Trump sent ‘explicit’ threat to cut funds from University of Virginia, senator says; The Guardian, June 29, 2025

Marina Dunbar , The Guardian; Trump sent ‘explicit’ threat to cut funds from University of Virginia, senator says

"The University of Virginia (UVA) received “explicit” notification from the Trump administration that the school would endure cuts to university jobs, research funding and student aid as well as visas if the institution’s president, Jim Ryan, did not resign, according to a US senator.

During an interview Sunday on CBS’s Face the Nation, Mark Warner, a Democratic senator for Virginia, defended Ryan – who had championed diversity policies that the president opposes – and predicted that Donald Trump will similarly target other universities.

Warner said he understood that the former UVA president was told that if he “tried to fight back, hundreds of employees would lose jobs, researchers would lose funding, and hundreds of students could lose financial aid or have their visas withheld”.

“There was indication that they received the letter that if he didn’t resign on a day last week, by 5 o’clock, all these cuts would take place,” Warner added. He also said he believes this to be the “most outrageous action” that the Trump administration has taken on education since it retook office in January.

Ryan resigned from his position as UVA president on Friday. He was facing political pressure from Washington to step aside in order to resolve a justice department investigation into UVA’s diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) policies, the New York Times reported on the same day.

“I cannot make a unilateral decision to fight the federal government in order to save my own job,” Ryan said in his resignation message to the university community. He expressed an unwillingness to risk the employment of other staff, as well as cuts to funding and financial aid for students.

Ryan had a reputation for trying to make the UVA campus more diverse and encouraging students to perform community service. He had served as the university’s president since 2018."

A Reckless Judicial Nomination Puts the Senate to the Test; The New York Times, June 29, 2025

DAVID FRENCH , The New York Times; A Reckless Judicial Nomination Puts the Senate to the Test

"Emil Bove, however, would be a problem for a very long time. At 44 years old, he’s been nominated for a lifetime appointment to the federal bench. That means he’d long outlast Trump in the halls of American power, and if past performance is any measure of future results, we should prepare for a judge who would do what he deems necessary to accomplish his political objectives — law and morality be damned...

Our nation does not need vengeful political operatives on the federal bench. Bove is a far worse nominee than Miers. Critics questioned her experience and her qualifications. They did not question her integrity. But with Emil Bove, integrity is precisely what is in doubt."

Justices need to own the consequences of their injunction ruling; The Washington Post, June 29, 2025

Editorial Board , The Washington Post; Justices need to own the consequences of their injunction ruling

"The bigger picture, though, is that the justices have now reserved to themselves alone the ability to issue nationwide injunctions. This will make it easier for the president and his executive branch officials to violate even black-letter constitutional rights as the country waits for the high court to tell them to stop."

An AI firm won a lawsuit for copyright infringement — but may face a huge bill for piracy; Los Angeles Times, June 27, 2025

 Michael Hiltzik , Los Angeles Times; An AI firm won a lawsuit for copyright infringement — but may face a huge bill for piracy

[Kip Currier: Excellent informative overview of some of the principal issues, players, stakes, and recent decisions in the ongoing AI copyright legal battles. Definitely worth 5-10 minutes of your time to read and reflect on.

A key take-away, derived from Judge Vince Chhabria's decision in last week's Meta win, is that:

Artists and authors can win their copyright infringement cases if they produce evidence showing the bots are affecting their market. Chhabria all but pleaded for the plaintiffs to bring some such evidence before him: 

“It’s hard to imagine that it can be fair use to use copyrighted books...to make billions or trillions of dollars while enabling the creation of a potentially endless stream of competing works that could significantly harm the market for those books.” 

But “the plaintiffs never so much as mentioned it,” he lamented.

https://www.latimes.com/business/story/2025-06-27/an-ai-firm-won-a-lawsuit-over-copyright-infringement-but-may-face-a-huge-bill-for-piracy]

[Excerpt]

"Anthropic had to acknowledge a troubling qualification in Alsup’s order, however. Although he found for the company on the copyright issue, he also noted that it had downloaded copies of more than 7 million books from online “shadow libraries,” which included countless copyrighted works, without permission. 

That action was “inherently, irredeemably infringing,” Alsup concluded. “We will have a trial on the pirated copies...and the resulting damages,” he advised Anthropic ominously: Piracy on that scale could expose the company to judgments worth untold millions of dollars...

