Tag: News

• 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.

• Tesla's Robotaxi Day has been delayed to October, Bloomberg previously reported.
• Elon Musk on social media confirmed Tesla needed "extra time" to redesign the front of the vehicle.
• Musk has said Tesla's driverless taxi business will function like "a combination of Airbnb and Uber."

Elon Musk has seemingly confirmed Tesla's Robotaxi event has been delayed and revealed one reason the company needs more time before the big reveal.

Bloomberg reported last week that the event had been delayed from August 8 to October. The delay was relayed internally and the design team was told to modify some aspects of the vehicle, according to the report.

Musk spoke publicly about the delay for the first time in a social media post on Monday.

"Requested what I think is an important design change to the front, and extra time allows us to show off a few other things," Musk said on X.

The Tesla CEO's post was in response to a video posted by Tesla shareholder Warren Redlich examining the potential reasoning behind a delay.

Musk has said Tesla's driverless taxi business — which will eventually allow Tesla drivers to opt into adding their vehicles to the fleet when not in use — is meant to function like "a combination of Airbnb and Uber."

So far, we've only seen a preview of what the app element of the service could look like.

A few weeks ago, Tesla released a demo clip showing Rosalie Nathans, whose profile says she's a senior manager for used cars and online sales at Tesla, requesting the service on the app and getting in the vehicle. The app display in the video seemed to allow passengers options to personalize their experience by listing the car temperature, audio volume, and song playing on the display.

The apparent reveal event delay isn't a complete shock — Musk often underestimates how long it will take to bring the ideas he has to market, saying he tends to be optimistic about product timelines. The same happened with the Cybertruck, Tesla's Full Self-Driving software, and Starlink's high-speed internet access in remote areas.

Not much is known about Tesla's Robotaxi event aside from that the public will get a glimpse at whatever the company has been working on. Tesla's Full Self-Driving software, which would power the Robotaxis, is still in beta and a work in progress — it currently requires human oversight at all times in case an intervention is needed. Tesla is also facing a number of lawsuits and regulator scrutiny related to safety concerns over its self-driving software.

Tesla has yet to officially announce a new date for the Robotaxi event. The EV company did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

• Former President Donald Trump picked JD Vance as his running mate.
• Vance was favored by the likes of Elon Musk and Donald Trump Jr.
• In selecting Vance, Trump has made clear he wants to cement his takeover of the GOP.

Former President Donald Trump is running like he has nothing to lose.

On Monday, Trump announced that he had selected Sen. JD Vance of Ohio as his vice presidential pick. In selecting Vance, Trump stiff-armed the establishment and Wall Street voices that settled on another finalist, North Dakota Gov. Doug Burgum. Instead, the voices of Tesla CEO Elon Musk and Donald Trump Jr. held the most sway.

"I've seen him on TV," Trump Jr. told CNN on the convention floor shortly after Vance's selection was announced. "I've seen him prosecute the case against the Democrats. No one is more articulate than that."

While he was once an outspoken "Never Trumper," Vance is now the MAGA heir apparent. As the senator alluded to earlier this year, Trump can serve at most four more years as president. It means the 39-year-old is now in the prime position to cement the populist takeover of the Republican Party.

Trump's selection shows he is confident in his lead. In national polling, he is in the best place for a Republican presidential nominee in over two decades. His opponent, President Joe Biden, also threw the Democratic Party into chaos after a disastrous debate performance. It remains to be seen how the assassination attempt on Trump will alter the race. But almost immediately, Republicans have embraced Trump's defiant response.

Vance is a firebrand who rarely embraces subtlety. In May, he expressed skepticism that former Vice President Mike Pence's life was ever truly in danger during the Capitol riot. Hours after Trump survived an assassination attempt, Vance suggested that it was Democrats to blame for the shots being fired even before a suspect had been named or a motive identified. And yes, Vance once compared his now running mate to Hitler.

Like Trump, Vance has embraced conspiracies about the 2020 election. The Ohio Republican has also clearly stated that he would have done the opposite of what Pence did on January 6. A Vice President Vance would have allowed lawmakers to consider alternative slates of electors even if that meant that the certified election results of a particular state could be rejected.

President Joe Biden's campaign wasted no time tearing into Vance, illustrating the extent to which the president's reelection campaign may try to focus on him.

"Donald Trump picked J.D. Vance as his running mate because Vance will do what Mike Pence wouldn't on January 6: bend over backwards to enable Trump and his extreme MAGA agenda, even if it means breaking the law and no matter the harm to the American people," Biden-Harris 2024 Chair Jen O'Malley Dillon said in a statement.

