Judge Rules in Favor of New Hampshire Bakery in Fight Over Donut Mural

A New Hampshire bakery has won a crucial victory in its fight to preserve a mural of donuts and other baked goods above its storefront. While town officials have attempted to force the bakery to remove the mural, citing zoning regulations, a federal court ruled on Monday that the city cannot enforce its sign rules against the bakery.

In 2022, Sean Young, the owner of Leavitt’s Country Bakery, a popular bakery in Conway, New Hampshire, collaborated with a local high school art class to paint a mural for the bakery’s storefront. The students’ mural depicted baked goods forming the shape of a mountain range, with a multicolored sunrise in the background. Initially, the mural didn’t cause any controversy—and it was even covered positively by local media. However, about a week after being installed, Conway’s Code Enforcement Officer Jeremy Gibbs told Young that the mural violated town zoning rules.

According to the town, the mural violated local laws that regulate signs. Because the mural depicted baked goods—which the bakery obviously sells—it was deemed a “sign,” not a mural, and signs are subject to rules limiting their size. While the town’s rules define a sign incredibly broadly, in practice, the town only enforces its sign regulations on speech it perceives as commercial in nature. If Leavitt’s Country Bakery had erected a mural of just a sunrise, for example, the town would have no problem with it, even though the rules on the books would apply to both. “Imposing different burdens on speech depending on who is speaking and what is being said is content based and speaker based restriction on free speech,” reads a 2023 complaint from the Institute for Justice, a public interest law group, which represented the bakery in its lawsuit against Conway.

On Monday, a judge agreed. While the judge noted that the town’s sign rules, as written, don’t necessarily violate the Constitution, the selective nature of the town’s enforcement does. “The court rules only that Conway’s application of its sign code, and specifically its enforcement of the sign code to the Leavitt’s sign in the particular manner it employed in this case, does not withstand any level of constitutional scrutiny,” reads a ruling from District Judge Joseph N. Laplante enjoining the town from forcing Young to remove the mural. “Although the display may have violated the sign code because of its size, Gibbs’ determination was based on a rationale with no textual basis in the sign code, which does not distinguish between displays based on content.”

Keep reading

EU Commission Sues Five Member States Over Censorship Law Non-Compliance

Five EU member countries are being taken to court by the EU Commission for failure to “effectively” comply with the bloc’s online censorship law, the Digital Services Act (DSA).

DSA, and the Digital Markets Act (DMA), are EU’s key regulations often criticized for centralizing the bloc’s power in the digital sphere at the expense of free speech, and tech companies’ business interests – but also, it appears, the sovereignty of member countries.

Among the “May infringements package” covering various areas regulated by the EU is the section dedicated to the digital economy. It is here that the Commission announced legal action against Cyprus, the Czech Republic, Poland, Portugal, and Spain.

These countries have been referred to the Court of Justice of the European Union; Bulgaria, meanwhile, has been put on notice and may eventually also find itself in court, unless it empowers a national digital services coordinator (DSC, a role established under DSA) and “lay down the rules on penalties applicable to infringements (of DSA).”

The EU Commission said that designating and empowering DSCs is an essential step in enforcing the DSA rules and “in ensuring the uniform application” of the regulation across the bloc.

Of the five EU members that are already in court, Poland has not designated or empowered a DSC at all, while the other four have done that – but failed to “entrust them with the necessary powers to carry out their tasks under the DSA.”

All five countries have yet to come up with rules regarding penalties for DSA infringement.

Keep reading

Victory for mom who claims child was sexually abused by AI chatbot that drove him to suicide

Florida mother who claims her 14-year-old son was sexually abused and driven to suicide by an AI chatbot has secured a major victory in her ongoing legal case. 

Sewell Setzer III fatally shot himself in February 2024 after a chatbot sent him sexual messages telling him to ‘please come home.’ 

According to a lawsuit filed by his heartbroken mother Megan Garcia, Setzer spent the last weeks of his life texting an AI character named after Daenerys Targaryen, a character on ‘Game of Thrones,’ on the role-playing app Character.AI.

Garcia, who herself works as a lawyer, has blamed Character.AI for her son’s death and accused the founders, Noam Shazeer and Daniel de Freitas, of knowing that their product could be dangerous for underage customers. 

On Wednesday, U.S. Senior District Judge Anne Conway rejected arguments made by the AI company, who claimed its chatbots were protected under the First Amendment. 

The developers behind Charcter.AI, Character Technologies and Google are named as defendants in the legal filing. They are pushing to have the case dismissed. 

The teen’s chats ranged from romantic to sexually charged and also resembled two friends chatting about life.

The chatbot, which was created on role-playing app Character.AI, was designed to always text back and always answer in character.

It’s not known whether Sewell knew ‘Dany,’ as he called the chatbot, wasn’t a real person – despite the app having a disclaimer at the bottom of all the chats that reads, ‘Remember: Everything Characters say is made up!’

But he did tell Dany how he ‘hated’ himself and how he felt empty and exhausted.

