halt

Anyone who has spent any time in the digital agora will know the chilling feeling of seeing some supposedly secret thing about yourself suddenly reflected in a targeted advertisement. In a new Silicon Valley soap, “The Audacity,” Duncan (Billy Magnussen) founds a company called PINATA, for Privacy Is Not a Thing Anymore, which will allow subscribers to snoop at a deep level on just about anyone in the world; the war against the date eaters, the name suggests, is long since lost, and is none of your business, anyway.

Created by Jonathan Glatzer who has written for “Succession” and “Better Call Saul,” the series premieres Sunday on AMC, the network of “Breaking Bad,” “Mad Men” and an earlier tech-related series, “Halt and Catch Fire,” about the rise of the personal computer — shows that focus on difficult, sometimes amoral characters whose shenanigans might change the world, not necessarily for the better. “The Audacity,” though well made enough, is not in their league.

Duncan made his fortune as a co-founder of a community app something along the lines of Facebook (which, along with Mark Zuckerberg, doesn’t exist in this silicon reality — “If only,” do I hear you sigh? Or was that me?) Now he’s trying to sell his information-gathering startup to “Cupertino” (as in the home of Apple), “the most important tech company to ever exist,” and leaking rumors he imagines will be to his advantage. Duncan is not himself a creator, or particularly smart — he thinks it’s “Schroeder’s Cat,” for example — but does have a gift for selling; his “genius” late partner, Hamish — a suicide — did the real work. Now a new Hamish enters his life in the form of Harper (Jess McLeod, whose blonde bob may remind viewers of the brilliant coder played by Mackenzie Davis on “Halt and Catch Fire”) the creator of the “algo” mentioned above.

Despite his riches, Duncan is unhappy enough to be a patient of the series’ other main character, therapist JoAnne (Sarah Goldberg). (He also has an “ayahuasca guy.”) Most prominent among her other clients is Carl (Zach Galifianakis), a semi-retired industry legend who made his money from a spam platform and whom Duncan will spend much of this eight-episode season attempting to impress. “People act like we took something as if we didn’t build everything they touch,” Carl will complain to JoAnne. “Where’s our parade? All I see are pitchforks and ingratitude.”

Sarah Goldberg plays Joanne, therapist to Duncan and Carl (Zach Galifianakis) in “The Audacity.”

(Ed Araquel/AMC)

JoAnne conducts her business from her rented home, as does her child psychiatrist (second) husband, Gary (Paul Adelstein), one of the few figures in this roundelay you will be given no reason to dislike. (It’s an old house, to contrast it with the modernist leviathans inhabited by the overly moneyed class.) Sharing the place is her weedy, newly arrived 15-year-old son, Orson (Everett Blunck), sent reluctantly from Baltimore, where his father is being treated for cancer. Orson has embarrassing gastric issues and watches alpha-male videos in the basement, where he also practices the bassoon. (That he’s working on “The Sorcerer’s Apprentice,” in its way a story of runaway tech, might have some thematic meaning, though it does also have a killer bassoon part.)

Something Duncan says in a session with JoAnne leads her to unload some stock, like Martha Stewart in 2004, and Duncan, working this out, blackmails her into passing on inside information from her clients to him. “You think you know everything because you have information, but information is not insight,” says JoAnne, who has insight to spare, making herself even more valuable to Duncan, whose pronouncements are more in the line of “Cheaters never lose, and losers, they never cheat” and “Empathetic is just pathetic with a prefix — I am an apex predator.”

Anushka (Meaghan Rath), a power player who works for Duncan, is also a toothless director of ethical innovation on the board at Cupertino. She’s married to Martin (Simon Helberg), who is working on something he calls Alexander, or Xander — he would say “someone,” probably — “an intelligent entity, more of an autonomous companion, for alienated teens based on personal data ecosystems.”

He has less time for his own alienated teen, Tess (Thailey Roberge) — “Dad, eyes on me,” she says, as the family sits at a comically long dinner table, the parents looking at their phones — who has been expressing herself through low-level vandalism and thievery. “I hear you’re klepto now,” says Jamison (Ava Marie Telek), the daughter of Duncan and Lili (Judy Punch), whose body mass is under constant review by her mother. Seemingly, all the children of the Valley are being shuttled by their parents toward Stanford, where they will matriculate by hook or by crook.

