Tag: police state

Ohio House Lawmakers Take Up GOP Bill To Amend Voter-Approved Marijuana Law As Alternative To Senate Overhaul

Ohio House lawmakers held another committee hearing on a bill to revise the state’s newly enacted marijuana legalization law, hearing additional testimony ahead of an expected vote on Wednesday.

After taking public input on the legislation from Rep. Jamie Callender (R) last week, the House Finance Committee met again on Tuesday to hear from additional advocates and stakeholders as Senate Republicans work to advance a separate revision package that’s sparked significant pushback.

The House bill is considered more palatable to reform supporters, as it’d make less sweeping changes to what voters approved on the November ballot—especially compared to the Senate legislation that initially called for the elimination of home cultivation and an indefinite delay on basic legalization provisions. That latter measure was significantly altered amid criticism last week, but it’s still facing sizable opposition.

Senate President Matt Huffman (R) originally aimed to pass the bill under an emergency prior to legalization taking effect last week, but that didn’t happen according to his timeline. House Speaker Jason Stephens (R), meanwhile, has said he doesn’t see the need to rush amending the initiated statute given that sales won’t begin until later in 2024.

The GOP House and Senate leaders have disagreed on certain procedural issues related to amending the marijuana law such as the timeline for enactment, but they’ve both generally expressed support for the idea of making changes such as revising the tax structure, preventing public consumption and deterring impaired driving.

In the House Finance Committee, members took additional public testimony on Tuesday, hearing from interested parties who expressed concern about issues such as the bill’s continued criminalization of sharing marijuana between adults and the redirection of tax revenue away from equity and toward law enforcement.

“My concern is that, through some of the reforms that I’m seeing being introduced in this legislature, we would be moving from puff-puff-pass to puff-puff-police and that is in total contradiction to what Ohio voters voted in support of,” Cat Packer, vice chair of Cannabis Regulators of Color Coalition (CRCC) and director of drug markets and legal regulation at the Drug Policy Alliance (DPA), said in testimony to the committee.

Keep reading

House Proposal Would Expand Federal Warrantless Spying Authority

The House of Representatives could vote this week on a bill to greatly expand federal digital surveillance powers—potentially broadening both the scope of electronic communications to be scooped up and giving law enforcement more opportunities to access that data.

Edward Snowden, who exposed parts of this same federal surveillance apparatus in 2013, called the new proposal “the biggest encroachment on your privacy rights since the Patriot Act” in a post on X (formerly Twitter). Civil libertarian groups have roundly criticized the bill and are encouraging lawmakers to vote against it.

That bill, the FISA Reform and Reauthorization Act of 2023, is one of two measures aiming to make changes to Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) that could be brought to the House floor on Tuesday. Section 702, created after 9/11, allows federal intelligence agencies to vacuum up communications between Americans and foreigners. Under some circumstances, law enforcement is allowed to query the Section 702 database, which includes an unknown amount of “incidental” data pulled from Americans’ online communications with foreigners.

Section 702 is set to expire at the end of the year, and recent revelations about how the FBI has misused the spying program have raised hopes that Congress might rein in the program.

Despite its name, however, the FISA Reform and Reauthorization Act appears to expand, not reform, the program.

One portion of the bill “vastly expands the universe of U.S. businesses that can be conscripted to aid the government in conducting surveillance,” Elizabeth Goitein, director of the national security program at the Brennan Center, a liberal think tank, posted on X.

Currently, the federal government can compel only businesses that have direct access to digital communications—telecom providers, internet service providers, and the like—to turn over that data to the Section 702 database. Under the terms of the House proposal, however, any business or entity that has access to telecom or internet equipment could be forced to participate in the federal government’s digital spying regime.

“Hotels, libraries, coffee shops, and other places that offer wifi to their customers could be forced to serve as surrogate spies,” writes Goitein.

That change would “effectively overrule” a recent decision from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC), the secret court that reviews America’s spying programs, write Steve Lane and Marc Zwillinger, two lawyers with experience arguing before the FISC.

