Author: openjargon

• Former President Donald Trump chose Ohio Sen. JD Vance as his running mate.
• A former Trump critic, Vance rose to fame as the author of a bestselling memoir, "Hillbilly Elegy."
• Vance was elected to the Senate in 2022 and became an outspoken supporter of Trump.

Donald Trump's dramatic Veepstakes have come to an end and Sen. JD Vance of Ohio has come out on top.

Despite winning the coveted spot as Trump's No. 2, though, Vance has had a winding path through Trumpism and politics overall.

Here are 10 things you need to know about Vance, the potential 50th vice president and heir apparent to the MAGA movement.

Born James Donald Bowman in Middletown, Ohio, JD Vance grew up in the Rust Belt and joined the Marines after high school.

Vance served in Iraq as a public affairs marine, escorting members of the press and writing stories about service members. He wrote in his 2016 memoir, "Hillbilly Elegy," that the Marine Corps "taught me how to live like an adult."

"It was in the Marine Corps where I first ordered grown men to do a job and watched them listen; where I learned that leadership depended far more on earning the respect of your subordinates than on bossing them around; where I discovered how to earn that respect; and where I saw that men and women of different social classes and races could work as a team and bond like family," he wrote, according to an excerpt published by Military.com.

He went on to study at Ohio State University and Yale Law School.

Vance majored in political science and philosophy at Ohio State and graduated summa cum laude. He then graduated from Yale Law School in 2013.

As Business Insider previously reported, while at Yale, law professor and "Battle Hymn of the Tiger Mother" author Amy Chua encouraged Vance to write a memoir about his upbringing.

Before becoming an author and politician, Vance worked at a venture capital firm backed by billionaire Peter Thiel.

As a law student, Vance attended a talk by Paypal founder Peter Thiel. He wrote in The Lamp in 2020 that it was "the most significant moment" of his time at Yale.

After two clerkships and a brief career in corporate law, Vance began working at Mithril Capital, a firm backed by Thiel, in 2016. A year later, he moved to Revolution, a VC firm in Washington, DC.

He wrote a best-selling memoir, "Hillbilly Elegy."

Vance published "Hillbilly Elegy" in the summer of 2016, before Trump was elected or projected to win the presidency. The memoir, which became a New York Times bestseller, focuses on Vance's experience growing up poor in Ohio and Kentucky and was largely read as an honest illustration of America's white working class. After Trump won, many turned to the book as an explanation for Trump's meteoric and unexpected rise.

A movie adaptation of "Hillbilly Elegy" came out on Netflix in 2020.

Vance is married to litigator Usha Chilukuri Vance.

Vance met his wife when they were both students at Yale Law School. In "Hillbilly Elegy," he wrote that Chilukuri Vance was his "Yale spirit guide" who encouraged him to seek opportunities within the elite institution. They wed in 2014.

Chilukuri Vance clerked for Judge Brett Kavanaugh in the US Court of Appeals before he became a Supreme Court Justice and also clerked for Chief Justice John Roberts, The New York Times reported. She now works at the law firm Munger, Tolles & Olson.

Vance and his wife have three young children.

They have two sons, 6-year-old Ewan and 4-year-old Vivek, and a 2-year-old daughter, Mirabel.

In February, Vance read "Oh, The Places You'll Go!" by Dr. Seuss on the Senate floor in honor of Vivek's 4th birthday, The Hill reported.

Vance started out as a "Never Trumper," but slowly changed his tune and embraced the former president.

When he published "Hillbilly Elegy," Vance was a self-described "Never Trumper" and even called the former president "reprehensible" in a now-deleted Twitter post.

As the years — and Trump presidency — wore on, though, Vance started to take a different approach. He told The Financial Times in 2018 that the former president "recognizes the frustration that exists in large parts of Ohio, Pennsylvania, eastern Kentucky and so forth."

Come 2020, Vance supported Trump's campaign and expressed regret for his previous stance. The tide turned in both directions, as Trump began to support Vance's foray into politics.

In 2021, Vance entered a crowded Senate primary race.

A junior congressman, Vance was only elected to the Senate in 2022 but has since become one of Trump's most loyal supporters. He entered a cramped Ohio primary in 2021 in the mold of an unrelenting Trump supporter and anti-elitist.

