Politics
Supreme Court chief justice report urges caution on use of AI ahead of contentious election year
With a wary eye over the future of the federal courts, Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts warned Sunday of the perils of artificial intelligence (AI) when deciding cases and other important legal matters.
His remarks came in the annual year-end report issued by the head of the federal judiciary, which made no mention of current controversies surrounding his court, including calls for greater transparency and ethics reform binding the justices.
Noting the legal profession in general is “notoriously averse to change,” Roberts urged a go-slow approach when embracing new technologies by the courts.
“AI obviously has great potential to dramatically increase access to key information for lawyers and non-lawyers alike,” he said. “But just as obviously it risks invading privacy interests and dehumanizing the law.”
TOP REPUBLICAN TALKS AI ARMS RACE: ‘YOU’LL HAVE MACHINES COMPETING WITH EACH OTHER’
Street view of the Supreme Court building. (STEFANI REYNOLDS/AFP via Getty Images)
“But any use of AI requires caution and humility,” he added. “As 2023 draws to a close with breathless predictions about the future of Artificial Intelligence, some may wonder whether judges are about to become obsolete. I am sure we are not— but equally confident that technological changes will continue to transform our work.”
Roberts also summarized the work of the nation’s 94 district courts, 13 circuit courts and his own Supreme Court. Previous year-end reports have focused on courthouse security, judges’ pay, rising caseloads and budgets.
The chief justice’s predictions of the future did not include his own court’s caseload, as he and his colleagues are poised to tackle several politically-charged disputes in the new year, many focused on former president Donald Trump’s legal troubles and re-election efforts.
WATCHDOG WARNS SEVERAL FEDERAL AGENCIES ARE BEHIND ON AI REQUIREMENTS
Chief Justice John Roberts attends the State of the Union address. (Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images)
Election examinations
The Supreme Court has tackled its share of election fights over the decades — remember Bush v. Gore nearly a quarter century ago? — but 2024 promises to make that judicial drama look quaint by comparison.
First up could be whether states can keep Trump’s name off primary and general election ballots. Colorado’s highest court said yes, and now the U.S. Supreme Court is being asked to decide the extent of a 14th Amendment provision that bans from office those who “engaged in insurrection.”
State courts across the country are considering whether Trump’s role in 2020 election interference and the Jan. 6 Capitol riots would disqualify him from seeking re-election.
The justices are being asked to decide the matter quickly, either by mid-February or early March, when the “Super Tuesday” primaries in 16 states are held.
In his leadership role as “first among equals,” the 68-year-old Roberts will likely be the key player in framing what voting disputes his court will hear and ultimately decide, perhaps as the deciding vote.
Despite a 6-3 conservative majority, the chief justice has often tried to play the middle, seeking a less-is-best approach that has frustrated his more right-leaning colleagues.
But despite any reluctance to stay away from the fray, the court, it seems, will be involved in election-related controversies.
“Given the number of election disputes it might be coming, a lot of them could be moving very quickly and will be very important to see what the court does,” said Brianne Gorod, chief counsel at the Constitutional Accountability Center. “Sometimes the Supreme Court has no choice but to be involved in the election cases, because there are some voting rights and election cases that the justices are required to resolve on the merits.”
Already the high court is considering redistricting challenges to voting boundaries in GOP-leaning states, brought by civil rights groups.
That includes South Carolina’s first congressional district and claims the Republican-led legislature created a racial gerrymander. A ruling is expected in spring 2024.
The high court could also be asked to weigh in on emergency appeals over vote-by-mail restrictions, provisional ballots deadlines, polling hours, the Electoral College and more.
Just weeks before President Trump’s first House impeachment in 2019, Roberts tried to downplay his court’s consideration of partisan political disputes.
“When you live in a polarized political environment, people tend to see everything in those terms,” Roberts said at the time. “That’s not how we at the court function and the results in our cases do not suggest otherwise.”
