It’s a rare issue that can bring 41 states together for a bipartisan fight. This week, state attorneys general across the political spectrum joined forces in suing Facebook parent company Meta for allegedly using features on Instagram and other platforms that hook young users, while denying or downplaying the risks to their mental health.

This comes two years after states began investigating Meta following revelations that the company’s internal research found Instagram was having a negative effect on some teen users’ mental health. Since then health professionals, including Surgeon General Dr. Vivek Murthy and the American Psychological Assn., have urged tech companies to make their products safer for young people.

But there hasn’t yet been significant change in the industry. Most companies haven’t been willing to overhaul their platforms to curb addictive features or harmful content for users under 18 years old, such as setting time limits on their apps or changing algorithms that steer kids into “rabbit holes” to keep them online. Nor have federal lawmakers been able to enact comprehensive product safety regulations because legislation has stalled in Congress or been blocked by courts.

In the absence of policy changes, lawsuits are the next logical step in prodding technology companies to ensure their products are safe for young people or be held accountable. Some have compared the states’ legal strategy to lawsuits against Big Tobacco and opioid manufacturers that revealed how the companies lied about the harm caused by their products, and forced them to change their business practices.

Meta is the first target because of the 2021 revelations, but the state attorneys general said this is an industry-wide investigation. They have also begun looking into TikTok.

The federal complaint alleges Meta used harmful and “psychologically manipulative product features,” such as “likes,” infinite scroll and constant alerts, to hook young people on Instagram and Facebook and keep them engaged for as much time as possible in order to boost profits. Despite knowing that young users’ brains are particularly vulnerable to manipulation by such features and internal studies warning that kids were being harmed, Meta allegedly concealed, denied and downplayed the harms.

The lawsuit, which was filed jointly by 33 states, including California, also accused Meta of violating the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act, a federal law that protects the digital privacy of children under 13 years old. Eight states and the District of Columbia filed separate lawsuits in state or federal courts, many alleging that Meta violated state consumer protection laws.

Meta said in a statement that it has already rolled out 30 tools to support teens on its apps since 2021, including reminders on Instagram for teens to take a break and sharing expert resources if kids search for posts on suicide or eating disorders. That’s a good start. The company lamented that the states chose to sue rather than work with tech firms “across the industry to create clear, age-appropriate standards.”

Indeed, there is a need for comprehensive safety standards across social media platforms. But a tech lobbying group of which Meta is a member has sued to stop an effort by California, which passed a first-in-the-nation law last year requiring age-appropriate design and child privacy protection. The law was recently put on hold by a federal judge citing 1st Amendment concerns. California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta has filed an appeal.

This is complex legal and regulatory terrain, and the states’ lawsuits are not a sure bet given existing laws that protect online platform companies from being held liable for content posted by users on their sites. Nor will any of these cases be resolved quickly. That’s OK. This is an essential fight for the future.

Find your latest news here at the Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle

The post Social media can harm kids. Lawsuits could force Meta, others to make platforms safer appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.

SANTA ANA, Calif. (AP) — A Southern California county has filed lawsuits alleging a major power company’s negligence caused two wildfires that collectively burned thousands of acres and prompted the evacuation of tens of thousands of people.

Orange County, which is home to more than 3 million people between Los Angeles and San Diego, filed a pair of lawsuits against Southern California Edison in which it alleges the company’s equipment played a role in wildfires in 2020 and 2022.

The county said in the lawsuit that it believes that the Coastal Fire — which burned 200 acres (80 hectares), destroyed 20 homes and prompted more than 900 people to evacuate in May 2022 — was caused by an electrical failure on a utility pole that supported a distribution line. The county alleged the incident occurred because Southern California Edison, known as SCE, failed to maintain its facilities in a safe manner in an area of significant risk of wildfire.

“We demand that the utilities responsible for the destruction of county assets, increased expenses, reduced revenues, and environmental damages, reimburse the County,” Orange County Supervisor Katrina Foley said in a statement.

In a separate lawsuit, the county said the Silverado Fire, which charred more than 12,000 acres (4,850 hectares) in October 2020, may have been sparked when a telecommunications wire had contact with an electric conductor. The county also named T-Mobile in the suit over the Silverado Fire, which prompted the evacuation of tens of thousands of people and caused school closures.

