This Website Maybe For Sale – Click Here -

COMPUTERS Resource Center

Source Match Computer News

Democrats hope Mueller testimony will have 'profound impact'

Democrats hope Mueller testimony will have 'profound impact' The chairman of the House Judiciary Committee says he expects special counsel Robert Mueller to have "a profound impact" when he testifies before Congress on July 17, even though Mueller has said he won't provide any new information. Mueller's unusual back-to-back testimony in front of the House Judiciary and Intelligence committees is likely to be the most highly anticipated congressional hearing in years, particularly given Mueller's resolute silence throughout his two-year investigation into Russian contacts with President Donald Trump's campaign . Democrats negotiated for more than two months to obtain the testimony, hoping to focus public attention on the special counsel's 448-page report that they believe most Americans have not read.


UPDATE 4-U.S. FAA identifies new risk on Boeing 737 MAX

UPDATE 4-U.S. FAA identifies new risk on Boeing 737 MAX WASHINGTON/SEATTLE, June 26 (Reuters) - The U.S. Federal Aviation Administration has identified a new potential risk that Boeing Co must address on its 737 MAX before the grounded jet can return to service, the agency said on Wednesday. The risk was discovered during a simulator test last week and it is not yet clear if the issue can be addressed with a software upgrade or will require a more complex hardware fix, sources with knowledge of the matter told Reuters. The FAA did not elaborate on the latest setback for Boeing, which has been working to get its best-selling airplane back in the air following a worldwide grounding in March in the wake of two deadly crashes within five months.


UPDATE 4-U.S. FAA identifies new risk on Boeing 737 MAX

UPDATE 4-U.S. FAA identifies new risk on Boeing 737 MAX WASHINGTON/SEATTLE, June 26 (Reuters) - The U.S. Federal Aviation Administration has identified a new potential risk that Boeing Co must address on its 737 MAX before the grounded jet can return to service, the agency said on Wednesday. The risk was discovered during a simulator test last week and it is not yet clear if the issue can be addressed with a software upgrade or will require a more complex hardware fix, sources with knowledge of the matter told Reuters. The FAA did not elaborate on the latest setback for Boeing, which has been working to get its best-selling airplane back in the air following a worldwide grounding in March in the wake of two deadly crashes within five months.


UPDATE 4-U.S. FAA identifies new risk on Boeing 737 MAX

UPDATE 4-U.S. FAA identifies new risk on Boeing 737 MAX WASHINGTON/SEATTLE, June 26 (Reuters) - The U.S. Federal Aviation Administration has identified a new potential risk that Boeing Co must address on its 737 MAX before the grounded jet can return to service, the agency said on Wednesday. The risk was discovered during a simulator test last week and it is not yet clear if the issue can be addressed with a software upgrade or will require a more complex hardware fix, sources with knowledge of the matter told Reuters. The FAA did not elaborate on the latest setback for Boeing, which has been working to get its best-selling airplane back in the air following a worldwide grounding in March in the wake of two deadly crashes within five months.


