Connect with us

Published

on

Apr 12 2024 KFF Health News

Thirty years after prisoners with disabilities sued the state of California and 25 years after a federal court first ordered accommodations, a judge found that state prison and parole officials still are not doing enough to help deaf and blind prisoners — in part because they are not using readily available technology such as video recordings and laptop computers.

U.S. District Judge Claudia Wilken's rulings on March 20 centered on the prison system's need to help deaf, blind, and low-vision prisoners better prepare for parole hearings, though the decisions are also likely to improve accommodations for hundreds of other prisoners with those disabilities.

"I believe I should have the same opportunity as hearing individuals," a prisoner, deaf since birth, said in court documents.

The lawsuit is one of several class-action proceedings that have led the courts to assume oversight of the prison system's treatment of those who are sick or suffer from mental illnesses.

"It is difficult not to despair," a blind prisoner said in written testimony. "I am desperate for some kind of assistance that will let me prepare adequately for my parole hearing."

The parole process can begin more than a year before an incarcerated person's hearing and last long afterward. And the consequences of rejection are great: People denied parole typically must wait three to 15 years before they can try again.

Prisoners are expected to review their prison records and a psychologist's assessment of whether they are at risk for future violence, write a release plan including housing and work plans, write letters of remorse, and prepare a statement to parole officials on why they should be released.

"It is a very time-consuming and important process," said Gay Grunfeld, one of the attorneys representing about 10,000 prisoners with many different disabilities in the federal class-action lawsuit. “All of these tasks are harder if you are blind, low-vision, or deaf."

The California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation and its Board of Parole Hearings "remain committed to conducting fair hearings and ensuring access to the hearings for all participants. We are assessing the potential impact of the order and exploring available legal options," said spokesperson Albert Lundeen.

The department counts more than 500 prisoners with serious vision problems and about 80 with severe hearing problems, though Grunfeld thinks both are undercounts.

California's prison system has lagged in adopting technological accommodations that are commonly used in the outside world, Wilken found in her ruling.

For instance, California gives prisoners digital tablets that can be used for communications and entertainment, and since late 2021 has gradually been providing secure laptops to prisoners who are enrolled in college, GED, and high school diploma programs.

But officials balked at providing computers that Wilken decided are needed by some prisoners with disabilities. She required the department to develop a plan within 60 days of her order to, among many things, provide those individuals with laptops equipped with accommodations like screen magnification and software that can translate text to speech or Braille. Related StoriesAI steps up in healthcare: GPT-3.5 and 4 excel in clinical reasoningLarge language models enhance differential diagnosis, paving the way for AI-assisted medical decision-makingHearing aid usage linked to reduced mortality in adults with hearing impairments

"It would make a huge difference to me to have equipment that would let me listen to and dictate written words, or produce written documents in another accessible manner," testified the blind prisoner. He added that such accommodations "would finally let me properly prepare for my parole hearing with the privacy, independence, and dignity that all humans deserve."

Similarly, California routinely uses video cameras during parole proceedings, including when it conducted hearings remotely during the coronavirus pandemic. But prison policy has prohibited videotaping the hearings, including sign language translations that some deaf prisoners rely on to understand the proceedings.

The deaf-since-birth prisoner, for example, testified that he also doesn't speak, his primary method of communication is American Sign Language, and his English is so poor that written transcripts do him no good. He advocated for recorded sign language translations of the hearings and related documents that he could review whenever he wanted, in the same way that other inmates can review written text.

Wilken ordered prison officials to comply.

“They need to be able to watch it later, not read it later,” said Grunfeld. “It’s going to make a huge difference in the lives of deaf signers.”

The department recently acquired 100 portable electronic video magnifiers, at a cost of $1,100 each, that prisoners with low vision can check out to use in their cells. The technology will augment similar devices in prison libraries that prisoners say aren't private and can be used only during libraries' limited hours.

Wilken said officials acquired the magnifiers only after prodding by prisoners and their attorneys.

Grunfeld said the judge's detailed order, which includes requirements like better assistance from attorneys, will "make sure that people with disabilities are on an equal footing as people who don’t have disabilities.”

“My colleagues and I have been working for several years to persuade CDCR to adopt this technology, and it’s been slow-going. But they’ve gradually accepted that they do need to do this," Grunfeld said. "It's long past due, but at least it’s coming.”

This article was produced by KFF Health News, which publishes California Healthline, an editorially independent service of the California Health Care Foundation. 

