Constitutional right

ABC Files Lawsuit Against President Biden’s Anti-Competitive Project Labor Agreement Rule for Federal Construction Projects

Retrieved on: 
Thursday, March 28, 2024
PLA, ABC, Administration, Government, District court, Regulatory Flexibility Act, Policy, Management, Builder, Complaint, Competition, Constitution, Constitutional right, Workforce, Federal, General contractor, Associated Builders and Contractors

ABC’s complaint asserts that President Joe Biden lacks the legal and constitutional authority to impose a new federal regulation injuring economy and efficiency in federal contracting and illegally steering construction contracts to certain unionized contractors, which employ roughly 10% of the U.S. construction workforce.

Key Points: 
  • ABC’s complaint asserts that President Joe Biden lacks the legal and constitutional authority to impose a new federal regulation injuring economy and efficiency in federal contracting and illegally steering construction contracts to certain unionized contractors, which employ roughly 10% of the U.S. construction workforce.
  • ABC estimates the Biden pro-PLA policy will affect at least 180 federal construction contracts valued at $16 billion across America on an annual basis, including several federal construction contracts for projects in Jacksonville and dozens of projects in Florida and the Southeast.
  • “ABC has heard from large and small federal contractors—including firms signatory to union agreements—and concerned federal agency contracting officers that the Biden administration’s controversial PLA policy has already stifled competition and raised costs on federal construction contracts in Florida and across the country.
  • ABC members won 54% of the $205.56 billion in federal contracts worth $35 million or more during fiscal years 2009-2023 and built award-winning projects safely, on time and on budget, without unnecessary government-mandated PLAs.

NCLA Asks Supreme Court to Resolve Circuit Split over Standing in Social Media Censorship Cases

Retrieved on: 
Wednesday, March 27, 2024
Speech, Government, Plaintiff, COVID-19, White, Social media, HHS, First, The central science, Supreme court, Fifth, Constitutional right, Supreme, Sixth, Court, NCLA

NCLA’s petition asks the Court to resolve a circuit split between the Fifth and Sixth Circuits on what plaintiffs must show to satisfy Article III standing in censorship cases against the government.

Key Points: 
  • NCLA’s petition asks the Court to resolve a circuit split between the Fifth and Sixth Circuits on what plaintiffs must show to satisfy Article III standing in censorship cases against the government.
  • The petition urges the Court to overturn the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit ruling that NCLA clients Mark Changizi, Michael Senger, and Daniel Kotzin lacked standing to challenge the censorship regime that silenced them.
  • The Supreme Court should resolve the resulting circuit split on this standing issue in the First Amendment context, at least holding NCLA’s Changizi cert petition until it issues a decision in Murthy.
  • NCLA released the following statements:
    “The Changizi allegations regarding government-induced social media censorship are nearly identical to those made in Murthy v. Missouri.

NCLA Asks en Banc Fifth Circuit to Vacate Legally Defective Nasdaq Board Diversity Rules

Retrieved on: 
Friday, March 22, 2024
Speech, Administration, Congress, Exchange, Public policy, Constitutional right, NCLA, Financial adviser

These Rules impose gender, race and sexual orientation quotas on corporate board membership for Nasdaq-listed companies.

Key Points: 
  • These Rules impose gender, race and sexual orientation quotas on corporate board membership for Nasdaq-listed companies.
  • A Fifth Circuit panel had upheld the Board Diversity Rules, but the en banc court granted NCLA’s request to rehear the case.
  • The Fifth Circuit panel in this case deferred to that flawed reasoning without addressing the statutory prohibitions that should invalidate the Rules.
  • NCLA looks forward to the en banc Fifth Circuit’s addressing each of these problems in turn.

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit agrees that digital facial images may be used for age verification

Retrieved on: 
Friday, March 22, 2024
Minor, Risk, HB, Texas House of Representatives, Trust, Constitutional right, Privacy, Government, Legislation

The appeals court found that the appropriate standard for review should have been a rational-basis and that age verification requirements can rationally be considered part of the legitimate interest the government has in restricting minors from accessing pornography.

Key Points: 
  • The appeals court found that the appropriate standard for review should have been a rational-basis and that age verification requirements can rationally be considered part of the legitimate interest the government has in restricting minors from accessing pornography.
  • The court also found that biometric age estimation based on a facial image is allowable under the legislation and does not present a greater privacy risk than in-person age verification.
  • Trust Stamp President Andrew Gowasack commented, “This decision is a major affirmation of the urgent need and market potential for AI-based age estimation services.
  • HB 1181 imposes substantial penalties on non-compliant sites and we believe that there will now be a rush to comply with the law.

Supreme Court Hears Oral Argument in Pivotal NCLA Case Against Gov’t Social Media Censorship

Retrieved on: 
Monday, March 18, 2024
CISA, Speech, Archive, Freedom, Ethics, COVID-19, Infection, Federation, White, Social media, Public policy, Constitution, First, Bioethics, Immunity, Kulldorff, CDC, Supreme court, DRS, Fifth, COVID-19 vaccine, Constitutional right, Safety, FBI, Injury, Paper, Government, Court, NCLA, Human

The vast, coordinated silencing of First Amendment-protected speech has targeted influential, highly qualified voices including doctors and scientists like Drs.

Key Points: 
  • The vast, coordinated silencing of First Amendment-protected speech has targeted influential, highly qualified voices including doctors and scientists like Drs.
  • We went to social media to voice our opinions and were silenced by government employees who bullied social media snowflakes into silencing our voices.
  • In the Murthy v. Missouri case, the Supreme Court has the opportunity to restore the First Amendment in this country.
  • That is what the government did here, and if that is allowed then the First Amendment is a dead letter.”

