The first piece of US AI legislation hits Trump’s desk – it’s anything but clear-cutSource: Unsplash The U.S. House of Representatives this week passed (409-2) what could amount to the country’s first official foray into AI-related legislation.The “Take It Down” Act, a bipartisan bill introduced in January by Senators Ted Cruz (R-Texas) and Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), covers two main areas: first, it would criminalize the nonconsensual publication of “intimate” imagery, specifically including that which is generated artificially, and second, it would require digital platforms to remove such instances of that imagery within 48 hours of receiving verified reports from victims.  President Donald Trump endorsed the bill during a joint session address in March, saying that he is looking “forward to signing it into law.” Fundamentally, the Take It Down Act was offered up as one of several legislative remedies to the crisis of deepfake pornography, something that had been around for years before ChatGPT kicked off a proliferation of cheap, accessible and realistic generative AI tools.  Deepfake technology thus entered into the hands of the masses, and the results have been predictably horrifying: instances of deepfake sexual harassment, specifically targeting young women and girls, have spread across middle- and high-school campuses and social media alike, impacting both teens and Taylor Swift alike. Of the laws offered up in the wake of this crisis, this is the only piece of legislation to reach the President’s desk; the Defiance Act, which passed the Senate nearly a year ago, was never introduced to the House.  It’s unclear how platforms intend to establish the infrastructure needed to accommodate the legislation. Neither Meta nor Google responded to requests for comment. The good, and the bad: While a number of groups have lauded the bill for the protections it offers, many more have expressed a variety of concerns with the letter of the law, here. In a statement published on Monday, the Cyber Civil Rights Initiative (CCRI) welcomed “the long-overdue federal criminalization of NDII (nonconsensual distribution of intimate images), but said that “we regret that it is combined with a takedown provision that is highly susceptible to misuse and will likely be counter-productive for victims. ”The CCRI has a couple of problems with the legislation, namely that it doesn’t provide any safeguards for false complaints. “It would be entirely possible for a platform to be overwhelmed with reports of content that are not intimate visual depictions at all.”Further, a failure to “reasonably” comply with takedown requests will be subject to enforcement by the FTC under the FTC Act, something that has the CCRI concerned based on the recent politicization of the organization.  In March, Trump said: “I’m going to use that bill for myself too if you don’t mind, because nobody gets treated worse than I do online, nobody.”Slade Bond, a former Department of Justice official, however, said that the legislation’s definitions are narrow enough that the Act would make a “poor tool for politicized enforcement. ”The Electronic Frontier Foundation, meanwhile, has said that the bill, beyond increasing risks of censorship, puts encrypted messaging services (like Signal) at risk, since they — unlike email providers — are not excluded from the provisions of the legislation. “How could such services comply with the takedown requests mandated in this bill? Platforms may respond by abandoning encryption entirely in order to be able to monitor content — turning private conversations into surveilled spaces,” EFF wrote.

There’s an app for that: Meta on Tuesday launched a stand-alone version of its AI assistant in the form of its Meta AI App. Built with Llama 4, the app brings Meta into more direct competition with OpenAI.In the red: Shares of Snap tumbled 11% in after-hours trading despite a strong earnings report, due to the company’s decision not to offer second-quarter guidance in the face of macroeconomic uncertainties. But the broader market had another good-ish day following hints that a trade deal with an unnamed country is close to being signed.

See new posts

Citizen Journalism article concerning Michael Comyn KC and the Clifford and O’Sullivan case.

15 web pages

Citizen Journalism Article: Michael Comyn KC and the Clifford and O’Sullivan Case – A Legal Battle for Justice

In the turbulent years of Ireland’s struggle for independence, one legal case stood out as a testament to the power of innovative legal strategy and the fight for justice: the Clifford and O’Sullivan case of 1921. At the heart of this landmark case was Michael Comyn KC, an Irish barrister whose bold approach saved 42 men from execution and left an indelible mark on constitutional law. This citizen journalism piece explores Comyn’s role, the case’s significance, and its broader implications, drawing on historical accounts and reflecting on its relevance today.

The Context: Ireland Under Martial Law

In 1920, Ireland was engulfed in the War of Independence, with tensions between Irish republicans and British authorities at a boiling point. The British administration imposed martial law in areas like County Cork, where Viscount French, the Lord Lieutenant, issued proclamations to curb republican activity. One such decree, enforced by British Commander-in-Chief Sir Nevil Macready, required civilians to surrender all arms, ammunition, and explosives by December 27, 1920. Failure to comply meant trial by military court and, upon conviction, a death sentence. General Sir E.P. Strickland was appointed to oversee these military courts, which operated with little regard for due process.

