House Vote Keeps Federal “Kill Switch” Vehicle Mandate Despite Privacy Concerns

A Republican attempt to cut off federal funding tied to vehicle “kill switch” enforcement failed in the House this week, leaving intact a law directing the Department of Transportation to develop mandatory impaired-driving prevention systems in new vehicles.

The proposal, led by Representative Thomas Massie of Kentucky, sought to bar the government from spending money to advance or enforce the measure, formally known as Section 24220 of the 2021 Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act.

The amendment was added to a broader spending bill, H.R. 7148, but was defeated 268 to 164. According to the House Clerk’s official roll call, 160 Republicans supported it, joined by four Democrats, while 57 Republicans and 211 Democrats voted against it.

Massie’s measure would have “prohibit[ed] the use of funds made available by this Act to implement section 24220 of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, including any requirements enabling or supporting vehicle ‘kill switch’ technology.”

His goal was to block any federal action that could force automakers to install technology capable of monitoring driver behavior and intervening when impairment is detected.

Following the vote, Massie wrote on X: “Unfortunately, the amendment I offered to defund the federally mandated automobile kill switch did not pass. 57 Republicans joined 211 Democrats to defeat it.”

The Kentucky lawmaker has led several efforts on this issue, including the “No Kill Switches in Cars Act” introduced in early 2025, which would “repeal a requirement for the Secretary of Transportation to issue certain regulations with respect to advanced impaired driving technology.”

Although the technology has not yet been required in any vehicle, the 2021 infrastructure law compels the Department of Transportation to develop regulations mandating its use. The legislative text refers broadly to systems that can “prevent or limit motor vehicle operation” if impairment is detected, but it leaves the technical design and privacy boundaries to regulators.

Four Democrats, Representatives J. Luis Correa of California, Val Hoyle of Oregon, Marcy Kaptur of Ohio, and Marie Gluesenkamp Perez of Washington, joined most Republicans in supporting Massie’s amendment. The final tally recorded 164 in favor, 268 against, none present, and four not voting.

Those opposing the amendment argue that the technology could prevent thousands of deaths caused by drunk driving.

Keep reading

ICE Tells Legal Observer, ‘We Have a Nice Little Database, and Now You’re Considered a Domestic Terrorist’

Video taken this morning in Maine shows an Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officer taking pictures of a legal observer’s car. When she asks why he’s doing that, he says, “Because we have a nice little database, and now you’re considered a domestic terrorist.”

The video is the latest example of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) labeling anyone who engages in First Amendment–protected activity opposing the Trump administration’s mass deportation program as a “domestic terrorist” and suggesting they’ll be subject to federal investigations.

The DHS did not immediately respond to request for comment on the scope of the database mentioned by the officer or whether it considers protected First Amendment activity to be conduct that warrants inclusion on the database.

Independent journalist Ken Klippenstein reported today that an unnamed federal law enforcement official told him that DHS “has ordered immigration officers to gather identifying information about anyone filming them.”

In September, President Donald Trump issued a memo ordering federal law enforcement to focus on ideologies that are allegedly fueling “domestic terrorism.” These include “anti-Americanism, anti-capitalism, and anti-Christianity; support for the overthrow of the United States Government; extremism on migration, race, and gender,” as well as opposition to “foundational American principles (e.g., support for law enforcement and border control).”

As Reason‘s Joe Lancaster wrote at the time, the memo was “an assault on the First Amendment” that listed protected free speech “as evidence of criminality that requires federal intervention.”

And since the Trump administration’s deportation campaign began last year, DHS officials have repeatedly insisted that following and recording federal immigration agents in public is a violation of a federal statute that makes it a crime to assault or impede law enforcement officers.

There have been dozens of recorded instances of ICE and Border Patrol officers harassing, assaulting, and detaining people for filming and following them, even though there is a well-established First Amendment right to record and observe the police.

For example, today Slate published the first-person account of Brandon Sigüenza, a Minneapolis man who was volunteering with a local group that monitors and records ICE activity. Federal immigration officers surrounded his car, smashed out his windows, roughly arrested him, and detained him for hours.

Sigüenza also submitted a sworn declaration describing his experiences in a civil rights lawsuit challenging the DHS’ actions in Minneapolis.

Keep reading

South Dakota Senate Panel Advances Bills To Ban Intoxicating Hemp And Kratom—But Without Recommendations For Passage

A South Dakota Senate panel advanced—but did not endorse—bans on hemp-derived intoxicants and kratom on Wednesday at the Capitol in Pierre.

