court of— the algorithm. really the only issue the court of appeal- issue the court of appeal considered of substance is whetherted the first amendment and the court of appeal is found 3—0 that it did not, that espionage is not excused by the first amendment and as a result tiktok really has no legal argument related to the algorithm specifically. the court really didn't reach that. it looked at the corporate structure issue and concluded there was sufficient evidence that tiktok was in essence a brand of ad a branch of the chinese government engaged in espionage and that is as far as the court went. the alleged espionage we should say because both china and tiktok deny those allegations. concrete creatures are urging their followers to follow them on other platforms. what do you think this key case means for the case more broadly? the court of appeals _ the case more broadly? the court of appeals was - the case more broadly? tue: court of appeals was clear the case more broadly? tte: court of appeals was clear that this decision only applied to tiktok and only the evidence of espionage specifically to tiktok o

tiktok�*s only real options are either to as the full court of appeals for the dc circuit to review thehe supreme court. but because this case started at the court of appeals, unusually, they have no appeal of rights, they can only request an appeal, they have to right to an appeal. that's interesting. the algorithm on tiktok, the thing that's made it so famous and so influential, is really the contentious issue, isn't it. can you talk us through the legal issues surrounding the algorithm. so really, the only issue the court of appeal�*s considered of substance is whether or not the ban on tiktok violated the first amendment and the court of appeals found 3—0 that it did not, that the espionage is not excused by the first amendment and as a result tiktok really has no legal argument related to the algorithm specifically. the court really didn't reach that. it looked at the corporate structure issue and concluded there was sufficient evidence that tiktok was, in essence, a brand of ad a branch of the chinese government engaged in espionage and that is as far as the court went. the allege

he's picked up the baton and says that he's intending to take her case directly back to the court of appealeard in the clip that he is explaining his argument there with the court is about the reliability of the lead prosecution expert witness. i should say, we haven't had any response from that witness. we not been able to clarify the claims that mcdonald is making. he's also saying that he has fresh evidence which he planning to bring through another group, the criminal case revision, the organization that looks at past trials and considers whether there may have been a miscarriage ofjustice. 0n whether there may have been a miscarriage ofjustice. on that front mark mcdonald says he is also confident that he has a team of experts working on this, he says he's confident that he will be able to make arguments there as well. how does that fit into the bigger picture? you may recently have heard that cheshire police are continuing to run an investigation into lucy b and have her about potential other crimes for lucy letby for that there's a public inquiry looking at what happened to babies at

yes, so the us court of appeals _ happens next? yes, so the us court of appeals in _ happens next? of appeals in the district of columbia ruled essentially this ban could go ahead. it was being challenged by tiktok and its owner, bytedance, the parent company, under the grounds that it was an infringement of first amendment rights. however, in its ruling, let me read you what they said, the first amendment exists to protect free speech in the united states, here at the government acted solely to protect that freedom from a foreign adversary nation. and to limit that ability to gather data on the people of the united states. you may recall this dates back to donald trump's first time in office, he went into a lengthy battle with tiktok, often railed against it through the form of the idea of tariffs. ultimately, it was under presidentjoe biden that this ruling came into effect. essentially, it gave china's owner, bytedance, untiljanuary owner, bytedance, until january to owner, bytedance, untiljanuary to either sell the company or divest it and as things currently stand, that will g

opinion i believe it is, because i know it's one of the issues that was briefed to the georgia court of appealse d.a. made statements outside of court that the trial judge found were, quote, legally improper. for example, she went in front of a church while this case was pending. and she said, essentially the reason these defendants have brought these motions, standard legal motions is because they're playing the race card. and the defendants, donald trump and other defense lawyers argued that that violated the responsibilities and ethics of a prosecutor and the trial judge oddly said those statements that fani willis made out of court were, quote, legally improper. and then he did nothing about it. he said, essentially, too bad there's no remedy. so still going through this court of appeals opinion, i'm interested to see if they also opine on that as well. >> yeah. and ellie, i mean, we should remind our viewers this is the case during which donald trump submitted himself to the fulton county jail for a mug shot. i mean, that infamous mug shot that is that is going to be remembered by so many

of these proceedings. this can be appealed to the georgia supreme court. it is expected to be appealed to the georgia supreme court, but this is a really decisive order against fani willis being able to continue this case. >> katherine, what's your reaction? what do you make of this ruling? >> it's not shocking. it was shock ing when we found out there was this relationship and you just said it was an unforced error, but usually appellate courts defer to the lower court, the trial judge who fashioned this. he said nathan wade, the man she was having an affair with, had to leave so the office could stay, and this court has said, nope. they didn't -- this court said that judge mavee did not preach that her decision-making wasn't just the indictment. it was who to charge, how to charge it, and that's at the time, when this alleged romantic relationship was going on, and they said, that also was one of the reasons why they think it's more than an appearance of impropriety. it's a conflict of interest, and not just her, the entire office is disqualified. so this

