#this stands for Committee of Publication Ethics

[alteredsilicone]

the internet has ruined me

there was another group whose acronym was ECOC and our professor pronounced it as e-cock

[rjzimmerman]

Opinion |Joe Biden: My plan to reform the Supreme Court and ensure no president is above the law. (Washington Post)

This nation was founded on a simple yet profound principle: No one is above the law. Not the president of the United States. Not a justice on the Supreme Court of the United States. No one.

But the Supreme Court’s 6-3 decision on July 1 to grant presidents broad immunity from prosecution for crimes they commit in office means there are virtually no limits on what a president can do. The only limits will be those that are self-imposed by the person occupying the Oval Office.

If a future president incites a violent mob to storm the Capitol and stop the peaceful transfer of power — like we saw on Jan. 6, 2021 — there may be no legal consequences.

And that’s only the beginning.

On top of dangerous and extreme decisions that overturn settled legal precedents — including Roe v. Wade — the court is mired in a crisis of ethics. Scandals involving several justices have caused the public to question the court’s fairness and independence, which are essential to faithfully carrying out its mission of equal justice under the law. For example, undisclosed gifts to justices from individuals with interests in cases before the court, as well as conflicts of interest connected with Jan. 6 insurrectionists, raise legitimate questions about the court’s impartiality.

I served as a U.S. senator for 36 years, including as chairman and ranking member of the Judiciary Committee. I have overseen more Supreme Court nominations as senator, vice president and president than anyone living today. I have great respect for our institutions and the separation of powers.

What is happening now is not normal, and it undermines the public’s confidence in the court’s decisions, including those impacting personal freedoms. We now stand in a breach.

That’s why — in the face of increasing threats to America’s democratic institutions — I am calling for three bold reforms to restore trust and accountability to the court and our democracy.

First, I am calling for a constitutional amendment called the No One Is Above the Law Amendment. It would make clear that there is no immunity for crimes a former president committed while in office. I share our Founders’ belief that the president’s power is limited, not absolute. We are a nation of laws — not of kings or dictators.

Second, we have had term limits for presidents for nearly 75 years. We should have the same for Supreme Court justices. The United States is the only major constitutional democracy that gives lifetime seats to its high court. Term limits would help ensure that the court’s membership changes with some regularity. That would make timing for court nominations more predictable and less arbitrary. It would reduce the chance that any single presidency radically alters the makeup of the court for generations to come. I support a system in which the president would appoint a justice every two years to spend 18 years in active service on the Supreme Court.

Third, I’m calling for a binding code of conduct for the Supreme Court. This is common sense. The court’s current voluntary ethics code is weak and self-enforced. Justices should be required to disclose gifts, refrain from public political activity and recuse themselves from cases in which they or their spouses have financial or other conflicts of interest. Every other federal judge is bound by an enforceable code of conduct, and there is no reason for the Supreme Court to be exempt.

All three of these reforms are supported by a majority of Americans— as well as conservative and liberal constitutional scholars. And I want to thank the bipartisan Presidential Commission on the Supreme Court of the United States for its insightful analysis, which informed some of these proposals.

We can and must prevent the abuse of presidential power. We can and must restore the public’s faith in the Supreme Court. We can and must strengthen the guardrails of democracy.

In America, no one is above the law. In America, the people rule.

[justinspoliticalcorner]

Michelangelo Signorile at The Signorile Report:

The New York Times reports on yet another treasonous flag flying on yet another home owned by Justice Samuel Alito and his wife. Last week, it was the Times report and a jaw-dropping photo of an upside-down flag—embraced by the “Stop the Steal’ movement—flown on the lawn of his Alexandra, Virginia, home in the days after January 6th. This week it’s an “Appeal to Heaven” flag, which, as the Times reports, ‘like the inverted U.S. flag, was carried by rioters at the Capitol in the days after Jan. 6, 2021.” It was flown at the Alito’s home on the Jersey shore on Long Beach Island in the summer of 2023. [...]

Tribe acknowledges that there is no way this MAGA-led House is going to impeach Alito but says that’s not an excuse for the Senate not to “at least initiate a serious investigation into whether impeachable offenses have been committed,” and, at the very least, “whether a meaningful, enforceable code of ethics” should be enacted. Tribe says the Senate should call for Alito to testify and subpoena him if he doesn't. He needs to explain under oath what the flags meant, not just release statements to the media blaming his wife. Two days ago, Senate Judiciary Committee chairman Dick Durbin, joining Democrats in the House and Senate, called on Alito to recuse himself from January 6th cases but said there’s “not much to be gained” by holding hearings. “No, we haven’t got anything planned,” he told NBC News. “I think he’s explained his situation. The American public understands what he did.”

Really? I think the American public is overwhelmingly horrified to see an upside-down flag on the lawn of a Supreme Court justice. Will Durbin continue with this weak argument even after the report of a second treasonous flag? His response is not only insufficient; it’s political malpractice as we’re headed into a critical election. There is an enormous amount to be gained. It’s all upside, no downside. The Supreme Court is very unpopular, having swung to the far right and stripping basic freedoms like the right to abortion. And after the corruption in the form of undisclosed gifts to Alito, Thomas and others, the American people want political leaders to stand up and demand justice. It doesn’t matter if Republicans fight against this. Let them be exposed as indifferent or supporting treason themselves.

This article from Michelangelo Signorile is spot-on 100% as to why Senate Judiciary Chair Senator Dick Durbin (D-IL) to conduct hearings on SCOTUS Justice Samuel Alito's unethical behavior while serving on the court.

[dontmeantobepoliticalbut]

Ron DeSantis has appointed Tina Descovich, a co-founder of Southern Poverty Law Center-designated hate group Moms for Liberty, to the Florida Commission on Ethics.

DeSantis announced Descovich’s appointment to the prominent commission on Wednesday (6 September). The appointment is still subject to confirmation by Florida’s Republican-led Senate.

The nine-member panel is responsible for weighing complaints and investigating alleged breaches of public trust against elected and appointed officials as well as state employees.

Descovich wrote on X, formally known as Twitter, that it will be a “privilege to serve the state [she loves] as a member of this commission.”

However, Alejandra Caraballo, an LGBTQ+ rights advocate and civil rights attorney, warned that Descovich’s appointment was dangerous because she would “be able to investigate LGBTQ state employees and allies and systematically remove them from state government.”

DeSantis just appointed the co-founder of an SPLC designated hate group as part of the the Florida Ethics Commission.

Descovich, who previously served on Brevard’s school board from 2016 to 2020, founded Moms for Liberty with Tiffany Justice in 2021 to “stand up for parental rights at all levels of government”, according to the group’s website.

The Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) labelled Moms for Liberty an “extremist group” because of its opposition to LGBTQ+ issues, advocacy for book bans and work against racially inclusive curriculums in schools.

“Moms for Liberty activities make it clear that the group’s primary goals are to fuel right-wing hysteria and to make the world a less comfortable or safe place for certain students – primarily those who are Black, LGBTQ or who come from LGBTQ families,” the SPLC’s 2022 Year in Hate and Extremism report stated.

The Florida-based group – which has chapters around the US – helped develop the state’s ‘Don’t Say Gay’ law and publicly advocated in favour of the legislation, which bans discussions of LGBTQ+ topics in schools.

