Tag: police state

Congress Takes Another Step Toward Enabling Broad Internet Censorship

The House Energy and Commerce Committee on Tuesday advanced the TAKE IT DOWN Act (S. 146) , a bill that seeks to speed up the removal of certain kinds of troubling online content. While the bill is meant to address a serious problem—the distribution of non-consensual intimate imagery (NCII)—the notice-and-takedown system it creates is an open invitation for powerful people to pressure websites into removing content they dislike. 

As we’ve written before, while protecting victims of these heinous privacy invasions is a legitimate goal, good intentions alone are not enough to make good policy. 

This bill mandates a notice-and-takedown system that threatens free expression, user privacy, and due process, without meaningfully addressing the problem it claims to solve. The “takedown” provision applies to a much broader category of content—potentially any images involving intimate or sexual content at all—than the narrower NCII definitions found elsewhere in the bill. The bill contains no protections against frivolous or bad-faith takedown requests. Lawful content—including satire, journalism, and political speech—could be wrongly censored. 

The legislation’s 48-hour takedown deadline means that online service providers, particularly smaller ones, will have to comply quickly to avoid legal risks. That time crunch will make it impossible for services to verify the content is in fact NCII. Instead, services will rely on automated filters—infamously blunt tools that frequently flag legal content, from fair-use commentary to news reporting.

Keep reading

Congressman sues gov’t over post-J6 Capitol Police actions

A congressman from Texas is suing the federal government for $2.5 million over the “unlawful harassment” he faced following the Jan. 6, 2021, protests and riots at the Capitol.

Rep Troy Nehls, R-Texas, charges that a Capitol police officer forced his way into Nehls’ congressional office without consent, then photographed materials in the room, including a whiteboard with a discussion of proposed firearms legislation.

Then the authorities followed up with an investigation by other officers.

Significant is the claim that the police violated the Speech and Debate Clause of the U.S. Constitution, which provides vast protections for members of Congress doing their duties.

The first count charges “intrusion on privacy,” for the entry of the officer into the congressman’s private office and taking pictures.

Keep reading

A secretive billionaire manages a California city like a one-man HOA… dictating how people run their lives

Welcome to Irvine, CA., where the median price of a home is $1.56 million. The winding streets are spotless, there’s no telephone polls visible, and every house has the exact same terracotta roof.

In the meticulously planned city, which continuously tops hottest housing market lists, streets run in perfect circles, everyone’s house must have windows on all four sides, and lawns are spaced accordingly.

Each village inside Irvine gets its own landscape design where only certain types of imported greenery and brightly colored plants are approved.

The mastermind behind the design and upkeep of Irvine is 92-year-old Donald Bren, CEO of Irvine Co., and the wealthiest real estate developer in America, according to Bloomberg. He’s reportedly a peculiar personality, and keeps personal information about himself private. 

Under his leadership, Irvine has become a bubble away from the rest of the world. 

Every corner of the city has surveillance cameras operated by local law enforcement, who also drive Tesla trucks designed for their specific police department. 

In 2024, Irvine made the list of the top five cities to raise a family, according to WalletHub. 

‘The appeal of Irvine is top ranked education, incredible employment centers, renowned health facilities, and an incredible master planned community with loads of open space, family activities and parks,’ local realtor Cathy Haney, a broker from First Team Real Estate, told the Daily Mail.

Keep reading

BitChute Discontinues Video-Sharing Service for UK Residents Over Online Censorship Laws

BitChute, a platform widely recognized for its commitment to free expression and open discourse, has officially withdrawn its services from the United Kingdom, citing untenable regulatory conditions under the UK’s recently enacted censorship law, the Online Safety Act. The move comes in direct response to regulator Ofcom’s newly enhanced authority, which enables the communications regulator to levy fines as high as 10% of a company’s global revenue if deemed non-compliant with the Act’s sweeping censorship demands.

This shift in regulatory climate marks what some view as a profound erosion of digital freedoms in the UK. BitChute’s decision could serve as the first signal of a broader exodus, with other international platforms potentially following suit to avoid the heavy-handed oversight now codified in British law.

In a detailed public statement posted to its website, BitChute explained the rationale behind the drastic step:

“After careful review and ongoing evaluation of the regulatory landscape in the United Kingdom, we regret to inform you that BitChute will be discontinuing its video-sharing service for UK residents.”

The platform highlighted the unpredictable and burdensome nature of the new legal framework, emphasizing the Act’s expansive mandates on content moderation and the discretionary powers it grants Ofcom to enforce them. BitChute warned that these provisions create an environment of legal ambiguity, placing platforms at the mercy of vague standards and severe penalties.

“The BitChute platform has always operated on principles of freedom of speech, expression and association…However, the evolving regulatory pressures—including strict enforcement mechanisms and potential liabilities—have created an operational landscape in which continuing to serve the UK market exposes our company to unacceptable legal and compliance risks.”

The company has implemented immediate restrictions: UK residents can still upload content to the platform, but none of their videos will be accessible to other UK-based users. Their content will remain viewable to users in other countries, who can interact with it as usual.