of her age, has been granted bail and ordered to appear at leicester crown court in february. a lawyer representing the child serial killer lucy letby says he is applying directly to the court of appealis based around the reliability of the evidence of the prosecution's lead expert witness. our special correspondent judith moritzjoins us from central london. explain what this means then, what is happening?— is happening? well, this is a new development _ is happening? well, this is a new development in _ is happening? well, this is a new development in lucy _ is happening? well, this is a new development in lucy letby's - is happening? well, this is a new development in lucy letby's case is happening? well, this is a new - development in lucy letby's case and it has been made public by her new defence lawyer, who has taken over from the team that represented her during her trials and appeals, now lucy letby has twice been denied permission by the court of appeal for his case to be heard there, and mr mcdonald has said he is intending to go directly back to the court again. normally he would go to another organisation, the criminal cases review commission, for case to be dealt with bu

characterized it well, the clip you ran, he was saying it's unprecedented for a circuit judge of a court of appeals'm not aware of any court of appeals judge who has retired after the president that the judge presumably wish had won the election did not he's referring to two district judges and that's rare. it's not unprecedented. in fact, mcconnell referred to two. had he had done so earlier. he said a republican and a democrat. it was actually two republican appointees in 2009, 2004. so it doesn't happen very often at all. judges sometimes withdraw their retirement plans, not necessarily after an election, but they just withdraw them when it when it appears to them that the person nominated to replace them is not someone to their liking. there's a couple of examples of that in past ten years or so, but by and large, once they say they're going to leave they they stick to it have these two gentlemen, these two judges said what motivated them to not retire i'm aware that the judge in ohio, marbley said something rather obliquely. i mean, he he once he saw, i think he said once he saw the election,

but the cause of death that was before the court of appeal is different now, according to doctor evanse—looked by the court of appeal. doctor evans has not commented on today's announcement, though the court has previously rejected letby�*s past arguments that his evidence was flawed. but letby�*s lawyers say they are fighting on new fronts and they say they have new evidence relating to how two of the babies died. they allege that one of them, known as baby 0, was killed by a doctor who made a mistake during resuscitation. letby�*s lawyers say they have teams of experts who are working on her case in support of her bid for freedom. however, at the same time, the police are continuing to investigate the former nurse over possible further crimes. she was recently interviewed by detectives about the deaths and near deaths of more babies who were in her care and a public inquiry into the case is still under way and isn't questioning the matter of letby�*s guilt. it is expected to report back next autumn. judith moritz, bbc news. three people have been killed in a school shooting in madiso

circuit court of appeals. and remember, the d.c. rcuit court of appeals again denied a stay of their ruling. and so, again, i just think that we want tiktok u.s.a. to survive. i think that a lot of people enjoy the content on tiktok. but now it's time for bytedance, which is controlled by the ccp, the chinese communist party, to divest itself of tiktok and allow it to continue to thrive. >> so this is a little confusing when we talk about bytedance and we talk about tiktok and we talk about stays, and this is and that's what happens on january 19th, if nothing changes, if no court steps in to shift anything, if no one sells anything, what happens on january 19th? >> well, right now millions of people have tiktok on their phones. but apple and google, for instance, will no longer be able to distribute tiktok. for instance. they'll not be able to give updates if tiktok. all that being said, tiktok might still be sold by bytedance even after january 19th, in which case they would then be able to be distributed again. but the main point

>> georgia court of appeals. ecial prosecutor who handled the case. there has been a lot of litigation back and forth over the personal relationship, that romantic relationship between the two. now, the court of appeals is saying not only should fani willis be disqualified, but also her entire office because there are only a handful of offices that can take on this case. then she is likely to take it to the georgia supreme court but it is likely a very conservative bench and it is an uphill battle to reverse this rolling. >> this has broadened the entire team. >> entire team. the entire fulton county prosecutor's office has been disqualified from pursuing these charges. but the underlying case is still intact. but the fulton county d.a. can -- in her office -- can no longer bring these charges. >> as i consider everything we are talking about with respect to fani willis's office being disqualified, to me the biggest take a and the biggest loss here is this has nothing to do with why we were actually here. and it d

