The car you buy in 2027 may come with something you never agreed to: a built-in system that monitors your eyes, your alertness, and your behavior behind the wheel. Under Section 24220 of the 2021 Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) is required to finalize rules mandating “advanced drunk and impaired driving prevention technology” in all new passenger vehicles. This is not a proposal. It is federal law already in motion. The safety argument behind this mandate is hard to dismiss. According to NHTSA data, more than 13,000 people were killed in alcohol-impaired crashes in 2021 alone, accounting for nearly a third of all U.S. traffic deaths that year. Alcohol-related crashes cost the American economy approximately $280 billion annually, covering medical expenses, legal proceedings, and lost productivity. The federal government believes this technology can prevent between 9,000 and 10,000 of those deaths every year. But saving lives comes with a cost that goes beyond dollars. As automakers prepare for the rollout, millions of drivers are asking questions that no one in Washington has fully answered yet: Who owns this data? Can it be used against you? And when did your car become a witness?
Tag: police state
Xbox Now Wants Your Face to Let You Play Games You Already Own in Singapore
Singapore gamers who bought and downloaded Xbox titles years ago are now being told they need to prove they’re adults before they can keep playing them.
Microsoft has started rolling out identity verification requirements across its Xbox and Microsoft Store platforms in Singapore, demanding face scans, government ID uploads, or authentication through the country’s national digital identity system, Singpass.
The price of accessing games you already own is now a biometric selfie or a copy of your passport.
The trigger is Singapore’s Online Safety Code of Practice for App Distribution Services, a regulation from the Infocomm Media Development Authority (IMDA) that took effect on April 1, 2026.
The rule requires app stores to prevent anyone estimated to be under 18 from downloading apps rated for adults, including dating services and content with sexual material. Five storefronts are covered: Apple’s App Store, Google Play, Samsung Galaxy Store, Huawei AppGallery, and Microsoft Store (which includes Xbox).
Each company has chosen its own methods for compliance. The methods vary, but they all share one thing in common: they collect sensitive personal data that didn’t exist in the platform’s records before this regulation.
Microsoft announced its approach on March 17, 2026, framing the verification as optional, while making it mandatory for anyone who wants full access.
“Microsoft users in Singapore will have multiple options to complete age assurance for our stores, giving people flexibility while prioritising privacy,” the company wrote, listing those options as Singpass verification, “secure facial age estimation using a selfie,” or uploading “an official government ID such as a national ID, driver’s license, passport, or residence permit.”
The company describes this as a one-time process. What it doesn’t describe is who processes the data, how long it exists in transit, or what happens if the system holding it gets breached.
Discord learned this lesson last year when its own partner leaked user data. The company that promises to delete your face scan still has to receive it first.
Singapore residents have started receiving emails from Xbox notifying them about the verification requirement, prompting confusion and concern.
UK Southport Inquiry Pushes Mass Surveillance and VPN Restrictions
On July 29 2024, a teenager walked into a children’s Taylor Swift-themed dance class in Southport, England, and murdered three young girls with a knife. He injured ten others.
It was, by any measure, one of the most horrifying attacks on British soil in recent memory, and what followed should have been a reckoning with the catastrophic state failures that let it happen.
Instead, the British government looked at the smoldering aftermath and decided the real enemy was the internet, and the solution just so happens to be the mass surveillance censorship proposals the government is already working on.
After the attack, outrage on social media turned to protests. Protests became riots. And the state’s response landed with a speed and ferocity that it had never managed to direct at, say, the agencies that let a known danger walk free for years.
A former childcarer named Lucy Connolly was jailed for 31 months for a single post on X. That is three months longer than the sentence given to a man who physically attacked a mosque during the same period of unrest.
The UK was already a country where arrests for “offensive” social media posts had nearly doubled in seven years, climbing from 5,502 in 2017 to 12,183 in 2023. The overall conviction rate for those arrests was falling at the same time. Police were locking people up for what they typed at a rate that was going up, while the number of convictions that actually stuck was going down.
The Southport riots became the accelerant. A House of Commons Home Affairs Committee report used the unrest to call for a “new national system for policing” with enhanced capabilities to surveil social media activity, framing public anger as a problem of online “misinformation” rather than a consequence of the state’s own failures.
The state was dodging accountability by demanding censorship and surveillance and blaming the internet for unrest.
FISA Section 702 Extension Faces House Vote With No Privacy Reforms
Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act expires in days.
