"Trump's case against the BBC is currently scheduled for a trial in February 2027.
A judge who was recently nominated by Donald Trump to serve in Florida's federal court has taken over as judge in the US president's $10bn defamation case against the BBC.Jeffrey Kuntz was nominated as a federal judge by Trump in April and confirmed by a 51-46 majority in the Republican-led Senate last month.He was previously an appeals court judge in Florida and replaces Judge Roy Altman, who had also been nominated by Trump in 2019.Altman was previously overseeing the case in which Trump is suing the BBC over the way its Panorama programme edited a speech he gave outside the Capitol in Washington DC on 6 January 2021.It is one of 17 cases that have been transferred to Kuntz following his appointment to the US District Court for the Southern District of Florida in July.Announcing the nomination in April on his social media platform, Truth Social, Trump praised Kuntz's work in Florida's Fourth District Court of Appeal, saying "Jeffrey has been TOUGH and SMART and delivered strong results for the Sunshine State."Trump's case against the BBC is currently scheduled for a trial in February 2027. The president has requested a jury trial.The broadcaster has previously apologised for editing together two different sections of the speech he gave before the 2021 Capitol riots.But the BBC has asked for the case to be dismissed, arguing that the programme did not meet the legal criteria for defamation and that the Florida court does not have jurisdiction over the corporation because the programme was not available there.As a Florida appeals judge, Kuntz was involved in another defamation case brought by the president.On 12 February 2025, he was one of three judges who ruled in Trump's favour to allow the president to continue a lawsuit against the Pulitzer Prize board after it honoured the New York Times and Washington Post for reporting on purported Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election. The case is ongoing.Kuntz's appointment in April by Trump prompted accusations of a conflict of interest from opponents as it emerged he had been in discussions about a potential federal court appointment at the time of the Pulitzer case.Kuntz said Florida judicial ethics rules had not required him to step aside from the case, and he was only contacted by the White House after he had given his legal opinion.As an appeals judge, Kuntz was also involved in a wide variety of other cases, ranging from the release of information from grand jury proceedings about late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, to whether a survivor of the 2016 Pulse nightclub shooting could sue a security company that trained and employed the shooter.
FILE - A Meta logo is shown on a video screen at LlamaCon 2025, an AI developer conference, in Menlo Park, Calif., April 29, 2025. Jeff Chiu/AP hide caption toggle caption Jeff Chiu/AP A New Mexico court has ordered Instagram and Facebook parent company Meta to pay $567 million to address harms to young people from its platforms in the second phase of a landmark trial. Judge Bryan Biedscheid said in a ruling late Thursday that the bulk of the money — $420 million — will be used for treatment services for young people. The rest will go toward awareness and prevention, screening services and other costs over the next five years. The new penalty is in addition to the $375 million in civil penalties that jurors ordered against Meta in March after determining the company knowingly harmed children's mental health and concealed what it knew about child sexual exploitation on its platforms. In the second phase, prosecutors asked the judge to impose fundamental changes at Meta aimed at reining in addictive features, improving age verification and preventing child sexual exploitation through default privacy settings and closer oversight. The total amount Meta is responsible for — $942 million — is a small fraction of of its annual profit, which was about $60 billion in 2025. Investors seemed to shrug off the New Mexico ruling in after-hours trading Thursday, sending Meta's stock down less than half a percent to $589.44. Still, the ruling is another setback for Meta, which faces an avalanche of lawsuits from thousands of families of children harmed by social media. New Mexico Attorney General Raúl Torrez said it sends an unmistakable message that companies will be held accountable when their product designs knowingly put children at risk. "Today's decision is a victory for every parent who has worried about what social media is doing to their child and every child who deserves to grow up safer online," he said in a statement. Meta vowed to appeal. "We work hard to keep people safe on our platforms and have been transparent about the challenges of identifying and removing bad actors and harmful content," the company said in a statement. "We remain confident in our record of protecting teens online and will continue to defend ourselves against claims that misrepresent the facts." The look of Meta's platforms could change The judge ordered Facebook and Instagram to build banner and informational screens to clearly explain its protection features, best practices and tools to address inappropriate comment, for example, and display them regularly. Those