Both bills were sponsored by Sen. John Carley, R-Piedmont.

The Senate Health and Human Services Committee voted unanimously to put the two prohibition bills in front of the full state Senate with no recommendation. Committees generally give a “do pass” recommendation to the bills they send out for a floor vote.

The votes came one day after the Senate Judiciary Committee offered its unqualified support for a bill meant to restrict the sale of certain hemp-based products to people older than 21. That bill came from Attorney General Marty Jackley (R).

In testimony about Carley’s bills, business owners and consumers of products like hemp-derived THC seltzers and kratom said they helped people kick opioids or alcohol. They also mentioned sales taxes collected on consumable products and the value of hemp to South Dakota farmers. That led some committee members to oppose the bills and sparked failed attempts to block the proposals. Ultimately, however, the committee opted to let the state Senate weigh in.

“We need to have a conversation about this on the floor,” said Sen. Curt Voight, R-Rapid City. “I think it rises to the level of a legislative decision.”

Possession, sale or use of kratom or THC consumables under each proposal would be a class 2 misdemeanor, punishable by up to 30 days in jail and a $500 fine.

Tighter rules on hemp products

The first bill, Senate Bill 61, aims to act as an outright ban on the possession, sale or use of any intoxicating hemp products in the state outside of licensed medical marijuana dispensaries.

Such products are typically produced by altering or distilling cannabidiol, or CBD, found in the hemp plant to produce forms of tetrahydrocannabinol, or THC, which is the intoxicating compound found in greater abundance in the marijuana plant.

Many of the gummies, vape cartridges and other products made using hemp-derived THC variants like Delta-8, Delta-9 or Delta-10 are sold primarily in smoke shops, but THC seltzers are often available at bars, liquor stores or grocery stores.

The products essentially act as a workaround for the prohibition of marijuana in South Dakota by anyone who lacks a medical marijuana card, Carley said. The senator is also a member of the state’s Medical Marijuana Oversight Committee, which has taken testimony from medical cannabis providers about the impact the unregulated market has on their operations.

“This actually is harming the licensed marijuana businesses,” Carley said.

Carley had the support of the South Dakota Police Chiefs’ Association, South Dakota Sheriff’s Association and a group called Protecting South Dakota Kids.

Opponents included representatives for hemp retailers and hemp growers and a handful of business owners, who said the bill’s ban on any products with more than 0.4 percent THC by weight would remove many non-intoxicating products from store shelves, including topical creams.

“All this is a hemp and CBD ban,” said Matt Yde, who sells CBD in Sioux Falls but does not offer intoxicating products. “I would have to close my store, because I would have to remove 90 percent of my products.”

Steve Siegel of the South Dakota Trial Lawyers Association said he’s had many friends who’ve switched to THC seltzers from alcohol or pain killers. He said their popularity shows consumer demand, and getting a medical marijuana card can be expensive and onerous.

“These drinks should be regulated. But they’re selling like wildfire,” Siegel said. “They’re a phenomenal alternative to alcohol.”

Carley responded by saying the state shouldn’t be encouraging people to switch from one mind-altering drug to another.

He was “sorry to hear” about people who’d been addicted to painkillers and alcohol, but said instead of switching to a THC alternative, “They need some friends there. They need some church. They need some God in their life, or even ice cream or tea.”

Keep reading

Former Uvalde Police Officer Acquitted Of All 29 Counts of Abandoning and Endangering a Child in Connection with School Shooting

Former Uvalde police officer Adrian Gonzales was acquitted of all 29 counts of abandoning and endangering a child in connection with the 2022 mass shooting.

In May of 2022, 18-year-old Salvador Ramos fatally shot 19 children and 2 adults at Robb Elementary School in Uvalde, Texas.

According to multiple reports, the shooter, Salvador Ramos, spent more than 40 minutes inside as loved ones and onlookers begged the police to charge into the building.

Police arrived at 11:37 am, just 4 minutes after the gunman entered the school doors, but Ramos continued on with his killing spree virtually uninterrupted.

Footage obtained by the Austin-American Statesman, showed cops running down the hall after they heard gunfire.

Keep reading

Immigration officers assert sweeping power to enter homes without a judge’s warrant, memo says

Federal immigration officers are asserting sweeping power to forcibly enter people’s homes without a judge’s warrant, according to an internal Immigration and Customs Enforcement memo obtained by The Associated Press, marking a sharp reversal of longstanding guidance meant to respect constitutional limits on government searches.