now lucy letby has twice been denied permission by the court of appeal for her case to be heard therek to the court again. normally he would go to another organisation, the criminal cases review commission, for a case to be dealt with. but he says he is going to bring up the issue again at the court of appeal of the reliability of the prosecution's lead expert witness, doctor dewi evans, on the basis, he says, that doctor evans has changed his view relating to three of the babies in the case. we haven't, by the way, had any response from doctor evans on those claims today. separately, lucy letby�*s defence team are also going to the criminal cases review commission. they say they have fresh evidence to present there relating to two babies at the moment, one of whom, baby 0, they're alleging rather than having been murdered, they say may well have died as a result of a mistake made by a doctor at the countess of chester hospital. now, the hospital themselves have not commented on that claim either. all of this together is going to be brought by letby�*s new defence team. meanwhile, che

and the court of appeals, the trump team, appealed that. then the court of appeals said, look, you can't sort of halfway fix this problem. you can't put the genie back in the bottle just by getting rid of one of the genies. you know, you've got to you've got a situation where the whole case is being viewed through the lens of this perceived, and at least a possible conflict of interest. and we just think that it's too big of a mess to move forward. one thing most judges will agree on is that there should be public confidence in the judicial system and in the outcomes of cases. and so this appeals court said, look, we're going to pause this thing. um, they set the case for oral argument, actually. and then that was set right after the election. then they removed the case from the oral argument calendar. that is, the court of appeals took the case off the calendar. my guess is at that point, the three judges that have been selected to be on the panel to make the decision had already sort of reached a majority consensus. and we see that in the

georgia's court of appeals has just disqualified her from prosecuting the 2020 election case against donald trump and his co-defendants. they are citing conflict of interest. well, no kidding. the court began looking into whether willis should continue the case after that romantic relationship with the ex-prosecutor, nathan wade came to light. the court said this. while we recognize that an appearance of impropriety is not enough to support disqualify indication, this is the rare case in which disqualification is mandated and no other thing can -- she put in there he was making more than anyone else on the staff and his resume didn't match. it will now be up to the prosecuting attorney's counsel of georgia to find another prosecutor to take over the case. that process could be delayed if fani willis decides to appeal to the state supreme court and tries to get back on the case. president-elect trump told fox moments ago quote, whole case has been a disgrace to justice and that should not be allowed to go any further. phil holloway, former assistant district attorney and former georgia

court even take her case in georgia? >> that's a good question, bill. i think what will happen here along the lines of possible appeals and so on is it looks likely, because of that presidential immunity decision by the supreme court, that any kind of state prosecution of president trump would have to be suspended -- at least suspended, if not dropped. you see that going on right now up in new york city with the case being heard by judge merchan. so even if they could get past immunity, they would still have to suspend it while president trump was in office. furthermore, you would have to go back and then scrub the whole indictment. scrub everything the grand jury did and say you have to eliminate anything that used official actions by president trump, any evidence that came in from white house officials, anything the president was doing in the oval office. they might actually fatally handicap this prosecution and require the whole thing to be dismissed. >> dana: interesting, too. she had this novel way of trying to get at him through rico. was that a mistake as well in addition to her personal behavior is what they a

70 sales so this more spherically the title not in any way biting. >> okay thank you. >> the court of appeals there applyal to you circuit with your understanding of our circuit came from and how enemy you got he is a long time ago and to be fair to the fourth circuit, they did say in the decision, talking about their did say empler would have to put clear and improve later they said, he met not the evidence that we are just meant that you he averted the employer but it's just the idce and they just never deviated from an been asked twice to overall it. >> will be relied only on the tenth circuit opinion on the cases. >> corct >> yes. >> just tenth circuit. >> and again, i don't think they've ever articulated a role in the working they only applied on the other side ta release policy basis for it the only other advantage of the edence does the districtourt said the connection of hearing is a lot toe said and obviously the district court made its own independent decision bute don't there's anything that could be aaid were nine members the factfinder to include the evidence wnd not satisfied. >

on to say president trump respectfully submits that upon reaching this decision, this court court of appealshould dismiss his appeal for lack of jurisdiction with directions to the trial court to immediately dismiss the indictment against the president. this investigation, of course, began with that infamous phone call from president trump to our secretary of state, brad raffensperger, in which he asked him to find more votes. there was also the fake elector scheme, where they tried to subvert the electoral college and say that trump won the state in 2020 when he lost, and of course, the illegal accessing of voting data in rural coffee county. but now, phil, with this filing, the fate of this case is unknown as the attorney here for the the president elect asking the trial court and the court of appeals to dismiss this case entirely. >> phil. nick valencia with the breaking news. thank you so much. still ahead, a stowaway who snuck through security and onto a delta flight to paris will finally land back in the u.s. to face consequences. the plane is expected to land at jfk in new york in les

court of appeals. want to make it clear, this is the district of columbia system and their court of appeals. the judges before us today are all nonpartisan. in fact, two of them were previously nominated by president trump. it gives you an idea how long they have been waiting. they are not interpreting federal law. they're overseeing local, criminal, and civil cases, just like judges in our state and local courts, as i said. so i just want to be really cl clear, our colleagues are going to delay these judges, they are going to make it even more difficult for the people of d.c. to deal with criminal justice issues and with their civil litigation. so i really hope given the fact that we're not talking about federal judges, we will be able to proceed with these nominations and support them. and with that, madam president, i ask unanimous consent that as if in executive session, the senate proceed to consideration of the following nomination -- ken kenechukwu onyemaechi okocha to be an associate judge of t