This article was reprinted from khn.org, a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF – the independent source for health policy research, polling, and journalism. Source:

KFF Health News

Continue Reading

Business

Energy price cap: Typical yearly energy bill to fall by £129 from July, Ofgem announces

Published

on

By

Energy price cap: Typical yearly energy bill to fall by £129 from July, Ofgem announces

Households on the energy price cap will see a 7% reduction in their average annual payments from 1 July, the industry regulator has announced while urging households to seek out the “better deals out there”.

The default cap – which is reviewed every three months – will see a typical household using gas and electricity and paying by Direct Debit stump up an average annual £1,720, Ofgem said.

That is down from the current April-June figure of £1,849 and reflects a reduction in wholesale gas prices.

Money latest: How energy price cap dip will affect me

The lower cap, however, will be £152 higher than the same three-month period last year.

It does not affect the millions of households to have taken a time-limited fixed deal.

Nevertheless, it represents some relief for families grappling with the cost of living aftershock that saw many essential bills rise by well above the rate of inflation last month.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Cost of living impacts families

Ofgem also confirmed further bill savings through a £19 average cut, from July, in standing charges for households paying by both direct debit and prepayment, following an operating cost and debt allowances review.

The price cap does not limit total bills because householders still pay for the amount of energy they consume.

The watchdog’s announcements were made just days after fresh forecasts suggested that bills linked to the cap could come down further from both October and January, given recent wholesale market price trends.

Industry data specialist Cornwall Insight estimated on Friday that the price cap was currently on course to rise only slightly in October – by less than £1 a month.

Wholesale gas costs last winter had been relatively stable until a cold snap hit much of Europe in January and early February, driving up demand at a time of weaker stocks.

Other risk factors ahead include extended EU gas storage rules and global conflicts, not least the continuing Russia-Ukraine war that sparked the 2022 energy price spike and cost of living crisis in the first place.

Tim Jarvis, director general of markets at Ofgem, said: “A fall in the price cap will be welcome news for consumers, and reflects a reduction in the international price of wholesale gas. However, we’re acutely aware that prices remain high, and some continue to struggle with the cost of energy.

“The first thing I want to remind people is that you don’t have to pay the price cap – there are better deals out there, so it’s important to shop around, and talk to your existing supplier about the best deal they can offer you. And changing your payment method to direct debit or smart pay as you go can save you up to £136.”

Read more:
Economy must be ‘strong enough’ for U-turn on winter fuel payments

Ofgem said that a minority of homes, 35%, were on a fixed rate deal.

Price comparison sites lined up after the price cap announcement to urge households still on the default tariff to investigate a switch.

Tom Lyon, director at Compare the Market said: “If anyone is worried about potentially higher energy bills later this year, they could consider locking in a fixed rate deal now.

“Fixed rate deals also protect you from price hikes if the oil and gas markets are volatile. Beyond your energy bills, it’s important to search and compare other household bills, such as your car insurance, credit cards, or broadband, to see if you can make savings.”

Continue Reading

Politics

Why Tether refuses to comply with MiCA

Published

on

By

Why Tether refuses to comply with MiCA

Why Tether refuses to comply with MiCA

Is Tether MiCA compliant?

The EU’s new Markets in Crypto-Assets regulation, better known as MiCA, is the first major attempt by a global economic power to create clear, region-wide rules for the crypto space, and stablecoins are a big focus.

MiCA mandates best practices. If a stablecoin is going to be traded in the EU, its issuer has to follow some stringent rules:

1. You need a license

To issue a stablecoin in Europe, you must become a fully authorized electronic money institution (EMI). That’s the same kind of license traditional fintechs need to offer e-wallets or prepaid cards. It’s not cheap and it’s not quick. 

2. Most of your reserves have to sit in European banks

This is one of the most controversial parts of MiCA. If you issue a “significant” stablecoin — and Tether’s USDT certainly qualifies — at least 60% of your reserves must be held in EU-based banks. The logic is to keep the financial system safe. 

3. Full transparency is non-negotiable

MiCA requires detailed, regular disclosures. Issuers have to publish a white paper and provide updates on their reserves, audits and operational changes. This level of reporting is new territory for some stablecoins, especially those that have historically avoided public scrutiny.

4. Non-compliant coins are getting delisted

If a token doesn’t comply, it won’t be tradable on regulated EU platforms. Binance, for example, has delisted USDT trading pairs for users in the European Economic Area (EEA). Other exchanges are following suit.

The European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) clarified that people in Europe can still hold or transfer USDT, but it can’t be offered to the public or listed on official venues. 