Though Lili has been configured as shallow and spoiled, Punch (a great comic actor) injects her with some warmth and keeps her from being the joke she might have been. Galifianakis has a native oddball energy, though some of Carl’s assigned interests feel tacked on and out of joint — he’s involved with a fight club, where “control alt delete” serves for saying “uncle,” and, even weirder, has been made a World War Ire-enactor and military fetishist; it’s a point that exists only to make him receptive to Tom (Rob Corddry), the deputy undersecretary of Veterans Affairs who has come to Palo Alto looking for a partner to digitize truckloads of files that will in some way help to better their plight. (“Straightforwardly, what’s the quant ben for us?” he’s asked. Translation: “What’s in it for us?”) The series’ designated tragic figure, he’s granted a karaoke performance, with original lyrics, of Peggy Lee’s “Is That All There Is?”

Much of the action has to do with characters buying and selling various enterprises, or failing to, and creating and breaking and creating alliances, and it ceases to matter after not too long awhile what person or which company does what. Much less of it has to do with people being people. The cast is very good and the dialogue good enough, but because few of these characters are developed beyond a handful of identifying characteristics, it’s a generally cold, dispassionate watch. As to Duncan, the nominal star of the show, it doesn’t matter whether he’ll win or lose — there’s not enough to hang on to. Past being unlikable, he’s unsympathetic, and worse, for all his noisy behavior, uninteresting. JoAnne, though her journey is more twisted, doesn’t fare all that much better.

To signal that he has considered these things, Glatzer gives Anushka, who has had a revelation, a speechy little speech to voice the thoughts already on your mind. “When was the last time we saw tech help? … Truth be told, what have we actually made better? Did we spread knowledge? No. People used to occasionally agree on truth. Are we more tolerant of those different from ourselves? Please. Absolutely blew it on climate. Data centers emit more greenhouse gas than all of air travel. And have we made made the lives of our children better? Probably, no. But we can have Q-tips at our door in an hour. Huzzah.” So true.

We also get a reminder, from Harper, to check the box that keeps a website from selling your information. It’s good advice.

Celebrations have erupted in Iraq’s capital, Baghdad, following the announcement of a two-week ceasefire between Iran and the United States. Iraq had been pulled into the war with pro-Iran armed groups and US forces carrying out attacks on each other.

SACRAMENTO — A federal judge appears willing to block a $6.2-billion merger of two large TV station groups as he evaluates whether Nexstar Media Group’s takeover of a rival violates U.S. antitrust laws.

At the conclusion of a two-hour hearing in Sacramento on Tuesday, U.S. District Court Chief Judge Troy L. Nunley signaled he was preparing to issue a preliminary injunction that would prevent Nexstar and Tegna from combining operations amid an ongoing legal challenge.

Nunley said he would draft a written order, which is expected by Friday.

Previously, Nunley had issued a temporary restraining order to pause the merger.

Last month, Nexstar raced to finalize its blockbuster purchase of Tegna — despite a lawsuit filed by California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta and seven other state attorneys general. The state officials, all Democrats, claimed the massive merger would give Nexstar too much control over local TV stations, ultimately hurting consumers by diminishing the diversity and quality of their newscasts.

California Deputy Attorney General Laura Antonini argued that when news consolidates, it results in a loss of diverse viewpoints.

“That’s extremely harmful to democracy and to the citizens of this state,” she said at the hearing.

President Trump has championed the Nexstar-Tegna merger, suggesting it would diminish the clout of the major TV networks, including those he often gripes about: ABC and NBC. Nexstar, based in Irving, Texas, owns dozens of network affiliate stations.

Nexstar, which also owns KTLA-TV Channel 5 in Los Angeles, already is the nation’s largest station group. The deal was expected to reshape the local television industry by extending Nexstar’s reach to 265 television stations, up from 164.

If the acquisition is finalized , Nexstar stations would cover 80% of the U.S. population, exceeding a 39% ownership cap set by Congress.

El Segundo-based DirecTV separately sued, alleging the combination of the nation’s two largest television station groups would do irreparable harm to its pay-TV business by raising prices and potentially increasing programming blackouts.

Representatives of Nexstar, DirecTV and Bonta’s office declined to comment after Tuesday’s hearing.

