Connect with us

Published

1 year ago

on

WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange has been imprisoned in London for nearly five years, pending extradition to the United States so he can be prosecuted for violating the Espionage Act by publishing classified information. Since that amount of time behind bars is about the same as the four-to-six-year prison term that Justice Department lawyers have said Assange would be likely to serve if convicted, you might think the Biden administration would be ready to reconsider this case, especially since it poses an alarming threat to freedom of the press. Instead, the U.S. government’s lawyers are back in London for yet another hearing, which Assange’s attorneys describe as a last-ditch attempt to block his extradition.

Recognizing the First Amendment implications, the Obama administration declined to prosecute Assange for obtaining and disclosing confidential State Department cables and military files leaked by former Army intelligence analyst Chelsea Manning in 2010. After all, leading news organizations in the United States and around the world had published stories based on the same documents, and those acts of journalism likewise could be construed as felonies once this precedent was established. So could the routine practices of reporters who cover national security, which commonly involves divulging information that the government prefers to keep secret.

Despite those concerns, the Trump administration decided that Assange should be locked up for doing things thatThe New York Times et al. do on a regular basis. All but one of the 17 counts in Assange’s latest federal indictment relate to obtaining or disclosing “national defense information,” which is punishable by up to 10 years in prison. Theoretically, Assange could face 160 years in prison for those counts alone, although the government’s lawyers say it probably would be more like the amount of time he already has served in the United Kingdom. Manning herselfwho, unlike Assange, violated the terms of her government employmentreceived a 35-year sentence but was released after seven years thanks to Barack Obama’s commutation.

“Some say that Assange is a journalist and that he should be immune from prosecution for these actions,” John Demers, then the head of the Justice Department’s National Security Division, told reporters after the Assange indictment was announced in May 2019. “The department takes seriously the role of journalists in our democracy and we thank you for it. It is not and has never been the department’s policy to target them for reporting.” There is no need to worry, Demers suggested, because Assange is “no journalist.”

This line of argument misconstrues the “freedom…of the press” guaranteed by the First Amendment, which applies to mass communication generally, not just the speech of people whom the government deigns to recognize as journalists. Demers’ assurance is similar to the reasoning that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit recently applied in counterintuitively concluding that treating journalism as a crime is not “obviously unconstitutional.”

That case involved Priscilla Villarreal, a Laredo, Texas, gadfly and citizen journalist who was arrestedin 2017 for violatingSection 39.06(c) of the Texas Penal Code. Under that previously obscure law, a person who “solicits or receives” information that “has not been made public” from a government official “with intent to obtain a benefit” commits a third-degree felony, punishableby two to 10 years in prison.

Texas defines “benefit” as “anything reasonably regarded as economic gain or advantage.” According to the arrest affidavits, the “benefit” that Villarreal sought was a boost in Facebook traffic. Section 39.06(c) defines “information that has not been made public” as “any information to which the public does not generally have access” that is also “prohibited from disclosure” under theTexas Public Information Act. The arrest affidavits did not address the latter requirement at all.

Like the Espionage Act, Section 39.06(c) purportedly criminalizes common reporting practicesin this case, obtaining information about a public suicide and a fatal car accident from a “backchannel source” at the local police department. Writing for the 5th Circuit majority in Villarreal v. Laredo, Judge Edith Jones did not try to hide her disdain for Villarreal, an independent, uncredentialed journalist who files her unfiltered reports on Facebook instead of publishing vetted and edited stories in a “mainstream, legitimate” news outlet.

“Villarreal and others portray her as a martyr for the sake of journalism,” Jones wrote. “That is inappropriate. She could have followed Texas law, or challenged that law in court, before reporting nonpublic information from the backchannel source. By skirting Texas law, Villarreal revealed information that could have severely emotionally harmed the families of decedents and interfered with ongoing investigations. Mainstream, legitimate media outlets routinely withhold the identity of accident victims or those who committed suicide until public officials or family members release that information publicly. Villarreal sought to capitalize on others’ tragedies to propel her reputation and career.”

Although Jones implies that Villarreal’s arrest was prompted by concern for “the families of decedents,” Villarreal plausibly argued that it was actually punishment for her outspoken criticism of local law enforcement agencies. In any case, there is no First Amendment exception for reporting that might offend or disturb people. And Jones’ characterization of Villarreal’s work as “capitaliz[ing] on others’ tragedies to propel her reputation and career” is an apt, if cynical, description of what many journalists do, even when they work for “mainstream, legitimate media outlets.” Jones apparently is unfamiliar with the bread and butter of local news organizations and has never heard the expression, “If it bleeds, it leads.”

