Austin Mooney
LightNews LightNews
austinjmooney.bsky.social
Austin Mooney
@austinjmooney.bsky.social
370 followers 360 following 22 posts
Privacy & security attorney. Tech, law, politics. Views mine etc. etc.
Posts Replies Media Videos
austinjmooney.bsky.social
1 weird trick class action firms are using to get around PRA bans
Private Law Firms Are Quietly Powering State Privacy Enforcement (via Passle)
A quiet shift with major consequences is underway in consumer protection enforcement. Across the country, we are seeing states file headline-grabbing la...
technologylaw.fkks.com
July 30, 2025 at 6:43 PM
austinjmooney.bsky.social
Interesting writeup. I haven't found a use for AI in my practice, but I think the answer is more clearly "yes"--lawyers can use AI without waiving privilege. Just need to adhere to same confidentiality as other law firm IT by, e.g., ensuring AI providers don't train models using privileged info.
Does Attorney-Client Privilege Survive When AI Listens?
Discover how using AI tools in legal workflows may jeopardize attorney-client privilege and what steps can help preserve confidentiality.
www.zwillgen.com
July 22, 2025 at 7:45 PM
Reposted by Austin Mooney
brianfung.me
Senate lawmakers have removed from the budget bill what would've been a years-long restriction on state-level AI regulations: www.reuters.com/legal/govern...
US Senate strikes AI regulation ban from Trump megabill
The Republican-led U.S. Senate voted overwhelmingly on Tuesday to remove a 10-year federal moratorium on state regulation of artificial intelligence from President Trump's sweeping tax-cut and spending bill.
www.reuters.com
July 1, 2025 at 12:51 PM
austinjmooney.bsky.social
Dinner with a view #biglaw
June 11, 2025 at 12:12 AM
Reposted by Austin Mooney
brianfung.me
Just in: A federal judge rules against Trump’s attempted purge of the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board, saying the firings of Travis LeBlanc and Ed Felten were illegal. The court voids the firings and orders the members be reinstated. 70 PAGES: storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.us...
“Upon careful consideration of the parties' submissions, ' their arguments during the hearing on the motions, and the plaintiffs' supplemental declarations, the Court concludes the following: (1) the plaintiffs' removals were unlawful because although the plain text of the PCLOB's organic statute does not include an express textual removal restriction, the Board's structure and function clearly indicate that Congress intended to create such a restriction on the President's removal power; (2) the restriction as it applies to the plaintifis is constitutional; and (3) the plaintiffs' requested declaratory and injunctive relief is both available and appropriate under the circumstances presented to the Court in this case. Accordingly, the Court must grant the plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment and deny the defendants' cross-motion for summary judgment.” “In response to the 9/11 Commission Report, Congress created an independent, multimember board of experts and tasked its members with the weighty job of overseeing the government's counterterrorism actions and policies, and recommending changes to ensure that those actions and policies adequately protect privacy and civil liberties interests. And, as the Court has now concluded, that responsibility is incompatible with at-will removal by the President, because such unfettered authority would make the Board and its members beholden to the very authority it is supposed to oversee on behalf of Congress and the American people. To hold otherwise would be to bless the President's obvious attempt to exercise power beyond that granted to him by the Constitution and shield the Executive Branch's counterterrorism actions from independent oversight, public scrutiny, and bipartisan congressional insight regarding those actions. And, when the President contravenes a statutory scheme designed by Congress to ensure that these interests are adequately protected, it is spocifically the "province and duty" of the independent Judiciary to "say what the law is." Marbury, S U.S. at 177. Fulfilling that obligation, the Court concludes for the foregoing reasons that it must grant the plaintifis' motion for summary judgment and deny the defendants' cross-motion for summary judgment.” “ORDER. In accordance with the Memorandum Opinion issued on this same date, it is hereby ORDERED