“Neither case is going to be the last word” in the battle between copyright holders and AI developers, says Aaron Moss, a Los Angeles attorney specializing in copyright law. With more than 40 lawsuits on court dockets around the country, he told me, “it’s too early to declare that either side is going to win the ultimate battle.”...

With billions of dollars, even trillions, at stake for AI developers and the artistic community at stake, no one expects the law to be resolved until the issue reaches the Supreme Court, presumably years from now...

But Anthropic also downloaded copies of more than 7 million books from online “shadow libraries,” which include untold copyrighted works without permission. 

Alsup wrote that Anthropic “could have purchased books, but it preferred to steal them to avoid ‘legal/practice/business slog,’” Alsup wrote. (He was quoting Anthropic co-founder and CEO Dario Amodei.)...

Artists and authors can win their copyright infringement cases if they produce evidence showing the bots are affecting their market."...

The truth is that the AI camp is just trying to get out of paying for something instead of getting it for free. Never mind the trillions of dollars in revenue they say they expect over the next decade — they claim that licensing will be so expensive it will stop the march of this supposedly historic technology dead in its tracks.

Chhabria aptly called this argument “nonsense.” If using books for training is as valuable as the AI firms say they are, he noted, then surely a market for book licensing will emerge. That is, it will — if the courts don’t give the firms the right to use stolen works without compensation."

ACM FAccT ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency; June 23-26, 2025, Athens, Greece

  

ACM FAccT

ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency

A computer science conference with a cross-disciplinary focus that brings together researchers and practitioners interested in fairness, accountability, and transparency in socio-technical systems.

"Algorithmic systems are being adopted in a growing number of contexts, fueled by big data. These systems filter, sort, score, recommend, personalize, and otherwise shape human experience, increasingly making or informing decisions with major impact on access to, e.g., credit, insurance, healthcare, parole, social security, and immigration. Although these systems may bring myriad benefits, they also contain inherent risks, such as codifying and entrenching biases; reducing accountability, and hindering due process; they also increase the information asymmetry between individuals whose data feed into these systems and big players capable of inferring potentially relevant information.

ACM FAccT is an interdisciplinary conference dedicated to bringing together a diverse community of scholars from computer science, law, social sciences, and humanities to investigate and tackle issues in this emerging area. Research challenges are not limited to technological solutions regarding potential bias, but include the question of whether decisions should be outsourced to data- and code-driven computing systems. We particularly seek to evaluate technical solutions with respect to existing problems, reflecting upon their benefits and risks; to address pivotal questions about economic incentive structures, perverse implications, distribution of power, and redistribution of welfare; and to ground research on fairness, accountability, and transparency in existing legal requirements."

Global South voices ‘marginalised in AI Ethics’; Gates Cambridge, June 27, 2025

 Gates Cambridge; Global South voices ‘marginalised in AI Ethics’

"A Gates Cambridge Scholar is first author of a paper how AI Ethics is sidelining Global South voices, reinforcing marginalisation.

The study, Distributive Epistemic Injustice in AI Ethics: A Co-productionist Account of Global North-South Politics in Knowledge Production, was published by the Association for Computing Machinery and is based on a study of nearly 6,000 AI Ethics publications between 1960 and 2024. Its first author is Abdullah Hasan Safir [2024 – pictured above], who is doing a PhD in Interdisciplinary Design. Other co-authors include Gates Cambridge Scholars Ramit Debnath[2018] and Kerry McInerney [2017].

The findings were recently presented at the ACM’s FAccT conference, considered one of the top AI Ethics conferences in the world. They show that experts from the Global North currently legitimise their expertise in AI Ethics through dynamic citational and collaborative practices in knowledge production within the field, including co-citation and institutional of AI Ethics."

Ethical guidance for AI in the professional practice of health service psychology; American Psychological Association, June 2025

American Psychological Association; Ethical guidance for AI in the professional practice of health service psychology

 "Artificial intelligence (AI) is developing rapidly and is increasingly being integrated into psychological practice. Many AI-driven tools are now available to assist with clinical decision-making, documentation, or patient engagement. These tools hold promises for improving access and efficiency, but they also raise ethical concerns that require careful consideration to safeguard patient well-being and trust.