“The significant change will be that this UK user-posted content will not be viewable by any other UK user, but will be visible to other users outside of the UK.”

This effectively means that while UK-based creators are not entirely barred from participation, their voices are now digitally cordoned off from fellow citizens, a result of legal constraints rather than technical ones.

Keep reading

Florida’s New Social Media Bill Says the Quiet Part Out Loud and Demands an Encryption Backdoor

At least Florida’s SB 868/HB 743, “Social Media Use By Minors” bill isn’t beating around the bush when it states that it would require “social media platforms to provide a mechanism to decrypt end-to-end encryption when law enforcement obtains a subpoena.” Usually these sorts of sweeping mandates are hidden behind smoke and mirrors, but this time it’s out in the open: Florida wants a backdoor into any end-to-end encrypted social media platforms that allow accounts for minors. This would likely lead to companies not offering end-to-end encryption to minors at all, making them less safe online.

Encryption is the best tool we have to protect our communication online. It’s just as important for young people as it is for everyone else, and the idea that Florida can “protect” minors by making them less safe is dangerous and dumb.

The bill is not only privacy-invasive, it’s also asking for the impossible. As breaches like Salt Typhoon demonstrate, you cannot provide a backdoor for just the “good guys,” and you certainly cannot do so for just a subset of users under a specific age. After all, minors are likely speaking to their parents and other family members and friends, and they deserve the same sorts of privacy for those conversations as anyone else. Whether social media companies provide “a mechanism to decrypt end-to-end encryption” or choose not to provide end-to-end encryption to minors at all, there’s no way that doesn’t harm the privacy of everyone.

If this all sounds familiar, that’s because we saw a similar attempt from an Attorney General in Nevada last year. Then, like now, the reasoning is that law enforcement needs access to these messages during criminal investigations. But this doesn’t hold true in practice.

In our amicus brief in Nevada, we point out that there are solid arguments that “content oblivious” investigation methods—like user reporting— are “considered more useful than monitoring the contents of users’ communications when it comes to detecting nearly every kind of online abuse.” That remains just as true in Florida today.

Law enforcement can and does already conduct plenty of investigations involving encrypted messages, and even with end-to-end encryption, law enforcement can potentially access the contents of most messages on the sender or receiver’s devices, particularly when they have access to the physical device. The bill also includes measures prohibiting minors from accessing any sort of ephemeral messaging features, like view once options or disappearing messages. But even with those features, users can still report messages or save them. Targeting specific features does nothing to protect the security of minors, but it would potentially harm the privacy of everyone.

Keep reading

Kansas Governor Says It’s Time For Lawmakers To ‘Finally Legalize Medical Marijuana’

Kansas Gov. Laura Kelly (D) says it’s time for lawmakers in the state to finally legalize medical marijuana.

The governor called for the reform on Wednesday, as she allowed a separate right-to-try bill to become law without her signature. That measure is intended to give people with debilitating or life-threatening conditions broader access to experimental medications.

“This bill gives Kansans with debilitating disease the option to make choices about their medical care,” Kelly said in a statement about the bill, SB 250. “Now I think it’s time for the Legislature to finally legalize medical Marijuana, giving the Kansans suffering from chronic pain or Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, and children suffering with Dravet’s Syndrome (epilepsy) the choice of the treatment they and their doctors determine best suits their needs.”

Notably, lawmakers earlier this year considered but ultimately rejected an amendment that would have added cannabis to the right-to-try bill. The lawmaker behind that effort, Sen. Cindy Holscher (D), said her intention was not to create a public medical marijuana system, however.

Sen. Mike Thompson (R) disparaged the idea at the time. “The term medical cannabis is nothing but a marketing ploy,” he said.

Polling from late last year shows that nearly three quarters (73 percent) of Kansans support legalizing medical marijuana. About six in 10 (61 percent) respondents also said they supported legalizing cannabis for broader adult use.

Legislators have nevertheless repeatedly shot down reform efforts.

The House of Representatives passed a medical cannabis bill in 2021, for example, but it stalled out in the Senate. And after numerous hearings on the issue, the Senate Federal and State Affairs Committee voted last March to table a limited medical marijuana pilot program bill.

A later effort to revive the medical cannabis bill on the Senate floor ultimately fell short.

Keep reading

Taliban morality enforcers arrest men for having the wrong hairstyle or skipping mosque, UN says

The Taliban morality police in Afghanistan have detained men and their barbers over hairstyles and others for missing prayers at mosques during the holy month of Ramadan, a U.N. report said Thursday, six months after laws regulating people’s conduct came into effect.

The Vice and Virtue Ministry published laws last August covering many aspects everyday life in Afghanistan, including public transport, music, shaving and celebrations. Most notably, the ministry issued a ban on women’s voices and bare faces in public.

That same month, a top U.N. official warned the laws provided a “distressing vision” for the country’s future by adding to existing employment, education, and dress code restrictions on women and girls. Taliban officials have rejected U.N. concerns about the morality laws.

