lodigame casino

Barau Jibrin ya zama Sanatan da ya fi kowanne gabatar da kudiriAmanda Hernández | (TNS) Stateline.org CHICAGO — Shoplifting rates in the three largest U.S. cities — New York, Los Angeles and Chicago — remain higher than they were before the pandemic, according to a report last month from the nonpartisan research group Council on Criminal Justice. The sharp rise in retail theft in recent years has made shoplifting a hot-button issue, especially for politicians looking to address public safety concerns in their communities. Since 2020, when viral videos of smash-and-grab robberies flooded social media during the COVID-19 pandemic, many Americans have expressed fears that crime is out of control. Polls show that perceptions have improved recently, but a majority of Americans still say crime is worse than in previous years. “There is this sense of brazenness that people have — they can just walk in and steal stuff. ... That hurts the consumer, and it hurts the company,” said Alex Piquero, a criminology professor at the University of Miami and former director of the federal Bureau of Justice Statistics, in an interview. “That’s just the world we live in,” he said. “We need to get people to realize that you have to obey the law.” At least eight states — Arizona, California, Florida, Iowa, Kansas, Louisiana, New York and Vermont — passed a total of 14 bills in 2024 aimed at tackling retail theft, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. The measures range from redefining retail crimes and adjusting penalties to allowing cross-county aggregation of theft charges and protecting retail workers. Major retailers have responded to rising theft since 2020 by locking up merchandise, upgrading security cameras, hiring private security firms and even closing stores. Still, the report indicates that shoplifting remains a stubborn problem. In Chicago, the rate of reported shoplifting incidents remained below pre-pandemic levels throughout 2023 — but surged by 46% from January to October 2024 compared with the same period a year ago. Shoplifting in Los Angeles was 87% higher in 2023 than in 2019. Police reports of shoplifting from January to October 2024 were lower than in 2023. Los Angeles adopted a new crime reporting system in March 2024, which has likely led to an undercount, according to the report. In New York, shoplifting rose 48% from 2021 to 2022, then dipped slightly last year. Still, the shoplifting rate was 55% higher in 2023 than in 2019. This year, the shoplifting rate increased by 3% from January to September compared with the same period last year. While shoplifting rates tend to rise in November and December, which coincides with in-person holiday shopping, data from the Council on Criminal Justice’s sample of 23 U.S. cities shows higher rates in the first half of 2024 compared with 2023. Researchers found it surprising that rates went up despite retailers doing more to fight shoplifting. Experts say the spike might reflect improved reporting efforts rather than a spike in theft. “As retailers have been paying more attention to shoplifting, we would not expect the numbers to increase,” said Ernesto Lopez, the report’s author and a senior research specialist with the council. “It makes it a challenge to understand the trends of shoplifting.” In downtown Chicago on a recent early afternoon, potential shoppers shuffled through the streets and nearby malls, browsing for gifts ahead of the holidays. Edward Johnson, a guard at The Shops at North Bridge, said that malls have become quieter in the dozen or so years he has worked in mall security, with the rise of online retailers. As for shoplifters, Johnson said there isn’t a single type of person to look out for — they can come from any background. “I think good-hearted people see something they can’t afford and figure nothing is lost if they take something from the store,” Johnson said as he patrolled the mall, keeping an eye out for lost or suspicious items. Between 2018 and 2023, most shoplifting in Chicago was reported in the downtown area, as well as in the Old Town, River North and Lincoln Park neighborhoods, according to a separate analysis by the Council on Criminal Justice. Newly sworn-in Cook County State’s Attorney Eileen O’Neill Burke this month lowered the threshold for charging retail theft as a felony in the county, which includes Chicago, from $1,000 to $300, aligning it with state law. “It sends a signal that she’s taking it seriously,” Rob Karr, the president and CEO of the Illinois Retail Merchants Association, told Stateline. Nationally, retailers are worried about organized theft. The National Retail Federation’s latest report attributed 36% of the $112.1 billion in lost merchandise in 2022 to “external theft,” which includes organized retail crime. Organized retail crime typically involves coordinated efforts by groups to steal items with the intent to resell them for a profit. Commonly targeted goods include high-demand items such as baby formula, laundry detergent and electronics. The same report found that retailers’ fear of violence associated with theft also is on the rise, with more retailers taking a “hands-off approach.” More than 41% of respondents to the organization’s 2023 survey, up