In July 2022, Moms for Liberty’s Twitter (now X) account was temporarily suspended for violating the social media platform’s rule against hateful conduct with a post criticising California’s gender-affirming healthcare bill.

The post claimed that gender dysphoria is a “mental health disorder” and that “California kids are at extreme risk from predatory adults.”

Moms for Liberty also alleged on social media that “CRT” (critical race theory) and “gender ideology” are “toxic for children.” In another post, the group claimed that “gender identity indoctrination” is “one of the most dangerous threats facing children in America today.”

Moms for Liberty has also been tied to other far-right organisations, and members have allegedly waged campaigns of harassment against school boards or rival parent groups.

In one interview, a Moms for Liberty member said LGBTQ+ kids should be placed in separate classrooms “like children with autism or Down’s syndrome.”

The American Historical Association also has condemned Moms for Liberty’s ‘vigorous’ advocacy of “censorship and harassment of history teachers, banning history books from libraries and classrooms and legislation that renders it impossible for historians to teach with professional integrity without risking job loss and other penalties.”

The Committee on LGBTQ History said the right-wing group “consistently spreads harmful, hateful rhetoric about the LGBTQIA+ community, including popularising the use of the term ‘groomer’ to refer to queer people and attacking the mere existence of trans youth.”

[mariacallous]

American politics is a circus. In the arena of Washington, DC, lawmaking and lawbreaking is a fanatical kind of entertainment, a warped experiment that, in recent years, has taken on the veneer of blind zealotry. Republicans, in particular, have thrived on a diet of chaos since the rise of former president Donald Trump, turning the performance of democracy into primetime viewing. “The reality of it is, it’s all theater,” Representative George Santos of New York said on Thursday during a press conference on the steps of the US Capitol as he faced expulsion from Congress.

Soaking in the carnival of media attention that has stalked him since he arrived in DC in 2022, Santos—taking one last stand as a solo act this week—was predictably unmuzzled in the hours leading up to the vote that would decide his political future. “It’s theater for the cameras, it’s theater for the microphones,” he said, referring to the playhouse of American bureaucracy and, ironically, himself. “It’s theater for the American people at the expense of the American people.”

In a short time, Santos had fashioned himself into one of the most fascinating carnival barkers of recent memory. By Friday he was out of a job.

As cameras rolled and online chatter swirled across social media about his alleged scams, there was nowhere for Santos to hide. Not that he wanted to, of course. In a Spaces conversation hosted on X, Santos was hellbent on exposing his congressional associates—“Felons galore,” he colored them—for their alleged crimes. “I have colleagues who are more worried about getting drunk every night with the next lobbyist that they’re gonna screw, and pretend like none of us know what’s going on, and sell off the American people,” he said. The spotlight was his alone, as was the intense scrutiny that came with it.

In October, a report filed by the House Ethics Committee claimed that Santos had overstepped his authority as a member of Congress, accusing him on multiple counts of financial fraud and criminal activity. The ethics report determined that Santos—among other misdeeds that already included charges of wire fraud and conspiracy—used campaign funds on Botox, the adult subscription site OnlyFans, and luxury Ferragamo shoes (select pairs sell for more than $2,000). True to form, and a true master of spin, Santos said the report was “littered in hyperbole.”

Equal parts enigma and attraction, Santos courted controversy from the beginning of his tenure as a US representative. There was an uncanny cadence to his personal testimony: Nothing was exactly as he told it. Even now, in the dim light of his scandalous incumbency, the question of “Who is George Santos?” remains unclear. The air of mystery surrounding Santos, and the public’s deep fascination with him, is owed to his own innate flair for invention, which both feeds into the eccentricity of American politics and mirrors the conceited, but no less savory, surrealism of reality TV that we obsess over. Who doesn’t love a surprising plot twist and a riveting character arc?

Even by Washington standards, where truth and fiction live side by side, Santos’ particular taste for fabrication was extraordinary. He said he received his MBA from New York University. He had not. He said he previously worked at investment firms Goldman Sachs and Citigroup. He had not. He said his grandparents were Jewish and escaped the Holocaust. They had not. He alleged personal connections to the September 11 attacks on the World Trade Center, where he said his mother worked in finance, and denied past criminality in Brazil. Those were also lies.

Hubris. Ego. Narcissism. These now seem to represent the defining traits of American lawmakers who swagger and shout with little concern for the dangerous consequences their actions set in motion. Perhaps it’s fitting, then, that earlier this week, photographer Al Drago captured a 15-foot inflatable George Santos against a backdrop of blue sky outside the US Capitol building, as MoveOn, a progressive public policy and advocacy group, called attention to the 35-year-old New York congressperson’s indulgent falsehoods. “Full of Lies,” exclaimed the message on its red tie, the inflatable’s tiny gremlin feet dangling in the air. As metaphors go, this one was unmistakable in its framing: George Santos is all hot air.

Santos always seemed thirsty for the spotlight, and now he has it. He is the first US representative to be banished from the House, not convicted of treason or a federal crime. In a vote of 311–114, members of Congress found a resounding legitimacy in the ethics committee report.

Santos has vowed to wear his expulsion like “a badge of honor.” In doing so he joins a cohort of politicos—along with Trump, Rudy Guiliani, and other MAGA acolytes—who defy the gravity of democracy, smugly facing the cameras even as they face indictments. In their reality of government, theirs is the only truth worth subscribing to.

The loss of Santos’ congressional seat in New York could help give Democrats the momentum they need, as Joe Biden readies for a likely round-two matchup against Trump. A screening of potential candidates is already underway, and a special election will be held next year. For now, though, democracy breathes a little easier—purged, though not completely, of the lies politicians like Santos feed into the body of the imperfect republic.

Farewell, George Santos. It was fun until it wasn’t.

[beardedmrbean]

The publisher of an Alabama newspaper was arrested, along with a reporter, last week after authorities accused them of publishing an article that exposed information about a grand jury probe involving the local school system. The situation raised the eyebrows of press-freedom advocates, but details remain scant, and the publisher has since been arrested for a second time. 

Atmore News owner Sherry Digmon, who is also a member of the local school board, and reporter Donald Fletcher were arrested last week. They were charged by the Escambia County district attorney with revealing grand-jury proceedings, which is a felony in Alabama. 

Last month, Atmore News published an article alleging the Escambia County Board of Education had received a subpoena seeking information about bonuses paid from pandemic relief funds. A follow-up piece reported that authorities seized the phones of school board members, including Digmon, who voted against renewing the school superintendent’s contract. It’s unclear what specific information about the grand jury the paper is accused of publishing. 

SMALL-TOWN ALABAMA NEWSPAPER PUBLISHER, REPORTER ARRESTED FOR REPORTING CONFIDENTIAL GRAND JURY INFO

The reporting said the school system’s bookkeeper and financial officer had received a subpoena to provide information about COVID-era bonuses paid to employees. The Atmore News also cited an anonymous source who claimed District Attorney Steve Billy wanted to prove school board members violated the state Open Meetings Act.

Digmon was also arrested Wednesday on a separate charge of violating state ethics law, the second time in less than a week that she was taken in. She is accused of using her school board position for personal gain and improperly soliciting a thing of value by selling $2,500 worth of advertisements to the school system. 

Prior to the second arrest, the Committee to Protect Journalists called on authorities in Escambia County, Alabama, to "immediately drop all charges" related to disclosing leaked information against Digmon and Fletcher. 

