theintercept--2020-12-23--Powerful Mobile Phone Surveillance Tool Operates in Obscurity Across the Country

the Bartonville , Texas , company Hawk Analytics and its product CellHawk have largely escaped public scrutiny .
CellHawk has been in wide use by law enforcement ; the software is helping police departments , the FBI , and private investigators around the United States convert information collected by cellular providers into maps of people ’ s locations , movements , and relationships .
Police records obtained by The Intercept reveal a troublingly powerful surveillance tool operated in obscurity , with scant oversight .
CellHawk ’ s maker says it can process a year ’ s worth of cellphone records @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that used to require painstaking work by investigators , including hand-drawn paper plots .
The web-based product can ingest call detail records , or CDRs , which track cellular contact between devices on behalf of mobile service providers , showing who is talking to whom .
It can also handle cellular location records , created when phones connect to various towers as their owners move around .
Such data can include “ tower dumps , ” which list all the phones that connected to a given tower — a form of dragnet surveillance @ @ @ @ @ @ @ numbers from a single tower dump undertaken in 2010 to try and collect evidence against a bank robbery suspect , according to a report from the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU .
CellHawk ’ s surveillance capabilities go beyond analyzing metadata from cellphone towers .
Hawk Analytics claims it can churn out incredibly revealing intelligence from large datasets like ride-hailing records and GPS — information commonly generated by the average American .
According to the company ’ s website , CellHawk uses GPS records in its “ unique animation analysis tool , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ materials , plots a target ’ s calls and locations over time .
“ Watch data come to life as it moves around town or the entire county , ” the site states .
The tool can also help map interpersonal connections , with an ability to animate more than 20 phones at once and “ see how they move relative to each other , ” according to a promotional brochure .
The company has touted features that make CellHawk sound more like a tool for automated , continuous surveillance than for just @ @ @ @ @ @ @ company .
CellHawk ’ s website touts the ability to send email and text alerts “ to surveillance teams ” when a target moves , or enters or exits a particular “ location or Geozone ( e.g .
your entire county border ) .
” On its website , Hawk Analytics claims this capability can help investigators “ view plots & maps of the cell towers used most frequently at the beginning and end of each day.
” But in brochures sent to potential clients , it was much more blunt , claiming @ @ @ @ @ @ @ where your suspect sleeps at night.
” The sheriff ’ s office in Hennepin County , Minnesota , which includes Minneapolis , certainly seemed impressed after it started using the software in early 2015 .
One criminal intelligence analyst lauded CellHawk ’ s ease of use in a February 2016 email comparing the subscription software to a competing tool .
“ CellHawk is pretty new and a lot cheaper !
The great thing about cellhawk is that it is ‘ hands off ’ by the user , as the software does everything for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The software can download calls from all major phone companies .
The biggest selling point is of course the mapping .
it also has animation , which is cool !
” Hennepin County Sheriff ’ s Office uses CellHawk as part of an effort to share intelligence through a Minnesota fusion center known as the Metro Regional Information Center , which brings together the FBI and eight counties serving up to 4 million people , according to the St .
Cloud Times .
In February 2018 , the latest year for which @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sheriff ’ s office renewed its annual subscription , providing the capability to store 250,000 CDRs .
A spokesperson for the sheriff ’ s office , Andrew Skoogman , said the office used certain CellHawk features infrequently .
For example , it is “ extremely rare ” for HCSO to analyze tower dumps , he said , and “ fairly rare ” for it to use CellHawk ’ s automated location alerting service , which is used “ based in the analytical needs of the investigator.
” The telecommunications data at the heart @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
For example , Verizon in 2019 received more than 260,000 subpoenas , orders , warrants , and emergency requests from various U.S. law enforcement entities , including more than 24,000 for location information .
But the legal requirements for obtaining that information are sometimes unclear .
The American Civil Liberties Union in 2014 called the legal standards related to tower dumps “ extremely murky.
” A 2018 Brennan Center report stated that the courts were “ split ” on the handling of such dumps , with some lower courts allowing access to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ which under the Stored Communications Act is obtained using a lower evidentiary standard than a warrant , requiring only “ reasonable grounds to believe ” the records are relevant to an ongoing investigation .
Location records particular to a given subscriber , meanwhile , can be obtained with just a court order — unless they span seven days or more , in which case police need to get a full warrant , according to a 2018 Supreme Court ruling .
Courts have also been divided on whether police need a court order or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ location data .
Hennepin County defined its own legal standards to rely upon in deploying technology like CellHawk .
These were articulated in a sheriff ’ s office policy document dated August 2015 — months after CellHawk was already in use .
The document , titled “ Criminal Information Sharing and Analysis , ” was released following a data request that was initiated in 2018 and fulfilled several years later following the election of a new sheriff .
It stated that the office needed “ [ r ] easonable suspicion , ” which @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are established to give … a basis to believe that there is , or has been , a reasonable possibility that an individual or organization is involved in a definable criminal activity or enterprise.
” The policy does not say that investigators must receive approval from a judge to retain information .
Skoogman did not respond to The Intercept ’ s question about what legal standard is applied to the collection of CDRs .
Chad Marlow , senior advocacy and policy counsel for the ACLU , when asked to review Hennepin County ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ technology was “ not inherently problematic ” but that the county set a low standard for how it handles the collection of CellHawk data .
Requiring “ reasonable suspicion ” is a typical threshold for traffic stops , not for intrusive searches , which require probable cause .
CellHawk ’ s capabilities — combing through data from calls , texts , ride-hailing applications , etc .
— are patently more intrusive than a traffic stop .
Beyond that , Marlow said , the county ’ s “ definition of reasonable suspicion is bizarrely @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ have to have a reasonable basis for a crime being committed not MAY BE being committed.
” Criminal intelligence information shall be retained for up to five years from the date of collection of use , whichever is later .
After that time , this information shall be deleted unless new information revalidates ongoing criminal activities of that individual and/or organization .
When updated criminal intelligence information is added into the file on a suspect individual or organization , such entries revalidate the reasonable suspicion and reset the five year standard for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ empowers HCSO investigators to scoop up this data and retain it for five years based on a fairly low legal standard .
And while this policy says the sheriff may not retain information based “ solely ” on support for “ unpopular causes ” or an individual ’ s “ race , gender , age or ethnic background ” and “ personal habits and/or predilections that do not break any laws or threaten the safety of others ” — mentioning activities covered by the First Amendment — if a crime were to occur @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , that data is considered fair game by law enforcement .
Under such low standards and with such a powerful surveillance utility , it wouldn ’ t take long to map out the social network of an entire protest movement .
For instance , during a protest outside a detention center in downtown Minneapolis to show solidarity with demonstrations in neighboring Wisconsin following the shooting of an unarmed Black man by the Kenosha Police Department , Dave Hutchinson , the Hennepin County sheriff , said , “ 11 individuals were arrested and are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ damage to property and unlawful assembly , ” according to an HCSO press release .
Should the criminal intelligence investigators at the fusion center run those individuals ’ information through CellHawk , it is not at all a stretch to say that the police would then possess a map of those individuals ’ associations based on calls , texts , and other records .
That map of social interactions could include thousands of activists who were not at all party to the crimes of which those 11 individuals are accused .
Hawk Analytics @ @ @ @ @ @ @ primary feature .
When asked whether the use of CellHawk undermined the presumption of innocence — essentially reversing the investigative process , so that evidence comes first and suspicion of a specific crime after — Skoogman replied , essentially , that innocent people had nothing to fear .
“ People come under suspicion of having committed a crime based on information developed by investigators , ” he wrote .
“ Based on evidence developed by those investigations , a suspect ’ s cell phone records may be obtained and analyzed .
On occasion @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that the suspect did not commit the crime under investigation .
This is the investigative process .
It is exactly why data is analyzed .
To determine whether the data available supports continued focus on an individual as a suspect or perhaps rules them out.
” In December 2013 , Heather Elvis went missing from her South Carolina home after becoming embroiled in a lovers ’ quarrel .
Several years later , an 11-day trial resulted in two 30-year sentences for one Tammy Moorer .
During the second day of that trial , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ expert witness when it comes to analyzing cell phone data , ” according to WBTW News 13 .
The station did not include that Melson was intimately involved in the creation of software that helped connect the dots in this case .
Additionally , according to reports from Northern Virginia , Hawk Analytics was reimbursed for their expert services which led to “ the prosecution of a man convicted of first-degree murder in the 2017 shooting death of a … CVS store manager.
” For their “ cellular data analysis and two days @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was paid $ 8,175 .
That certainly isn ’ t a windfall , but it rivals the amount made from the sale of a small number of CellHawk subscriptions , and it effectively compounds revenue streams from multiple sides of the criminal justice system .
CellHawk is not the only technology that investigators in the Twin Cities use to process intelligence about suspects and others .
Hennepin County and their law enforcement partners use automated license plate readers ; stingrays and competing , similar devices ; aerial surveillance ; and social media intelligence @ @ @ @ @ @ @ alone is powerful — but added to the area police ’ s already expansive arsenal , it tips local law enforcement toward becoming more like intelligence agencies than municipal cops .
Lengthy data retention policies and the power of these surveillance tools create a litany of frightening possibilities for overreach and abuse .