During the hearing, Nexstar attorney Alexander Okuliar, argued against an injunction, saying the plaintiffs had failed to demonstrate that the merger posed an immediate threat to the public. He said DirecTV and the attorneys general had only offered proposed financial harms.

In court documents, the state attorneys general and DirecTV alleged the deal would give Nexstar multiple TV stations in dozens of markets. That raised concerns about layoffs in an industry that has sustained significant downsizing in recent years as viewers and advertisers migrate to streaming options and social media platforms like TikTok.

Nexstar could “shut down local newsrooms in dozens of markets, reducing the amount, variety, and quality of local broadcast news that Americans rely on for trusted information about their communities,” DirecTV alleged.

For example, Nexstar owns the Fox station in Sacramento, while McLean, Virginia-based Tegna owns the ABC affiliate.

Okuliar pushed back, saying there was no evidence that local newsrooms would be shuttered.

“One of the reasons for this deal is to protect local broadcasters, to protect local journalism,” he told the judge.

Nexstar contends the deal would strengthen TV station economics, allowing stations to bolster their news gathering and expand the number of newscasts. The company cited dozens of awards won by Nexstar journalists, including in Oklahoma City.

In addition to Bonta, the plaintiffs include state attorneys general in Colorado, Connecticut, Illinois, New York, North Carolina, Oregon and Virginia.

Nearly two dozen lawyers attended the hearing on behalf of the other plaintiffs. Eight lawyers represented Nexstar and Tegna.

Nexstar Chief Executive Perry Sook and Chief Operating officer Michael Biard also attended.

In its complaint, DirecTV argued that it would suffer financial harm because Nexstar would use its increased heft to demand significantly higher fees for the rights to carry its network-affiliate stations, which carry local news, primetime shows and professional sports, including NFL football. Such programming disputes can lead to blackouts which infuriate customers.

Nexstar’s lawyers disputed such allegations, telling the judge the merger would ultimately increase the value of content. The company suggested the deal could lower prices for distributors like DirecTV, which has about 10 million customers nationwide.

Nunley recently combined the DirecTV and state attorneys general lawsuits into one.

The judge, who was elevated to the federal bench by President Obama, had already expressed concerns about the merger.

In his March 27 order granting the temporary restraining order, Nunley said DirecTV had demonstrated that it could prevail at a trial due to the merits of its arguments.

He then instructed Nexstar to “immediately cease all ongoing actions relating to integration and consolidation of Nexstar and Tegna.”

Instead, the Tegna unit must continue to operate independently as “an ongoing, economically viable, and active competitor,” the judge wrote.

The Nexstar-Tegna merger took on political overtones in early February after Trump threw his weight behind it, writing in a post on Truth Social that the proposed union was among the “good deals,” because it would provide competition against “THE ENEMY, the Fake News National TV Networks.”

“GET THAT DEAL DONE!” Trump wrote.

The state attorneys general sued to block the merger on March 18, when the transaction was still pending at the U.S. Justice Department, which is tasked with conducting anti-trust reviews, and the Federal Communications Commission, which oversees TV station licenses.

The DOJ and FCC blessed the deal the following day.

Within an hour, Nexstar announced that it finalized the transaction and that Tegna had been disbanded.

“It’s very rare to do what Nexstar did here,” DirecTV’s attorney Glenn Pomerantz said.

Nexstar had asked the judge to require the plaintiffs to post a $150 million bond to compensate it for damages it would suffer from any delays in closing the deal.

NEW ORLEANS — A U.S. Army staff sergeant is trying to halt his wife’s deportation after she was detained inside a Louisiana military base where the couple was planning to live together just days after their wedding.

The effort to remove the soldier’s wife, who was born in Honduras and remained in a federal immigration detention center Monday, has drawn criticism from military family advocates who called the detention demoralizing in a time of war and warned that deporting spouses could undermine recruitment.

Staff Sgt. Matthew Blank said he brought his wife, Annie Ramos, 22, to his base in Fort Polk, La., last Thursday so that she could begin the process to receive military benefits and take steps toward a green card. The couple married in March.

Federal immigration agents detained Ramos as part of the Trump administration’s mass deportation agenda, which legal experts say has dispensed with the U.S. Department of Homeland Security’s practice of leniency toward families of military members.