Senate Passes $4.6 Billion Border-Funding Bill after Rejecting Pelosi’s Version

Senate Passes $4.6 Billion Border-Funding Bill after Rejecting Pelosi’s Version The Senate on Wednesday passed a $4.6 billion spending package to alleviate the ongoing crisis at the southern border, just moments after rejecting a similar emergency-funding bill advanced by House Democrats that included restrictions on the funding of certain border-enforcement measures.Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who shepherded the more restrictive spending bill through the House on Tuesday, announced her caucus's opposition to the Senate bill before it was voted on, ensuring a contentious reconciliation process between the two chambers before a final bill can be sent to President Trump's desk.“They pass their bill, we respect that,” Pelosi said Wednesday. “We passed our bill, we hope they would respect that. And there are some improvements that we think can be reconciled.”Republican lawmakers have emphasized the urgency of the border crisis in asking their Democratic colleagues to avoid a protracted reconciliation process by passing the Senate spending bill immediately, before lawmakers leave town for the one-week July 4 recess.Addressing his colleagues on the Senate floor before the vote on Wednesday, Majority Leader Mitch McConnell emphasized the bipartisan support behind the upper chamber's spending bill, which ultimately passed 84–8.“The House has not made much progress toward actually making a law, just more resistance theater,” McConnell said. “The Senate has a better and more bipartisan way forward.”“It’s a productive compromise that would go a long way to begin to address the border crisis: no poison pills, just a clean bill,” he added, referencing the restrictions placed on the use of funds in the House spending bill.The House bill, which fell 19 votes short of passage in the Senate, includes numerous humanitarian provisions related to the detention of migrants and restricts the amount of funding that can be allocated to enforcement mechanisms.The Senate bill, meanwhile, allocates $1.3 billion to improve the Border Patrol and HHS detention facilities, which have been overwhelmed by the 144,000 asylum-seekers that arrived at the border last month, as well as $2.9 billion to improve the medical care and supervision of migrant children, many of whom, according to multiple recent reports, have been deprived of basic hygiene products and proper beds due to lack of resources.House Democrats, particularly those in the progressive wing of the caucus, remain opposed to the Senate bill because they believe it does not do enough to ensure the humane treatment of migrants. Their bill would allow lawmakers to do unannounced checks of detention facilities, would mandate the provision of certain hygiene products, and would limit the amount of time children can be detained to just 90 days.


Senate Passes $4.6 Billion Border-Funding Bill after Rejecting Pelosi’s Version

Senate Passes $4.6 Billion Border-Funding Bill after Rejecting Pelosi’s Version The Senate on Wednesday passed a $4.6 billion spending package to alleviate the ongoing crisis at the southern border, just moments after rejecting a similar emergency-funding bill advanced by House Democrats that included restrictions on the funding of certain border-enforcement measures.Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who shepherded the more restrictive spending bill through the House on Tuesday, announced her caucus's opposition to the Senate bill before it was voted on, ensuring a contentious reconciliation process between the two chambers before a final bill can be sent to President Trump's desk.“They pass their bill, we respect that,” Pelosi said Wednesday. “We passed our bill, we hope they would respect that. And there are some improvements that we think can be reconciled.”Republican lawmakers have emphasized the urgency of the border crisis in asking their Democratic colleagues to avoid a protracted reconciliation process by passing the Senate spending bill immediately, before lawmakers leave town for the one-week July 4 recess.Addressing his colleagues on the Senate floor before the vote on Wednesday, Majority Leader Mitch McConnell emphasized the bipartisan support behind the upper chamber's spending bill, which ultimately passed 84–8.“The House has not made much progress toward actually making a law, just more resistance theater,” McConnell said. “The Senate has a better and more bipartisan way forward.”“It’s a productive compromise that would go a long way to begin to address the border crisis: no poison pills, just a clean bill,” he added, referencing the restrictions placed on the use of funds in the House spending bill.The House bill, which fell 19 votes short of passage in the Senate, includes numerous humanitarian provisions related to the detention of migrants and restricts the amount of funding that can be allocated to enforcement mechanisms.The Senate bill, meanwhile, allocates $1.3 billion to improve the Border Patrol and HHS detention facilities, which have been overwhelmed by the 144,000 asylum-seekers that arrived at the border last month, as well as $2.9 billion to improve the medical care and supervision of migrant children, many of whom, according to multiple recent reports, have been deprived of basic hygiene products and proper beds due to lack of resources.House Democrats, particularly those in the progressive wing of the caucus, remain opposed to the Senate bill because they believe it does not do enough to ensure the humane treatment of migrants. Their bill would allow lawmakers to do unannounced checks of detention facilities, would mandate the provision of certain hygiene products, and would limit the amount of time children can be detained to just 90 days.