While HCSO has acknowledged its use of some of these tools , it has not released any public reports on its use of CellHawk .
Rachel Levinson-Waldman , deputy director of the Brennan Center ’ s liberty and national security @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s policy said , “ The reference to use is concerning , since that could significantly expand the time for retention.
” Minnesota state law requires an individual whose electronic device was subject to a tracking warrant be notified within 90 days if that evidence did not end up in court .
This “ tracking warrant ” law has been on the books since 2014 and yet , judging from press reports in recent years , it ’ s not clear any one in the state has ever received such a notice or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ unsealed by the courts .
The law seems to have been thwarted in part by police avoiding warrants and obtaining instead court orders under the much lower “ reasonable suspicion ” standard .
This , despite the fact that Minnesota law clearly states , under a subdivision titled “ Tracking warrant required for location information , ” that “ a warrant granting access to location information must be issued only if the government entity shows that there is probable cause the person who possesses an electronic device or is using a unique identifier @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is about to commit a crime.
” Julia Decker , policy director for the ACLU of Minnesota , said that “ there doesn ’ t seem to be oversight ” for the use of CellHawk in the state , even though surveillance should get oversight of “ the highest standard possible.
” She also said that Hennepin ’ s policy to retain CellHawk and similar data for five years raises the potential for harm to civil liberties .
“ I think this highlights how the rapid development of surveillance tech outstrips existing laws @ @ @ @ @ @ @ problematic , ” said Decker .
“ Without oversight/regulation , powerful surveillance technology is integrated into already-existing investigatory frameworks , instead of being examined and considered beforehand for its potential to actually expand or push the limits/bounds of those frameworks and encroach on civil liberties .
… In this moment of talking about police reform , use of surveillance tech needs to be part of the discussion.
” Hawk Analytics has many clients around the United States .
This reporter conducted a survey using the Freedom of Information Act to collect invoices for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s website , referred to in CellHawk ’ s training sessions , or mentioned in local news reports .
He found numerous agencies fielding the technology : Atlanta and Fayette County , Ga. ; Kansas City , Kan. ; Franklin County , Va. ; Utah County , Utah , ; Fort Collins , Colo. ; Hidalgo County , Texas ; Orange County , Calif. ; and , of course , the FBI all have paid for CellHawk in the last several years .
The Madison , Wisconsin , police department appears to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2018 alone but has demanded close to $ 700 to examine and provide them .

Until now, the Bartonville, Texas, company Hawk Analytics and its product CellHawk have largely escaped public scrutiny. CellHawk has been in wide use by law enforcement, helping police departments, the FBI, and private investigators around the United States convert information collected by cellular providers into maps of people’s locations, movements, and relationships. Police records obtained by The Intercept reveal a troublingly powerful surveillance tool operated in obscurity, with scant oversight.
CellHawk’s maker says it can process a year’s worth of cellphone records in 20 minutes, automating a process that used to require painstaking work by investigators, including hand-drawn paper plots. The web-based product can ingest call detail records, or CDRs, which track cellular contact between devices on behalf of mobile service providers, showing who is talking to whom. It can also handle cellular location records, created when phones connect to various towers as their owners move around.
Such data can include “tower dumps,” which list all the phones that connected to a given tower — a form of dragnet surveillance. The FBI obtained over 150,000 phone numbers from a single tower dump undertaken in 2010 to try and collect evidence against a bank robbery suspect, according to a report from the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU.
Police use CellHawk to process datasets they routinely receive from cell carriers like AT&T and Verizon, typically in vast spreadsheets and often without a warrant. This is in sharp contrast to a better known phone surveillance technology, the stingray: a mobile device that spies on cellular devices by impersonating carriers’ towers, tricking phones into connecting, and then intercepting their communications. Unlike the stingray, CellHawk does not require such subterfuge or for police to position a device near people of interest. Instead, it helps them exploit information already collected by private telecommunications providers and other third parties.
CellHawk’s surveillance capabilities go beyond analyzing metadata from cellphone towers. Hawk Analytics claims it can churn out incredibly revealing intelligence from large datasets like ride-hailing records and GPS — information commonly generated by the average American. According to the company’s website, CellHawk uses GPS records in its “unique animation analysis tool,” which, according to company promotional materials, plots a target’s calls and locations over time. “Watch data come to life as it moves around town or the entire county,” the site states.
The tool can also help map interpersonal connections, with an ability to animate more than 20 phones at once and “see how they move relative to each other,” according to a promotional brochure.
CellHawk helps police exploit information already collected by private telecommunications providers.
The company has touted features that make CellHawk sound more like a tool for automated, continuous surveillance than for just processing the occasional spreadsheet from a cellular company. CellHawk’s website touts the ability to send email and text alerts “to surveillance teams” when a target moves, or enters or exits a particular “location or Geozone (e.g. your entire county border).”
On its website, Hawk Analytics claims this capability can help investigators “view plots & maps of the cell towers used most frequently at the beginning and end of each day.” But in brochures sent to potential clients, it was much more blunt, claiming that CellHawk can help “find out where your suspect sleeps at night.”
Screenshot: Sam Richards
Data Sharing and Loose Regulation in Minnesota
The sheriff’s office in Hennepin County, Minnesota, which includes Minneapolis, certainly seemed impressed after it started using the software in early 2015. One criminal intelligence analyst lauded CellHawk’s ease of use in a February 2016 email comparing the subscription software to a competing tool. “CellHawk is pretty new and a lot cheaper! The great thing about cellhawk is that it is ‘hands off’ by the user, as the software does everything for you. It is drag and drop. The software can download calls from all major phone companies. The biggest selling point is of course the mapping. it also has animation, which is cool!”
Hennepin County Sheriff’s Office uses CellHawk as part of an effort to share intelligence through a Minnesota fusion center known as the Metro Regional Information Center, which brings together the FBI and eight counties serving up to 4 million people, according to the St. Cloud Times. In February 2018, the latest year for which The Intercept obtained HCSO invoices, the sheriff’s office renewed its annual subscription, providing the capability to store 250,000 CDRs.
A spokesperson for the sheriff’s office, Andrew Skoogman, said the office used certain CellHawk features infrequently. For example, it is “extremely rare” for HCSO to analyze tower dumps, he said, and “fairly rare” for it to use CellHawk’s automated location alerting service, which is used “based in the analytical needs of the investigator.”
The telecommunications data at the heart of CellHawk is shared extensively by providers. For example, Verizon in 2019 received more than 260,000 subpoenas, orders, warrants, and emergency requests from various U.S. law enforcement entities, including more than 24,000 for location information. But the legal requirements for obtaining that information are sometimes unclear. The American Civil Liberties Union in 2014 called the legal standards related to tower dumps “extremely murky.” A 2018 Brennan Center report stated that the courts were “split” on the handling of such dumps, with some lower courts allowing access to the data using a court order, which under the Stored Communications Act is obtained using a lower evidentiary standard than a warrant, requiring only “reasonable grounds to believe” the records are relevant to an ongoing investigation. Location records particular to a given subscriber, meanwhile, can be obtained with just a court order — unless they span seven days or more, in which case police need to get a full warrant, according to a 2018 Supreme Court ruling. Courts have also been divided on whether police need a court order or warrant to obtain “real-time” cellular location data.
Hennepin County defined its own legal standards to rely upon in deploying technology like CellHawk.
Hennepin County defined its own legal standards to rely upon in deploying technology like CellHawk. These were articulated in a sheriff’s office policy document dated August 2015 — months after CellHawk was already in use. The document, titled “Criminal Information Sharing and Analysis,” was released following a data request that was initiated in 2018 and fulfilled several years later following the election of a new sheriff. It stated that the office needed “[r]easonable suspicion,” which was deemed “present when sufficient facts are established to give … a basis to believe that there is, or has been, a reasonable possibility that an individual or organization is involved in a definable criminal activity or enterprise.”
The policy does not say that investigators must receive approval from a judge to retain information. Skoogman did not respond to The Intercept’s question about what legal standard is applied to the collection of CDRs.
Chad Marlow, senior advocacy and policy counsel for the ACLU, when asked to review Hennepin County’s CellHawk policy, said the CellHawk technology was “not inherently problematic” but that the county set a low standard for how it handles the collection of CellHawk data. Requiring “reasonable suspicion” is a typical threshold for traffic stops, not for intrusive searches, which require probable cause. CellHawk’s capabilities — combing through data from calls, texts, ride-hailing applications, etc. — are patently more intrusive than a traffic stop. Beyond that, Marlow said, the county’s “definition of reasonable suspicion is bizarrely convoluted” and should require that investigators “have to have a reasonable basis for a crime being committed not MAY BE being committed.”
Hennepin County’s policy continued:
Criminal intelligence information shall be retained for up to five years from the date of collection of use, whichever is later. After that time, this information shall be deleted unless new information revalidates ongoing criminal activities of that individual and/or organization. When updated criminal intelligence information is added into the file on a suspect individual or organization, such entries revalidate the reasonable suspicion and reset the five year standard for retention of that file.
The policy empowers HCSO investigators to scoop up this data and retain it for five years based on a fairly low legal standard.
