Virginia teachers learn AI tools and ethics at largest statewide workshop; WTVR, July 23, 2025

 

WTVR CBS 6 Web Staff; Virginia teachers learn AI tools and ethics at largest statewide workshop


[Kip Currier: Nothing in this brief article substantively (or even cursorily) talks about the ethics issues of K-12 teachers using AI tools. The piece extolls what can be gained by teachers using AI tools. But what's lost by using these products? What skills do we not gain or hone by relying on AI to think and create for us?

Was an ethics code or AI code of conduct discussed at all at this two-day gathering of teachers?

And what about the ongoing problem of AI hallucinations-- i.e. inaccurate and nonexistent information generated by AI? Nowhere in this reporting is the need for proofreading and verification of AI-generated outputs even mentioned.

In the pell-mell rush to adopt AI tools, fueled by AI tech companies, it's vital to remember the need for embracing AI ethics guidelines and guardrails.]

[Excerpt]

"Hundreds of Virginia teachers are getting hands-on experience with artificial intelligence tools, ethics and curriculum integration at the largest statewide professional development workshop focused on AI.

The two-day workshop, hosted by AI Ready RVA, continues Thursday at the VCU School of Business...

"There are tools that allow teachers to create lesson plans or quizzes or rubrics immediately based on a source that they can find online so they don't have to spend hours on Sunday prepping for the week ahead. And so we have a list of various platforms that we're going to be teaching them and practice sessions so that they can master these tools so that way they start the school year really strong," Demetriou said."

Trump’s AI agenda hands Silicon Valley the win—while ethics, safety, and ‘woke AI’ get left behind; Fortune, July 24, 2025

 SHARON GOLDMAN, Fortune; Trump’s AI agenda hands Silicon Valley the win—while ethics, safety, and ‘woke AI’ get left behind

"For the “accelerationists”—those who believe the rapid development and deployment of artificial intelligence should be pursued as quickly as possible—innovation, scale, and speed are everything. Over-caution and regulation? Ill-conceived barriers that will actually cause more harm than good. They argue that faster progress will unlock massive economic growth, scientific breakthroughs, and national advantage. And if superintelligence is inevitable, they say, the U.S. had better get there first—before rivals like China’s authoritarian regime.

AI ethics and safety has been sidelined

This worldview, articulated by Marc Andreessen in his 2023 blog post, has now almost entirely displaced the diverse coalition of people who worked on AI ethics and safety during the Biden Administration—from mainstream policy experts focused on algorithmic fairness and accountability, to the safety researchers in Silicon Valley who warn of existential risks. While they often disagreed on priorities and tone, both camps shared the belief that AI needed thoughtful guardrails. Today, they find themselves largely out of step with an agenda that prizes speed, deregulation, and dominance.

Whether these groups can claw their way back to the table is still an open question. The mainstream ethics folks—with roots in civil rights, privacy, and democratic governance—may still have influence at the margins, or through international efforts. The existential risk researchers, once tightly linked to labs like OpenAI and Anthropic, still hold sway in academic and philanthropic circles. But in today’s environment—where speed, scale, and geopolitical muscle set the tone—both camps face an uphill climb. If they’re going to make a comeback, I get the feeling it won’t be through philosophical arguments. More likely, it would be because something goes wrong—and the public pushes back."

Venezuelans deported by Trump to El Salvador describe ‘horror movie’ mega-prison; The Guardian, July 24, 2025

Marina Dunbar and agency , The Guardian; Venezuelans deported by Trump to El Salvador describe ‘horror movie’ mega-prison

"Arturo Suárez, whose reggaeton songs surfaced on social media after he was sent to El Salvador, arrived at his family’s home in the Venezuelan capital, Caracas, on Tuesday. His sister hugged him after he emerged from a vehicle belonging to the country’s intelligence service.

“It is hell. We met a lot of innocent people,” Suárez told reporters, referring to the prison he was held in. “To all those who mistreated us, to all those who negotiated with our lives and our freedom, I have one thing to say, and scripture says it well: vengeance and justice is mine, and you are going to give an account to God [the] Father.”...