“The new definition,” Lane and Zwillinger argued in a post on a legal blog connected to Zwillinger’s law firm, “could give the government warrantless access to any communication system in America through which any one-side-foreign communication could be found.”

The FISA Reform and Reauthorization Act would also expand how the government uses its Section 702 database.

Specifically, the bill would add a new provision to authorize Section 702 investigations as part of the process of “vetting of all non-United States persons who are being processed for travel to the United States.”

“This new authority proposes to give immigration services the ability to audit entire communication histories before deciding whether an immigrant can enter the country,” writes India McKinney, director of federal affairs for the Electronic Freedom Foundation (EFF), which opposes the bill. “This is a particularly problematic situation that could cost someone entrance to the United States based on, for instance, their own or a friend’s political opinions—as happened to a Palestinian Harvard student when his social media account was reviewed when coming to the U.S. to start his semester.”

Again, that provision of the bill seems to directly overrule the FISC, which has repeatedly struck down attempts by federal officials to expand Section 702 surveillance to include greater scrutiny of immigrants, McKinney notes.

Keep reading

Living Everywhere in a Carceral Surveillance State

If you live in a Chinese city, or even in London, you are probably so used to surveillance cameras all around you – on lamp posts, the corners of buildings, and so on – that you would hardly bat an eyelid. Yet what contemporary city-denizens take for granted was not always the case, and most people would be surprised to know that surveillance has a long history, and was linked to modes of punishment from early on.

The thinker who brought us the history of punishment, linked with surveillance, was Michel Foucault, who died prematurely in 1984, and whose thesis of ‘panopticism’ I referred to in an earlier post. His work is an inexhaustible source of insight regarding the way in which one enters into a relationship with history – something that is not self-evident, but requires careful consideration of the contingent, usually unpredictable factors which have contributed to the present state of affairs. This insight also opens the way for a critique of current social practices, which may otherwise seem self-justifying and necessary. 

Foucault’s writings on enlightenment suggest that there is a fundamental difference between ‘enlightenment’ in the Kantian sense, which emphasised the universal moment of scientific and philosophical knowledge, and ‘enlightenment’ in the sense of a philosophy of the contemporary present, which would do justice to both the (Kantian) universal as well as what is contingent and particular, which is not subject to historical laws, deterministically conceived.

In his essay, What is enlightenment? (in The Foucault Reader, ed. Rabinow, P., New York: Pantheon Books, pp. 32-50), Foucault argues that Kant’s emphasis on the universal should be amplified by Baudelaire’s characterisation of the modern in terms of a tension between being and becoming (or the universal and the particular), in this way finding the ‘eternal’ (or enduringly valuable) in the transitory, historically contingent moment. For Baudelaire, this amounts to a species of self-invention.

Foucault, however, maintains that such self-invention would enable one to turn Kant’s critique into one that is pertinent for the present time, by inquiring what there is, in what we have been taught to accept as being necessary and universal, which we no longer are, or want to be, thus practising a kind of ‘transgressive’ enlightenment. This, I would like to show, is highly germane to the time in which we find ourselves, and by scrutinising the history that has brought us to our fraught present, we should be in a better position to identify what it is that we no longer want to be.

Keep reading

New York Governor Vetoes Bills To Allow Hemp Seed In Animal Feed, Calling On State To Collect ‘More Information’ On Safety

The governor of New York has vetoed a pair of bills that would have allowed hemp seeds to be included in animal feed for pets, horses and camelids such as llamas and alpacas—citing a lack of information about the safety of such uses, which she wants the state to study in an “expeditious manner.”

The Senate and Assembly passed the legislation months ago, but the bills were only formally transmitted to Gov. Kathy Hochul (D) late last month. While she’s strongly advocated for the state’s hemp industry, the governor said in a veto message on Friday that the federal Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has not yet approved adding hemp seed to animal feed, and so “more information is required.”

“To that end, I am directing the Department of Agriculture and Markets to work with Cornell University’s College of Agriculture and Life Sciences to research the impacts of the use of hemp seed or hemp seed products in animal feed,” Hochul wrote. “This study is to be completed in an expeditious manner to better inform the industry on the questions raised by the potential for expanded use of hemp products.”

