buzzfeed--2020-09-27--Deadly Terror Networks And Drug Cartels Use Huge Banks To Finance Their Crimes. These Secret Documen

Deadly Terror Networks And Drug Cartels Use Huge Banks To Finance Their Crimes. These Secret Documents Show How The Banks Profit.

Thousands of secret “ suspicious activity reports ” offer a never-before-seen picture of corruption and complicity — and how the government lets it flourish .
A huge trove of secret government documents reveals for the first time how the giants of Western banking move trillions of dollars in suspicious transactions , enriching themselves and their shareholders while facilitating the work of terrorists , kleptocrats , and drug kingpins .
And the US government , despite its vast powers , fails to stop it .
Today , the FinCEN Files — thousands of “ suspicious activity reports ” and other US @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of global financial corruption , the banks enabling it , and the government agencies that watch as it flourishes .
BuzzFeed News has shared these reports with the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists and more than 100 news organizations in 88 countries .
These documents , compiled by banks , shared with the government , but kept from public view , expose the hollowness of banking safeguards , and the ease with which criminals have exploited them .
Profits from deadly drug wars , fortunes embezzled from developing countries , and hard-earned savings @ @ @ @ @ @ @ allowed to flow into and out of these financial institutions , despite warnings from the banks ’ own employees .
Money laundering is a crime that makes other crimes possible .
It can accelerate economic inequality , drain public funds , undermine democracy , and destabilize nations — and the banks play a key role .
“ Some of these people in those crisp white shirts in their sharp suits are feeding off the tragedy of people dying all over the world , ” said Martin Woods , a former suspicious transactions investigator @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to stop financial crime have instead allowed it to flourish .
So long as a bank files a notice that it may be facilitating criminal activity , it all but immunizes itself and its executives from criminal prosecution .
The suspicious activity alert effectively gives them a free pass to keep moving the money and collecting the fees .
The Financial Crimes Enforcement Network , or FinCEN , is the agency within the Treasury Department charged with combating money laundering , terrorist financing , and other financial crimes .
It collects millions of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ SARs .
It makes them available to US law enforcement agencies and other nations ’ financial intelligence operations .
It even compiles a report called “ Kleptocracy Weekly ” that summarizes the dealings of foreign leaders such as Russian President Vladimir Putin .
What it does not do is force the banks to shut the money laundering down .
In the rare instances when the US government does crack down on banks , it often relies on sweetheart deals called deferred prosecution agreements , which include fines but no high-level arrests .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to hold executives personally accountable , under guidance by former deputy attorney general Rod Rosenstein that warned government agencies against “ piling on.
” Rosenstein did not respond to requests for comment , but after this article was published , he wrote to say that his policies sought to “ encourage prosecutors to pursue charges against the people responsible for corporate wrongdoing.
” The FinCEN Files investigation shows that even after they were prosecuted or fined for financial misconduct , banks such as JPMorgan Chase , HSBC , Standard Chartered , Deutsche Bank @ @ @ @ @ @ @ continued to move money for suspected criminals .
Suspicious payments flow around the world and into countless industries , from international sports to Hollywood entertainment to luxury real estate to Nobu sushi restaurants .
They filter into the companies that make familiar items from people ’ s lives , from the gas in their car to the granola in their cereal bowl .
The FinCEN Files expose an underlying truth of the modern era : The networks through which dirty money traverse the world have become vital arteries of the global economy .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ wide-ranging and so unchecked that it has become inextricable from the so-called legitimate economy .
Banks with household names have helped to make it so .
Information from millions of these documents feeds into a single database , through which law enforcement officers can summon detailed financial information with a few keystrokes .
The FinCEN Files opens a rare window into this vast system of financial intelligence , unmatched in the world but all but unknown to the public .
The SARs themselves are so closely held that members of the public can @ @ @ @ @ @ @ subpoenas , and banks are not allowed even to confirm their existence .
Prior to this reporting , very few SARs had ever been revealed .
The FinCEN Files encompass more than 2,100 .
For more than a year , BuzzFeed News and its partner news organizations across the world mined the information on these tens of thousands of pages to map more than 200,000 transactions .
( Here ’ s an explanation of how we did it . )
In all , suspicious activity reports in the FinCEN Files flagged more than @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and 2017 .
Western banks could have blocked almost any of them , but in most cases they kept the money moving and kept collecting their fees .
Suspicious activity reports are written by the banks ’ financial crime watchdogs , or compliance officers , who are often parked in remote offices and left to make sense of a vast number of transactions with very few resources , writing SARs with little research or verification .
BuzzFeed News ’ research went much further , including reams of internal bank data , thousands of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ interviews with sources across the globe , dozens of Freedom of Information Act filings , five public records lawsuits , and requests for three federal courts to unseal records — all to piece together the intricacies of a financial system that is largely hidden .
BuzzFeed News is not publishing the SARs in full because they contain information about people or companies that are not under suspicion , but who were swept up in the banks ’ searches .
A subset of the documents is being published , with redactions , to support @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Treasury Department received detailed questions about the FinCEN Files investigation , the agency released a statement saying that it was “ aware that various media outlets intend to publish a series of articles based on unlawfully disclosed Suspicious Activity Reports ( SARs ) .
” It continued , “ the unauthorized disclosure of SARs is a crime that can impact the national security of the United States , compromise law enforcement investigations , and threaten the safety and security of the institutions and individuals who file such reports.
” The agency announced that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Department of Justice and the Treasury Department ’ s Office of Inspector General .
In a subsequent letter , FinCEN ’ s general counsel said that disclosure of SARs can make banks less willing to file them , which “ could mean law enforcement has fewer potential leads to stop crimes like human trafficking , child exploitation , fraud , corruption , terrorism , and cyber-enabled crime.
” FinCEN did not respond to repeated invitations to discuss security concerns .
Sen. Ron Wyden , a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee , which @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the FinCEN Files investigation “ reinforces the fact that we now have two systems of law enforcement and justice in the country.
” Drug cartels move millions through US banks ; poor people go to jail for possession .
“ If you 're wealthy and well-connected , you can figure out how to do an enormous amount of harm to society at large and ensure that it accrues to enormous financial benefit for all of you.
” Robert Mazur , a former federal special agent and an expert in money laundering , said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ enhance national security , aid future investigations , and encourage institutions to more consistently adhere to SAR filing requirements , ” and `` will hopefully get people who are in a position of power to correct an apparent systemic failure.
” Based in the United Arab Emirates , Mazaka General Trading presented itself to the world as a wholesaler .
But between March 2013 and April 2014 , the company received nearly $ 50 million from five companies involved in a Russian money laundering ring that manipulated international stock trades .
In May @ @ @ @ @ @ @ than $ 4 million from a Singapore company that appears barely even to exist .
It was also sending and receiving money from British firms located at 175 Darkes Lane , one of the world 's most notorious addresses for shell companies , which are a common tool to hide ownership .
These transactions by Mazaka General Trading — which the Treasury Department later declared to be a part of the Khanani money laundering network , a group that has financed terrorism and drug cartels around the globe — involved businesses and people @ @ @ @ @ @ @ States .
But as the money pinged around from one bank to another , it was all being tracked and it would all be reported to the Treasury Department .
Because the US dollar is the lifeblood of international finance , the common denominator between the world ’ s disparate currencies , banking customers around the world need access to it .
But only select banks are licensed to conduct dollar transactions .
So smaller banks in other countries partner with larger institutions , which exchange their customers ’ pesos , yuan , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fee , the arrangement , known as correspondent banking , helps keep the global economy humming .
As they pass through US banks , these transfers give the Treasury Department a vantage that no other country has .
It shares some of that information through the Egmont Group , a little-known coalition of financial intelligence units from more than 150 countries and territories .
SARs have provided Egmont members with financial details that would be otherwise unattainable , such as those concerning former Olympic Committee member Lamine Diack , who has been sentenced @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Russian doping scandal , and the Russian oligarch Oleg Deripaska , who was sanctioned by the US two years ago .
( Deripaska has sued the US government , maintaining that he is an innocent victim of politics . )
But if the database is a powerful asset to law enforcement investigations , to privacy advocates , it is a nightmare of overreach .
Congress created the current SAR program in 1992 making banks the frontline in the fight against money laundering .
But Michael German , a former FBI special agent who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , said that after 9/11 , `` the SAR program became more about mass surveillance than identifying discrete transactions to disrupt money launderers.
” Today , he said , `` the data is used like the data from other mass surveillance programs .
Find someone you want to get for whatever reason then sift through the vast troves of data collected to find anything you can hang them with . ''
In 2017 , when US congressional committees began investigating the last presidential election and other matters , they , too , turned @ @ @ @ @ @ @ requested SARs on Deutsche Bank , which had loaned Trump money ; Christopher Steele , the former MI6 agent who wrote the so-called Trump dossier ; an array of Russian oligarchs ; Trump ’ s former campaign chairperson Paul Manafort ; and even a small casino in the Pacific run by a former Trump employee .
All told , they were looking for information on more than 200 entities .
FinCEN unearthed tens of thousands of pages of documents .
Those documents , along with a few additional SARs requested by federal law @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the FinCEN Files .
Some were never turned over to the committees that requested them .
A person familiar with the matter blew the whistle to multiple members of Congress .
The collection does not include any SARs about Trump ’ s finances .
( A source familiar with the matter told BuzzFeed News that FinCEN ’ s database did not contain SARs on either Trump or the Trump Organization . )
And though the documents show suspicious payments to people in Trump ’ s orbit before and after key moments in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not provide direct information on any election interference .
Because the searches were so broad , however , they revealed something that most in Congress hadn ’ t even been looking for : evidence that the world ’ s biggest banks kept doing business with clients that they themselves suspected were facilitating terror and corruption .
The information was laid out in transaction by transaction .
And it had been there all along .
FinCEN received more than 2 million SARs last year .
That number has nearly doubled over the past decade @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pressure to file and the volume of international transactions has grown .
Over the same period , FinCEN ’ s staff has shrunk by more than 10 % .
Sources there say most SARs are never even read , let alone acted upon .
Meanwhile , experts say , some banks treat SARs as a kind of get-out-of-jail-free card , filing alerts about a huge array of transactions without actually moving to halt them .
In some cases , banks filed numerous reports on the same clients , detailing their suspected crimes over @ @ @ @ @ @ @ welcome their business .
By December 2013 , JPMorgan Chase had filed at least eight SARs on accounts and companies controlled by Manafort , flagging more than $ 10 million , according to a FinCEN research report .
Manafort , who went on to become Trump ’ s campaign chair , was convicted of bank and tax fraud in 2018 .
Paul Pelletier , a former senior Justice Department lawyer who once led the agency ’ s fraud unit , said that approach makes a mockery of the system .
“ You ca @ @ @ @ @ @ @ SAR without eventually violating the money laundering laws , ” he said .
“ You cut them off and drop them as clients .
But you do n't keep taking their money . ''
Despite the banks ’ sweeping powers to investigate account holders , the FinCEN Files investigation reveals that major financial institutions often fail to perform the most basic checks on their customers , such as verifying where a business is located when someone opens a new account .
The lapses allow criminal groups to hide behind shell corporations , registered @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and slide the proceeds of their crimes into the global financial system .
In many cases , the banks appear to have no idea whatsoever whose money they are moving .
When investigators for HSBC ’ s American operations asked their colleagues in Hong Kong for the name of the person who owned Trade Leader , a company that had moved more than half a billion dollars through the bank in less than two years , the answer they got was “ None available.
” The company would reportedly emerge as an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , a sprawling scheme in which wealthy Russians , facilitated by banks , secretly moved their money into the West .
After scandals like the Russian Laundromat , federal prosecutors have made big pronouncements about forcing meaningful change .
Addressing an anti–money laundering conference in 2015 , Leslie Caldwell , then the head of the Justice Department 's criminal division , said that when it came to getting banks to clean up their acts , deferred prosecution agreements , which typically involve a fine and a probationary period , “ can often accomplish @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more than , we could from a criminal conviction.
” But the FinCEN Files investigation shows something very different .
Banks often get to the end of their agreement without actually fixing the problems .
Then , instead of getting the prosecution that they had been threatened with , they just get another chance .
And sometimes another .
In 2012 , HSBC faced a historic crisis .
After permitting narcotraffickers to launder money and conducting business in off-limits countries such as Sudan and Myanmar , the bank was fined $ 1.9 billion @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and to hold it to that promise , the government installed an independent monitor to keep close watch .
But the FinCEN Files investigation shows HSBC continued banking , and profiting from , the same kinds of customers that got it in trouble in the first place , such as a Panamanian import-export firm that the Treasury Department later said was laundering money for drug kingpins .
JPMorgan Chase got a deferred prosecution deal of its own .
For years , it was the primary bank of the world ’ s biggest @ @ @ @ @ @ @ multiple warnings from its own employees , the bank never filed a suspicious activity report on him and allegedly collected $ 500 million in fees .
For punishment , the bank was required to pay a $ 1.7 billion fine and promise to improve its money laundering defenses .
But after it settled the Madoff case , the bank ’ s own investigators said they suspected it had opened its accounts to an alleged Russian organized crime figure who is known for drug trafficking and contract murders , as well as businesses tied @ @ @ @ @ @ @ which the US has placed off-limits .
It happened at Standard Chartered , too .
Last year , the government amended its 2012 deferred prosecution agreement after the bank was found to have continued clearing transactions for individuals and businesses in off-limits countries , primarily Iran .
The bank paid fines totaling $ 1.1 billion to US and UK authorities , and extended the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement for the sixth time in the space of seven years .
The bank apologized for its “ violations and control deficiencies ” but @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The FinCEN Files documents show Standard Chartered processed hundreds of millions of dollars for companies it suspected were circumventing sanctions against Iran until at least 2017 .
Since 2010 , at least 18 financial institutions have received deferred prosecution agreements for anti–money laundering or sanctions violations , according to an analysis by BuzzFeed News .
Of those , at least four went on to break the law again and get fined .
Twice , the government responded to this kind of repeat offense by renewing the deferred prosecution agreement — the very @ @ @ @ @ @ @ If the government wanted to , experts in financial crime say , it could stop the dirty money coursing through the big banks , as well as the vast array of criminal activity it funds .
One step would be to require companies to disclose their owners to the Treasury Department , rather than allowing people to hide behind a shell company .
Lawmakers are debating a bipartisan bill that could address that for small companies .
The National Federation of Independent Business has opposed it , saying it raises privacy issues and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , who cosponsored the bill , told BuzzFeed News , “ Congress must act soon because criminals have long been revising , adjusting , and amending their tactics to circumvent our laws.
” Greater public accountability could also make a difference .
HSBC has fought to keep secret the final report by the monitor that the government installed to watch over the bank during the years of its deferred prosecution agreement .
It even took the unusual step of weighing in on a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit , when BuzzFeed News sued @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The knowledge that negative reports could become public , and potentially damage share prices , could impel wayward banks to clean up their acts .
Others say the SARs themselves are part of the problem .
German , the former FBI special agent , called the idea behind them `` naive '' because `` the largest money laundering operations occur with the cooperation of the financial institutions , or at least some officers within those institutions .
The lack of money laundering enforcement had nothing to do with a lack of evidence @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of interest by political and law enforcement leadership.
’ ’ The most powerful way to fix the problem might be the simplest : Arrest the executives whose banks break the law .
`` The bankers will never learn until you start putting silver bracelets on people , '' Pelletier said .
`` Think of the message you 're sending to repeat offenders . ''
`` These guys know what they 're doing , ’ ’ said Thomas Nollner , a former regulator with the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency .
“ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ go to jail , period . ''
That approach was once the norm .
“ Back in the 1980s and 90s and even into the early 2000s , the government went after CEOs all the time , ” said US District Judge Jed Rakoff , who has been an outspoken critic of weak penalties for white-collar criminals .
In the past , the CEOs of Enron , WorldCom , and Tyco were all sent to jail for what they did , he pointed out .
“ Now that ’ s deterrence.
” Rakoff @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , a bank that engages in money laundering can literally be forced out of business by the government , and it is kind of surprising that government hasn ’ t taken that step , given the obvious deterrent effect it would have.
” Ultimately , the power to keep criminal profits from being laundered through the US financial system may not reside in the actions of a bank ’ s compliance office or its computer systems or even its executive tier .
It may not reside with banking regulators or federal prosecutors or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a matter of national policy alone .
Shutting down wayward banks could have an impact on the whole economy — for the US , its major trade partners , and beyond .
When other countries find their banks under US scrutiny , they step in .
In 2012 , Standard Chartered and HSBC were facing criminal prosecution .
George Osborne , at that time the UK ’ s chancellor of the exchequer , wrote to the chairperson of the US Federal Reserve , Ben Bernanke , and Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner to discuss @ @ @ @ @ @ @ response could have “ unintended consequences.
” He warned of a “ contagion.
” The implication : Close one bank and the whole economy could suffer .
Mazur , the former federal special agent and money laundering expert , says there are a “ mosaic ” of reasons why US authorities let the money keep running , but one of them may just be that it finds its way into too many pockets .
“ Even if it 's bad wealth , it buys buildings , ” he said .
“ It puts @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the nation.
” ● Sophie Comeau , Waylon Cunningham , Sam Feehan , Nancy Guan , Kristy Hutchings , Kylie Storm , Felicia Tapia , Karen Wang , Abby Washer , and Ashley Zhang of the USC Annenberg School for Communication and Journalism contributed reporting .