The memo authorizes ICE officers to use force to enter a residence based solely on a more narrow administrative warrant to arrest someone with a final order of removal, a move that advocates say collides with Fourth Amendment protections and upends years of advice given to immigrant communities.

The shift comes as the Trump administration dramatically expands immigration arrests nationwide, deploying thousands of officers under a mass deportation campaign that is already reshaping enforcement tactics in cities such as Minneapolis.

For years, immigrant advocates, legal aid groups and local governments have urged people not to open their doors to immigration agents unless they are shown a warrant signed by a judge. That guidance is rooted in Supreme Court rulings that generally prohibit law enforcement from entering a home without judicial approval. The ICE directive directly undercuts that advice at a time when arrests are accelerating under the administration’s immigration crackdown.

Keep reading

Australia Passes New Bills For Tougher Gun Control And Anti-Hate Speech Laws

The Australian Parliament has passed two new bills that will set up a national gun buyback scheme, and attempt to combat anti-Semitism and hate speech in response to the Bondi terror attack.

In Australia’s lower house, the gun buyback bill passed 96 to 45 with the Liberal-National Coalition opposing, while the hate and extremism-focused bill passed with amendments, securing 116 votes to just seven.

Later on the evening of Jan. 20, both bills made it through the Senate.

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese wrote on X that the government was “standing against hate and strengthening” national security.

New Gun Buyback Passes Lower House After 3 Hours

The Combatting Antisemitism, Hate and Extremism (Firearms and Customs Laws) Bill 2026 introduces not only the national gun buyback scheme, but new restrictions around background checks, the sale of firearm types, and new offences relating to accessing information online about firearms, ammunition, and accessories.

Home Affairs Minister Tony Burke told parliament that had such measures been in place earlier, the Bondi Beach attackers would not have been able to legally obtain weapons.

The father of the terrorist duo, Sajid Akram, owned six firearms, despite his son being interviewed and cleared by intelligence agencies over concerns of radicalisation.

The bill was debated for close to three hours, with several MPs proposing amendments.

Independent MP Zali Steggall sought to ensure firearms background checks explicitly included “criminal history or proceedings relating to domestic violence or AVOs issued in local courts.”

Bob Katter, the federal MP of Kennedy, moved an amendment that would automatically revoke a firearm licence for anyone placed on an ASIO watchlist. That amendment was defeated, 88 votes to 13.

Katter, who opposed the broader reforms, blamed the Bondi attack on failures in the immigration system and argued the legislation undermined gun ownership.

“If they get their way, then the only people that will have guns are the people in uniforms. And we know what sort of society that is, that the only people that have guns are the people in uniforms,” he said.

Keep reading

Police Use Tear Gas, Stun Grenades Against Farmers Protesting Mercosur Trade Agreement At EU Parliament In Strasbourg

During the farmers’ protest in Strasbourg, ahead of the European Parliament’s vote on the Mercosur trade deal, police used tear gas against demonstrators seeking an appeal to block the agreement.

Officers reportedly were forced to throw stun grenades at the protesters as they tried to enter the parliament building.

“Farmers are trying to get into the European Parliament. The police used tear gas,” wrote MEP Maciej Wąsik of the Law and Justice party (PiS) on social media.

Remix News reported yesterday that around 4,000 farmers from across the European Union, including Italy, Belgium, and Germany, were expected to descend on Strasbourg, with French farmers forming the majority.

Keep reading

Florida Lawmakers Approve Bill To Ban Public Marijuana Smoking Ahead Of Possible Legalization Vote On The Ballot

A Florida Senate panel has advanced legislation to ban smoking or vaping marijuana in public places, a development that comes as an industry-funded campaign is seeking to place a recreational cannabis legalization initiative on the November ballot.

The Senate Regulated Industries Committee on Tuesday approved the bill, which defines a public place as “a place to which the public has access, including, but not limited to, streets; sidewalks; highways; public parks; public beaches; and the common areas, both inside and outside, of schools, hospitals, government buildings, apartment buildings, office buildings, lodging establishments, restaurants, transportation facilities, and retail shops.”

The measure from Sen. Joe Gruters (R), who is also chairman of the Republican National Committee, would specify that marijuana cannot be smoked or vaped in customs smoking rooms at airports.

Sen. Ana Maria Rodriguez (R) presented the bill, SB 986, on Gruters’s behalf at the committee hearing.

“There is currently no prohibition on smoking marijuana in public places if adult use is approved by the voters,” she saidaccording to Florida Politics. “By banning public smoking of marijuana, we are protecting community health and quality of life, as well as protecting certain outdoor spaces from marijuana smoke such as beaches and parks.”

