Politics

(WASHINGTON) — It’s a brand battle in the Supreme Court this week as whiskey maker Jack Daniel’s Properties, Inc. takes on a dog toy manufacturer in a case over free speech and federal trademark law.

The case, first filed by Jack Daniel’s Properties, Inc., against VIP Products LLC in Arizona several years ago and slated for a Wednesday hearing before the high court, claims trademark infringement over an injection-molded vinyl chew toy the whiskey manufacturer says infringes on its trademark.

VIP’s “Silly Squeakers” dog toys are made to resemble real-life products, mostly involving sodas, beers, wines and liquors. The toy bottle in question reads “BAD SPANIELS” instead of “JACK DANIEL’S,” “The Old No. 2” instead of “Old No. 7 Brand,” and “On your Tennessee CARPET” instead of “Tennessee sour mash WHISKEY.”

The district court found VIP’s use of the Jack Daniel’s trademark was likely to confuse consumers. However, on appeal, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in favor of VIP in 2020. The Supreme Court is now tasked with determining when “humorous use” of a brand’s logo and identity in a commercial product by a third party violates federal trademark law or deserves protection under the First Amendment.

Jack Daniel’s brief claims the products mislead customers for profit.

“VIP sells products mimicking Jack Daniel’s iconic marks and trade dress that mislead consumers, profit from Jack Daniel’s hard-earned goodwill, and associate Jack Daniel’s whiskey with excrement,” reads the brief.

The dog toy company invokes its First Amendment rights in its brief to the Supreme Court.

“Freedom of speech begins with freedom to mock,” reads the first sentence of VIP’s brief.

The brief of respondent argues the product is not a trademark infringement because “Bad Spaniels” is not an actual product — the dog toy, which has artwork on it, is the product.

“This case is not a dispute between two trademarks on commercial products,” reads the brief. “VIP uses a pretend trademark and pretend trade on a pretend label on a pretend bottle full of pretend contents.”

Rogers v. Grimaldi

The Ninth Circuit decision, upholding VIP’s ability to sell the whiskey-themed dog toy, relied on a longstanding ruling from a different federal appeals court in the 1989 case Rogers v. Grimaldi.

When actress Ginger Rogers sued Alberto Grimaldi and MGM films over Ginger and Fred — a film about two cabaret performers whose routine resembled that of Rogers and Fred Astaire — the Second Circuit Court of Appeals developed a test, known as the Rogers test, for balancing First Amendment free speech rights with trademark protections under the Lanham Act. The court ruled in favor of Grimaldi, saying the film was not likely to deceive or cause confusion in replicating a trademarked routine.

In the Jack Daniel’s case, the Ninth Circuit agreed that the Jack Daniel’s bottle design is protected under trademark law but concluded the humorous approach of VIP was protected by the First Amendment.

“Although VIP used Jack Daniel’s trade dress and bottle design to sell Bad Spaniels, they were also used to convey a humorous message, which was protected by the First Amendment,” reads the opinion.

Other stakeholders

A slate of major commercial brands have weighed in on the Supreme Court case through amicus briefs, or friend-of-the-court filings that allow other stakeholders to inform the justices of broader implications of a case.

Nike, Inc., Campbell Soup Company, Levi Strauss & Co. and American Apparel & Footwear Association all filed briefs in favor of Jack Daniel’s argument. If the Ninth Circuit ruling stands, it “opens the door to a new global counterfeit threat: an influx of infringing products meriting First Amendment protection because their creators clear a ground-level hurdle of affixing minimal ‘humorous’ expression onto them,” according to American Apparel’s amicus brief.

In the 1986 case Grey v. Campbell Soup Company, Campbell’s, which owned the trademark GODIVA, won an injunction against a pet treat maker branded as Dogiva, with packaging that infringed on the trademark for Godiva’s chocolates. Campbell’s brief claims it would have lost the case under the standard set forth by the Ninth Circuit in 2020.

“If the case were litigated today, Grey would undoubtedly argue that DOGIVA was intended to be a humorous commentary on the GODIVA® brand and thus was an expressive work, and Ninth Circuit precedent would require the district court to impose a heightened burden on Campbell Soup to show that the Rogers test was satisfied,” reads the Campbell brief.

