Aggregator
2 men previously detained and released in Nancy Guthrie disappearance have not been ‘cleared,’ sheriff says
Autistic man who vanished from NYC home stabbed in unprovoked attack: cops, sources
See The Hilarious AI Ads That Furious California Democrats Want Banned
Two California Democrats are moving to outlaw AI-generated campaign ads at the federal level, just days after a Republican rival for the governor's mansion used the technology to hammer their party.
Sen. Adam Schiff (D-CA) and Rep. Ro Khanna (D-CA) on Monday reintroduced the AI Ads Act, which would make it a federal violation to use artificial intelligence to impersonate candidates or committees in federal races.
This is the satire Ro Khanna and Adam Schiff want to make illegal so democrats aren't the butt of jokes.
— Charles Curran (@charliebcurran) July 30, 2026The push comes on the heels of two AI-generated spots from GOP gubernatorial candidate Steve Hilton, who went after Gov. Gavin Newsom, former Vice President Kamala Harris and Democrat gubernatorial nominee Xavier Becerra.
Enough Is Enough. Let's Fix California.
— Charles Curran (@charliebcurran) July 23, 2026Of course, Hilton isn't the only one having fun with the technology. The campaign of Spencer Pratt, the reality television star turned Los Angeles mayoral candidate, made waves with his creative and side-splitting ads from Los Angeles-based director Charles Curran.
Be the Hero LA needs. Vote Spencer Pratt. pic.twitter.com/VTskAwynpB
— Charles Curran (@charliebcurran) May 20, 2026LA is worth saving. Vote Spencer Pratt. pic.twitter.com/sQQQUjN9YY
— Charles Curran (@charliebcurran) June 1, 2026Unsurprisingly, Schiff claims his bill isn't about politics, but about protecting against a so-called "serious threat to our democracy."
"AI-generated fraudulent advertising which uses the likeness or voices of candidates to misrepresent their positions, campaigns, or causes, or otherwise misrepresents a candidate's point of view is not only wrong - it poses a serious threat to our democracy that should concern all Americans regardless of their party," said Schiff. "Fraudulent AI advertising has already proliferated in races across the country, and if Congress does not act, this runaway challenge will only get worse as AI becomes increasingly capable of blurring the lines between fact and fiction. With November elections around the corner, time is of the essence to reign in false political advertising."
Groups that support the bill include Common Cause, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, the Campaign Legal Center, Protect Democracy and Public Citizen, according to the New York Post.
"AI will transform our lives and our society in many ways, but it can't be used to mislead voters or undermine our democracy. I'm proud to lead the AI Ads Act with Senator Schiff to ban AI-generated content that deceives the public about candidates or elections," Khanna said in a statement.
Tyler Durden Thu, 07/30/2026 - 18:00Dodgers vs. Mariners prediction: Odds, picks, best bet
Yankees’ misery continues with literal extra-innings walk-off loss to White Sox
Video shows 200 migrant children at California container site during Xavier Becerra’s HHS tenure
Rock-hurling crew stabbed 2 teen boys, snatched electric scooter in NYC attack: cops
Politics is getting more vulgar, with two presidents leading the way on curse words counts: study
Jason Kelce reveals the one thing that surprised him most about Taylor Swift and Travis’ wedding
Jason Kelce reveals the one thing that surprised him most about Taylor Swift and Travis’ wedding
Dad of Nolan Wells’ ‘best friend’ slams family lawyer Ben Crump for ‘financially exploiting’ teen’s death, turning it into political circus
Federal Judge Rules Race-Based Portion Of Houston Program Unconstitutional
Authored by Kimberly Hayek via The Epoch Times,
A federal judge on Tuesday permanently barred the city of Houston from enforcing the race-based parts of a program that includes numerical goals for awarding public contracts to minority-owned businesses, ruling that doing so is in violation of the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment.
A judge's gavel, in this file photo. Andrew Kelly/ReutersU.S. District Judge David Hittner described his decision as the first to extend the U.S. Supreme Court's 2023 ruling against race-conscious college admissions to municipal public contracting programs. He found Houston could not justify treating businesses differently due to the race of their owners.
"The public interest favors a permanent injunction because there is no public interest in permitting the government to continue enforcing an unconstitutional race-based policy," Hittner wrote in his findings of fact and conclusions of law.
Landscape Consultants of Texas Inc. and Metropolitan Landscape Management Inc., two Spring-based landscaping firms owned by Jerry and Theresa Thompson, a white married couple, filed the original lawsuit in September 2023. They were represented by Pacific Legal Foundation. In their filing, they argued Houston's Minority, Women, and Small Business Enterprise Program, as well as a similar policy at the Midtown Management District, precluded them from opportunities due to their race.
"Equal protection means equal protection for everyone, not preferential treatment for some," Erin Wilcox, a lawyer for the plaintiffs at the Pacific Legal Foundation, said in a statement. "The Fourteenth Amendment guarantees every business owner the same shot at a government contract, regardless of race."
Houston City Attorney Arturo Michel said the city may appeal.
"The city will abide by the court's decision regarding existing contracts and recently awarded contracts pending any further court order," Michel said.
The program requires the city to establish annual goals for contracts going to minority-owned businesses. It also allows departments to impose contract-specific goals.
Non-minority firms were often required to subcontract a percentage of work to certified minority-owned businesses even if they had no operational need to subcontract. Minority-owned firms could fulfill the requirement with their own workers.
Hittner held a four-day bench trial in December 2025, ultimately concluding that under the Supreme Court's framework in Students for Fair Admissions Inc. v. Harvard, government may use race only to remedy specific, identified past discrimination.
"Houston is required to identify concrete, particularized discrimination and demonstrate that its use of race is necessary to remedy that discrimination," Hittner said. "Houston has not done so."
Hittner noted the city's own expert witness testified that a 2024 disparity study commissioned by the city identified no specific instances of intentional discrimination by Houston officials or employees in recent years. The city had not disciplined anyone for contracting discrimination in the previous five years and found no particular constitutional or statutory violations.
Hittner limited the injunction to the race-conscious guidelines. Preferences based on gender or small-business status were not struck down. The order also applies to the Midtown Management District's parallel policy.
Reuters contributed to this report.
Tyler Durden Thu, 07/30/2026 - 17:40