from 38% in 2022, reported that no employee is authorized to try and stop a shoplifter. (The federation’s reporting has come under criticism. It retracted a claim last year that attributed nearly half of lost merchandise in 2021 to organized retail crime; such theft accounted for only about 5%. The group announced this fall it will no longer publish its reports on lost merchandise.) Policy experts say shoplifting and organized retail theft can significantly harm critical industries, drive up costs for consumers and reduce sales tax revenue for states. Those worries have driven recent state-level action to boost penalties for shoplifting. California Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom signed a package of 10 bills into law in August aimed at addressing retail theft. These measures make repeated theft convictions a felony, allow aggregation of crimes across multiple counties to be charged as a single felony, and permit police to arrest suspects for retail theft even if the crime wasn’t witnessed directly by an officer. In September, Newsom signed an additional bill that imposes steeper felony penalties for large-scale theft offenses. California voters also overwhelmingly approved a ballot measure in November that increases penalties for specific drug-related and theft crimes. Under the new law, people who are convicted of theft at least twice may face felony charges on their third offense, regardless of the stolen item’s value. “With these changes in the law, really it comes down to making sure that law enforcement is showing up to our stores in a timely manner, and that the prosecutors and the [district attorneys] are prosecuting,” Rachel Michelin, the president and CEO of the California Retailers Association, told Stateline. “That’s the only way we’re going to deter retail theft in our communities.” In New Jersey, a bipartisan bill making its way through the legislature would increase penalties for leading a shoplifting ring and allow extended sentences for repeat offenders. “This bill is going after a formally organized band of criminals that deliver such destruction to a critical business in our community. We have to act. We have to create a deterrence,” Democratic Assemblymember Joseph Danielsen, one of the bill’s prime sponsors, said in an interview with Stateline. The legislation would allow extended sentences for people convicted of shoplifting three times within 10 years or within 10 years of their release from prison, and would increase penalties to 10 to 20 years in prison for leading a retail crime ring. The bill also would allow law enforcement to aggregate the value of stolen goods over the course of a year to charge serial shoplifters with more serious offenses. Additionally, the bill would increase penalties for assaults committed against retail workers, and would require retailers to train employees on detecting gift card scams. Maryland legislators considered a similar bill during this year’s legislative session that would have defined organized retail theft and made it a felony. The bill didn’t make it out of committee, but Cailey Locklair, president of the Maryland Retailers Alliance, said the group plans to propose a bill during next year’s legislative session that would target gift card fraud. Better, more thorough reporting from retailers is essential to truly understanding shoplifting trends and its full impact, in part because some retail-related crimes, such as gift card fraud, are frequently underreported, according to Lopez, of the Council on Criminal Justice. Measuring crime across jurisdictions is notoriously difficult , and the council does not track organized retail theft specifically because law enforcement typically doesn’t identify it as such at the time of arrest — if an arrest even occurs — requiring further investigation, Lopez said. The council’s latest report found conflicting trends in the FBI’s national crime reporting systems. The FBI’s older system, the Summary Reporting System, known as SRS, suggests that reported shoplifting hadn’t gone up through 2023, remaining on par with 2019 levels. In contrast, the FBI’s National Incident-Based Reporting System, or NIBRS, shows a 93% increase in shoplifting over the same period. The discrepancy may stem from the type of law enforcement agencies that have adopted the latter system, Lopez said. Some of those communities may have higher levels of shoplifting or other types of property crime, which could be what is driving the spike, Lopez said. Despite the discrepancies and varying levels of shoplifting across the country, Lopez said, it’s important for retailers to report these incidents, as doing so could help allocate law enforcement resources more effectively. “All law enforcement agencies have limited resources, and having the most accurate information allows for not just better policy, but also better implementation — better use of strategic resources,” Lopez said. Stateline staff writer Robbie Sequeira contributed to this report. ©2024 States Newsroom. Visit at stateline.org. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.A federal appeals court panel on Friday unanimously upheld a law that could lead to a ban on TikTok in a few short months, handing a resounding defeat to the popular social media platform as it fights for its survival in the U.S. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit denied TikTok's petition to overturn the law — which requires TikTok to break ties with its China-based parent company ByteDance or be banned by mid-January — and rebuffed the company's challenge of the statute, which it argued had ran afoul of the First Amendment. “The First Amendment exists to protect free speech in the United States,” said the court's opinion, which was written by Judge Douglas Ginsburg. “Here the Government acted solely to protect that freedom from a foreign adversary nation and to limit that adversary’s ability to gather data on people in the United States.” TikTok and ByteDance — another plaintiff in the lawsuit — are expected to appeal to the Supreme Court, though its unclear whether the court will take up the case. “The Supreme Court has an established historical record of protecting Americans’ right to free speech, and we expect they will do just that on this important constitutional issue," TikTok spokesperson Michael Hughes said in a statement. “Unfortunately, the TikTok ban was conceived and pushed through based upon inaccurate, flawed and hypothetical information, resulting in outright censorship of the American people,” Hughes said. Unless stopped, he argued the statute “will silence the voices of over 170 million Americans here in the US and around the world on January 19th, 2025.” Though the case is squarely in the court system, its also possible the two companies might be thrown some sort of a lifeline by President-elect Donald Trump, who tried to ban TikTok during his first term but said during the presidential campaign that he is now against such action . The law, signed by President Joe Biden in April, was the culmination of a years-long saga in Washington over the short-form video-sharing app, which the government sees as a national security threat due to its connections to China. The U.S. has said it’s concerned about TikTok collecting vast swaths of user data, including sensitive information on viewing habits , that could fall into the hands of the Chinese government through coercion. Officials have also warned the proprietary algorithm that fuels what users see on the app is vulnerable to manipulation by Chinese authorities, who can use it to shape content on the platform in a way that’s difficult to detect — a concern mirrored by the European Union on Friday as it scrutinizes the video-sharing app’s role in the Romanian elections. TikTok, which sued the government over the law in May, has long denied it could be used by Beijing to spy on or manipulate Americans. Its attorneys have accurately pointed out that the U.S. hasn’t provided evidence to show that the company handed over user data to the Chinese government, or manipulated content for Beijing’s benefit in the U.S. They have also argued the law is predicated on future risks, which the Department of Justice has emphasized pointing in part to unspecified action it claims the two companies have taken in the past due to demands from the Chinese government. Friday’s ruling came after the appeals court panel, composed of two Republican and one Democrat appointed judges, heard oral arguments in September. In the hearing, which lasted more than two hours, the panel appeared to grapple with how TikTok’s foreign ownership affects its rights under the Constitution and how far the government could go to curtail potential influence from abroad on a foreign-owned platform. On Friday, all three of them denied TikTok’s petition. In the court's ruling, Ginsburg, a Republican appointee, rejected TikTok's main legal arguments against the law, including that the statute was an unlawful bill of attainder or a taking of property in violation of the Fifth Amendment. He also said the law did not violate the First Amendment because the government is not looking to "suppress content or require a certain mix of content” on TikTok. “Content on the platform could in principle remain unchanged after divestiture, and people in the United States would remain free to read and share as much PRC propaganda (or any other content) as they desire on TikTok or any other platform of their choosing,” Ginsburg wrote, using the abbreviation for the People’s Republic of China. Judge Sri Srinivasan, the chief judge on the court, issued a concurring opinion. TikTok’s lawsuit was consolidated with a second legal challenge brought by several content creators - for which the company is covering legal costs - as well as a third one filed on behalf of conservative creators who work with a nonprofit called BASED Politics Inc. Other organizations, including the Knight First Amendment Institute, had also filed amicus briefs supporting TikTok. “This is a deeply misguided ruling that reads important First Amendment precedents too narrowly and gives the government sweeping power to restrict Americans’ access to information, ideas, and media from abroad,” said Jameel Jaffer, the executive director of the organization. “We hope that the appeals court’s ruling won’t be the last word.” Meanwhile, on Capitol Hill, lawmakers who had pushed for the legislation celebrated the court's ruling. "I am optimistic that President Trump