The seven dissenting judges saw the situation differently. “If the First Amendment means anything,” Judge James C. Ho wrote in a dissent joined by five of his colleagues, “surely it means that citizens have the right to question or criticize public officials without fear of imprisonment.” Judge James E. Graves Jr. likewise complained that “the majority opinion will permit government officials to retaliate against speech while hiding behind cherry-picked state statutes.”

Judge Stephen A. Higginson noted that Thomas Paine, who wrote “the pro-independence pamphlet that historian Gordon Wood describes as ‘the most incendiary and popular pamphlet of the entire revolutionary era,'” was, like Villarreal, a “citizen-journalist.” Upholding “the text of the Constitution, as well as the values and history that it reflects,” he said, “the Supreme Court guarantees the First Amendment right of engaged citizen-journalists, like Paine, to interrogate the government.” Jones, by contrast, presumably would view Paine as disreputable, since he did not work for a “mainstream, legitimate media outlet.”

Assange’s critics, including some professional journalists, have proposed a similar distinction, arguing that he does not deserve the First Amendment’s protection because he is not a “real” journalist. But whatever you might think of Assange’s opinions, his tactics, or the care he exercised in publishing classified material, that distinction is not grounded in the Constitution and will not hold in practice.

The editors and publishers of The New YorkTimes,The Guardian,Le Monde,Der Spiegel, andEl Pas recognized as much in 2022, when they urged the Justice Department to drop the case against Assange. In ignoring that advice, the Biden administration seems bent on establishing a dangerous precedent that replaces the First Amendment’s guarantee with the whims of prosecutors.

Related Topics:
Continue Reading

US

‘It’s a war’: Meet the volunteers leading the fight against Trump’s ICE raids

Published

11 mins ago

on

July 14, 2025

By

'It's a war': Meet the volunteers leading the fight against Trump's ICE raids

It’s 5.30am, but the car park outside a laundrette in south central Los Angeles is already bustling.

A woman is setting up a stand selling tacos on the pavement and the sun is beginning to rise behind the palm trees.

A group of seven women and two men are gathered in a circle, most wearing khaki green t-shirts.

The leader, a man named Francisco “Chavo” Romero, begins by asking how everyone is feeling. “Angry,” a few of them respond. “Proud of the community for pushing back,” says another.

Ron, a high school history teacher, issues a rallying cry. “This is like Vietnam,” he says. “We’re taking losses, but in the end we’re going to win. It’s a war.”

Francisco “Chavo” Romero, Union del Barrio, a volunteer group, attempting to spot immigration officials
Image:
Francisco ‘Chavo’ Romero leads a volunteer group, attempting to warn people ahead of ICE raids

This is what the resistance against Donald Trump’s immigration policy looks like here. In the past month, immigration and customs enforcement agents – known as ICE – have intensified their raids on homes and workplaces across Los Angeles.

Since the beginning of June, nearly 2,800 undocumented immigrants have been arrested in the city, according to the Department of Homeland Security. The previous monthly high was just over 850 arrests in May this year.

Federal immigration agents toss tear gas at protesters during a raid in the agriculture area of Camarillo, Calif
Image:
Police use tear gas against protesters, angry at a recent immigration raid at a farm in Camarillo, California. Pic: AP

Videos have circulated online of people being tackled to the ground in the car park of DIY shops, in car washes and outside homes. The videos have prompted outrage, protests and a fightback.

“Chavo” and Ron belong to a group of organised volunteers called Union del Barrio. Every morning, a group of them meet, mostly in areas which have high immigrant populations.

The day I meet them, they’re in an area of LA which is heavily Latino. Armed with walkie talkies to communicate with each other, megaphones to warn the community and leaflets to raise awareness they set out in cars in different directions.

Ron, a high school history teacher, driving in LA trying to spot ICE officials
Image:
A volunteer from Union del Barrio shows Sky’s Martha Kelner how they try to stay one step ahead of ICE agents

They’re looking for cars used by ICE agents to monitor “targets”.

“That vehicle looks a little suspicious,” says Ron, pointing out a white SUV with blacked-out windows, “but there’s nobody in it”.

An elderly Latino man is standing on a street corner, cutting fruit to sell at his stall. “He’s the exact target that they’re looking for,” Ron says. “That’s what they’re doing now. The low-hanging fruit, the easy victim. And so that is proving to be more successful for their quotas.”