And while this policy says the sheriff may not retain information based “solely” on support for “unpopular causes” or an individual’s “race, gender, age or ethnic background” and “personal habits and/or predilections that do not break any laws or threaten the safety of others” — mentioning activities covered by the First Amendment — if a crime were to occur during a protest, as is routine, that data is considered fair game by law enforcement. Under such low standards and with such a powerful surveillance utility, it wouldn’t take long to map out the social network of an entire protest movement.
Under such low standards and with such a powerful surveillance utility, it wouldn’t take long to map out the social network of an entire protest movement.
For instance, during a protest outside a detention center in downtown Minneapolis to show solidarity with demonstrations in neighboring Wisconsin following the shooting of an unarmed Black man by the Kenosha Police Department, Dave Hutchinson, the Hennepin County sheriff, said, “11 individuals were arrested and are being held on probable cause riot, damage to property and unlawful assembly,” according to an HCSO press release. Should the criminal intelligence investigators at the fusion center run those individuals’ information through CellHawk, it is not at all a stretch to say that the police would then possess a map of those individuals’ associations based on calls, texts, and other records. That map of social interactions could include thousands of activists who were not at all party to the crimes of which those 11 individuals are accused. Hawk Analytics markets such social network analysis as a primary feature.
When asked whether the use of CellHawk undermined the presumption of innocence — essentially reversing the investigative process, so that evidence comes first and suspicion of a specific crime after — Skoogman replied, essentially, that innocent people had nothing to fear. “People come under suspicion of having committed a crime based on information developed by investigators,” he wrote. “Based on evidence developed by those investigations, a suspect’s cell phone records may be obtained and analyzed. On occasion, that analysis has developed information suggesting that the suspect did not commit the crime under investigation. This is the investigative process. It is exactly why data is analyzed. To determine whether the data available supports continued focus on an individual as a suspect or perhaps rules them out.”
Screenshot: The Intercept
Deployed — and Promoted — Across the Country
Hawk Analytics CEO Mike Melson, whose bio on the company website describes him as a former NASA engineer, offers free trials to law enforcement organizations to which he hopes to sell his product. Additionally, Melson has worked as an expert witness, ready to testify on behalf of prosecutors. His testimony sometimes appears in local news outlets without mention of the fact that he is the CEO of the company that could stand to financially benefit, albeit indirectly, from a conviction. Hawk Analytics failed to comment on the record after multiple attempts were made over the phone and by email.
“This highlights how the rapid development of surveillance tech outstrips existing laws.”
In December 2013, Heather Elvis went missing from her South Carolina home after becoming embroiled in a lovers’ quarrel. Several years later, an 11-day trial resulted in two 30-year sentences for one Tammy Moorer. During the second day of that trial, Melson made an appearance as “an expert witness when it comes to analyzing cell phone data,” according to WBTW News 13. The station did not include that Melson was intimately involved in the creation of software that helped connect the dots in this case.
Additionally, according to reports from Northern Virginia, Hawk Analytics was reimbursed for their expert services which led to “the prosecution of a man convicted of first-degree murder in the 2017 shooting death of a … CVS store manager.” For their “cellular data analysis and two days of expert testimony,” Hawk Analytics was paid $8,175. That certainly isn’t a windfall, but it rivals the amount made from the sale of a small number of CellHawk subscriptions, and it effectively compounds revenue streams from multiple sides of the criminal justice system.
CellHawk is not the only technology that investigators in the Twin Cities use to process intelligence about suspects and others. Hennepin County and their law enforcement partners use automated license plate readers; stingrays and competing, similar devices; aerial surveillance; and social media intelligence, among other spy tech. CellHawk alone is powerful — but added to the area police’s already expansive arsenal, it tips local law enforcement toward becoming more like intelligence agencies than municipal cops.
Lengthy data retention policies and the power of these surveillance tools create a litany of frightening possibilities for overreach and abuse. While HCSO has acknowledged its use of some of these tools, it has not released any public reports on its use of CellHawk. Rachel Levinson-Waldman, deputy director of the Brennan Center’s liberty and national security program, who reviewed Hennepin County’s policy said, “The reference to use is concerning, since that could significantly expand the time for retention.”
Minnesota state law requires an individual whose electronic device was subject to a tracking warrant be notified within 90 days if that evidence did not end up in court. This “tracking warrant” law has been on the books since 2014 and yet, judging from press reports in recent years, it’s not clear any one in the state has ever received such a notice or if a tracking warrant has ever been unsealed by the courts. The law seems to have been thwarted in part by police avoiding warrants and obtaining instead court orders under the much lower “reasonable suspicion” standard. This, despite the fact that Minnesota law clearly states, under a subdivision titled “Tracking warrant required for location information,” that “a warrant granting access to location information must be issued only if the government entity shows that there is probable cause the person who possesses an electronic device or is using a unique identifier is committing, has committed, or is about to commit a crime.”
Julia Decker, policy director for the ACLU of Minnesota, said that “there doesn’t seem to be oversight” for the use of CellHawk in the state, even though surveillance should get oversight of “the highest standard possible.” She also said that Hennepin’s policy to retain CellHawk and similar data for five years raises the potential for harm to civil liberties.
“I think this highlights how the rapid development of surveillance tech outstrips existing laws, and how that can be really problematic,” said Decker. “Without oversight/regulation, powerful surveillance technology is integrated into already-existing investigatory frameworks, instead of being examined and considered beforehand for its potential to actually expand or push the limits/bounds of those frameworks and encroach on civil liberties. … In this moment of talking about police reform, use of surveillance tech needs to be part of the discussion.”
Hawk Analytics has many clients around the United States. This reporter conducted a survey using the Freedom of Information Act to collect invoices for CellHawk subscriptions from agencies referenced on CellHawk’s website, referred to in CellHawk’s training sessions, or mentioned in local news reports. He found numerous agencies fielding the technology: Atlanta and Fayette County, Ga.; Kansas City, Kan.; Franklin County, Va.; Utah County, Utah,; Fort Collins, Colo.; Hidalgo County, Texas; Orange County, Calif.; and, of course, the FBI all have paid for CellHawk in the last several years. The Madison, Wisconsin, police department appears to have thousands of potential CellHawk records from 2018 alone but has demanded close to $700 to examine and provide them.


theintercept--2020-12-22--Inside the Scramble for Power in the Board Controlling Puerto Rico’s Financial Future

between Wall Street bondholders and the people of Puerto Rico is coming to a head , as the Trump administration looks to lock down gains that financiers have made in their battle with the island .
The fate of the island hinges on the terms of a bankruptcy-like deal currently being hashed out by a seven-person , unelected control board and a bankruptcy judge , all of which must be ultimately approved by the legislature and governor of Puerto Rico .
President Donald Trump ’ s defeat in his reelection campaign and the forthcoming change in administration has triggered a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with Wall Street creditors targeting key positions — which Republicans recently scrambled to fill with appointees seen as friendly to bondholders .
Of particular concern to critics of a bondholder-friendly deal is Trump ’ s appointee , Justin Peterson , who is tied to a firm that represented the very same vulture funds that stand to profit off Puerto Rico ’ s debt .
The stakes for Puerto Rico ’ s future will be enormous , said Julio López Varona , co-director of community dignity campaigns at the Center For Popular Democracy , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ list of demands for President-elect Joe Biden by more than 30 organizations from Puerto Rico and its diaspora .
“ In the next 2 months an unelected fiscal control board will present a restructuring deal worth upwards of 30 billion dollars that will impact the people of Puerto Rico for decades , ” López Varona said by text message .
“ The current deal provides payments to hedge funds and millionaire bondholders by cutting pensions and forcing Puerto Rico into a long haul of austerity-driven policies that will force even more people to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ stability of essential services .
This happens while the island is in the middle of a pandemic.
” If the board strikes a deal that favors bondholders and leaves the island ’ s debt load at an unsustainably high level , it could set the commonwealth on a predictable course .
Austerity and cuts to social services will be needed to pay Wall Street and could further hamper the economy , driving an exodus from the island and fueling a vicious cycle that would lead in fairly short order to a new bankruptcy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Puerto Rico ’ s assets are sold off and the island is turned into a full-blown playground for the mega-rich .
The alternative path , beating back the bondholders , could allow Puerto Rico to invest instead in its own future .
The fight also has political implications .
As Puerto Ricans fled the island over the past several years , escaping the misery of Hurricane Maria and its economic fallout , Democrats hoped to cash in at the ballot box .
But Puerto Ricans broadly dashed those hopes , voting in sizable @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this dynamic was Puerto Ricans ’ displeasure with the legislation that created the fiscal control board ; it became a stand-in for Puerto Ricans ’ anger at the rapacious treatment they ’ ve received .
The bill was bipartisan but was signed into law by President Barack Obama in 2016 and has come to be associated with Democrats .
It ’ s all moving fast and , as usual , Puerto Rico is far from the minds of Washington ’ s power brokers , though people with the ear of Trump are circling @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Gov .
Chris Christie , a Trump confidante , has two lobbying contracts related to Puerto Rico and strong links with the financial interests eyeing a payday .
On the debt front , Puerto Rico ’ s Financial Oversight and Management Board , known locally as la junta , is required to submit a plan to Judge Laura Taylor Swain by February 10 for managing $ 35 billion in debt to bondholders .