The Distilled Spirits Council of the United States also filed an amicus brief in favor of Jack Daniel’s. A release sent to ABC News earlier this week says this case is about ensuring responsible advertising.

“This case is no laughing matter,” Courtney Armour, chief legal officer for Distilled Spirits Council, said. “While the case involves dog toys, even allegedly ‘humorous’ knock-offs can confuse consumers as to what messaging and products well-known alcohol beverage brands endorse.”

The Biden administration also supports a ruling in favor of Jack Daniel’s, according to a brief from the U.S. Solicitor General’s office.

Among those weighing in on behalf of VIP are at least 30 trademark law professors, whose brief argues the company’s “speech” is “noncommercial.”

The Motion Picture Association — comprised of some of the largest film distributors in the country — filed a brief that backed neither party, instead offering context for why filmmakers are invested in the case.

“A work might [refer to trademarks] to create a realistic or fanciful setting, to cast the mark in a creative new light, or to comment on it directly,” the filing says.

The court is expected to deliver a decision in the case by the end of June.

Copyright © 2023, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — President Joe Biden on Tuesday teased a 2024 run as he celebrated American legends Bruce Springsteen, Gladys Knight, Julia Louis Dreyfus and more in a White House ceremony.

Biden bestowed medals to nearly two dozen individuals and groups whose work, he said, deepened the country’s “understanding of the humanities and broadened our citizen’s engagement with history, literature, philosophy and so many other subjects.”

“Above all, you’re masters of your craft,” Biden told the recipients.

Biden made a reference to a potential 2024 campaign while introducing author Colson Whitehead, noting he won two Pulitzer prizes for his consecutive novels “The Underground Railroad” and “The Nickel Boys.”

“How in the hell did you do that? Pretty good man. I’m kinda looking for back-to-back myself,” Biden said, prompting a loud applause.

Biden has repeatedly said his intention is to run for reelection, though he’s yet to make any formal announcement.

Biden also quipped about how “some people are born to run” while he praising rock music icon Bruce Springsteen.

“Bruce Springsteen, a poet troubadour, chronicler of American life and resilience and hope and dreams, recipient of the Presidential Medal of Freedom, along with 20 Grammys, an Oscar, a Tony, and an unyielding love from millions of fans across generations,” Biden said.

Biden introduced Dreyfus as “President Julia Louis Dreyfus” for her role as Selina Meyer in the hit HBO sitcom “Veep.”

“I’m gonna talk to Julia later whether she liked being VP or president better,” he joked. “I got to figure that one out.”

Biden recognized each individual who was honored and detailed their work in their respective fields.

When it came to Knight, Biden described her as the “Empress of Soul” and said she’s “truly one of the best things ever to happen in terms of music.”

Other recipients included comedian Mindy Kaling, designer Vera Wang, activist Bryan Stevenson, artists Judith Francisca Baca and Antonio Martorell-Cardona, and writers Ann Patchet, Amy Tan, Walter Isaacson and Tara Westover.

“Mindy Kaling you know from Massachusetts, but as we all know, Scranton, Pennsylvania made her who she is,” Biden joked, in a nod to Kaling’s work on “The Office.”

It was the first time Biden awarded the arts medals since taking office after the COVID-19 pandemic put the ceremony on pause.

Biden previously bestowed Elton John with a National Humanities Medal during a White House concert last fall as John was embarking on his farewell tour — an honor John said he was “flabbergasted and humbled” to receive.

“You do make the country better, make it a better place,” Biden said to the 2021 awardees as the event came to a close.

Copyright © 2023, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(MADISON, Wis.) — The two candidates in Wisconsin’s crucial Supreme Court race met for their only debate Tuesday, debating hot-button issues such as abortion access and gerrymandering two weeks before voters will decide the balance of the state’s highest court.

Milwaukee County Circuit Judge Janet Protasiewicz, a liberal judge, and former Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice Daniel Kelly, a conservative, sparred for nearly an hour at the Wisconsin Bar Association, dinging each other over trustworthiness and policy in the race to win a 10-year term.

