Larry Mantle interviews Democrat Alex Padilla in preparation for the 2018 general election on November 6. We also discuss the surge of illegal crossings at the Texas border; analyze the potential utility of U.S. adopting domestic terrorism law; and more.
Migrant caravan aside, why is the Texas border seeing a dramatic surge of illegal crossings?
The migrant caravan is weeks away from arriving at the US border.
Also expected at the border are the thousands of troops that President Trump has deployed to assist border agents. Independent of what’s current happening at the border, an LA Times article is reporting that the Texas border is expecting that arrests from illegal crossings would likely reach 20,000 in October - more than double the amount from last year.
AirTalk checks in from the border from both California and Texas.
Guests:
Molly Hennessy-Fiske, Houston bureau chief for the Los Angeles Times, who has been reporting on the story from Rio Grande Valley in Texas; she tweets
Shaw Drake, policy counsel at the ACLU Border Rights Center in El Paso, Texas
Jean Guerrero, reporter who covers the border for KPBS, the NPR affiliate in San Diego, who’s been following the migrant caravan from Tijuana
Andrew Nietor, immigration and criminal defense attorney; president of the board of directors of Federal Defenders of San Diego, which handles criminal cases after getting a notification of a case from the Federal court; he tweets
Free speech or defamation? Writer sues to unmask anonymous internet user who accused him of rape in ‘media men’ list
Last year, as #MeToo was gaining traction, writer Moira Donegan created a Google Doc called the “sh*tty media men” list, which was meant to crowdsource reports of problematic behavior by men working in magazines and publishing.
The spreadsheet circulated quickly, picking up over 70 different names. Now one of those names has filed a federal lawsuit. Writer and filmmaker Stephen Elliott is seeking a court-ordered retraction, $1.5 million in damages and for Google to hand over medata from the list, in order to unmask those who anonymously interacted with the list, whether they commented on it or shared it.
The suit raises legal questions about whether Elliot has a right to know the identities of his accusers and whether those accusers (and everyone else who would be outed) have a right to remain anonymous. On the one hand, those allegations could be false and have caused damage to Elliot’s professional reputation. On the other hand, anonymity allows people to speak out about abuses.
We discuss the legal and ethical implications raised by the suit.
Guests:
Steven Gebelin, trial attorney who specializes in intellectual property and internet law at Syverson, Lesowitz and Gebelin LLP in Beverly Hills; he has represented both plaintiffs and defendants in defamation lawsuits
Aaron Mackey, staff attorney at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, where he works on issues such as free speech, privacy and transparency; he tweets
AirTalk midterm elections interviews: incumbent Alex Padilla running for Secretary of State
In the 2014 general election, Democrat Alex Padilla defeated Republican candidate Pete Peterson to become California Secretary of State, winning a near 54 percent majority of the vote to succeed then-Secretary Debra Brown.
He was sworn in on January 5 of the following year, and for the last four years has kept election reform, security and voting rights at the forefront of his agenda.
So what has the secretary accomplished during his tenure and what are his plans for the state if given a second term to serve?
Padilla, who is also a former state senator and Los Angeles City Council member, joins host Larry Mantle in preparation for the 2018 general election on November 6.
You can listen to our interview with Republican candidate for Secretary of State Mark Meuser here.
Ready for Election Day? Get up to speed on what you need to know with our Voter Game Plan at elections.laist.com. Read up on the candidates and ballot measures, find out about registration deadlines or ask us your questions.
Guest:
Alex Padilla, California Secretary of State; he tweets
Legal scholars debate necessity, potential utility of U.S. adopting domestic terrorism law
Under U.S. law, there is currently no such thing as a crime of ‘domestic terrorism.’
Federal law enforcement can charge alleged domestic terrorists under other statutes that designate punishment for hate crimes, firearm and explosives possession, depending on the nature and gravity of the offense, but there is no special provision for law enforcement to bring “domestic terrorism” charges. But in the wake of incidents like the explosive devices sent via mail to various high-profile critics of President Trump last week and the shooting at a Pittsburgh synagogue on Saturday, does the U.S. need a more targeted law for charging individuals accused of domestic terrorism?
Legal scholars are divided on the issue, and have been for some time. Proponents of adopting a domestic terrorism law say that it could open up more investigative tools for the feds to use, would put it on the same moral level as international terrorism simply by giving it a label, and that by labeling an offense ‘domestic terrorism’ it will allow law enforcement to better track trends and outcomes of domestic terrorism incidents and prosecution of them. But skeptics worry that a domestic terrorism law could lead to violations of civil liberties if, say, the government were to classify a domestic organization as ‘terrorists’ because they didn’t agree with their ideology, and that federal law enforcement agents already have access to the tools they need to prosecute domestic terrorism.
We look at the tools the U.S. currently has to prosecute domestic terrorism, what a specific law to prosecute it might look like, and the First Amendment and civil liberties concerns a law like it could raise.
Guests:
Mary McCord, visiting professor of law at Georgetown University; she was the acting Assistant Attorney General for National Security at the U.S. Department of Justice from 2016-2017 and served as its Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General for the National Security Division from 2014-2016
Shirin Sinnar, associate professor of law at Stanford University where she teaches courses in civil procedure, terrorism, and the intersection of race and identity with national security
On your phone and on the move: Why the future of gaming is all about streaming
Last month, Microsoft announced its plans to launch Project xCloud, a service that will let users stream Xbox One games to computers, phones, tablets and other devices.
Currently, most games are limited to the device you are using. In a post announcing the service, Microsoft said “entertainment should be available on demand and accessible from any screen.” Project xCloud will let gamers connect an Xbox One controller to mobile devices via Bluetooth. This is not the first game-streaming venture of its kind. But Microsoft says it has figured out aspects that would push the existing concept forward.
The tech company says Project xCloud has resolved encoding and latency issues, which currently limits which games can be enjoyed. The mobile gaming market is a $50 billion industry. It accounts for almost half of all gaming revenues worldwide. Globally, the gaming market is expected to grow to a $115 billion industry this year alone. We look at the growth of the mobile gaming industry that has given way to whole new class of gamers.
We have reached out to Microsoft to discuss Project xCloud but they declined our request for an interview
Guests:
Samuel Axon, senior reviews editor with Ars Technica, who has been reporting on Microsoft’s game-streaming service; he tweets @SamuelAxon
Tim O’Shea, senior vice president and equity analyst covering the video game sector at Jefferies, an independent global investment banking firm based in New York