At stake is how much the government will cut into ordinary Puerto Ricans ’ pensions and social services to pay @ @ @ @ @ @ @ table now would relieve about 66 percent of that debt , while cutting pensions by 8.5 percent for those who receive more than $ 1,500 per month .
Critics say the direction of the deal unfairly apportions much of the payback to hedge funds and that it ’ s unsustainable , leaving the island vulnerable to a future default .
But with Republican appointees at the table — especially a pair of new appointments seen to be friendly to bondholders — many are worried that it could get even worse and that billions @ @ @ @ @ @ @ into the hands of predatory creditors .
Puerto Rico ’ s debt exploded in the mid-aughts , driven by the sale of relatively high-risk , high-interest bonds , as federal policy changes decimated the island ’ s manufacturing base .
As a default on the debt became more and more inevitable , vulture funds bought up the bonds at a steep discount , positioning themselves for huge returns if they could force the island to repay in full — a version of a plan such vulture funds carried out in Argentina .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on the debt was created by a politically fraught law called the Puerto Rico Oversight , Management , and Economic Stability Act , known as PROMESA , set up to determine how much money the vulture funds will get .
The board ’ s seven seats are apportioned through a system where the majority of each house of Congress gets two seats , and the minority in each chamber gets one , plus one outright pick from the White House .
When Trump became president , the GOP majority became 5 to 2 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
But when Democrats took back the House , it shrunk to a 4-3 Republican margin .
With Biden to be sworn in , Democrats have the chance to win back control , but only if they can make a long-shot bid to force out Trump ’ s pick , who has already stirred up controversies in a few short months in his seat .
Justin Peterson came into the board at a moment when three seats remained vacant .
All seven junta members ’ terms expired in the summer of 2019 , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to fill them , even as members left .
Trump only moved to fill his own seat in October , naming Peterson , a managing partner at DCI Group , to a three-year term .
Peterson ’ s appointment in October ratcheted up tensions significantly , with Rep. Nydia Velazquez , D-N.Y. , attacking him over his longtime role with the vulture funds .
“ As of the summer of 2018 , I have not worked for anybody who had bonds on this set of issues , ” Peterson told The Intercept .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ I think that all the stakeholders involved need to do their own work .
What I want to do is create a transparent and fair process.
” Publicly , Peterson has declared , “ Puerto Rico should be governed by its elected leaders — not a permanent Board ” — an echo of a point that anti-austerity opponents of the board have also made .
Peterson ’ s history working with vulture funds that have designs on the island , however , has often put him at odds with those opponents .
DCI @ @ @ @ @ @ @ same hedge funds that feasted on the crises in both Puerto Rico and Argentina .
In turn , the firm has lobbied extensively on matters related to Puerto Rico ’ s debt and launched campaigns designed specifically to assure that the big Puerto Rico payday arrives .
On behalf of Doral Bank , which was seeking $ 229 million dollars from the commonwealth ’ s government , DCI launched what Puerto Rico ’ s largest paper dubbed a “ smear campaign ” against the Puerto Rican government in 2014 .
As part of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , a dark-money group out of Iowa , published full-page ads in the Wall Street Journal and Politico , claiming a debt plan by former Puerto Rico Gov .
Alejandro García Padilla would stiff seniors and retirees .
For another group of bondholders , DCI paid Puerto Rican political figures to influence public opinion , according to El Nuevo Día .
DCI also had a hand in a campaign by an astroturf group called Main Street Bondholders , according to reporting by the New York Times , cast as ordinary bond-holding retirees who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to Puerto Rico ’ s fiscal irresponsibility .
Peterson himself , according to the Wall Street Journal , previously advised two particularly aggressive Puerto Rico bondholders , Aurelius Capital Management LP and Autonomy Capital .
Aurelius , like Peterson , has positioned itself as an opponent of the fiscal control board , filing a lawsuit claiming the junta is illegitimate , since its members are not confirmed by the Senate .
It was a bet that , without the board , the firm could squeeze something closer to full repayment on bonds it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ full value .
The firm lost the case in the U.S. Supreme Court this summer .
Peterson has said he has not worked with the companies since 2018 .
As president , Biden could hypothetically remove a board member , but he would need cause — something Biden is unlikely to use Peterson ’ s previous hedge funds work for .
Asked about that pressure , Peterson said he felt comfortable that he ’ d remain in his position .
“ I would refer you to statute , ” he said .
“ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I want to do this and I want to work for the people of Puerto Rico , but this is a democracy and people will make their case.
” Peterson ’ s role on the board could also have an impact on energy and climate change policies — areas that he worked on at DCI Group .
Peterson ’ s profile on DCI ’ s website notes that he leads the firm ’ s energy practice ; he “ has two decades of experience advising senior executives in the oil and natural gas @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to roll back harmful regulations , expand oil and natural gas development , and defend the reputations of large energy companies under attack by activist groups.
” Under Peterson ’ s watch , DCI appears to have been an important player in Exxon Mobil ’ s effort to cover up its early knowledge of the climate crisis .
The firm registered as a lobbyist for Exxon Mobil starting in 2005 until DCI was subpoenaed by the Virgin Islands in 2016 as part of the islands ’ Exxon Mobil climate denial investigation , which @ @ @ @ @ @ @ corporation .
Much of DCI ’ s work for the fossil fuel industry does not show up in public records , but where it has been unearthed , Peterson ’ s name appears frequently .
DCI ran a website funded in part by Exxon that laundered climate change denial as carefully researched op-eds ; Peterson is listed repeatedly as vice president in the records of a nonprofit apparently set up to fund the web publication .
An invitation list , later leaked to Greenpeace , for a 2006 event hosted by DCI on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s who of climate deniers — alongside Peterson and another DCI Group staff member .
More recently , DCI has also engaged in controversial pushes in favor of oil pipelines .
Peterson ’ s experience with energy issues could come into play in his new role on the board , which is overseeing the privatization of the island ’ s power utility and has the power to fast-track so-called critical infrastructure projects .
It ’ s a process that has been at odds with a law that says the island must move @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and with the island ’ s movement for community-led rooftop solar energy .
The power utility issue is one Chris Christie is engaged in lobbying on : One of his contracts is with the Puerto Rico Electric Power Authority , or PREPA , which is amid a controversial privatization process .
“ Everybody kind of focuses on the restructuring process , but there ’ s other important things going on , ” said Peterson .
“ The LUMA deal is a big step forward for Puerto Rico .
This is something that would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this company LUMA and will create efficiencies and help with some of what Puerto Rico needs to do to become more competitive in terms of attracting business.
” Peterson has already shaken up the board .
At the end of October , he dramatically stormed out of his first public meeting , derailing a vote on the filing of the debt restructuring plan and claiming that the deal should be negotiated with bondholders first .
It put a stake in the ground on how Peterson is likely to proceed .
“ I think @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from Peterson , to show he has a different agenda , ” said Sergio Marxuach , policy director and general counsel at the Center for a New Economy .
Peterson , though , is not the only new board member that could shake things up .
On December 8 , Trump announced plans to appoint Republican House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy ’ s nominee , John Nixon , who was the state of Michigan ’ s budget director as Detroit underwent its own debt crisis , paired with brutal austerity measures .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ York state ’ s education commissioner , who had been nominated by Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer , D-N.Y. Rosa replaced Ana Matosantos , a Democrat-nominated board member perceived as unfriendly to bondholders .
And Trump indicated he would reappoint Andrew Biggs , a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute who filled one of the two seats apportioned to the Senate Majority , and so was originally nominated by Leader Mitch McConnell , R-Ky. Last week , Trump moved to fill another seat with a Democrat ’ s nominee , Antonio Medina @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , D-Calif. , for one of her two seats .
Medina , a former pharmaceutical executive and corporate consultant , previously served as head of the Puerto Rico Industrial Development Company , a government entity that promotes private investment in the island .
That left one seat vacant .
Left in limbo is board chair David Skeel , a University of Pennsylvania law professor also named by McConnell whose term has expired .
Bondholders had expected Skeel to be an ally , but he has so far disappointed them , pushing for a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ which in turn has led to pressure by Wall Street firms on Republicans to deny Skeel a reappointment .
Former Rep. Sean Duffy , a one-time reality TV star and a Republican from Wisconsin , recently penned the type of esoteric op-ed widely assumed in Washington to be part of a lobbying campaign , urging Trump to replace Skeel .
Sources involved in the negotiations suggested to The Intercept that the campaign has been successful , and Skeel is unlikely to be reappointed .
The board ’ s membership is now majority Republican @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that they can ram through whatever they want .
A quorum of five members is required for any plan to advance .
Furthermore , Puerto Rico ’ s legislature has to approve any deal , which is not typically the case with such control boards .
Last year , the legislature passed a resolution pledging not to approve pension cuts as part of the deal .
For critics of a deal more favorable to bondholders , Nixon ’ s resume in particular could mean he is as big a threat as Peterson .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ risk from the perspective of Puerto Rico because Nixon does have experience in this kind of thing , ” said Marxuach .
As budget director in Michigan , Nixon played an important role in at least two of the state ’ s fiscally strapped cities .
In both Detroit and Flint , he installed emergency managers who pushed austerity measures — which , in Flint , led to cost-cutting that has been blamed , in part , for the crisis of dangerous drinking water .
Nixon told The Intercept he was not actively @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that the Flint water crisis occurred after he left Michigan .