Keep reading

Texas House OKs Bill To Sue Vaccine Makers for False Ads

In a major victory for accountability and informed consent, the Texas House of Representatives passed HB 3441 yesterday, a bill that would allow Texans to sue vaccine manufacturers whose advertising leads to injury or harm.

The unprecedented move comes as CDC data show there have been an alarming 2,665,796 adverse events linked to vaccines since 1990, the vast majority related to COVID-19 jabs.

But if fewer than 1% of adverse events are reported – as a 2010 HHS-funded Harvard analysis confirms – the real number could exceed 266 million, or roughly 7.6 million per year, or 20,800 per day.

First filed in February, the new bill passed yesterday by a vote of 88–31, moving the legislation one step closer to becoming law.

The pioneering legislation boasts a whopping 79 brave sponsors, 74 Republicans and 5 Democrats.

The bill is spearheaded by Representatives Shelley Luther (R-62), Jeff Leach (R-67), Marc LaHood (R-121), Oscar Longoria (D-35), and Mike Schofield (R-132).

If you want this kind of bill passed in your state or at the federal level, you can find your local, state, and U.S. representatives here and let them know.

Keep reading

Vicious FBI Agents Accused of Terrorizing Innocent J6 Families and Harassing Children Sue to Keep Their Identities Hidden

In 2023 The Gateway Pundit published the shocking story of Chris and In Annette Kuehne.

Chris Kuehne is a 22-year veteran who received numerous medals and awards, including the Purple Heart, a Navy Commendation Medal with Valor, and a Navy and Marine Corps Achievement Medal with Valor for actions in combat.

On January 6, 2021, Chris went inside the Capitol but did not cause any harm or damage – in fact he cleaned trash off the floor, helped to stop theft of government property, asked people to leave the building, and went up to Capitol Police Officers to ask how he could help. Chris was also set-up by an FBI operative that day. Chris committed no violence and did nothing wrong.

One month later, in the early morning of February 11, 2021 Chris, his four-year-old child, and his wife Annette, who was pregnant at the time were awakened to sirens, cell phone rings, and bursts of colorful lights reflecting through our windows.

Annette later went public about the raid, “The FBI instructed Chris to come outside immediately. Our 4-year-old was awakened from the chaos, and I picked him up and ran downstairs to open the front door. Our house, street and neighboring streets were completely surrounded by armed FBI and law enforcement. It was a scene that we see so many times in the movies, but now it was here at my house! There were three large armored tactical vehicles parked on my front, side and back yard, and police vehicles that extended throughout the entire community. I open the door, and for a second, I didn’t realize that there were about twenty FBI SWAT Team members with semi-automatic rifles pointed at my son and I. We were covered by the bright red lasers pointed at our faces, chests, and various points on our bodies.”

Keep reading

‘No trace of alcohol’: Police thought Amazon worker’s stroke was a DWI, then threw him in jail for 7 hours and caused him to go blind, lawsuit says

Missouri man who was wrongly arrested for DWI while he was exhibiting symptoms of a stroke is suing the sheriff’s office for not getting him the medical treatment he needed.

In a complaint filed in federal court in April, Paul Espinosa, 54, claimed that while he was arriving at the parking lot of the Amazon Warehouse in Republic, Missouri, where he worked, he was pulled over by Greene County Sheriff’s Deputy Kyle Winchell. Winchell claimed that Espinosa’s car was “weaving,” and the deputy suspected he was driving while intoxicated. Espinosa agreed to a field sobriety test, including a Breathalyzer test, which yielded a reading of 0.000% — indicating there was “no trace of alcohol in his system,” the lawsuit states.

However, Espinosa showed signs of “swaying” during other parts of the test, and Winchell arrested Espinosa on suspicion of DWI. Espinosa was put in the back of Winchell’s vehicle and transported to the jail. Espinosa began “sweating profusely” during the transport, despite the car’s air conditioning running throughout the trip. Upon their arrival at the jail, Espinosa’s “motor skills were declining,” the lawsuit states.

Keep reading

Google Reaches $1.375 Billion Settlement with Texas Over Privacy Violations Involving Location Tracking and Biometric Data

Google has reached a $1.375 billion settlement with Texas over allegations the tech giant intruded on user privacy by collecting data without proper consent. The resolution, announced by Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, concludes two lawsuits centered on the company’s handling of sensitive information across several of its products.

The lawsuits focused on practices involving Google’s location tracking, biometric data collection, and its private browsing tool, Incognito mode. According to Paxton, the company engaged in prolonged surveillance of individuals’ movements, online activity, and even biometric identifiers like voiceprints and facial features, activities he claimed were conducted without user knowledge or agreement.

“In Texas, Big Tech is not above the law,” said Paxton. “For years, Google secretly tracked people’s movements, private searches, and even their voiceprints and facial geometry through their products and services. I fought back and won.”

Although the total settlement figure has been made public, specific terms remain undisclosed, and the state has not explained how the funds will be distributed.

Google has denied any wrongdoing and emphasized that the agreement resolves claims based on policies that have already been updated. “This settles a raft of old claims, many of which have already been resolved elsewhere, concerning product policies we have long since changed,” said Google spokesperson José Castañeda. He added, “We are pleased to put them behind us, and we will continue to build robust privacy controls into our services.”