. >> t court of appeals applied its own circuit precedent. what is your understanding of where that came from? >> it rose a long time ago. to be fair, the 10th circuit did say inhe decision who had the burden but itaithe employer would have to but clear proof forward. later the 10th circuit sd at we meant by that was not fair and convincing evidence. we just meant the burden is on the employer but it is just a preponderance of the evidence and the fourth circuit never deviated from it. th have been asked twice to erruled it and they have declined twice. >> it relied only on the 10th circuit opinion? >> correct. just the 10th circuit i don't think the fourth circuit has ever articulated a rule. it is noteworthy that they only applie it, they are dog in the overtime case which seems the least policy-based. the hething i want to say is the district couaid just in the connection of the hearing, there was a lot to be set on the liability question. the district court is going to ke its own independent decision on remand. we don'think there is anythi

willis, fighting back on the decision, filing a notice to the georgia court of appeals to ask the statepreme court to review the ruling. joining us in our fifth seat, trial attorney dante mills. dante, was this the right choice? the only choice, perhaps? >> no, i never thought i would say this because the legal industry, the legal industry is very important to me. but the cancel culture has made it into the legal industry. i have a lot of celebrity clients, and they're concerned that if somebody brings an allegation, they may lose business. whether that allegation is true or not. here in the legal field, a defendant said fani willis did something wrong. it was determined she didn't. but now she's disqualified anyway. and that's a problem because now if defendants bring up allegations just and make them up, does that disqualify the prosecutors from going after them? and if we follow this specific case through, we know that now it's going to be difficult to find a prosecutor to move forward with this case. >> isn't it also true that while maybe to the letter of the law, she didn't do anyt

the lawsuit has gotten struck down -- we have lost at the district court and court of appeals level. is one of those cases best served by going to the u.s. supreme court. we see school districts in other states pass laws or rules that compel students to lie or violate their own viewpoints and basically violate their first amendment rights. the supreme court is going to have to weigh in on this. i was grateful to see the biden administration rescind another title ix policy that would have compelled schools to force boys into girls bathrooms and showers. i'm glad we got that rescinded based on the comment letters we wrote. now we have to go to the legal battleground to fight these types of policies from being implemented in school districts around the country so they don't happen here in south carolina. >> julie: it's crazy we've had the conversation allowing biological boys into girls's bathrooms. it is ridiculous and why i don't send my kids to public schools. i don't want a man walking in on my daughter using the toilet. i want to ask you about ohio being the co-leader on this brief

. >> the court of appeals here applied its own circuit president to me what is your understanding of where that circuit precedent came from, where itare? >> it arose the long time ago, relying on a 10th circuit predt. to be fair, the fifth circuit did y that decision, it was talking about o had the burden, but did say, the employer would have to put eaand permanent proof forward and later, the 10th circuit idwhat we meant by that is not cleaand convincing evidence. you are not supposedto take us literally, we just met, th burden is on the employer, but it is just a preponderance of idence and the fourth circuit never deviated from it. they have been asked twice, overleit, and they declined twice to overrule it. >> it relied only on the 10th circuit's opinion, not one our cases? >> correct. if the 10th circuit. again, we trieani don't think the fourth circuit ha ever articulated a rule. it is sowh noteworthy that they have only applied it, or they are doing it in the overtime case too, which seems the let licy basis for it. the only other thg i want to say on the preponderance of evid

new sales, so this is more atmospherically inconsistent with their titl t in any way -- >> the court of appeals applied its own circuit precedent. what is your understanding where that circuit precedent came from? hoit arose? >> it ro long time ago, relying on the 10th circt precedent to the fourth circuit, the 10th circt d say in that decision it was talking about who had the burden, but it did say they would have to put clear and affirmivproof forward. later, the 10th circuit said what we met s not clear and convincing evidence. yowere not supposed to take this literally. we justmet you have the burden on the employer, but it is just the preponderance of the evidence. e fourth circuit never deviated a bit. they ve been asked twice to overrule it and they have declined twice to overrule it. >> if they reedonly on the 10th circuit opinion, not on our cases -- >> correct. >> just the 10th circuit. again, donot think the fourth circuit has ever ticulated a rule. it is somewhat noteworthy that theyha only applied it are doing it in the overtime case, which seems the least policy- based for it. the