Meanwhile, Andry José Hernández Romero, a gay makeup artist who had been deported to Cecot under an obscure wartime law invoked by the Trump administration, was among those released.

Romero had entered the US legally through the CBP One app last summer, seeking asylum, but eventually was detained and removed to El Salvador with the others.

The Immigrant Defenders Law Center, based in Los Angeles, is now appealing Romero’s case, according to ABC, asserting that he was denied his legal right to seek asylum.

Romero broke down in tears when he was finally reunited with his parents in Venezuela on Wednesday, reported ABC News 10.

“His entire town was waiting for him, preparing a meal,” said Melissa Shepard, legal services director at the California non-profit."

Immigration courts hiding the names of ICE lawyers goes against centuries of precedent and legal ethics requiring transparency in courts; The Conversation, July 23, 2025

1. Cassandra Burke Robertson, Professor of Law and Director of the Center for Professional Ethics, Case Western Reserve University, The Conversation; Immigration courts hiding the names of ICE lawyers goes against centuries of precedent and legal ethics requiring transparency in courts

[Kip Currier: ICE immigration lawyers intentionally hiding their names, and immigration court judges facilitating this practice, should chill the blood of any lawyer and non-lawyer concerned about accountability, transparency, ethics, and the rule of law in a democratic country. This is not normal practice for free societies that value public trust. We should not and cannot permit such actions to be normalized: civil watchdogs like the ACLU and legal groups like the American Bar Association (ABA) have a responsibility to publicize their positions on these concerning Kafkaesque developments in U.S. courts and society at large.

The speed at which the U.S. is transitioning into an autocratic police state since Inauguration Day 2025 is both stunning and terrifying.

For more information on these issues, see here and here.]

[Excerpt]

1. "Something unusual is happening in U.S. immigration courts. Government lawyers are refusing to give their names during public hearings.
2. 
   
3. In June 2025, Immigration Judge ShaSha Xu in New York City reportedly told lawyers in her courtroom: “We’re not really doing names publicly.” Only the government lawyers’ names were hidden – the immigrants’ attorneys had to give their names as usual. Xu cited privacy concerns, saying, “Things lately have changed.
4. 
   
5. When one immigration lawyer objected that the court record would be incomplete without the government attorney’s name, Xu reportedly refused to provide it. In another case, New York immigration Judge James McCarthy in July referred to the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or ICE, attorney as merely “Department” throughout the hearing.
6. 
   
7. New York immigration Judge Shirley Lazare-Raphael told The Intercept that some ICE attorneys believe it is “dangerous to state their names publicly.” This follows a broader pattern of ICE agents wearing masks during arrests to hide their identities. 
8. This secrecy violates a fundamental principle that has protected Americans for centuries: open courts. Here’s how those courts operate and why the principle governing them matters."

President Trump’s AI Action Plan Misses the Mark, Calls for Action Without Vision; Public Knowledge, July 23, 2025

Shiva Stella, Public Knowledge; President Trump’s AI Action Plan Misses the Mark, Calls for Action Without Vision

"Today, the Trump administration announced its artificial intelligence action plan designed to “accelerate AI innovation” – by stepping aside and giving technology companies free rein over how the technology develops. The plan removes state and federal regulatory requirements, eliminates protections against bias and discrimination, fails to address competition concerns, and ignores climate and environmental risks.

The plan does continue to advance important work on developing an AI evaluation ecosystem and supporting critical research on AI interpretability, control, security risks, and advancing the fundamental science of AI. However, these modest steps throw into stark contrast the failure to meaningfully invest in America’s AI future.

Public Knowledge argues that real AI innovation will require real leadership from our democratically elected leaders, investments and actions that break down monopolies and corporate control, and public trust earned by creating AI systems that are safe, fair, and subject to the rule of law...

The following can be attributed to Nicholas Garcia, Senior Policy Counsel at Public Knowledge: 

“This plan is action without vision or direction. Cutting regulations and eliminating protections is, by itself, not a plan for innovation and competition in AI – it is a handout to already-entrenched, powerful tech companies. The real constraints on AI innovation are well-known: access to training data, compute power, and research talent. This plan’s solutions in those areas are severely lacking. At its heart, the plan is starkly divided between political posturing and serious science.