"CPJ is outraged by the arrest of Atmore News publisher Sherry Digmon and reporter Don Fletcher and calls on local authorities to immediately drop all charges against them. They should not be prosecuted for simply doing their jobs and covering a matter of local interest, such as the allocation of school board funds," Committee to Protect Journalists program coordinator Katherine Jacobsen said. 

"Journalists play a crucial role in their local communities," Jacobsen continued. "Arresting them creates a chilling effect and is a gross misuse of taxpayer funds."

Following the second arrest, the CPJ said it's "still investigating whether or not yesterday's arrest of Sherry Digmon was in relation to her work as a school board member or her work at the Atmore News," and stood by its initial defense.

"We stand by our concerns about the October 27 arrests of Digmon and Atmore News reporter Don Fletcher. Publishing leaked material is not a crime and journalists should not be arrested and charged for simply doing their jobs and reporting on matters of public interest," a CPJ spokesperson told Fox News Digital. 

The Atmore News published a story on Thursday headlined, "No secrets," which explained the situation surrounding the initial arrests. 

"Atmore News publisher and co-owner Sherry Digmon and Atmore News reporter Don Fletcher, both arrested last Friday — along with a bookkeeper for the county school system — for revealing grand jury secrets, were ordered Monday to refrain from publishing future stories about criminal and civil matters that might come before a grand jury, specifically those regarding the Escambia County Board of Education," the news staff wrote. 

"In an initial appearance held Monday, October 30, before District Judge Eric Coale, Digmon and Fletcher signed statements acknowledging that, as a condition of their bonds, both would in the future have ‘no communications about ongoing criminal investigations including schools and other.’ Coale verbally added, ‘until they are public record,’" the story continued. "The journalists were arrested under the provisions of Alabama Criminal Code Section 12-16-216: ‘Grand juror, witness, etc., prohibited from revealing, disclosing, etc., form, nature, etc., of physical evidence or questions asked; no person to directly, indirectly, etc., by any means, obtain information as to physical evidence or questions asked; exception as to state prosecutions.’"

The publication added, "Digmon, who was one of four school board members to vote against a new contract for Superintendent of Education Michele McClung, and Fletcher were released at 8:34 p.m. after surety bonds of $10,000 were posted for each." 

Alabama Press Association general counsel Dennis Bailey told the Associated Press on Wednesday that the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled the First Amendment gives "the news media a right to publish truthful information on matters of public concern, even if unlawfully acquired, provided the publisher did not participate in the unlawful conduct."

"I do not know all the facts here, but based upon what I have seen so far, it is my opinion reporters who receive and publish unsolicited tips about the actual issuance and service of a grand jury subpoena do not violate Alabama grand jury secrecy laws unless they coerced someone to provide the information," Bailey wrote in an email to the AP, adding that he has "never seen a reporter arrested for publishing truthful information about the existence of a grand jury subpoena."

When asked about the second arrest, Bailey stood by his statement.

"My comments related to the [initial] complaints are not affected by the filing of other complaints about other charges," Bailey told Fox News Digital. 

District Attorney Billy did not immediately respond to a request for comment. 

Earnest White, who represents Digmon and Fletcher, did not immediately respond to a request for comment. 

[illm4nn3rd]

Proposal for a Renewed Constitutional Convention: Celebrating Tradition, Embracing Tomorrow

Invoking Article V for a Future-Ready America

To: Whom it may concern

Introduction:

As we stand on the cusp of a new era, it is incumbent upon us to ensure that our cherished Constitution, crafted by our Founding Fathers, remains vibrant and responsive to the challenges of our time.

Purpose:

Utilizing the provision of Article V, we endeavor to create an inclusive platform that harmonizes our time-honored principles with the pressing demands of the modern age. We seek to breathe fresh life into our Constitution, ensuring its enduring relevance.

Core Topics for Discussion:

Digital Rights & Privacy: Navigating the balance between modern technology and our cherished personal freedoms, and the responsibilities large corporations hold to the customers they serve. Right to repair being of great importance.

Stewardship of the Land: Upholding our duty to the land that may yet nurture us for future generations.

Universal Rights: A renewed commitment to justice and equality for all.

Election Integrity: Refining our systems to better echo the people's voice.

Addressing Grievances: Evolving our mechanisms for a neutral mediation in dispute resolution.

Science, Ethics, and Human Dignity: Charting the interplay between innovation and moral values.

America on the Global Stage: Revaluating our shared space on the global stage while upholding our core principles.

State-Specific Issues: Highlighting the unique challenges and strengths of each state.

Costs of Responsibility: Debating and reconciling the responsibilities of individual citizens, state governments, and the Federal government amongst one other, and the costs required for upholding said responsibility. Balancing the cost of living for working class citizens while keeping the burden with in reason for all Americans.

Convention Dynamics:

Commencement: A momentous kick-off on July 4th, paying tribute to our democratic roots.

Duration: A two-year journey, dedicating two weeks to each state based on their Union accession, to allow deep dives into regional concerns.

State Representation: Five delegates from each state: two from state legislatures, two chosen by popular vote, and one appointed by the governor.

Oversight:

An Oversight Committee comprising nine distinguished individuals will guide the proceedings:

Three nominated by the federal government to represent national interests.

Three chosen by collective state governors to voice state-centric concerns.

Three elected by the popular vote, ensuring the citizenry's voice remains at the forefront.

Public Involvement:

Transparency: A steadfast commitment to open discourse, with deliberations documented for public perusal.

Engagement Platforms: Town halls and digital forums to capture a myriad of views.

Educational Endeavors: Initiatives to deepen public understanding of pivotal topics.

Post-Convention Action Plan:

Documentation: Archiving outcomes for public review and historical records.

State-Level Engagements: Encouraging states to participate in cooperation and bridge building, regardless of ratification.

Community Mobilization: Aiding local movements to use authentic language while promoting civil debate.

Review Mechanism:

8 years post-convention, the Oversight Committee will reconvene as a Review Council and will:

Assess: Examine the real-world impact of the convention's resolutions.

Recommend: Make recommendations to Federal legislatures on any further corrections or changes that may yet assist in creating a more perfect Union.

Provide Guidance: Offer insights for future conventions, drawing from encountered challenges and gained experiences.

Financing:

Funding will be sourced judiciously from federal and state treasuries, accompanied by rigorous oversight mechanisms to ensure transparent and neutral allocation.

Conclusion:

In reimagining our Constitution, we embark on a journey that honors our past while crafting a beacon for our future. We invite you to join hands in this noble pursuit, shaping a legacy for generations to come.

With profound respect and hope for our shared future, A Patriot in Service to the Republic.

[dzthenerd490]

File: Candyman

SCP#: AEU

Code Name: Candyman, the Demon of Five

Object Class: Keter

Special Containment Procedures: Memetic kill agents have been placed in the graffiti, products, books, art, advertisement, and other items regularly viewed by the public. These memetics influence regularly influence the people of [data expunged] to ignore or not care about the "Candyman Legend". It should be noted this will not destroy SCP-AEU but will prevent it from harming civilians ever again. Unfortunately, this is confirmed to be the best containment method for SCP-AEU.