But the court’s reputation as a fair arbiter of the law and Constitution has continued to erode to all-time lows.
A Fox News poll in June found just 48% of those surveyed having confidence in the Supreme Court, down from 83% just six years ago.
COMMERCE SECRETARY WILL BAN NVIDIA AI CHIPS DESIGNED TO GET AROUND RESTRICTIONS
Former President Donald Trump on the campaign trail. (Scott Olson/Getty Images)
The Trump term?
Donald Trump faces separate criminal prosecution in four jurisdictions in 2024 — two federal cases over document mishandling and 2020 election interference; and two state cases in Georgia over 2020 election interference and New York over hush money payments to a porn star.
The prospect of a former president and leading GOP candidate facing multiple criminal convictions — with or without the blessing of the United States Supreme Court — has the potential to dominate an already riven election campaign.
The former president has filed various motions in each case, seeking to drop charges, delay the proceedings, and be allowed to speak publicly at what he sees as politically-motivated prosecutions.
The Supreme Court recently refused to fast-track a separate appeal, over Trump’s scheduled criminal trial scheduled to start the day before “Super Tuesday.”
Special counsel Jack Smith is challenging Trump’s claim of presidential immunity in the 2020 election interference case. The former president says the prosecutions amount to a “partisan witch hunt.”
While the justices are staying out of the dispute for now, they could quickly jump back in later this winter, after a federal appeals court decides the merits in coming weeks.
But the justices will decide this term whether some January 6 Capitol riot defendants can challenge their convictions for “corruptly” obstructing “official proceedings.” Oral arguments could be held in February or March.
More than 300 people are facing that same obstruction law over their alleged efforts to disrupt Congress’ certification of Joe Biden’s 2020 presidential election victory over Trump.
The former president faces the same obstruction count in his case, and what the high court decides could affect Trump’s legal defense in the special counsel prosecution, and the timing of his trial.
EXPERTS WEIGH IN ON STRENGTHS, WEAKNESSES OF BIDEN’S AI EXECUTIVE ORDER
Supreme Court Justices posing for an official photo at the Supreme Court. (Photo by OLIVIER DOULIERY/AFP via Getty Images)
Look ahead
In the short term, the Supreme Court, with its solid conservative majority, will hear arguments and issue rulings in coming months on hot-button topics like:
– Abortion, and access to mifepristone, a commonly-used drug to end pregnancies
– Executive power, and an effort to sharply curb the power of federal agencies to interpret and enforce “ambiguous” policies enacted by Congress
– Social media, and whether tech firms — either on their own or with the cooperation of the government — can moderate or prevent users from posting disinformation
– Gun rights and a federal ban on firearm possession by those subject to domestic violence restraining orders
Off the bench, the court last month instituted a new “code of conduct” — ethics rules to clarify ways the justices can address conflicts of interest, case recusals, activities they can participate in outside the court and their finances.
It followed months of revelations that some justices, particularly Clarence Thomas, did not accurately report gifts and other financial benefits on their required financial disclosure reports.
The court in a statement admitted the absence of binding ethics rules led some to believe that the justices “regard themselves as unrestricted by any ethics rules.”
“To dispel this misunderstanding, we are issuing this code, which largely represents a codification of principles that we have long regarded as governing our conduct.”
All this reflects the delicate balancing act the chief justice will navigate in a presidential election year.
The unprecedented criticism of the high court’s work — on and off the bench — is not lost on its nine members.
“There’s a storm around us in the political world and the world at large in America,” Justice Brett Kavanaugh said this fall. “We, as judges and the legal system, need to try to be a little more, I think, of the calm in the storm.”
Some court watchers agree the court as an institution may struggle in the near term to preserve its legitimacy and public confidence, but time might be on its side.