“It is clear that some of the experts’ messages from the public comments reached the White House. Continuing to develop an AI evaluation ecosystem; investing in research on AI interpretability and control; promoting the development and use of open-source and open-weights models; and claiming an international leadership position on evaluating AI national security risks are all critically important policy pursuits. 

“President Trump also spoke strongly in his speech tonight about the need to protect the rights to read and learn. He is absolutely correct about the need to protect those fundamental rights for everyone, including for AI training. Unfortunately, there is no mention of how to protect these rights or address questions about copyright in the AI action plan. 

“Instead of focusing more deeply on research or promoting competition, the AI action plan continues the Trump administration’s attack on diversity and equality, on the green energy solutions needed to both protect our planet and power AI, and on the very institutions of science and learning that are necessary to secure the promise of AI. This demonstrates how the vindictive political project of ‘preventing woke’ directly clashes with achieving actual leadership in AI.

“Ultimately, the plan’s soaring and optimistic language of AI acceleration is undermined by a failure to embrace an affirmative vision of how AI will improve the lives of everyday Americans and how to actually get there. We can only hope that these small steps in the right direction on evaluations, research, and open-source – along with the administration’s remarks on copyright – means that there is more to come to ensure that the American people are the winners of the AI race. As it stands right now, this plan fails to meet the challenges of this pivotal moment.” 

You may view our recent blog post, “Hopes and Fears for President Trump’s AI Action Plan,” for more information."

Donald Trump Is Fairy-Godmothering AI; The Atlantic, July 23, 2025

Matteo Wong , The Atlantic; Donald Trump Is Fairy-Godmothering AI

"In a sense, the action plan is a bet. AI is already changing a number of industries, including software engineering, and a number of scientific disciplines. Should AI end up producing incredible prosperity and new scientific discoveries, then the AI Action Plan may well get America there faster simply by removing any roadblocks and regulations, however sensible, that would slow the companies down. But should the technology prove to be a bubble—AI products remain error-prone, extremely expensive to build, and unproven in many business applications—the Trump administration is more rapidly pushing us toward the bust. Either way, the nation is in Silicon Valley’s hands...

Once the red tape is gone, the Trump administration wants to create a “dynamic, ‘try-first’ culture for AI across American industry.” In other words, build and test out AI products first, and then determine if those products are actually helpful—or if they pose any risks.

Trump gestured toward other concessions to the AI industry in his speech. He specifically targeted intellectual-property laws, arguing that training AI models on copyrighted books and articles does not infringe upon copyright because the chatbots, like people, are simply learning from the content. This has been a major conflict in recent years, with more than 40 related lawsuits filed against AI companies since 2022. (The Atlantic is suing the AI company Cohere, for example.) If courts were to decide that training AI models with copyrighted material is against the law, it would be a major setback for AI companies. In their official recommendations for the AI Action Plan, OpenAI, Microsoft, and Google all requested a copyright exception, known as “fair use,” for AI training. Based on his statements, Trump appears to strongly agree with this position, although the AI Action Plan itself does not reference copyright and AI training.

Also sprinkled throughout the AI Action Plan are gestures toward some MAGA priorities. Notably, the policy states that the government will contract with only AI companies whose models are “free from top-down ideological bias”—a reference to Sacks’s crusade against “woke” AI—and that a federal AI-risk-management framework should “eliminate references to misinformation, Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion, and climate change.” Trump signed a third executive order today that, in his words, will eliminate “woke, Marxist lunacy” from AI models...

Looming over the White House’s AI agenda is the threat of Chinese technology getting ahead. The AI Action Plan repeatedly references the importance of staying ahead of Chinese AI firms, as did the president’s speech: “We will not allow any foreign nation to beat us; our nation will not live in a planet controlled by the algorithms of the adversaries,” Trump declared...