Supreme Court Rebuffs Businesses, Won't Topple Regulation Precedent

Supreme Court Rebuffs Businesses, Won't Topple Regulation Precedent (Bloomberg) -- A divided U.S. Supreme Court rejected calls by business groups to overturn two decades-old rulings that have given federal agencies broad power to interpret their own regulations.Voting 5-4 on the central issues, the court on Wednesday reaffirmed rulings from 1945 and 1997 that typically require judges to defer to an agency on the meaning of ambiguous regulations. The court limited that legal doctrine, though, laying out new guidelines for when courts should yield to agencies.Chief Justice John Roberts joined the court’s liberals in the majority. Writing the court’s lead opinion, Justice Elena Kagan rejected contentions that federal agencies have grown too powerful and that judges should have the primary responsibility for interpreting unclear regulations.“It is no answer to the growth of agencies for courts to take over their expertise-based, policymaking functions,” Kagan wrote for the court.The ruling came as the justices near the end of their nine-month term. The court will issue its final opinions Thursday and is expected to rule on partisan gerrymandering and the Trump administration’s plan to ask about citizenship in the 2020 census.The justices may say Friday whether they will consider letting President Donald Trump end a deferred-deportation program for young undocumented immigrants started by President Barack Obama.‘No Fair Hearing’Business groups said deference to agencies on the meaning of regulations leads to onerous and unpredictable rules and leaves companies vulnerable to penalties when an agency shifts its thinking. Trade groups representing the oil, mining, farming and manufacturing industries were among those urging the court to jettison the prior rulings.Four conservative justices said the court should have scrapped the doctrine, known as “Auer deference” after the 1997 Auer v. Robbins ruling. Writing for the group, Justice Neil Gorsuch said Auer deference lets agencies avoid having to amend their regulations through formal notice-and-comment proceedings.“With Auer, there is no fair hearing,” Gorsuch wrote. “Whether purposeful or not, the agency’s failure to write a clear regulation winds up increasing its power, allowing it to both write and interpret rules that bear the force of law.”Kagan said Auer deference should apply only when a regulation is “genuinely ambiguous,” when an agency’s interpretation is reasonable and when its approach stems from its “substantive expertise” and “fair and considered judgment.”“What emerges is a deference doctrine not quite so tame as some might hope, but not nearly so menacing as they might fear,” she wrote.Gorsuch said the majority opinion had rendered Auer a “paper tiger” and is likely to “force litigants and lower courts to jump through needless and perplexing new hoops.”Roberts ConcursRoberts concurred with the majority but didn’t join all of Kagan’s reasoning. In a separate opinion, he wrote that the “distance between the majority and Justice Gorsuch is not as great as it may initially appear.”Roberts said Auer deference generally will apply in cases when a judge would have been persuaded by an agency’s interpretation anyway.Roberts said the decision doesn’t affect a better-known legal doctrine called “Chevron deference.” That requires courts to defer to agencies on the meaning of ambiguous laws -- rather than rules -- as long as the regulators’ interpretation is reasonable.Wednesday’s ruling to a large degree tracks an approach urged by the Trump administration, which had asked the court to narrow the two precedents without directly overturning them.Opponents of Auer deference offered mixed reactions.“The Supreme Court missed an opportunity today to strike down an unconstitutional, judicially created doctrine that gives unaccountable bureaucrats the benefit of the doubt when deciding what their regulations do or do not require of small businesses and, indeed, all Americans,” said Karen Harned, executive director of the National Federation of Independent Business’s Small Business Legal Center.But Paul Hughes, a lawyer with McDermott Will & Emery who argued against Auer deference when the court heard the case in March, called the ruling a victory and said it will “significantly narrow agency authority.”The Justice Department declined to comment.Vietnam VeteranThe issue came to the court in a non-business context. Hughes represented James Kisor, a Vietnam War veteran who says he suffers from post-traumatic stress syndrome and is seeking retroactive benefits.Kisor said the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs should reconsider its denial of his 1982 claim for benefits because it didn’t consider important evidence about his combat service. The case turned on a VA regulation that requires reconsideration if “relevant” service records come to the department’s attention.A federal appeals court, applying Auer deference, ruled against Kisor. The Supreme Court’s ruling Wednesday told the lower court to reconsider whether deference was warranted.The 1945 ruling, Bowles v. Seminole Rock, deferred to a World War II price-control board in its enforcement of a disputed regulation that governed building materials. The 1997 Auer decision deferred to the Labor Department’s interpretation, expressed in a court filing, of a regulation on overtime pay.Defenders of those rulings said they give agencies flexibility to account for changing circumstances. The 1997 ruling was written by Justice Antonin Scalia, a staunch conservative who later came to consider his opinion a mistake.The case is Kisor v. Wilkie, 18-15.(Updates with reaction starting in 17th paragraph)To contact the reporter on this story: Greg Stohr in Washington at gstohr@bloomberg.netTo contact the editors responsible for this story: Joe Sobczyk at jsobczyk@bloomberg.net, Laurie Asséo, Justin BlumFor more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.com©2019 Bloomberg L.P.