The bipartisan push to extend it without a single privacy reform is now accelerating, with House Speaker Mike Johnson, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley, and President Trump all lining up behind an 18-month renewal that preserves the government’s ability to search Americans’ communications without a warrant.
The House Rules Committee met to consider H.R. 8035, the bill that would keep Section 702 alive through late 2027.
Johnson has refused to allow amendments, telling reporters that adding reforms would threaten the bill’s passage. That position blocks the one change that privacy-focused lawmakers in both parties have spent years fighting for: a requirement that the FBI get a judge’s approval before searching a database of Americans’ phone calls, emails, and text messages that were collected without individual court orders.
Trump posted on Truth Social today, calling on Republicans to “get a clean extension of FISA 702 through the House of Representatives this week.” He wrote, “I am asking Republicans to UNIFY and vote together on the test vote to bring a clean Bill to the floor. We need to stick together when this Bill comes before the House Rules Committee today to keep it CLEAN!”
The president, who told lawmakers to “KILL FISA” during the 2024 reauthorization debate, wrote in a March Truth Social post that “whether you like FISA or not, it is extremely important to our Military.”
Grassley announced his support for the clean extension this morning after the Department of Justice agreed to revise rules governing congressional oversight of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court.
The DOJ committed to rolling back a Biden-era policy from November 2024 that had restricted how members of Congress could attend and observe FISC and FISCR proceedings, including banning note-taking and allowing the DOJ to exclude lawmakers from certain sessions.
Those restrictions directly contradicted the Reforming Intelligence and Securing America Act (RISAA), which Congress passed in April 2024 and which explicitly required congressional access to the surveillance courts.
“I applaud DOJ for lifting its restrictions on congressional oversight of FISC and FISCR proceedings. With Congress’s access fully restored, the Trump administration has faithfully implemented the reforms Congress called for in its last FISA reauthorization and proven its commitment to transparency and the protection of civil liberties,” Grassley said.
“Section 702 is one of our nation’s most valuable national security tools. Especially given the current threat environment, it’s imperative Congress doesn’t allow this critical authority to lapse. We must ensure American lives aren’t put at risk by a potential Section 702 expiration on April 20. The best path forward is for the House to pass a clean, 18-month FISA extension.”
The DOJ agreed to stop excluding members of Congress from surveillance court proceedings, stop banning note-taking, and stop preventing lawmakers from sharing information with appropriately cleared colleagues. These were things Congress already required by law.
The DOJ was violating its own statute, got caught, and agreed to comply. Grassley is treating compliance with existing law as a reason to skip reforms that would protect 330 million Americans from warrantless searches of their private communications.
Nothing about the DOJ’s procedural fix addresses the core problem with Section 702: the FBI routinely searches a massive database of communications collected under the program to find and read Americans’ emails, texts, and phone calls, all without getting a warrant.
The FISA Court itself called the FBI’s compliance problems “persistent and widespread” in 2022. FBI queries targeting Americans’ data rose 35% in 2025, according to the latest transparency report from the Office of the Director of National Intelligence.
The agency asking Congress for more time is the same one running more warrantless searches than ever.
FAFO: American YouTuber Sent to Prison in South Korea for Disrespecting Public Statue
An American YouTuber who goes by the name ‘Johnny Somali’ has been sentenced to prison time in South Korea for disrespecting a public statue and basically gyrating and twerking on it.
This was not only disrespectful but incredibly stupid.
Johnny is going to learn a whole new level of respect for American freedom from this episode. It’s amazing how time spent in a foreign prison can make someone appreciate how great things are in the USA.
The Associated Press reports:
American YouTuber sentenced to 6 months in South Korean prison for offensive stunts
An American YouTuber who sparked national outrage in South Korea for provocative stunts, including dancing on a statue honoring victims of wartime sexual slavery, was sentenced to six months in prison Wednesday.
The Seoul Western District Court found Ramsey Khalid Ismael, a self-proclaimed internet “troll” known online as Johnny Somali, guilty of multiple charges, including obstruction of business and distributing fabricated sexually explicit content.
Prosecutors had sought a three-year term for Ismael, who also faced accusations of harassing staff and visitors at an amusement park, disrupting a convenience store by blasting music and upending noodles onto a table, causing similar scenes on a bus and subway, and distributing non-consensual deepfake videos.
The court said the 25-year-old displayed “severe” disrespect for South Korean law, noting that he offended countless people with livestreamed stunts aimed at generating YouTube revenue. The court ordered his immediate detention following the verdict, citing him as a flight risk.