Paul Pelletier, a former senior Justice Department lawyer who once led the agency’s fraud unit, said that approach makes a mockery of the system. “You can't just file SAR after SAR after SAR without eventually violating the money laundering laws,” he said. “You cut them off and drop them as clients. But you don't keep taking their money."
Despite the banks’ sweeping powers to investigate account holders, the FinCEN Files investigation reveals that major financial institutions often fail to perform the most basic checks on their customers, such as verifying where a business is located when someone opens a new account. The lapses allow criminal groups to hide behind shell corporations, registered with no identifying details about their ownership, and slide the proceeds of their crimes into the global financial system.
In many cases, the banks appear to have no idea whatsoever whose money they are moving.
When investigators for HSBC’s American operations asked their colleagues in Hong Kong for the name of the person who owned Trade Leader, a company that had moved more than half a billion dollars through the bank in less than two years, the answer they got was “None available.” The company would reportedly emerge as an important hub in the so-called Russian Laundromat, a sprawling scheme in which wealthy Russians, facilitated by banks, secretly moved their money into the West.
After scandals like the Russian Laundromat, federal prosecutors have made big pronouncements about forcing meaningful change.
Addressing an anti–money laundering conference in 2015, Leslie Caldwell, then the head of the Justice Department's criminal division, said that when it came to getting banks to clean up their acts, deferred prosecution agreements, which typically involve a fine and a probationary period, “can often accomplish as much as, and sometimes even more than, we could from a criminal conviction.”
But the FinCEN Files investigation shows something very different. Banks often get to the end of their agreement without actually fixing the problems. Then, instead of getting the prosecution that they had been threatened with, they just get another chance. And sometimes another.
In 2012, HSBC faced a historic crisis. After permitting narcotraffickers to launder money and conducting business in off-limits countries such as Sudan and Myanmar, the bank was fined $1.9 billion. It promised to change its ways, and to hold it to that promise, the government installed an independent monitor to keep close watch. But the FinCEN Files investigation shows HSBC continued banking, and profiting from, the same kinds of customers that got it in trouble in the first place, such as a Panamanian import-export firm that the Treasury Department later said was laundering money for drug kingpins.
JPMorgan Chase got a deferred prosecution deal of its own. For years, it was the primary bank of the world’s biggest Ponzi schemer, Bernie Madoff. Despite multiple warnings from its own employees, the bank never filed a suspicious activity report on him and allegedly collected $500 million in fees. For punishment, the bank was required to pay a $1.7 billion fine and promise to improve its money laundering defenses. But after it settled the Madoff case, the bank’s own investigators said they suspected it had opened its accounts to an alleged Russian organized crime figure who is known for drug trafficking and contract murders, as well as businesses tied to the repressive North Korean regime, which the US has placed off-limits.
It happened at Standard Chartered, too. Last year, the government amended its 2012 deferred prosecution agreement after the bank was found to have continued clearing transactions for individuals and businesses in off-limits countries, primarily Iran. The bank paid fines totaling $1.1 billion to US and UK authorities, and extended the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement for the sixth time in the space of seven years. The bank apologized for its “violations and control deficiencies” but promised that none had occurred after 2014.
The FinCEN Files documents show Standard Chartered processed hundreds of millions of dollars for companies it suspected were circumventing sanctions against Iran until at least 2017.
Since 2010, at least 18 financial institutions have received deferred prosecution agreements for anti–money laundering or sanctions violations, according to an analysis by BuzzFeed News. Of those, at least four went on to break the law again and get fined. Twice, the government responded to this kind of repeat offense by renewing the deferred prosecution agreement — the very tool that failed the first time.