But whatever happens on the international stage, hundreds of millions of Americans will feel more and more of generative AI’s influence—on salaries and schools, air quality and electricity costs, federal services and doctor’s offices. AI companies have been granted a good chunk of their wish list; if anything, the industry is being told that it’s not moving fast enough. Silicon Valley has been given permission to accelerate, and we’re all along for the ride."

Donald Trump Says AI Companies Can’t Be Expected To Pay For All Copyrighted Content Used In Their Training Models: “Not Do-Able”; Deadline, July 23, 2025

Ted Johnson, Tom Tapp, Deadline; Donald Trump Says AI Companies Can’t Be Expected To Pay For All Copyrighted Content Used In Their Training Models: “Not Do-Able”

 

[Kip Currier: Don't be fooled by the flimflam rhetoric in Trump's AI Action Plan unveiled yesterday (July 23, 2025). Where Trump's AI Action Plan says “We must ensure that free speech flourishes in the era of AI and that AI procured by the Federal government objectively reflects truth rather than social engineering agendas", it's actually the exact opposite: the Trump plan is censorious and will "cancel out" truth (e.g. on climate science, misinformation and disinformation, etc.) in Orwellian fashion.]

[Excerpt]

"The plan is a contrast to Trump’s predecessor, Joe Biden, who focused on the government’s role in ensuring that the technology was safe.

The Trump White House plan also recommends updating federal procurement guidelines “to ensure that the government only contracts with frontier large language model (LLM) developers who ensure that their systems are objective and free from top-down ideological bias.” Also recommended is revising the National Institute of Standards and Technology AI Risk Management Framework to remove references to misinformation, DEI and climate change.

“We must ensure that free speech flourishes in the era of AI and that AI procured by the Federal government objectively reflects truth rather than social engineering agendas,” the plan says."

Now Trump Wants to Rename Artificial Intelligence to This; The Daily Beast, July 23, 2025

Erkki Forster, The Daily Beast; Now Trump Wants to Rename Artificial Intelligence to This

"President Donald Trump has set his sights on a new linguistic enemy. While speaking at an artificial intelligence summit Wednesday, Trump realized mid-thought that he doesn’t like the word “artificial” at all. “I can’t stand it. I don’t even like the name,” the 79-year-old president said. ”You know, I don’t like anything that’s artificial so could we straighten that out please?” he asked, pointing to someone in the audience. “We should change the name.” As disbelieving laughter rippled through the room, Trump insisted, “I actually mean that—I don’t like the name ‘artificial’ anything.” He then offered an alternative—one he often uses to describe himself: “It’s not artificial. It’s genius. It’s pure genius.”"

Partner Who Wrote About AI Ethics, Fired For Citing Fake AI Cases; Above The Law, July 23, 2025

Joe Patrice , Above The Law; Partner Who Wrote About AI Ethics, Fired For Citing Fake AI Cases

"Don’t blame the AI for the fact that you read a brief and never bothered to print out the cases. Who does that? Long before AI, we all understood that you needed to look at the case itself to make sure no one missed the literal red flag on top. It might’ve ended up in there because of AI, but three lawyers and presumably a para or two had this brief and no one built a binder of the cases cited? What if the court wanted oral argument? No one is excusing the decision to ask ChatGPT to resolve your $24 million case, but the blame goes far deeper.

Malaty will shoulder most of the blame as the link in the workflow who should’ve known better. That said, her article about AI ethics, written last year, doesn’t actually address the hallucination problem. While risks of job displacement and algorithms reinforcing implicit bias are important, it is a little odd to write a whole piece on the ethics of legal AI without even breathing on hallucinations."

Trump derides copyright and state rules in AI Action Plan launch; Politico, July 23, 2025

MOHAR CHATTERJEE , Politico; Trump derides copyright and state rules in AI Action Plan launch

"President Donald Trump criticized copyright enforcement efforts and state-level AI regulations Wednesday as he launched the White House’s AI Action Plan on a mission to dominate the industry.

In remarks delivered at a “Winning the AI Race” summit hosted by the All-In Podcast and the Hill and Valley Forum in Washington, Trump said stringent copyright enforcement was unrealistic for the AI industry and would kneecap U.S. companies trying to compete globally, particularly against China.