Protasiewicz cast Kelly as a “true threat to our democracy,” while Kelly repeatedly responded by painting his liberal opponent as a liar, with both citing ties to their partisan affiliations. The race is formally nonpartisan, but the two candidates’ résumés and comments cast little doubt as to their ideological makeups.

Protasiewicz highlighted Kelly’s track record of working with state GOP officials in an attempt to submit pro-Trump electors after the 2020 election even though then-candidate Joe Biden won the state.

“I am running against probably one of the most extreme partisan characters in the history of the state. This is somebody who advised the Republican Party on the fake elector scheme,” Protasiewicz said. Kelly accused Protasiewicz of lying about his role in that effort.

The former state Supreme Court justice, meanwhile, accused his opponent of being “bought and paid for” by the state’s Democratic Party and suggested she would have a “major problem going forward” if she were elected. Protasiewicz said she would recuse herself from any cases involving the state Democratic Party due to the support it has given her campaign.

Kelly did use the Republican Party of Wisconsin’s offices as his campaign headquarters in his 2020 campaign to stay on the court, but he said he would not accept any money from the state party.

The two also took aim at each other over comments on abortion and outside groups involved in the issue, with each accusing the other of forecasting how he or she would rule on an 1849 abortion law still technically on the books that bans the procedure in virtually all instances.

Protasiewicz, while acknowledging being an abortion rights supporter, said she would decide a case about the ban based on the law not her personal beliefs.

“I have been very clear about my values to the electorate because I think the electorate deserves to know what a person’s values are, Rather than hiding, I think the electorate deserve to know. I’ve also been very clear that any decision that I render will be made based solely on the law and the Constitution,” she said.

“My personal opinion is that it should be a women’s right to make a reproductive health decision, period,” she added.

Protasiewicz also noted Kelly’s endorsement from Wisconsin Right To Life, a group that opposes abortion rights, though Kelly said he did not make any promises to the group on how he’d rule.

“The conversations we had were this: Will you pledge to follow the law? Will you uphold the Constitution? Will you do the job of the justice and simply using existing law to decide the case has to come before the court? And that’s the same pledge I made to everyone, regardless of the issue involved that might come before the court. And so, they can be confident — just like everyone else in the state — that decisions would be based on the law,” Kelly shot back.

Protasiewicz and Kelly also tangled over the state’s legislative lines, with Protasiewicz claiming the current maps are rigged in Republicans’ favor and Kelly accusing her again of forecasting a future ruling from the debate stage.

“So, we know that the maps are not fair. We have battleground elections. We know they’re not. But the question is, am I able to fairly make a decision on a case? Of course I would. … That’s what you do. I can assure you that every single case that I will ever handle will be rooted in the law 100%,” Protasiewicz said.

“See, this is a problem that you have when you have a candidate who does nothing but talk about her personal politics,” Kelly responded. “She’s already told each and every one of you how she will approach this. And although she says the formulaic words that she will follow the law, she’s never said one thing in this campaign that would lead to any reasonable belief that that’s what she will do.”

The stakes are high for the April 4 faceoff between the two. The seven-member Supreme Court, currently split 4-3 in conservatives’ favor, would flip if Protasiewicz replaced retiring Justice Patience Roggensack, a conservative.

Besides ruling on issues like abortion rights and gerrymandering, the court could become involved in a close presidential election, as was the case when it intervened in 2020 to shut down an effort by former President Donald Trump to overturn his narrow loss in the state.

Copyright © 2023, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — Federal lawmakers have reintroduced a bill that would give consumers a tax break on the purchase of a new electric bike.

The Electric Bicycle Incentive Kickstart for the Environment (E-BIKE) Act would offer a refundable tax credit amounting to 30% of the e-bike’s price, capped at $1,500.

New e-bikes that cost less than $8,000 would be eligible for the refund — up from what was initially $4,000 in President Joe Biden’s original Build Back Better proposal.

The new bill also doubles the income limits to receive the maximum credit — up to $150,000 for a single filer and $300,000 for joint filers — to match the electric car credits in the Inflation Reduction Act.