APA’s Ethical Guidance for AI in the Professional Practice of Health Service Psychology (PDF, 126KB) was developed specifically for health service psychologists who want to ethically integrate AI into their practice. This document offers practical considerations and recommendations tailored to real-world clinical settings.

Whether you’re exploring new technologies or seeking guidance on tools already in use, this resource is designed to help you navigate the evolving landscape of AI while staying aligned with ethical responsibilities in psychological care."

A fourth judge has blocked a Trump executive order targeting elite law firms; NPR, June 27, 2025

Ryan Lucas, NPR; A fourth judge has blocked a Trump executive order targeting elite law firms

"A federal judge has struck down President Trump's executive order targeting the law firm Susman Godfrey, delivering the latest in a series of legal wins for firms that have challenged the president's punitive campaign against Big Law.

The ruling Friday from U.S. District Judge Loren AliKhan marks the fourth time out of four that a federal judge has permanently blocked one of Trump's executive orders seeking to punish an elite law firm.

Judge AliKhan said in her ruling that the executive order against Susman Godfrey "is unconstitutional from beginning to end."

"Every court to have considered a challenge to one of these orders has found grave constitutional violations and permanently enjoined enforcement of the order in full," she wrote. "Today, this court follows suit, concluding that the order targeting Susman violates the U.S. Constitution and must be permanently enjoined.

"The Court's ruling is a resounding victory for the rule of law and the right of every American to be represented by legal counsel without fear of retaliation," Susman Godfrey said in a statement. "We applaud the Court for declaring the administration's order unconstitutional. Our firm is committed to the rule of law and to protecting the rights of our clients without regard to their political or other beliefs."

The latest order delivers a resounding rebuke to Trump's unprecedented series of executive orders targeting prominent law firms since February. The orders have sought to punish them for representing causes or clients that he opposes, or for once employing attorneys he dislikes, such as former special counsel Robert Mueller."

The Anthropic Copyright Ruling Exposes Blind Spots on AI; Bloomberg, June 26, 2025

Dave Lee , Bloomberg; The Anthropic Copyright Ruling Exposes Blind Spots on AI

[Kip Currier: It's still early days in the AI copyright legal battles underway between AI tech companies and everyone else whose training data was "scarfed up" to enable the former to create lucrative AI tools and products. But cases like this week's Anthropic lawsuit win and another suit won by Meta (with some issues still to be adjudicated regarding the use of pirated materials as AI training data) are finally now giving us some more discernible "tea leaves" and "black letter law" as to how courts are likely to rule vis-a-vis AI inputs.

This week being the much ballyhooed 50th anniversary of the so-called "1st summer blockbuster flick" Jaws ("you're gonna need a bigger boat"), these rulings make me think we the public may need a bigger copyright law schema that sets out protections for the creatives making the fuel that enables stratospherically profitable AI innovations. The Jaws metaphor may be a bit on-the-nose, but one can't help but view AI tech companies akin to rapacious sharks that are imperiling the financial survival and long-standing business models of human creators.

As touched on in this Bloomberg article, too, there's a moral argument that what AI tech folks have done with the uncompensated use of creative works, without permission, doesn't mean that it's ethically justifiable simply because a court may say it's legal. Or that these companies shouldn't be required by updated federal copyright legislation and licensing frameworks to fairly compensate creators for the use of their copyrighted works. After all, billionaire tech oligarchs like Zuckerberg, Musk, and Altman would never allow others to do to them what they've done to creatives with impunity and zero contrition.

Are you listening, Congress?

Or are all of you in the pockets of AI tech company lobbyists, rather than representing the needs and interests of all of your constituents and not just the billionaire class.] 

[Excerpt]

"In what is shaping up to be a long, hard fight over the use of creative works, round one has gone to the AI makers. In the first such US decision of its kind, District Judge William Alsup said Anthropic’s use of millions of books to train its artificial-intelligence model, without payment to the sources, was legal under copyright law because it was “transformative — spectacularly so.”...

If a precedent has been set, as several observers believe, it stands to cripple one of the few possible AI monetization strategies for rights holders, which is to sell licenses to firms for access to their work. Some of these deals have already been made while the “fair use” question has been in limbo, deals that emerged only after the threat of legal action. This ruling may have just taken future deals off the table...