Trump is betting that Vance will help him lock down states like Pennsylvania by extolling his blue-collar roots that were at the center Vance's New York Times bestseller "Hillbilly Elegy."

Vance was just sworn into the Senate last year. In terms of elected office experience, he would be one of the least experienced vice presidents in history.

Even in his short time in the chamber, Vance has staked out clear territory for himself. Among a group much closer to the Reagan-era GOP, the Ohioian has been an unrepentant populist in favor of protectionist trade policies. Like Trump, Vance has also strongly questioned sending defense aid to Ukraine.

Vance took his case against Ukraine aid to the Munich Security Conference in February. The gathering of the West's top defense officials was once a major stop for Sen. John McCain, who, more than any Republican, embodied the interventionist foreign policy that prized Europe's role in shaping the post-Cold War world.

In addressing the gathering, Vance said it was "time for a wake-up call."

Trump delivered one to the party he has forcibly molded in his image. Vance could make sure the GOP never goes back.

• Andrea Persson is a 44-year-old Argentina football supporter who was given tickets to Copa America.
• There was nowhere to park at the stadium, so she paid $50 to park outside of someone's house.
• She described huge crowds of people with parents taking their children away to get air.

This as-told-to essay is based on a conversation with Andrea Persson. It has been edited for length and clarity.

My husband and I were so excited to watch Argentina — where my family is from — against Colombia in the Copa America final. We were given tickets and couldn't wait.

We had gone to a previous Argentina game, so we knew there would be a lot of traffic getting to the stadium. We left plenty of time to get there in time for the 8:00 p.m. start. My GPS showed it would take us 35 minutes to get to the stadium from where we were.

As we approached the stadium, there weren't any signs pointing traffic toward parking lots. At the first parking lot entrance we reached, someone parked and directed traffic to another entrance. This happened another two times. Although we weren't told the parking lots were full, I assume that is why we were being redirected. The traffic between each of the parking lots was moving incredibly slowly.

We were getting concerned about the time because it was close to 7:00 p.m. People were standing outside houses on the street near the stadium with signs offering parking for $50. So we paid in cash and parked.

The car journey that was meant to take 35 minutes took us two hours. That's the start of when we realized how poorly organized the event was.

There were so many people waiting outside the stadium to get in

As we approached the stadium, we saw a wave of people trying to get inside. We went to the first gate. It was closed. A second gate. It was closed. A third. Closed.

People were moving slowly to try to get from one entrance to the other. We were stuffed together like sardines. I walked right behind my husband with my hand on his back, and my friend's hand was on my back. We were afraid of getting separated.

Although I didn't see anyone who had fallen in the crowds, I was so scared of people falling and starting a stampede we'd get caught in.

It felt like there was no air. The heat and humidity were worse than usual, and everyone was packed in so close together.

Around me, I could see parents with terrified looks. This was meant to be a family event, but parents were thinking about the safety of their children in the crowds. Many families were moving back, away from the stadium. I saw some jumping over bushes and fences to get away.

People were yelling out warnings about staying calm and not making any sudden movements as kids were around. Even though I would have loved my daughter to have come with us, I would have been terrified if she had.

We debated leaving

By 8:00 p.m., we moved away from the stadium to decide whether to leave to watch the game somewhere else. We weren't sure if we'd miss it waiting to be let in. Around the same time, people inside the stadium were texting to say the stadium was half full, so we decided to stay, hoping they'd open the doors soon.

Everyone was talking about how poorly organized the whole event was.

Eventually, an entrance gate opened, and we slowly made our way to it with the rest of the crowd. Although there were police present at the security points, no one's tickets or bags were checked.

It was only later, once we were safely in, that I thought how dangerous it was that no one knew what was inside these bags people were bringing in.

Instead of taking the elevator, which was jam-packed, we took a ramp to our section. When we arrived at the entrance of section 318, someone asked for our tickets. We showed him our phone, but nothing was scanned, and no bags were checked.

At 8:20 p.m., we sat down in our seats. The game hadn't started, and the stadium was still only half-full. About an hour later, the game finally started.

During the game, I saw officers trying to take people without tickets out of the stadium.

We loved being there, watching so many Colombians and Argentinians mixed together in one place. The mood was cheerful and respectful. It was a night to remember.

While the game itself was great, the event's organization was a total failure. If we're going to host the World Cup here, something has to change.

• Wayne LaPierre is back on trial in Manhattan, fighting for the right to return to the NRA.
• LaPierre led the gun group's fight to legalize AR-15s, the kind of weapon used against Trump.
• During a break in testimony Monday, he offered his 'hearts and prayers' for the victims' families.