Vance embraced the former president's policies and eventually earned his coveted endorsement. With Trump's blessing, he catapulted through the primary and into Congress.

Vance serves on various congressional committees and represents the "New Right."

In the Senate, Vance serves on the Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Committee; the Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee; the Joint Economic Committee; and the Special Committee on Aging. Like Trump, he has an isolationist bent on foreign policy and takes a hard-line approach to immigration.

During his limited time in office, Vance has come to embody what Politico dubbed the "New Right" movement — an ill-defined coalition of younger conservatives who are trying to push the Republican party toward more populism, conservatism, and nationalism.

Trump selected Vance as his running mate in the 2024 presidential race.

Trump selected Vance as his running mate in a post on Truth Social. In it, he celebrated Vance's business background and said that, as vice president, the youngster "will do everything he can to help me MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN."

If elected, the 39-year-old will be one of the youngest vice presidents in the nation's history and well-positioned to inherit the MAGA crown.

• Disney is the latest big company to have its data leaked online.
• Hacking group Nullbulge said it published internal Slack information from "almost 10,000 channels."
• For weeks, an X account had warned the company that it had been hacked and a leak was coming.

An apparent leak has made messages, files, code, and other data from Disney's internal Slack public.

A hacking group known as Nullbulge claimed responsibility for the leak in a blog post. In it, it said people could gain details on Disney's planned projects, some log-in information, and more, all taken from the company Slack messaging system.

Nullbulge said it accessed "almost 10,000 channels" to dump "every message and file possible." The group remains anonymous but said its mission includes advocating for artist rights, The Wall Street Journal reported. Business Insider couldn't verify Nullbulge's claims regarding the size of the hack.

Disney artist contracts, "approach to AI," and "blatant disregard for the consumer" motivated the group to target the entertainment company, according to the Journal.

The X account @NullBulgeGroup spent weeks posting about infiltrating Disney's Slack. One post from July 4 appears to show a dashboard with the daily attendance at Disneyland Paris.

A Disney spokesperson told BI that the company is investigating the matter.

Disney is the latest major corporation to experience a data leak in the past week. On Friday, AT&T said that hackers stole "nearly all" of its customers' call and text records.

An unidentified Nullbulge spokesperson gave the Journal some insight into why hackers might release data first and ask questions later.

"If we said, 'Hello Disney, we have all your Slack data,' they would instantly lock down and try to take us out. In a duel, you better fire first," the spokesperson said.

• Several important Supreme Court decisions this term dealt with questions of executive power.
• In two rulings, SCOTUS expanded presidential power and limited the rest of the executive branch.
• Where the Court limited the executive branch, it granted power to the judiciary, experts told BI.

With its rulings this term, the Supreme Court created a perfect storm for the lower courts to be inundated with legal challenges on everything from the applications of regulatory laws to the scope of the presidency's power.

In doing so, the high court has set up a political chessboard through which the judicial branch can claw power away from the established executive authority.

Meanwhile, some members of lower courts — such as US District Judge Aileen Cannon, in her Monday decision to toss out Donald Trump's classified documents case — are, intentionally or not, creating ways to assist SCOTUS in methodically shrinking the executive branch's power.

The Supreme Court's attack on executive power

Taken together, two specific Supreme Court decisions this term — on Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo and Corner Post, Inc. v. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System — combined to create a window for an array of new lawsuits to challenge once-settled law and be reinterpreted by a deeply polarized court. And in the cunning way the high court's conservative majority phrased its decisions, the justices kept the power to clean up the mess for themselves.

In a ruling on June 28, the court overturned 40 years of precedent and rolled back the Chevron doctrine. Once considered a victory among conservative lawmakers because it had upheld a deregulatory interpretation of policy by the Reagan administration, the Chevron doctrine gave the Environmental Protection Agency — and federal agencies more broadly — the power to interpret ambiguous regulatory language in laws enacted by Congress, as long as the agency's interpretation was reasonable.

By rolling Chevron back, the Court decided it should no longer defer to executive branch interpretations of the laws involving its agencies. It has now limited the power of presidentially appointed officials to determine how their agencies should be run under existing laws.