The now-vetoed measures specified that the industrial hemp seed that could be added to certain animal feed included seed hulls and seed meal. Supporters said that the cannabis products could be a nutritious additive that’s high in protein and fiber.

The legislation was similar to measures that have been enacted in Montana and Pennsylvania, and it’s backed by the National Hemp Association.

“Protecting industrial hemp production in New York will encourage greater production and research into the myriad uses of this plant, including as a renewable building material,” the text says. “It will also open the door for small, New York-based animal food processors to establish this marketplace before hemp seeds are authorized far use in commercial feed nationally.”

A fiscal note says that the legislation could ultimately increase tax revenue for the state because of “increased sales of New York hemp seed product and commercial feed.”

The bills would not have extended the hemp seed additive authorization to other commercial livestock, presumably due to regulatory complications related to adding items to feed for animals that are used for human consumption.

That said, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) recently found that cows that are fed hempseed cake retain very low concentrations of THC and CBD in their bodies, indicating that meat products from hemp-fed cattle are safe for human consumption.

Keep reading

Apple Just Confirmed Governments Are Spying on People’s Phones With Push Notifications

Governments are spying on U.S. smartphone users through the push notifications that they receive from apps, Senator Ron Wyden wrote in a letter to the Department of Justice on Wednesday and Apple confirmed. 

Wyden wrote that the federal government had restricted Apple and other companies’ ability to share information about this process. The Senator’s office “received a tip” last year that “government agencies in foreign countries were demanding smartphone ‘push’ notification records from Google and Apple,” Wyden, a Democratic senator from Oregon, wrote in the letter to Attorney General Merrick Garland. “My staff have been investigating this tip for the past year, which included contacting Apple and Google. In response to that query, the companies told my staff that information about this practice is restricted from public release by the government.” 

Apple confirmed in a statement to Reuters on Wednesday that, “In this case, the federal government prohibited us from sharing any information. Now that this method has become public we are updating our transparency reporting to detail these kinds of requests.”

The process by which push notifications are generated requires the phone company to serve as a “digital post office,” Wyden wrote. Push notifications are sent through Apple and Google’s servers, which means that the companies “serve as intermediaries in the transmission process,” and can therefore be made to hand over information to governments that request it. 

According to Wyden’s letter, the information that can be gleaned from push notification requests is mostly metadata. This includes information “detailing which app received a notification and when, as well as the phone and associated Apple or Google account to which that notification was intended to be delivered,” Wyden wrote. In some cases, requesters may even receive unencrypted content such as the text that was delivered in the notification. 

The senator said that companies can therefore “be secretly compelled by governments to hand over this information.” 

An unnamed source confirmed to Reuters that both foreign and U.S. government agencies had been asking the companies for push notification data, for example to tie anonymous users of messaging apps to specific accounts. They did not say which government agencies had participated in this, or for how long. 

Apple advises its developers to encrypt any sensitive data sent through a push notification, but does not require this practice. 

Keep reading

Taxpayer-Subsidized Seminars Train Cops To Violate the Constitution

If a driver looks away while passing a police car, cops learn from a checklist promoted at an October 2021 conference in Atlantic City, that is suspicious. But if a driver stares at the police car, that is also suspicious. Hats work both ways too: Wearing one “low to cover [your] face” is suspicious, but so is removing a hat when you are stopped by the police. Other telltale signs of criminal activity, according to Street Cop Training’s list of “reasonable suspicion factors,” include texting, smoking, lip licking, yawning, stretching, talking to a passenger while keeping your eyes on the road, signaling a turn early or late, maintaining “awkward closeness” or “awkward distance” during a stop, standing parallel or perpendicular to the car, saying you are heading to work or heading home, questioning the reason for the stop, and refusing permission for a search.

That Street Cop Training checklist, which offers handy excuses for officers keen to conduct searches for drugs or seizable cash, figures prominently in a recent report from Kevin Walsh, New Jersey’s acting comptroller. The report criticizes the New Jersey company for encouraging officers to make or extend stops without reasonable suspicion and for promoting a “warrior” mentality that fosters the excessive use of force. “We found so many examples of so many instructors promoting views and tactics that were wildly inappropriate, offensive, discriminatory, harassing, and, in some cases, likely illegal,” Walsh said when he released the report this week. “The fact that the training undermined nearly a decade of police reforms—and New Jersey dollars paid for it—is outrageous.”