Conservative U.S. Justice Gorsuch again sides with liberals in criminal case

Conservative U.S. Justice Gorsuch again sides with liberals in criminal case The court ruled that the right of Andre Haymond to face a jury trial under the U.S. Constitution's Sixth Amendment was violated when a judge unilaterally imposed an additional prison sentence after Haymond violated the terms of his supervised release. Haymond originally was sentenced to just over three years in prison and 10 years of supervised release after being convicted by a jury in 2010 of possessing pornographic images involving children. After completing his sentence, Haymond was found in 2015 in possession of 59 additional images.


Conservative U.S. Justice Gorsuch again sides with liberals in criminal case

Conservative U.S. Justice Gorsuch again sides with liberals in criminal case The court ruled that the right of Andre Haymond to face a jury trial under the U.S. Constitution's Sixth Amendment was violated when a judge unilaterally imposed an additional prison sentence after Haymond violated the terms of his supervised release. Haymond originally was sentenced to just over three years in prison and 10 years of supervised release after being convicted by a jury in 2010 of possessing pornographic images involving children. After completing his sentence, Haymond was found in 2015 in possession of 59 additional images.


Conservative U.S. Justice Gorsuch again sides with liberals in criminal case

Conservative U.S. Justice Gorsuch again sides with liberals in criminal case The court ruled that the right of Andre Haymond to face a jury trial under the U.S. Constitution's Sixth Amendment was violated when a judge unilaterally imposed an additional prison sentence after Haymond violated the terms of his supervised release. Haymond originally was sentenced to just over three years in prison and 10 years of supervised release after being convicted by a jury in 2010 of possessing pornographic images involving children. After completing his sentence, Haymond was found in 2015 in possession of 59 additional images.


Houston Texans QB Deshaun Watson takes part in life-changing activities in Israel

Houston Texans QB Deshaun Watson takes part in life-changing activities in Israel Watson joined American Voices in Israel for their annual trip to Israel. While there, he visited several biblical sites and was baptized.


Houston Texans QB Deshaun Watson takes part in life-changing activities in Israel

Houston Texans QB Deshaun Watson takes part in life-changing activities in Israel Watson joined American Voices in Israel for their annual trip to Israel. While there, he visited several biblical sites and was baptized.


