News of the World

[kyonides]

Chinese Spy Balloon Did Not Collect Data While Transiting US

The Chinese spy balloon that flew over sensitive U.S. military sites earlier this year did not collect or transmit any information before it was shot down off the Carolina coast, the Pentagon told reporters on June 29.

The balloon, which flew from Alaska to the East Coast, came equipped with commercially available U.S.-made gear that allowed it to take photos and videos and gather other information, according to media reports on Thursday citing preliminary findings from a government-led investigation.

The gear was mixed with some more specialized Chinese sensors and other equipment in what officials saw as an inventive surveillance attempt by Beijing, according to the Wall Street Journal, which first reported on the issue.

Pentagon spokesperson Brig. Gen. Pat Ryder on Thursday wouldn’t confirm whether U.S. components were on the balloon, but said the department was aware of previous cases where foreign militaries have used off-the-shelf U.S. equipment such as drones.

“So, that in of itself is not surprising,” he said at a press briefing.

Although the balloon had “intelligence collection capabilities,” Ryder said the Pentagon determined that “it did not collect while it was transiting the United States or overflying the United States.”

Defense officials have previously said they took measures to limit the balloon’s capacity to gather sensitive information, and “certainly the efforts that we made contributed,” said Ryder.

Supreme Court’s Affirmative Action Ruling Draws Celebration and Criticism

Prior to Thursday’s decision, the Supreme Court had allowed colleges to weigh an applicant’s race when making admissions decisions. In the 1978 case Regents of the University of California v. Bakke and the 2003 case Grutter v. Bollinger, the Supreme Court ruled that colleges could favor minority groups as long as they considered other factors beyond race specifically and did not implement racial quota systems.

The Students for Fair Admissions (SFFA) challenged affirmative action policies at Harvard and the University of North Carolina, culminating in the Supreme Court’s ruling on Thursday in SFFA v. President and Fellows of Harvard College, finding that college race-based admissions programs are unconstitutional. Much of the arguments in the case focused on claims affirmative action policies unfairly impacted college applicants of Asian descent.
...
While some Asian Americans championed SFFA’s cause, a trio of activists affiliated with OCA–Asian Pacific American Advocates were among those who criticized the Supreme Court’s decision on Thursday.
...
Jonathan Butcher, the Will Skillman Senior Research Fellow in Education Policy at the conservative Heritage Foundation, also celebrated in his initial reaction to the Supreme Court’s affirmative action decision.

“I think that this is a huge victory for students, really, from all backgrounds, all races and all ethnicities,” Butcher told NTD News.

Butcher said affirmative action would often result in its beneficiaries being admitted to challenging academic settings where they underperform.

Biden Announces New Student Loan Forgiveness Plan Hours After SCOTUS Ruling

Biden made a televised statement on June 30, within hours of the court decision, promising to provide debt relief for some borrowers and a temporary measure to ease the transition back to loan repayment after a pause of over three years.

Biden had unveiled the original loan-forgiveness plan in August 2022. At the time, some critics charged that the move was intended to boost the chances of Democratic candidates in the midterm election. Others denounced it as unfair to Americans who had repaid their college loans and as an illegal usurpation of congressional authority.

The Congressional Budget Office said the plan could cost about $400 billion. The Wharton School estimated that it could exceed $1 trillion.

The high court ruled on June 30 that Biden’s plan violated the HEROES Act, which he had used as a legal authority for taking the action.
...
Biden said he had identified a “new path” consistent with the Supreme Court ruling that would allow U.S. Secretary of Education Miguel Cardona to compromise, waive, or release loans under certain circumstances.

Biden did not give further details but did say the plan was legally sound, based on the Higher Education Act, and that it would take time to implement.

Cardona said the plan would include “as many as possible” and be implemented “as quick as possible” at a White House press conference following Biden’s remarks, but offered no specifics.

Major UPS Strike Looming: Americans’ Packages Could Be in Jeopardy

UPS has previously stated that it transports some 6 percent of the U.S. gross domestic product (GDP) on a daily basis and about 3 percent of the worldwide GDP, according to a news release. It means that a nationwide strike could have far-reaching effects on commerce, while impacting Americans’ orders and package-delivery services.

Global shipping firm Pitney Bowes says UPS has about about 37 percent of the United States’ total parcel market share among shippers in 2023, while it averaged about 24 million packages per day last year. FedEx has about 33 percent of the parcel market share, the U.S. Postal Service has 16 percent, and Amazon has about 12 percent, the firm said.
...
The UPS Teamsters contract ends on July 31, and if a deal isn’t made soon, a portion of the company’s drivers could go on strike this summer. The Teamsters posted photos of “Teamster practice pickets” in a social media post on Thursday, showing workers in UPS uniforms holding signs.

UPS has said that it is the United States’ “single-largest employer” of the Teamsters union, comprising some 300,000 delivery drivers, transportation workers, and warehouse employees.

In June, the union voted to authorize a strike if UPS doesn’t meet its demands by the end of the month. The Teamsters says the group wants “higher wages for all workers, more full-time jobs, an end to forced overtime and harassment from management, elimination of a two-tier wage system, and protection from heat and other workplace hazards.”

Brazil’s Bolsonaro Barred from Running for Office for 8 Years

Former Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro’s political career faced a major setback on Friday as Brazil’s federal electoral court (TSE) barred him from public office until 2030 over his challenge to last year’s election results.

In a ruling Friday, the 68-year old conservative firebrand was convicted by the court for abuse of power and misuse of the media when, on the eve of Brazil’s 2022 election, he publicly called into question the reliability of the country’s electronic voting system.

Specifically, Bolsonaro was accused of undermining democracy in Brazil by claiming that electronic ballots were vulnerable to fraud and hacking. Five of the electoral court’s seven judges voted to banish him from politics for eight years, while two voted against.

Bolsonaro’s lawyers, who have argued that his remarks had no impact on the election results, said Friday that they would appeal the decision to the Supreme Court.

If the verdict stands, however, Bolsonaro will be prohibited from being a presidential candidate in the 2026 election, though he’ll be eligible to run in 2030. He’ll also be barred from taking part in municipal elections in 2024 and 2028.
...
If the verdict stands on appeal, his leftist rival Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva will not have to face his main foe if he runs for re-election in 2026.