California Rep. Jimmy Panetta — who reintroduced the bill on Tuesday along with California Reps. Mike Thompson and Adam Schiff and Oregon Rep. Earl Blumenauer, the Congressional Bike Caucus chairman — called the bill a “commonsense way to encourage” e-bike ownership, particularly for low-income earners looking to reduce their carbon footprint.

“By incentivizing Americans to own and use e-bikes, we are allowing them the chance to help improve the quality of life in our communities and tackle the climate crisis in our country,” Panetta said in a statement.

The e-bike tax credit was ultimately eliminated from the Build Back Better Act and was left out of the Inflation Reduction Act.

In reintroducing the bill, Panetta’s office pointed to the success of an e-bike rebate program implemented in Denver last year that issued more than 4,700 e-bike rebates.

“Transitioning to a clean energy economy includes changing the way we get around,” Hawaii Sen. Brian Schatz, chairman of the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Transportation, Housing and Urban Development who has introduced companion legislation in the Senate, said in a statement. “Our bill will make it more affordable for working people to buy an e-bike and help get cars off the road.”

Amid concerns over e-bike safety — in particular low-quality bikes equipped with shoddy, potentially dangerous and explosive batteries — the reintroduced E-Bike Act also includes language to help address battery hazards. The proposed bill defines eligible e-bikes as ones that meet battery safety standards set by Underwriters Laboratory, an industry leader in battery technology, or that “may be recognized by the United States Consumer Product Safety Commission.”

Copyright © 2023, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — President Joe Biden on Tuesday announced the establishment of two new national monuments, protecting land totaling more than half a million acres.

Biden named Avi Kwa Ame National Monument in Nevada and Castner Range National Monument in Texas as the nation’s newest monuments during the White House’s Conservation in Action Summit at the Interior Department.

Biden said these areas will be protected for future generations, and is part of the administration’s goal of preserving 30% of lands and waters by 2030 in accordance with his broader climate initiatives.

“When we conserve our country’s natural gifts, we’re not just protecting the livelihoods of people who depend on them, like the family farms, outdoor recreation, businesses, rural communities welcoming visitors from all across the country and around the world,” Biden said at the White House Conservation in Action Summit at the Department of the Interior on Tuesday.

“We’re protecting the heart and the soul of our national pride.”

Avi Kwa Ame National Monument — also known as Spirit Mountain — is in a part of the state that’s been targeted for development of renewable energy, especially solar power. The Interior Department has identified 9 million acres of public land outside the monument’s borders that could be used for solar projects and the Bureau of Land Management is reviewing proposals for 13 potential projects in Nevada.

“It’s a place of reverence, it’s a place of spirituality and it’s a place of healing,” Biden said. “And now it will be recognized for the significance it holds and be preserved forever, forever.”

Biden said protecting the Castner Range in Texas as a national monument had significance for tribal nations and the military.

“It tells a story of the tribal nations who lived there, and the members of our armed forces were trained in those lands,” he said. “It’s also a place of incredible beauty.”

Biden said he’s directing Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo to consider creating a new National Marine Sanctuary designation to protect U.S. waters surrounding Pacific islands. The new sanctuary would include 777,000 square miles of the Pacific Ocean southwest of Hawaii.

“That’s an area larger than the Alaskan and Colorado put together and three times the size of Texas,” he said, adding, “It would make it the largest ocean area on the planet with the highest level of protection.”

The day of conservation comes as Biden approved more drilling in Alaska for the Willow Project, a move environmental groups have slammed, and one day after the United Nations released a dire climate change report.

Copyright © 2023, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(NEW YORK) — A judge declined Tuesday to move the trial date for a civil lawsuit filed against former President Donald Trump, his eldest children and his company by New York Attorney General Letitia James, alleging they duped banks and insurers by inflating the value of Trump’s real estate portfolio.

Trump’s legal team sought the delay but Judge Arthur Engoron said there was no need to postpone what he called a “seemingly simple case” of whether Trump’s disclosures to his lenders and insurers, known as statements of financial condition, were accurate or not.

“The issue is whether the statements were false,” Engoron said. “This case is complex, but it is not complicated.”