"So that is, in theory, taking power away from unelected officials," Justin Crowe, a professor of political science at Williams University who researches the Supreme Court, told Business Insider. "But, where is that power going? It's not exactly going to the people or to elected officials. In some roundabout sense it might be going to Congress, but in reality, it's going to courts and judges, and giving courts and judges the ability to second-guess agency decisions."

Under the new rules, federal agencies wouldn't be the authority on the regulations they enforce. That means a plaintiff could challenge regulatory rules and enforcement methods by agencies like the EPA, Securities Exchange Commission, or Department of Health and Human Service, and the Court would be allowed to interpret the legal regulations, potentially siphoning even more power from the executive branch.

A one-two punch against regulation

Corner Post was decided on July 1, receiving less media attention than Loper did several days prior. But, when combined with the outcome of the Loper decision, Corner Post "almost encourages the targets of administrative regulation to sue," according to Jonathan Entin, a retired constitutional law professor at Case Western Reserve University.

"Loper says no deference to the agency; the courts are supposed to interpret regulations. But the Corner Post case, which was a challenge to a Federal Reserve Board regulation about card swiping fees, may encourage loads of legal challenges," Entin, who clerked for former Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg while she was in the DC Circuit, said.

In the Corner Post case, Entin told BI, the Court expanded the six-year time limit for plaintiffs to bring lawsuits against federal agencies over their regulatory rules. The new limitations are no longer based on when the rule was implemented, as a lower court had determined. Instead, the high court decided the countdown begins when a plaintiff says they were injured by the rule — which "opens up every rule for renewed challenges by just anybody," Entin said.

This means that a plaintiff could sue over a rule enacted decades ago if they can make a case that they were hurt by the regulation within the last six years — like a newly created gas station suing over emissions regulations that it claims hinder its business, giving the current court a window to reinterpret old law.

With Corner Post, Entin said, the Supreme Court created a statute of limitations that, from the standpoint of federal agencies, never really expires.

A 'tsunami of lawsuits'

In her dissent in the Corner Post case, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson noted that taken together, the Loper and Corner Post decisions would open up a "tsunami of lawsuits" from plaintiffs who have grievances with various federal regulations — from the Federal Reserve Board's fees for debit card processing to the Environmental Protection Agency's Clean Air Act and beyond. 

Those inevitable legal challenges will offer the Court ample opportunities to weigh in — and flex its power — in the future.

But the Court didn't stop at giving itself the reins to interpret regulations that federal agencies are beholden to.

The most striking example might be the Supreme Court's ruling in Trump v. United States, in which the court granted widespread immunity to sitting presidents for official actions taken in office. But an insidious element of the Trump case is that it gave the judiciary the power to decide what exactly constitutes an official, protected, action, compared to an unofficial — and thereby unprotected — one.

In the Trump case, the Supreme Court offered Trump broad immunity for some of his acts concerning his January 6 election interference case. It also kicked some decisions back down to DC District Judge Tanya Chutkan to determine whether other elements of the charges against the former president would be protected by the "official act" immunity or if he could still be prosecuted for them.

Additional challenges from the Trump camp on Chutkan's decisions could land the case back on the Supreme Court's desk for more specific interpretation.

Similarly, Judge Cannon's Monday decision to toss out the former president's classified documents case will almost certainly find its way to the Supreme Court after appeal.

Cannon, who was appointed by Trump, ruled that the appointment of Special Counsel Jack Smith to prosecute the former president was unconstitutional because Smith was not approved by Congress to fill the role like other legal officers of the US who have the power to impanel grand juries and bring indictments.

Smith was assigned to the job by Attorney General Merrick Garland — a presidentially appointed position. Special counsels have historically been used for major cases in which Justice Department officials may have a conflict of interest, such as the Ronald Reagan-era Iran-Contra affair, Bill Clinton's Whitewater controversy, and the criminal investigation into Hunter Biden.

Clarence Thomas signaled in his opinion in the Supreme Court's immunity case ruling this month that he believes many types of special counsels are unconstitutional. It was only weeks after Thomas's opinion that Cannon made her ruling.

