode. Nonetheless, these syndromes often go undiagnosed owing to the wide range of symptoms and lack of diagnostic tests," an introduction to the research on The Lancet website said.

There were similarities between the symptoms of those with "long Covid" and "long colds," but typical post-Covid issues such as taste and smell deficiencies and dizziness were less common in people suffering from long colds.

"Long Covid" typically refers to a range of mid- and long-term effects that can emerge following a Covid infection '-- including fatigue, breathlessness and cognitive dysfunction.

The term "long Covid" was coined in spring 2020 when people who had had Covid-19 did not fully recover for several weeks or months after they were first infected.

The World Health Organization defines it as "the continuation or development of new symptoms three months after the initial infection ... with these symptoms lasting for at least two months with no other explanation."

Link to Article

Archived Version

Fri, 06 Oct 2023 16:07

Our purpose & culture

We bring people together through voices they trust and content they love.

Through shared ambitions, our culture is shaped by our unique, talented team members from all over the country who are fueled by passion, and guided by our values.

Our values

Community Our strength is in connection to others.'‹ We work together, champion our common goals, and celebrate diverse perspectives that make us stronger for our audiences, our business, and our world. '‹

Curiosity We listen to learn and grow.'‹ We ask the questions that help us build deeper connections '' and uncover better solutions. '‹

Creativity We dream big to build extraordinary experiences.'‹ We imagine possibilities and try new things to speed innovation and fuel our best work.'‹

Courage We lead with purpose and conviction.'‹ We are brave. We meet challenges and take smart risks. It's how we deliver exceptional outcomes.'‹

Diversity, equity & inclusion We embrace and reflect the diversity of our communities in our workforce and in our content in order to build a stronger, more equitable world.

Social impact It's our privilege and our responsibility to unite our listeners, brands, and communities with programs that educate, serve, and influence positive change.

Our people We're over 4,000 passionate audio fans creating premium content with a single goal: connecting people through audio '' personally, meaningfully, when it matters most.'‹

Join us We love what we do. We think you'll love it too. Whatever you do best, whatever you're passionate about, we invite you to bring your bright, creative and innovative talent and join us.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Fri, 06 Oct 2023 04:17

NAOMI WOLF has found Jesus!

Wolf first made a name for herself with ''The Beauty Myth,'' a 1991 feminist critique of feminine stereotypes. Admired by some and ridiculed by others, Wolf has since written on everything from motherhood to promiscuity. During the 2000 election campaign, she famously advised Al Gore to work on being an ''alpha male,'' and her most recent book, a folksy memoir about her father, left many erstwhile fans clearing their throats in embarrassment.

For the record:

12:00 a.m. March 3, 2006 For The Record Los Angeles Times Friday March 03, 2006 Home Edition California Part B Page 13 Editorial Pages Desk 0 inches; 20 words Type of Material: Correction Religion: A Jan. 27 column about religion in the United States said the Pilgrims hanged witches. It was the Puritans.

Maybe that's what pushed Wolf toward Jesus. In an interview published last weekend in Scotland's Glasgow Sunday Herald, Wolf announced that she had been struggling with a midlife crisis a few years ago when she went into ''a light meditative state.'' That's when it happened: ''I was completely dumbfounded but I actually had this vision of ... of Jesus.''

If that doesn't sound like the Naomi Wolf you love (or hate), Wolf agrees. ''I wasn't myself in this visual experience. I was a 13-year-old boy sitting next to him [Jesus] and feeling feelings I'd never felt in my lifetime.... It was probably the most profound experience of my life.''

Has Wolf genuinely found her spiritual side, albeit by getting in touch with her inner adolescent boy? Or is this sheer opportunism, a bid for media love in an evangelized world that's increasingly hostile to feminism?

The Herald was quick to put it all in perspective. ''In America, finding God is an acceptable resolution to midlife crisis.''

Well, no need to be snide! It's true that the United States has always had a tradition of eclectic religiosity. And why not? Our shores were settled by the Pilgrims, who were brave, brilliant and -- face it -- absolutely nuts. They arrived in the New World and lost no time before starting to denounce one another as heretics. Before the century was out, they had managed to hang 19 witches. Then there was the Great Awakening and the Wesleyan revival and the rise of ''televangelism,'' to mention but a few episodes of American religious fervor.

So yes, we Americans have always been enthusiastic about religion. Speaking in tongues? We can do that. Visions and fainting fits? We can produce entire revival camps full of synchronized fainters. Don't like your old religion? We've got a new one. Found Jesus while you were temporarily inhabiting the body of a 13-year-old boy? Not a problem, Naomi: We've got a church for you here somewhere.

It's true that some of our zanier religious impulses have been rather destructive (think Jim Jones and Kool-Aid), but others have been bound up with notable American achievements. The ferment of the Great Awakening led to the founding of Princeton and Columbia, and the mid-19th century religious revivals helped fuel the abolitionist movement.