will facilitate an American takeover of TikTok to allow its continued use in the United States and I look forward to welcoming the app in America under new ownership,” said Republican Rep. John Moolenaar of Michigan, chairman of the House Select Committee on China. Democratic Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi, who co-authored the law, said “it's time for ByteDance to accept” the law. To assuage concerns about the company’s owners, TikTok says it has invested more than $2 billion to bolster protections around U.S. user data. The company has also argued the government’s broader concerns could have been resolved in a draft agreement it provided the Biden administration more than two years ago during talks between the two sides. It has blamed the government for walking away from further negotiations on the agreement, which the Justice Department argues is insufficient. Attorneys for the two companies have claimed it’s impossible to divest the platform commercially and technologically. They also say any sale of TikTok without the coveted algorithm - the platform’s secret sauce that Chinese authorities would likely block under any divesture plan - would turn the U.S. version of TikTok into an island disconnected from other global content. Still, some investors, including Trump’s former Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin and billionaire Frank McCourt, have expressed interest in purchasing the platform. Both men said earlier this year that they were launching a consortium to purchase TikTok’s U.S. business. This week, a spokesperson for McCourt’s Project Liberty initiative, which aims to protect online privacy, said unnamed participants in their bid have made informal commitments of more than $20 billion in capital.

Texans get visit from longtime foe Derrick Henry when the Ravens visit on Christmas DayHitman who killed Navy officer in Newport News among 37 death row inmates commuted by BidenBy CHRISTINE FERNANDO CHICAGO (AP) — As Donald Trump’s Cabinet begins to take shape, those on both sides of the abortion debate are watching closely for clues about how his picks might affect reproductive rights policy in the president-elect’s second term . Trump’s cabinet picks offer a preview of how his administration could handle abortion after he repeatedly flip-flopped on the issue on the campaign trail. He attempted to distance himself from anti-abortion allies by deferring to states on abortion policy, even while boasting about nominating three Supreme Court justices who helped strike down the constitutional protections for abortion that had stood for half a century. In an NBC News interview that aired Sunday, Trump said he doesn’t plan to restrict medication abortion but also seemed to leave the door open, saying “things change.” “Things do change, but I don’t think it’s going to change at all,” he said. The early lineup of his new administration , including nominations to lead health agencies, the Justice Department and event the Department of Veterans Affairs, has garnered mixed — but generally positive — reactions from anti-abortion groups. Abortion law experts said Trump’s decision to include fewer candidates with deep ties to the anti-abortion movement could indicate that abortion will not be a priority for Trump’s administration. “It almost seems to suggest that President Trump might be focusing his administration in other directions,” said Greer Donley, an associate law professor at the University of Pittsburgh School of Law. Karen Stone, vice president of public policy at Planned Parenthood Action Fund , said while many of the nominees have “extensive records against reproductive health care,” some do not. She cautioned against making assumptions based on Trump’s initial cabinet selections. Still, many abortion rights groups are wary, in part because many of the nominees hold strong anti-abortion views even if they do not have direct ties to anti-abortion activists. They’re concerned that an administration filled with top-level officials who are personally opposed to abortion could take steps to restrict access to the procedure and funding. After Trump’s ambiguity about abortion during his campaign, “there’s still a lot we don’t know about what policy is going to look like,” said Mary Ruth Ziegler, a law professor at the University of California, Davis School of Law. That approach may be revealed as the staffs within key departments are announced. Trump announced he would nominate anti-vaccine activist Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to lead the Health and Human Services Department, which anti-abortion forces have long targeted as central to curtailing abortion rights nationwide. Yet Kennedy shifted on the issue during his own presidential campaign. In campaign videos, Kennedy said he supports abortion access until viability , which doctors say is sometime after 21 weeks, although there is no defined timeframe. But he also said “every abortion is a tragedy” and argued for a national ban after 15 weeks of pregnancy, a stance he quickly walked back. The head of Health and Human Services oversees Title X funding for a host of family planning services and has sweeping authority over agencies that directly affect abortion access, including