Gabriela Ornelas, a spokesperson for Southern California Edison, declined to comment on the lawsuits. She said the company cooperated with Orange County fire officials in their investigations.

Last year, the utility told state regulators unspecified electrical “circuit activity” happened at about the time that the Coastal Fire wildfire erupted. The company also previously reported the possible contact with the “lashing wire” in the Silverado Fire.

A message seeking comment was sent by email to T-Mobile.

The lawsuits, which were filed on Monday, were first reported late Tuesday by the Orange County Register.

Various utilities’ electrical equipment has repeatedly been linked to the ignition of disastrous California wildfires, especially during windy weather. The state Public Utilities Commission in 2021 approved a settlement placing of more than half a billion dollars in fines and penalties for Southern California Edison for its role in five wildfires in 2017 and 2018.

In Northern California, Pacific Gas & Electric will face a trial for manslaughter over its role in the Zogg Fire in 2020, which killed four people. The company, which is the nation’s largest utility, pleaded not guilty.

Find your latest news here at the Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle

The post Southern California county files lawsuits alleging power company’s equipment sparked wildfires appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.

Nine months after the U.S. Supreme Court ended a nationwide right to an abortion, the landscape is far from settled, with lawmakers considering broader bans or stronger protections and legal challenges popping up nationwide.

It’s been a hectic week for abortion policy with Republican-dominated states seeking to tighten restrictions, Democratic lawmakers trying to protect abortion access — and court fights playing out on multiple fronts.

Here’s what’s happening:

WHAT’S THE STATUS OF ABORTION PILLS?

This question lies at the heart of the most closely watched current abortion-related lawsuit.

A combination of two drugs is the nation’s most common method for ending pregnancies.

But Alliance Defending Freedom, which opposed abortion, has asked a Texas judge to revoke or suspend the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s 2000 approval of one of the drugs, mifepristone. The legal question looms as the Biden Administration is working on rules to make the pills more widely available, and pharmacies and states sort out whether that will happen.

After a hearing last week, U.S. District Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk, sitting in Amarillo, Texas, said he would rule “as soon as possible.”

In the meantime, Wyoming Gov. Mark Gordon became the first in the nation to sign a bill specifically banning abortion pills. It’s to take effect July. Thirteen states already had blanket bans on all forms of abortion and 15 had limits on access, such as requiring that the pills be dispensed only and directly by doctors.

The same day Gordon signed that, California Democrats introduced a measure intended to offer legal protection to doctors who mail abortion pills to patients in other states. A handful of other Democrat-controlled states have proposed or adopted similar laws already.

WHAT NEW BANS ARE IN PLACE?

Wyoming’s Gordon also allowed a separate ban on abortions at all stages of pregnancy to take effect Sunday without his signature. However, a judge on Wednesday halted enforcement, at least for now.

Teton County District Court Judge Melissa Owens blocked an earlier ban last year hours before it was to take effect. Her order on the first ban remains in effect as courts decide whether it complies with the state’s constitution.

ANY OTHER NEW COURT RULINGS?

This week, the Oklahoma Supreme Court struck down a narrow part of that state’s abortion ban.

The court ruled that a woman has the right to an abortion if her doctor finds that continuing her pregnancy risks her life, not just when she’s in the midst of a life-threatening medical emergency.

ARE THERE OTHER NEW ANTI-ABORTION MEASURES?

The Kansas House on Wednesday passed a bill declaring that when an abortion procedure inadvertently results in a live birth, medical personnel must try to preserve the newborn’s life. The legislation now goes to the state Senate, where it’s also expected to pass.

At least 18 other states have similar laws on the books. Opponents say it’s a circumstance that very rarely happens — but that the law would create additional trauma for women who seek abortions.

A similar measure was on the ballot in Montana last year and voters rejected it.

WHAT STATES ARE PROTECTING ABORTION?

Oregon lawmakers heard testimony this week on a bill that would protect abortion providers and patients from criminal and civil liability in other states and would allow a person to bring a lawsuit against a public body for interfering with their reproductive health rights. The measure also seeks to protect gender-affirming care in the state.