“You can’t be expected to have a successful AI program when every single article, book or anything else that you’ve read or studied, you’re supposed to pay for,” he said. “You just can’t do it because it’s not doable. ... China’s not doing it.”

Trump’s comments were a riff as his 28-page AI Action Plan did not wade into copyright and administration officials told reporters the issue should be left to the courts to decide.

Trump also signed three executive orders. One will fast track federal permitting, streamline reviews and “do everything possible to expedite construction of all major AI infrastructure projects,” Trump said. Another expands American exports of AI hardware and software. A third order bans the federal government from procuring AI technology “that has been infused with partisan bias or ideological agendas,” as Trump put it...

Trump echoed tech companies’ complaints about state AI laws creating a patchwork of regulation. “You can’t have one state holding you up,” he said. “We need one common sense federal standard that supersedes all states, supersedes everybody.”"

Trump has fired the head of the Library of Congress, but the 225-year-old institution remains a ‘library for all’ – so far; The Conversation, July 23, 2025

Alex H. Poole, Associate Professor of Information Science, Drexel University , The Conversation; Trump has fired the head of the Library of Congress, but the 225-year-old institution remains a ‘library for all’ – so far

"A library for all

Following Hayden’s dismissal, Trump appointed Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche, his former personal lawyer, as acting librarian of Congress. 

Hayden has contended that her dismissal, which occurred alongside other firings of top civil servants, including the national archivist, represents a broad threat to people’s right to easily access free information. 

“Democracies are not to be taken for granted,” Hayden said in June. She explained in an interview with CBS that she never had a problem with a presidential administration and is not sure why she was dismissed. 

“And the institutions that support democracy should not be taken for granted,” Hayden added. 

In her final annual report as librarian, Hayden characterized the institution as “truly, a library for all.” So far, even without her leadership, it remains just that."

AI chatbots remain overconfident -- even when they’re wrong; EurekAlert!, July 22, 2025

 CARNEGIE MELLON UNIVERSITY, EurekAlert!; AI chatbots remain overconfident -- even when they’re wrong

"Artificial intelligence chatbots are everywhere these days, from smartphone apps and customer service portals to online search engines. But what happens when these handy tools overestimate their own abilities? 

Researchers asked both human participants and four large language models (LLMs) how confident they felt in their ability to answer trivia questions, predict the outcomes of NFL games or Academy Award ceremonies, or play a Pictionary-like image identification game. Both the people and the LLMs tended to be overconfident about how they would hypothetically perform. Interestingly, they also answered questions or identified images with relatively similar success rates.

However, when the participants and LLMs were asked retroactively how well they thought they did, only the humans appeared able to adjust expectations, according to a study published today in the journal Memory & Cognition.

“Say the people told us they were going to get 18 questions right, and they ended up getting 15 questions right. Typically, their estimate afterwards would be something like 16 correct answers,” said Trent Cash, who recently completed a joint Ph.D. at Carnegie Mellon University in the departments of Social Decision Science and Psychology. “So, they’d still be a little bit overconfident, but not as overconfident.”

“The LLMs did not do that,” said Cash, who was lead author of the study. “They tended, if anything, to get more overconfident, even when they didn’t do so well on the task.”

The world of AI is changing rapidly each day, which makes drawing general conclusions about its applications challenging, Cash acknowledged. However, one strength of the study was that the data was collected over the course of two years, which meant using continuously updated versions of the LLMs known as ChatGPT, Bard/Gemini, Sonnet and Haiku. This means that AI overconfidence was detectable across different models over time.

“When an AI says something that seems a bit fishy, users may not be as skeptical as they should be because the AI asserts the answer with confidence, even when that confidence is unwarranted,” said Danny Oppenheimer, a professor in CMU’s Department of Social and Decision Sciences and coauthor of the study."

Commentary: A win-win-win path for AI in America; The Post & Courier, July 22, 2025

 Keith Kupferschmid, The Post & Courier; Commentary: A win-win-win path for AI in America

"Contrary to claims that these AI training deals are impossible to make at scale, a robust free market is already emerging in which hundreds (if not thousands) of licensed deals between AI companies and copyright owners have been reached. New research shows it is possible to create fully licensed data sets for AI.