Supreme Court’s Conservative Justices Weigh Scrapping Another Precedent

Supreme Court’s Conservative Justices Weigh Scrapping Another Precedent (Bloomberg) -- The U.S. Supreme Court’s conservative majority may be ready to overturn a longstanding precedent for the third time in recent weeks -- perhaps foreshadowing the vulnerability of its rulings on abortion rights.The justices will rule as early as Wednesday on a business-backed bid to overturn decades-old decisions that give federal agencies broad power to say what their regulations mean.The case is one of eight rulings due before the justices’ term ends this week. The court also plans to rule on gerrymandered voting maps and the Trump administration’s bid to add a citizenship question to the 2020 census.Another precedent-toppling ruling would extend a pattern that already has liberal justices sounding alarms. They’ve hinted that the five conservative justices may be eyeing the landmark 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling, which legalized abortion nationwide.“Today’s decision can only cause one to wonder which cases the court will overrule next,” dissenting Justice Stephen Breyer wrote last month when the court overruled a 1979 precedent to say that states are immune from private suits in another state’s courts.“Well, that didn’t take long,” Justice Elena Kagan wrote 39 days later when the court overturned part of a 1985 ruling and said people could go directly to federal court to claim that a government regulation unconstitutionally took private property without compensation. “Now one may wonder yet again.”Both of those were 5-4 decisions, with Chief Justice John Roberts and the other Republican appointees -- Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh -- in the majority.Ducking AbortionSo far, the court has largely sidestepped the explosive topic of abortion. In May, the court turned away Indiana’s bid to bar abortions based on a fetus’s race or gender or a risk of genetic disorder -- an appeal that could have raised new doubts about Roe. The justices did uphold a separate Indiana law requiring clinics to bury or cremate fetal remains.The court could provide new signals about its intentions on abortion this week. The justices are due to say whether they’ll consider Alabama’s effort to ban the most common method used for women in their second trimester of pregnancy.The court under Roberts has actually overturned precedents at a slower rate than previous courts, says Jonathan Adler, a constitutional law professor at Case Western Reserve School of Law. Before this term started, the Roberts court had issued only 13 rulings that overturned a precedent, according to data from the Government Printing Office, he says.But Roberts, who took his seat in 2005, has never had a conservative majority as reliable as the one he got when the Senate confirmed Kavanaugh to succeed the retired Anthony Kennedy.“It is certainly possible either that the court may become more aggressive going forward or that the cases in which the court reconsiders precedents will have a greater ideological uniformity,” Adler said.Adler is among those urging the court to overturn a 1997 ruling, Auer v. Robbins, that requires judges to defer to a federal agency’s interpretation of its own regulations, as long as its approach is reasonable.Business groups say that ruling, along with a related 1945 decision, leads to onerous and unpredictable rules and leaves companies vulnerable to penalties when an agency shifts its thinking. Defenders of the rulings say they give agencies flexibility to account for changing circumstances.Religion and GerrymandersThe regulation, property-rights and sovereign-immunity cases are among the four appeals this term that squarely asked the justices to topple at least one precedent.The fourth one split the court in an unusual way last week. The court had been asked to overturn a rule that lets states and the federal government file separate criminal charges over the same conduct without violating the Constitution’s ban on double jeopardy.The court refused on a 7-2 vote, reaffirming precedents dating to the middle of the 19th century. Alito’s majority opinion said the case for keeping precedents “grows in proportion to their antiquity.” An unlikely pair of justices -- Gorsuch and liberal Ruth Bader Ginsburg -- dissented.Three other cases have raised questions about precedents, though less directly. In backing hunting rights in Wyoming for the Crow Indian Tribe, a majority that included the four liberals and Gorsuch said an 1896 ruling had previously been “repudiated.”In ruling last week that a 40-foot cross could remain in a Maryland public intersection as a war memorial, a majority of justices criticized, without overruling, a 1971 decision that set up a three-part test for assessing whether government support for religion goes too far.And the gerrymandering cases could topple a 1986 ruling that said voting maps could be challenged as too partisan, though the justices in that case couldn’t agree on a standard for doing so. Paul Clement, the lawyer defending a Republican-drawn North Carolina congressional map, told Roberts during arguments in March that the court might need to overturn that ruling.‘Jolt to the System’At the center of it all is Roberts, who said in his 2005 Senate confirmation hearing that overruling a precedent is a “jolt to the legal system.” He has tended to take a multi-step approach toward questioning a precedent, signaling concern in a preliminary case before voting to overturn it altogether.“His favorite methodology seems to be to essentially chip away at cases in various steps so that the day that the case is actually overruled it’s really not even news, it’s been coming for a couple of years,” Clement said last month at a symposium co-hosted by the conservative Heritage Foundation and Bradley Foundation.Writing the majority opinion in the property-rights case last week, Roberts said the 1985 Williamson County v. Hamilton Bank ruling relied on “exceptionally ill-founded reasoning,” had been repeatedly criticized by justices over the years and had proven “unworkable in practice.”It’s still too early to judge how Roberts will act toward precedents now that he has a stronger conservative majority, Adler said.“Like a lot of people I’m curious if the chief is going to become more aggressive, but I’m not willing to say that we can be sure of that yet,” said Adler.To contact the reporter on this story: Greg Stohr in Washington at gstohr@bloomberg.netTo contact the editors responsible for this story: Joe Sobczyk at jsobczyk@bloomberg.net, Laurie Asséo, John HarneyFor more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.com©2019 Bloomberg L.P.