The original lawsuits, filed in 2022, accused Google of circumventing user privacy settings, continuing to track locations despite users believing the feature was off. They also charged that the company’s so-called private browsing mode did not actually provide meaningful privacy and that Google had collected biometric data from Texans without obtaining legally required consent.

Keep reading

Smartmatic Suffers Setback in FOX News Case After NY Judge Orders Company to Prove Evidence of Damages

FOX News moved to dismiss the $2.7 billion “meritless” nuisance case by Smartmatic in a press release in February 2021.

FOX News argued at the time, “If the First Amendment means anything, it means that Fox cannot be held liable for fairly reporting and commenting on competing allegations in a hotly contested and actively litigated election.”

Smartmatic suffered a setback in a New York court after a NY judge orders the company to prove it suffered actual damages following the FOX News reporting.

Smartmatic, the controversial election machine company, filed charges against FOX News in February 2021 following a segment on the conservative channel.

Four years later – this week a New York judge ordered Smartmatic to produce real evidence it suffered actual harm from the FOX News segment.

This comes weeks after FOX News again called on the suit to be tossed out.

Keep reading

Deported Mother Who Took 2-Year-Old US Citizen Child With Her Drops Lawsuit Against Trump Admin

A lawsuit filed against the Trump administration alleging it deported an illegal immigrant and her 2-year-old U.S. citizen child to Honduras last month without due process is being dropped, lawyers for the child’s family confirmed on Tuesday.

The toddler, identified in court filings only as V.M.L., and her 11-year-old Honduran-born sister were kept with their mother, Jenny Carolina Lopez-Villela, who was arrested during a check-in appointment at an Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) office in New Orleans.

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and the National Immigration Project filed a lawsuit against their deportations in April, claiming the toddler was held “incommunicado,” with ICE “refusing or failing to respond to multiple attempts by attorneys and family members to contact them.”

They further argued that the family did not have a fair opportunity to decide whether they wanted the children to stay in the United States.

The federal government has denied those claims.

Gracie Willis, one of the family’s lawyers, said on Tuesday that they have decided to dismiss the case to allow for “space and time to consider all the options that are available to them.”

Keep reading

Court Order Blocking Trump From Targeting Perkins Coie Is Overreach

Federal District Court Judge Beryl Howell’s injunction prohibiting the implementation of Donald Trump’s executive order restricting the Perkins Coie law firm spoils a righteous core with judicial activism.

On March 6, Trump issued an executive order asserting that “the dishonest and dangerous activity of…Perkins Coie has affected this country for decades. Notably, in 2016 while representing failed Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, Perkins Coie hired Fusion GPS, which then manufactured a false “dossier” designed to steal an election…. Perkins Coie has worked with activist donors including George Soros to judicially overturn popular, necessary, and democratically enacted election laws….”

The order also accused Perkins Coie of racial discrimination, citing its “publicly announced percentage quotas in 2019 for hiring and promotion on the basis of race and other categories prohibited by civil rights laws.”

The order suspended security clearances for the firm’s lawyers and barred them from federal buildings, prohibited the government from engaging the firm, directed federal contractors to disclose if they use the firm’s services, and referred the firm to be investigated for violating civil rights laws. The order was one of several similar orders issued, or contemplated, against leading law firms.

Howell, an Obama appointee, previously served as chief judge for the District of Columbia, in which capacity she was a strong supporter of Jack Smith’s Trump prosecution. Her 120-page opinion excoriated the administration for disregarding the First Amendment and failing to comply with her orders. She criticized the content and formatting of the Justice Department’s memoranda, averred that the government had no credible evidence of racial discrimination or other wrongdoing by Perkins Coie, and rejected all of its arguments.

Howell is right that the First Amendment and principles of American justice mandate that lawyers be able to deliver candid advice and zealous advocacy to their clients. But, she goes too far by ignoring the compelling case that Perkins Coie conspired with Hillary Clinton and Fusion GPS to improperly influence the 2016 election and destabilize the Trump presidency by developing the fraudulent Steele dossier (which falsely accused Trump of being a Russian agent), and then misleading government investigators about its provenance.

She began her decision by quoting Shakespeare’s admonition to “kill all the lawyers” to make it easier to seize power, and Alexis de Tocqueville, who wrote that the legal profession “is the most powerful existing security against the excesses of democracy.” Howell then held that “using the powers of the federal government to target lawyers for their representation of clients and avowed progressive employment policies in an overt attempt to suppress and punish certain viewpoints…, is contrary to the Constitution, which requires that the government respond to dissenting or unpopular speech or ideas with tolerance, not coercion…. Simply put, government officials cannot… use the power of the State to punish or suppress disfavored expression.”

Access to unvarnished legal advice is sacrosanct, but Howell goes off the rails. She never acknowledges that much of Perkins Coie’s wrongdoing had nothing to do with its legal advice, but came in its capacity as a political kingpin. She bewilderingly asserts that using the firm’s admissions of racial discrimination violates its First Amendment rights. Her related attack on the administration’s opposition to diversity programs reveals her motives for this bizarre conclusion.

Keep reading