No wonder one federal judge recently called claims that licensing is impractical “ridiculous,” given the billions at stake: “If using copyrighted works to train the models is as necessary as the companies say, they will figure out a way to compensate copyright holders.” Just like AI companies don’t dispute that they have to pay for energy, infrastructure, coding teams and the other inputs their operations require, they need to pay for creative works as well.

America’s example to the world is a free-market economy based on the rule of law, property rights and freedom to contract — so, let the market innovate solutions to these new (but not so new) licensing challenges. Let’s construct a pro-innovation, pro-worker approach that replaces the false choice of the AI alarmists with a positive, pro-America pathway to leadership on AI."

Wave of copyright lawsuits hit AI companies like Cambridge-based Suno; WBUR, July 23, 2025

 

Sharon Brody

Rob Lane,

WBUR; Wave of copyright lawsuits hit AI companies like Cambridge-based Suno

"Suno, a Cambridge company that generates AI music, faces multiple lawsuits alleging it illegally trained its model on copyrighted work. Peter Karol of Suffolk Law School and Bhamati Viswanathan of Columbia University Law School's Kernochan Center for Law, Media, and the Arts join WBUR's Morning Edition to explain how the suits against Suno fit into a broader legal battle over the future of creative work.

This segment aired on July 23, 2025. Audio will be available soon."

Trump Told Park Workers to Report Displays That ‘Disparage’ Americans. Here’s What They Flagged.; The New York Times, July 22, 2025

Maxine Joselow and Lisa Friedman, The New York Times; Trump Told Park Workers to Report Displays That ‘Disparage’ Americans. Here’s What They Flagged.

[Kip Currier: Trump's order directing National Park Service (NPS) staff to flag historical signs that "inappropriately disparage Americans" is contemptible and reads like a dystopian plot point befitting Fahrenheit 451 or 1984. It's also contrary to the advancement of knowledge and rigorous historical inquiry.

As a lifelong aficionado of the stunning diversity of America's national parks, I also find this directive deeply offensive because it seeks to sanitize and censor the complexity of U.S history: solely to satisfy one American's monarchical sense of what is and is not "appropriate". That is inherently un-American.

Thank goodness, then, that a heroic superteam of librarians, historians, and others are mobilizing right now to safeguard records of American history from erasure and expurgation. Until the day that fulsome, tangled, sobering, uplifting historical record -- our individual and collective history and legacy -- can be restored, appreciated, and learned from in all of its imperfectness.]

[Excerpt]

"According to internal documents reviewed by The New York Times, employees of the National Park Service have flagged descriptions and displays at scores of parks and historic sites for review in connection with President Trump’s directive to remove or cover up materials that “inappropriately disparage Americans.”

In an executive order in March, the president instructed the Park Service to review plaques, films and other materials presented to visitors at 433 sites around the country, with the aim of ensuring they emphasize the “progress of the American people” and the “grandeur of the American landscape.”

Employees had until last week to flag materials that could be changed or deleted, and the Trump administration said it would remove all “inappropriate” content by Sept. 17, according to the internal agency documents. The public also has been asked to submit potential changes.

In response, a coalition of librarians, historians and others organized through the University of Minnesota has launched a campaign called “Save Our Signs.” It is asking the public to take photos of existing content at national parks and upload it. The group is using those images to build a public archive before any materials may be altered. So far, it has more than 800 submissions."

Getting Along with GPT: The Psychology, Character, and Ethics of Your Newest Professional Colleague; ABA Journal, May 9, 2025

 ABA Journal; Getting Along with GPT: The Psychology, Character, and Ethics of Your Newest Professional Colleague