Supreme Court’s Conservative Justices Weigh Scrapping Another Precedent

Supreme Court’s Conservative Justices Weigh Scrapping Another Precedent (Bloomberg) -- The U.S. Supreme Court’s conservative majority may be ready to overturn a longstanding precedent for the third time in recent weeks -- perhaps foreshadowing the vulnerability of its rulings on abortion rights.The justices will rule as early as Wednesday on a business-backed bid to overturn decades-old decisions that give federal agencies broad power to say what their regulations mean.The case is one of eight rulings due before the justices’ term ends this week. The court also plans to rule on gerrymandered voting maps and the Trump administration’s bid to add a citizenship question to the 2020 census.Another precedent-toppling ruling would extend a pattern that already has liberal justices sounding alarms. They’ve hinted that the five conservative justices may be eyeing the landmark 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling, which legalized abortion nationwide.“Today’s decision can only cause one to wonder which cases the court will overrule next,” dissenting Justice Stephen Breyer wrote last month when the court overruled a 1979 precedent to say that states are immune from private suits in another state’s courts.“Well, that didn’t take long,” Justice Elena Kagan wrote 39 days later when the court overturned part of a 1985 ruling and said people could go directly to federal court to claim that a government regulation unconstitutionally took private property without compensation. “Now one may wonder yet again.”Both of those were 5-4 decisions, with Chief Justice John Roberts and the other Republican appointees -- Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh -- in the majority.Ducking AbortionSo far, the court has largely sidestepped the explosive topic of abortion. In May, the court turned away Indiana’s bid to bar abortions based on a fetus’s race or gender or a risk of genetic disorder -- an appeal that could have raised new doubts about Roe. The justices did uphold a separate Indiana law requiring clinics to bury or cremate fetal remains.The court could provide new signals about its intentions on abortion this week. The justices are due to say whether they’ll consider Alabama’s effort to ban the most common method used for women in their second trimester of pregnancy.The court under Roberts has actually overturned precedents at a slower rate than previous courts, says Jonathan Adler, a constitutional law professor at Case Western Reserve School of Law. Before this term started, the Roberts court had issued only 13 rulings that overturned a precedent, according to data from the Government Printing Office, he says.But Roberts, who took his seat in 2005, has never had a conservative majority as reliable as the one he got when the Senate confirmed Kavanaugh to succeed the retired Anthony Kennedy.“It is certainly possible either that the court may become more aggressive going forward or that the cases in which the court reconsiders precedents will have a greater ideological uniformity,” Adler said.Adler is among those urging the court to overturn a 1997 ruling, Auer v. Robbins, that requires judges to defer to a federal agency’s interpretation of its own regulations, as long as its approach is reasonable.Business groups say that ruling, along with a related 1945 decision, leads to onerous and unpredictable rules and leaves companies vulnerable to penalties when an agency shifts its thinking. Defenders of the rulings say they give agencies flexibility to account for changing circumstances.Religion and GerrymandersThe regulation, property-rights and sovereign-immunity cases are among the four appeals this term that squarely asked the justices to topple at least one precedent.The fourth one split the court in an unusual way last week. The court had been asked to overturn a rule that lets states and the federal government file separate criminal charges over the same conduct without violating the Constitution’s ban on double jeopardy.The court refused on a 7-2 vote, reaffirming precedents dating to the middle of the 19th century. Alito’s majority opinion said the case for keeping precedents “grows in proportion to their antiquity.” An unlikely pair of justices -- Gorsuch and liberal Ruth Bader Ginsburg -- dissented.Three other cases have raised questions about precedents, though less directly. In backing hunting rights in Wyoming for the Crow Indian Tribe, a majority that included the four liberals and Gorsuch said an 1896 ruling had previously been “repudiated.”In ruling last week that a 40-foot cross could remain in a Maryland public intersection as a war memorial, a majority of justices criticized, without overruling, a 1971 decision that set up a three-part test for assessing whether government support for religion goes too far.And the gerrymandering cases could topple a 1986 ruling that said voting maps could be challenged as too partisan, though the justices in that case couldn’t agree on a standard for doing so. Paul Clement, the lawyer defending a Republican-drawn North Carolina congressional map, told Roberts during arguments in March that the court might need to overturn that ruling.‘Jolt to the System’At the center of it all is Roberts, who said in his 2005 Senate confirmation hearing that overruling a precedent is a “jolt to the legal system.” He has tended to take a multi-step approach toward questioning a precedent, signaling concern in a preliminary case before voting to overturn it altogether.“His favorite methodology seems to be to essentially chip away at cases in various steps so that the day that the case is actually overruled it’s really not even news, it’s been coming for a couple of years,” Clement said last month at a symposium co-hosted by the conservative Heritage Foundation and Bradley Foundation.Writing the majority opinion in the property-rights case last week, Roberts said the 1985 Williamson County v. Hamilton Bank ruling relied on “exceptionally ill-founded reasoning,” had been repeatedly criticized by justices over the years and had proven “unworkable in practice.”It’s still too early to judge how Roberts will act toward precedents now that he has a stronger conservative majority, Adler said.“Like a lot of people I’m curious if the chief is going to become more aggressive, but I’m not willing to say that we can be sure of that yet,” said Adler.To contact the reporter on this story: Greg Stohr in Washington at gstohr@bloomberg.netTo contact the editors responsible for this story: Joe Sobczyk at jsobczyk@bloomberg.net, Laurie Asséo, John HarneyFor more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.com©2019 Bloomberg L.P.