Description: SCP-AEU is a number demon and a lore parasite that currently take the form of a tall man of African descent. His right hand is replaced with a hook and his chest is filled with ravenous bees. Unfortunately, even with D Class sacrificed to take samples it has proven impossible to capture these bees as they seem just as metaphysical as SCP-AEU himself. The physical form of SCP-AEU was made form the local story of the "Candyman" who seeks revenge after being killed simply for loving a white woman back in the 1800s.

However, it should not be mistaken as SCP-AEU has no actual relation to the man in the local tale, it just takes the form of him. SCP-AEU as explained before is a number demon which for those that don't know are demons that curse a particular number in a unique way to have people summon then and be devoured. In SCP-AEU's case, the number is five, it's summoned through a little folk lore game where you must say "Candyman" five times in front of a mirror.

SCP-AEU is also a lore parasite which are spiritual anomalies taking the form of local stories to gain power and influence. The more widespread the story the stronger the parasite becomes. This and the "Candyman game" have given SCP-AEU more power than any lore parasite and number demon on their own.  Allowing it to torment and haunt the entire community of SCP-AEU for decades. Shockingly, SCP-AEU normally just kills and devours those that summon him, but it is possible for SCP-AEU to simply kill those around them and have the victim blamed for his own crimes.

SCP-AEU was discovered in 1992, when dozens of murders were reported in the [data expunged] public housing project. It was reported that the rumor of the "Candyman game" reached some of the locals and after one of them did the dare, they all died. Foundation agents disguised as police officers covered up the scene as just a mass homicide and as instructed, damaged the bodies to further sell this cover story. Afterwards as a precaution a Foundation Field Researcher was deployed who specialized in lore parasite. They found traces of demonic particles on the bodies and in the building where they were found.

Foundation agents sent D Class to the area more specifically abandoned buildings with mirrors to see if they would be devoured by SCP-AEU and sure enough he showed up. Unfortunately, in initial testing there were Foundation researchers and agents standing guard over the D Class. SCP-AEU killed them all instead thinking the Foundation would pin the blame on the D Class. The D Classes were killed anyways as they were now acting as anchors for SCP-AEU which would lead to SCP-AEU's influence growing. From here it was determined that SCP-AEU was too dangerous to be left as it was, leading to the current Special Containment Procedures implemented.

Currently the memetic kill agents implemented around the [data expunged] community have shown at least 89%. Unfortunately, there are still those that play the "Candyman game" leading to incidences still occurring. As such The Ethics Committee has approved the implementation of Protocol "The Unknown Killer" to deal with any "unwanted variables". There has not been given a single codename for the killer and every time the public comes up with several others are to be introduced onto any dead bodies. This is done to prevent SCP-AEU from regaining its strength by latching onto a new story. It is with hope that all of this will result in SCP-AEU's eradication. Though unfortunately if it ever does happen the Foundation will have no way of knowing for sure.

.

SCP: Horror Movie Files Hub

[coochiequeens]

Has anyone considered what the impact of having three mothers and still not knowing where half his DNA come is going to have on this kid in the future?

An adoption order has been approved for a little boy with three mothers.

The adoptive mother of the boy, known as Kaspar, is a woman who is unable to have children.

Kaspar’s birth mother is the surrogate mum who carried him in her womb.

Kaspar’s biological mother is an anonymous woman who donated her egg for in-vitro fertilisation.

“Increasingly, this way of being born is becoming common,” Family Court Judge Alayne Wills said in granting the adoption order.

“It will not be unusual for Kaspar, by the age of 12, to be one of a number of children in the same situation.”

Kaspar’s birth story has been recorded in a decision by Judge Wills handed down in 2021 but which has only just been published on a court website.

Under Family Court rules, the people involved cannot be identified, but the court has given them fictitious names for the purposes of publication.

The adoption order was sought by Giselle and Jon Meyer, who brought Kaspar home from hospital when he was four days old.

Jon Meyer is Kaspar’s biological father. Giselle and Jon Meyer are unable to have children of their own together.

A long-standing friend of Jon Meyer, Abigail Lint, offered to be a surrogate mother for the couple.

“That is a gift given to the parents by her,” Judge Wills said.

The surrogate pregnancy was made possible by in-vitro fertilisation (IVF) through Fertility Associates and was approved by the Ethics Committee on Assisted Reproductive Technology, which is appointed by the Minister of Health.

It also required approval from Oranga Tamariki, and a social worker gave the green light for Kaspar to be placed into the Meyers’ care.

The egg used in the IVF process was donated by a woman who wished only to be known as Esme.

Judge Wills said that not knowing his biological mother was “probably not ideal” for Kaspar, but that issue could not be addressed without Esme’s consent.

[abigailspinach]

An Op-Ed in WaPo

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2024/07/29/joe-biden-reform-supreme-court-presidential-immunity-plan-announcement/

Please note this fun header:

The writer is president of the United States.

On top of dangerous and extreme decisions that overturn settled legal precedents — including Roe v. Wade — the court is mired in a crisis of ethics. Scandals involving several justices have caused the public to question the court’s fairness and independence, which are essential to faithfully carrying out its mission of equal justice under the law. For example, undisclosed gifts to justices from individuals with interests in cases before the court, as well as conflicts of interest connected with Jan. 6 insurrectionists, raise legitimate questions about the court’s impartiality.

I served as a U.S. senator for 36 years, including as chairman and ranking member of the Judiciary Committee. I have overseen more Supreme Court nominations as senator, vice president and president than anyone living today. I have great respect for our institutions and the separation of powers.

What is happening now is not normal, and it undermines the public’s confidence in the court’s decisions, including those impacting personal freedoms. We now stand in a breach.

First, I am calling for a constitutional amendment called the No One Is Above the Law Amendment. It would make clear that there is no immunity for crimes a former president committed while in office. I share our Founders’ belief that the president’s power is limited, not absolute. We are a nation of laws — not of kings or dictators.

Second, we have had term limits for presidents for nearly 75 years. We should have the same for Supreme Court justices. The United States is the only major constitutional democracy that gives lifetime seats to its high court. Term limits would help ensure that the court’s membership changes with some regularity. That would make timing for court nominations more predictable and less arbitrary. It would reduce the chance that any single presidency radically alters the makeup of the court for generations to come. I support a system in which the president would appoint a justice every two years to spend 18 years in active service on the Supreme Court.

Third, I’m calling for a binding code of conduct for the Supreme Court. This is common sense. The court’s current voluntary ethics code is weak and self-enforced. Justices should be required to disclose gifts, refrain from public political activity and recuse themselves from cases in which they or their spouses have financial or other conflicts of interest. Every other federal judge is bound by an enforceable code of conduct, and there is no reason for the Supreme Court to be exempt.

All three of these reforms are supported by a majority of Americans— as well as conservative and liberal constitutional scholars. And I want to thank the bipartisan Presidential Commission on the Supreme Court of the United States for its insightful analysis, which informed some of these proposals.

We can and must prevent the abuse of presidential power. We can and must restore the public’s faith in the Supreme Court. We can and must strengthen the guardrails of democracy.

In America, no one is above the law. In America, the people rule.