Rep. Alex Andrade (R) is sponsoring a similar bill to ban public cannabis smoking in the House of Representatives.

The proposals are among a growing list of cannabis legislation that lawmakers are introducing for consideration next year.

Keep reading

Attorney General Misses Deadline For Rules To Make It Easier To Study Schedule I Drugs Like Marijuana And Psychedelics

Attorney General Pam Bondi has missed a congressionally mandated deadline to issue guidelines for easing barriers to research on Schedule I substances such as marijuana and psychedelics.

Under legislation passed by lawmakers and signed into law by President Donald Trump last year, Bondi was supposed to publish interim rules setting out new processes for Schedule I research registration by January 16—but that has not occurred.

“This failure to act leaves researchers, institutions and regulators without clear guidance and directly contributes to research harm—the preventable damage caused when restrictive or unclear drug policies obstruct legitimate scientific research,” Kat Murti, executive director of Students for Sensible Drug Policy (SSDP), said in a press release on Tuesday. “Research harm delays medical innovation, limits evidence-based policymaking and slows the development of potential treatments for overdose, pain, addiction and mental health conditions.”

“Congress gave the attorney general a clear deadline and a clear mandate: reduce barriers to research while ensuring transparency and public input,” Murti said. “Missing this deadline is not a neutral administrative failure—it actively perpetuates research harm. When scientists are left navigating vague or contradictory rules, lifesaving research is delayed, innovation stalls and public health suffers.”

While drug policy reform advocates have sounded the alarm about the main thrust of the bill, which is to permanently place analogues of the opioid fentanyl into Schedule I of the Controlled Substances Act (CSA), there are components that could help facilitate studies into drugs, including cannabis, psilocybin, MDMA and others.

The Congressional Research Service (CRS) broke down the various provisions of the law—the Halt All Lethal Trafficking of Fentanyl Act (HALT Fentanyl Act)—in a report last year, including its potential impact on studies into currently controlled substances.

“Section 3 of the HALT Fentanyl Act contains multiple provisions designed to streamline research with Schedule I controlled substances,” CRS said. “The section applies generally to Schedule I substances, including but not limited to [fentanyl-related substances, or FRS.]”

It would do so by amending statute in a way that creates a “simplified registration process for researchers whose research” is funded by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) or the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), for example.

The revised registration process would also apply to entities studying Schedule I drugs under an Investigational New Drug (IND) exemption from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA).

“Under the new process, the researcher may submit a notice to [the Drug Enforcement Administration] containing the controlled substance to be used in the research, the quantity of the substance to be used, demonstration that one of the above criteria is met (e.g., the grant or project number and identification of the funding agency or the IND application number), and demonstration that the researcher is allowed to do the research under the law of the state where the research will be conducted,” the CRS report said.

“Researchers currently registered to conduct research with Schedule I or II controlled substances may begin their new research within 30 days of the notice to DEA,” it says. “For a researcher without a current registration, DEA must act within 45 days of receiving all required information either to register the applicant or issue an order for the applicant to show cause why registration should not be denied.”

Another change under the new law makes it so DEA-registered researchers will not have to obtain a separate registration for a Schedule I drug “if the manufactured quantities are small and are produced for purposes of the research and the researcher notifies DEA of the manufacturing activities and the quantities of the substance in question.”

Keep reading

Germany’s Censorship Frontier And The Rise Of Digital Control

Some achieve notoriety and fame by chance. Fortune may fall into one person’s lap, another may experience his ten minutes of public shine through a fluke rhetorical spark. In the case of the Minister‑President of Schleswig‑Holstein in Germany, however, this is a dubious honor.

In his appearance on Markus Lanz’s show on Germany’s state TV “ZDF”, CDU politician Daniel Günther slid into that revealing tone of small talk to which people are prone precisely when they believe themselves in a supposedly safe social environment – a place where no criticism is expected, no matter what leaves their lips.

What emerged during his guest spot on Lanz was a condemnable attitude toward the principle of free speech and toward critical media: the threat of censorship up to and including the blocking of individual platforms, including the portal Nius, reveals a profound ethical collapse. A growing, subtly operating apparatus of repression is now reaching us – a warning we should take seriously.

It was almost comical how Lanz, styled by public‑broadcasting elites as a star moderator, in tandem with the state‑aligned media sector repeatedly sought in the aftermath to rhetorically downplay Günther’s clearly articulated desire for censorship. Decontextualize, diffuse, and smother the real scandal with new waves of outrage like the Greenland debate – that’s how the media repair operation works.

Keep reading