Street Cop Training was founded in 2012 by Dennis Benigno, who was a Woodbridge, New Jersey, police officer until 2015. Each year the company, which Benigno describes as “one of the largest, if not the largest, police training providers in the United States,” trains about 25,000 officers from agencies across the country. The six-day Atlantic City seminar that Walsh describes in his report attracted nearly 1,000 officers, including 240 from New Jersey. Their employers covered the expenses, which included a $499 fee for each officer, travel and lodging, and paid time off.

What did taxpayers get for their money? Potentially, Walsh argues, greater exposure to more expenses down the road, including millions of dollars spent to litigate and settle civil rights lawsuits. “This kind of training comes at too high a price for New Jersey residents,” Walsh’s report says. “The costs of attendance for training like this is small in comparison to the potential liability for lawsuits involving excessive force, unlawful searches and seizures, and harassment and discrimination.”

While “some of the observations and reasoning” described in Street Cop’s checklist “find support in case law,” Walsh says, “others appear to be arbitrary and contradictory.” Officers who follow Benigno’s advice therefore may end up violating the Fourth Amendment by making or prolonging stops based on factors that fall short of reasonable suspicion. If so, any resulting searches also would be unconstitutional, making any evidence they discover inadmissible.

Keep reading

New York Will Charge Drivers $15 To Enter Lower Manhattan

After a grueling, yearslong, process, New York area commuters finally know how much in new congestion charges they’ll pay for driving into lower Manhattan. Actually getting the published tolls approved is going to require more process still.

Earlier this week, the board of the Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA)—the state agency that runs rail and bus service in the New York City area—gave initial approval to a toll schedule that will charge the average driver $15 to enter lower Manhattan during peak times (5 a.m. to 9 p.m. on weekdays and 9 a.m. to 9 p.m. on weekends).

Trucks, buses, and vans will pay $24 per day for the same privilege, while larger vehicles like multiunit trucks and sightseeing buses will pay $36 per day. Included in the schedule are discounts for low-income drivers and credits for people using already-tolled tunnels.

Vehicles without an E-ZPass will pay higher rates, ranging from $22.50 for passenger cars to $54 for larger trucks.

The revenue from these congestion tolls will go toward covering the MTA’s budget deficits.

The board’s vote this week merely kicks off an additional round of public input and review scheduled to last four months, during which more changes could be made. This latest stage of public review is in addition to the 19 outreach sessions the MTA held during the yearslong federal environmental review process. The agency has already received 28,000 pages worth of public comments as well.

So, congestion tolls won’t be implemented until spring 2024 at the earliest.

New York’s long road to congestion pricing started back in 2019 when the New York Legislature approved a plan to toll drivers entering lower Manhattan as part of that year’s budget agreement.

The intent of the new tolls was to raise money for the city’s cash-strapped subway system and reduce rush-hour gridlock. London, Singapore, and Stockholm all have tolled congestion zones covering their city centers.

Economics and transportation policy wonks tend to love congestion pricing as an efficient means of rationing scarce road space. Done right, it can be a real benefit to commuters who benefit from more predictable travel times and free-flowing traffic.

From the get-go, however, New York primarily pitched its congestion pricing plan as a means of raising money for the city’s subway system. That helped alienate drivers who’d have to pay it.

“They didn’t lead with, ‘We’re going to stabilize traffic flow and therefore benefit you as motorists,'” Marc Scribner, a transportation policy researcher at the Reason Foundation (which publishes this website), told Reason earlier this year. “You can understand the knee-jerk reaction from a lot of motorists is that this is a cash grab.”

The political opposition from motorists has only complicated what was always going to be a fraught, prolonged implementation process.

Keep reading

Gun Owners Of America Defeats Hidden Gun Control In Military Funding Bill

When laws are debated in Congress that are too controversial to pass on their own, oftentimes sneaky politicians will attempt to place similar language into must-pass bills.