stuart: georgia court of appeals disqualified district attorney fani will us for prosecuting donald trump case. they've not thrown out trump's indictment completely, they have no authority to proceed. chalk up another legal been for trump. on the markets, gains are moderating. it is up but not much, one hundred 40 points higher. the nasdaq composite up 60 points. it had been up that way. back to the amazon strike. >> and behind me trying to get as many trucks. and rent the trucks for making deliveries, and getting more of these trucks going. the protesters have been resisting and blocking trucks, sometimes in the street, we see some of that video, there been to arrests, and blocking and disorderly conduct. earlier this morning, another arrest, a driver pulling out, got to the road and stopped his truck and refused to move. he was also arrested. what these workers are looking for is to be recognized, looking for better pay and better benefits and recognized as part of teamsters, they are not doing that. we are close to the christmas season. there are concerns from viewers, this should not

they have ten days to go to the appeal court, of course. i the appeal court, of course. will be very quickly because it is concerning rape, so they have ten days to go to the appeal court. also the prosecutor has ten days to go to the court. i know that you have been following this case yourself, you specialise in women victims of domestic violence. what changes do you feel this case could bring to french society? what are your hopes? mt; could bring to french society? what are your hopes? my first ho -e is what are your hopes? my first hepe is that. _ what are your hopes? my first hope is that, you _ what are your hopes? my first hope is that, you know, - hope is that, you know, everything begins when the victim goes to the police station to file a complaint, everything begins at this time, and i hope that now the justice will not say, well, i am not sure what she is saying is real or not real. we have to believe the victims. when the victim goes to the police station to file a complaint it means that what she will say is real, it is serious. so i hope that now every fil

appealing. they will try to get the supreme court to actually reverse this or decide differently than the court of appeals did. what's most likely going to happen is the case will go to the prosecuting attorney's counsel in atlanta and it would be the ones that decided whether or not they were going to prosecute this. we've been asking for a neutral and detached prosecutor to look at this case and i've always thought that once we had that they would say no. this is not a case we're good to prosecute and i still think that >> trace: public perception has played a big part in this case and the lead counsel for president trump said the following quoting today as the court rightfully noted, only the remedy of disqualification will suffice to restore public confidence. this decision puts an end to a politically motivated persecution of the next president of the united states. i'm wondering if he's right. do you believe that it does restore some public confidence here? >> i get does but i think what ms. willis does is also good to be important. it's unfortunate that she didn't take background originally

i think that's what the court of appeals said. one of those things that you know it when you see it. it's the appearance of impropriety. it's so great that it had to be enough to kick them off the case. i think it's really -- it's clear, you know, how fani willis has dug in from the beginning. she started this. she could have done the right thing early on, whenever we brought this to everyone's attention and said hey, let's have a new central prosecutor handle this case. let's have someone else look at it. i think she was terrified because her case is so weak. she didn't want to have someone look at it. >> steve: can you really thank her for undoing this. here's the thing. >> lawrence: she not even trump's lawyer. >> steve: right. she wasn't. she was representing one of the other people in the georgia election interference case turns out that person was friends with nathan wade, text messages between the two of them that she brought forward and it's like, wait a minute, that disqualifies fani willis and, obviously, as of yesterday

commission, which investigates alleged miscarriages ofjustice, to apply for it to be sent back to the court of appeal nato headquarters in brussels and antony blinken, the us secretary of state is there. he is shortly to emerge onto that stage where the secretary general of nato, mark rutter. we will take a listen and look at what is going on there as soon as he comes to there as soon as he comes to the stage. let's go back to what is going on in parliament today. it is prime minister's questions injust over today. it is prime minister's questions in just over five minutes. ben wright, ourschool corresponded is with us. to tell us what we have got in store. . , ., store. later this afternoon, the conservatives - store. later this afternoon, the conservatives have - store. later this afternoon, the conservatives have put| store. later this afternoon, - the conservatives have put down or holding an opposition day debate on that very contentious question that flowed from the budget, the government was my decision to put 20% inheritance tax on farms worth over £1 million. there was a massive process we s