“I never imagined that trying to do the right thing would lead to her being taken away from me,” said Blank, 23, in a statement to the Associated Press. “What was supposed to be the happiest week of our lives has turned into one of the hardest.”

Ramos’ detention was first reported by The New York Times.

Ramos entered the U.S. in 2005, when she was younger than 2 years old. That same year, her family failed to appear for an immigration hearing, leading a judge to issue a final order of removal, according to the Department of Homeland Security.

“She has no legal status to be in this country,” Homeland SEcurity said in an emailed statement. “This administration is not going to ignore the rule of law.”

In 2020, Ramos applied to receive Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, also known as DACA, but her husband says her application has remained “in limbo” amid legal fights to end the Obama-era program.

Last April, Homeland Security eliminated a 2022 policy that considered military service of an immediate family member to be a “significant mitigating factor” in deciding whether or not to pursue immigration enforcement. The administration’s new policy states that “military service alone does not exempt aliens from the consequences of violating U.S. immigration laws.”

Prior to the Trump administration’s mass deportation push, Homeland Security generally allowed the spouses of active-duty military members to gain legal status through policies like parole in place and deferred action that military recruiters promote, according to Margaret Stock, a military immigration law expert.

Ramos’ case would have been easy to resolve in the past, Stock said, but instead Homeland Security now appears to be focusing on detaining members of military families whenever the opportunity arises — including when, like Ramos, they are attempting to apply for legal status.

“It doesn’t make any sense — they’re going to get arrested for following the law? That’s stupid,” Stock said. “It’s bad for morale, it disrupts the soldiers’ readiness.”

In September, more than 60 members of Congress wrote to the Homeland Security and Defense Departments warning that arrests of military personnel and veterans’ family members was “betraying its promises to service members who play a key role in protecting U.S. national security.”

The Pentagon declined to comment.

Lydiah Owiti-Otienoh, who runs an advocacy group called the Foreign-Born Military Spouse Network, said she’s anecdotally seen an increase in cases where the lives of military families have been upended by tightening immigration restrictions. She believes the federal government is undermining its own interests by attempting to deport military spouses.

“It just sends a really bad message — we don’t care about you, about your spouses, anything you are doing,” Owiti-Otienoh said. “If military families are not stable, national security is not stable.”

Blank’s mother, Jen Rickling, told the AP in a statement that her daughter-in-law, a Sunday school teacher and biochemistry major, had been everything she hoped for — someone who “loves my son with her whole heart.”

“We absolutely adore her,” Rickling said. “I believe in this country. And I believe we can do better than this — for Annie, for other military families, and for the values we hold dear.”

Blank says he had been eager to start building a life and with Ramos on the base while he served his country.

“I want my wife home,” Blank said. “And I will not stop fighting until she is back where she belongs, by my side.”

Brook writes for the Associated Press.

ORLANDO, Fla. — Environmental groups on Tuesday asked a federal appellate court panel to drop its temporary halt of a lower court’s order instructing state officials to close an immigration detention center in the heart of the Florida Everglades known as “Alligator Alcatraz.”

The Everglades facility remains open, still holding detainees, because the appellate court in early September relied on arguments by Florida and the Trump administration that the state had not yet applied for federal reimbursement, and therefore wasn’t required to follow federal environmental law. State officials opened the detention center last summer to support President Trump’s immigration crackdown.

Questions by the three appellate judges during oral arguments in a Miami courtroom focused on how much control the federal government had over the state-built facility and under what circumstances an environmental review was required to be in compliance with federal law. The judges did not indicate when they would rule.

Jesse Panuccio, an attorney for the Florida Department of Emergency Management, told the judges federal funding and federal control of the facility were the two criteria for determining if the federal environmental law would apply and the federal agencies had no control over the state-run detention center.

Florida was notified in late September that FEMA had approved $608 million in federal funding to support the center’s construction and operation.

“You need both,” Panuccio said. “Even with funding, I don’t think that would follow because they don’t have federal control.”

An attorney for the environmental groups said the law requiring a review applied to the facility because the Department of Homeland Security had authorized the funding and immigration was a responsibility of the federal government, not the state.

“What is different about this property is that immigration is constitutionally a federal function,” said Paul Schwiep,” an attorney representing the Friends of the Everglades and the Center for Biological Diversity. “The state has no role.”