Trump has denied wrongdoing and cast the lawsuit as politically motivated by the New York attorney general.

The trial is scheduled to start on Oct. 2

Trump’s attorneys also sought the court’s permission to take depositions from more than 30 witnesses, which the attorney general’s office called an excessive “fishing expedition.”

“We’re asking for a fair opportunity,” defense attorney Christopher Kise said. “They’ve had three years to talk to 80 people plus.”

The attorney general’s office filed a $250 million civil lawsuit in September alleging the Trumps altered the values of their holdings to suit different business purposes like arranging loans or applying for tax breaks.

The lawsuit accused them of engaging in “numerous acts of fraud and misrepresentation in the preparation of Mr. Trump’s annual statements of financial condition” that overstated the values of nearly every major property in the Trump portfolio over at least a 10-year period.

“These acts of fraud and misrepresentation grossly inflated Mr. Trump’s personal net worth as reported in the Statements by billions of dollars and conveyed false and misleading impressions to financial counterparties about how the Statements were prepared,” the lawsuit said.

The judge has already rejected several defenses, including what Engoron called the “everyone was doing it” defense.

“You don’t have to have an accounting degree,” Engoron said. “A triplex apartment is worth less money if it’s 11,000, not 30,000 square feet,” referring to an allegation in the state’s 214-page complaint that Trump overvalued his apartment in Trump Tower. Until he moved to Florida, Trump lived in an 11,000-square-foot triplex. From 2012 to 2016, Trump represented the size of the apartment to be 30,000 square feet and valued it as high as $327 million, according to the lawsuit.

Trump is defending himself in the civil suit as he awaits a possible criminal indictment.

Copyright © 2023, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(ORLANDO, Fla.) — House Speaker Kevin McCarthy on Tuesday again ripped into the Manhattan district attorney when asked about the potential charges against Donald Trump at a news conference at the House GOP retreat in Orlando while seemingly growing frustrated with reporters after multiple questions about the former president who has continued to dominate the news cycle.

McCarthy was asked directly if had concerns specifically about Trump’s alleged conduct regarding a hush money payment to Stormy Daniels and quickly pivoted to talking about Hillary Clinton and did not answer the question — before instead targeting the Manhattan DA.

“What we see before us is a political game being played by a local … Look this isn’t New York City, this is just a Manhattan, this is just a borough DA. Okay,” McCarthy said.

McCarthy told ABC News when asked that he hasn’t spoken to Trump in three weeks and that he has not talked to him about his calls for House committees to investigate the Manhattan DA.

“I have not talked to the president, maybe three weeks? No, I have not talked to him about the investigation at all,” McCarthy said.

At times, McCarthy seemed to grow frustrated that, at the House issues retreat, he’s being asked repeatedly about Trump amid potential charges, blaming the press who he claims keeps bringing up the former president.

However, ahead of this weeks retreat McCarthy announced he would direct House committees to investigate the investigation into Trump, which helped fuel the news cycle heading into this week’s retreat.

“We’re not talking about this in our conference; you’re asking about it,” McCarthy said. When asked if Trump is still the leader of the Republican Party, McCarthy again took a jab at the press: “In the press room, for all of you, he is.”

McCarthy’s comments targeting the press come as other GOP members at the retreat have privately complained to ABC News about how the former president has once again dominated the coverage around this week’s retreat, which members had hoped to use to promote their legislative goals.

Copyright © 2023, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — As Russian President Vladimir Putin confers with China’s President Xi Jinping in Moscow, the visit signifies more than a celebration of the so-called “no limits” partnership between the two powers.

It’s also a pivotal meeting poised to deepen the gap between the East and West, and just the latest in a series of stress tests on the relationship between Beijing and Washington — one already pushed to a near-breaking point.

Even though Biden administration officials anticipated Xi would journey to Moscow, they still describe the summit as a setback for the U.S.-China relationship and say they’ll be watching the visit closely to see if Beijing intends to supply Moscow with military aid — a potentially game-changing development for the war in Ukraine, and one that could bring the simmering tensions between the U.S. and China to a boil.