“By its nature, the court kind of takes a long-term view of things,” said Thomas Dupree, a former top Justice Department official, who has litigated cases before the Supreme Court. “Even when we disagree with the outcome in a particular case, I have never had any doubt that these are men and women who are doing their absolute best to faithfully apply the laws and the Constitution of the United States to reach the right result.”
Politics
Commentary: A Becerra-Steyer race in November? It’s possible
With just days left to campaign and polls putting him in an unexpectedly strong third place — maybe even second — Tom Steyer is down-not-out. But Riverside’s favorite MAGA sheriff and Republican contender Chad Bianco is almost definitely shoulders-to-the-mat done.
That means there’s no chance of a Republican sweep in this blue state, and suddenly, what has up until now been a pretty dry governor’s primary race has turned into one that has a slim-but-genuine chance at a surprise ending — two Democrats on the November ticket.
“It’s a low probability,” political data guru Paul Mitchell told me, “But there’s always a chance.”
He puts it somewhere under 10%. But stranger things have happened. Spencer Pratt, for instance.
Those of you who have hung on to your ballots like winning lottery tickets, and those who plan on voting in person, will largely decide what happens next: An Xavier Becerra-Steve Hilton top two is a virtual election for Becerra since there just aren’t enough Republican voters in the state to carry a general election. A Becerra-Steyer face-off would force both candidates to define a vision of California beyond generic liberal ideas.
Personally, I wouldn’t mind seeing California have that Dem-on-Dem showdown so that voters of all parties (or none) have the chance to pin these would-be leaders down on the details of their policies. So far, this election has been light on the specifics, but the state faces real problems — from a failing healthcare system to gas prices that literally mystify even lawmakers.
Everything changes when a candidate becomes a winner, so maybe it would be good for democracy to have an old-fashioned war of ideas in this moment when the future of California holds so many unknowns.
Is Steyer just a billionaire dilettante trying to buy an office? Is Becerra beholden to the many corporate interests who have funded his campaign? Those are just the top-line questions many voters still have.
“There’s lots of shades of blue,” pointed out Chad Peace of the Independent Voter Project, on a press call to support open primaries. “When we only look at things as, ‘Oh, there’s red and there’s blue,’ we forget that.”
But voters remain nervous, and the ballot is still packed — along with the top three, former Rep. Katie Porter and San José Mayor Matt Mahan are still campaigning, though with falling support.
Voters, Mitchell said, “are really thinking about the implications” of their vote, and perhaps don’t want to throw it away on a candidate they perceive as having no chance. That’s why the new polls showing Steyer as a contender have the potential of stirring up momentum, especially for voters who originally saw themselves filling in the bubble for one of those candidates on the decline.
Recent polls have put Steyer in a near-dead-heat with Republican front-runner Hilton, both hovering slightly above or below 20%. Becerra, the former California attorney general and a former Biden Cabinet secretary, leads them both by a few points, especially among Latino voters. As my colleague Gustavo Arellano has pointed out, Becerra would be the state’s second Latino governor, after Romualdo Pacheco, who held the office for 10 months in 1875.
“A Dem-Dem race, maybe we’ll get more people involved, because it’s going to be a harder fight, you know?” Diane McClure told me. She’s a board member of the California Nurses Assn., which endorsed Steyer early — in large part because he supports a plan for single-payer health insurance, which that union has long fought for.
McClure, of course, would love to see Steyer take the top spot in that easy-win scenario against Hilton, though that seems doubtful. But a Steyer-Becerra race?
“Maybe it’s a good thing, maybe it’ll wake some people up,” she said.
For his part, Steyer is staying the course. At a Sacramento stop Friday, he bounded around chatting with about four dozen mostly union supporters, wearing trademark Nikes, this time a vintage pair with a tartan plaid swoop.
“Four days,” Steyer said when he finally took the microphone. “I really need you to stand with me. But let me say this: you stand with me, I stand with you.”
Unlike his debate performances, Steyer is passionate, and, though it seems unlikely based on his television appearances, has an amiable charisma dotted with a fair amount of light profanity.