"The Limits of GenAI’s Simulated Humanity

• Creative thinking. An LLM mirrors humanity’s collective intelligence, shaped by everything it has read. It excels at brainstorming and summarizing legal principles but lacks independent thought, opinions, or strategic foresight—all essential to legal practice. Therefore, if a model’s summary of your legal argument feels stale, illogical, or disconnected from human values, it may be because the model has no democratized data to pattern itself on. The good news? You may be on to something original—and truly meaningful!
• True comprehension. An LLM does not know the law; it merely predicts legal-sounding text based on past examples and mathematical probabilities.
• Judgment and ethics. An LLM does not possess a moral compass or the ability to make judgments in complex legal contexts. It handles facts, not subjective opinions.  
• Long-term consistency. Due to its context window limitations, an LLM may contradict itself if key details fall outside its processing scope. It lacks persistent memory storage.
• Limited context recognition. An LLM has limited ability to understand context beyond provided information and is limited by training data scope.
• Trustfulness. Attorneys have a professional duty to protect client confidences, but privacy and PII (personally identifiable information) are evolving concepts within AI. Unlike humans, models can infer private information without PII, through abstract patterns in data. To safeguard client information, carefully review (or summarize with AI) your LLM’s terms of use."

Senators Introduce Bill To Restrict AI Companies’ Unauthorized Use Of Copyrighted Works For Training Models; Deadline, July 21, 2025

 Ted Johnson , Deadline; Senators Introduce Bill To Restrict AI Companies’ Unauthorized Use Of Copyrighted Works For Training Models

"Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO) and Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) introduced legislation on Monday that would restrict AI companies from using copyrighted material in their training models without the consent of the individual owner.

The AI Accountability and Personal Data Protection Act also would allow individuals to sue companies that uses their personal data or copyrighted works without their “express, prior consent.”

The bill addresses a raging debate between tech and content owners, one that has already led to extensive litigation. Companies like OpenAI have argued that the use of copyrighted materials in training models is a fair use, while figures including John Grisham and George R.R. Martin have challenged that notion."

Big Law Firms Bowed to Trump. A Corps of ‘Little Guys’ Jumped in to Fight Him.; The New York Times, July 21, 2025

 Elizabeth Williamson, The New York Times; Big Law Firms Bowed to Trump. A Corps of ‘Little Guys’ Jumped in to Fight Him.

[Kip Currier: A must-read article for anyone looking for lawyers willing "to fight the good fight". 

Kudos to these "officers of the court" who are standing up for the rule of law and the U.S. legal system's bedrock ethical principles and responsibilities.]

[Excerpt]

"President Trump’s executive orders seeking to punish big law firms have led some of them to acquiesce to him and left others reluctant to take on pro bono cases that could put them at odds with the administration.

But as opponents of the White House’s policies organized to fight Mr. Trump in court on a vast range of actions and policies, they quickly found that they did not need to rely on Big Law. Instead, an army of solo practitioners, former government litigators and small law firms stepped up to volunteer their time to challenge the administration’s agenda."

Following Trump cut to LGBTQ youth suicide hotline, California steps up to fill the gap; Governor Gavin Newsom, July 16, 2025

Governor Gavin Newsom; Following Trump cut to LGBTQ youth suicide hotline, California steps up to fill the gap

"Just weeks after the Trump administration announced that they would eliminate specialized suicide prevention support for LGBTQ youth callers through the 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline, California is taking action to improve behavioral health services and provide even more affirming and inclusive care. Through a new partnership with The Trevor Project, Governor Gavin Newsom and the California Health and Human Services Agency (CalHHS) will provide the state’s 988 crisis counselors enhanced competency training from experts, ensuring better attunement to the needs of LGBTQ youth, on top of the specific training they already receive.

This partnership builds on existing collaborations, like those under California’s Master Plan for Kids’ Mental Health, and reflects a shared commitment to evidence-based, LGBTQ+ affirming crisis care. Callers to 988 will continue to be met with the highest level of understanding, respect, and affirmation when they reach out for help.

“To every young person who identifies as LGBTQ+: You matter. You are not alone. California will continue to show up for you with care, with compassion, and with action,” said Kim Johnson, Secretary of CalHHS. “Through this partnership, California will continue to lead, providing enhanced support for these young people.”

“There could not be a more stark reminder of the moral bankruptcy of this Administration than cutting off suicide prevention resources for LGQBT youth. These are young people reaching out in their time of deepest crisis—andI’m proud of California’s work to partner with the Trevor Project to creatively address this need. No matter what this Administration throws at us, I know this state will always meet cruelty with kindness and stand up for what’s right,” said First Partner Jennifer Siebel Newsom.