[gary232]

List of all organizations backing Project 2025 1792 Exchange American Accountability Foundation AAPLOG - American Association of Pro-Life OBGYNs Alabama Policy Institute Alliance Defending Freedom American Center for Law and Justice American Commitment American Compass American Cornerstone Institute The American Conservative American Council of Trustees and Alumni American Family Association America First Legal American Juris Link American Legislative Exchange Council The American Main Street Initiative American Moment American Principles Project The American Family Project The American Redistricting Project Americans United for Life AMAC Action - The Association of Mature American Citizens The Bull Moose Project California Family Council Calvert Task Group Centennial Institute at Colorado Christian University Center for Equal Opportunity Center for Family & Human Rights Center for Immigration Studies Center for Military Readiness Center for Renewing America Center for Secure Free Society Citizens Against Government Waste The Claremont Institute Coalition for Liberty Coalition for a Prosperous America Committee for Justice Concerned Women for America Conservative Partnership Institute Consumers Defense Defense of Freedom Institute Eagle Forum Ethics and Public Policy Center Fairer America Family Policy Alliance Family Research Council Feds for Freedom First Liberty America Forge Leadership Network Foundation for American Innovation Foundation for Government Accountability Freedom's Journal Institute The Frederick Douglass Foundation Gun Owners Foundation The Heartland Institute The Heritage Foundation Herzog Foundation MacArthur Society of West Point Graduates Hillsdale College Honest Elections Project Independent Women's Forum Institute for Education Reform Institute for Energy Research Institute for the American Worker The Institute for Women's Health Intercollegiate Studies Institute Dr. James Dobson Family Institute The James Madison Institute Job Creators Network Keystone Policy Leadership Institute League of American Workers Liberty University Mackinac Center for Public Policy The Malone Institute Middle East Forum Media Research Center Mississippi Center for Public Policy Moms for Liberty Mountain States for Policy Center National Association of Scholars National Center for Public Policy Research National Religious Broadcasters National Rifle Association National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation Native Americans for Sovereignty & Preservation Nevada Policy Noah Webster Educational Foundation The Oklahoma Council of Public Affairs Project 21 Pacific Research Institute The Palm Beach Freedom Institute Palmetto Promise Patrick Henry College The Patriot Foundation Trust Personnel Policy Operations Public Interest Legal Foundation Protect Our Kids Recovery for America Now Foundation Republican Overseas Foundation SAVE - Stop Abusive and Violent Environments STARRS - Stand Together Against Racism and Radicalism in the Services Students for Life of America Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America Tea Party Patriots Texas Public Policy Foundation Teneo Turning Point USA Young America's Foundation

[universepublicschool]

Top CBSE School in Jaipur, Rajasthan – 2024 New Admission Start

Universe Public School: A Beacon of Excellence

As one of the Top CBSE Schools in Jaipur, Rajasthan, Universe Public School stands as a pillar of educational excellence and innovation. Our commitment to fostering a nurturing and stimulating learning environment ensures that every student reaches their highest potential. We are thrilled to announce the commencement of 2024 new admissions, offering prospective students a chance to join our esteemed institution.

Why Choose Universe Public School?

Holistic Education Approach

Universe Public School, we believe in a holistic education that nurtures the mind, body, and spirit. Our curriculum is designed to develop well-rounded individuals who excel academically and are also equipped with essential life skills. We emphasize the importance of critical thinking, creativity, and ethical values.

State-of-the-Art Infrastructure

Our campus boasts state-of-the-art infrastructure, including modern classrooms, advanced science and computer labs, a well-stocked library, and expansive sports facilities. These resources provide our students with the best possible environment to learn and grow.

Experienced and Dedicated Faculty

Our faculty members are highly qualified and dedicated professionals who are passionate about teaching and mentoring. They employ innovative teaching methods to make learning engaging and effective. Their commitment to continuous professional development ensures that they remain at the forefront of educational advancements.

Comprehensive Curriculum

The CBSE curriculum at Universe Public School is comprehensive and meticulously planned to meet the educational needs of our students. It encompasses a wide range of subjects, including sciences, humanities, mathematics, and languages, ensuring a balanced and in-depth education.

Academic Excellence and Beyond

Outstanding Academic Performance

Universe Public School has a proven track record of outstanding academic performance. Our students consistently achieve top ranks in board examinations and excel in various competitive exams. We take pride in nurturing academic excellence through rigorous yet supportive teaching methodologies.

Extracurricular Activities

We believe that extracurricular activities are crucial for the all-round development of our students. Our school offers a diverse array of activities, including:

Sports and Athletics: Facilities for cricket, football, basketball, athletics, and more.

Arts and Music: Opportunities to explore and develop talents in music, dance, drama, and visual arts.

Clubs and Societies: Various clubs such as science club, literature club, debate society, and more to foster specialized interests.

Focus on Moral and Ethical Education

We place a strong emphasis on moral and ethical education. Our students are taught the values of integrity, respect, responsibility, and empathy. These values are integrated into our curriculum and school culture, shaping students into responsible global citizens.

Admissions for 2024: Join Us

Admission Process

The admission process at Universe Public School is designed to be transparent and straightforward. Here are the steps for prospective students:

Application Form: Obtain and submit the application form, either online through our website or in person at the school office.

Documentation: Provide necessary documents including birth certificate, previous school records, and any other required certificates.

Entrance Examination: Attend the entrance examination, designed to assess the student's knowledge and skills.

Interview: Successful candidates will be called for an interview with the admission committee.

Final Admission: Upon clearing the interview, complete the final admission formalities and secure your seat.

Scholarships and Financial Aid

We are committed to making quality education accessible to all. Scholarships and financial aid are available for meritorious and needy students. Details regarding eligibility and application procedures are available on our website.

Sourse URL - Best CBSE School for New Admission in Jaipur: Universe Public School

Parental Involvement and Community Engagement

Active Parental Involvement

We believe that parental involvement is key to a child's success. Universe Public School encourages active participation from parents through regular parent-teacher meetings, workshops, and interactive sessions. This partnership ensures that parents are well-informed and involved in their child's educational journey.

Community Engagement

Our school is actively involved in community engagement initiatives. We organize various outreach programs, environmental projects, and social service activities. These initiatives help our students develop a sense of social responsibility and community spirit.

Testimonials from Our Alumni and Parents

Alumni Success Stories

Our alumni have gone on to achieve remarkable success in various fields. Here are a few testimonials:

"Universe Public School laid the foundation for my academic and personal growth. The supportive environment and excellent faculty helped me achieve my dreams." – Anisha Sharma, IIT Graduate.

"The holistic education at Universe Public School prepared me for the challenges of the real world. I am grateful for the values and skills I learned here." – Rajesh Verma, Entrepreneur.

Parent Testimonials

Parents of our students also have positive experiences to share:

"I am extremely satisfied with the education my child is receiving at Universe Public School. The teachers are dedicated and the facilities are top-notch." – Meera Singh, Parent.

"The school not only focuses on academics but also on overall development. My child has become more confident and responsible." – Amit Kumar, Parent.

Conclusion: Be a Part of Our Legacy

Universe Public School is more than just an educational institution; it is a nurturing ground for future leaders. Our 2024 new admission process is an opportunity for your child to join a school that prioritizes academic excellence, holistic development, and moral values. We invite you to be a part of our legacy and contribute to shaping a brighter future.