“Make a decent living, buy a house, have a great education for your kids, and retire,” he said. “That’s what we’re trying to build here. We can easily do that. When people say that’s not possible, bull—, that’s bull—.”
It was enough to sway Ricky Carter, one of the few non-union members in the room, who was invited because his wife, Barbara, was on a prayer chain with another invitee. An older Black man originally from South Los Angeles, Carter represents a demographic where Steyer has growing popularity.
“I believe him. He got it right in here,” he said, pounding a fist over his heart. “It ain’t about no color, creed and race. … It’s about the people.”
Indeed, elections are about the people, though it doesn’t always feel like it. But suddenly, this one does.
Politics
Anti-ICE agitator charged with allegedly biting officers during Delaney Hall clashes
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
An anti-U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agitator was hit with federal charges after gnarly photos showed bloody bite marks he allegedly made into federal agents’ arms during violent clashes outside Delaney Hall detention center in Newark, New Jersey.
Brendan John Geier, a 26-year-old man from Madison, New Jersey, was part of a group of agitators blocking the road near Delaney Hall on Thursday night when ICE deportation officers instructed the group to move away, the U.S. Department of Justice said.
The group allegedly ignored the commands and instead violently engaged with the officers, according to the DOJ. Geier then “engaged in a struggle with deportation officers, kicking officers and ultimately biting an officer’s forearm, and another’s knuckle. Both victims received treatment at a local hospital,” prosecutors said. He was charged with assaulting federal officers and causing bodily injury and appeared before U.S. Magistrate Judge Cari Fais on Friday, the DOJ said.
“We will not tolerate the vicious attacks on ICE officers we’ve seen in New Jersey the last few days. These riots are clearly not ‘peaceful protests’ as you can see from the photos of these horrific wounds. Assault a federal officer, you’ll be held accountable,” Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche wrote in a Friday afternoon post on X.
NEW JERSEY AGITATORS BITE, KICK AND PUNCH ICE AGENTS AS DELANEY HALL CLASHES CONTINUE; 9 MORE ARRESTED: DHS
Blanche posted to X photos of bloodied ICE agents displaying their wounds.
Immigration agents display bloody wounds they allegedly incurred when New Jersey man Brendan John Geier bit them. May 28, 2026. (U.S. Department of Justice)
“Peaceful protest doesn’t translate to violently attacking federal law enforcement officers,” Blanche said in a statement. “Federal officers are protecting United States’ property and facilities. With virtually no local law enforcement support from New Jersey, rioters are regrouping and attacking. We will not tolerate the vicious attacks we have seen in Newark the last few days, and we will make arrests and hold people accountable for criminal conduct.”
“As alleged in the Justice Department’s complaint, this violent rioter savagely bit an ICE law enforcement officer outside of Delaney Hall. The Trump Administration will always stand with our law enforcement officers,” Department of Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin also added in the statement. “Anyone who assaults a law enforcement officer will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.”
ANTI-ICE AGITATORS THROW WOODEN PALLETS, MATTRESSES AT FEDERAL AGENTS DURING CHAOTIC NJ DETENTION CENTER CLASH
Federal immigration officers clashed with protesters outside Delaney Hall in Newark, N.J., on Thursday. (Mostafa Bassim/Anadolu)
“As alleged, this defendant responded to lawful orders from federal officers by kicking one and biting two others who were performing their official duties,” U.S. Attorney Robert Frazer for the District of New Jersey also said in the statement. “Assaulting law enforcement officers is unacceptable. Period. Federal officers must be able to carry out their responsibilities without being subjected to violence, intimidation, or obstruction. This Office will continue to prosecute those who, as alleged here, assault officers and interfere with the lawful execution of their duties.”
“To be clear, peaceful protest does not mean biting, kicking, or punching law enforcement officers,” Acting Special Agent in Charge Spiros Karabinas of Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) Newark added in the statement.