buzzfeed--2020-09-28--Gwyneth Paltrow Posed In Her Birthday Suit To Celebrate Her 48th Birthday And Her Daughter Didn't He

Gwyneth Paltrow Posed In Her Birthday Suit To Celebrate Her 48th Birthday And Her Daughter Didn't Hesitate To Comment On It

And earlier this year she talked to Jimmy Kimmel about how her children have grown to appreciate her sex-positive lifestyle @ @ @ @ @ My son said to me the other day , he was like , ‘ At @ @ @ @ @ really embarrassing that there were vibrators on your website , and now I think it @ @ @ @ @ ! '
He ’ s like , ‘ You ’ re a feminist , Mom @ @ @ @ @ badass.
’ I was like , ‘ Thank you !
’ ”

And earlier this year she talked to Jimmy Kimmel about how her children have grown to appreciate her sex-positive lifestyle website, saying, "My son said to me the other day, he was like, ‘At first I thought it was really embarrassing that there were vibrators on your website, and now I think it’s a great thing!' He’s like, ‘You’re a feminist, Mom. You’re a badass.’ I was like, ‘Thank you!’”


buzzfeed--2020-09-27--27 Hacks, Tips, And Habits To Help You Get Better Sleep Over Time

Here 's more about each : White noise is most popular when it come to falling asleep .
It includes all frequencies at equal intensity — so you wo n't hear one sound more than another , which makes it good at masking loud sounds that stimulate the brain .
Examples of white noise include radio or TV static , vacuum cleaners , or a fan .
Pink noise also contains all frequencies but not at equal intensity .
Lower frequencies are stronger in pink noise , making it more rumbly and deeper sounding than white noise .
Pink noise @ @ @ @ @ @ @ example , steady rain , wind , waves , and rustling leaves .
Brown noise is even deeper than pink noise .
The lower frequencies in brown noise are stronger than in pink noise .
Think waterfalls or thunder .
P.S .
If you 're on the market for a noise machine , you can get one that has 20 unique sounds from Amazon for $ 49.95 .
There are also playlists on Spotify , like this white noise one , or apps , like the myNoise app ( which is free for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ YouTube channel ) .

Here's more about each:
White noise is most popular when it come to falling asleep. It includes all frequencies at equal intensity — so you won't hear one sound more than another, which makes it good at masking loud sounds that stimulate the brain. Examples of white noise include radio or TV static, vacuum cleaners, or a fan.
Pink noise also contains all frequencies but not at equal intensity. Lower frequencies are stronger in pink noise, making it more rumbly and deeper sounding than white noise. Pink noise happens a lot in nature — for example, steady rain, wind, waves, and rustling leaves.
Brown noise is even deeper than pink noise. The lower frequencies in brown noise are stronger than in pink noise. Think waterfalls or thunder.
P.S. If you're on the market for a noise machine, you can get one that has 20 unique sounds from Amazon for $49.95. There are also playlists on Spotify, like this white noise one, or apps, like the myNoise app (which is free for iOS and Android and has its own YouTube channel).


buzzfeed--2020-09-27--16 A+ Period Tweets That Made Me Laugh More Than I Should Have

If you 're like me and you hate periods with a passion , then you 've come to the right @ @ @ @ @ period tweets are here to comfort you like two Advils and an extra strong heating @ @ @ @ @ you like what you read , why not give these Twitter users a follow ?

If you're like me and you hate periods with a passion, then you've come to the right place. Because these funny period tweets are here to comfort you like two Advils and an extra strong heating pad. BTW, if you like what you read, why not give these Twitter users a follow?


buzzfeed--2020-09-27--Penn Badgley And Domino Kirke Welcome Their First Child Together

`` Pregnancy after loss is a whole other thing .
After two miscarriages in a row , we were ready @ @ @ @ @ stopped trusting my body and started to accept the fact that I was done .
@ @ @ @ @ I ’ ve seen and heard it all . ''

BuzzFeed Bring Me
Obsessed with travel? Discover unique things to do, places to eat, and sights to see in the best destinations around the world with Bring Me!


buzzfeed--2020-09-28--America’s “Patchwork Pandemic” Is Why We Haven’t Gotten COVID-19 Under Control

The world ’ s most powerful nation has played whack-a-mole with the coronavirus , slowing its transmission in one place only for it to flare up somewhere else .
As the US marched steadily toward 200,000 recorded deaths from COVID-19 , President Donald Trump returned to a familiar line that he has pushed since the start of the pandemic : “ It is going away.
” In reality , COVID-19 is not going away — certainly not before an election that for many will be a referendum on Trump ’ s handling of this crisis .
Over the past six @ @ @ @ @ @ @ massive game of whack-a-mole with the coronavirus , temporarily taming its spread in one place only to have it flare up somewhere else where stringent controls on viral transmission were either never put in place , or were relaxed before it was safe to do so .
This patchwork spread of COVID-19 has kept the world ’ s most powerful nation in the coronavirus ’ s grip , as shown in these animations tracking its spread as it killed 200,000 Americans across the country since March .
This map shows the weekly rate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people for what the US Census Bureau calls “ core-based statistical areas.
” These consist of a county or combination of counties containing at least one city with at least 10,000 people .
While some rural areas that are grayed out in our map have also been hit hard by COVID-19 , this geographical view clearly reveals the shifting patchwork of hotspots of viral transmission that has characterized the US epidemic so far .
As testing has expanded across the nation , the meaning of a “ case ” has changed : Those @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or no symptoms who would not have been tested in the early days .
( Read the methods to learn how we set the color scale so that the map still highlights the initial outbreak in and around New York City . )
The animation reveals the restless pattern of what the Atlantic ’ s Ed Yong in May dubbed America ’ s “ patchwork pandemic.
” Unlike countries in Europe , Asia , and Oceania that were able to enact nationwide measures to limit the spread of the virus , the US @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Instead , individual states , cities , and counties temporarily got things under control , only for the virus to find susceptible populations elsewhere , especially in places with limited restrictions on gatherings and no face mask requirements .
“ This is just spreading from place to place to place , and it ’ s going to continue to do that , ” Kate Grabowski , an epidemiologist at Johns Hopkins University , told BuzzFeed News .
In part , the patchwork pandemic in the US is a consequence of the US federal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
But epidemiologists and health policy experts fault the Trump administration for failing to develop a strong national infection-control strategy and to coordinate with state and county health departments to tackle the crisis head on .
“ One of my major concerns about the pandemic response is that we ’ ve never had a united plan for the United States , ” Howard Koh of the Harvard T. H. Chan School of Public Health , formerly assistant secretary of health in the Obama administration , told BuzzFeed News .
Instead , individual state @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on when and how to lock down and reopen .
Even after New York City and other parts of the Northeast were hit hard in April , lockdowns elsewhere were inconsistent and often short-lived .
Encouraged by Trump , states across the South and West rushed to open bars , restaurants , and other businesses in May , despite failing to meet White House and CDC guidelines for reopening .
“ We didn ’ t have a consistent imposition of public health measures , ” Ezekiel Emanuel , vice provost of global initiatives @ @ @ @ @ @ @ former health policy adviser to the Obama administration , told BuzzFeed News .
“ And then we rushed to open up things like restaurants and bars.
” The result was the surge in cases across the Sun Belt states that took off from mid-June , clearly visible in the animation after early infection hotspots around New York City , New Orleans , and Detroit had calmed down .
New local outbreaks have continued to emerge .
Right now , some of the worst affected areas are in Wisconsin — where cases have surged @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ We have this rolling thunder of waves of illness across the country , ” Koh said .
A lack of leadership at the federal and state level also means that the nation has missed on opportunity to systematically gather information on which interventions are most effective in curbing viral transmission , according to Jessica Metcalf , a demographer at Princeton University who studies infectious disease dynamics .
“ We still do n't have a robust sense of what works to reduce transmission , and how this scales with the costs , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
This animation of COVID-19 deaths highlights the enormously high death tolls in April in New York City and the surrounding area in particular .
Death rates are now lower in part because doctors have gotten better at treating the people who are most seriously ill. We now know that putting people on ventilators is less helpful than was initially thought .
Laying severely ill patients face down seems to help , as does treatment with steroids and the antiviral drug remdesivir , given emergency approval on May 1 .
Still , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ already disadvantaged local communities , including high death rates among Native Americans in counties including Navajo , Arizona , and McKinley , New Mexico — and more recently in the border communities of southeast Texas , where large numbers of people in the Latino community have died .
Across the nation , Black Americans have disproportionately been infected and died : The patchwork pandemic has underlined the nation ’ s stark racial and economic divides .
These charts show the daily counts of cases and deaths for the nation as a whole .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ France , and Spain are now wrestling with a significant “ second wave ” of COVID-19 after months with relatively few cases , the US never had any respite over the summer months .
Instead , the patchwork pandemic has given the US an ongoing rollercoaster of infections and deaths .
And over the past couple of the weeks , new confirmed cases have been trending up once again .
Experts warn that this rollercoaster will continue , with outbreaks likely to return to places where the virus has already wrought havoc once @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
It ’ s an endemic disease at this point , ” Grabowski said .
“ I think we ’ re certainly going to see increases in infections in New York City and Florida again.
” The big hope is that an effective vaccine can finally bring things under control — not eliminating the virus , but turning it into something we can live with .
“ If we can eventually get a vaccine that is widely available and effective , there ’ s a chance that this ‘ patchwork ’ that you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that ’ s a big ‘ if , ’ ” Maia Majumder , a computational epidemiologist at Harvard University , told BuzzFeed News by email .
Right now , Trump is butting heads with senior health officials in the administration over his desire to get a vaccine approved before the election , pushing back against safeguards to ensure that candidate vaccines are only approved for the public after rigorous processes to determine their safety and efficacy .
Few experts think a massive rollout across the majority of the population can happen before the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ if things go well .
“ I keep saying November 2021 , ” Emanuel said .
Anthony Fauci , director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases , has said that a vaccine that is 75 % effective would be unlikely to achieve the herd immunity needed to finally stop rampant transmission of the coronavirus and allow us to resume something like our previous lives if only two-thirds of Americans take it .
And a growing worry is that many people won ’ t take a vaccine .
According to a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , just 51 % of Americans said they would definitely or probably take a vaccine if it were available today .
That level of hesitancy exceeds the hard core of committed antivaxxers , and seems to reflect wider concerns that approval may be rushed before safety has been fully established .
“ I think the hesitancy reflects the politicization , ” Emanuel said .