While other conservative justices have not so clearly stated their opinion on special counsels, a future ruling preventing their use would erode the right of the Attorney General's office to appoint special prosecutors, removing that power from the executive branch.

The pattern is not limited to the immunity case or those involving business regulations — it's part of a trend of the Supreme Court dismantling the non-presidential powers of the executive branch, rolling back laws, and reversing lower court rulings involving guns, emergency abortions, and where homeless people are allowed to sleep.

In the July 6 episode of Slate's Supreme Court analysis podcast "Amicus with Dahlia Lithwick," Senior Court Reporter Mark Joseph Stern said the Court spent this term expanding its power and "restructuring representative democracy to make it less representative and less democratic."

And it can keep happening no matter who is in the White House.

"It strikes me that this is a court that does not have a modest view of its own role," Entin told BI. "It has reached out to decide things that it didn't necessarily have to decide, and by doing so, it encourages other potential litigants to try to swing for the fences. And whether the court got these cases right or not, I think we're going to see more cases raising these sorts of issues come along."

• Taylor Swift's newest album "The Tortured Poets Department" has logged 12 straight weeks at No. 1.
• "Poets" is now her biggest album on the Billboard 200 chart, outlasting "1989" and "Fearless."
• Swift's self-titled debut album performed the worst on the Billboard 200, peaking at No. 5.

Taylor Swift gave us fair warning in her newest album: "Try and come for my job." Three months later, she's still in her prime.

Released on April 19, "The Tortured Poets Department" has logged 12 consecutive weeks at No. 1 on the Billboard 200, a career-best for Swift.

The uninterrupted reign of "Poets" is rare for a streaming-era release. It's the first album ever by a female artist to spend its first 12 weeks atop the chart, surpassing a record previously held by Whitney Houston's 1987 blockbuster "Whitney." The all-time record for a consecutive streak among women is held by Carole King's masterpiece "Tapestry," which spent 15 weeks at No. 1 in 1971.

Swift is no stranger to chart success. Keep reading for a ranking of her 15 studio albums (including both originals and rerecords) based on their Billboard 200 performances.

9. "Taylor Swift"

Billboard 200 peak: No. 5

Swift's self-titled debut is the only studio album in her catalog that hasn't reached No. 1 on the Billboard 200.

"Taylor Swift" debuted at No. 19 and scaled the chart for more than a year, peaking at No. 5 in 2008.

8 (tie). "Lover"

Billboard 200 peak: No. 1 for one week

Swift's seventh studio album was the first one that she owned outright, thanks to her new label contract with UMG.

"Lover" was promoted by several singles, including "You Need to Calm Down," "The Archer," and "The Man." Four years later, once Swift kicked off The Eras Tour, "Cruel Summer" climbed to No. 1 on the Billboard Hot 100 and stayed there for four weeks, becoming the album's biggest hit.

8 (tie). "Red (Taylor's Version)"

Billboard 200 peak: No. 1 for one week

The extended tracklist for "Red (Taylor's Version)" included the storied 10-minute version of "All Too Well," a longtime fan-favorite song in Swift's catalog.

"All Too Well (10 Minute Version)" was released alongside a short film directed by Swift and promoted by a convention-breaking performance on "Saturday Night Live." It became the longest song to reach No. 1 in the history of the Hot 100.

7 (tie). "Fearless (Taylor's Version)"

Billboard 200 peak: No. 1 for two weeks

"Fearless" was the first rerecorded album that Swift ever released.

The "Taylor's Version" series was inspired by the sale of Swift's masters to Scooter Braun in 2019, which she described as her "worst case scenario" in a passionate open letter. Swift decided to remake and rerelease her first six albums in a bid to reclaim ownership of her life's work. (Braun later sold Swift's masters to a private-equity company.)

In addition to faithfully recreating each tracklist, Swift decided to add never-before-heard songs "from the vault" that were written during the album's original creative process but cut from the final product.

"I've spoken a lot about why I'm remaking my first six albums, but the way I've chosen to do this will hopefully help illuminate where I'm coming from," Swift explained. "Artists should own their own work for so many reasons, but the most screamingly obvious one is that the artist is the only one who really knows that body of work."