ABC News spoke with experts and officials about the challenges Russia and China’s alliance poses to the U.S., the Biden administration’s approach to Beijing, and how world leaders can avoid potentially catastrophic escalation.

Xi and Putin: Neighbors, partners, and ‘leaders for life’

While Xi’s three-day state visit is a welcome signal of support for Putin’s war effort, it also comes at a critical time for the Chinese leader as he tightens his authoritarian grip, formally locking down an unprecedented third term as China’s president.

The two men already have highlighted their personal bond, calling each other “dear friend” as they also touted their strategic partnership and increasingly ominous opposition to the West.

“China and Russia are more aligned than they’ve been since the 1950s,” said Brad Bowman, senior director of the Center on Military and Political Power at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies.

Despite being a close ally of the Kremlin and echoing many of its talking points on Ukraine, Xi has sought to project his country’s involvement in the conflict as a peace mission, promoting his 12-point proposal for a cease-fire.

Secretary of State Antony Blinken on Monday said the dovish motivations claimed by Beijing were merely a façade, calling it “a stalling tactic at best” or an attempt “to facilitate an unjust outcome.”

“It would enable Russia to further entrench positions in Ukraine. And a ceasefire now, without a durable solution, would allow President Putin to rest and refit his troops and then restart the war at a time more advantageous to Russia,” Blinken said. “The world should not be fooled by any tactical move by Russia, supported by China or any other country, to freeze the war on its own terms.”

Sources in the Biden administration have also said that China could still choose to supply Russia’s military with lethal aid, a possibility they’ve warned of since last month and a development the U.S. has said would prompt steep consequences for Beijing.

“We’ll see what they come out of this meeting talking about,” White House spokesperson John Kirby said Monday of Xi and Putin.

“China has not condemned the war but they haven’t provided lethal weapons. They haven’t participated in sanctions the way we obviously would have preferred them to do,” he added. “They have made their own sovereign decisions and largely, at least tacitly, many of those decisions have come down on the side of Russia here.”

Kirby said Xi Jinping should play a “constructive role” and reach out directly to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, saying, “China … we believe … should hear directly from the Ukrainians, and not just from the Russians.”

Scott Kennedy, a senior adviser at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, says that shared goal has emboldened China to expand its power on the global stage, seeking to edge out the U.S.

“What’s new lately is the greater willingness to directly name the U.S. as the source of tensions in the world and just be much more direct, suggesting that they are gradually moving in a direction which they don’t see the possibility of improving the relationship and that themselves may take more drastic actions,” he said.

A fine line between ‘competition’ and conflict

Publicly, the Biden administration streamlines its stance toward China into a single catchphrase: “Invest, align, compete.”

Invest refers to invigorating American institutions and align means drawing closer to allies and partners. But “compete” seems open to interpretation, and perhaps liable to escalation.

“When I look at the threat from China, it’s unprecedented in American history, I don’t think we’ve ever confronted a threat that combines a hostile ideology, an economy roughly the size of her own, in a military that is increasingly capable, and in some ways, more formidable than ours in key capabilities,” said Bowman.

Kennedy says that while Washington as a whole has shifted in response to Beijing’s increasingly bellicose stance, there’s not a consensus on how to move forward.

“Is the goal to sort of harden the West against China but assume that we’re going to be coexisting indefinitely? Or do you see this conflict is such an existential challenge that the U.S. goal has to be to fundamentally change the nature of the Chinese regime to make it more compatible with the international system?” he questioned.

In certain ways, the Biden administration is hedging its bets, straddling both approaches.

As one example, it has repeatedly stressed the need for open lines of communication with China but provided Beijing with little advance warning before announcing an agreement to provide Australia with nuclear subs, a maneuver aimed at countering China in the Indo-Pacific. Likewise, Beijing has used a similar double-edged strategy in many areas.

“The Chinese say that they believe in cooperation and mutual respect, but they’re doing a lot of things which are inconsistent with those principles,” said Kennedy. “We’re locked into now is a vicious cycle in which both sides actually have relatively mirrored views of the other’s motives and blame, and both have a relatively fatalistic view about the trajectory of their relationship.”