2 U.S. service members killed in Afghanistan; Taliban says they died in an ambush

2 U.S. service members killed in Afghanistan; Taliban says they died in an ambush Two U.S. service members were killed in Afghanistan on Wednesday, the American-led NATO mission in Afghanistan said in a statement.


2 U.S. service members killed in Afghanistan; Taliban says they died in an ambush

2 U.S. service members killed in Afghanistan; Taliban says they died in an ambush Two U.S. service members were killed in Afghanistan on Wednesday, the American-led NATO mission in Afghanistan said in a statement.


Saudi envoy blasts UN expert's report on Khashoggi killing

Saudi envoy blasts UN expert's report on Khashoggi killing In what amounted to a face-off at the U.N's top human rights body, Ambassador Abdulaziz Alwasil insisted that special rapporteur Agnes Callamard had failed to follow proper procedures and used flawed sourcing in her 101-page report made public last week. "Accusations have been launched, and fingers have been pointed — (she is) supporting herself on non-credible articles or sources," he told the Human Rights Council, in Arabic through a U.N. interpreter.


Saudi envoy blasts UN expert's report on Khashoggi killing

Saudi envoy blasts UN expert's report on Khashoggi killing In what amounted to a face-off at the U.N's top human rights body, Ambassador Abdulaziz Alwasil insisted that special rapporteur Agnes Callamard had failed to follow proper procedures and used flawed sourcing in her 101-page report made public last week. "Accusations have been launched, and fingers have been pointed — (she is) supporting herself on non-credible articles or sources," he told the Human Rights Council, in Arabic through a U.N. interpreter.


Saudi envoy blasts UN expert's report on Khashoggi killing

Saudi envoy blasts UN expert's report on Khashoggi killing In what amounted to a face-off at the U.N's top human rights body, Ambassador Abdulaziz Alwasil insisted that special rapporteur Agnes Callamard had failed to follow proper procedures and used flawed sourcing in her 101-page report made public last week. "Accusations have been launched, and fingers have been pointed — (she is) supporting herself on non-credible articles or sources," he told the Human Rights Council, in Arabic through a U.N. interpreter.


US military says 2 service members killed in Afghanistan

US military says 2 service members killed in Afghanistan The U.S. military said two of its service members were killed Wednesday in Afghanistan. The deaths occurred a day after U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo visited the Afghan capital of Kabul, where he said Washington was hopeful of a peace deal before Sept. 1. At a news conference Wednesday in New Delhi, Pompeo said he was aware of the two deaths.


Supreme Court rules for sex offender in child pornography case testing power of judges, juries

Supreme Court rules for sex offender in child pornography case testing power of judges, juries The Supreme Court ruled that even sex offenders deserve to have the reasons for their sentences determined by a jury, not a judge.


It Looks Like the Dodge Charger Is Getting a Widebody Variant

It Looks Like the Dodge Charger Is Getting a Widebody Variant Dodge showed off a "concept" version of its muscle sedan with a widebody setup, and it seems like the production car is coming soon.


It Looks Like the Dodge Charger Is Getting a Widebody Variant

It Looks Like the Dodge Charger Is Getting a Widebody Variant Dodge showed off a "concept" version of its muscle sedan with a widebody setup, and it seems like the production car is coming soon.