“The repeated assaults on federal officers at Delaney Hall are criminal acts — not protected speech. Homeland Security Investigations is unwavering in its commitment to hold those who attack law enforcement fully accountable under the law,” Karabinas concluded.
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
Demonstrations at Delaney Hall were in their sixth night by Thursday. (Mostafa Bassim/Anadolu)
Ongoing demonstrations outside Delaney Hall are entering their second week.
Fox News Digital contacted the DOJ for additional information.
On Saturday morning, anti-ICE agitators and counterprotesters were both seen outside Delaney Hall. A crowd was growing, and many officers were seen patrolling on bikes, with a visible divide between pro-ICE protesters and anti-ICE agitators.
New Jersey Gov. Mikie Sherrill, who spent Memorial Day at Delaney Hall supporting the anti-ICE crowds, announced Friday that she was instructing New Jersey State Police to assume responsibility for public safety outside the detention center. Earlier in the week, Mullin had placed the blame on Sherrill for not allowing local law enforcement to cooperate with federal immigration authorities. DHS said local police were largely absent as federal agents were met with violent demonstrators.
Fox News’ Kimberly Ruiz contributed to this report.
Politics
Commentary: A second offering to Spencer Pratt, and 5 points about the L.A. mayor’s race
Well, I gave him a chance, offering my services.
I was willing to give the young novice a primer on what a mayor can and can’t do, and let him know City Hall is a reality show like no other he’s been on. But Spencer Pratt didn’t call me in response to my column last week.
I did, however, hear from a slew of his most ardent supporters.
Steven C. had this to say: “You’re a left-wing idiot, and … it’s time for you to retire. You’re a joke!!! You always have been!!! God bless Spencer Pratt and the 45th and 47th President of the United States Donald Trump!!!!!”
You may be onto something, Steven!!! I’ve been thinking about retiring!!!! But then a former reality TV star like Pratt comes along, launches unholy attacks on the huddled and unhoused masses, and tells Vanity Fair he had a chat with God, who told him He wants Pratt to be mayor of L.A!!!!! With people like this running for office, how can I retire?!!!!!
R.W. wrote to say: “You say Spencer has never done anything in his life…What credentials do you have? From what I’ve read about you, you are a lousy commie journalist who has never accomplished anything in your life!!”
Just recently, R.W., I replaced a broken toilet tank flush valve and I learned two Willie Nelson songs on the guitar. That’s not nothing.
Peter did not mince words: “Your piece on Pratt is a hit piece filled with bull— . You should go f— yourself before someone takes you out, which is the appropriate response to a s—bag like yourself. So please f— off and drop dead, which is exactly what you deserve.”
Peter, I did drop dead once. Cardiac arrest. While on the other side, I saw God, who told me to snap out of it because He was going to tell Spencer Pratt to run for mayor. Who knew God had a defibrillator?
All of these, by the way, were actual emails, and there were many more just like them. But it’s only fair to note that despite the fulminating knucklehead wing of Pratt’s posse, he’s tapped into a justifiable sense of frustration with City Hall, given homelessness, the Palisades inferno and budget issues that squeeze all manner of basic city services.
That’s why Mayor Karen Bass is paddling furiously, trying to keep her political career afloat. In the latest UC Berkeley-L.A. Times poll, Bass is at 26%, Nithya Raman at 25% and Pratt at 22%. That’s so tight, it appears that no one will get the 50% needed to win outright, and if we get a top-two runoff, it’s not clear who will go to the dance.
So as we close out the primary, with the election on Tuesday, five talking points come to mind.
Which candidate knows the city best?
Los Angeles has 114 distinct neighborhoods spread across 470 square miles (that’s 10 times the size of San Francisco), with an estimated 220 languages spoken. Diversity is a defining characteristic, and roughly half the population is Latino, which makes it a shame there’s no Latino candidate for mayor, especially given the raids and roundups by President Trump.
