With anti-establishment politics shaking governments across the west, US and European intelligence chiefs are newly raising the alarm about Russian cyber attacks and information warfare, saying they pose a threat to their democracies. In the US, the warnings have been met with a mix of outrage and outright dubiousness. While a bipartisan group of senators…
Voters in four states and Washington, D.C. have approved measures legalizing marijuana for individuals over 21, and four states — Alaska, Colorado, Oregon, and Washington — approved taking marijuana production and sales off the criminal market and regulating and taxing them. Additionally, 25 States have now legalized marijuana for medical use within those States.
New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie is now being vetted as a possible vice presidential pick for presumptive Republican nominee Donald Trump, according to two ranking Republican officials as reported earlier today by Yahoo News and The Guardian. Additionally, many in the Beltway contend that Gov. Christie would be on the short list for appointment of US Attorney General in a potential Trump Presidential Administration.
During the Republican Presidential Debates, Gov. Chris Christie unequivocally and unambiguously stated that he would use the Federal governments authority via the USDOJ or otherwise to shut down all licensed and/or regulated use of marijuana in any State regardless of lawful medicinal or other legal use within such a State — i.e., Christie vowed not to follow the current DOJ policy concerning marijuana as most recently has been set forth in its 2013 Memo.
Protecting the Principle of Federalism in Marijuana Policies: Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA) reintroduced H.R. 1940, the Respect State Marijuana Laws Act with strong bipartisan support. This legislation would modify the federal Controlled Substances Act to protect anyone acting in compliance with state marijuana laws from federal prosecution and resolve the conflict between state and federal marijuana laws, ensuring states can determine their own policies. Others have introduced similar legislation.
It remains imperative that all US States who have already authorized and/or decriminalized marijuana be vigilant in monitoring Federal officials and those who aspire to be. Similarly, States such as California which are now contemplating legal marijuana on the ballot this year, should be fully aware of Federal policy and particularly those who will be in a position to apply it.
Accordingly, should Trump select Christie as his VP (potentially becoming only a heartbeat away from the Presidency), or alternatively, appoint him as his AG in any Trump administration should Trump become POTUS, the result for State regulated, authorized, and legal marijuana could be disastrous specifically to State-authorized marijauna and generally to concepts of federalism as to other fundamental State’s rights.
Saturday, November 14th 2015 — Ian J. Imrich, Esq.
Experts in geolocation — the technique of determining a computer’s location — say that blocking proxies is one of the first, and most straightforward, steps that websites take to keep users from restricted areas off the sites.
By stating in the “terms of service” that users in some regions are not allowed, while at the same time doing little to enforce the rule, online gambling companies around the world often try to have it both ways, said Feda Mecan, a senior official at Playing Legal, a site based in Germany that is devoted to legal gambling in the United States. “I think they are playing that card, to be honest,” Mr. Mecan said.
Then, according to a poker web forum the NYT has reported, a DraftKings employee appeared to provide public advice on how to circumvent geographic restrictions in the United States.
“It seems absurd that a daily fantasy sports operator with financial means would not implement the best possible technology,” Professor Marc Edelman of Baruch College said.
Whether by mistake or perhaps by design, the failure to timely, properly, and regularly employ readily available Geo-Blocking technology to comply with jurisdictional rules in certain States throughout the nation could prove disastrous in the ongoing investigations and pending legal proceedings against of one of the top two daily fantasy sports companies currently operating within the US.
One-off or successful strategy for other cases? That’s the discussion surrounding AG Eric Holder’s conviction yesterday of a former CIA officer who leaked top-secret information to a New York Times reporter. This time the sources was not revealed.
“As this verdict proves, it is possible to fully prosecute unauthorized disclosures that inflict harm upon our national security without interfering with journalists’ ability to do their jobs,” the attorney general said in a statement.
However, other lawyers said it was unclear whether the government’s success against Sterling without much help from Risen signaled that approach could be duplicated or whether it was unique to the situation at hand.