This map shows the weekly rate of new confirmed COVID-19 cases per 100,000 people for what the US Census Bureau calls “core-based statistical areas.” These consist of a county or combination of counties containing at least one city with at least 10,000 people. While some rural areas that are grayed out in our map have also been hit hard by COVID-19, this geographical view clearly reveals the shifting patchwork of hot spots of viral transmission that has characterized the US epidemic so far.
As testing has expanded across the nation, the meaning of a “case” has changed: Those identified today include many people with mild or no symptoms who would not have been tested in the early days. (Read the methods to learn how we set the color scale so that the map still highlights the initial outbreak in and around New York City.)
The animation reveals the restless pattern of what the Atlantic’s Ed Yong in May dubbed America’s “patchwork pandemic.” Unlike countries in Europe, Asia, and Oceania that were able to enact nationwide measures to limit the spread of the virus, the US never took a coordinated national approach.
Instead, individual states, cities, and counties temporarily got things under control, only for the virus to find susceptible populations elsewhere, especially in places with limited restrictions on gatherings and no face mask requirements.
“This is just spreading from place to place to place, and it’s going to continue to do that,” Kate Grabowski, an epidemiologist at Johns Hopkins University, told BuzzFeed News.
In part, the patchwork pandemic in the US is a consequence of the US federal system, which gives autonomy to states. But epidemiologists and health policy experts fault the Trump administration for failing to develop a strong national infection-control strategy and to coordinate with state and county health departments to tackle the crisis head-on.
“One of my major concerns about the pandemic response is that we’ve never had a united plan for the United States,” Howard Koh of the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, formerly assistant secretary of health in the Obama administration, told BuzzFeed News.
Instead, individual state and local governments have taken the lead on when and how to lock down and reopen. Even after New York City and other parts of the Northeast were hit hard in April, lockdowns elsewhere were inconsistent and often short-lived.
Encouraged by Trump, states across the South and West rushed to open bars, restaurants, and other businesses in May, despite failing to meet White House and CDC guidelines for reopening.
“We didn’t have a consistent imposition of public health measures,” Ezekiel Emanuel, vice provost of global initiatives at the University of Pennsylvania and a former health policy adviser to the Obama administration, told BuzzFeed News. “And then we rushed to open up things like restaurants and bars.”
The result was the surge in cases across the Sun Belt states that took off from mid-June, clearly visible in the animation after early infection hot spots around New York City, New Orleans, and Detroit had calmed down.
New local outbreaks have continued to emerge. Right now, some of the worst affected areas are in Wisconsin — where cases have surged in 18- to 24-year-olds in recent weeks.
“We have this rolling thunder of waves of illness across the country,” Koh said.
A lack of leadership at the federal and state level also means that the nation has missed on opportunity to systematically gather information on which interventions are most effective in curbing viral transmission, according to Jessica Metcalf, a demographer at Princeton University who studies infectious disease dynamics.
“We still don't have a robust sense of what works to reduce transmission, and how this scales with the costs,” Metcalf told BuzzFeed News by email.
Weekly coronavirus deaths


buzzfeed--2020-09-28--A Russian Billionaire With Close Ties To Putin Made Suspicious Payments To Nobu

Exquisite sushi , a celebrity chef , and glamorous clientele have made Nobu , a restaurant and hotel empire with more than 40 outlets in 20 countries , one of the world ’ s most famous luxury brands .
But one aspect of the chain ’ s expansion has so far remained a secret : Nobu accepted more than $ 600,000 that its bank deemed suspicious , as part of a deal with a close associate of Vladimir Putin who also has strong ties to the White House .
That associate , the billionaire Russian real estate developer Aras Agalarov @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2016 meeting at Trump Tower where senior members of the Trump campaign expected to receive dirt on Hillary Clinton .
Agalarov ’ s company , Crocus International , runs two Nobu restaurants in Moscow , one in the heart of the city and a second in the glittering Crocus City megamall , site of the 2013 Miss Universe beauty pageant that Donald Trump ran .
Confidential government documents reveal , however , that for a time , Crocus International paid Nobu ’ s hefty licensing fees through untraceable offshore companies , which experts @ @ @ @ @ @ @ money laundering .
The arrangement led the bank ’ s investigators to threaten to stop accepting the payments entirely .
Some came through a Latvian bank that has since been shut down due to its involvement in a Russian money laundering scheme .
The suspicious banking transactions were sent to the US Treasury Department ’ s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network , known as FinCEN .
They were compiled , along with thousands of pages of other records , in response to requests by the Senate Intelligence Committee as part of its inquiry into @ @ @ @ @ @ @ presidential election .
The Nobu documents , revealed here for the first time , provide additional information about the Agalarov family , whose business dealings were discussed in the Mueller report .
The documents are part of the more than 2,100 suspicious activity reports , or SARs , that BuzzFeed News shared with the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists and more than 100 news organizations around the world as part of the FinCEN Files investigation .
By law , banks must file these documents when they detect the hallmarks of money laundering or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in and of themselves evidence of a crime , but they can support investigations and intelligence gathering .
The FinCEN Files also open a window onto the scope and scale of the dirty economy .
They show suspicious transactions from untraceable offshore companies , like the ones that Crocus International used , located around the globe .
From Hollywood entertainment to Venezuelan public housing , almost no part of the world ’ s economy is untouched by this shadow financial system — not even the A5 Wagyu beef that Nobu serves , rare @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Agalarov is an unlikely business partner for a hospitality empire cofounded by Robert De Niro , the actor who has emerged as an outspoken critic of Trump .
From the podium at the 2018 National Board of Review awards , De Niro denounced Trump as a “ fucking fool.
” He has stated that he would never let the president into any of the Nobu restaurants .
Agalarov , by contrast , reportedly had Trump sit at his table at his 58th birthday party .
De Niro did not respond to multiple requests @ @ @ @ @ @ @ SARs do not suggest that De Niro himself was involved in or even aware of these financial irregularities , and they do not fault Nobu , which the bank referred to as “ non-concerning.
” Nobu ’ s corporate controller was aware of the irregular payments , and he tried repeatedly to get the Agalarovs to stop making them .
Scott Balber , the attorney for Agalarov , said all of the offshore companies cited in the SARs are owned by Agalarov , along with other similar companies that he uses as part @ @ @ @ @ @ @ transactions , he said : “ Most people do n't run their businesses in anticipation of a Buzzfeed reporter 's questions years later , based upon illegally leaked SARS.
” He said there were no problems .
Back in 2009 , Nobu was looking to expand to Russia , and the family of real estate billionaires paved the way .
`` Well , it just happened that we found the Agalarovs now , ” De Niro told the Moscow News when the first Nobu Moscow opened in April 2009 .
“ Without them @ @ @ @ @ @ @ . ''
As Nobu and Crocus International prepared to open the second restaurant in the Crocus City mall , a US bank was flagging financial transactions that seemed fishy .
Nobu Restaurant Group requires its partners to pay fees for licensing as well as for things like clothes and electric stoves .
But in late 2014 , payments for the Moscow locations began arriving not from Crocus International , the entity that signed the licensing agreement , but from companies in offshore havens known for money laundering and tax evasion , such as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and Belize .
In August 2015 , according to a suspicious activity report that First Republic Bank sent to the Treasury Department , Nobu ’ s corporate controller wrote Crocus International a reminder that payments needed to be sent from the company ’ s account .
He told BuzzFeed News that he reached out “ multiple times ” to ask them to stop sending the money through the offshore companies .
The controller , Merrick Rhodes , said he knew that First Republic might look askance at payments from an unknown third party @ @ @ @ @ @ @ requested that it comes through one of the parent companies , ” he told BuzzFeed News .
“ Obviously our bank wants us to have it come from them.
” By the time Nobu Crocus City opened in November of that year , investigators from the bank had spotted more than $ 200,000 in payments they deemed suspicious .
Denso Trading Ltd. , which was registered in the United Kingdom by a Cypriot company to an unrelated Russian , sent more than $ 90,000 and then dissolved .
Denso sent payments through Trasta @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was involved in a notorious money laundering ring .
First Republic continued filing suspicious activity reports to the Treasury Department — and processing those suspicious payments .
Documents reviewed by BuzzFeed News showed that the bank had filed nine reports between November 2014 and June 2017 , flagging $ 602,886 from at least 10 different offshore companies .
In the June 2017 report , the bank said that the transactions it reviewed “ were concerning based upon the non-transparent nature of the wire originators.
” Geo Business Invest Corp. , which the bank @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in Belize , sent more than $ 170,000 .
Other SARs filed by First Republic also mention the use of possible shell companies .
First Republic became more aggressive in its approach in June 2017 , threatening to withhold payments that did not originate from a Crocus International account .
First Republic Bank declined to comment about the transactions .
Rhodes , Nobu ’ s controller , told BuzzFeed News that in early 2017 , the licensing agreements for the two restaurants were transferred to another company , NIME LLC , owned by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Since then , he said , there have been no payments from anyone other than the company named in the contract.●