The federal district judge in Miami in mid-August ordered the facility to wind down operations over two months because officials had failed to do a review of the detention center’s environmental impact according to federal law. That judge concluded that a reimbursement decision already had been made. The appellate court halted the order on an appeal.

The environmental lawsuit was one of three federal court challenges to the Everglades facility since it opened. In the others, a detainee said Florida agencies and private contractors hired by the state had no authority to operate the center under federal law. The challenge ended after the immigrant detainee who filed the lawsuit agreed to be removed from the United States.

In the third lawsuit, a federal judge in Fort Myers, Fla., ruled the Everglades facility must provide detainees there with better access to their attorneys, as well as confidential, unmonitored, unrecorded outgoing legal calls.

Schneider writes for the Associated Press.

Jassim al-Budaiwi calls on UN Security Council to guarantee ‘uninterrupted navigation through all strategic waterways’.

The head of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) has called on the United Nations to act to immediately halt Iranian attacks across the region, condemning the strikes as a “flagrant violation” of international law and the United Nations Charter.

Speaking at the UN Security Council (UNSC) on Thursday, GCC Secretary-General Jassim al-Budaiwi urged the council to “take all necessary measures” to bring an end to Iran’s attacks on Gulf countries.

The UNSC must “take all necessary means” to “protect maritime corridors and guarantee the uninterrupted maritime navigation through all strategic waterways” in the region, al-Budaiwi said.

He also stressed that the six GCC states – Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Bahrain, Oman, Kuwait and the United Arab Emirates – must be included in any talks or deals with Iran “to enhance regional security and prevent further escalation or the repetition of such attacks in the future”.

“The GCC reaffirms the urgent need to immediately halt these attacks; restore security, stability and calm in the region, and ensure the safety of air and maritime navigation, the safety of international supply chains, and the protection of global energy markets,” al-Budaiwi said.

Iran has carried out daily missile and drone attacks across the Middle East, including in Arab Gulf nations, since the United States and Israel launched a war against the country on February 28.

While Iranian officials have said they are acting in self-defence and striking US and Israeli-linked targets, the attacks have struck civilian sites across the Gulf, including several of the region’s critical energy facilities.

Iran also has effectively closed the Strait of Hormuz, a key Gulf waterway through which about one-fifth of the world’s oil and liquified natural gas supplies transit, sending global energy prices skyrocketing.

Reporting from the Emirati city of Dubai on Thursday evening, Al Jazeera’s Zein Basravi said frustrations are growing across the Gulf as the US-Israeli war on Iran drags on.

“The GCC countries were from day one – months before this war even began – trying to keep it from happening. But it was like trying to stop a slow-moving car crash. And effectively, that crash has happened in their front yard,” Basravi said.

He noted that 85 percent of the projectiles fired by Iran have targeted Gulf countries, with the UAE the hardest hit.

“Their primary threats are the retaliatory attacks by Iran,” Basravi said of the GCC. “And their primary focus is bringing that to an immediate close – and that means ending the conflict as soon as possible.”

April 1 (UPI) — A federal judge has blocked construction of President Donald Trump‘s $400 million White House ballroom, ruling the New York real estate developer does not have congressional authorization to continue the project.

“The President of the United States is the steward of the White House for future generations of First Families. He is not, however, the owner!” U.S. District Judge Richard Leon for the District of Columbia wrote in the ruling.

Trump has said building a White House ballroom had been a dream of his since before he was president. Construction of the 90,000-square-foot building began with the demolition of the East Wing of the White House in October. Initially said to cost $200 million, the ballroom’s price tag has since doubled. Trump has said it will be financed by private donors.

In December, the National Trust for Historic Preservation sued the Trump administration to halt construction, arguing the project has not been authorized by Congress as required by U.S. law.

In response, the Trump administration has claimed Congress has already given him authority to construct the project, pointing to a statute that Leon, a President George W. Bush appointee, said only permits the president “to conduct ordinary maintenance and repair of the White House.”

Leon said the Trump administration’s understanding of the law assumes Congress has granted “nearly unlimited power to the President to construct anything, anywhere on federal land in the District of Columbia, regardless of the source of funds.”

“This clearly is not how Congress and former Presidents have managed the White House for centuries, and this Court will not be the first to hold that Congress has ceded its powers in such a significant fashion,” he said in the 35-page ruling.