In April 1921, 42 men, including Clifford and O’Sullivan, were arrested near Mitchelstown, County Cork, for possessing arms. Tried by a military tribunal, they faced execution. The situation was dire, and the military courts’ authority seemed absolute. Enter Michael Comyn, a barrister with a reputation for defending republican prisoners and a deep commitment to justice.

Michael Comyn: The Man Behind the Defense

Michael Comyn (1871–1952) was no ordinary lawyer. Born in County Clare to a tenant farmer and Land League activist, Comyn’s early life was shaped by the injustices of British rule, including his family’s eviction in 1879. A nationalist at heart, he was in Kansas City with Sinn Féin founder Arthur Griffith during the 1916 Easter Rising. Upon returning to Ireland, he became a fierce advocate for republican prisoners, arguing cases before the House of Lords and earning a reputation for tenacity.

When solicitor James G. Skinner from Mitchelstown approached Comyn and his brother James with the desperate plea, “Do anything but do something… Invent something if necessary,” Comyn rose to the challenge. The Clifford and O’Sullivan case was not just a legal battle; it was a matter of life and death for 42 men.

The Legal Strategy: Prohibition as a Novel Defense

Comyn’s genius lay in his decision to apply for a writ of Prohibition, an obscure legal remedy rarely used in such contexts. His argument was bold: the military court was illegal and lacked jurisdiction to try the defendants or adjudicate their cases. This approach was a gamble, as it challenged the very foundation of British military authority in Ireland.

The case began in the Chancery Division in Ireland, where Mr. Justice Powell heard Comyn’s application. Despite the compelling argument, Powell felt constrained to dismiss it, citing legal precedents. Undeterred, Comyn appealed to the Court of Appeal, where the Crown argued that Powell’s order was made in a “criminal cause or matter” under the Supreme Court of Judicature Act of 1877, meaning no appeal was permissible. The Court of Appeal, led by O’Connor, M.R., and Lord Justices Ronan and O’Connel, upheld this view and dismissed the appeal.

Comyn’s persistence led the case to the House of Lords on June 16, 1921, just six weeks after the military court’s verdict. Led by Sir John Simon KC, Comyn, his nephew James Comyn, Joe McCarthy (later a judge), and Richard O’Sullivan presented their case. The House of Lords, however, ruled against the appeal on July 28, 1921. Their Lordships, including four Scottish judges and Lord Atkinson from Ireland, held that Prohibition was inappropriate because the military court was not a judicial tribunal and its officers were functi officio (no longer in office). They also avoided delving into the case’s merits, wary that habeas corpus might be attempted next.

The Outcome: A Royal Intervention

Despite the legal setback, the Clifford and O’Sullivan case had a remarkable outcome. Comyn later revealed that King George V, shocked by the prospect of executing 42 men, personally intervened. According to Comyn, the king secured a promise from the prime minister that no executions would take place and that peace negotiations would proceed. None of the 42 men were executed, and following the Anglo-Irish Treaty later that year, they were freed.

This intervention underscored the case’s significance beyond the courtroom. James Comyn, Michael’s nephew and a distinguished barrister, later cited Clifford and O’Sullivan as a leading authority in constitutional law, highlighting its impact on challenging unchecked military power. Notably, no republican prisoner defended by Comyn during the “troubles” faced the death penalty, a testament to his skill and dedication.

Reflections: Citizen Journalism and Historical Memory

As a citizen journalist, revisiting the Clifford and O’Sullivan case offers valuable lessons. It highlights the power of individuals like Comyn to challenge systemic injustice through creativity and courage. In an era when professional journalism often struggles to cover local and historical stories due to resource constraints, citizen journalists can fill the gap by uncovering and sharing narratives that might otherwise be forgotten.

The case also resonates with contemporary debates about the rule of law and the rights of the accused. Military tribunals, then and now, raise questions about due process and fairness. Comyn’s use of Prohibition reminds us that legal innovation can be a tool for justice, even in the face of overwhelming odds.

Moreover, the case underscores the importance of public pressure and high-profile intervention. King George V’s role, while controversial, shows how visibility can sway outcomes. Today, citizen journalists amplify marginalized voices and hold power to account, much like Comyn did in the courtroom.