Alsup was right when he wrote that “the technology at issue was among the most transformative many of us will see in our lifetimes.”...

But that doesn’t mean it shouldn’t pay its way. Nobody would dare suggest Nvidia Corp. CEO Jensen Huang hand out his chips free. No construction worker is asked to keep costs down by building data center walls for nothing. Software engineers aren’t volunteering their time to Meta Platforms Inc. in awe of Mark Zuckerberg’s business plan — they instead command salaries of $100 million and beyond. 

Yet, as ever, those in the tech industry have decided that creative works, and those who create them, should be considered of little or no value and must step aside in service of the great calling of AI — despite being every bit as vital to the product as any other factor mentioned above. As science-fiction author Harlan Ellison said in his famous sweary rant, nobody ever wants to pay the writer if they can get away with it. When it comes to AI, paying creators of original work isn’t impossible, it’s just inconvenient. Legislators should leave companies no choice."

MAGA Attorney Threatens To Sue Journalists Over ‘Unpatriotic’ Reporting; Gets The Exact Response He Deserves; Above The Law, June 27, 2025

Kathryn Rubino , Above The Law; MAGA Attorney Threatens To Sue Journalists Over ‘Unpatriotic’ Reporting; Gets The Exact Response He Deserves

[Kip Currier: The New York Times' refusal to capitulate to Trump administration bullying of reporters and defamation lawsuit threats regarding NYT reporting on the Iran bombings earlier this week is a model for other news organizations. As NYT attorney David McCraw explained in his response letter to a Trump lawyer calling for a retraction and apology:

“No retraction is needed.” He continued, “No apology will be forthcoming. We told the truth to the best of our ability. We will continue to do so.”"]

The paragraph right before that rebuke, though, is equally assertive but articulates the public's interest in access to truthful reporting and the ability to assess leadership decision-making in a democracy:

But let's not lose sight of the larger point to be made. The American public has a right to know whether the attack on Iran -- funded by taxpayer dollars and of enormous consequence to every citizen -- was a success. We rely on our intelligence services to provide the kind of impartial assessment that we all need in a democracy to judge our country's foreign policy and the quality of our leaders' decisions. It would be irresponsible for a news organization to suppress that information and deny the public the right to hear it. And it would be even more irresponsible for a president to use the threat of libel litigation to try to silence a publication that dared to report that the trained, professional, and patriotic intelligence experts employed by the U.S. government thought that the President may have gotten it wrong in his initial remarks to the country."] 

[Excerpt]

"President Donald Trump doesn’t like anyone asking too many questions about the Iran strikes he unilaterally authorized. In fact, when news outlets report that the bombings were not as destructive as Trump initially boasted, he (and other members of his administration

(Opens in a new window)) lashed out at members of the media. On Truth Social, he called out(Opens in a new window) journalists from CNN and the New York Times as “fake news reporters” who are “bad people with evil intentions.” 

But that wasn’t the end of Trump’s tantrum. His personal attorney Alejandro Brito sent letters to the NYT (Opens in a new window)and CNN(Opens in a new window), full of legal bluster. The missives demand they “retract and apologize” the reporting for “false,” “defamatory,” and “unpatriotic” reporting, First Amendment be damned!

The Fourth Estate is more functional than Biglaw(Opens in a new window), so in the face of these threats, the outlets responded with stinging rebukes.

David McCraw, the lawyer for the Times replied(Opens in a new window), “No retraction is needed.” He continued, “No apology will be forthcoming. We told the truth to the best of our ability. We will continue to do so.”"

UVA President James Ryan Caved to MAGA—and They Forced Him Out Anyway; The New Republic, June 27, 2025

Siva Vaidhyanathan, The New Republic ; UVA President James Ryan Caved to MAGA—and They Forced Him Out Anyway

[Kip Currier: Capitulation to Trump almost never gives people and organizations what they think or hope it will. For examples, just look to the craven law firms that have debased themselves and are paying the price for submission.

The forcing out of UVA President James Ryan is just another step in what Trump et al have planned for higher education.]

[Excerpt]

"Thomas Jefferson’s vision for a noble and educated republic has been dealt a firm blow. The enemies of free and open inquiry, of science, and of informed, democratic citizenship have chopped off the head of the very university Jefferson founded to make his vision real. 