"For example, only I know which songs I wrote that almost made the 'Fearless' album," she continued. "Songs I absolutely adored, but were held back for different reasons."

Many were skeptical that the "Taylor's Version" project would be embraced by fans, let alone achieve commercial success.

Those skeptics were forced to eat their words when "Fearless (Taylor's Version)" began to outpace the original on streaming platforms. According to Billboard, "Fearless (Taylor's Version)" earned more equivalent album sales in its first week of release than "Fearless" earned over the entire next year.

7 (tie). "Speak Now (Taylor's Version)"

Billboard 200 peak: No. 1 for two weeks

The rerecorded version of Swift's third album featured six songs from the vault, including two duets: "Electric Touch" with Fall Out Boy and "Castles Crumbling" with Hayley Williams, one of Swift's oldest friends.

6 (tie). "Reputation"

Billboard 200 peak: No. 1 for four weeks

"Reputation" arrived after an extended period of silence. Her longtime feud with Ye (then known as Kanye West) and Kim Kardashian reached a fever pitch; Swift decamped to London and withdrew from the public eye.

She returned with a new snake-infested aesthetic and "Look What You Made Me Do," a cheeky lead single that poked fun at her own persona.

Swift also declined to participate in interviews or media appearances while promoting her sixth album. Instead, she relied on a simple tagline: "There will be no further explanation. There will just be reputation."

6 (tie). "Evermore"

Billboard 200 peak: No. 1 for four weeks

"Evermore" was surprise-released just five months after Swift's previous album, "Folklore." The two were billed as "sister albums," created under near-identical conditions with the same team of collaborators.

"To put it plainly, we just couldn't stop writing songs," Swift explained on social media.

"Evermore" was nominated for album of the year at the 2022 Grammys, but lost to Jon Batiste's "We Are."

5 (tie). "Speak Now"

Billboard 200 peak: No. 1 for six weeks

Swift's third album had a lot to live up to, following the blockbuster success of "Fearless."

In response to skeptics — who questioned whether the teen phenom was relying too heavily on her collaborators — Swift decided to write "Speak Now" entirely by herself. She is the only songwriter credited on the standard tracklist.

5 (tie). "Midnights"

Billboard 200 peak: No. 1 for six weeks

Swift's 10th studio album sold over 1 million copies in its debut week, the first to cross that seven-figure threshold since Swift's own "Reputation." (She has now achieved the feat on seven different occasions.)

"Midnights" also won album of the year at the Grammys, joining "Fearless," "1989," and "Folklore" in the prestigious group of victors. Swift is the only artist in history to win album of the year four times.

5 (tie). "1989 (Taylor's Version)"

Billboard 200 peak: No. 1 for six weeks

The rerecorded version of "1989" was released nine years after the original. Swift added five vault songs to the tracklist, including the fan-favorite closer "Is It Over Now?"

4. "Red"

Billboard 200 peak: No. 1 for seven weeks

"Red" is Swift's fourth studio album. It featured a mishmash of Max Martin-produced pop bangers ("We Are Never Ever Getting Back Together," "I Knew You Were Trouble") and country-rock breakup anthems ("State of Grace," "Holy Ground").

3. "Folklore"

Billboard 200 peak: No. 1 for eight weeks

"Folklore" marked a sonic departure for Swift, stripping down her favored synth-pop production to reveal introspective reflections and intricate story arcs.

The pandemic-era album was coproduced by Swift, Jack Antonoff, and Aaron Dessner of The National. It received rave reviews from critics and is widely considered her best work to date.

2 (tie). "Fearless"

Billboard 200 peak: No. 1 for 11 weeks

Swift's sophomore effort had the longest run at No. 1 of any album in the 2000s. "Fearless" has since been certified diamond by the RIAA.

2 (tie). "1989"

Billboard 200 peak: No. 1 for 11 weeks

Swift's fifth album marked her official pivot from country to pop music, a move that Swift said she had to "really fight — and I mean aggressively fight — to have happen."

In addition to its double-digit streak atop the Billboard 200, "1989" yielded several hit singles on the Hot 100, including "Shake It Off," "Blank Space," and "Bad Blood."