some significant number but not a huge number get resolved at the court of appeals. almost no cases get resolved by the supreme court. that can't minimize the importance of the supreme court. every case they hear is a big case. that's why it feels they have such a big outcome, but one of the reasons why, you know, in the voting rights election where i litigate regularly, why you see us continuing to have so much success is because when you look at the composition of the bench that exists right now, it is not a bad composition. a lot of that is due to joe biden. joe biden has appointed -- will have appointed before he left and confirm more judges than donald trump. when you combine those judges appointed by democratic presidents versus republican presidents it's about 57, 58% of the total federal judiciary will have been appointed by democrats. and that is in the world in which we are entering where donald trump controls the executive branch with an iron first, the republicans in congress are just lap dogs and will do whatever he want. go find whatever test there is fo

of them. and we lost in the district court because we had no way of knowing what the basis was and so we went to the court of appeals and on the panel was a quite conservative judge who had been in the office of legislative affairs. very conservative person. but he was also a very fair person and he understood kind of what was right and what was wrong and we had this -- ron argued the case and we had this argument and he kept saying, i don't understand what's going on here? what's happening? how am i supposed to be able to do this? so he wrote an opinion where which he created whereas come to be known as the vaughn index. in which the rule has come down and he just made this up, but it was a perfectly sensible rule to make up. which he said, if you're going to claim an exemption, you have to tell us which part of which documents are exemption and on what basis, including factual information. that changed the balance of power in the litigation process. it made it possible to be able to take the de novo requirement and be able to put it into effect so the district judges would have something to go on. all these years

commission, which investigates alleged miscarriages ofjustice, to apply for it to be sent back to the court of appealnti—government protests continued for a sixth night in georgia after the country's constitutional court rejected an appeal from the opposition to overturn the result of 0ctober�*s election. police fired water cannon at demonstrators who are angry about the government being too authoritarian and its announcement that it plans to delay its talks to join the eu until 2028. earlier i spoke to guram imnadze, director of the human rights group socialjustice center on his reaction to the protests. the first thing we have to mention about these protests is these protests are politically driven. i would say this is a grassroots protest, organised by people themselves and that's why it is not easy for the government and police institutions to deal with this kind of protest because self organisation is quite strong in this regard, and it's not easy to presume or deal with these kind of protests effectively. what we have seen is that the government has systematically manipulated elections and we c

circuit court of appeals was very clear it's time for bytedance to divest tiktok and it's time for bytedanceith this particular ruling that the d.c. circuit court of appeals made but they failed and not as well previous time to sell tiktok. their national security law in china that require bytedance which controls tiktok to provide all user data to the chinese communist party upon its request. >> back to you. maria: that was the key what you heard him say in terms of the rules in china. you cannot rollover the place but china has its rules and part of the national security rule in china are such that it can demand all the data from tiktok or any other company that it once to be sent to the ccp, that's really where the national security threat comes in even though were talking 170 million users of tiktok, the u.s. company may want to acquire there are a lot of people that want to acquire this company. >> 70s goodbye the fact that chinese get the data it is bad for the kids and the idea that the chinese calling censorship is absurd they don't allow this version of tiktok in china it's absurd t

circuit court of appeals was very clear, it's time for bytedance to divest tiktok, and it's time for to stay this particular ruling that the d.c. circuit court of appeals made, but they failed in that as well. and so, again, it's time to sell tiktok. maria: tell me about tiktok and what it's doing. how is it a threat? >> well, basically what's going on is this: there are national security laws in china that require bytedance, which controls tiktok, to provide all user data to the chinese communist party upon its request. not only that, but basically a chinese communist party cell is embedded at the uppermost levels of bytedance to make sure that it does the ccp's bidding. maria: unbelievable. >> and so given that national security threat and the access to data, everyone believes that this particular law was needed, and that's why it was passed. maria: more congressman, thank you so much. we so appreciate your time. ofinki i'll see you tomorrow on. ofinki i'll see you tomorrow on. "morningings wit fox -- wait, can we afford a safari? great question. like everything, it takes a little p

they were not successful at the trial level, but here the court of appeals says based on just the appearance of impropriety, usually that's not enough. but here what this romantic relationship did to sort of taint public perception of the case, that is enough. and again, this is rare that this would be how they would go on something that was just the appearance that something wasn't off. but they said, look, the only way to really restore public trust in this case is for her and her office to be removed from the case. so the case itself was not dismissed. but after this opinion, they would have to find a new prosecutor, a new office that would want to take on this case. now, it's not just president elect trump. there are other co-defendants attached to this case. incredibly complicated because it's a rico prosecution. the way they brought this case, there are always questions about whether it would even make it to trial based on the complexities. but look, trump, throughout his entire life, really, he's been trying to undermine trust in the criminal justice system, and especially when it com

families saying this has saved lives is what this kind of medical treatment has provided their family though the lower court just below this, the appeals court ruled in favor of the state. and i know you know this, but for everyone out there and in doing so um, said that the law was a reasonable legislative move. and here is a little bit of what was said in that decision. the unsettled developing, in truth, still experimental nature of treatments in this area surely permits more than one policy approach judge sutton wrote in the majority opinion. and the constitution does not favor one over the other. how do you argue against that today well this is not just regulation of medical care. >> this is the state drawing a line based on sex and so what's going on here is there's 50 years of precedent from the united states supreme court that says that when the government treats people differently based on whether you're male or female the government has to have a very good reason for doing that. that's the right standard that the lower court should have applied. it's it's not the standard that the court of appeals applied and the whole legal