On Friday, the Trump administration, aided by a board appointed entirely by Republican Governor Glenn Younkin, forced University of Virginia President James Ryan to resign. The Justice Department had threatened to block all federal funds to the second-oldest public university in the country if Ryan remained in office.   

Ryan and the board had eliminated all diversity, equity, and inclusion programs in March, even though the specious executive order commanding such changes was already under challenge by the courts. The university chose to comply rather than fight.   

But, in a turn that Franz Kafka would appreciate (and perhaps inspired), the Trump administration declared that capitulation insufficient. In a clumsily worded letter to the university sent in April, the Department of Justice claimed that it had “received complaints that [Ryan’s] office and the University may have failed to implement these directives and further that you have refused to produce the report on the matter.”...

To this day, no one at the university has a clear idea what the university could or should have done. The New York Times reported Thursday that the only specific move the Justice Department demanded in recent weeks was Ryan’s resignation. 

Laying the attack on the University of Virginia on DEI was brilliant and maddening. What, exactly, is DEI? Those of us who work in universities have a good idea. It is the collection of efforts and programs that allow students who have served in the military, do not come from homes that have had college students before, graduated from high schools deep in the coal fields of Appalachia, arrived on student visas from Nigeria, have endured sexual violence or harassment, or occupy segments of society that are constantly under attack from the majority to succeed and graduate. They are not zero-sum programs. They do not deny anyone else an opportunity to attend a university or thrive at one.   

DEI programs recognize that society and the world are complex, diverse places."

Hegseth announces new name of US navy ship that honored gay rights icon Harvey Milk; The Guardian, June 27, 2025

Edward Helmore, The Guardian ; Hegseth announces new name of US navy ship that honored gay rights icon Harvey Milk

[Kip Currier: The money quote in this Guardian article is Pete Hegseth's statement that:

“People want to be proud of the ship they are sailing in."

It's an intentionally offensive statement against gay rights pioneer Harvey Milk. It's also a coded slur meant to troll LGBTQ+ people -- delivered at the tail end of Pride Month -- by suggesting which vessel names inspire feelings of pride and which do not.

Recall, too, that Hegseth kicked off June and Pride Month by announcing he would be renaming naval vessels that had been given the names of historical figures and civil rights activists, several of whom were veterans, like Harvey Milk, Cesar Chavez, and Medgar Evers.]

[Excerpt]

"The US defense secretary, Pete Hegseth, has formally announced that the US navy supply vessel named in honor of the gay rights activist Harvey Milk is to be renamed after Oscar V Peterson, a chief petty officer who received the congressional Medal of Honor for his actions in the Battle of the Coral Sea in the second world war.

“We are taking the politics out of ship naming,” Hegseth announced on Friday on X.

In an accompanying video-statement, Hegseth added: “We are not renaming the ship to anything political. This is not about political activists, unlike the previous administration. Instead, we are renaming the ship after a congressional Medal of Honor recipient.”

“People want to be proud of the ship they are sailing in,” Hegseth added."

How IMLS Funding Cuts Will Impact Prison Libraries; Medium, June 11, 2025

Lauren Triola , Medium; How IMLS Funding Cuts Will Impact Prison Libraries

"With the recent chaos surrounding the future of the Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS), people are concerned about libraries around the country losing vital government funding. Most of the uproar against the proposed cuts has centered on how important public libraries are to their communities. However, there’s another type of library that will also be affected by these funding cuts — one that is indispensable to the community it serves.

Prison libraries are a lifeline to many people who are incarcerated. They depend heavily on IMLS grants, and if IMLS is dismantled or suffers severe funding cuts, then prison libraries will struggle to exist."

Alaska Cannot Survive This Bill; The New York Times, June 27, 2025

Bryce Edgmon and Cathy Giessel, The New York Times ; Alaska Cannot Survive This Bill

"The likely impacts from the “big, beautiful bill” are particularly ugly for our home state, Alaska: Nearly 40,000 Alaskans could lose health care coverage, thousands of families will go hungry through loss of benefits from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, and the shift in costs from the federal government to the state will plunge our budget into a severe deficit, cripple our state economy and make it harder to provide basic services.

This is not about partisanship. One of us is a Republican and the other is an independent. In the Alaska Legislature, our State Senate and House are led by a bipartisan governing coalition. Our focus is squarely on the survival of the people we represent.