One of those must-pass bills is the National Defense Authorization Act, also known as the NDAA. The annual NDAA creates new programs, strategies, and authorizes the Department of Defense to procure new technologies.

This year, thanks to Gun Owners of America and the support of our grassroots members, we are happy to report that the proposed gun control amendments to the NDAA have been defeated.

So, you might ask, what gun control did the anti-gun politicians in Congress try to sneak into this year’s bill?

The answer is a permanent reauthorization of the Undetectable Firearms Act.

Gun Owners of America is the only pro-gun lobbying organization to historically oppose the Undetectable Firearms Act since its passage into law in 1988. 

The act itself began as an attempt to ban handguns like the Glock 17 when they were first introduced to the market in the mid-80s. At this time, polymer-framed handguns were a very new idea, and a misunderstanding about the Glock’s polymer frame prompted an idea that even though the Glock had a metal slide, its polymer frame would somehow make it undetectable to metal detectors and, therefore, be the weapon of choice for criminals.

When the act was finally passed through Congress, a compromise was made – so it did not affect any existing handguns.

Nowadays, with the advent of 3D printing, the Undetectable Firearms Act stifles manufacturers from producing smaller, lighter, and higher-performing handguns because they must meet the UFA’s weight requirement. This issue is compounded for the consumer handgun market because of the massive demand for concealed carry firearms, especially in light of the recent landmark NYSRPA v. Bruen decision.

Keep reading

Former sheriff’s deputy pleads guilty to child sex abuse, child porn charges

A former San Diego County sheriff’s deputy Wednesday changed his plea to guilty on multiple charges, including child sex abuse and possession of child pornography.

Jose Soto Jr. was arrested in May and charged with possession of child pornography and an assault weapon.

In addition to his guilty pleas on the child pornography charge, Soto pleaded guilty to one count of lewd and lascivious acts on a child and one count of continuous child sexual abuse.

Under California code, a “continuous sexual abuse of a child” charge applies to a person who has regular access to a child under 14 and has committed three or more lewd acts on them for three or more months.

Keep reading

We All Have PTSD

Two years ago, reports started appearing that compared the effects of lockdowns with post-traumatic stress disorder. As it turns out, one of the symptoms of PTSD is forgetting what happened. It’s an evolved trait that helps the human mind cope with terrible things. Our brains are good at blocking it out. I will explain the neuroscience behind this in a bit but first an anecdote from this morning.

I was speaking to the director of a childrens’ choir and he was speaking about an age gap in his singers. The lead singer just graduated high school, and the next oldest singer is 14, which creates huge problems for the choral competence. I hesitated to do it but I finally just observed that this 3-year gap fits exactly with the lockdown period, child masking, and Zoom school.

He began to speak about what it was like to train a choir on Zoom and then conduct masked singers outdoors on winter nights. He recalled the attacks and the difficulties, and then his voice trailed off.

“Actually I’ve blocked out that whole period of life from my memory. I won’t think about it anymore. Anyway, I need to circulate a bit here but good seeing you.”

That was that.

It got me curious about the relationship between selective memory and trauma. For a long time now I’ve noticed that when this subject comes up, the response is either to quickly change the subject, which is common, or dig deeper into what seems like a bit of catharsis. Some people have so much to share, so many painful memories, so much shock and abuse to report, that once they start they cannot stop talking.

This one comment from this one choir director got me suspecting that vast numbers of people might be trying to forget it all. This is how the political debates manage to pretend like this never happened, how the major media gets away with never bringing it up, and how people like Fauci still get high speaking fees, and so on. It’s not just that they are no-good liars; too often it’s because people really do want to forget.

This is how the number one most shared trauma of our lives is fading so fast into the national and global consciousness.

It’s a well-known feature of child or spousal abuse. The memories are so terrible and grim that the human mind develops the capacity for pretending like it never happened if only so that life functioning can continue. This is fine but actually the trauma is still there and feeds other forms of pathologies like substance abuse and attachment disorders and so on. The point of therapy is to come to terms with the reality itself in the process of healing.

Keep reading