California’s crisis call centers

Across California, twelve 988 call centers remain staffed around the clock by trained crisis counselors, ready to support anyone in behavioral health crises, including LGBTQ youth.

f you, a friend, or a loved one are in crisis or thinking about suicide, you can call, chat, or text 988 and be immediately connected to skilled counselors at all times. Specialized services for LGBTQ youth are also available via The Trevor Project hotline at 1‑866‑488‑7386, which continues as a state-endorsed access point...

Why this matters

LGBTQ youth are four times more likely to attempt suicide than their peers, and without affirming services, their risk increases dramatically. Since its launch in 2022, the 988 LGBTQ+ “Press 3” line connected more than 1.5 million in crisis.

How to get help 

Call, text or chat 988 at any time to be connected with trained crisis counselors.

Call 1-866-488-7386, text START to 678678, or chat at TheTrevorProject.org/GetHelp to reach Trevor Project specialists.

Visit CalHOPE for non-crisis peer and family support."

Trump administration ends 988 Lifeline's special service for LGBTQ+ young people; NPR, July 19, 2025

Rhitu Chatterjee , NPR; Trump administration ends 988 Lifeline's special service for LGBTQ+ young people

[Kip Currier: Like the suspension of PEPFAR medicines for HIV prevention throughout the Global South and the dismantling of USAID, terminating Lifeline's specialized services for at risk LGBTQ+ youth is another deeply cruel and indifferent policy decision by the Trump 2.0 administration that will result in losses of life. One has to wonder about the moral character of the individuals who are making these decisions.

California has introduced measures to provide these life-saving services for LGBTQ+ young persons, as reported in a July 16, 2025 press release:

Just weeks after the Trump administration announced that they would eliminate specialized suicide prevention support for LGBTQ youth callers through the 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline, California is taking action to improve behavioral health services and provide even more affirming and inclusive care. Through a new partnership with The Trevor Project, Governor Gavin Newsom and the California Health and Human Services Agency (CalHHS) will provide the state’s 988 crisis counselors enhanced competency training from experts, ensuring better attunement to the needs of LGBTQ youth, on top of the specific training they already receive.]

Where are the voices of, for example, Big Tech gay billionaires like Apple CEO Tim Cook, Palantir co-founder Peter Thiel, and OpenAI co-founder/CEO Sam Altman -- who are privileged and blessed to be in positions of leadership and influence -- to speak out against policy decisions like this? Or step up to the plate and donate a fraction of their wealth to support services like Lifeline?]

[Excerpt]

"The nation's Suicide and Crisis Lifeline, 988, shuttered the specialized services for LGBTQ+ youth this week. The move came a day after the Lifeline marked three years since its launch. During this period, it has fielded more than 16 million calls, texts and chats. Nearly 10% of those contacts have been from gay and transgender young people, according to government data.

"This is a tragic moment," says Mark Henson, vice president of government affairs and advocacy at The Trevor Project, one of several organizations that had contracts with the federal government to provide counseling services for this vulnerable population. The Trevor Project fields about half the LGBTQ+ contacts.

Data from the Youth Behavior Risk Survey, conducted by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, show that LGBTQ+ youth are more likely to experience persistent feelings of sadness and hopelessness compared to their peers, and more likely to attempt suicide.

When these young people contact 988, they have had the option to press 3 to be connected to a counselor specifically trained to support their unique mental health needs, which are associated with discrimination and violence they often face. This service is similar to what 988 offers to veterans, who are also at a higher risk of suicide, and can access support tailored for them by pressing 1 when they contact 988. That service will be retained as 988 enters its fourth year.

"Many LGBTQ+ youth who use these services didn't know they existed until they called 988 and found out there is someone on the other end of the line that knows what they've gone through and cares deeply for them," says Henson.

Government data show that demand for this service grew steadily since it launched, from about 2,000 contacts per month in September 2022 to nearly 70,000 in recent months."