Former National Rifle Association leader Wayne LaPierre — who arguably did more than any single person to keep AR-15s legal — offered his "hearts and prayers" for the victims of Saturday night's assassination attempt against Donald Trump.

LaPierre, 74, spoke to Business Insider briefly from the hallway outside his second civil-corruption trial, which began Monday in Manhattan.

"I am thankful that President Trump appears to be okay," he said. "God Bless his family. I know our hearts and prayers go out to the Buffalo fireman that lost his life, and his family."

"Also, we pray for the well-being and recovery of the victims," he added.

LaPierre declined to answer questions about his role in legalizing AR-15s, the kind of assault weapon used in Saturday's assassination attempt. He also declined to comment on President Joe Biden's ongoing efforts to reinstate a ban on assault weapons.

"That's all I have to say," he said, walking away.

LaPierre resigned from the NRA's helm in January, in the middle of his first corruption trial, at which a jury ordered him to repay the gun lobby $4.35 million. He cited his chronic Lymes disease in stepping down.

LaPierre is now fighting New York Attorney General Letitia James, who attended Monday's trial and who hopes a judge will ban him for life from any future fiscal role in the gun lobby.

This second trial's witness list is shaping up to be a who's who of assault-rifle proponents, just days after the attempt on Trump's life by a 20-year-old carrying a legally purchased AR-15,

First to be subpoenaed to the witness stand by James' side was longtime gun-rights advocate Charles Cotton, who has fought against assault rifle bans and universal background checks for decades.

The former NRA president and current board member once lamented, "Too bad we lost the civil war," in a post to an online forum, as reported by Slate.

Under questioning Monday, Cotton tried to refute the AG's contention that the NRA is in large part only pretending to shape up its finances and distance itself from LaPierre.

The NRA has yet to press LaPierre for the $4.35 million he now owes them, or to demand he repay millions more in legal fees the gun lobby has spent on him, James has complained in court filings.

Cotton was questioned by an assistant attorney general, Steve Shiffman, about remarks he made during the NRA's annual meeting in May.

In addressing the meeting, Cotton had inaccurately claimed the NRA "won" the first trial and that the NRA was not found liable for any wrongdoing, according to transcripts shown in court.

Asked if LaPierre had been punished in any way, Cotton responded from the witness stand, "We were keeping a lot closer eye on him. He knew there was a spotlight on him."

Cotton had high praise for fellow board member Ronnie Barrett, who is on the defense witness list.

"Ronnie Barrett literally is a rock star in our community," Cotton said, praising his colleague's fundraising and business experience.

Barrett is also the inventor of the Barrett .50 caliber sniper rifle, Cotton said, noting from the witness stand, "It was adopted by the military — all military services use his rifle. He literally designed the gun," Cotton added.

According to Barrett's own NRA profile, the sniper rifle is so effective, Al Qaeda purchased them in the 1980s, and Irish Republican Army snipers used them to kill British police officers and Irish constables during "The Troubles" in Northern Ireland.

The AG's lawyers will likely also ask Barrett about also downplaying the jury's findings at the May meeting.

While speaking at the meeting, Barrett brushed aside the jury's finding that NRA Corporate Secretary John Frazer failed to uphold his duties and lied in regulatory filings.

Barrett called Frazer's actions "a little mistake," and likened it to stepping in "cow piles," according to a transcript excerpt included in an AG court filing.

This second, non-jury trial is being held before state Supreme Court Justice Joel Cohen.

In addition to the ban on LaPierre, James is asking that Cohen install an independent monitor who would audit and supervise how the NRA uses contributions and donations, something the gun lobby's lawyers liken to a state takeover.

James's office oversees charitable and nonprofit organizations in New York. In 2020, she sued the NRA, LaPierre, and three other longtime top executives, alleging a leadership culture of fraud, greed, and retaliation against whistleblowers.

At his first corruption trial in January, LaPierre, who successfully lobbied against even modest, popular gun-control laws for three decades, was found liable by a jury living lavishly on the NRA's dime and was found to have caused $5 million in harm to the organization.

The trial is expected to last two weeks.

• Mark Cuban warned that social media algorithms could determine the president.
• "This is the first AI driven election season where policy and personalities mean nothing," he wrote.
• He also called the impact of algorithms on children "terrifying."

Will social media decide who becomes president? That's what Mark Cuban is worrying about.

The billionaire "Shark Tank" investor warned about social media's outsized influence this election cycle.

"This is the first AI driven election season where policy and personalities mean nothing and algorithms drive everything," Cuban wrote on X on Monday.

Cuban argued that "narratives delivered by the algorithms" — whether factual or not — are now more important to voters than "actual events."