The benefits of Medicaid and the SNAP program permeate the entire fabric of the Alaska economy, with one in three Alaskans receiving Medicaid, including more than half of the children. In remote Arctic communities, Medicaid dollars make medical travel possible for residents from the hundreds of roadless villages to the communities where they are able to receive proper medical treatments...

Alaska cannot afford to lose health care funding. Our state is near the top of the list for the highest rates of suicide, tuberculosis and sexually transmitted infections in the nation. It is also severely lacking in adequate behavioral health services. The cuts will only make these problems worse.

Work requirements instituted in Medicaid are untenable for rural Alaska, with many communities facing limited broadband access and job opportunities. Alaskans who lose health care coverage will be forced to delay care until it’s an emergency."

No One Is in Charge at the US Copyright Office; Wired, June 27, 2025

 KATE KNIBBS , WIRED; 

No One Is in Charge at the US Copyright Office

"It’s a tumultuous time for copyright in the United States, with dozens of potentially economy-shaking AI copyright lawsuits winding through the courts. It’s also the most turbulent moment in the US Copyright Office’s history. Described as “sleepy” in the past, the Copyright Office has taken on new prominence during the AI boom, issuing key rulings about AI and copyright. It also hasn’t had a leader in more than a month...

As the legality of the ouster is debated, the reality within the office is this: There’s effectively nobody in charge. And without a leader actually showing up at work, the Copyright Office is not totally business-as-usual; in fact, there’s debate over whether the copyright certificates it’s issuing could be challenged."

Supreme Court decides whether to allow parents to shield children from LGBTQ books in school; Fox News, June 27, 2025

Ashley Oliver , Fox News ; Supreme Court decides whether to allow parents to shield children from LGBTQ books in school

"The Supreme Court held Friday that a group of Maryland parents are entitled to opt their children out of school lessons that could violate their beliefs in a case centered on religious freedom. 

The justices decided 6-3 along ideological lines in Mahmoud v. Taylor that parents can exclude their children from a Maryland public school system's lessons that contain themes about homosexuality and transgenderism if they feel it conflicts with their religious faith."

Getty drops copyright allegations in UK lawsuit against Stability AI; AP, June 25, 2025

  KELVIN CHAN, AP; Getty drops copyright allegations in UK lawsuit against Stability AI

"Getty Images dropped copyright infringement allegations from its lawsuit against artificial intelligence company Stability AI as closing arguments began Wednesday in the landmark case at Britain’s High Court. 

Seattle-based Getty’s decision to abandon the copyright claim removes a key part of its lawsuit against Stability AI, which owns a popular AI image-making tool called Stable Diffusion. The two have been facing off in a widely watched court case that could have implications for the creative and technology industries."

Emil Bove’s ‘I’m Not A Henchman’ T-Shirt Has People Asking Questions At Judicial Confirmation Hearing; Above The Law, June 26, 2025

 Liz Dye  , Above The Law; Emil Bove’s ‘I’m Not A Henchman’ T-Shirt Has People Asking Questions At Judicial Confirmation Hearing

"Emil Bove, III began his career at the Southern District of New York, where he was by all accounts a competent prosecutor. His management style left something to be desired, however, and he was denied promotion for “abusive” behavior

(Opens in a new window) toward his subordinates...

Third Circuit, here he comes!

On Wednesday, June 25, Bove appeared before the Senate Judiciary Committee, which is considering his nomination to the Third Circuit.

He opened by insisting, “I am not anybody’s henchman, I am not an enforcer. I’m a lawyer from a small town, who never expected to be in an arena like this.”

That is horseshit, of course. No one gets to “an arena like this” without a healthy dose of ambition. Note that Bove’s aw shucks modesty didn’t extend to telling the White House that he’d be a more appropriate nominee the US District Court.

And although his tone during the hearing was measured, his willingness to twist the truth was on full display

Asked about the Adams case, Bove pointed to the order dismissing the charges(Opens in a new window) as proof that he’d behaved appropriately. In reality, the Justice Department’s refusal to prosecute left the court little choice. And Judge Dale Ho denied the DOJ’s request to dismiss without prejudice, because allowing the Trump administration to reap the benefits of a corrupt bargain would be “difficult to square with the words engraved above the front entrance of the United States Supreme Court: ‘Equal Justice Under Law.’”

