Pandemic, essential workers in the United States have continued in their daily jobs to care for and protect americans, to produce and deliver food and essential goods, and to uphold our nations Critical Infrastructure. These men and women, our moms and dads, brothers and sisters, are putting the livelihoods of their fellow americans ahead of their own. Each and every morning despite the pandemic, they wake up and they go to work. In this fight against the invisible enemy, the critical logistics operators, the supply workers, medical professionals, and many others who are on the front lines responding to coronavirus could not be more important to our victory. They truly are our heroes. Folks, our nation cannot weather this pandemic without our essential workforce. They first and foremost deserve our gratitude. So today we want to say thank you. Thank you to our doctors, our nurses, and our Health Care Workers who see firsthand the seriousness of this disease yet put their own health and
Thank you, mr. Chief justice and may it please the court. In 1991, congress enacted the tcpas basic restriction on the placement of automated calls to cell phones. In the years that followed lower courts consistently upheld the constitutionality of that restriction as a contact neutral restriction on the use of calling technologies consumers found particularly intrusive and annoying and the Congress Debt exception in 2015 did not introduce any constitution infirmity into the statutory scheme and that exception is limit to a narrow category of calls that intrude less on Consumer Privacy than the typical automated call and that serve an important counterveiling interest in protecting the federal fisk. Theres been a good deal back and forth in the briefs whether sponedents challenge is properly viewed as one to the exception or to the general automated call restriction. And i think in circumstances like this theres not a right way or wrong way, not a right or wrong challenge to bring, the
Thank you mr. Chief justice and may i please the court. The basic prescription on automated calls to cell phones in the years that followed dave field the constitutionality in the content of natural restriction on the use of calling technologies consumers found particularly intrusive and annoying. Congress enacted the exception in 2015 did not introduce any constitutional infirmity into the statutory scheme that exception is limited to the category of calls that intrude less severely on Consumer Privacy than does the typical automated call into the countervailing interest in protecting. Theres been a good deal of back and forth about whether respondents challenge the exception or the general automated call restriction and in circumstances because therere isnt a right or wrong way. There is simply here we think both challenges could have been both but would fail. Id like to focus first on the challenge the respondent is asserting that is a challenge to the automated restriction into the
Congress did not introduce any constitutional infirmity into the statutory scheme. That exception is limited to a narrow category of calls less severely on Consumer Privacy than does the typical automated call and serve a countervailing interest. Theres been a good deal of backandforth about whether responding to challenges exceptioniewed as the or the general automated call. I think in steer circumstances like this is not a wrong way or wrong way, there simply two conceptually distinct analytical ways of challenging a law that includes a basic prescription. Here we think both challenges couldve been brought in both would fail. Id like to focus on the asserting,hich it is the challenge respondents are asking the court to focus on. The challenge on the automated call restriction. The theory is the government exception taken in combination with other aspects of the statutory scheme prevents the automated call restriction from performing its Consumer Protection function. The firstld under
Contains on a timely subject that the height of stocks of amazon and google and others and with a broad scope why this book and why now . Thank you for having me by the way. I started this book in 2017. I had just taken a job as a columnist the mandate was to figure out the World Biggest business in opinion form which is a rather large mandate and in order to narrow the funnel, started to look through corporate numbers i saw how well they transition from the Financial Sector to the Technology Sector since a great financial crisis and one number that stuck out was looking at how 80 percent of corporate wealth was being held than 10 percent of the firms. Those were the richest in personal data and intellectual property. You are holding the majority of the worlds corporate wealth and the majority of those are that i profile in the book. Netflix and google. Host there are some overlap like facebook and google with Digital Advertising and apple has shunned advertising and technology. Huber