The SARs do not suggest that De Niro himself was involved in or even aware of these financial irregularities, and they do not fault Nobu, which the bank referred to as “non-concerning.” Nobu’s corporate controller was aware of the irregular payments, and he tried repeatedly to get the Agalarovs to stop making them.
Scott Balber, the attorney for Agalarov, said all of the offshore companies cited in the SARs are owned by Agalarov, along with other similar companies that he uses as part of his business.
Asked about the transactions, he said: “Most people don't run their businesses in anticipation of a Buzzfeed reporter's questions years later, based upon illegally leaked SARS.” He said there were no problems.
Back in 2009, Nobu was looking to expand to Russia, and the family of real estate billionaires paved the way.
"Well, it just happened that we found the Agalarovs now,” De Niro told the Moscow News when the first Nobu Moscow opened in April 2009. “Without them, we wouldn't have managed it."
As Nobu and Crocus International prepared to open the second restaurant in the Crocus City mall, a US bank was flagging financial transactions that seemed fishy.
Nobu Restaurant Group requires its partners to pay fees for licensing as well as for things like clothes and electric stoves. But in late 2014, payments for the Moscow locations began arriving not from Crocus International, the entity that signed the licensing agreement, but from companies in offshore havens known for money laundering and tax evasion, such as the British Virgin Islands, Anguilla, and Belize.


buzzfeed--2020-09-27--The Victims Of Violence During The Kenosha Protests Are Suing Facebook

Kyle Rittenhouse raises his hands as he walks toward police vehicles after allegedly killing two men and shooting another .
Four people are suing Facebook for its alleged role in enabling the violence that overtook the city of Kenosha , Wisconsin , in August .
The five-count civil complaint filed late Tuesday in a Wisconsin federal court argues that Facebook “ empowered right wing militias to inflict extreme violence and deprive Plaintiffs and protestors of their rights ” by providing a platform for the groups to recruit members and plan violence .
It also accuses alleged shooter Kyle Rittenhouse , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ boogaloo , ” and the “ commander ” of the self-described militia group Kenosha Guard of being part of a violent conspiracy to violate the constitutional rights of four Black Lives Matter protesters , including the partner of a man killed during the protests .
The suit , the first to accuse Facebook of abetting the violence in Kenosha , centers on the night of Aug. 25 , when a Black Lives Matter protest in the Wisconsin city descended into violence .
Two men were killed and another was shot after an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who crossed state lines from Illinois and used a semi-automatic weapon .
He is now charged with two counts of first-degree murder , and one count each of attempted homicide , recklessly endangering the safety of two people , and possessing a weapon while under the age of 18 .
“ There is a failure on the part of Facebook to act based upon warnings that result [ ed ] in armed militias violating state law and in the case of Rittenhouse going to a peaceful protest to violently repress and deter American @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ” attorney Jason Flores-Williams , who filed the suit , told BuzzFeed News .
The plaintiffs are Hannah Gittings , whose partner was among those Rittenhouse allegedly killed ; Christopher McNeal , a Black man and longtime resident of Kenosha ; Nathan Peet , a Kenosha resident who attempted to assist one of the people allegedly killed by Rittenhouse ; and Carmen Palmer , a Black woman who traveled to Kenosha from Milwaukee with her kids and a church protest group to march against racial injustice .
Earlier this month , BuzzFeed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ page encouraging attendees to bring arms to the city had been flagged 455 times by people on Facebook .
CEO Mark Zuckerberg told employees the company ’ s failure to remove the event page was “ an operational mistake.
” BuzzFeed News also reported that Facebook did not remove the page after the shootings occurred , despite its claims to employees and the press to the contrary .
The company later apologized for misleading the public .
This lawsuit , McNeal v. Facebook , Inc. , follows a similar complaint filed in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Right ” rally held in Charlottesville , Virginia , in 2017 .
Both lawsuits cite Reconstruction-era laws in attempts to hold white supremacists accountable for violent suppression of constitutional rights .
The Kenosha suit also attempts to pierce the broad protections afforded to platforms like Facebook for user-generated content under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act .
Do you work at Facebook or another technology company ?
We 'd love to hear from you .
Reach out at craig.silverman @ buzzfeed.com and ryan.mac @ buzzfeed.com or via one of our tip line @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for Rittenhouse , called the suit `` nonsense . ''
`` As to Kyle Rittenhouse , this lawsuit is errant nonsense but may provide a golden opportunity for obtaining documents and sworn testimony from Facebook to bolster Kyle ’ s future defamation case against Facebook for falsely accusing him of mass murder , '' Wood told BuzzFeed News , referring to Facebook 's decision to designate the incident a mass shooting and remove Rittenhouse 's account and any content celebrating his actions .
`` Thus , I view the lawsuit as a blessing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ defendants did not immediately respond to a request for comment .
The complaint says the four plaintiffs were “ terrorized , assaulted , harassed , and placed in so much fear when facing the business end of military grade assault rifles that they determined it was too dangerous to continue to protest.
” Palmer , one of the plaintiffs , told BuzzFeed News that people she described as white supremacists called her and her children racist slurs and pointed guns at them as they protested peacefully .
She said that fearing for their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ but discovered their car tires had been slashed .
As they stood near their car , a man riding in a truck with other heavily armed people pepper-sprayed them .

Four people are suing Facebook for its alleged role in enabling the violence that overtook the city of Kenosha, Wisconsin, in August.
The five-count civil complaint filed late Tuesday in a Wisconsin federal court argues that Facebook “empowered right wing militias to inflict extreme violence and deprive Plaintiffs and protestors of their rights” by providing a platform for the groups to recruit members and plan violence. It also accuses alleged shooter Kyle Rittenhouse, a follower of the fringe anti-government group “boogaloo,” and the “commander” of the self-described militia group Kenosha Guard of being part of a violent conspiracy to violate the constitutional rights of four Black Lives Matter protesters, including the partner of a man killed during the protests.
The suit, the first to accuse Facebook of abetting the violence in Kenosha, centers on the night of Aug. 25, when a Black Lives Matter protest in the Wisconsin city descended into violence. Two men were killed and another was shot after an alleged altercation with Rittenhouse, a 17-year-old who crossed state lines from Illinois and used a semi-automatic weapon. He is now charged with two counts of first-degree murder, and one count each of attempted homicide, recklessly endangering the safety of two people, and possessing a weapon while under the age of 18.
“There is a failure on the part of Facebook to act based upon warnings that result[ed] in armed militias violating state law and in the case of Rittenhouse going to a peaceful protest to violently repress and deter American citizens from engaging in their constitutional rights,” attorney Jason Flores-Williams, who filed the suit, told BuzzFeed News.
The plaintiffs are Hannah Gittings, whose partner was among those Rittenhouse allegedly killed; Christopher McNeal, a Black man and longtime resident of Kenosha; Nathan Peet, a Kenosha resident who attempted to assist one of the people allegedly killed by Rittenhouse; and Carmen Palmer, a Black woman who traveled to Kenosha from Milwaukee with her kids and a church protest group to march against racial injustice.
Earlier this month, BuzzFeed News reported that a Kenosha Guard event page encouraging attendees to bring arms to the city had been flagged 455 times by people on Facebook. CEO Mark Zuckerberg told employees the company’s failure to remove the event page was “an operational mistake.” BuzzFeed News also reported that Facebook did not remove the page after the shootings occurred, despite its claims to employees and the press to the contrary. The company later apologized for misleading the public.
This lawsuit, McNeal v. Facebook, Inc., follows a similar complaint filed in the wake of the deadly “Unite the Right” rally held in Charlottesville, Virginia, in 2017. Both lawsuits cite Reconstruction-era laws in attempts to hold white supremacists accountable for violent suppression of constitutional rights. The Kenosha suit also attempts to pierce the broad protections afforded to platforms like Facebook for user-generated content under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act.
Do you work at Facebook or another technology company? We'd love to hear from you. Reach out at craig.silverman@buzzfeed.com and ryan.mac@buzzfeed.com or via one of our tip line channels.
Lin Wood, an attorney for Rittenhouse, called the suit "nonsense."
"As to Kyle Rittenhouse, this lawsuit is errant nonsense but may provide a golden opportunity for obtaining documents and sworn testimony from Facebook to bolster Kyle’s future defamation case against Facebook for falsely accusing him of mass murder," Wood told BuzzFeed News, referring to Facebook's decision to designate the incident a mass shooting and remove Rittenhouse's account and any content celebrating his actions. "Thus, I view the lawsuit as a blessing in disguise.”
Facebook and the other defendants did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
The complaint says the four plaintiffs were “terrorized, assaulted, harassed, and placed in so much fear when facing the business end of military grade assault rifles that they determined it was too dangerous to continue to protest.”
Palmer, one of the plaintiffs, told BuzzFeed News that people she described as white supremacists called her and her children racist slurs and pointed guns at them as they protested peacefully. She said that fearing for their safety, they decided to leave, but discovered their car tires had been slashed. As they stood near their car, a man riding in a truck with other heavily armed people pepper-sprayed them.


buzzfeed--2020-09-28--16 Funny Vagina Tweets That You'll Probably Only Laugh At If You Have A Vagina

Hey , hi , hello .
If you have a vagina and like to laugh , then you 've come @ @ @ @ @ Because these funny tweets about vaginas , vulvas , and more are A+++ .
BTW @ @ @ @ @ you read , why not give some of these clever Twitter users a follow !