Man selling fruit on a street in LA
Image:
This man, selling fruit on a street corner in LA, is a potential target of immigration agents

In the end, it turns out to be a quiet morning in this part of LA, no brewing immigration operations. But elsewhere in the city, dawn raids are happening.

ICE agents are under pressure from the White House to boost their deportation numbers in line with Donald Trump’s campaign promise to crack down on illegal immigration.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

In June, tear gas and rubber bullets were fired at protestors demonstrating against immigration raids

Maria’s husband Javier was one of those arrested in LA. He came to the United States from Mexico when he was 19 and is now 58.

The couple have three grown-up children and two grandchildren. But Javier’s work permit expired two years ago, according to Maria and so he was living here illegally.

Maria whose husband Javier was one of those arrested in Los Angeles
Image:
Maria’s husband Javier was arrested after his work permit expired

She shows me a video taken last month when Javier was at work at a car wash in Pomona, an area of LA. He is being handcuffed and arrested by armed and masked ICE agents, forced into a car. He is now being held at a detention centre two hours away.

“I know they’re doing their job,” she says, “but it’s like, ‘you don’t have to do it like that.’ Getting them and, you know, forcing people and pushing them down on the ground. They’re not animals.”

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

US troops accused of ‘political stunt’ after park raid

Maria wipes away tears as she explains the impact of his absence for the past four weeks. “It’s been so hard without him,” she says. “You feel alone when you get used to somebody and he’s not there any more. We’ve never been apart for as long as this.”

The family have a lawyer and is appealing for him to remain in the US, but Maria fears he will be sent back to Mexico or even a third country.

Maria's husband Javier was one of those arrested in Los Angeles.
Image:
Maria fears her husband, who has lived in the US for nearly 40 years, will be sent back to Mexico

“I don’t know what to say to my grandkids because the oldest one, who is five was very attached to his papas, as he calls him. And he’s asking me, ‘When is papa coming home?’ and I don’t know what to say. He’s not a criminal.”

The fear in immigrant communities can be measured by the empty restaurant booths and streets that are far quieter than usual.

A sign asking people to report sightings of ICE officials in LA
Image:
People in LA are being asked to report sightings of ICE officials so others can be warned

I meet Soledad at the Mexican restaurant she owns in Hollywood. When I arrive, she’s watching the local news on the TV as yet another raid unfolds at a nearby farm.

She’s shaking her head as ICE agents face off with protesters and military helicopters hover overhead. “I am scared. I am very scared,” she says.

All of her eight employees are undocumented, and four of them are too scared to come into work, she says, in case they get arrested. The process to get papers, she says, is too long and too expensive.

Read more from Sky News:
Farmer first to die during ICE raids
Trump warns comic over citizenship

Soledad, who owns a Mexican restaurant in Hollywood
Image:
Soledad, who owns a Mexican restaurant, plans to hide her illegal workers if immigration officials arrive

“They call me and tell me they are too afraid to come in because immigration is around,” she says.

“I have to work double shifts to be able to make up for their hours, and yes, I am very desperate, and sometimes I cry… We have no sales, and no money to pay their wages.”

There is just one woman eating fajitas at a booth, where there would usually be a lunchtime rush. People are chilled by the raids.

Follow The World
Follow The World

Listen to The World with Richard Engel and Yalda Hakim every Wednesday

Tap to follow

Soledad says she plans to hide her illegal workers if immigration officials arrive.

“I’ve told them, get inside the fridge, hide behind the stove, climb up where we have a space to store boxes, do not run because they will hunt you down.”

The White House says they’re protecting the country from criminals. ICE agents have been shot at while carrying out operations, their work becoming more dangerous by the day.

The tension here is ratcheting up. Deportation numbers are rising too. But the order from Donald Trump is to arrest even more people living here illegally.

Continue Reading

Technology

Nvidia CEO downplays U.S. fears that China’s military will use his firm’s chips

Published

1 hour ago

on

July 14, 2025

By

Nvidia CEO downplays U.S. fears that China's military will use his firm's chips

Co-founder and chief executive officer of Nvidia Corp., Jensen Huang attends the 9th edition of the VivaTech trade show in Paris on June 11, 2025.

Chesnot | Getty Images Entertainment | Getty Images

Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang has downplayed U.S. fears that his firm’s chips will aid the Chinese military, days ahead of another trip to the country as he attempts to walk a tightrope between Washington and Beijing. 