“ The people of Puerto Rico don ’ t deserve this , ” he said , but added : “ The bondholders have a face as well .
They ’ re people who invested in Puerto Rico.
” “ There ’ s a whole pattern of folks that have experience in Michigan that have been enlisted to carry out the same tasks in Puerto Rico , ” noted Peter Hammer , director of the Damon J. Keith Center for Civil Rights at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
For example , both former Michigan Treasurer Andy Dillon as well as Steven Rhodes , the retired U.S. bankruptcy judge who oversaw the Detroit case , have been paid consultants to the Puerto Rican government or the fiscal board .
But to Hammer , given the board ’ s purpose , the people on it don ’ t matter so much .
“ Certain people can make it more embarrassingly crass and more transparent what ’ s going on and other people can make some façade that this is an exercise of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and others have argued that in both Puerto Rico and Detroit , austerity measures were enacted that would not be tolerated in majority-white states or cities .
For creditors such as the hedge funds that DCI represented , it ’ s an extractive process that relies on racism , he said .
As Hammer put it , “ We use the debt instrument to take what we want and disenfranchise the people who are not respected as human beings in the first place.
” Backers of the control board approach point to the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ say it creates a process that could lead to vast amounts of debt forgiveness for Puerto Rico , which , absent new legislation , no other path would achieve .
López Varona , of the Center for Popular Democracy , which organized the letter to Biden , agrees .
“ What we have learned is that PROMESA is a tool for extracting wealth from Puerto Rico .
It has never been anything else , ” he said .
“ The people in the fiscal control board — that ’ s their job.
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ repayment deal is not what the anti-austerity movement is asking for .
The letter to Biden urges the incoming president to advance the repeal of PROMESA and abolish the board entirely .
“ We have an opportunity with Biden to say , ‘ We don ’ t need PROMESA — what we need is investment and cancellation of the debt , ’ ” López Varona said .
Many have pointed out that much of the debt was illegally issued in violation of Puerto Rico ’ s constitution and have called for a full @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the Puerto Rican organizations ’ letter .
Beyond the debt , the groups also want long-delayed hurricane relief funds to be released at last to the island , funding for programs like SNAP at least equivalent to what states receive , and the creation of a constitutional convention to help settle the debate over whether Puerto Rico should become a state , break free of the United States entirely , or more firmly establish a status that falls somewhere in between .
Those opponents of the board aligned against bondholders are also @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Rico in the summer of 2019 .
“ I don ’ t mind having Peterson on the board .
What Peterson shows people is what the board is , ” said López Varona .
“ People will protest and go to the streets if we feel like the board is doubling down on austerity measures to please bondholders .
”

A long-running clash between Wall Street bondholders and the people of Puerto Rico is coming to a head, as the Trump administration looks to lock down gains that financiers have made in their battle with the island.
The fate of the island hinges on the terms of a bankruptcy-like deal currently being hashed out by a seven-person, unelected control board and a bankruptcy judge, all of which must be ultimately approved by the legislature and governor of Puerto Rico. President Donald Trump’s defeat in his reelection campaign and the forthcoming change in administration has triggered a jockeying for power inside the board, with Wall Street creditors targeting key positions — which Republicans recently scrambled to fill with appointees seen as friendly to bondholders.
Of particular concern to critics of a bondholder-friendly deal is Trump’s appointee, Justin Peterson, who is tied to a firm that represented the very same vulture funds that stand to profit off Puerto Rico’s debt.
The stakes for Puerto Rico’s future will be enormous, said Julio López Varona, co-director of community dignity campaigns at the Center For Popular Democracy, which spearheaded a letter laying out a list of demands for President-elect Joe Biden by more than 30 organizations from Puerto Rico and its diaspora.
“In the next 2 months an unelected fiscal control board will present a restructuring deal worth upwards of 30 billion dollars that will impact the people of Puerto Rico for decades,” López Varona said by text message. “The current deal provides payments to hedge funds and millionaire bondholders by cutting pensions and forcing Puerto Rico into a long haul of austerity-driven policies that will force even more people to leave the island and will threaten the stability of essential services. This happens while the island is in the middle of a pandemic.”
If the board strikes a deal that favors bondholders and leaves the island’s debt load at an unsustainably high level, it could set the commonwealth on a predictable course. Austerity and cuts to social services will be needed to pay Wall Street and could further hamper the economy, driving an exodus from the island and fueling a vicious cycle that would lead in fairly short order to a new bankruptcy. The end result could be that Puerto Rico’s assets are sold off and the island is turned into a full-blown playground for the mega-rich.
The alternative path, beating back the bondholders, could allow Puerto Rico to invest instead in its own future.
The fight also has political implications. As Puerto Ricans fled the island over the past several years, escaping the misery of Hurricane Maria and its economic fallout, Democrats hoped to cash in at the ballot box. But Puerto Ricans broadly dashed those hopes, voting in sizable numbers for Republicans. One driver of this dynamic was Puerto Ricans’ displeasure with the legislation that created the fiscal control board; it became a stand-in for Puerto Ricans’ anger at the rapacious treatment they’ve received. The bill was bipartisan but was signed into law by President Barack Obama in 2016 and has come to be associated with Democrats.
It’s all moving fast and, as usual, Puerto Rico is far from the minds of Washington’s power brokers, though people with the ear of Trump are circling. For instance, former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, a Trump confidante, has two lobbying contracts related to Puerto Rico and strong links with the financial interests eyeing a payday.
Chris Christie, governor of New Jersey, greets attendees during a campaign event in Milford, N.H., on Feb. 3, 2016. Photo: Victor J. Blue/Bloomberg/Getty Images
On the debt front, Puerto Rico’s Financial Oversight and Management Board, known locally as la junta, is required to submit a plan to Judge Laura Taylor Swain by February 10 for managing $35 billion in debt to bondholders. At stake is how much the government will cut into ordinary Puerto Ricans’ pensions and social services to pay them off. The deal on the table now would relieve about 66 percent of that debt, while cutting pensions by 8.5 percent for those who receive more than $1,500 per month.
Critics say the direction of the deal unfairly apportions much of the payback to hedge funds and that it’s unsustainable, leaving the island vulnerable to a future default. But with Republican appointees at the table — especially a pair of new appointments seen to be friendly to bondholders — many are worried that it could get even worse and that billions of additional dollars could be pushed back into the hands of predatory creditors.
Trump’s Pick
Puerto Rico’s debt exploded in the mid-aughts, driven by the sale of relatively high-risk, high-interest bonds, as federal policy changes decimated the island’s manufacturing base. As a default on the debt became more and more inevitable, vulture funds bought up the bonds at a steep discount, positioning themselves for huge returns if they could force the island to repay in full — a version of a plan such vulture funds carried out in Argentina.
The board trying to hash out the deal on the debt was created by a politically fraught law called the Puerto Rico Oversight, Management, and Economic Stability Act, known as PROMESA, set up to determine how much money the vulture funds will get.
The board’s seven seats are apportioned through a system where the majority of each house of Congress gets two seats, and the minority in each chamber gets one, plus one outright pick from the White House. When Trump became president, the GOP majority became 5 to 2, cementing the power of the bondholders. But when Democrats took back the House, it shrunk to a 4-3 Republican margin. With Biden to be sworn in, Democrats have the chance to win back control, but only if they can make a long-shot bid to force out Trump’s pick, who has already stirred up controversies in a few short months in his seat.
Justin Peterson came into the board at a moment when three seats remained vacant. All seven junta members’ terms expired in the summer of 2019, but Trump didn’t immediately move to fill them, even as members left. Trump only moved to fill his own seat in October, naming Peterson, a managing partner at DCI Group, to a three-year term. Peterson’s appointment in October ratcheted up tensions significantly, with Rep. Nydia Velazquez, D-N.Y., attacking him over his longtime role with the vulture funds.
A very Trumpian tweet from a Trump hack. I want to know, @JPHusker_ who are you making deals for? The people of Puerto Rico or your buddies from your time as a lobbyist for the bondholders? https://t.co/P961asD0Am — Rep. Nydia Velazquez (@NydiaVelazquez) October 23, 2020
“As of the summer of 2018, I have not worked for anybody who had bonds on this set of issues,” Peterson told The Intercept. “So, no conflicts and frankly I think that all the stakeholders involved need to do their own work. What I want to do is create a transparent and fair process.”
Publicly, Peterson has declared, “Puerto Rico should be governed by its elected leaders — not a permanent Board” — an echo of a point that anti-austerity opponents of the board have also made. Peterson’s history working with vulture funds that have designs on the island, however, has often put him at odds with those opponents.
DCI Group has worked for some of those same hedge funds that feasted on the crises in both Puerto Rico and Argentina. In turn, the firm has lobbied extensively on matters related to Puerto Rico’s debt and launched campaigns designed specifically to assure that the big Puerto Rico payday arrives.