Given our history, perhaps it's inevitable that many a modern midlife crisis will culminate in a spiritual awakening. But in our religion-saturated culture, I worry that we're losing touch with another great American tradition: the tradition of skepticism, rebellion and good old-fashioned orneriness.

In my own family, that's a tradition we cherish. I grew up hearing about my great-great-grandmother Mamie O'Laughlin. As her father lay dying, Mamie summoned a priest to his bedside. The priest sent back a message demanding $25, far beyond the family's meager means, and her father died without the sacrament. Later, when Mamie herself lay dying, a priest came -- this time unbidden. He offered Mamie the crucifix. Summoning up the last of her strength, she furiously flung it across the room.

Then there was my paternal great-grandfather, Chaim Steinbrook, born in the mid-1800s in a Russian Jewish village where his own father was a grain merchant and self-styled Talmudic scholar. In one version of the family legend, Chaim's father refused to let his hungry neighbors consume any of his plentiful grain during a year of famine, because the grain had been planted after the previous Passover and thus was not yet kosher. Disgusted, 14-year-old Chaim ran way from home and found his way to America, where he later refused to let his children even visit the local synagogue's playground.

Many Americans have characters like these in their family trees: rebels and misfits, independent spirits who place the demands of humanity over the blandishments of religion. People like the early American feminist Elizabeth Cady Stanton, who had little time for religious cant. Stanton mocked the biblical account of Eve's origin in Adam's rib as ''a petty surgical operation to find material for the mother of the race. It is on this allegory that all the enemies of women rest their battering rams.''

As for Wolf, it's hard to argue with a vision. But if Wolf, who insists she's still committed to feminism, really needs a great American tradition to help her through her midlife crisis, she could do worse than emulate Elizabeth Cady Stanton.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sun, 08 Oct 2023 14:56

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sun, 08 Oct 2023 14:49

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sun, 08 Oct 2023 14:09

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sun, 08 Oct 2023 13:58

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sun, 08 Oct 2023 13:55

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sun, 08 Oct 2023 13:54

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sat, 07 Oct 2023 17:26

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sat, 07 Oct 2023 17:19

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sat, 07 Oct 2023 17:14

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sat, 07 Oct 2023 17:11

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sat, 07 Oct 2023 16:09

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sat, 07 Oct 2023 16:04

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sat, 07 Oct 2023 15:56

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sat, 07 Oct 2023 15:55

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sat, 07 Oct 2023 15:53

Link to Article

Archived Version

Fri, 06 Oct 2023 21:58

Firefighters are working to prevent an explosion at an electrical plant in the New South Wales Hunter Valley as an unprecedented chemical blaze burns out of control. Fire and Rescue NSW (FRNSW) crews are at an electrical plant at Tomago near Port Stephens where the facility's machinery overheated just after 5am on Friday.

Electrical machinery, measuring 14 x 3 metres, overheated from 700 degrees to 1200 degrees, sparking a chemical blaze.

The chemical blaze erupted at the Tomago facility. (9News) There are concerns the heat build-up is close to hazardous materials like a hydrogen-container.>>

Three staff members were evacuated from the site which is designed to store heat as a power source.>>

Emergency services have set up an 800-metre exclusion zone>>.

"Police have closed roads around the new facility and evacuated 15 neighbouring businesses as a precaution," FRNSW said.

"It will react with water which has caused FRNSW to set up an exclusion zone," FRNSW's Scott Dodson said.>>

A piece of machinery overheated sparking the blaze. (9News) It's a delicate situation for firefighters as they're unable to extinguish the blaze with water due to the risk of sparking an explosion.

">>If water is introduced it could cause an explosion," Dodson said.

"We are looking at other extinguishing mediums to cool it down."

Dodson said firefighters are looking to introduce nitrogen to cool it down.>>

Specialist crews including the Hazardous Materials unit are at the scene using equipment like an aerial platform and a bulk carbon dioxide tanker.

Staff evacuated from the electrical plant. (9News) Crews in breathing apparatus are carrying out heat readings within the warehouse housing the machinery.

The incident isn't expected to be resolved for hours.

Dodson said the electrical facility is a trial plant in its commissioning phase and firefighters have never seen a blaze like this before.

Tomago Road is closed in both directions between Old Punt Road and McIntrye Road and motorists are advised to avoid the area.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Fri, 06 Oct 2023 21:45

Link to Article

Archived Version

Fri, 06 Oct 2023 21:43

Link to Article

Archived Version

Fri, 06 Oct 2023 21:43

Link to Article

Archived Version

Fri, 06 Oct 2023 21:42

Link to Article

Archived Version

Fri, 06 Oct 2023 21:38

Link to Article

Archived Version

Fri, 06 Oct 2023 21:11

Link to Article

Archived Version

Fri, 06 Oct 2023 21:49