[legalhub16]

ADVOCATES ACT, 1961

PROFESSION ETHICS AND ADVOCACY

I. Professional Ethics

Professional ethics refers to the norms or principles that regulate the behaviour and conduct of any individual or group in any commercial setting. Professional ethics can be defined as the typical behaviour and ideals of persons who operate in a specific sector. These principles are established by professional organisations. This is done to protect the public reputation of the profession and to maintain a disciplined atmosphere. It also protects the integrity of client relationships by regulating professional behaviour.

Professional ethics in law refers to a code of conduct and set of rules that govern the behaviour of legal practitioners. These standards must be followed by advocates and lawyers who practise law. These are the fundamental actions of a lawyer. Ethics are fundamental prerequisites in all professions, including law. It governs human behaviour and moral standards. Lawyers and Advocates must follow professional norms when dealing with clients and in court in order to keep their professional standing. The Advocate Act of 1961 established a statutory organisation known as the Bar Council of India.

II. Role of Professional Ethics in Advocacy

In India's legal system, professional ethics are paramount. Justice and the rule of law are both helped by this. By adhering rigidly to the rules of law, advocates uphold the integrity of the system and protect justice for all. Honesty and objectivity are guaranteed by professional ethics. It is the ethical responsibility of lawyers to treat their clients fairly. A fair and unbiased foundation is necessary for the administration of justice. The integrity of the legal profession is upheld by professional ethics. Legal ethics dictate that attorneys must always be forthright with their clients. A sense of duty is instilled, and the honour of the profession is protected. The public's trust in the legal system is bolstered. The smooth operation of the system depends on trust. People put their faith in lawyers when they see that they are following the rules of ethics.

III. Need for Professional Ethics

The law serves as the cornerstone for the government's vault. A proper code of conduct is required to prevent the legal system from being swayed by bias, lack of accountability, avarice, or unworthy reasons. Ethics binds advocates to the Bar and judges to the Bench of Justice. The standard of ethics varies between an advocate, litigants, clients, and a judge in a court. The Bar and the Bench have a duty to protect clients from being targeted for unfair tactics. Lawyers must follow the code of conduct in order to maintain their membership in the field.

IV. Advocates Act 1961

The All-India Bar Committee and the Law Commission were major sources of advice that led to the passage of this statute. The Bar Council of India was founded by the Indian Parliament under Section 4 of this Act, and it was entrusted with the responsibilities listed in Section 7 of the same Act. Standards for advocates are mentioned in Section 7(1)(b), and the Bar Council is granted the authority to create rules regulating the professional conduct of advocates in Section 49(1)(c).

V. Code of Conduct

The Act lays forth a number of responsibilities and requirements for advocates, including the following: Advocates are not allowed to promote or solicit clients for employment. Trainers cannot charge for their services as advocates. Before taking on a new case, attorneys must get their client's permission to continue working with another attorney. It is against the law for advocates to engage in unlicensed practices using their name or services.

VI. Bar Council of India (BCI)

The Indian Bar Association: IBA In portion 6, chapter II, BCI lays forth the rules. There are 39 regulations that govern the responsibilities of lawyers towards their clients, their opponents, and the courts.

VII. Duty of Advocate towards Court

To present oneself appropriately, one must adhere to the advised dress code. This regulation is anticipated to be followed by them. Advocates' matters have been delayed or even dismissed in numerous instances because they failed to appreciate the importance of correct attire. Therefore, they should dress in the appropriate manner if they want to keep their dignity. Publicly wearing a band or gown is not permitted for advocates in India, with the exception of certain ceremonial occasions as determined by the court and the Bar Council of India. Section 30 of the Advocates Act, 1961 states that if an advocate has personal relations with a judicial officer, he or she must refuse to appear before the court or ask to be placed on a different bench. Legal counsel should use their best judgement and refrain from making derogatory comments or using excessive language during proceedings; this was ruled in the 1954 case of M.Y. Shareef & Ors. V. Hon'ble judges of Nagpur high court & ors. Avoiding illegal tactics: A lawyer representing a client should avoid engaging in illegal tactics against the court, the other side, or any client. Should he or she fail to do so, severe repercussions can befall them. Concerning conflicts of interest involving money, a lawyer must recuse himself from any case in which he has a financial stake. Restricted communication: An advocate may not engage in corrupt practises, such as buying off a judge or procuring a favour, as established in the 1953 case of Rizwan ul hasan v. state of UP.

Rule 33 states that an advocate cannot represent both their client and the other side in the same case. This is an important component of the advocate's duty towards the client. Client surety: During proceedings, advocates are not permitted to provide client surety. Rule 12 of the Act states that an advocate is required to give notice if there is a justifiable justification for the advocate to withdraw from the case. The attorney must return the payment. Rule 13 of the Act states that an advocate cannot represent a case in which he is also a witness. This includes the advocate himself. In accordance with Rule 14, a lawyer must tell his clients all relevant information, including any relationships he may have had with the other side before taking their case. It is mandatory that he does so.

VIII. Duty of Advocate towards the Clients

An advocate's duty is to put his client's interests first and to use all legal methods to further those objectives.Rule 15 makes note of it. No suppression of evidence: According to Rule 16, a defence attorney must not suppress any evidence that would establish the defendant's innocence. The advocate is not required by Rule 17 to reveal any conversations that have taken place between himself and his client. It will be considered a violation of secrecy even in a legal setting. Rule 32 states that an advocate should not lend money to clients since it might influence the advocate's judgement.

IX. Duty towards the Opponents

Preventing direct communication or negotiation with the opposing party & Fulfilling the promises made.

X. Punishment

According to Section 35 of The Advocates Act, 1961, if an advocate is found guilty of such a violation, the case will be sent to the disciplinary committee. The committee will then notify the advocate of the date of the hearing. Following a hearing, the committee has the following options: issue a warning to the advocate, dismiss the complaint, suspend the advocate for a specified amount of time, or remove the advocate's name from the state roll.

XI. Concluding Remarks

Professional ethics are crucial in many areas of work, not just advocacy. It improves the field's standing in the community. Legal ethics and the legal profession are closely intertwined. The Advocates Act of 1961 governs every aspect of behaviour, language, and dress. Such a strict code of conduct is necessary in this ever-changing climate to preserve the public's confidence in advocacy. Because the attorney-client relationship is fiduciary, breaking it is penalised. In addition to this code of conduct, these provisions are nevertheless void.

To ensure that these provisions are effective, efforts should be done. Advocacy professionals may face severe repercussions for violating such restrictions. Moral principles ought to be upheld at work Lawyers have a responsibility to fulfil in order to maintain their integrity and dignity. Since the goal of the legal profession is to uphold the law and administer justice, it is imperative that practitioners take the ethical code seriously in order for the discipline to succeed.

XII. Bibliography

Accounting tools, https://www.accountingtools.com/articles/professional-ethics , (last visited 25 Nov 2023)

Law Bhoomi, https://lawbhoomi.com/what-is-professional-ethics-in-law/#:~:text=Professional%20ethics%20promote%20integrity%20and,in%20all%20their%20professional%20dealings., (last visited 25 Nov 2023)

The Advocates Act, 1961, S.49, Act no.25 of parliament (India).