On behalf of Doral Bank, which was seeking $229 million dollars from the commonwealth’s government, DCI launched what Puerto Rico’s largest paper dubbed a “smear campaign” against the Puerto Rican government in 2014. As part of the campaign, the American Future Fund, a dark-money group out of Iowa, published full-page ads in the Wall Street Journal and Politico, claiming a debt plan by former Puerto Rico Gov. Alejandro García Padilla would stiff seniors and retirees. For another group of bondholders, DCI paid Puerto Rican political figures to influence public opinion, according to El Nuevo Día. DCI also had a hand in a campaign by an astroturf group called Main Street Bondholders, according to reporting by the New York Times, cast as ordinary bond-holding retirees who stood to lose their life savings due to Puerto Rico’s fiscal irresponsibility.
Peterson himself, according to the Wall Street Journal, previously advised two particularly aggressive Puerto Rico bondholders, Aurelius Capital Management LP and Autonomy Capital. Aurelius, like Peterson, has positioned itself as an opponent of the fiscal control board, filing a lawsuit claiming the junta is illegitimate, since its members are not confirmed by the Senate. It was a bet that, without the board, the firm could squeeze something closer to full repayment on bonds it had bought for far less than their full value. The firm lost the case in the U.S. Supreme Court this summer. Peterson has said he has not worked with the companies since 2018.
As president, Biden could hypothetically remove a board member, but he would need cause — something Biden is unlikely to use Peterson’s previous hedge funds work for. Asked about that pressure, Peterson said he felt comfortable that he’d remain in his position. “I would refer you to statute,” he said. “I’ve stated the reasons why I want to do this and I want to work for the people of Puerto Rico, but this is a democracy and people will make their case.”
Left/Top: Mock “Wanted” posters featuring images of members of Puerto Rico’s fiscal control board members are seen on the Charging Bull sculpture during a demonstration in New York City on Sept. 30, 2016. Right/Bottom: Members of the activist group CANCEL THE DEBT blocked midtown intersections to protest MoMA board of trustees member Steven Tananbaum, the owner of a large amount of Puerto Rican debt through his hedge fund company GoldenTree, in New York City on Oct. 21, 2019. Photo: John Taggart/Bloomberg/Getty Image; Erik McGregor/LightRocket/Getty Images
Energy Industry Work
Peterson’s role on the board could also have an impact on energy and climate change policies — areas that he worked on at DCI Group.
Peterson’s profile on DCI’s website notes that he leads the firm’s energy practice; he “has two decades of experience advising senior executives in the oil and natural gas industry” and “has led efforts to roll back harmful regulations, expand oil and natural gas development, and defend the reputations of large energy companies under attack by activist groups.”
Under Peterson’s watch, DCI appears to have been an important player in Exxon Mobil’s effort to cover up its early knowledge of the climate crisis. The firm registered as a lobbyist for Exxon Mobil starting in 2005 until DCI was subpoenaed by the Virgin Islands in 2016 as part of the islands’ Exxon Mobil climate denial investigation, which was later dropped under pressure from the corporation.
Much of DCI’s work for the fossil fuel industry does not show up in public records, but where it has been unearthed, Peterson’s name appears frequently. DCI ran a website funded in part by Exxon that laundered climate change denial as carefully researched op-eds; Peterson is listed repeatedly as vice president in the records of a nonprofit apparently set up to fund the web publication. An invitation list, later leaked to Greenpeace, for a 2006 event hosted by DCI on the Clean Air Act included a who’s who of climate deniers — alongside Peterson and another DCI Group staff member. More recently, DCI has also engaged in controversial pushes in favor of oil pipelines.
Peterson’s experience with energy issues could come into play in his new role on the board, which is overseeing the privatization of the island’s power utility and has the power to fast-track so-called critical infrastructure projects. It’s a process that has been at odds with a law that says the island must move to 100 percent renewable energy by 2050 and with the island’s movement for community-led rooftop solar energy.
The power utility issue is one Chris Christie is engaged in lobbying on: One of his contracts is with the Puerto Rico Electric Power Authority, or PREPA, which is amid a controversial privatization process.
“Everybody kind of focuses on the restructuring process, but there’s other important things going on,” said Peterson. “The LUMA deal is a big step forward for Puerto Rico. This is something that would move the transmission function from PREPA to this company LUMA and will create efficiencies and help with some of what Puerto Rico needs to do to become more competitive in terms of attracting business.”
Board Politics
Peterson has already shaken up the board. At the end of October, he dramatically stormed out of his first public meeting, derailing a vote on the filing of the debt restructuring plan and claiming that the deal should be negotiated with bondholders first. It put a stake in the ground on how Peterson is likely to proceed. “I think it was a bit of a show from Peterson, to show he has a different agenda,” said Sergio Marxuach, policy director and general counsel at the Center for a New Economy. Peterson, though, is not the only new board member that could shake things up.
On December 8, Trump announced plans to appoint Republican House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy’s nominee, John Nixon, who was the state of Michigan’s budget director as Detroit underwent its own debt crisis, paired with brutal austerity measures. The president also appointed Betty Rosa, New York state’s education commissioner, who had been nominated by Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y. Rosa replaced Ana Matosantos, a Democrat-nominated board member perceived as unfriendly to bondholders.
And Trump indicated he would reappoint Andrew Biggs, a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute who filled one of the two seats apportioned to the Senate Majority, and so was originally nominated by Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky.
Last week, Trump moved to fill another seat with a Democrat’s nominee, Antonio Medina, selected by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., for one of her two seats. Medina, a former pharmaceutical executive and corporate consultant, previously served as head of the Puerto Rico Industrial Development Company, a government entity that promotes private investment in the island. That left one seat vacant.
Left in limbo is board chair David Skeel, a University of Pennsylvania law professor also named by McConnell whose term has expired. Bondholders had expected Skeel to be an ally, but he has so far disappointed them, pushing for a deal that included more debt forgiveness — which in turn has led to pressure by Wall Street firms on Republicans to deny Skeel a reappointment. Former Rep. Sean Duffy, a one-time reality TV star and a Republican from Wisconsin, recently penned the type of esoteric op-ed widely assumed in Washington to be part of a lobbying campaign, urging Trump to replace Skeel. Sources involved in the negotiations suggested to The Intercept that the campaign has been successful, and Skeel is unlikely to be reappointed.
The board’s membership is now majority Republican, but that does not necessarily mean that they can ram through whatever they want. A quorum of five members is required for any plan to advance. Furthermore, Puerto Rico’s legislature has to approve any deal, which is not typically the case with such control boards. Last year, the legislature passed a resolution pledging not to approve pension cuts as part of the deal.
Michigan Budget Director John Nixon photographed in Lansing, Mich., on Jan. 13, 2011. Photo: Al Goldis/AP
For critics of a deal more favorable to bondholders, Nixon’s resume in particular could mean he is as big a threat as Peterson. “Nixon could be more of a risk from the perspective of Puerto Rico because Nixon does have experience in this kind of thing,” said Marxuach. As budget director in Michigan, Nixon played an important role in at least two of the state’s fiscally strapped cities. In both Detroit and Flint, he installed emergency managers who pushed austerity measures — which, in Flint, led to cost-cutting that has been blamed, in part, for the crisis of dangerous drinking water.
Nixon told The Intercept he was not actively involved in bankruptcy negotiations in Detroit and that the Flint water crisis occurred after he left Michigan. “The people of Puerto Rico don’t deserve this,” he said, but added: “The bondholders have a face as well. They’re people who invested in Puerto Rico.”
“There’s a whole pattern of folks that have experience in Michigan that have been enlisted to carry out the same tasks in Puerto Rico,” noted Peter Hammer, director of the Damon J. Keith Center for Civil Rights at Wayne State University Law School in Michigan. For example, both former Michigan Treasurer Andy Dillon as well as Steven Rhodes, the retired U.S. bankruptcy judge who oversaw the Detroit case, have been paid consultants to the Puerto Rican government or the fiscal board.
But to Hammer, given the board’s purpose, the people on it don’t matter so much. “Certain people can make it more embarrassingly crass and more transparent what’s going on and other people can make some façade that this is an exercise of governance,” he said. He and others have argued that in both Puerto Rico and Detroit, austerity measures were enacted that would not be tolerated in majority-white states or cities. For creditors such as the hedge funds that DCI represented, it’s an extractive process that relies on racism, he said. As Hammer put it, “We use the debt instrument to take what we want and disenfranchise the people who are not respected as human beings in the first place.”
Backers of the control board approach point to the requirement for Puerto Rican political approval and say it creates a process that could lead to vast amounts of debt forgiveness for Puerto Rico, which, absent new legislation, no other path would achieve.
López Varona, of the Center for Popular Democracy, which organized the letter to Biden, agrees. “What we have learned is that PROMESA is a tool for extracting wealth from Puerto Rico. It has never been anything else,” he said. “The people in the fiscal control board — that’s their job.”
Critics’ Demands
Ultimately, a “good” debt repayment deal is not what the anti-austerity movement is asking for. The letter to Biden urges the incoming president to advance the repeal of PROMESA and abolish the board entirely. “We have an opportunity with Biden to say, ‘We don’t need PROMESA — what we need is investment and cancellation of the debt,’” López Varona said.
Many have pointed out that much of the debt was illegally issued in violation of Puerto Rico’s constitution and have called for a full audit, a demand that is included in the Puerto Rican organizations’ letter. Beyond the debt, the groups also want long-delayed hurricane relief funds to be released at last to the island, funding for programs like SNAP at least equivalent to what states receive, and the creation of a constitutional convention to help settle the debate over whether Puerto Rico should become a state, break free of the United States entirely, or more firmly establish a status that falls somewhere in between.