changes and an educational campaign in New Mexico would be subject to review by the state. The court said federal children's privacy laws prevent Meta from applying age-verification tools to children under 13. The Children's Online Privacy Protection Act, or COPPA, means it cannot order Meta to request children to submit personal data or be passively tracked online, even for age verification purposes. The court also noted that ordering verification of children's ages only for Meta and not other social media companies would be "inequitable and unduly injurious" to the company. Instead, the court ordered Meta to continue to improve its age assurance tools in New Mexico, which include using artificial intelligence to determine people's age based on signals such as who their friends are and what types of content they post and consume. Meta must also attempt to develop a dedicated "under-13-years-of-age prediction model" in the next two years. Additionally, Meta should also request proof of age for Instagram and Facebook users in New Mexico it estimates to be under 13. If it determines a user to be under 13, or under 18 but without being able to estimate a specific age, Meta must treat the user as under 13 or under 18 until the user verifies their age. The company must also partner with schools or a child safety organization to create a reporting portal where school staff can fla
Paramount risks $650m quarterly fees if merger delays extend beyond September, as per the merger agreement terms.A coalition of 12 states led by California has prevailed in a recent plea to pause Paramount Skydance’s acquisition of Warner Bros Discovery, the parent company of studios including New Line Cinema and news network CNN, amid allegations that the merger would harm competition.On Monday United States District Judge Araceli Martinez-Olguin, in response to a lawsuit seeking to block the merger that was filed by the states last Monday, gave the states 14 days to argue the merits of the case.Recommended Stories list of 4 itemslist 1 of 4Iranians suffer from power blackouts during war and heatwavelist 2 of 4Andy Burnham’s in-tray: The challenges facing the new UK PMlist 3 of 4Yemen’s Houthis declare naval blockade of Saudi Arabia: What to knowlist 4 of 4Petrol prices climb as US–Iran tensions disrupt marketsend of listIt could take months before the court issues its final ruling. Judge Martinez-Olguin will hold a hearing on the request on August 3.The states argued in their lawsuit, which was filed in federal court in California, that the merger would reduce the amount of content available to consumers and lead to mass layoffs.Under the terms of the merger financing, if the deal is delayed, Paramount would have to pay $650m per quarter, beginning September 30, under what is known as a ticking fee. The media giant would also owe a 25-cent-per-share fee, amounting to roughly $7m per day, according to the company’s merger agreement.The deal has long been in the crosshairs of both Hollywood and Washington amid allegations that the merger would reduce jobs in movie and television production, limit options for consumers and affect the news landscape by bringing CBS News and CNN under one roof.There are concerns internally that Paramount’s Larry Ellison, a close ally of US President Donald Trump, and his son David, the CEO, could bring in changes to CNN similar to what they carried out at CBS. That includes hiring Bari Weiss, a right-wing opinion writer with no previous television experience, to lead one of the US’s premier broadcast news channels.Reports that Weiss could shape the future of CNN if the merger ultimately goes through has reportedly prompted some top talent to consider leaving. Paula Reid is headed to MS Now, and Anderson Cooper has reportedly floated the idea that he would leave the network in the event of a Weiss takeover.Media freedom experts have warned that the merger would hurt access to diverse viewpoints in the news.“A Paramount-Warner Bros merger would set a dangerous precedent in regulatory policy by favoring a media owner based on their willingness to generate news coverage pleasing to the President of the United States,” Rodney Benson, professor at the department of media, culture, and communication at New York University, said in newly published analysis of the impact of the merger on press freedom.“This merger would also significantly increase concentration in ownership of major professional news outlets and social media, effectively reducing consumer choice and increasing the proportion of political news and information closely tied to the government in power.”This was not the only lawsuit filed last week. On Tuesday, the Writers Guild of America also filed a suit to block the merger.The suit alleged that the merger would “eliminate competition in an already consolidated industry, threatening the livelihoods of entertainment workers and the creative diversity of TV and film,” WGA West President Michele Mulroney said.Representatives for Paramount Skydance did not respond to Al Jazeera’s request for comment.On Wall Street, Paramount Skydance’s stock tumbled on news of the pause but quickly rebounded to trade roughly flat by midday. Warner Bros Discovery stock continued to fall following the ruling, down 3.8 percent in midday trading.
Discussion (0)