1. "The Tortured Poets Department"

Billboard 200 peak: No. 1 for 12 weeks

Swift's 11th studio album has not left the No. 1 slot since its debut in April, fending off new releases from stars like Dua Lipa, Billie Eilish, and, most recently, Zach Bryan.

The album's 12-week reign brings Swift's total sum of weeks atop the chart to 81, extending her record among solo artists.

Since the Billboard 200 was launched in 1956, only The Beatles have logged more weeks at No. 1 than Swift.

• The Allen & Co. Sun Valley Conference, known as the "summer camp for billionaires," took place last week.
• Several attendees were spotted wearing colorful, tinted sunglasses.
• According to a celebrity stylist, the trend is as fashion-forward as it is functional.

Last week, the ultrawealthy flocked to Idaho for Allen & Co.'s annual Sun Valley Conference.

The conference, often called "summer camp for billionaires," started in the 1980s and brings some of the world's wealthiest and most powerful business leaders to one space for several days of presentations, outdoor activities, and networking. This year, it was held from July 9 to 13.

Sun Valley also doubles as a fashion trend pulse for the 1%, as high-profile attendees typically wear casual looks that offer a peek into their day-to-day style.

Pops of red and the classic tech-bro vest were in at Sun Valley 2024, but the weekend's standout style trend was a smaller accessory: tinted sunglasses.

Colorful sunglasses were the hit accessory of Sun Valley 2024

Take a peek at some photos from the conference, and you'll quickly spot some of the richest people in the world wearing colorful lenses.

For instance, Oprah Winfrey and Gayle King were spotted walking side-by-side in purple and blue lenses. Winfrey also wore glasses with soft-brown lenses during the week's festivities.

Likewise, Diane von Furstenberg sported taupe lenses alongside her husband, Barry Diller, who rocked bright yellow glasses. Film producer Brian Grazer was also photographed in yellow sunglasses.

Jeff Bezos and Lauren Sánchez didn't embrace bright-colored lenses, but their light brown and gray tinted shades were still a step away from traditional black.

Celebrity stylist and author Kim Appelt told Business Insider that colorful sunglasses perfectly merge multiple trends that have been popular in 2024, including the revival of vintage fashion from the 1970s and 1990s.

"There's a retro revival right now with the '70s and '90s coming back, so these sunglasses obviously fit perfectly into that," she said.

Gen Z, in particular, has embraced retro looks. Still, as Sun Valley shows, multiple generations are jumping on board, according to Appelt, who recently styled Justin Bieber's mother, Pattie Mallette, in custom-tinted sunglasses from Holly Eyewear.

Appelt also noted that colorful sunglasses are an easy way for people to play with quiet luxury, so it made sense to her that Sun Valley attendees leaned into the trend.

"That's a big thing for billionaires," she said. "They don't want to be overly flashy."

Perhaps the trend caught on at Sun Valley because attendees' futures are so bright they need a little help shading them. However, according to Appelt, the sunglasses likely appeal to the group because they are as functional as they are stylish. Plus, they help the wearer balance privacy and being seen when they're likely to be photographed in public.

"If you're a little tired, but maybe it's not super sunny out, you've got a tinted pair," she said, adding that they give you "a little bit of privacy without really obscuring your view."

There are many ways to play with the trend

If you want to try the trend, there are high-end and more affordable glasses in nearly every shape and size imaginable.

Holly Sharma of Holly Eyewear recommends glasses from Linda Farrow or Gucci if you want to splurge on high-end tinted sunnies. For instance, Linda Farrow's $1,075 Magali Angular Sunglasses, which have a narrower fit, can be made with purple or green lenses. At the same time, Gucci's ombre pink Cat-Eye Frame Sunglasses cost $650 and are printed with the Gucci label on the frames themselves.

Other retailers offer more moderately priced glasses, like Madewell's all-green Linbrook Sunglasses, which are on sale for $49.99, and Warby Parker's $95 green-lensed Kadri glasses.

And Amazon also has plenty of affordable options if you're not looking to spend less than $20 on sunglasses.

Whatever budget you're working with, the world might look slightly different when you slip on a pair of the trendiest sunglasses of the season.

The FBI identified Thomas Matthew Crooks as the man who shot at former president Donald Trump during his rally on July 13. Here's what we know.