Hey, hi, hello. If you have a vagina and like to laugh, then you've come to the right place. Because these funny tweets about vaginas, vulvas, and more are A+++. BTW, if you like what you read, why not give some of these clever Twitter users a follow!


buzzfeed--2020-09-28--Lizzo Said The Body Positivity Movement Has Been "Made Acceptable" And Is "No Longer Benefiting" The

Lizzo Said The Body Positivity Movement Has Been "Made Acceptable" And Is "No Longer Benefiting" The People Who Created It

`` I feel no ways about that , because inclusivity is what my message is always about , '' she @ @ @ @ @ 'm glad that this conversation is being included in the mainstream narrative . ''
She @ @ @ @ @ don ’ t like is how the people that this term was created for are @ @ @ @ @ Girls with back fat , girls with bellies that hang , girls with thighs that @ @ @ @ @ that overlap .
Girls with stretch marks .
You know , girls who are in @ @ @ @ @ need to be benefiting from the mainstream effect of body positivity now . ''

The "Juice" singer went on to explain that she thinks it would be "lazy" at this point for her to call herself "body positive", and so she's pushing for a different label instead.


buzzfeed--2020-09-28--This Red-Food Visual Test Is Harder Than You Probably Think

The food in the box is an apple !


buzzfeed--2020-09-29--A Psychologist Shared Photos From A Phenomenon Called The Thatcher Effect And It's Wild

`` This is thought to happen because our brains are so finely tuned to recognizing faces in the upright position @ @ @ @ @ identify many faces that are very similar as unique individuals very easily .
It has @ @ @ @ @ processes involved in face recognition rely as much on the structural relationship between features as @ @ @ @ @ example , the configuration between eyes , nose , and mouth , '' she explained @

"This is thought to happen because our brains are so finely tuned to recognizing faces in the upright position. This enables us to identify many faces that are very similar as unique individuals very easily. It has been hypothesized that the cognitive processes involved in face recognition rely as much on the structural relationship between features as the features themselves. For example, the configuration between eyes, nose, and mouth," she explained.


buzzfeed--2020-09-28--27 Hacks, Tips, And Habits To Help You Get Better Sleep Over Time


buzzfeed--2020-09-28--Republicans Are Moving Judge Amy Coney Barrett’s Nomination Faster Than Any Supreme Court Nominee Si

Republicans Are Moving Judge Amy Coney Barrett’s Nomination Faster Than Any Supreme Court Nominee Since 1975

WASHINGTON — Republicans are setting the fastest Supreme Court nomination timeline in nearly five decades as they rush to confirm Judge Amy Coney Barrett with just five weeks until the election .
Multiple polls have shown that a majority of Americans believe the winner of the Nov. 3 election should fill the late justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg ’ s seat on the Supreme Court .
But Republicans have said they will vote this year on Barrett ’ s nomination , regardless of whether President Donald Trump wins , and after they blocked then-president Barack Obama ’ s Supreme Court nominee @ @ @ @ @ @ @ year .
Senate Judiciary Committee Chair Lindsey Graham has scheduled Barrett ’ s confirmation hearing to start on Oct. 12 , just 16 days after President Donald Trump announced her nomination on Saturday .
Defending the speedy timeline , Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and Republicans say history is on their side , pointing to examples of justices who went from a nomination announcement to a Senate hearing in a two-week time frame .
But that data skips over 45 years of recent history , going back to an era when Supreme Court @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fights that they are now .
Since the 1980s and the political battles over then-president Ronald Reagan ’ s Supreme Court picks , it ’ s taken nominees at least a month to get to a hearing before the Senate after being nominated , and it ’ s often taken much longer .
It took 57 days for Trump ’ s last Supreme Court nominee , Justice Brett Kavanaugh , to appear for his first confirmation hearing after being announced at the White House ; his nomination was briefly held up over sexual @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , which he denied during a quickly scheduled second hearing .
Justice Neil Gorsuch , Trump ’ s first nominee , had his hearing 48 days after his White House reveal .
Ginsburg ’ s nomination moved more quickly , but it still took 36 days for her to have a hearing before the Senate after then-president Bill Clinton announced her nomination in June 1993 .
Trump announced Barrett ’ s nomination at the White House just over a week after Ginsburg died .
The president has said that he ’ s pushing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of getting her seated before the Nov. 3 election , saying he ’ ll need a broader conservative majority on the Supreme Court if it plays a role in deciding the election ’ s outcome .
The courts are already considering dozens of cases related to mail-in voting during the coronavirus pandemic and Trump ’ s campaign and the Republican National Committee are fighting multiple legal battles to limit remote voting .
Democrats are furious .
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer released a statement on Saturday accusing Republicans of “ shamelessly rushing ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ignoring the late justice ’ s wish that she not be replaced until after the election .
“ This reprehensible power grab is a cynical attack on the legitimacy of the Court , ” Schumer said .
Responding to criticism about the timeline for Barrett ’ s confirmation proceedings , McConnell ’ s office put out a fact sheet identifying eight justices who went from a presidential announcement to a Senate hearing in two weeks or less .
Those justices were all confirmed between 1962 and 1975 .
“ There 's nothing inappropriate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Court vacancies have been dealt with in a shorter time frame than the time frame between now and the election or the time frame between now and the end of this Senate , which is at the end of this calendar year , ” McConnell told Fox News .
“ They do n't like what happened .
I understand that .
”

WASHINGTON — Republicans are setting the fastest Supreme Court nomination timeline in nearly five decades as they rush to confirm Judge Amy Coney Barrett with just five weeks until the election.
Multiple polls have shown that a majority of Americans believe the winner of the Nov. 3 election should fill the late justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s seat on the Supreme Court. But Republicans have said they will vote this year on Barrett’s nomination, regardless of whether President Donald Trump wins, and after they blocked then-president Barack Obama’s Supreme Court nominee in 2016 because it was an election year. Senate Judiciary Committee Chair Lindsey Graham has scheduled Barrett’s confirmation hearing to start on Oct. 12, just 16 days after President Donald Trump announced her nomination on Saturday.
Defending the speedy timeline, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and Republicans say history is on their side, pointing to examples of justices who went from a nomination announcement to a Senate hearing in a two-week time frame. But that data skips over 45 years of recent history, going back to an era when Supreme Court nominations weren’t the fierce partisan fights that they are now.
Since the 1980s and the political battles over then-president Ronald Reagan’s Supreme Court picks, it’s taken nominees at least a month to get to a hearing before the Senate after being nominated, and it’s often taken much longer.
It took 57 days for Trump’s last Supreme Court nominee, Justice Brett Kavanaugh, to appear for his first confirmation hearing after being announced at the White House; his nomination was briefly held up over sexual assault allegations from his high school days, which he denied during a quickly scheduled second hearing. Justice Neil Gorsuch, Trump’s first nominee, had his hearing 48 days after his White House reveal. Ginsburg’s nomination moved more quickly, but it still took 36 days for her to have a hearing before the Senate after then-president Bill Clinton announced her nomination in June 1993.
Trump announced Barrett’s nomination at the White House just over a week after Ginsburg died. The president has said that he’s pushing Barrett’s nomination in the hopes of getting her seated before the Nov. 3 election, saying he’ll need a broader conservative majority on the Supreme Court if it plays a role in deciding the election’s outcome. The courts are already considering dozens of cases related to mail-in voting during the coronavirus pandemic and Trump’s campaign and the Republican National Committee are fighting multiple legal battles to limit remote voting.
Democrats are furious. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer released a statement on Saturday accusing Republicans of “shamelessly rushing” to fill Ginsburg’s seat and ignoring the late justice’s wish that she not be replaced until after the election.
“This reprehensible power grab is a cynical attack on the legitimacy of the Court,” Schumer said.
Responding to criticism about the timeline for Barrett’s confirmation proceedings, McConnell’s office put out a fact sheet identifying eight justices who went from a presidential announcement to a Senate hearing in two weeks or less. Those justices were all confirmed between 1962 and 1975.
“There's nothing inappropriate about filling this vacancy. Many Supreme Court vacancies have been dealt with in a shorter time frame than the time frame between now and the election or the time frame between now and the end of this Senate, which is at the end of this calendar year,” McConnell told Fox News. “They don't like what happened. I understand that.”


buzzfeed--2020-09-28--Here’s How Judge Amy Coney Barrett, Trump’s Newest Supreme Court Nominee, Has Ruled On Abortion, Imm

Here’s How Judge Amy Coney Barrett, Trump’s Newest Supreme Court Nominee, Has Ruled On Abortion, Immigration, And Policing