Minnesota lawmakers passed bills to prohibit enforcement in the state of laws, subpoenas, judgements or extradition requests from other states for people who obtain, provide or assist with abortions there. Hawaii Gov. Josh Green signed a similar measure on Wednesday. As in other states, Minnesota’s current governor and Hawaii’s former governor signed executive orders extending similar protections.

Find your latest news here at the Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle

The post A hectic week for abortion policy with laws and lawsuits appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.

Embattled vaping company Juul Labs has reached settlements covering thousands of lawsuits over its e-cigarettes, which in recent years became a scourge in schools and communities nationwide.

Financial terms of the settlement were not disclosed, but Juul said that it has secured an equity investment to fund it.

Buffeted by lawsuits, Juul announced hundreds of layoffs last month and bankruptcy appeared increasingly likely as it secured financing to continue operations.

The e-cigarette maker faced more than 8,000 lawsuits suits brought by individuals and families of Juul users, school districts, city governments and Native American tribes. This week’s settlement resolves most of those cases, which had been consolidated in a California federal court pending several bellwether trials.

“These settlements represent a major step toward strengthening Juul Labs’ operations and securing the company’s path forward,” a company spokeswoman said in a statement.

Attorneys for the plaintiffs said in a statement the deal would “put meaningful compensation in hands of victims and their families,” and provide schools and local governments with funding for anti-vaping education programs. A judge is expected to soon review and approve the settlement.

Juul rocketed to the top of the U.S. vaping market five years ago on the popularity of flavors like mango, mint and creme brulee. But the startup’s rise was fueled by use among teenagers, some of whom became hooked on Juul’s high-nicotine pods.

Parents, school administrators and politicians largely blamed the company for a surge in underage vaping, which now includes dozens of flavored e-cigarette brands that are the preferred choice among teens.

Amid the backlash of lawsuits and government sanctions, Juul dropped all U.S. advertising and discontinued most of its flavors in 2019.

In June the Food and Drug Administration rejected Juul’s application to keep its product on the market as a smoking alternative for adults, throwing its future into uncertainty. The FDA said Juul did not adequately address key questions about the potential for chemicals to leech from its device. The FDA has placed a temporary hold on its initial decision while Juul files an appeal.

Then, in September, the San Francisco company agreed to pay nearly $440 million to settle a two-year investigation by 33 states into the marketing of its high-nicotine vaping products.

That same month the company’s largest investor, tobacco giant Altria, announced plans to resume competing on its own in the e-cigarette space.

Altria pulled its own e-cigarettes off the market in 2018 after taking a nearly $13 billion stake in Juul. But that investment has lost more than 95% of its value as Juul’s prospects have dimmed, giving Altria the option to exit its non-compete agreement.

That means Juul could soon be forced to battle for space on retail shelves with Marlboro-maker Altria, along with long-standing competitors like Reynolds American’s Vuse, which recently edged past Juul to become the leading U.S. vaping brand.

Juul has also settled with 37 states and territories over the last year and said it’s in ongoing talks with other key stakeholders to resolve remaining litigation.

Anti-tobacco advocates said Wednesday it was impossible to evaluate the terms of the settlement without knowing how much Juul will pay.

“We are extremely troubled by the lack of settlement details provided and by Juul’s apparent public controlling of this settlement narrative,” said Meredith Berkman of Parents Against Vaping E-cigarettes.

Find your latest news here at the Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle

The post Juul reaches settlements covering thousands of lawsuits appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.

LOS ANGELES (AP) — The University of California system announced Tuesday it will pay nearly $375 million to more than 300 women who said they were sexually abused by a UCLA gynecologist, bringing a record amount in total payouts by a public university in a wave of sexual misconduct scandals by campus doctors.

The settlement followed previous deals with hundreds of other patients who said Dr. James Heaps groped them, made suggestive comments or conducted unnecessarily invasive exams during his 35-year career.

“Dr. Heaps sexually abused patients for years while UCLA Health put profits over their safety,” attorney Jennifer McGrath said in a statement. “Today’s settlement is the result of the bravery of these victims, and sends a message that healthcare institutions must protect vulnerable patients and act decisively at complaints of abuse.”