This means employees at social media companies who design algorithms have "the most influential positions in politics," Cuban said — followed by campaign staffers "who can figure out how to reverse-engineer the algos."

Cuban outlined his argument on X, but said the thesis applies to all social platforms "that are tuned to maximize engagement and or revenue."

Beyond politics, he called the impact of unpredictable algorithms on children today "terrifying" — and even more influential than their parents.

Cuban did not immediately respond to a request for comment from Business Insider.

Cuban similarly warned of social media's ills Sunday after the attempted assassination of former president and GOP nominee Donald Trump.

Cuban warned users to watch out for scammers and grifters like people creating fake fundraisers. He also wrote he hoped the former president was okay, and thanked the Secret Service for putting themselves in harm's way.

The famed entrepreneur has previously voiced his support for President Joe Biden in November's election.

Cuban's also publicly feuded with Elon Musk, the billionaire owner of the X platform itself — as well as CEO of SpaceX and Tesla — who endorsed Trump for president after the former president was shot during a campaign rally on Saturday.

Bloomberg also reported that Musk sent money to a pro-Trump group even before the attempted assassination.

Musk had previously said he wasn't donating to any candidate in the 2024 election.

• USS Mason, a destroyer, was forced to defend itself against Houthi missile attacks in 2016.
• Years later, in 2023 and into 2024, that same warship found itself battling the Iran-backed rebels once again.
• The 2016 engagements helped the Navy prepare for its most recent fight, the Mason's commanding officer said.

When USS Mason sailed into the Red Sea toward the end of last year, the US Navy warship quickly found itself in a familiar situation: defending against Houthi missile attacks.

Unlike some other ships, the Arleigh Burke-class destroyer battled the Houthis years before they started targeting merchant shipping lanes in what has become a monthslong campaign. The Mason's commanding officer says that earlier fight helped the Navy prepare for its latest clash with the Iran-backed rebels.

It's not quite the same fight, the commanding officer said. "They are evolving in their own tactics, techniques and procedures, but we are continuing to outpace what they are changing," Cmdr. Justin Smith told Business Insider in an interview last week.

The Mason recently returned to its homeport in Florida after a deployment to the Middle East as part of the Dwight D. Eisenhower Carrier Strike Group, which spent months defending merchant shipping lanes in the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden from Houthi attacks.

During its exhausting deployment, the Mason intercepted a number of Houthi drones and missiles — including some fired at the destroyer. But it actually wasn't the first time that the warship found itself in this highly dangerous situation.

The Houthis targeted the Mason with missiles on multiple occasions in October 2016 while the destroyer was operating in the Red Sea and around the Bab-el-Mandeb Strait. Some of these threats were intercepted by the warship.

In November 2023, just over seven years later, the Houthis fired several missiles in the general direction of the Mason, this time while it was responding to an attempted hijacking of a merchant vessel in the Gulf of Aden. The projectiles landed in the water several miles away.

Smith said that the Navy learned a lot from the Mason's first engagements with the Houthis back in 2016 and explained that the investments the sea service made since then — specifically, in training and readiness initiatives — have "paid off" during the recent deployments.

"We took a lot of human performance factors away from the crew members and the watch team's performance during 2016, and the Navy really studied that to ensure that we are going to have this combat warrior mentality and mindset to be ready for any type of threat or engagement that can be encountered," Smith said.

Smith said sailors first develop this mindset during boot camp, but it became an enduring aspect of training and something he sought to continue on board the destroyer to ensure that the crew was ready for a sustained threat.

Smith said that the Navy has invested heavily in human performance and that the investment has been worth it. "Our sailors — they still remain the Navy's most powerful weapon system," he said. "If we didn't have the great training we have now, our readiness would be impacted."

The Eisenhower carrier strike group leadership has routinely stressed that the Navy will draw lessons from the ongoing counter-Houthi mission and apply them to future combat operations, and that process is already underway.

For instance, Rear Adm. Marc Miguez, who spent months commanding the strike group, said in a reflection on the deployment that the sea service would benefit from more training scenarios focused on unmanned systems.

Another consideration is the threat posed by anti-ship ballistic missiles. Though long in various arsenals, these weapons had never seen combat until the Houthis launched them in late 2023. In the fighting that followed, the Eisenhower strike group intercepted a number of these missiles, giving the Navy valuable information that would be useful in a future conflict — whether that's against the Houthis or another force.

"Everything is evolving, and things don't remain stagnant in threats," Smith said, adding that the Navy is always working to "demonstrate to the Houthis that we'll be able to challenge them currently and then moving forward in the future."