WASHINGTON — Judge Amy Coney Barrett has only been a judge for three years , but she ’ s already developed a robust record on politically divisive issues — including abortion , immigration , and gun rights .
President Donald Trump announced Barrett as his nominee to fill the late justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg ’ s seat on Saturday , just over a week after Ginsburg died of pancreatic cancer .
Barrett was confirmed to the US Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit in late 2017 , following a career largely spent as a law school academic .
Barrett @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump ’ s prior two Supreme Court appointees , Justices Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh , who each spent more than a decade as lower court judges .
Still , her opinions , dissents , and the decisions she ’ s joined written by her colleagues shed light on her legal philosophy .
According to the 7th Circuit ’ s online database of decisions , she ’ s written 97 majority opinions , six dissents , and four concurring opinions .
Her writing style is clear , and she isn ’ t known @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s views on abortion are likely to feature prominently in the confirmation fight .
She was on record as being against abortion before she became a judge , and on the 7th Circuit , she has sided with states trying to impose restrictions on the procedure .
Democrats and reproductive rights advocates warn that replacing Ginsburg — a reliable vote for protecting reproductive health — with Barrett would empower the court to revisit abortion rights laid out by the court in 1973 in Roe v. Wade and a line of decisions that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ record of siding with fellow Republican appointees on abortion and other politically divisive issues , with some exceptions — in a gun rights case , for instance , she took an even more expansive view of the reach of the Second Amendment than the two Ronald Reagan appointees who were also on the panel .
In an immigration case , she joined two of her more liberal-leaning colleagues not only in reviving a Mexican man ’ s challenge to a deportation order , but also rejecting a legal opinion by former attorney general @ @ @ @ @ @ @ US immigration courts to close pending cases .
With the election less than six weeks away , one area of the law of intense interest for both Democrats and Republicans is how much state and local officials can expand opportunities for mail-in and absentee voting during the coronavirus pandemic .
Barrett hasn ’ t participated in a case about that to date .
Before becoming a judge , Barrett was a law professor at Notre Dame Law School , a post that gave her more freedom to talk about her personal beliefs ; @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of conduct that prevents them from publicly expressing views about issues that might end up in court .
She spoke about her opposition to abortion and was a member of University Faculty for Life at Notre Dame .
Barrett hasn ’ t written opinions or dissents about abortion since becoming a judge , but she has participated in cases that offer insight into how she ’ d approach the issue as a Supreme Court justice .
One such case involved two Indiana laws , one that required abortion providers to bury or cremate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ based on the race , sex , or disability of the fetus .
In April 2018 , a three-judge 7th Circuit panel that didn ’ t include Barrett blocked both laws from going into effect .
Indiana asked the full 7th Circuit to reconsider the ruling on the fetal remains disposal law .
In an order issued a few months later , the 7th Circuit judges split on whether to take the case en banc , which meant the original decision stood .
Barrett voted in favor of reconsidering the panel ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ dissent written by Judge Frank Easterbrook that not only questioned the decision to strike down the restrictions on disposing of fetal remains , but also the injunction that blocked Indiana from banning abortion due to race , sex , or disability , which the state hadn ’ t asked the full court to hear .
Another case Barrett participated in involved another Indiana law that requires pregnant teenagers to get permission from a parent or guardian to have an abortion .
Pregnant teens can petition a judge to bypass parental consent , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Circuit panel ruled that Indiana could not enforce a law requiring a teen ’ s parents or guardians to be notified if they went to court to petition a judge .
A few months later , a majority of the 7th Circuit judges voted against reconsidering that decision .
Barrett was one of the judges who voted in favor of granting Indiana ’ s request to reargue the case before the full court .
She didn ’ t write a statement explaining that vote but joined a one-paragraph dissent written by Judge Michael @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s parental notification law hadn ’ t taken effect yet , the case raised important questions about a court ’ s authority to block it .
Trump ’ s executive orders restricting immigration from majority-Muslim nations was the first big Supreme Court fight for his administration , and his attempts at enforcing hardline immigration policies have frequently landed in court .
Barrett has a mixed record when it comes to analyzing the administration ’ s immigration policies .
In one of the few cases where Barrett has written about high-level actions taken @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to individual immigration cases , she sided with the government ’ s decision to expand the “ public charge ” rule to deny permanent residency to immigrants that officials deemed likely to use public benefits .
On June 10 , the 7th Circuit ruled 2–1 to uphold an injunction that blocked the expanded “ public charge ” rule .
The two judges in the majority wrote that the Department of Homeland Security had gone too far in expanding the rule to cover immigrants who might use temporary or minimal government assistance .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Judge Diane Wood wrote , “ requires a degree of dependence that goes beyond temporary receipt of supplemental in-kind benefits from any type of public agency.
” Barrett dissented .
Delving into the historical record , she wrote that when the term “ public charge ” became part of federal immigration law in the late 19th century , it wasn ’ t clear how much government assistance it was referring to .
When Congress updated immigration laws in 1996 , she wrote that lawmakers added restrictions that gave the rule more “ bite @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to smaller amounts of government aid .
The challengers and House Democrats had argued that because Congress made welfare benefits available to green card holders , it didn ’ t make sense to deny permanent residency to immigrants who might use those benefits in the future .
Barrett disagreed .
“ A lawful permanent resident who falls on hard times can rely on public assistance to get back on her feet .
Congress ’ s willingness to authorize funds to help immigrants who encounter unexpected trouble is perfectly consistent with its reluctance to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ predictable upon arrival , ” Barrett wrote .
In January 2019 , Barrett wrote a 2–1 opinion upholding the Trump administration ’ s decision to deny a visa to the spouse of a naturalized US citizen based on a finding that the spouse was involved in trying to smuggle children into the United States .
The couple argued and presented evidence that the children were in fact their children and also that the children had drowned .
Barrett agreed with a lower court judge who had dismissed the case on the grounds that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ consular officers .
The judge who dissented wrote that Barrett ’ s interpretation “ sweeps more broadly than required by the Supreme Court and our own precedent ” and deprived the US citizen husband “ of an important constitutional right.
” In May 2019 , the full court voted against reconsidering Barrett ’ s opinion , and she defended her decision against criticism from her dissenting colleagues that she ’ d empowered consular officers with “ unfettered authority ” to reject visas .
In an immigration case decided in June , Barrett found @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of her more liberal-leaning colleagues .
She wrote an opinion not only reviving a deportation challenge but also disagreeing with a legal opinion issued in 2018 by Sessions that restricted the power of immigration judges to administratively close cases , a procedure that puts removal cases on hold .
Qualified immunity , a legal doctrine that allows police to claim immunity against lawsuits accusing them of excessive force and other misconduct , faced new scrutiny this year after the deaths of George Floyd , Breonna Taylor , and other Black people during encounters @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have reached different conclusions over the years about how to apply the doctrine , but the Supreme Court has declined to take up the issue to set nationwide standards .
In August 2019 , Barrett wrote an opinion upholding qualified immunity for Chicago police officers sued over a car stop involving three Black men who argued the officers lacked reasonable suspicion to pull them over .
The officers were investigating a shooting and received dispatches that identified the suspects as three Black men in a gray car .
The descriptions didn ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ over , but Barrett wrote that “ reasonable suspicion can exist without an exact match.
” The judge also wrote that officers could be entitled to immunity even if they said they didn ’ t remember the stop and there was no official report about it , based on other evidence showing what they knew at the time .
In January 2019 , Barrett wrote an opinion denying qualified immunity to a detective who made false statements in a sworn affidavit as part of a murder investigation .
The detective ’ s lies @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Barrett wrote , and the “ unlawfulness of using deliberately falsified allegations to establish probable cause could not be clearer.
” In July 2019 , the 7th Circuit ruled 2-1 in favor of reviving the lawsuit filed by two inmates at an Illinois jail who were hit by buckshot fired by prison guards in response to a fight between other inmates in the dining hall .
The inmates argued the guards used unconstitutional excessive force ( the case didn ’ t involve qualified immunity ) .
The two judges in the majority @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on key issues — such as whether the fight was over when the guards fired their shotguns , where exactly they aimed the warning shots , and why they fired into the crowd or the ceiling instead of a dedicated “ shot box ” — so the case should go to a jury .
Barrett dissented .
She wrote that there was no evidence the guards intentionally hit the inmates , so the inmates couldn ’ t meet a standard that the Supreme Court had laid out for cases challenging prison discipline — @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sadistically.
” She criticized her colleagues , writing that they had tried to “ assist ” the inmates by suggesting possible theories for how the guards intended to hit the inmates that weren ’ t supported by the evidence .
It ’ s been a decade since the Supreme Court heard a major case involving the Second Amendment and the rights of Americans to keep and carry guns .
Kavanaugh , Gorsuch , and Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito Jr. made clear during the court ’ s last term that they think @ @ @ @ @ @ @ issue .
In a March 2019 decision , Barrett wrote that she shared the concern of other conservative judges and gun rights advocates that the Second Amendment was being treated as a “ second-class ” right .
The 7th Circuit had ruled 2–1 to reject a Second Amendment challenge to federal and Wisconsin laws that ban people convicted of most felony crimes from owning or possessing a firearm .
The man who sued had pleaded guilty to one count of mail fraud , for which he was sentenced to one year and one @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fell under the firearms ban .
He argued that the federal and state bans shouldn ’ t apply to nonviolent offenders with no other criminal record .
The two judges in majority found that the government had shown that preventing nonviolent former felons from having guns was “ substantially related to its interest in preventing gun violence.
” They cited studies showing rates of violent crime committed by people who previously were convicted of nonviolent crimes .
Barrett dissented , writing in favor of expanding the Second Amendment ’ s gun rights protections @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a line between restricting former felons from exercising “ civic rights ” — such as voting and serving on a jury — and restricting “ individual rights ” such as owning a gun .
Allowing the government to ban all former felons from owning a gun without proof that a person presented a risk to public safety treated the Second Amendment as a “ second-class right , ” Barrett wrote .
“ History is consistent with common sense : it demonstrates that legislatures have the power to prohibit dangerous people from possessing guns @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people who are dangerous , ” she wrote .
Barrett ’ s nomination now heads to the Senate , where the Judiciary Committee will hold at least one hearing considering her qualifications .
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has said that the Senate will vote this year on her nomination , though it is unclear whether that vote will come before or after Election Day .
Republicans have said they will vote on the nomination regardless of whether Trump wins the election .