Internet Poker Consumer Protection Act of 2015 (CA AB No. 167 — Jones-Sawyer)
LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST AB 167, as introduced, Jones-Sawyer. Gambling: Internet poker: unlawful gambling activity. (1) Existing law, the Gambling Control Act, provides for the licensure of certain individuals and establishments that conduct controlled games, as defined, and for the regulation of these gambling activities by the California Gambling Control Commission. The Department of Justice has related investigatory and enforcement duties under the act. Any violation of these provisions is punishable as a misdemeanor, as specified. This bill, which would be known as the Internet Poker Consumer Protection Act of 2015, would establish a framework to authorize intrastate Internet poker, as specified. The bill would authorize eligible entities to apply for a 4-year license to operate an authorized poker Web site offering the play of authorized Internet poker games to registered players within California, as specified. The bill would require that the license be automatically renewed every 4 years upon application, as specified. The bill would prohibit the offer or play of any gambling game provided over the Internet that is not an authorized Internet poker game permitted by the state pursuant to these provisions. The bill would provide that it is unlawful for a person to aggregate computers or any other Internet access device in a place of public accommodation within the state, including a club or other association, or a public or other setting, that can accommodate multiple players to simultaneously play an authorized Internet poker game, or to promote, facilitate, or market that activity. The bill would provide that any violation of the Internet Poker Consumer Protection Act of 2015 is punishable as a felony. By creating new crimes, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would require the commission, and any other state agency with a duty pursuant to these provisions, to adopt regulations to implement the provisions within 270 days after the operative date of this bill, in consultation with the department and federally recognized California Indian tribes, and to facilitate the operation of authorized poker Web sites and expedite the state's receipt of revenues. The bill would require an eligible entity, as defined, to pay an application processing fee sufficient to cover all reasonable costs associated with the review of the entity's suitability for licensure and the issuance of the license, for deposit into the Internet Poker Fund, as created by the bill, to be continuously appropriated to the department and the commission in the amounts necessary to perform their duties pursuant to this bill. The bill would require an entity seeking to act as a service provider to apply for a service provider license, employees of a licensed operator or a licensed service provider to obtain employee work permits, and owners, officers, and directors of a licensed operator to be subject to a suitability review and obtain employee work permits. The bill would establish a tribal gaming regulatory authority process for the purpose of processing tribal employee work permits, and authorize a tribe that is a licensed operator to elect to participate in the tribal gaming regulatory authority process. This bill would require the payment of an annual regulatory fee, for deposit into the Internet Poker Fund, to be continuously appropriated for the actual costs of license oversight, consumer protection, state regulation, and other purposes related to this bill. The bill would require each licensee to pay a one-time license deposit into the General Fund in the amount of $10,000,000. The license deposit would be credited against quarterly fees equivalent to 8.5% of the licensee's gross gaming revenue proceeds, as specified. The bill would require an applicant for an operator license to provide documentation establishing that the applicant is qualified to pay the one-time license deposit through its own net position or through credit directly to the applicant, as specified. This bill would establish the Unlawful Gambling Enforcement Fund within the General Fund for purposes of ensuring adequate resources for law enforcement charged with enforcing the prohibitions and protections of the provisions described above. The bill would authorize the Attorney General, and other public prosecutors, as specified, to bring a civil action to recover a civil penalty in an unspecified amount against a person who engages in those prohibited activities described above, or other specified unlawful gambling activities. The bill would provide for an unspecified percentage of revenues from civil penalties collected to be deposited into the fund and used for law enforcement activities pursuant to these provisions, upon appropriation by the Legislature. This bill would require the commission, in consultation with the department, the Treasurer, and the Franchise Tax Board, to issue a report to the Legislature describing the state's efforts to meet the policy goals articulated in this bill within one year of the operative date of this bill and, annually, thereafter. The bill would also require the Bureau of State Audits, at least 4 years after the issue date of any license by the state, but no later than 5 years after that date, to issue a report to the Legislature detailing the implementation of this bill, as specified. The bill would provide that specified provisions are not severable. (2)Existing constitutional provisions require that a statute that limits the right of access to the meetings of public bodies or the writings of public officials and agencies be adopted with findings demonstrating the interest protected by the limitation and the need for protecting that interest. This bill would make legislative findings to that effect. (3)The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason. (4)This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.