EMBARK ALERT: Bragar Eagel & Squire, P.C. is Investigating Embark Technology, Inc. f/k/a Northern Genesis Acquisition Corp. II on Behalf of Long-Term Stockholders and Encourages Investors to Contact the Firm

Retrieved on: 
Saturday, March 16, 2024
Health, Register, CFO, EPS, Individual, NGA, District court, Telephone, Securities Class Action, Classification, News, Acquisition, Software, IPO, Disclosure, Delaware General Corporation Law, Prospectus, Bank statement, P.C, Fraud, False, GAAP, Constitutional right, Bears' Cave

Our investigation concerns whether the board of directors of Embark have breached their fiduciary duties to the company.

Key Points: 
  • Our investigation concerns whether the board of directors of Embark have breached their fiduciary duties to the company.
  • Headquartered in San Francisco, California, Embark is a Delaware corporation that builds software for carriers to enable autonomous trucks within their fleets.
  • The autonomous vehicle company offers software as a service product ecosystem, such as Embark driver, Embark universal interface, and Embark guardian.
  • Legacy Embark was a startup company that developed self-driving truck technology designed for freight and logistic services.

AHF Prevails in CA’s Unconstitutional Attempt to End Medi-Cal Contract

Retrieved on: 
Friday, March 22, 2024
Professional Services, AIDS, Health, Legal, Insurance, Health Insurance, General Health, AIDS Healthcare Foundation, District court, Patient, Managed care, DHCS, Constitutional right, AHF, State, Medi-Cal, Hospital

In a move that ultimately was found unconstitutional, the State and its representatives attempted to end AHF’s very long-standing Medi-Cal contract to provide health care to about 770 people living with AIDS in California after AHF mailed patients suggesting they contact DHCS.

Key Points: 
  • In a move that ultimately was found unconstitutional, the State and its representatives attempted to end AHF’s very long-standing Medi-Cal contract to provide health care to about 770 people living with AIDS in California after AHF mailed patients suggesting they contact DHCS.
  • AHF sued, alleging violations of the First Amendment, and the court issued a preliminary injunction.
  • The lawsuit was pursued in the U.S. District Court, Central District of California (Los Angeles), and the U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
  • The dispute is now over, and AHF’s contract has been further extended through December 31, 2025.

Credova Calls Out Major Credit Card Companies and Vows to Protect Consumer Privacy and Rights

Retrieved on: 
Friday, March 22, 2024
Apps, Applications, Technology, Finance, Fintech, Banking, Professional Services, Public Policy, Government, Software, Other Policy Issues, Constitutional right, BNPL, Fourth Amendment, Recreation, Privacy, Politics

California recently passed a controversial law that mandates the tracking and coding of firearm transactions by payment card networks.

Key Points: 
  • California recently passed a controversial law that mandates the tracking and coding of firearm transactions by payment card networks.
  • Last month, these companies confirmed their intention to meet the May 2025 deadline for implementing the required codes.
  • This is a clear violation of the trust that consumers place in these companies to protect their rights.
  • In contrast to the actions of the major credit card companies, Credova offers solutions that respect and protect individual liberty, reinforcing its stance as a defender of constitutional rights in the financial sector.

Liberty Energy Inc. Comments on Stay of SEC Climate Rule and Need for Affordable, Reliable Energy to Better Human Lives

Retrieved on: 
Wednesday, March 20, 2024
Other Energy, Oil, Gas, Environment, Public Relations, Investor Relations, Energy, Environmental Policy, Communications, Environmental Issues, Speech, Climate change, Comment, Liberty, Climate, Security (finance), Quality of life, Constitutional right

The Climate Rule was adopted by the SEC on March 6, 2024, and Liberty promptly filed litigation to challenge it.

Key Points: 
  • The Climate Rule was adopted by the SEC on March 6, 2024, and Liberty promptly filed litigation to challenge it.
  • In response, the 5th Circuit granted an administrative stay of the Climate Rule on March 15, 2024.
  • In order to better human lives, the world needs more affordable, reliable energy, not less of it.
  • The report highlights the central role that energy plays in human lives and discusses inevitable trade-offs involved in our energy system and climate change policies.

Social Media Victims Law Center: Buffalo Judge Denies Social Media Companies’ Motion to Dismiss Lawsuits Related to Their Role in Radicalizing Shooter at the Tops Friendly Markets Mass Shooting; Case to Proceed to Discovery

Retrieved on: 
Tuesday, March 19, 2024
Social Media, Communications, Legal, Professional Services, Section 230, Crime, Algorithm, Plaintiff, Communications Decency Act, Snap Inc., Meta Platforms, Social media, Artificial intelligence, Gendron, Tops Friendly Markets, Amazon (company), L.L.C, Constitutional right, Parent, Violence

Ten people were killed, all of them Black, and three people were injured.

Key Points: 
  • Ten people were killed, all of them Black, and three people were injured.
  • In their motion, the social media companies argued they were immune from civil liability by Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act and the First Amendment.
  • However, Plaintiffs lawyers from the Social Media Victims Law Center and Law Office of John V. Elmore argued that this was a product liability case based on the addictive and dangerously defective design of the social media platforms which makes Section 230 irrelevant in this lawsuit.
  • “Social media companies purposefully designed their products to be addictive to young users like the Buffalo shooter and the artificial intelligence driven algorithms that radicalized him to commit unspeakable acts of racist violence at Tops Friendly Markets were foreseeable consequences of their intentional design decisions.