In other words, you might still have USDT in your wallet, but good luck trying to swap it on a regulated platform.

Key reasons why Tether rejects MiCA regulations

Tether is unique in that it has explained why it wants nothing to do with MiCA regulations. The company’s leadership, especially CEO Paolo Ardoino, has been pretty vocal about what they see as serious flaws in the regulation, from financial risks to privacy concerns to the bigger picture of who stablecoins are really for.

1. The banking rule could backfire

One of MiCA’s most talked-about rules says that “significant” stablecoins — like Tether’s USDt (USDT) — must keep at least 60% of their reserves in European banks. The idea is to make stablecoins safer and more transparent. But Ardoino sees it differently.

How Ardoino sees Tether (USDT) differently

He’s warned that this could create new problems, forcing stablecoin issuers to rely so heavily on traditional banks could make the whole system more fragile. 

After all, if there’s a wave of redemptions and those banks don’t have enough liquidity to keep up, we’d witness a struggling bank and a stablecoin crisis simultaneously.

Instead, Tether prefers to keep most of its reserves in US Treasurys, assets it says are liquid, low-risk and much easier to redeem quickly if needed.

2. They don’t trust the digital euro

Tether also has a broader issue with the direction Europe is heading, especially regarding a digital euro. Ardoino has openly criticized it, raising alarms about privacy. 

He has argued that a centrally controlled digital currency could be used to track how people spend their money, and even control or restrict transactions if someone falls out of favor with the system.

Privacy advocates have echoed similar concerns. While the European Central Bank insists that privacy is a top priority (with features like offline payments), Tether isn’t convinced. In their eyes, putting that much financial power in the hands of one institution is asking for trouble.

3. Tether’s users aren’t in Brussels. They’re in Brazil, Turkey and Nigeria

At the heart of it, Tether sees itself as a lifeline for people in countries dealing with inflation, unstable banking systems and limited access to dollars. 

These are places like Turkey, Argentina and Nigeria, where USDT is often more useful than the local currency.

MiCA, with all its licensing hoops and reserve mandates, would require Tether to shift focus and invest heavily in meeting EU-specific standards. That’s something the company says it’s not willing to do, not at the expense of the markets it sees as most in need of financial tools like USDT.

Did you know? Turkey ranks among the top countries for cryptocurrency adoption, with 16% of its population engaged in crypto activities. This high adoption rate is largely driven by the devaluation of the Turkish lira and economic instability, prompting citizens to seek alternatives like stablecoins to preserve their purchasing power.

What happens when Tether doesn’t comply with MiCA

Tether’s decision to skip MiCA didn’t exactly fly under the radar. It’s already having real consequences, especially for exchanges and users in Europe.

Exchanges are dropping USDT

Big names like Binance and Kraken didn’t wait around. To stay on the right side of EU regulators, they’ve already delisted USDT trading pairs for users in the European Economic Area. Binance had removed them by the end of March 2025. Kraken followed close behind, removing not just USDT but also other non-compliant stablecoins like EURT and PayPal’s PYUSD.

Users are left with fewer options

If you’re in Europe and holding USDT, you’re not totally out of luck; you can still withdraw or swap it on certain platforms. But you won’t be trading it on major exchanges anymore. That’s already pushing users toward alternatives like USDC and EURC, which are fully MiCA-compliant and widely supported.

Even major crypto payment processors are pulling support, leaving users with fewer options for spending their crypto directly.

A hit to liquidity? Probably.

Pulling USDT from European exchanges could make the markets a bit shakier. Less liquidity, wider spreads and more volatility during big price moves are all on the table. Some traders will adjust quickly. Others? Not so much.

Did you know? Tether (USDT) is the most traded cryptocurrency globally, surpassing even Bitcoin in daily volume. In 2024, it facilitated over $20.6 trillion in transactions and boasts a user base exceeding 400 million worldwide.

Tether vs MiCA regulation

Tether may be out of sync with the EU, but it’s far from retreating. If anything, the company is doubling down elsewhere, looking for friendlier ground and broader horizons.

Firstly, Tether’s picked El Salvador as its new base, a country that has fully embraced crypto. After getting a digital asset service provider license, the company is setting up a real headquarters there. Ardoino and other top execs are making the move too.