IPleaders,  https://blog.ipleaders.in/indian-courts-professional-ethics , (last visited 25 Nov 2023)

[justinspoliticalcorner]

David Smith at The Guardian:

“Look at me, look at me,” said Martha-Ann Alito. “I’m German, from Germany. My heritage is German. You come after me, I’m gonna give it back to you.” It was a bizarre outburst from the wife of a justice on America’s highest court. Secretly recorded by a liberal activist, Martha-Ann Alito complained about a neighbour’s gay pride flag and expressed a desire to fly a Sacred Heart of Jesus flag in protest. This, along with audio clips of Justice Samuel Alito himself and a stream of ethics violations, have deepened public concerns that the supreme court is playing by its own rules. The Democratic representative Jamie Raskin has described a “national clamour over this crisis of legitimacy” at the court.

A poll last month for the progressive advocacy organisation Stand Up America suggests that the supreme court will now play a crucial role in voters’ choices in the 2024 election. Nearly three in four voters said the selection and confirmation of justices will be an important consideration for them in voting for both president and senator in November. Reed Galen, a co-founder of the Lincoln Project, a pro-democracy group, said: “The idea that these guys act as if they are kings ruling from above, to me, should absolutely be an issue. It was always Republicans who said we hate unelected judges legislating from the bench and we hate judicial activism. That’s all this stuff is.” Public trust in the court is at an all-time low amid concerns over bias and corruption. Alito has rejected demands that he recuse himself from a case considering presidential immunity after flags similar to those carried by 6 January 2021 rioters flew over his homes in Virginia and New Jersey. Justice Clarence Thomas has ignored calls to step aside because of the role his wife, Ginni, played in supporting efforts to overturn Donald Trump’s loss to Joe Biden in 2020.

Ethical standards have been under scrutiny following revelations that some justices failed to report luxury trips, including on private jets, and property deals. Last week Thomas, who has come under criticism for failing to disclose gifts from the businessman and Republican donor Harlan Crow, revised his 2019 form to acknowledge he accepted “food and lodging” at a Bali hotel and at a California club. These controversies have been compounded by historic and hugely divisive decisions. The fall of Roe v Wade, ending the nationwide right to abortion after half a century, was seen by many Democrats as a gamechanger in terms of people making a connection between the court and their everyday lives.

There are further signs of the debate moving beyond the Washington bubble. Last week, the editorial board of the Chicago Sun-Times newspaper argued that, since the court’s own ethics code proved toothless, Congress should enact legislation that holds supreme court justices to higher ethical standards. The paper called for the local senator Dick Durbin of Illinois, who is chair of the Senate judiciary committee, to hold a hearing on the issue.

[...] Congressional Democrats have introduced various bills including one to create an independent ethics office and internal investigations counsel within the supreme court. Broader progressive ideas include expanding the number of seats on the court or limiting the justices to 18-year terms rather than lifetime appointments. But such efforts have been repeatedly thwarted by Republicans, who over decades impressed on their base the importance of the court, ultimately leading to a 6-3 conservative majority including three Trump appointees. This week Senate Republicans blocked the ​​Supreme Court Ethics, Recusal, and Transparency Act, legislation that would require the court to adopt a binding code of conduct for all justices, establish procedures to investigate complaints of judicial misconduct and adopt rules to disclose gifts, travel and income received by them that are at least as rigorous as congressional disclosure rules.

Democrats should be aggressive about confronting a runaway radical right-wing majority on SCOTUS and make it a major issue. #SCOTUSisCompromised

See Also:

Vox: What can Democrats actually do about Thomas’s and Alito’s corruption?

[mariacallous]

When Democratic senators convened for a private luncheon on Thursday, all eyes were on Sen. Bob Menendez. The hard-nosed and hawkish New Jersey Democrat, a longtime heavyweight in congressional foreign policy, has faced a wave of calls from his own party to resign. It comes in the wake of a damning indictment alleging he secretly worked to advance the interests of a foreign power, Egypt, in exchange for bribes, and sought to influence criminal charges against businessmen involved in the scheme.

Menendez, who has denied any wrongdoing and pleaded not guilty to the charges, had to give up his gavel as chairman of the powerful Senate Foreign Relations Committee after the indictment was released last week. Going into the luncheon, he had two options: accede to the demands of the majority of Democratic senators calling on him to resign, or dig in his heels and fight.

To the surprise of no one who knows him, Menendez chose to fight.

During the meeting, according to two people with direct knowledge of it, Menendez doubled down on what he said in public: He is innocent of the charges and has no plans to step down. His defense appeared to win him no new allies. Sen. Chris Coons, another Democratic foreign-policy heavyweight who also chairs the Ethics Committee, left the luncheon when Menendez got up to speak. So did two other members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee—Sens. Jeanne Shaheen and Brian Schatz, according to the people briefed on the matter. None of the nearly 30 Democratic senators who called on him to resign have backtracked.

Menendez’s defiant stand at the congressional luncheon offered a glimpse into the political fallout from the indictment, and a foretaste of major changes in one of the most historic and vaunted institutions in Congress, with significant implications for U.S. foreign policy.

Foreign Policy spoke with more than a dozen current and former staffers on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, as well as lawmakers and outside experts on the fallout of the indictment and what it means for Congress and the Biden administration’s agenda. Menendez’s office did not respond to a request for comment or interview.

The first is that the scandal has rocked a vaunted committee with a storied legacy in foreign policy, and one that has served as a relative bastion of bipartisanship and stability while the rest of Washington descends into hyper-partisan rancor. The committee has produced eight U.S. presidents and 19 secretaries of state, from Andrew Jackson to John F. Kennedy to Joe Biden. Its cadre of professional staff has gone on to leading roles in the State Department and Pentagon, including Antony Blinken, Biden’s secretary of state, whose job as Democratic staff director on the committee spring-boarded his rise.

Lawmakers and staffers alike say they are stunned and saddened by the revelations outlined in the indictment. “There’s no way other than to say the allegations against Sen. Menendez are horrific,” Sen. Ben Cardin, who succeeded Menendez as chairman of the committee, told reporters before the luncheon on Thursday. “That is extremely challenging for all of us here.”

The charges against Menendez and his wife directly implicate his work on the committee, including allegations that he shared a confidential blueprint of the U.S. Embassy in Egypt’s staffing rosters with an Egyptian businessman through his wife, who then forwarded it to Egyptian officials. “Such tasking by the Egyptians would be consistent with classic modus operandi in a recruitment operation,” Asha Rangappa, a former senior FBI official, and Marc Polymeropoulos, a former senior CIA official, wrote in Just Security.

The indictment also alleges that Menendez provided advance notice of non-public information on the release of U.S. military aid to Egypt and even ghost-wrote a letter for the government of Egypt requesting more U.S. military aid. The FBI has reportedly launched a counterintelligence probe into whether Egyptian intelligence services were involved in the alleged scheme, according to NBC News. 

Menendez has in the past week repeatedly insisted that the allegations are false. Menendez was previously charged with corruption, but those charges ended in a mistrial in 2017, and his message to his colleagues and supporters was that he overcame corruption charges before and could do so again. Still, there’s no modern precedent for the scandal the Senate Foreign Relations Committee now faces, even as Cardin and the top Republican on the committee, Idaho Sen. Jim Risch, vow to get immediately back to business on the committee’s work—if the looming government shutdown doesn’t stop them first.

A spokesperson for Risch downplayed the effect of the scandal on the committee itself. “One person alone does not determine the work of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, even the chairman,” the spokesperson said. “All four leaders of the House and Senate foreign relations committees have roles and rights as leaders of these important national security committees. Among other things, this helps to ensure one person does not have undue influence on the foreign policy of the U.S. Congress.”