A mayor doesn’t have to speak six languages and know every corner of the city, but residents want to be seen and heard, and feel like they’re understood and represented.
Raman is well-versed on homelessness policy, and she’s spot-on about the need for greater urgency in problem-solving, but as my colleague Noah Goldberg reported, constituents in her district complain that they haven’t seen enough of her.
As I said, Pratt has wisely targeted municipal failure. But in the realm of outsider candidates with Republican credentials, Rick Caruso, who ran against Bass last time, was comfortable whether he was in the Valley, South L.A. or anywhere in between. And he easily connected with people. Would Pratt be a tourist in his own city?
By virtue of her job the last four years, Bass — who raised a blended Black and Latino family — knows the city best, although her unfavorability rating is a big problem.
What about the other candidates?
In the aforementioned poll, minister and housing activist Rae Huang had 9% and former educational technology businessman Adam Miller had 5%. Virtual unknowns, neither had a legit chance of winning, but they could be spoilers for one of the top three candidates.
I spoke to both, and if you’re undecided, you should read up on them before voting. On Huang’s website, the first words are “Homes are for people, not profit.” Miller wants to bring his success in the business world to City Hall, and when you consider his policy agenda along with his nonprofit work with veterans and homelessness, he’s a better candidate than Pratt.
But he wasn’t on a reality TV show.
Democrats ruined L.A. and California, right?
If only I had a nickel for every time a reader suggested that.
By 101 measures, Los Angeles is one of the great cities of the world and California has built the world’s fourth-largest economy while leading on climate change, so apocalyptic diagnoses are a bit off the mark.
Also, local elections are nonpartisan. You don’t run for mayor as a D or an R.
And yet it’s true that Democrats and their policies and sensibilities rule the day, and they have a lot to answer for in Los Angeles and in California.
But would the same critics suggest that in conservative cities like Fresno and Bakersfield, which have their own homelessness and other problems, Republicans are to blame?
When it comes to housing, poverty, healthcare and streets occupied by people who are addicted or mentally ill, the failures go back decades, touch all levels of government, and cross party lines.
Have I given up on Los Angeles?
When I pointed out that Pratt seemed unaware of these complexities, and of the structural limits of mayoral power, readers suggested he was rising to the challenge while I was giving up on L.A.
Not at all. I care about L.A. enough to hold its leaders to a higher accountability, and to scrutinize posers and pretenders who think they can do a better job.
My advice for the next mayor.
Fix what’s broken, celebrate what works and take responsibility for what doesn’t.
Now let me try one more time:
Spencer, give me a call.
You can’t tell us you had a conversation with God about running for mayor and not share more details.
Did God scold you for referring to the mayor as Karen “Basura,” which means trash in Spanish?
Did He say we should pull out of the ‘28 Olympics, or have any advice on how to fill potholes and fix sidewalks?
If you’re having regular conversations about City Hall with the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, we’re dying to know:
On homelessness, what would Jesus do?
steve.lopez@latimes.com
-
Entertainment1 minute agoDid the outcome of World War II depend on the weather? Separating fact from fiction in ‘Pressure’
-
Politics13 minutes agoCommentary: A Becerra-Steyer race in November? It’s possible
-
Sports21 minutes agoTransgender Jurupa Valley senior AB Hernandez wins state track medal amid muted protest
-
World31 minutes ago
Paris Saint-Germain wins the Champions League after penalty shootout victory against Arsenal
-
News58 minutes ago
Graham Platner’s wife says she’s ‘deeply hurt’ by public revelations of her husband’s extramarital sexts | CNN Politics
-
Los Angeles, Ca2 hours agoMotorcyclist killed by hit-and-run truck driver in Sun Valley
-
Detroit, MI3 hours agoClear skies give Metro Detroit perfect Blue Moon viewing weather
-
Dallas, TX3 hours agoH-E-B files construction permit for Dallas location, next step towards 2028 open