Conclusion: A Legacy of Justice

Michael Comyn KC’s defense in the Clifford and O’Sullivan case was a masterclass in legal strategy and moral conviction. By leveraging an obscure remedy and navigating a hostile legal system, he saved 42 lives and set a precedent in constitutional law. His story, preserved in historical records and family accounts, deserves to be remembered as a beacon of resistance against injustice.

As citizen journalists, we have a duty to unearth such stories, connecting past struggles to present challenges. The Clifford and O’Sullivan case reminds us that one person’s ingenuity can change history—and that the fight for justice is never truly over.

Sources:

• Wikipedia entry on Michael Comyn
• Canisgallicus.com, family history notes on Michael Comyn KC
• James Comyn’s legal writings on the Clifford and O’Sullivan case

Note: This article is written from a citizen journalism perspective, aiming to inform and inspire while critically examining historical narratives. For further details, readers are encouraged to explore primary sources and legal archives.

Watch “5 SIGNS YOU’RE DEALING WITH A PSYCHOPATH (RUN!!!) | BY ANTHONY HOPKINS” on YouTube

Attachments area

Preview YouTube video 5 SIGNS YOU’RE DEALING WITH A PSYCHOPATH (RUN!!!) | BY ANTHONY HOPKINS

5 SIGNS YOU’RE DEALING WITH A PSYCHOPATH (RUN!!!) | BY ANTHONY HOPKINS

Watch “Betrayed by Blood: Why Your Family Rejects You – The Shocking Truth Revealed | Anthony Hopkins” on YouTube

Inbox

Search for all messages with label Inbox

Remove label Inbox from this conversation

See new posts

Conversation

Mario Nawfal

@MarioNawfal

GIANT ANTARCTIC ICEBERG BREAKS AWAY, REVEALING SECRET UNDERSEA WORLD

An iceberg roughly the size of Chicago broke off from Antarctica’s George VI ice shelf, uncovering a previously hidden seafloor ecosystem. They discovered an astonishing underwater landscape filled with rare marine life—including large sponges and at least six completely new species. Scientists believe this vibrant ecosystem may have existed secretly beneath the ice for centuries, thriving under extreme and isolated conditions. The Schmidt Ocean Institute, which sponsored the groundbreaking expedition, has publicly shared the findings, inviting researchers worldwide to explore this remarkable discovery further. Source: CBS

https://x.com/i/status/1903625243719024914

Quote

Mario Nawfal

@MarioNawfal

·

Mar 16

Show more

1:50 AM · Mar 23, 2025

·

668.7K Views

John Crotty (@itsjohncrotty) posted at 9:33 am on Thu, Apr 24, 2025:

Remembering Roger Casement, sent to London this week, 1916

British diplomat & Irish rebel

‘The Father of modern human rights investigations’

He was Knighted for exposing atrocities overseas

For Ireland’s cause, he was hanged

His words live on – here are his finest (1) 

https://t.co/Di3bMTuMHP
(https://x.com/itsjohncrotty/status/1915323198758863028?t=Wg8UMLOhT7be-VkTrtemVw&s=03) 

DogeDesigner (@cb_doge) posted at 8:31 pm on Sun, Apr 27, 2025:

BREAKING: Elon Musk has just revealed that Neuralink had to use a robot to insert brain electrodes because humans couldn’t match the needed accuracy.

He also predicted that robots will be better than good surgeons in a few years and the best surgeons in five years. 

https://t.co/XgI7DUjBEt
(https://x.com/cb_doge/status/1916575892232450302?t=U5C824cYiO1ph-84tnEa0g&s=03) 

937,964 views Apr 26, 2025

Geoffrey Hinton, whose work shaped modern artificial intelligence, says companies are moving too fast without enough focus on safety. Brook Silva-Braga introduced us to Hinton in 2023 and recently caught up with him. Each weekday morning, “CBS Mornings” co-hosts Gayle King, Tony Dokoupil and Nate Burleson bring you the latest breaking news, smart conversation and in-depth feature reporting. “CBS Mornings” airs weekdays at 7 a.m. on CBS and stream it at 8 a.m. ET on the CBS News app. Subscribe to “CBS Mornings” on YouTube:    / cbsmornings   Watch CBS News 24/7: https://cbsnews.com/live/ Download the CBS News app: https://cbsnews.com/mobile/ Follow “CBS Mornings” on Instagram:   / cbsmornings   Like “CBS Mornings” on Facebook:   / cbsmornings   Follow “CBS Mornings” on X:   / cbsmornings   Subscribe to our newsletter: https://cbsnews.com/newsletters/ Try Paramount+ free: https://paramountplus.com/?ftag=PPM-0..