Those opponents of the board aligned against bondholders are also invoking the anti-corruption protests that rocked Puerto Rico in the summer of 2019.
“I don’t mind having Peterson on the board. What Peterson shows people is what the board is,” said López Varona. “People will protest and go to the streets if we feel like the board is doubling down on austerity measures to please bondholders.”


theintercept--2020-12-22--Liberal Legal Organization Renews Amazon VP’s Position on Its Board Despite Member Protest

following an employee walkout at an Amazon warehouse in Staten Island to protest the lack of safety protections amid the new pandemic , Amazon fired the lead organizer , Chris Smalls , with the public rationale that he had violated rules around social distancing .
Under pressure , Amazon pledged in early April to ramp up its distribution of personal protective equipment , but a leaked memo from a private meeting revealed company executives had discussed how to smear Smalls and damage any potential union efforts .
Smalls is “ not smart , or articulate , ” argued Amazon ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ urged the company to tell reporters Smalls ’ s conduct was “ immoral , unacceptable , and arguably illegal.
” Zapolsky ’ s comments outraged many left-leaning groups , including a group of lawyers and law students affiliated with the American Constitution Society , a self-described progressive legal organization that was created in 2001 to help build the bench of liberal judges and act as a countervailing force to the conservative Federalist Society .
More than 100 individuals sent a letter to ACS ’ s president , Russ Feingold , the former Democratic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ board of directors protesting the inclusion of a deputy of Zapolsky ’ s , Andrew DeVore , in its leadership ranks .
DeVore , an Amazon vice president and associate general counsel , reports to Zapolsky and manages Amazon ’ s “ labor and employment ” issues , among other areas .
The signatories argued that Amazon ’ s conduct around Smalls was no isolated incident when it comes to “ trampling worker rights ” and also blasted the company ’ s record on privacy , surveillance , tax avoidance , anticompetitive practices @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of local governments .
“ We urge you to ask for Mr. DeVore ’ s immediate resignation from the Board of Directors , ” the letter read .
DeVore was appointed in 2017 .
Following the letter , ACS sought to handle the internal uprising in several ways , including organizing a virtual town hall for local chapter leaders with Feingold to discuss their concerns .
Feingold “ expressed ACS ’ s respect for workers rights , but my feeling was he treated the meeting like a politician as a way to pacify @ @ @ @ @ @ @ actions , ” said Hooman Hedayati , a member of the Washington , D.C. , ACS chapter board who attended the town hall .
Feingold declined to share with attendees how much money ACS receives from Amazon ( it ’ s listed as a 2020 corporate sponsor on its website ) but insisted the amount was negligible .
ACS also released a public statement reiterating the organization ’ s support for workers ’ s rights , and urged “ employers to support the right of their employees ” to form unions and demand @ @ @ @ @ @ @ statement failed to name-check Amazon specifically .
“ I think it was very concerning that ACS as a progressive organization won ’ t make a statement that specifically calls out Amazon and its bad track record , ” he told The Intercept .
“ It makes me question to what degree they ’ d really be willing to speak up in support of the labor movement.
” Feingold also made a few personal calls , including to Leo Gertner , a labor lawyer and lead organizer of the letter , to suggest that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ DeVore ’ s three-year term expires at the end of the year .
“ Feingold was very nice , diplomatic , and courteous and told me he was very supportive of our effort , but that the board was not interested in voting to remove Mr. DeVore or change his status in any way , ” Gertner said .
“ But he told me DeVore was up for reappointment soon and his term was going to end this year.
” Since April , Amazon has continued to face charges of anti-worker activity , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for the company sought to blunt a union effort at an Alabama warehouse .
But in response to questioning , ACS confirmed to The Intercept that DeVore ’ s position on the board was actually renewed this year for another three-year term .
David Lyle , ACS ’ s senior counsel for communications , said in a statement that keeping DeVore on “ does not affect ACS programming or other decisions , at the national or chapter levels , ” but maintained that leadership found him “ to be a very engaged board @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ] representation of a diversity of experiences.
” Silicon Valley do not end with DeVore .
Apple ’ s in-house counsel , Philippa Scarlett , was appointed to the board of directors in 2017 , and now serves on ACS ’ s board of advisers , though her affiliation with Apple is not actually disclosed in her bio .
Over the last decade , ACS has taken at least $ 290,000 from Google , Microsoft , and Facebook , with other corporate sponsorships coming from Verizon and Amazon , according to pages detailing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ raised questions among its members about how ACS positions itself on matters of antitrust , bankruptcy , and corporate power — areas where ACS has less clear stances than it does on issues around reproductive and civil rights .
Some members say this is because ACS has molded its politics in the image of the corporate-minded Senate that serves as gatekeeper to the judiciary .
“ ACS is an elite-driven organization based in D.C. with a board of directors full of Harvard , Yale , and Stanford alums , where most of those @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and advised those megacorporations , ” said Gertner .
“ I think they have an interest in putting themselves out as liberal and progressive because they have genuinely pro-choice views and are mildly anti-war , but the capture of the elite stratum by corporations is pretty much complete.
” ACS doesn ’ t shy away from questioning corporate power , though the bulk of its interrogation has been confined to panel discussions .
Anti-monopoly advocate Barry Lynn of the Open Markets Institute says ACS could be doing more to offer a progressive vision @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Federalist Society helps train and educate its conservative members on monopoly and antitrust .
Following the election of Donald Trump , some antitrust advocates , including Lynn , reached out to ACS to encourage the legal organization to take a firmer stance on these issues .
In February 2017 , Lynn , his colleague Lina Khan , antitrust attorney Jonathan Kanter , and Andy Green of the Center for American Progress met with Kara Stein , ACS ’ s vice president of policy and program .
“ We said , ‘ Hey @ @ @ @ @ @ @ don ’ t support people who are hardcore conservative on corporate welfare , ’ ” Lynn said .
“ We want them to be a counterweight to the Federalist Society .
Maybe they won ’ t take as radical a position as us , but we do think they should be pretty critical and at least work to educate its members about why the right takes the positions it does.
” Lynn says the response they received was relative openness — if anti-monopoly advocates could fundraise for the work .
“ They basically @ @ @ @ @ @ @ you really want us to engage on these issues around monopoly , then the way to do it would be to give us some money , build up a program , ’ ” Lynn said , adding that Washington , D.C. , “ is full of these pay-to-play places.
” David Lyle , ACS ’ s senior counsel for communications , didn ’ t deny Lynn ’ s characterization of the meeting and said it “ was like many ACS holds regularly to explore partnerships and ways to collaborate on topics and issues.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ events that have been critical of corporate power and encouraged stronger antitrust work , including an antitrust conference Khan organized at Yale .
Hedayati says his ACS chapter has hosted several antitrust events in recent years — including one last month on political influence around antitrust investigations and a film screening in 2019 where members discussed shortcomings of antitrust law .
In response to questions , Lyle also pointed to a national panel ACS sponsored on consolidation of wealth and power in 2017 , one on the constitutional dilemmas of Big Tech in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in July .
He also noted ACS has “ been pleased ” to publish scholars like Khan in ACS ’ s official law journal , and that the organization is publishing an essay by her this week with policy recommendations for the Biden administration .
In a statement to The Intercept , Khan said , “ ACS ’ s leadership choices speak to the organization ’ s values , and it ’ s inappropriate for ACS to use my willingness to participate in past events as cover for its troubling choice to reappoint @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” ACS declined to comment on the donations it receives from tech companies or make Feingold available for an interview .
“ Our work in this field , including the promotion of leading advocates of more strict antitrust enforcement and critics of technology companies speaks for itself , ” said Lyle .
As a U.S. senator , Feingold was a leading champion on campaign finance reform , pushing major legislation to curb the influence of money in politics .
He was also known among his colleagues — and often privately resented — for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ spirit of Senate ethics rules .
Lynn told The Intercept that ACS ’ s corporate tech donations “ can ’ t help but affect ” the organization .
“ When those sorts of folks are in the room they ’ re going to affect the policy , ” he said .
Other members argue ACS ’ s murkiness on corporate power is less a reflection of rank corruption and points more to the reality that ACS ’ s aim to be a “ big-tent ” organization for liberals means it effectively becomes more @ @ @ @ @ @ @ vague policy positions palatable to the full Democratic Party .
In the absence of drawing clearer lines in the sand and providing a sharper vision for what progressive lawyering means in the realms of corporate power and bankruptcy law , newer organizations like Demand Justice , the People ’ s Parity Project , and the Law and Political Economy Project will continue to fill what its supporters say is an intellectual and advocacy void for lawyers on the left .
The Biden administration , for its part , has recently appointed a number @ @ @ @ @ @ @ companies , though maintains it will continue serious investigations into the practices of these firms .
The Trump administration filed a major antitrust suit against Google , which will continue under the Biden administration .
The suit is seen as potentially the first of several such clashes with tech titans .
“ I think antitrust and antimonopoly people feel listened to on the substance by the Biden administration , ” said Jeff Hauser , the director of the Revolving Door Project , which advocates for progressive executive branch appointments .
“ But the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ appointed who will be able to slow the move of the government against these companies.