Another takeaway is that Menendez stepping back from the committee is likely permanent, even if he overcomes the second round of corruption charges he has faced and wins an uphill reelection battle.

Menendez, who has served as either chair or ranking member of the committee for the better part of a decade, was a brash and strong-willed lawmaker who had no qualms getting into brass-knuckle political clashes with senior national security officials in Republican and Democratic administrations alike. His ouster removes an ardent hawk from a key Senate leadership position who challenged his own party on policies from Iran to engagement with Cuba to major foreign arms sales. It could give the Biden administration more leeway to defrost ties with Cuba, where every move it made was met with withering criticism from Menendez. He also stood out as a prominent supporter of Israel at a time when support for Israel in the Democratic caucus is wilting.

There could be some tangible impacts on foreign policy, too. Some committee aides hope that Cardin, who they say has a better personal rapport with Risch than Menendez did, can work more effectively to address the growing backlog of nominations for senior diplomatic posts sitting before the committee. The day after Cardin took the committee gavel, the committee sent out a notice that it would be holding nomination hearings for the posts of U.S. ambassador to Somalia and Liberia, as well as a top posting for the U.S. Peace Corps.

There are 37 nominees for senior diplomatic and foreign aid posts pending on the Senate floor, including 23 ambassador nominees, an issue that’s been plaguing the State Department for years as ambassador posts sit unfilled for months or longer. “That’s outrageous,” Cardin said. “Not having a confirmed ambassador in a country weakens the United States’ national security.”

Menendez’s sidelining also removes one roadblock to a planned U.S. sale of F-16 fighter jets to NATO ally Turkey. Menendez led the charge in blocking the arms sale over Turkey’s internal repression and opposition to allowing Finland and Sweden to join the NATO alliance. (Finland has joined, but Sweden is still being held up by Turkey and Hungary.) “One of our most important problems regarding the F-16s were the activities of U.S. Sen. Bob Menendez against our country,” Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan told reporters this week, as The Associated Press reported. Cardin declined to say whether he would adopt Menendez’s position on the arms sale, though other senators remain opposed to it.

Finally, the fallout from the indictment could bring new levels of scrutiny to the U.S. relationship with Egypt, a longtime ally that is one of the top recipients of U.S. military aid in the world, worth around $1.3 billion per year. Sen. Chris Murphy, a leading progressive Democrat on the committee who has called on Menendez to resign, told Foreign Policy in a statement that he wanted an investigation into Egypt’s actions with Menendez. Senators “have a responsibility to understand whether Egypt was running an illicit influence campaign on the Foreign Relations Committee,” he said.

The United States has for decades viewed Egypt as a reliable partner and ally, particularly in the context of its relationship with Israel, but a growing number of lawmakers on both sides of the aisle are questioning that orthodoxy. Human rights and democracy groups charge that Egypt under President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi has taken a sharply authoritarian bent, and say that continuing the U.S. relationship with Cairo undermines U.S. values and democracy promotion.

A group of lawmakers has repeatedly tried to cut aid to Egypt in recent years, though it has only made limited gains. Days before Menendez’s indictment was unveiled, the Biden administration approved $235 million in aid to Egypt, invoking a waiver on the grounds of national security. Only a fraction of U.S. aid was withheld, to the dismay of lawmakers more concerned about human rights. Since 1946, the United States has provided Egypt with more than $85 billion in military and economic aid.

Human rights advocates and other policy experts are already calling for the Biden administration to rethink that decision. “The immediate action should be to put a hold on that assistance to Egypt until there is proper time to investigate this further,” said Mai El-Sadany, executive director of the Tahrir Institute for Middle East Policy, a think tank. “Allowing this to go through would send the wrong message for the U.S. at a very wrong time.”

Rep. Gregory Meeks, the top Democrat on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, on Friday called for the administration to pause a portion of funding to Egypt but did not mention the Menendez indictment in his statement.

The Egyptian Embassy in Washington did not respond to a request for comment.

Egypt has many supporters in Congress beyond Menendez, and Menendez has repeatedly criticized the Egyptian government over human rights violations and detaining political prisoners and journalists. But human rights advocates and lawmakers hope the Menendez indictment triggers a broad rethink of U.S.-Egypt relations.

Tom Malinowski, a former New Jersey Democratic representative who also served as a senior State Department official in the Obama administration, says it’s well past time to reassess the U.S. relationship with Egypt. He has joined a chorus of New Jersey Democrats calling on Menendez to resign.

“The Egyptians behave as if they can get away with just about anything. They act as if they have protectors behind the scenes in Washington who will ensure the money keeps flowing no matter what,” Malinowski said. “This episode perhaps helps explain in part why they have treated the U.S. aid as an entitlement for so many years.”

[beardedmrbean]

The two largest hacktivist groups in the Ukraine conflict have vowed to de-escalate cyber-attacks and comply with new rules of engagement published by a war watchdog.

On Wednesday, the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) issued the first list of rules for civilian hackers ever created.

Dubbed a "Geneva Code of cyber-war", it was initially criticised as unworkable.

But now Ukrainian and Russian hackers say they will comply with the rules.

Since the invasion of Ukraine there has been a steady stream of disruptive cyber-attacks against public services in both Ukraine and Russia with varying degrees of impact.

Hacktivist groups have been using largely unsophisticated forms of cyber-attack, but successfully temporarily disrupted banks, companies, pharmacies, hospitals, railway networks and civilian government services for Ukrainian and Russian citizens.

With few soft targets in government or military, hacktivists on both sides have revelled in causing friction for ordinary people to further their causes, often collecting angry social media posts from those affected by their attacks.

By vowing to comply with the ICRC rules, hacker groups will avoid cyber-attacks that affect civilians.

Speaking to the BBC, the leader of the infamous pro-Russian hacking group Killnet said he "agrees to the terms and rules of the Red Cross, let this be the first step from Killnet to peace".

Killmilk, as he is known, started the Telegram group for Killnet shortly after his country invaded, and now has 90,000 followers.

Killmilk has posted videos of himself urinating on the flags of Ukraine and Nato, and the group was highlighted as a persistent source of low-level disruptive attacks on Ukrainian targets.

The group has been accused of having close links to the Kremlin, but has always denied this.

In April, the UK's National Cyber Security Centre highlighted groups like Killnet as a new threat facing Ukraine allies, warning UK businesses that attacks from them on are on rise.

If Killnet keeps to its word, then cyber-attacks on civilian targets, including those of Ukraine's allies, will stop.

The IT Army of Ukraine also said it would be following the ICRC's eight rules.

The group, which has 160,000 members on its Telegram channel, also targets public services such as railway systems and banks.

Its spokesman told BBC News that the group will "make best efforts to follow the rules", even though it may place them at a disadvantage to their adversaries. The spokesman added that attacks on healthcare targets have been a long-standing red line already.

The news means that there will likely be a major reduction in the number of cyber attacks as groups restrict their activities to official or military targets.

But other hacktivist groups working for other patriotic or ethical causes in the world told the BBC they would not be following the rules at all.

The ICRC issued the eight rules of engagement in an attempt to end the free-for-all that has accelerated during the Ukraine cyber-conflict, warning that unprecedented numbers of people are joining patriotic cyber-gangs.