In an interview with CNN aired Sunday, Huang said “we don’t have to worry about” China’s military using U.S.-made technology because “they simply can’t rely on it.”

“It could be limited at any time; not to mention, there’s plenty of computing capacity in China already,” Huang said. “They don’t need Nvidia’s chips, certainly, or American tech stacks in order to build their military,” he added.

The comments were made in reference to years of bipartisan U.S. policy that placed restrictions on semiconductor companies, prohibiting them from selling their most advanced artificial intelligence chips to clients in China. 

Huang also repeated past criticisms of the policies, arguing that the tactic of export controls has been counterproductive to the ultimate goal of U.S. tech leadership. 

“We want the American tech stack to be the global standard … in order for us to do that, we have to be in search of all the AI developers in the world,” Huang said, adding that half of the world’s AI developers are in China. 

‘The Nvidia Way’ author Tae Kim: Jensen Huang always positions Nvidia ahead of the next big trend

That means for America to be an AI leader, U.S. technology has to be available to all markets, including China, he added.

Washington’s latest restrictions on Nvidia’s sales to China were implemented in April and are expected to result in billions in losses for the company. In May, Huang said chip restrictions had already cut Nvidia’s China market share nearly in half.

Huang’s CNN interview came just days before he travels to China for his second trip to the country this year, and as Nvidia is reportedly working on another chip that is compliant with the latest export controls.

Last week, the Nvidia CEO met with U.S. President Donald Trump, and was warned by U.S. lawmakers not to meet with companies connected to China’s military or intelligence bodies, or entities named on America’s restricted export list.

According to Daniel Newman, CEO of tech advisory firm The Futurum Group, Huang’s CNN interview exemplifies how Huang has been threading a needle between Washington and Beijing as it tries to maintain maximum market access.

“He needs to walk a proverbial tightrope to make sure that he doesn’t rattle the Trump administration,” Newman said, adding that he also wants to be in a position for China to invest in Nvidia technology if and when the policy provides a better climate to do so.

But that’s not to say that his downplaying of Washington’s concerns is valid, according to Newman. “I think it’s hard to completely accept the idea that China couldn’t use Nvidia’s most advanced technologies for military use.”

He added that he would expect Nvidia’s technology to be at the core of any country’s AI training, including for use in the development of advanced weaponry. 

A U.S. official told Reuters last month that China’s large language model startup DeepSeek — which says it used Nvidia chips to train its models — was supporting China’s military and intelligence operations. 

On Sunday, Huang acknowledged there were concerns about DeepSeek’s open-source R1 reasoning model being trained in China but said that there was no evidence that it presents dangers for that reason alone.

Huang complimented the R1 reasoning model, calling it “revolutionary,” and said its open-source nature has empowered startup companies, new industries, and countries to be able to engage in AI. 

“The fact of the matter is, [China and the U.S.] are competitors, but we are highly interdependent, and to the extent that we can compete and both aspire to win, it is fine to respect our competitors,” he concluded. 

Continue Reading

Environment

Musk will ask Tesla shareholders to vote on bailout for twitter/xAI

Published

2 hours ago

on

July 14, 2025

By

Musk will ask Tesla shareholders to vote on bailout for twitter/xAI

Tesla shareholders will vote on whether to invest into xAI, Tesla CEO Elon Musk’s private company, according to a post by Musk on twitter today.

Elon Musk is not just the CEO of Tesla, the electric car company that you may have heard about from time to time in Electrek’s coverage, but several other companies as well. And, famously, Musk companies often share resources – there has been much talk of incorporating SpaceX technology into Tesla vehicles, and putting xAI/twitter’s “MechaHitler”…. er, I mean, “Grok”…. feature into Tesla cars, among other collaborations that have happened over his various companies’ histories.

And today, Musk made it official that he will seek greater collaboration between three of his companies: Tesla, xAI, and twitter, in the form of an investment into xAI by Tesla.

The situation is a little more complicated than that, though.

Advertisement – scroll for more content

Tesla is a public company, owned by shareholders. Musk is the largest shareholder, but only owns around 12% of the company himself.

This is a different situation than xAI, which is a private company, owned by Musk. While there are other investors, he can exercise much more direct control over the company, and doesn’t have to put big decisions up to a vote.

One of the recent decisions he made with xAI was to purchase twitter in March. You may say, “wait, I thought he bought twitter back in 2022?,” and you’d be correct. Musk purchased twitter for $44 billion in 2022, which was widely agreed to be far too high a price, and then rapidly saw the company’s valuation drop to under $10 billion.