Bove denied telling subordinates to defy a court order, but said he just plum couldn’t remember if he’d told them to give the bird to a federal judge.

Over and over he simply refused to answer questions based on spurious claims about the deliberative process privilege. But, he assured the senators, all was on the up and up, even if he couldn’t commit(Opens in a new window) to recusing from cases involving his former client Donald Trump.

And if any Republican senator might be tempted to vote no, he brought out the big guns. Alan Dershowitz, late of Harvard Law (and his marbles), sent a letter(Opens in a new window) to the Judiciary Committee gushing that “Mr. Bove’s superior character, demeanor and diligence are evident throughout his time as Principal Associate Deputy Attorney General, as well as in private practice.”"

(Opens in a new windowtoward his subordinates.

Denmark to tackle deepfakes by giving people copyright to their own features; The Guardian, June 27, 2025

 Miranda Bryant  , The Guardian; Denmark to tackle deepfakes by giving people copyright to their own features

"The Danish government is to clamp down on the creation and dissemination of AI-generated deepfakes by changing copyright law to ensure that everybody has the right to their own body, facial features and voice.

The Danish government said on Thursday it would strengthen protection against digital imitations of people’s identities with what it believes to be the first law of its kind in Europe."

Manzanar teaches about Japanese American incarceration in the US. That’s in jeopardy under Trump; The Guardian, June 26, 2025

 Victoria Namkung, The Guardian; Manzanar teaches about Japanese American incarceration in the US. That’s in jeopardy under Trump

"Since then, Manzanar, which now has a museum and reconstructed barracks that visitors can walk through, has been transformed into a popular pilgrimage destination for Japanese Americans to remember and teach others about this history. (Manzanar was one of 10 concentration camps where the US government forcibly relocated and held more than 110,000 people of Japanese descent during the second world war.)

But recently, under the direction of the Trump administration, National Park Service (NPS) employees have hung new signs at Manzanar that historians and community advocates say will undermine these public education efforts. The notices encourage visitors to report “any signs or other information that are negative about either past or living Americans or that fail to emphasize the beauty, grandeur, and abundance of landscapes and other natural features” via a QR code. The signs, which have been posted at all national parks, monuments and historic sites, were displayed in support of Donald Trump’s executive order Restoring Truth and Sanity to American History...

“Any attempt to constrain or sanitize the stories that are told at Manzanar should concern every American,” said Naomi Ostwald Kawamura, executive director of Densho, an organization that documents the testimonies of Japanese Americans who were held in concentration camps. “I’m incredibly disappointed that this is happening in the United States because museums, monuments and memorials are public spaces where we can explore difficult history, confront our past, engage with what’s uncomfortable and then be able to imagine the future that we want to collectively share.”"

A lot has changed since we created AI ethics guidelines for newsrooms. Here’s what you need to know now; Poynter, June 26, 2025

 Jennifer Orsi, Poynter ; A lot has changed since we created AI ethics guidelines for newsrooms. Here’s what you need to know now

"More than a year ago, the Poynter Institute published a “starter kit” for newsrooms to create their own ethics policies for using artificial intelligence in their journalism. AI use in newsrooms has grown swiftly since then — and gotten more complex — and the team behind the starter kit has just published a new update,adding more information for visual journalism and for those developing products in newsrooms.

“One of the biggest things we heard over the last year was, the editorial guidelines are great, but what do you visual teams do? What is allowed there?” said Poynter faculty member and MediaWise director Alex Mahadevan, who helps lead Poynter’s AI work. “And people building these products — chatbots and such — what are their ethical obligations?”...

Much of the new material was devised and workshopped during Poynter’s second Summit on AI, Ethics and Journalism, which took place in New York City in April, this time in partnership with The Associated Press. 

Poynter published its first guidelines in March 2024, and refined them further following its first AI Summit in St. Petersburg in June 2024. Much has changed in AI use in journalism since then, Poynter leaders said.

“Before we published these guidelines, most of the newsrooms that I talk to were avoiding AI, thinking that no good could come from it,” said Kelly McBride, Poynter senior vice president and chair of the Craig Newmark Center for Ethics and Leadership. “Many newsrooms are now doing tiny experiments, and many more are contemplating adding AI to their workflows.”"