The university has agreed to pay nearly $700 million to Heap’s patients, dwarfing a $500 million settlement by Michigan State University in 2018 that was considered the largest by a public university. The University of Southern California, a private institution, has agreed to pay more than $1 billion to settle thousands of cases against the school’s longtime gynecologist.

Heaps, 65, who retired as the scandal unfolded, has pleaded not guilty to 21 felony counts for allegedly sexually assaulting seven women.

Women who brought the lawsuits said UCLA ignored their complaints and deliberately concealed abuse that happened for decades during examinations at the UCLA student health center, the Ronald Reagan UCLA Medical Center or in Heaps’ campus office.

UCLA acknowledged it received a sex abuse complaint against Heaps from a patient in December 2017 and it launched an investigation the following month that concluded she was sexually assaulted and harassed, attorneys said.

Heaps, however, continued to practice until his retirement in June 2018. The university did not release its finding in the investigation until November 2019 — months after Heaps was arrested.

The university previously reached settlements with other patients of Heaps for $316 million. The most recent settlement with 312 women resolves the vast majority of claims against Heaps, the university said.

“The conduct alleged to have been committed by Heaps is reprehensible and contrary to our values,” UCLA said in a statement. “We are grateful to all those who came forward, and hope this settlement is one step toward providing some level of healing for the plaintiffs involved.”

The university said it would pay for the settlements through a combination of insurance, risk financing and capital bond proceeds.

Sex abuse by doctors on college campuses has led to massive settlements at Ohio State University, Johns Hopkins University and Columbia University.

Michigan State paid $500 million to 300 women and girls who said they were assaulted by Larry Nassar, who was a campus sports doctor and a doctor for USA Gymnastics. Nassar, who also sexually abused Olympic gold medal gymnasts, is serving prison sentences likely to keep him behind bars for the rest of his life.

The University of Michigan reached a $490 million settlement with more than 1,000 people who said they were sexually assaulted by the late Dr. Robert Anderson, during his nearly four-decade career as a sports doctor at the school.

Find your latest news here at the Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle

The post UCLA to pay record of nearly $700M in doctor abuse lawsuits appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.

Lawsuits are piling up less than a week after the deadly crowd crush at the Astroworld concert, and legal experts say the risk is mounting that juries could decide against rapper Travis Scott and the companies behind the tragic event in Houston.

Several legal experts told The Associated Press that Scott’s past incitement of concertgoers offers a history that could make it easier to pursue negligence claims against companies that planned and managed the show, which killed eight people and left hundreds injured. And although the investigations have just begun, experts expect dozens more lawsuits seeking damages that could climb into hundreds of millions of dollars.

At the center of the legal maelstrom is Scott, a 30-year-old rapper famous for whipping fans into a frenzy who has pleaded guilty to misdemeanor charges tied to stirring up crowds at previous concerts.

“This put everyone on notice: ‘This is what has happened, and there is no reason it can’t happen again,’” said John Werner, a lawyer in Beaumont, Texas, who is not involved in Astroworld cases. “They know this is a situation that can get out of hand.”

“This tragedy was months, if not years, in the making,” wrote Houston lawyer Steve Kherkher in a lawsuit demanding more than $1 million for a man trampled in the melee, which he said was “predictable and preventable” given the rapper’s history.

More than a dozen lawsuits have been filed so far against Scott and several companies, including entertainment giant Live Nation, concert promoter ScoreMore, a nonprofit managing the Houston-owned venue. The complaints allege that organizers failed to take simple crowd-control steps, to staff properly and to act on early signs of trouble at the sold-out concert at NRG Park that attracted 50,000 fans.

“The way the concert was set up, planned, organized, and the way things were handled once there was a problem, it boggles the mind,” lawyer Tony Buzbee said this week in announcing that he was suing on behalf of three dozen victims, including 21-year-old Axel Acosta, who died.

Buzbee’s news conference played directly to the court of public opinion, with the tone of an opening statement complete with slides and video clips.

He and other attorneys have seized on an early clue of trouble that came hours before the concert began when throngs of fans rushed past security and metal detectors through a fence.