Then, in March 2025, Musk had xAI purchase twitter in an all-stock deal, valuing twitter company at $45 billion – again, far too high of a valuation, but considering he purchased the company from himself, he could set the price at whatever he wanted.

The move was widely considered to be a bailout of twitter, and the numbers involved considered arbitrary, perhaps partially to help save face for Musk after he made one of the worst business deals of all time.

Now the two are the same entity, and it seems clear that he would like to bring Tesla into the fold, in some way or another.

Musk has already improperly used resources from Tesla, a public company, to boost xAI and twitter, his private companies. Last year, he gave up Tesla’s priority position for highly sought-after NVIDIA H100 GPUs, instead shipping those GPUs to xAI and twitter. Tesla could have used these GPUs for training its FSD/Robotaxi systems, which Musk has claimed is the most important thing to Tesla’s future, but instead graciously sent them to his other company that used them to, uh, train a bot to say Nazi stuff apparently.

xAI has also poached talent from Tesla, multiple times, showing how Musk is using Tesla as a farm team for his private company.

So it hasn’t been a secret that Musk would like to use public money to bail out his private companies, as he’s been setting the stage for for a while now.

Musk has previously “discussed” getting Tesla to invest in xAI in the past, but the idea was never made official until today, when Musk said that he will put the idea to a shareholder vote.

In response to one of his superfans asking for the the opportunity to waste money on an overvalued social media app (which would mark the third time it has been overpaid for in as many years), and the backend fueling “MechaHitler,” Musk said this:

Tesla traditionally holds its annual shareholder meeting around the middle of the year, so if it were a normal year, this shareholder vote might be imminent.

But it’s not a normal year, as just last week Tesla announced an exceptionally late shareholder meeting, pushing it back to November, the latest it has ever held the meeting.

This means that Musk will have around four months to campaign for this idea – something that he’ll perhaps have more time to do, now that he’s no longer cosplaying as a government official.

We don’t know what the structure of the deal might look like yet, but Musk has been clear in the past that he wants more shares in Tesla. After selling many of his shares in order to buy twitter, he later complained that he doesn’t feel comfortable having less than 25% of Tesla. Given that his recent xAI/twitter deal was an all-stock deal, Musk could attempt to fund any investment of Tesla into xAI via shares, giving himself more Tesla shares in exchange for the company gaining a portion of xAI. Though to get him to 25% voting shares in Tesla, that would require either an enormous valuation for xAI, a small valuation for Tesla, or purchasing a large percentage of xAI (or, perhaps, all three, given how much higher TSLA’s valuation is than xAI’s).

We may however have a hint as to how that vote will go, because the last time Musk campaigned for a clearly terrible idea, Tesla shareholders ate it up.

In mid-2024, Musk ended his yearslong absenteeism at Tesla in a flurry of activity, hoping to persuade enough shareholders to vote for his illegal $55B pay package.

That flurry involved firing 10% of the company (supposedly in order to save money – though Tesla’s earnings have dropped drastically since), including important leadership and successful teams, which caused chaos with Tesla’s projects. He also pushed back an all-important affordable car project (which we’ve still heard nothing about) and held Tesla’s AI projects hostage while shifting both resources and staff from Tesla to his private AI company, even as he claims that AI is the future of Tesla.

In the end, these bad decisions worked, and shareholders voted to give their bad CEO his $55B pay package, even though it was later ruled to still be illegal.

So it looks like we’ve got another campaign coming up, and if last time was any indication, expect some really bad decisions along the way. It worked last time, didn’t it?

Republicans recently killed a number of home energy efficiency credits, including the rooftop solar credit. That means you only have until the end of this year to upgrade your home before republicans raise the cost of doing so by an average of ~$10,000. So if you want to go solar, get started TODAY, because these things take time and the system needs to be active before you file for the credit.

To make sure you find a trusted, reliable solar installer near you that offers competitive pricing, check out EnergySage, a free service that makes it easy for you to go solar. It has hundreds of pre-vetted solar installers competing for your business, ensuring you get high-quality solutions and save 20-30% compared to going it alone. Plus, it’s free to use, and you won’t get sales calls until you select an installer and share your phone number with them.

Your personalized solar quotes are easy to compare online and you’ll get access to unbiased Energy Advisors to help you every step of the way. Get started here. – ad*

FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.

Continue Reading

Trending