For Trump to continue with the project, he can ask Congress to either appropriate the funds or approve of another funding scheme, he said.

“Unfortunately for Defendants, unless and until Congress blesses this project through statutory authorization, construction has to stop!”

In awarding the National Trust for Historic Preservation an injunction, Leon delayed its enforcement for 14 days in acknowledgment that the Trump administration intends to appeal his decision and that stopping an ongoing construction project may raise logistical issues.

“We are pleased with Judge Leon’s ruling today to order a halt to any further ballroom construction until the Administration complies with the law and obtains express authorization to go forward,” Carol Quillen, president and CEO of the nonprofit organization, said in a statement.

“This is a win for the American people on a project that forever impacts one of the most beloved and iconic places in our nation.”

Trump lambasted the decision on his Truth Social platform.

“He is WRONG! Congressional approval has never been given on anything in these circumstances, big or small, having to do with construction at the White House,” he said in a statement.

In an earlier statement issued after the ruling was made, Trump insulted the National Trust for Historic Preservation as “a Radical Left Group of Lunatics.”

According to the White House Historical Association, Congress has long been responsible for appropriating funds for the care, repair, refurnishing and maintenance of the White House, and Congress approved the Truman-era reconstruction project from 1948 to 1952.

WASHINGTON — A federal judge on Tuesday ordered the Trump administration to suspend its construction of a $400 million ballroom where it demolished the East Wing of the White House, barring construction work from proceeding without congressional approval.

U.S. District Judge Richard Leon in Washington granted a preservationist group’s request for a preliminary injunction that temporarily halts President Trump’s White House ballroom project.

Leon, who was nominated to the bench by Republican President George W. Bush, concluded that the National Trust for Historic Preservation is likely to succeed on the merits of its claims because “no statute comes close to giving the President the authority he claims to have.”

“The President of the United States is the steward of the White House for future generations of First Families. He is not, however, the owner!” the judge wrote.

Leon suspended enforcement of his order for 14 days, acknowledging that the case “raises novel and weighty issues, that halting an ongoing construction project “may raise logistical issues.” He also recognized that the administration is likely to appeal his decision.

The judge ruled that any construction work that’s necessary to ensure the safety and security of the White House is exempt from the scope of the injunction. Leon said he reviewed material that the government privately submitted to him before concluding that halting construction wouldn’t jeopardize national security.

Trump, in a social media post, criticized the trust for suing him over a project that he said is being built at no cost to taxpayers. “Doesn’t make much sense, does it?” he wrote.

The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the ruling.

The preservationists sued to obtain an order pausing the ballroom project until it undergoes multiple independent reviews and receives congressional approval.

The White House announced the ballroom project over the summer. By late October, Trump had demolished the East Wing to make way for a ballroom that he said would fit 999 people. The White House said private donations, including from Trump himself, would pay for the planned construction of a 90,000-square-foot ballroom.

Trump proceeded with the project before seeking input from a pair of federal review panels, the National Capital Planning Commission and the Commission of Fine Arts. Trump has stocked both commissions with allies.

On Feb. 26, Leon rejected the preservationist group’s initial bid to temporarily halt the ballroom’s construction. He said the privately funded group had based its challenge on a “ragtag group” of legal theories and would have a better chance of success if it amended the lawsuit, which it did.

The administration has said above-ground construction on the ballroom would begin in April.

“We are two weeks away,” plaintiffs’ attorney Thaddeus Heuer said during a March 17 hearing. “The imminence is now imminent.”

During the hearing, Leon sounded skeptical of what he referred to as the government’s “shifting theories and shifting dynamics” for its arguments in the case.

“I don’t think it’s a new theory,” Justice Department attorney Jacob Roth told the judge.

Leon expressed frustration at Roth’s attempts to equate the massive ballroom project with relatively modest construction work at the White House under previous administrations.

“This is an iconic symbol of this nation,” the judge said.

The administration argued that other presidents didn’t need congressional approval for previous White House renovation projects, large and small.

“Many of those projects were highly controversial in their time yet have since become accepted — even beloved — parts of the White House,” government attorneys wrote.

Kunzelman writes for the Associated Press. AP writer Darlene Superville contributed to this report.