Trump Reverses Himself, Joins Obama and Biden in Demanding “Clean” Renewal of NSA Domestic Spying Powers
In August 2013 — in the wake of our Snowden reporting, which revealed the NSA’s mass warrantless domestic spying on Americans — an extraordinary bipartisan bill emerged. Jointly sponsored by one of the most liberal House members (Michigan Democrat John Conyers) and one of his most libertarian-conservative counterparts (Michigan Republican Justin Amash), the bill would have reined in the NSA’s domestic spying powers by imposing serious limits on how such powers can be exercised when aimed at American citizens.
When the Conyers-Amash bill was first introduced, “Official Washington” did not take it seriously. But the Snowden revelations were causing serious public anger about NSA spying, and many members of Congress shared that anger because they were not told that the NSA had implemented a system of mass warrantless surveillance aimed, in part, at Americans. As a result, support for the bill quickly picked up bipartisan steam, seemingly heading toward certain passage — until Barack Obama called Nancy Pelosi.
Despite running for President as a constitutional law professor who vowed to end the civil liberties abuses of the War on Terror, Obama had become an enthusiastic supporter — and user — of the NSA’s domestic spying system. He thus instructed then-Speaker Nancy Pelosi to whip enough Democratic House votes to kill the bill. She did as she was told, and the bill — which initially appeared on its way to approval — was defeated 205-217 (94 Republicans and 111 Democrats voted for the reform bill; 134 Republicans and 83 Democrats voted against it). Official Washington heralded Pelosi as the heroine who saved NSA warrantless spying on Americans.
It is hard to overstate how significant the passage of this bill would have been. It would have been the first time in two decades that the U.S. Congress limited rather than increased the domestic powers of the U.S. security state. The era of the Patriot Act would finally have been confronted, or at least diluted. But Obama and Pelosi joined hands with the likes of GOP pro-spying members such as Peter King, Michelle Bachmann, and Kristi Noem to block any limits on the NSA’s power to spy on Americans without warrants.
Now, Donald Trump is on the verge of doing what Obama and Pelosi did back then. Despite running in 2024 by vowing to “KILL FISA,” based on his (quite valid) claim that spying powers had been abused against him for political ends in the 2016 presidential campaign, Trump on Monday demanded that FISA be fully renewed: yet again, with no reforms, safeguards, or limits of any kind.
Congress this week, perhaps as early as Wednesday, will vote on a renewal of Section 702 of FISA, which grants the NSA the power to spy on certain communications of American citizens without a warrant. Although it appeared that there was bipartisan support for finally imposing some limits and safeguards in the wake of years of documented abuses, Trump’s demand on Tuesday — that all House Republicans unite to renew the spying powers with no limits — raises serious doubts about whether any reform is now possible.
Treasury Secretary Says Order on Citizenship Proof for Banking Is ‘in Process’
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent on Monday confirmed that an executive order mandating banks to collect citizenship information on customers is underway.
“It’s in process. And I don’t think it’s unreasonable, because, why don’t we have information on who’s in our banking system?” he told Semafor in an April 13 interview, responding to whether the Trump administration was working on the banking order.
“I have a place in the UK; they want to know who lives in every apartment—and how do we know that it’s not part of a foreign terrorist organization?” he added.
At least one Republican lawmaker has asked the Trump administration to implement such an order, and The Wall Street Journal reported, citing anonymous sources, that banks could be tasked with requiring people to submit passports under the policy.
In a post issued on X in October 2025, Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) included a letter he sent to Bessent urging the secretary to carry out a “comprehensive review of current rules that allow illegal aliens to obtain financial services and access to the U.S. banking system.”
“Access to the American banking system is a privilege that should be reserved for those who respect our laws and sovereignty,” Cotton wrote in the letter. “When individuals are allowed to open accounts without verifying legal status, we are permitting illegal aliens to establish financial roots and integrate economically, all while bypassing the legal channels that millions use properly.”
Appeals court upholds West Virginia vaccine mandate, denies religious exemption
A federal appeals court ruled that West Virginia can enforce its school vaccine mandate without offering religious exemptions, overturning a lower court decision that had allowed an unvaccinated student to remain enrolled in an online public school.
In a 2-1 decision, the US Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit found the state’s vaccination requirement does not violate the First Amendment’s protection of religious freedom.
