1 lucky me pancit canton calories
Stephanie Vaquer Signed With WWE Despite Another “Very Juicy” Offer
DJI's first portable power stations are packed with features - plus a little something extra (and prices are slashed in this Black Friday deal!)IHSAA girls basketball scores | Saturday, Nov. 30
Honeywell cuts guidance as Bombardier partnership to lift investment costs
By HALELUYA HADERO AP Business Writer A federal appeals court panel on Friday unanimously upheld a law that could lead to a ban on TikTok in a few short months, 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, its 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. The law, signed by President Joe Biden in April, was the culmination of a years-long 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 — a concern mirrored by the European Union on Friday as it scrutinizes the video-sharing app’s role in the Romanian elections. TikTok, which sued the government over the law in May, has long denied it could be used by Beijing to spy on or manipulate Americans. Its attorneys have accurately pointed out that the U.S. hasn’t provided evidence to show that the company handed over user data to the Chinese government, or manipulated content for Beijing’s benefit in the U.S. They have also argued the law is predicated on future risks, which the Department of Justice has emphasized pointing in part to unspecified action it claims the two companies have taken in the past due to demands from the Chinese government. Friday’s ruling came after the appeals court panel, composed of two Republican and one Democrat appointed judges, heard oral arguments in September. In the hearing, which lasted more than two hours, the panel appeared to grapple with how TikTok’s foreign ownership affects its rights under the Constitution and how far the government could go to curtail potential influence from abroad on a foreign-owned platform. On Friday, all three of them denied TikTok’s petition. In the court’s ruling, Ginsburg, a Republican appointee, rejected TikTok’s main legal arguments against the law, including that the statute was an unlawful bill of attainder or a taking of property in violation of the Fifth Amendment. He also said the law did not violate the First Amendment because the government is not looking to “suppress content or require a certain mix of content” on TikTok. “Content on the platform could in principle remain unchanged after divestiture, and people in the United States would remain free to read and share as much PRC propaganda (or any other content) as they desire on TikTok or any other platform of their choosing,” Ginsburg wrote, using the abbreviation for the People’s Republic of China. Judge Sri Srinivasan, the chief judge on the court, issued a concurring opinion. TikTok’s lawsuit was consolidated with a second legal challenge brought by several content creators - for which the company is covering legal costs - as well as a third one filed on behalf of conservative creators who work with a nonprofit called BASED Politics Inc. Other organizations, including the Knight First Amendment Institute, had also filed amicus briefs supporting TikTok. “This is a deeply misguided ruling that reads important First Amendment precedents too narrowly and gives the government sweeping power to restrict Americans' access to information, ideas, and media from abroad,” said Jameel Jaffer, the executive director of the organization. “We hope that the appeals court’s ruling won’t be the last word.” Meanwhile, on Capitol Hill, lawmakers who had pushed for the legislation celebrated the court’s ruling. “I am optimistic that President Trump will facilitate an American takeover of TikTok to allow its continued use in the United States and I look forward to welcoming the app in America under new ownership,” said Republican Rep. John Moolenaar of Michigan, chairman of the House Select Committee on China. Democratic Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi, who co-authored the law, said “it’s time for ByteDance to accept” the law. To assuage concerns about the company’s owners, TikTok says it has invested more than $2 billion to bolster protections around U.S. user data. The company has also argued the government’s broader concerns could have been resolved in a draft agreement it provided the Biden administration more than two years ago during talks between the two sides. It has blamed the government for walking away from further negotiations on the agreement, which the Justice Department argues is insufficient. Attorneys for the two companies have claimed it’s impossible to divest the platform commercially and technologically. They also say any sale of TikTok without the coveted algorithm - the platform’s secret sauce that Chinese authorities would likely block under any divesture plan - would turn the U.S. version of TikTok into an island disconnected from other global content. Still, some investors, including Trump’s former Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin and billionaire Frank McCourt, have expressed interest in purchasing the platform. Both men said earlier this year that they were launching a consortium to purchase TikTok’s U.S. business. This week, a spokesperson for McCourt’s Project Liberty initiative, which aims to protect online privacy, said unnamed participants in their bid have made informal commitments of more than $20 billion in capital. —The Associated PressNoneNone
By REBECCA SANTANA, Associated Press WASHINGTON (AP) — The picture of who will be in charge of executing President-elect Donald Trump’s hard-line immigration and border policies has come into sharper focus after he announced his picks to head Customs and Border Protection and also the agency tasked with deporting immigrants in the country illegally. Trump said late Thursday he was tapping Rodney Scott, a former Border Patrol chief who’s been a vocal supporter of tougher enforcement measures, for CBP commissioner. As acting director of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Trump said he’d nominate Caleb Vitello, a career ICE official with more than 23 years in the agency who most recently has been the assistant director for firearms and tactical programs. Related Articles They will work with an immigration leadership team that includes South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem as head of the Department of Homeland Security ; former acting Immigration and Customs Enforcement head Tom Homan as border czar ; and immigration hard-liner Stephen Miller as deputy chief of staff. Customs and Border Protection, with its roughly 60,000 employees, falls under the Department of Homeland Security. It includes the Border Patrol, which Scott led during Trump’s first term, and is essentially responsible for protecting the country’s borders while facilitating trade and travel. Scott comes to the job firmly from the Border Patrol side of the house. He became an agent in 1992 and spent much of his career in San Diego. When he joined the agency, San Diego was by far the busiest corridor for illegal crossings. Traffic plummeted after the government dramatically increased enforcement there, but critics note the effort pushed people to remote parts of California and Arizona. San Diego was also where wall construction began in the 1990s, which shaped Scott’s belief that barriers work. He was named San Diego sector chief in 2017. When he was appointed head of the border agency in January 2020, he enthusiastically embraced Trump’s policies. “He’s well known. He does know these issues and obviously is trusted by the administration,” said Gil Kerlikowske, the CBP commissioner under the Obama administration. Kerlikowske took issue with some of Scott’s past actions, including his refusal to fall in line with a Biden administration directive to stop using terms like “illegal alien” in favor of descriptions like “migrant,” and his decision as San Diego sector chief to fire tear gas into Mexico to disperse protesters. “You don’t launch projectiles into a foreign country,” Kerlikowske said. At the time Scott defended the agents’ decisions , saying they were being assaulted by “a hail of rocks.” While much of the focus of Trump’s administration may be on illegal immigration and security along the U.S.-Mexico border, Kerlikowske also stressed the importance of other parts of Customs and Border Protection’s mission. The agency is responsible for securing trade and international travel at airports, ports and land crossings around the country. Whoever runs the agency has to make sure that billions of dollars worth of trade and millions of passengers move swiftly and safely into and out of the country. And if Trump makes good on promises to ratchet up tariffs on Mexico, China and Canada, CBP will play an integral role in enforcing them. “There’s a huge amount of other responsibility on trade, on tourism, on cyber that take a significant amount of time and have a huge impact on the economy if it’s not done right,” Kerlikowske said. After being forced out under the Biden administration, Scott has been a vocal supporter of Trump’s hard-line immigration agenda. He has appeared frequently on Fox News and testified in Congress. He’s also a senior fellow at the Texas Public Policy Foundation. In a 2023 interview with The Associated Press, he advocated for a return to Trump-era immigration policies and more pressure on Mexico to enforce immigration on its side of the border.Biden is considering preemptive pardons for officials and allies before Trump takes office