WASHINGTON — Judge Amy Coney Barrett has only been a judge for three years, but she’s already developed a robust record on politically divisive issues — including abortion, immigration, and gun rights.
President Donald Trump announced Barrett as his nominee to fill the late justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s seat on Saturday, just over a week after Ginsburg died of pancreatic cancer. Barrett was confirmed to the US Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit in late 2017, following a career largely spent as a law school academic.
Barrett brings less experience as a judge than Trump’s prior two Supreme Court appointees, Justices Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh, who each spent more than a decade as lower court judges. Still, her opinions, dissents, and the decisions she’s joined written by her colleagues shed light on her legal philosophy. According to the 7th Circuit’s online database of decisions, she’s written 97 majority opinions, six dissents, and four concurring opinions. Her writing style is clear, and she isn’t known for rhetorical flourishes or snark.
Barrett’s views on abortion are likely to feature prominently in the confirmation fight. She was on record as being against abortion before she became a judge, and on the 7th Circuit, she has sided with states trying to impose restrictions on the procedure. Democrats and reproductive rights advocates warn that replacing Ginsburg — a reliable vote for protecting reproductive health — with Barrett would empower the court to revisit abortion rights laid out by the court in 1973 in Roe v. Wade and a line of decisions that came after.
Barrett has a consistent record of siding with fellow Republican appointees on abortion and other politically divisive issues, with some exceptions — in a gun rights case, for instance, she took an even more expansive view of the reach of the Second Amendment than the two Ronald Reagan appointees who were also on the panel. In an immigration case, she joined two of her more liberal-leaning colleagues not only in reviving a Mexican man’s challenge to a deportation order, but also rejecting a legal opinion by former attorney general Jeff Sessions that limited the power of US immigration courts to close pending cases.
With the election less than six weeks away, one area of the law of intense interest for both Democrats and Republicans is how much state and local officials can expand opportunities for mail-in and absentee voting during the coronavirus pandemic. Barrett hasn’t participated in a case about that to date.
Abortion
Before becoming a judge, Barrett was a law professor at Notre Dame Law School, a post that gave her more freedom to talk about her personal beliefs; federal judges are bound by a code of conduct that prevents them from publicly expressing views about issues that might end up in court. She spoke about her opposition to abortion and was a member of University Faculty for Life at Notre Dame.
Barrett hasn’t written opinions or dissents about abortion since becoming a judge, but she has participated in cases that offer insight into how she’d approach the issue as a Supreme Court justice.
One such case involved two Indiana laws, one that required abortion providers to bury or cremate fetal remains and another that banned abortions based on the race, sex, or disability of the fetus. In April 2018, a three-judge 7th Circuit panel that didn’t include Barrett blocked both laws from going into effect. Indiana asked the full 7th Circuit to reconsider the ruling on the fetal remains disposal law.
In an order issued a few months later, the 7th Circuit judges split on whether to take the case en banc, which meant the original decision stood. Barrett voted in favor of reconsidering the panel’s ruling against Indiana. She joined a dissent written by Judge Frank Easterbrook that not only questioned the decision to strike down the restrictions on disposing of fetal remains, but also the injunction that blocked Indiana from banning abortion due to race, sex, or disability, which the state hadn’t asked the full court to hear.
Another case Barrett participated in involved another Indiana law that requires pregnant teenagers to get permission from a parent or guardian to have an abortion. Pregnant teens can petition a judge to bypass parental consent, and in August 2019, a three-judge 7th Circuit panel ruled that Indiana could not enforce a law requiring a teen’s parents or guardians to be notified if they went to court to petition a judge. A few months later, a majority of the 7th Circuit judges voted against reconsidering that decision.
Barrett was one of the judges who voted in favor of granting Indiana’s request to reargue the case before the full court. She didn’t write a statement explaining that vote but joined a one-paragraph dissent written by Judge Michael Kanne. Kanne wrote that because Indiana’s parental notification law hadn’t taken effect yet, the case raised important questions about a court’s authority to block it.
Immigration
Trump’s executive orders restricting immigration from majority-Muslim nations was the first big Supreme Court fight for his administration, and his attempts at enforcing hardline immigration policies have frequently landed in court. Barrett has a mixed record when it comes to analyzing the administration’s immigration policies.
In one of the few cases where Barrett has written about high-level actions taken by the Trump administration, as opposed to individual immigration cases, she sided with the government’s decision to expand the “public charge” rule to deny permanent residency to immigrants that officials deemed likely to use public benefits.
On June 10, the 7th Circuit ruled 2–1 to uphold an injunction that blocked the expanded “public charge” rule. The two judges in the majority wrote that the Department of Homeland Security had gone too far in expanding the rule to cover immigrants who might use temporary or minimal government assistance. The term “public charge,” Chief Judge Diane Wood wrote, “requires a degree of dependence that goes beyond temporary receipt of supplemental in-kind benefits from any type of public agency.”
Barrett dissented. Delving into the historical record, she wrote that when the term “public charge” became part of federal immigration law in the late 19th century, it wasn’t clear how much government assistance it was referring to. When Congress updated immigration laws in 1996, she wrote that lawmakers added restrictions that gave the rule more “bite” and made clear that it applied to smaller amounts of government aid.
The challengers and House Democrats had argued that because Congress made welfare benefits available to green card holders, it didn’t make sense to deny permanent residency to immigrants who might use those benefits in the future. Barrett disagreed.
“A lawful permanent resident who falls on hard times can rely on public assistance to get back on her feet. Congress’s willingness to authorize funds to help immigrants who encounter unexpected trouble is perfectly consistent with its reluctance to admit immigrants whose need for help is predictable upon arrival,” Barrett wrote.
In January 2019, Barrett wrote a 2–1 opinion upholding the Trump administration’s decision to deny a visa to the spouse of a naturalized US citizen based on a finding that the spouse was involved in trying to smuggle children into the United States. The couple argued and presented evidence that the children were in fact their children and also that the children had drowned. Barrett agreed with a lower court judge who had dismissed the case on the grounds that courts can’t second-guess decisions by consular officers.
The judge who dissented wrote that Barrett’s interpretation “sweeps more broadly than required by the Supreme Court and our own precedent” and deprived the US citizen husband “of an important constitutional right.” In May 2019, the full court voted against reconsidering Barrett’s opinion, and she defended her decision against criticism from her dissenting colleagues that she’d empowered consular officers with “unfettered authority” to reject visas.
In an immigration case decided in June, Barrett found herself on the same side as two of her more liberal-leaning colleagues. She wrote an opinion not only reviving a deportation challenge but also disagreeing with a legal opinion issued in 2018 by Sessions that restricted the power of immigration judges to administratively close cases, a procedure that puts removal cases on hold.
Police
Qualified immunity, a legal doctrine that allows police to claim immunity against lawsuits accusing them of excessive force and other misconduct, faced new scrutiny this year after the deaths of George Floyd, Breonna Taylor, and other Black people during encounters with law enforcement officers. Federal courts have reached different conclusions over the years about how to apply the doctrine, but the Supreme Court has declined to take up the issue to set nationwide standards.
In August 2019, Barrett wrote an opinion upholding qualified immunity for Chicago police officers sued over a car stop involving three Black men who argued the officers lacked reasonable suspicion to pull them over. The officers were investigating a shooting and received dispatches that identified the suspects as three Black men in a gray car. The descriptions didn’t match the car that the officers pulled over, but Barrett wrote that “reasonable suspicion can exist without an exact match.” The judge also wrote that officers could be entitled to immunity even if they said they didn’t remember the stop and there was no official report about it, based on other evidence showing what they knew at the time.
In January 2019, Barrett wrote an opinion denying qualified immunity to a detective who made false statements in a sworn affidavit as part of a murder investigation. The detective’s lies were “material” to the case, Barrett wrote, and the “unlawfulness of using deliberately falsified allegations to establish probable cause could not be clearer.”
In a lawsuit challenging prison discipline tactics, Barrett sided with law enforcement.
In July 2019, the 7th Circuit ruled 2-1 in favor of reviving the lawsuit filed by two inmates at an Illinois jail who were hit by buckshot fired by prison guards in response to a fight between other inmates in the dining hall. The inmates argued the guards used unconstitutional excessive force (the case didn’t involve qualified immunity). The two judges in the majority found the record wasn’t clear on key issues — such as whether the fight was over when the guards fired their shotguns, where exactly they aimed the warning shots, and why they fired into the crowd or the ceiling instead of a dedicated “shot box” — so the case should go to a jury.
Barrett dissented. She wrote that there was no evidence the guards intentionally hit the inmates, so the inmates couldn’t meet a standard that the Supreme Court had laid out for cases challenging prison discipline — that the guards acted “maliciously and sadistically.” She criticized her colleagues, writing that they had tried to “assist” the inmates by suggesting possible theories for how the guards intended to hit the inmates that weren’t supported by the evidence.
Second Amendment
It’s been a decade since the Supreme Court heard a major case involving the Second Amendment and the rights of Americans to keep and carry guns. Kavanaugh, Gorsuch, and Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito Jr. made clear during the court’s last term that they think it’s time to revisit the issue.
In a March 2019 decision, Barrett wrote that she shared the concern of other conservative judges and gun rights advocates that the Second Amendment was being treated as a “second-class” right.
The 7th Circuit had ruled 2–1 to reject a Second Amendment challenge to federal and Wisconsin laws that ban people convicted of most felony crimes from owning or possessing a firearm. The man who sued had pleaded guilty to one count of mail fraud, for which he was sentenced to one year and one day in prison, which meant he fell under the firearms ban. He argued that the federal and state bans shouldn’t apply to nonviolent offenders with no other criminal record.
The two judges in majority found that the government had shown that preventing nonviolent former felons from having guns was “substantially related to its interest in preventing gun violence.” They cited studies showing rates of violent crime committed by people who previously were convicted of nonviolent crimes.
Barrett dissented, writing in favor of expanding the Second Amendment’s gun rights protections to certain nonviolent ex-offenders. She drew a line between restricting former felons from exercising “civic rights” — such as voting and serving on a jury — and restricting “individual rights” such as owning a gun. Allowing the government to ban all former felons from owning a gun without proof that a person presented a risk to public safety treated the Second Amendment as a “second-class right,” Barrett wrote.
“History is consistent with common sense: it demonstrates that legislatures have the power to prohibit dangerous people from possessing guns. But that power extends only to people who are dangerous,” she wrote.
Confirmation
Barrett’s nomination now heads to the Senate, where the Judiciary Committee will hold at least one hearing considering her qualifications. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has said that the Senate will vote this year on her nomination, though it is unclear whether that vote will come before or after Election Day. Republicans have said they will vote on the nomination regardless of whether Trump wins the election.