Moreover, after banking over $5 billion in profits in early 2024, Tether is putting its capital to work:

  • AI: Through its venture arm, Tether Evo, the company has picked up stakes in firms like Northern Data Group and Blackrock Neurotech. Tether has also launched Tether AI, an open-source, decentralized AI platform designed to operate on any device without centralized servers or API keys. The goal is to use AI to boost operations and maybe build some new tools along the way.
  • Infrastructure and AgTech: Tether invested in Adecoagro, a company focused on sustainable farming and renewable energy. It’s a surprising move, but it fits Tether’s bigger strategy of backing real-world, resilient systems.
  • Media and beyond: There are also signs Tether wants a footprint in content and communications, signaling it’s thinking far beyond crypto alone.

Tether’s MiCA exit highlights crypto’s global regulatory chaos

Tether walking away from MiCA is a snapshot of a much bigger issue in crypto: How hard it is to build a business in a world where every jurisdiction plays by its own rulebook.

The classic game of regulatory arbitrage

This isn’t Tether’s first rodeo when it comes to navigating regulations. Like many crypto companies, they’ve mastered the art of regulatory arbitrage, finding the friendliest jurisdiction and setting up shop there. 

Europe brings in strict rules? Fine, Tether sets up in El Salvador, where crypto is welcomed with open arms.

However, it does raise questions. If big players can simply move jurisdictions to dodge regulations, how effective are those rules in the first place? And does that leave retail users protected or just further confused?

A crypto world that’s all over the map

The bigger issue is that the global regulatory landscape is incredibly fragmented. Europe wants full compliance, transparency and reserve mandates. The US is still sending mixed signals. Asia is split; Hong Kong is pro-crypto, while China stays cold

Hong Kong has also passed the Stablecoin Bill to license fiat-backed issuers and boost its Web3 ambitions. Meanwhile, Latin America is embracing crypto as a tool for financial access.

For companies, it’s a mess. You can’t build for one global market; you must constantly adapt, restructure or pull out entirely. For users, it creates massive gaps in access. A coin available in one country might be inaccessible in another just because of local policy.

As a final thought: Tether’s resistance to MiCA seems to be more than just a protest against red tape. 

It’s making a bet that crypto’s future will be shaped outside Brussels, not inside it.

Continue Reading

Technology

Apple raises trade-in prices for iPhones in China to spur demand in key market

Published

on

By

Apple raises trade-in prices for iPhones in China to spur demand in key market

People stand in front of an Apple store in Beijing, China, on April 9, 2025.

Tingshu Wang | Reuters

Apple on Friday raised the amount of money people can get off their next iPhone in China by trading in their old device, rolling out further incentives to spur demand in a crucial market.

The iPhone 15 Pro Max now has a trade-in value of up to 5,700 Chinese yuan ($791), an increase from 5,625 yuan previously. For reference, a brand new iPhone 15 Pro Max starts at 7,999 yuan in China. The iPhone 15 Pro model can now be traded in for up to 4,750 yuan, up from 4,725 prior.

There are also trade-in value increases across other models too.

Apple has looked to offer discounts over the last year, especially around holiday periods in China. While the latest hikes are not huge, they signal Apple’s ongoing desire to galvanize sales in the world’s second largest economy, where it has faced falling market share and declining sales amid tougher competition from local rivals.

In the first quarter of the year, Apple’s China shipments fell 8% year-on-year, while the company’s share of the smartphone market in the country declined from 15% to 13%, according to data from Canalys. Apple also reported this month that sales in its Greater China region, which includes Hong Kong and Taiwan, fell slightly on an annual basis.

But Apple’s China headache goes beyond sales to questions over its supply chain and products. While U.S. President Donald Trump has paused most tariffs on China for now, there is still an ongoing discussion about whether chips and other electronics may receive a special duty.

Apple, which makes around 90% of its iPhones in China via its manufacturing partner Foxconn, has been looking to move more production to India — though Trump has also voiced displeasure with that. The White House leader said this month that he told Apple CEO Tim Cook he doesn’t want the company building products in India and would rather them make devices in the U.S.

Apple’s biggest challengers number Xiaomi and Huawei, with the latter seeing a stunning revival in its home market over the last 17 months thanks to breakthroughs in chips and aggressive launches of new devices.

Xiaomi, which was the biggest player by market share in China in the first quarter, has meanwhile been ramping up its presence in the high-end device space to directly compete with Apple. On Thursday, the company launched the Xiaomi 15S Pro smartphone that contains an in-house developed chip — something very few companies in the world have managed to do successfully.

Xiaomi has also committed nearly $7 billion to develop more chips over the next 10 years, signaling its ambition to compete with Apple and Huawei.

Continue Reading

Trending