” Update : Dec. 22 , 2020 , 3:35 p.m .
ET This article has been updated to include a comment from Lina Khan that was received after publication .

In late March, following an employee walkout at an Amazon warehouse in Staten Island to protest the lack of safety protections amid the new pandemic, Amazon fired the lead organizer, Chris Smalls, with the public rationale that he had violated rules around social distancing. Under pressure, Amazon pledged in early April to ramp up its distribution of personal protective equipment, but a leaked memo from a private meeting revealed company executives had discussed how to smear Smalls and damage any potential union efforts. Smalls is “not smart, or articulate,” argued Amazon’s general counsel David Zapolsky, who urged the company to tell reporters Smalls’s conduct was “immoral, unacceptable, and arguably illegal.”
Zapolsky’s comments outraged many left-leaning groups, including a group of lawyers and law students affiliated with the American Constitution Society, a self-described progressive legal organization that was created in 2001 to help build the bench of liberal judges and act as a countervailing force to the conservative Federalist Society. More than 100 individuals sent a letter to ACS’s president, Russ Feingold, the former Democratic senator from Wisconsin, and the ACS board of directors protesting the inclusion of a deputy of Zapolsky’s, Andrew DeVore, in its leadership ranks. DeVore, an Amazon vice president and associate general counsel, reports to Zapolsky and manages Amazon’s “labor and employment” issues, among other areas.
The signatories argued that Amazon’s conduct around Smalls was no isolated incident when it comes to “trampling worker rights” and also blasted the company’s record on privacy, surveillance, tax avoidance, anticompetitive practices, contracts with ICE, and bullying of local governments. “We urge you to ask for Mr. DeVore’s immediate resignation from the Board of Directors,” the letter read. DeVore was appointed in 2017.
Following the letter, ACS sought to handle the internal uprising in several ways, including organizing a virtual town hall for local chapter leaders with Feingold to discuss their concerns.
Feingold “expressed ACS’s respect for workers rights, but my feeling was he treated the meeting like a politician as a way to pacify the opposition rather than committing to specific actions,” said Hooman Hedayati, a member of the Washington, D.C., ACS chapter board who attended the town hall. Feingold declined to share with attendees how much money ACS receives from Amazon (it’s listed as a 2020 corporate sponsor on its website) but insisted the amount was negligible.
ACS also released a public statement reiterating the organization’s support for workers’s rights, and urged “employers to support the right of their employees” to form unions and demand safe working conditions.
Hedayati noted the statement failed to name-check Amazon specifically. “I think it was very concerning that ACS as a progressive organization won’t make a statement that specifically calls out Amazon and its bad track record,” he told The Intercept. “It makes me question to what degree they’d really be willing to speak up in support of the labor movement.”
Feingold also made a few personal calls, including to Leo Gertner, a labor lawyer and lead organizer of the letter, to suggest that the problem will basically go away when DeVore’s three-year term expires at the end of the year. “Feingold was very nice, diplomatic, and courteous and told me he was very supportive of our effort, but that the board was not interested in voting to remove Mr. DeVore or change his status in any way,” Gertner said. “But he told me DeVore was up for reappointment soon and his term was going to end this year.”
Since April, Amazon has continued to face charges of anti-worker activity, most recently this month, when attorneys for the company sought to blunt a union effort at an Alabama warehouse.
But in response to questioning, ACS confirmed to The Intercept that DeVore’s position on the board was actually renewed this year for another three-year term. David Lyle, ACS’s senior counsel for communications, said in a statement that keeping DeVore on “does not affect ACS programming or other decisions, at the national or chapter levels,” but maintained that leadership found him “to be a very engaged board member” and “valu[ed] representation of a diversity of experiences.”
Andrew DeVore, vice president and associate general counsel with Amazon, listens during a Senate Commerce Committee hearing on consumer data privacy in Washington, D.C., on Sept. 26, 2018. Photo: Andrew Harrer/Bloomberg/Getty Images
ACS’s ties to Silicon Valley do not end with DeVore. Apple’s in-house counsel, Philippa Scarlett, was appointed to the board of directors in 2017, and now serves on ACS’s board of advisers, though her affiliation with Apple is not actually disclosed in her bio.
Over the last decade, ACS has taken at least $290,000 from Google, Microsoft, and Facebook, with other corporate sponsorships coming from Verizon and Amazon, according to pages detailing ACS convention donors. The contributions have raised questions among its members about how ACS positions itself on matters of antitrust, bankruptcy, and corporate power — areas where ACS has less clear stances than it does on issues around reproductive and civil rights. Some members say this is because ACS has molded its politics in the image of the corporate-minded Senate that serves as gatekeeper to the judiciary.
“ACS is an elite-driven organization based in D.C. with a board of directors full of Harvard, Yale, and Stanford alums, where most of those folks cut their teeth in corporate law and advised those megacorporations,” said Gertner. “I think they have an interest in putting themselves out as liberal and progressive because they have genuinely pro-choice views and are mildly anti-war, but the capture of the elite stratum by corporations is pretty much complete.”
ACS doesn’t shy away from questioning corporate power, though the bulk of its interrogation has been confined to panel discussions. Anti-monopoly advocate Barry Lynn of the Open Markets Institute says ACS could be doing more to offer a progressive vision on these issues, in the way the Federalist Society helps train and educate its conservative members on monopoly and antitrust.
Following the election of Donald Trump, some antitrust advocates, including Lynn, reached out to ACS to encourage the legal organization to take a firmer stance on these issues. In February 2017, Lynn, his colleague Lina Khan, antitrust attorney Jonathan Kanter, and Andy Green of the Center for American Progress met with Kara Stein, ACS’s vice president of policy and program.
“We said, ‘Hey, at least do no harm, don’t support people who are hardcore conservative on corporate welfare,’” Lynn said. “We want them to be a counterweight to the Federalist Society. Maybe they won’t take as radical a position as us, but we do think they should be pretty critical and at least work to educate its members about why the right takes the positions it does.” Lynn says the response they received was relative openness — if anti-monopoly advocates could fundraise for the work.
“They basically told us, ‘Well, if you really want us to engage on these issues around monopoly, then the way to do it would be to give us some money, build up a program.’”
“They basically told us, ‘Well, if you really want us to engage on these issues around monopoly, then the way to do it would be to give us some money, build up a program,’” Lynn said, adding that Washington, D.C., “is full of these pay-to-play places.” David Lyle, ACS’s senior counsel for communications, didn’t deny Lynn’s characterization of the meeting and said it “was like many ACS holds regularly to explore partnerships and ways to collaborate on topics and issues.”
ACS has sponsored local and national events that have been critical of corporate power and encouraged stronger antitrust work, including an antitrust conference Khan organized at Yale. Hedayati says his ACS chapter has hosted several antitrust events in recent years — including one last month on political influence around antitrust investigations and a film screening in 2019 where members discussed shortcomings of antitrust law.
In response to questions, Lyle also pointed to a national panel ACS sponsored on consolidation of wealth and power in 2017, one on the constitutional dilemmas of Big Tech in 2018, and one on tech regulation in July. He also noted ACS has “been pleased” to publish scholars like Khan in ACS’s official law journal, and that the organization is publishing an essay by her this week with policy recommendations for the Biden administration.
In a statement to The Intercept, Khan said, “ACS’s leadership choices speak to the organization’s values, and it’s inappropriate for ACS to use my willingness to participate in past events as cover for its troubling choice to reappoint a top Amazon lawyer to the board.”
ACS declined to comment on the donations it receives from tech companies or make Feingold available for an interview. “Our work in this field, including the promotion of leading advocates of more strict antitrust enforcement and critics of technology companies speaks for itself,” said Lyle. As a U.S. senator, Feingold was a leading champion on campaign finance reform, pushing major legislation to curb the influence of money in politics. He was also known among his colleagues — and often privately resented — for his strict and obsessive fealty to the spirit of Senate ethics rules.
Lynn told The Intercept that ACS’s corporate tech donations “can’t help but affect” the organization. “When those sorts of folks are in the room they’re going to affect the policy,” he said.
Other members argue ACS’s murkiness on corporate power is less a reflection of rank corruption and points more to the reality that ACS’s aim to be a “big-tent” organization for liberals means it effectively becomes more of a networking group, with inevitable vague policy positions palatable to the full Democratic Party. In the absence of drawing clearer lines in the sand and providing a sharper vision for what progressive lawyering means in the realms of corporate power and bankruptcy law, newer organizations like Demand Justice, the People’s Parity Project, and the Law and Political Economy Project will continue to fill what its supporters say is an intellectual and advocacy void for lawyers on the left.
The Biden administration, for its part, has recently appointed a number of leaders and alumni from big tech companies, though maintains it will continue serious investigations into the practices of these firms. The Trump administration filed a major antitrust suit against Google, which will continue under the Biden administration. The suit is seen as potentially the first of several such clashes with tech titans.
“I think antitrust and antimonopoly people feel listened to on the substance by the Biden administration,” said Jeff Hauser, the director of the Revolving Door Project, which advocates for progressive executive branch appointments. “But the question is whether there will be people appointed who will be able to slow the move of the government against these companies.”
Update: Dec. 22, 2020, 3:35 p.m. ET
This article has been updated to include a comment from Lina Khan that was received after publication.