Thursday’s report, from the U.N. mission in Afghanistan, said in the first 6 months of the laws’ implementation, over half of detentions made under it concerned “either men not having the compliant beard length or hairstyle, or barbers providing non-compliant beard trimming or haircuts.”

The report said that the morality police regularly detained people arbitrarily “without due process and legal protections.”

During the holy fasting month of Ramadan, men’s attendance at mandated congregational prayers was closely monitored, leading at times to arbitrary detention of those who didn’t show up, the report added.

The U.N. mission said that both sexes were negatively affected, particularly people with small businesses such as private education centers, barbers and hairdressers, tailors, wedding caterers and restaurants, leading to a reduction or total loss of income and employment opportunities.

Keep reading

Whites Need Not Apply — British Police Force Blocks Applications From White People

White applicants from a British or Eastern European background are at a disadvantage when applying for entry-level police constable roles at one of the U.K.’s largest police forces, according to reports by The Telegraph newspaper.

It has emerged that West Yorkshire Police permits Black, Asian, and Minority Ethnic (BAME) candidates to submit job applications all year round, but White people must wait for specific recruitment drives, sparking accusations of positive discrimination.

The police force claims the move is designed to boost diversity numbers and make the police more reflective of the area’s multicultural society.

An internal whistleblower told the U.K. newspaper that Black and Asian applicants are labeled as “gold” category candidates and are encouraged to apply at any time. White candidates from Britain, Ireland, and Eastern Europe, meanwhile, are “bronze” applicants.

Rather than focusing on how qualified an applicant is, the branding effectively sees candidates prioritized initially purely on the color of their skin.

Keep reading

TAKE IT DOWN Act Advances in House Despite Major Censorship Concerns

The US House Committee on Energy and Commerce has passed the TAKE IT DOWN (Tools to Address Known Exploitation by Immobilizing Technological Deepfakes on Websites and Networks) Act in a 49 to 1, bipartisan vote, and the legislation is now headed for the House of Representatives.

If the bill clears that hurdle as well, it will be up to President Trump to sign it into law.

Backed, among others, by First Lady Melania Trump, TAKE IT DOWN was introduced as a way to stop the spread of real, and AI-generated non-consensual intimate imagery (NCII). If, as it seems likely, TAKE IT DOWN becomes law, it will force platforms to remove flagged content within 48 hours.

But the bill’s critics continue to warn that the text lacks proper safeguards and other requirements that would prevent it from being misused, or abused as a tool of censorship, instead of narrowly serving its declarative purpose.

These concerns are not addressed in a press release the Committee on Energy and Commerce issued after adopting the proposal, as it focused instead on the benefits the legislation would provide to victims of dissemination of explicit imagery, with an emphasis on that which is AI-generated, i.e., on deepfakes.

However, campaigners, among them the Center for Democracy and Technology and the EFF, believe that the bill’s actual wording does not live up to its good intent, specifically around the takedown requirement which “lends itself to abuse.”

While the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) would be tasked with issuing penalties for non-compliance, under TAKE IT DOWN, there are no consequences for those making false reports, which could lead to legitimate content quickly disappearing from the internet.

The bill doesn’t lay out how those affected might appeal once their content is falsely flagged and removed, while platforms are under no threat of penalty for removing constitutionally protected speech.

Keep reading

Top GOP Senator In Indiana Says It’d Be A ‘Smart Move’ To Decriminalize Marijuana

Indiana’s top Senate leader says that decriminalizing small amounts of marijuana would be a “smart move” in his view, though he remains “unconvinced” that broader legalization of cannabis is in the state’s best interest.

In a wide-ranging interview published by The Indiana Lawyer this week, Senate Pro Tempore Rodric Bray (R) said he knows marijuana reform is “becoming more and more popular, of course, across the state of Indiana, and also in this building.”

“We can’t exist in a vacuum,” acknowledged the lawmaker, who has historically opposed both medical and adult-use legalization. “More than 30 states have legalized marijuana in some capacity, including those states around us.”

While Bray said he was speaking personally—”just Rod Bray talk, and not our caucus”—he described marijuana decriminalization as a better path forward, taking a more moderate approach to reform.

“I think that it would be a smart move, based on where we are in that space right now, that we decriminalize small amounts of marijuana. I don’t think that needs to be criminal at this point,” he said. “Maybe it’s an infraction or something like that, because people are obviously buying it legally in other parts of the country [and] can’t possess it when you come back here. But should that be a jailable offense at this point? Maybe not.”

Decriminalization is “something I would consider,” he added. “But we have to do that as a body.”

Lawmakers in Illinois have been eyeing various cannabis reforms recently, including both medical and adult-use cannabis legalization. In January, Gov. Mike Braun (R) said he’s “amenable” to legalizing medical marijuana but noted that he wasn’t sure whether Republican lawmakers would even take up the matter.

“When it comes to medical marijuana, I’m clear on record that I’m going to be amenable to hearing a case for it,” Braun said at the time.

Other lawmakers have been studying nearby Michigan and Illinois as guides for how to eventually legalize marijuana more broadly.

Bray, for his part, said at a December event that he doesn’t support any form of marijuana legalization.

Keep reading