. >> a federal court of appeals has overturned the rape conviction of former 40 niner dana stubblefield. stubblefield was sentenced to 15 years to life in prison after a jury found him guilty of raping a woman who was interviewing for a babysitting job. this was in 2015, the woman said. stubblefield held her prisoner, threatening her with a handgun. during the trial, prosecutors said police never searched for the gun in stubblefield's home because he was a famous black man. the appeals court found that statement was racially discriminatory and violated the racial justice act. well, hundreds of new laws go into effect in california just a few days on january 1st. abc seven news anchor karina nova runs through some of them. >> artificial intelligence is becoming a bigger part of our lives, but not all of it in a positive way. several new laws offer some protection against abuse. it's now a crime to create and post a sexually explicit image or video of a real person that was created using artificial intelligence, but made to look real. social media platforms now have to provide mechanisms

of witnesses testified. and they noted that trial court did, that. there was the appearance of a conflict of interest. now, the significance of that, the court of appeals now says, is that a conflict, an appearance alone is, uh, gives you the ability to disqualify. that's just not the law. and the dissent, right, has said that's the judge who disagreed with the majority. right has said that in 45 years there has not been and it's not been the law that because of the appearance of impropriety, that you disqualify someone that has to be an actual conflict of interest, not the appearance. that's number one. number two, very briefly, is usually an appellate court sits in judgment to decide whether the trial court abused its discretion. that means that they exercised judgment. that was just so unreasonable as to be overturned. and this court basically said yes. generally speaking, you don't unless you're a trial court, unless there's an egregious error made by the lower court with respect to discretion. that's a judgment, a legal judgment overrule. so i think on those two bases, i think it's a questionable decision. and, you know, she's right. that is fani

least 15 people were injured on the sixth consecutive night of anti—government protests, after the country's constitutional court rejected an appealnment being too authoritarian and its announcement that it plans to delay its talks to join the eu until 2028. meanwhile, the georgian rights ombudsman has accused the police of using torture on some of the 300 people detained since thursday. levan ioseliani believed the police are using intentional, severe violence for the purpose of punishment. earlier i spoke with guro. this is grassroots _ earlier i spoke with guro. this is grassroots protest - earlier i spoke with guro. try 3 is grassroots protest organised by people. that is why it is not easy for the government to deal with this kind of protest because organisations are quite strong in this regard and it is not easy to presume or deal with this kind of protest effectively. what you have seen is the government systematically manipulating elections and we can say that these elections were parliamentary elections were systematically rigged. the government proceeded to openly invoke a new process which is democratic up siding of geo

. >> what you said is what his lawyers, karyn friedman say, the new york state court of appeals 12 yearsthat a gang that terrorizes, the way we think of terrorism, a neighborhood, that you can't charge this. so a little girl was murdered, a young man was paralyzed, new york state court of appeals says no. this was intended for, and they cited the state legislature, 9/11, the oklahoma city bombing, the 1993 bombing, the students who were shot at and one was murdered on the brooklyn bridge. and appellate courts since have also said that, no, it's really not intended for anything other than those very significant. i'll be interested to see what evidence because he will be arraigned and we will know more. >> i guess the reason i'm so piqued by this is that i wonder if it's a slippery slope when you're attaching a terrorism charge to individual acts, and yes, we're going to get more information, and maybe more details on what he was writing, and what he intended to incite here, but i wonder -- there's a little bit of discomfort i have with the idea of charging this one person with an act of t

court of appeals ruled against blocking this ban and said it would move forward with the ruling. this coincides with donald trump also meeting on monday with the ceo of tiktok, and they had this meeting where trump said that tiktok hold as close place in his heart. now this is something of an about turn for the president-elect. who, in his first term moved also to block the social media app. but it's certainly an acknowledgement of the popularity of the app and particularly among younger voters with whom he saw great gains in the last election. this timing is one day before trump's inauguration on the 20th. we'll be waiting to see whether he can make any changes there and what will be coming down the pike for tiktok. this hugely popular app. >> okay, thank you, karen. >>> still to come, find out when you can check in, when it comes to the third season of the white lotus, and it's time to find the second part of wicked. to find e second part of wicked. citrusy. ahhhhhhhh! (crash) touchdown! (♪♪) mountaaaain dew! (♪♪) skincare can start in the laundry room. that's why i always recom