the Food and Drug Administration and Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. The role is especially vital amid legal battles over a federal law known as EMTALA, which President Joe Biden’s administration has argued requires emergency abortion access nationwide, and FDA approval of the abortion pill mifepristone. Mini Timmaraju, president of the national abortion rights organization Reproductive Freedom for All, called Kennedy an “unfit, unqualified extremist who cannot be trusted to protect the health, safety and reproductive freedom of American families.” His potential nomination also has caused waves in the anti-abortion movement. Former Vice President Mike Pence , a staunch abortion opponent, urged the Senate to reject Kennedy’s nomination. Marjorie Dannenfelser, president of the national anti-abortion group Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, said the group had its own concerns about Kennedy. “There’s no question that we need a pro-life HHS secretary,” she said. Fox News correspondent Marty Makary is Trump’s pick to lead the FDA, which plays a critical role in access to medication abortion and contraception. Abortion rights groups have accused him of sharing misinformation about abortion on air. Russell Vought , a staunch anti-abortion conservative, has been nominated for director of the Office of Management and Budget. Vought was a key architect of Project 2025 , a right-wing blueprint for running the federal government. Among other actions to limit reproductive rights, it calls for eliminating access to medication abortion nationwide, cutting Medicaid funding for abortion and restricting access to contraceptive care, especially long-acting reversible contraceptives such as IUD’s. Despite distancing himself from the conservative manifesto on the campaign trail, Trump is stocking his administration with people who played central roles in developing Project 2025. Trump acknowledged that drafters of the report would be part of his incoming administration during the Sunday interview with NBC News, saying “Many of those things I happen to agree with.” “These cabinet appointments all confirm that Project 2025 was in fact the blueprint all along, and the alarm we saw about it was warranted,” said Amy Williams Navarro, director of government relations for Reproductive Freedom for All. Dr. Mehmet Oz , Trump’s choice to lead the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, is a former television talk show host who has been accused of hawking dubious medical treatments and products. He voiced contradictory abortion views during his failed Senate run in 2022. Oz has described himself as “strongly pro-life, praised the Supreme Court decision overturning Roe v. Wade , claimed “life starts at conception” and referred to abortion as “murder.” But he also has echoed Trump’s states-rights approach, arguing the federal government should not be involved in abortion decisions. “I want women, doctors, local political leaders, letting the democracy that’s always allowed our nation to thrive to put the best ideas forward so states can decide for themselves,” he said during a Senate debate two years ago. An array of reproductive rights groups opposed his Senate run. As CMS administrator, Oz would be in a key position to determine Medicaid coverage for family planning services and investigate potential EMTALA violations. Related Articles National Politics | In promising to shake up Washington, Trump is in a class of his own National Politics | Election Day has long passed. In some states, legislatures are working to undermine the results National Politics | Trump attorney Alina Habba, a Lehigh University grad, to serve as counselor to the president National Politics | With Trump on the way, advocates look to states to pick up medical debt fight National Politics | Trump taps forceful ally of hard-line immigration policies to head Customs and Border Protection As Florida’s attorney general, Pam Bondi defended abortion restrictions, including a 24-hour waiting period. Now she’s Trump’s choice for attorney general . Her nomination is being celebrated by abortion opponents but denounced by abortion rights groups concerned she may revive the Comstock Act , an anti-vice law passed by Congress in 1873 that, among other things, bans mailing of medication or instruments used in abortion. An anti-abortion and anti-vaccine former Florida congressman, David Weldon, has been chosen to lead the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which collects and monitors abortion data across the country. Former Republican congressman Doug Collins is Trump’s choice to lead the Department of Veterans Affairs amid a political battle over abortion access and funding for troops and veterans. Collins voted consistently to restrict funding and access to abortion and celebrated the overturning of Roe v. Wade. “This is a team that the pro-life movement can work with,” said Kristin Hawkins, president of the national anti-abortion organization Students for Life.

Google must sell Chrome to restore competition in online search, DOJ argues

“The Year: 2024′′ FREE STREAM: Watch live today on ABCAbcarian: UnitedHealthcare's chief executive was shot dead. Why did thousands react with glee?