“Whatever security they had was wholly insufficient,” said former federal prosecutor Philip Hilder, a Houston lawyer not involved in any Astroworld case. “The crowd went right through.”

Hilder also criticized the event’s 56-page planning document, which was submitted to the city for approval. He said the plans were “boilerplate,” with too few details about the safety of the parking lot where the performance was held, which had no seating or aisles and no pens to contain the crowds.

The planning document, obtained by The Associated Press and shared with Hilder, mentions the possibility of tornadoes, bomb threats, active shooters, civil disobedience and riots but makes no mention of a possible crowd surge.

Several lawyers say litigation is also likely to focus on an unexplained delay between the time city officials declared a “mass casualty event” and when the concert organizers finally stopped the show, a 37-minute gap during which fans kept pushing toward the stage, collapsing and getting crushed.

“The band kept going on and on long after the problem existed,” said Frank Branson, a personal injury lawyer in Dallas. “It’s hard to believe that wasn’t a conscious disregard to the audience, to safety and welfare.”

It’s not clear what Scott could see from the stage as his fans were getting pushed, punched, pinned and trampled, some screaming out to stop the show.

On video posted to social media, Scott is seen at one point stopping the music, pointing into the audience and asking for aid for someone: “Security, somebody help, jump in real quick.”

In an Instagram post on Saturday, the rapper said he was “devastated” by the deaths and suggested he was unaware of the carnage below him.

“Anytime I can make out what’s going on, I stop the show and help them get the help they need,” he said. “I could just never imagine the severity of the situation.”

Representatives of Scott did not respond to an email from the AP seeking comment on Tuesday.

Scott is famous for encouraging fans to ignore security and crowd surf and stage dive in the mosh pit below him. A commercial for this year’s Astroworld event, since removed from YouTube, shows fans breaking through barricades and storming the concert grounds at the 2019 event.

In 2015, Chicago officials said Scott encouraged fans at the Lollapalooza music festival to vault security barricades. The rapper was sentenced to one year of court supervision after pleading guilty to reckless conduct charges.

In 2017, Scott was arrested after he encouraged fans to bypass security and rush the stage during a concert in Arkansas, leaving a security guard, a police officer and several others injured. Scott faced several misdemeanor charges, including inciting a riot. He pleaded guilty to disorderly conduct and paid a fine.

Scott is also being sued by a concertgoer who says he was partially paralyzed when he was pushed from a third-floor balcony at a New York City concert in 2017, an incident the man says happened after Scott encouraged people to jump.

Dallas lawyer Ellen Presby said Scott’s past will help make a case against him, but his likely defense will be to argue that he is just a performer who leaves the security details to other people, which will make it more difficult to attach blame.

Defense lawyers will argue “what he does is hop on the stage and do his thing and it’s all set up for him,” she said. If she were defending him, she added, she would “try to find facts that he was as surprised and horrified as everyone else.”

Houston attorney C.J. Baker said a criminal filing against Scott is possible given his past behavior, but it would be a difficult case because it would have to establish intent, not just carelessness.

“You would need to show that he acted in a way that he sort of knew what was happening and acted that way anyway,” he said. “That is a much bigger, much steeper hill to climb” than the lawsuits.

Houston lawyer Joel Androphy said most law firms are likely to focus on civil suits that pile on defendants with resources to pay out big damages.

Aside from Scott, the biggest legal target is Live Nation, a publicly traded company whose stock has soared as fans rush to more concerts and festivals now that many pandemic restrictions have been lifted. The company has declined to comment on what went wrong, but issued a statement Monday that it is helping police with a criminal investigation and “will address all legal matters at the appropriate time.”

The company reported it held $4.6 billion in cash as of September. Its stock fell less than 1% Tuesday afternoon after plunging more than 5% a day earlier.

Suing Houston and Harris County for negligence would be difficult, given that both enjoy broad protection under the doctrine of sovereign and government immunity, but there are exceptions, several lawyers said.

“They’re mostly protected, but their conduct is going to be looked at with a critical eye,” said Houston lawyer Randy Sorrels, past president of the Texas State Bar Association.

Find your latest news here at the Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle

The post Rapper’s rowdy past raises red flags in Astroworld lawsuits appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.