court of appeals for the d.c.y to uphold a law forcing tiktok's chinese parent company to divest ownership. the court backing congress and the justice department inciting national security and data collection concerns about the app. tiktok owner bytedance has until january 19th of next year to divest or face a possible u.s. ban. tiktok will likely challenge this decision in the supreme court, and in a statement says in part that a ban will silence its users. >>> the jobs market rebounded, according to new numbers from the labor department today, 227,000 skrobs 227,000 jobs were added in november. that's better than expected after a weak report in october because of the hurricanes and also the boeing strike. the unemployment rate is up slightly at 4.2%. nbc news senior business correspondent christine romans joins us now. thanks for being with us. >> hi, andrea. >> what do these numbers show, and what does it tell you about the fed's decision? >> i mean, as you said, you know, we had that really weak reading in oct

of use among minors. the case was picked up bth supreme court after the u.s. court of appealsn the ruled fifth circuit against the fda, arguing that the agency unlawfully imposed new standards on the cpaes. the oral argument is one hour and 20

court of appeals, a block south of market street. congresswoman pelosi will be there to unveil new signage. she has represent california's 11th cgresonal district for 37 years, and was the first woman elected to serve as speaker of the house. california's largest class of women lawmakers will be taking the oath of office tomorrow in sacramento. according to the nonprofit close the gap, california. a record high of 59 women will serve in the next session. that's 49% of the state legislature. and double the number of women who served just seven years ago. the center for american women and politics says female state legislators make up about one third of seats nationwide. >> black friday shoppers spent a record $10.8 billion online. adobe analytics reports this is more than a 10% increase from last year's $9.8 billion spent online. they say about 55% of this year's online shoppers used their mobile devices, which is a 12% increase from last year. some of the top selling products were skincare, bedding, espresso machine, speakers and hea

. >>> a federal court of appeals upheld a $5 million judgment in a civil sexual abuse case against president-elect donald trump. columnist e. jean carroll accused him of viewing her in a department store dressing room in the 1990s and defaming her with comments. trump denies the case and calls it a hoax. >>> meanwhile president-elect donald trump is throwing full support behind house speaker mike johnson. on social media trump called him a hard working religious man who will deliver for america. johnson says he's ready to push trump's agenda, but with the republican party's slim majority friday's house speaker vote is expected to be a tight race. >>> a fundraising effort is underway to help the santa cruz businesses impacted from last week's wharf collapse. the community foundation launched a disaster fund to help the 17 shops and restaurants that are still closed with hopes of reopening after the inspections are complete, but there's no timetable when that might happen. the foundation now welcomes donations and is urging people to help businesses by purchasing items online. >>> the future of the

commission, which investigates alleged miscarriages ofjustice, to apply for it to be sent back to the court of appealwyers for president— elect donald trump have asked a new yorkjudge to completely dismiss the criminal case in which he was convicted of falsifying business records — to cover up payments to the adult film star, stormy daniels. our north america correspondent david willis has the details. donald trump was found guilty in may of falsifying business records in order to cover up a payment of $130,000 to the porn star stormy daniels. he was the first us president, former or current, to be convicted of a criminal offence. but following his re—election last month, sentencing in that case was postponed. now the district attorney, the prosecution, is calling for sentencing to be postponed until mr trump has served his second term in office. in other words, for another four years. but mr trump's lawyers want the case to be dismissed altogether. and in a motion to the court, they cited the decision by presidentjoe biden to pardon his son hunter as evidence that the criminaljustice system in this

court do here? what are the scope of possibilities? there? >> yeah, this is such a huge, high stakes legal battle. so tiktok just lost last week in the court of appeals. the court of appeals said, yes, this law does involve your first amendment rights and the rights of your 170 million users. but there's a compelling national security interest. now the supreme court has to make the next move. either they are going to say, yes, we will pause this, meaning the whole law does not go into effect until the whole case is briefed before the supreme court, or they will refuse to pause it. and if they refuse to pause it, caitlin, then this law goes into effect on january 19th of 2025, with enormous consequences for this huge social media company. >> yeah, and a lot of upset younger users, probably. elie honig, thank you for breaking that all down for us, and we'll keep track of that also tonight here in washington, paris hilton is bringing her star power here to get a bill that has been years in the making across the finish line before it's too late. the reality star turned entrepreneur was back on capitol hill, urging the house of representatives to pass a b