It Looks Like the Dodge Charger Is Getting a Widebody Variant

It Looks Like the Dodge Charger Is Getting a Widebody Variant Dodge showed off a "concept" version of its muscle sedan with a widebody setup, and it seems like the production car is coming soon.


Millions of people are traveling to New York for WorldPride. Why are some opting to skip?

Millions of people are traveling to New York for WorldPride. Why are some opting to skip? WorldPride, the annual LGBTQ celebration, is in New York this year -- and LGBTQ people of all stripes are making the global trek.


Millions of people are traveling to New York for WorldPride. Why are some opting to skip?

Millions of people are traveling to New York for WorldPride. Why are some opting to skip? WorldPride, the annual LGBTQ celebration, is in New York this year -- and LGBTQ people of all stripes are making the global trek.


Millions of people are traveling to New York for WorldPride. Why are some opting to skip?

Millions of people are traveling to New York for WorldPride. Why are some opting to skip? WorldPride, the annual LGBTQ celebration, is in New York this year -- and LGBTQ people of all stripes are making the global trek.


Global chipmakers rally on Micron's upbeat results, Huawei shipments

Global chipmakers rally on Micron's upbeat results, Huawei shipments The company also said it had resumed some shipments to Huawei Technologies after reviewing a U.S. ban on selling products to the Chinese smartphone maker. Micron shares were up 10%, while those of Nvidia Corp, Intel Corp, Xilinx Inc and Advanced Micro Devices rose between 2% and 6%. U.S. chipmakers suspended shipments to Huawei after the U.S. government on May 15 added the world's biggest telecoms equipment maker and 68 affiliates to an "Entity List", banning it from acquiring components and technology from U.S. firms without government approval.


Today’s top deals: $17 LED light strip, $30 true wireless earbuds, $25 Wi-Fi extender, SanDisk microSD deals, more

Today’s top deals: $17 LED light strip, $30 true wireless earbuds, $25 Wi-Fi extender, SanDisk microSD deals, more When we say we've managed to find some truly unbelievable daily deals for today's roundup, we're not kidding. Highlights include a multi-color LED light strip that can do everything Philips Hue's $70 model can do for just $17 when you use the coupon code 7NELDEDF at checkout, $40 true wireless earbuds with touch control for just $29.99 with coupon code I7QWMF5M, the faster version of Amazon's best-selling Wi-Fi range extender for just $24.99 after a $17 discount and a $5 coupon, an UltraPot that's basically an Instant Pot on steroids for only $59.99, $8 off Super Mario Maker 2 for Nintendo Switch if you preorder before its release on Friday, two Sonos Play:1 speakers and a $30 Amazon gift card for just $298, huge discounts on SanDisk Ultra microSD cards in all sizes, an Instant Pot cookbook with 500 recipes for only $3.99, the first big discount on AirPods 2 with Wireless Charging Case, white Philips Hue bulbs for under $12 a piece, 20 rolls of toilet paper for $17, and more. Check out all of today's best bargains below.


View Photos of the 2020 Audi Q7

View Photos of the 2020 Audi Q7

View Photos of the 2020 Audi Q7

Authorities in Utah release new photos of last time missing college student seen in public

Authorities in Utah release new photos of last time missing college student seen in public Police issued a public appeal for a person last seen with a University of Utah student before she disappeared more than a week ago.


U.S. Treasury Secretary says U.S., China were close to trade deal - CNBC

U.S. Treasury Secretary says U.S., China were close to trade deal - CNBC "We were about 90% of the way there (with a deal) and I think there's a path to complete this," Mnuchin said in an interview to the news channel. U.S. President Donald Trump and his Chinese counterpart Xi Jinping will meet this week at the G20 summit in Japan hoping to calm their 11-month trade war. Separately, in comments on recent U.S. sanctions on Iran, Mnuchin said he believes the sanctions "are working".


The biggest Porsche Taycan teasers in one place

The biggest Porsche Taycan teasers in one place For over a year, Porsche has been teasing the production version of the Mission E concept via spec reveals, shadowed videos, and obscure photographs of the Taycan in camouflage. Since the company debuted the Mission E concept EV in 2015, rumors have been pointing towards the development of a production version of the model and, sure enough, that model was announced two years later in June 2018. Since the Taycan was officially reported, Porsche has been releasing teasers every couple months about the car's development progress.