A new Cold War?

While the Biden administration has repeatedly denied the U.S. and China are entering a new Cold War, Bowman says Washington should acknowledge how strained their ties have become.

“It’s information warfare, it’s economic warfare. It’s basically every kind of warfare you can but we’re not quite yet to the point where we’re shooting at each other yet,” he said. “But I’m worried it’s not going to stay cold.”

Bowman says avoiding that depends on a number of factors, such as moving quickly to arm Taiwan in order to deter a potential invasion from mainland China and continuing to build and reinforce a strong coalition of Western allies.

Kennedy agrees with the administration’s stated goal that “guardrails” need to be installed to avoid the relationship from veering into a catastrophic war, but notes that China has been hesitant to adopt and use tools like direct hotlines between the countries.

Chances for direct diplomacy are also limited. After a Chinese surveillance balloon was spotted over the U.S., Biden said he intended to hold a call with his counterpart Xi, but that has yet to be scheduled. That same incident prompted the administration to indefinitely postpose Blinken’s trip to Beijing, dashing another chance for engagement.

“We have no good mechanisms in place to manage a crisis,” said Kennedy. “I’m worried that we are heading toward the possibility of an unintentional conflict that could spiral out of control very quickly.”

Copyright © 2023, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — President Joe Biden plans on Tuesday to announce the establishment of two new national monuments, protecting land totalling more than half a million acres, a White House official said.

Biden is expected to name Avi Kwa Ame National Monument in Nevada and Castner Range National Monument in Texas as the nation’s newest monuments during the White House’s Conservation in Action Summit at the Interior Department.

Biden will also direct the Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo to consider creating a new National Marine Sanctuary designation to protect U.S. waters surrounding Pacific islands.

The day of conservation comes as Biden approved more drilling in Alaska for the Willow Project, a move environmental groups have slammed, and one day after the United Nations released a dire climate change report.

Copyright © 2023, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — A Washington, D.C., jury on Monday found four associates of the far-right Oath Keepers militia group guilty of conspiracy for their role in the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol.

Through the course of two separate trials late last year into January, six members of the Oath Keepers were found guilty of seditious conspiracy including the group’s leader, Stewart Rhodes.

The six defendants in the current jury trial, Sandra Parker, Bennie Parker, Laura Steele, Connie Meggs, Michael Greene and William Isaacs, faced the lesser charge of conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding along with a range of other felony charges.

Isaacs, Meggs, Steele and Sandra Parker were found guilty as charged while Greene was acquitted of conspiracy to obstruct and prevent officers from carrying out their duties. Bennie Parker was found not guilty of obstructing the Electoral College certification while all six defendants were found guilty of trespassing.

All the defendants have maintained their innocence throughout the trial, arguing the events of Jan. 6 were more of a spontaneous outburst stemming from peaceful protest and not part of a coordinated effort to topple the government. Defense counsel is expected to challenge the verdict in court.

While Bennie Parker and Greene were not alleged to have entered the Capitol on Jan. 6, prosecutors said the other four defendants did as part of the now-infamous ‘stack’ formation of Oath Keepers clad in military-style gear seen moving together through the pro-Trump mob.

Greene, U.S. Army veteran who served as an operations leader for the Oath Keepers on Jan. 6 but denied being a formal group member, previously testified on Stewart Rhodes’ behalf during the first Oath Keepers seditious conspiracy trial late last year.

While Greene denied the Oath Keepers engaged in any planned effort to attack the Capitol, prosecutors cited private messages he had sent to a Signal chat members of the group communicated in during the course of the riot, including one saying, “We’re storming the Capitol” and another where he noted how rioters had invaded then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s office.

Jury deliberations continue on two charges against Bennie Parker and Michael Greene.

Authorities have arrested some 1,000 people in connection to the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol. Federal prosecutors continue to bring forward a mountain of evidence in a variety of complex legal cases, some involving multiple defendants each.

Five accused members of another far-right group known as the Proud Boys are currently standing trial on seditious conspiracy charges. The jury trial is expected to continue at least through the end of the month.

Copyright © 2023, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.