The case was brought by Anthony and Krystle Perry on behalf of their daughter, who was enrolled in West Virginia Virtual Academy but was later disenrolled after officials determined she was not fully vaccinated. The parents argued vaccination conflicted with their Christian beliefs and sought a religious exemption, which state law does not provide.
West Virginia is one of a small number of states that do not allow religious exemptions for school vaccine requirements.
A lower court had previously sided with the family and issued an injunction allowing the child to continue attending school while the case proceeded. The appeals court reversed that decision, ruling the parents are unlikely to succeed on their constitutional claim.
Legal experts cited in the case said the ruling does not reflect what they describe as a shifting legal landscape around religious exemptions. They pointed to recent Supreme Court decisions that they say require courts to apply a higher standard, known as “strict scrutiny,” when evaluating such claims.
Zelensky Signs Law Against Antisemitism in Ukraine: Up to 8 Years in Prison
Ukraine has moved into a new phase in its legal response to antisemitism. On April 14, 2026, President Volodymyr Zelensky signed Law No. 2037-IX, introducing criminal liability for antisemitic acts and creating a graduated scale of punishment, from fines and restrictions on liberty to prison terms of up to eight years.
For Israeli readers, this is not merely a technical legal development. It is a moral and political signal. At a time when antisemitism is again rising in many parts of the world and Jewish communities are living with renewed anxiety, Ukraine is trying to draw a firmer legal boundary. Antisemitism is no longer being addressed only through public condemnation or symbolic declarations. It is now being tied more directly to criminal responsibility.
From legal definition to criminal punishment
This law did not appear out of nowhere. In September 2021, Ukraine’s parliament adopted the foundational law “On Preventing and Combating Antisemitism in Ukraine.” That earlier legislation gave a legal definition of antisemitism, listed its manifestations, and established the principle that such acts must carry responsibility. Zelensky signed that law the following month.
But definition alone was never enough. The next step was Bill No. 5110, designed to place antisemitism within the logic of criminal prosecution by amending Article 161 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine. Parliament approved the bill in February 2022, and Zelensky’s signature has now given that framework full legal force.
What the new law changes
Under the new system, incitement to hatred, discrimination, restriction of rights, or other public acts motivated by antisemitism can be punished by fines, restraint of liberty, or imprisonment for up to three years. The law also allows for disqualification from holding certain positions or engaging in certain professional activities.
If such acts are accompanied by violence, threats, deception, or are committed by an official, the punishment becomes harsher and can rise to five years in prison.
If the offense is committed by an organized group or leads to grave consequences, the sentence may range from five to eight years. That upper threshold is what gives this law particular resonance far beyond Ukraine itself.
Law now bans Ohioans from using Michigan’s cheaper cannabis
Despite changes to Ohio and Michigan’s cannabis laws, it is still cheaper for Ohioans to drive from Columbus to a Michigan dispensary than to buy marijuana in-state.
Ohio’s cannabis market was subject to legislative changes in the past month as Senate Bill 56 went into effect. The bill banned intoxicating hemp products like THC drinks and increased penalties and restrictions for adult-use cannabis. Data shows central Ohioans would save about $76.63 by driving to Michigan to purchase cannabis, but S.B. 56 now makes possessing cannabis purchased out of state illegal. See previous coverage of S.B. 56 in the video player above.
Because cannabis is federally illegal and state borders are federal jurisdiction, it has always been illegal to cross state lines with cannabis. Previously, the law prevented Ohioans from bringing cannabis from Michigan into Ohio, but not from using cannabis purchased in Michigan within the Buckeye state.
S.B. 56 changes the legality of consuming or possessing cannabis purchased out of state. Under S.B. 56, legal cannabis only extends to legal home-grown marijuana or cannabis purchased at a licensed Ohio dispensary. The law means any cannabis purchased out of state is illegal possession.
Although Ohioans have been able to legally purchase and use recreational cannabis since August 2024, some Ohioans still crossed the border to purchase marijuana more cheaply. Four months into legalization, an ounce of marijuana flower cost more than $200 in Ohio and around $91 in Michigan. At the time, Ohioans would save over $100 on average by driving to Michigan.
Over a year later, Ohioans still save if they purchase in Michigan. NBC4 averaged sales data for one ounce of flower for each month of 2026 in both Michigan and Ohio. The closest Michigan dispensary to Columbus is around 174 miles away, so the average vehicle could make a round trip using about one tank of gas. Gas costs were calculated using the U.S. Energy Information Administration’s average gas pricing data for each month.
Hellbound and Down 
You must be logged in to post a comment.