that the 10 Plaintiffs' Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED. It is further ORDERED that the 12 Defendants' Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment and Opposition to Plaintiffs' Motion for Summary Judgment is DENIED. It is therefore DECLARED that the terminations of the plaintiffs, Travis LeBlanc and Edward Felten, were unlawful, in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 2000ee, and therefore null and void. It is further ORDERED that the plaintiff Travis LeBlanc remains a member of the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board ("PCLOB" or "the Board"), having been appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate to a term expiring on January 29, 2028, and he may be removed by the President prior to expiration of his term only for cause. It is further ORDERED that the plaintiff Edward Felten remains a member of the PCLOB, having been appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate to a term expiring on January 29, 2025, and being eligible to serve at his discretion until either his successor is confirmed or one year after the date of the expiration of his current term, i.e., January 29, 2026, whichever occurs first, and he may be removed by the President prior to expiration of his holdover term only for cause or upon the confirmation of a successor to his position on the Board. It is further ORDERED that the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board, defendant Beth A. Williams, defendant Jenny Fitzpatrick, and defendant Trent Morse, as well as their subordinates, agents, and employees, are ENJOINED from…”
May 21, 2025 at 4:31 PM
Reposted by Austin Mooney
davidjbier.bsky.social
Cato has published my comprehensive review of the ~240 Venezuelans the US government renditioned 2 months ago to Salvador’s notorious prison. We identified FIFTY who came legally, never violated any immigration law, but are imprisoned at the US government’s request and at US taxpayer expense.
May 19, 2025 at 4:06 PM
Reposted by Austin Mooney
reichlinmelnick.bsky.social
NEW: As the Trump admin is flying Afrikaners here today to be resettled as "refugees," @Sec_Noem is terminating Temporary Protected Status for Afghanistan — meaning they may start deporting women and allies who protected our troops to the Taliban to be persecuted or killed!
DHS Terminating Temporary Protected Status for Afghanistan WASHINGTON – Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem today announced the termination of Temporary Protected Status for Afghanistan. The TPS designation for the country expires on May 20, 2025, and the termination will be effective on July 12, 2025. At least 60 days before a TPS designation expires, the Secretary, after consultation with appropriate U.S. government agencies, is required to review the conditions in a country designated for TPS to determine whether the conditions supporting the designation continue to be met, and if so, how long to extend the designation. “This administration is returning TPS to its original temporary intent,” said Secretary Kristi Noem. “We’ve reviewed the conditions in Afghanistan with our interagency partners, and they do not meet the requirements for a TPS designation. Afghanistan has had an improved security situation, and its stabilizing economy no longer prevent them from returning to their home country. Additionally, the termination furthers the national interest as DHS records indicate that there are recipients who have been under investigation for fraud and threatening our public safety and national security. Reviewing TPS designations is a key part of restoring integrity in our immigration system.” After consultation with interagency partners, Secretary Noem determined that conditions in Afghanistan no longer meet the statutory requirements. The Secretary’s decision was based on a U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services review of the country conditions and in consultation with the Department of State. The Secretary determined that, overall, there are notable improvements in the security and economic situation such that requiring the return of Afghan nationals to Afghanistan does not pose a threat to their personal safety due to ongoing-armed conflict or extraordinary and temporary conditions. She further determined that permitting Afghan nationals to remain t…
May 12, 2025 at 4:02 PM
Reposted by Austin Mooney
mattjay.com
The most daming claim in this statement IMO:

Within 15 minutes of DOGE accounts being created…
Attackers in Russia tried logging in using those new creds.
Correct usernames and passwords.

2 options here. The DOGE device was hacked. And I don't think I need to explain the 2nd.
April 18, 2025 at 12:12 AM
austinjmooney.bsky.social
Have had this quote in the home office for years, mostly as a gag. Hits different these days
April 16, 2025 at 9:34 PM
Reposted by Austin Mooney
orinkerr.bsky.social
These are both one-sided reports, so caution is warranted. But now there are two reports, a week apart, of U.S. lawyers stopped at the border in which border agents wanted access to their phones.

(1) 4/7/25
freep.com/story/news/l...

(2) 4/15/25
nbcnewyork.com/news/nationa...
April 16, 2025 at 4:00 PM
austinjmooney.bsky.social
IRS sharing legally protected data with DHS is a major privacy scandal that raises the question: what other surveillance laws are currently being flouted that we don’t know about? www.nytimes.com/2025/04/08/u...
Top I.R.S. Officials Said to Resign After Deal to Give ICE Migrants’ Data
The agreement is a major departure from the Internal Revenue Service’s previous stance encouraging migrants to file their taxes.
www.nytimes.com
April 9, 2025 at 6:52 PM
Reposted by Austin Mooney
jordfran.bsky.social
Board Member Mactaggart reiterates his longstanding concerns about overstepping statutory authority, litigation risks to the agency, and the cost of the regulations. He brought a motion to pause the rulemaking and have the new Executive Director study the legal risks and costs of the rulemaking.
April 4, 2025 at 5:22 PM
austinjmooney.bsky.social
Great article by @evelyndouek.bsky.social
Can I Teach the First Amendment If I Only Have a Green Card?
Protections on free speech look weaker than they did when I became a permanent resident.
www.theatlantic.com
April 2, 2025 at 10:46 PM
Reposted by Austin Mooney
timobrien.bsky.social
40% of U.S.-affiliated Nobel Prize winners in the sciences — physics, chemistry and medicine — between 2000 and 2023 were immigrants.
www.axios.com/2025/03/31/u...
American progress in peril
As the U.S.'s global lead is contested and competition for the world's top talent gets stiffer, the Trump administration is disrupting the system that has propelled the country.
www.axios.com
March 31, 2025 at 10:53 AM
Reposted by Austin Mooney
markwarner.bsky.social
We should all be terrified to live in an America where legal residents can be detained, held at gunpoint, or deported because of the color of their skin or because the President disagrees with their views.
March 28, 2025 at 2:16 PM
austinjmooney.bsky.social
If you ever wondered what SCOTUS thinks about the trolley problem:
chrisgeidner.bsky.social Chris Geidner @chrisgeidner.bsky.social · Mar 21
BREAKING: The Supreme Court, on a 7-2 vote, says that doing nothing can mean that you have done something. An "omission," Thomas writes for the court, can be the "use of physical force" and, hence, a "crime of violence."

Gorsuch, joined by Jackson, dissents.
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES No. 23-825 SALVATORE DELLIGATTI, PETITIONER U. UNITED STATES ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT [March 21, 2025] JUSTICE THOMAS delivered the opinion of the Court. Title 18 U.S. C. §924(c)(3)(A) defines a "crime of violence" to include a felony that involves the "use of physical force" against another person. In the context of a closely related statute, we have held that "the knowing or intentional causation of bodily injury necessarily involves the use of physical force." United States v. Castleman, 572 U. S. 157, 169 (2014). This case asks whether that principle extends to §924(c)(3)(A) and, if so, whether the principle holds in cases where an offender causes bodily injury by omission rather than action. We answer both questions in the affirmative.
March 21, 2025 at 5:54 PM
Reposted by Austin Mooney
daniel-solove.bsky.social
The firing of the 2 Democratic FTC Commissioners will surely be a topic in my conversation with Max Schrems next Tues, 3/25, 2 PM ET. Register here: teachprivacy.com/webinar-gdpr... @maxschrems.bsky.social (noyb)
Webinar: GDPR Enforcement, Trump 2.0, and Max Schrems
GDPR Enforcement, Trump 2.0, and Max Schrems March 25, 2025, at 2 PM ET In this webinar, Professor Daniel Solove will discuss with Max Schrems the future
teachprivacy.com
March 18, 2025 at 10:13 PM
austinjmooney.bsky.social
Interesting question: couldn’t FTC Commissioners Slaughter and Bedoya just keep showing up for work? Precedent for it seems pretty clear.
March 18, 2025 at 9:39 PM
austinjmooney.bsky.social
…aaand Bedoya was fired.
austinjmooney.bsky.social Austin Mooney @austinjmooney.bsky.social · Jan 29
Major implications for US federal privacy enforcement if (big if) these removals survive legal challenge. FTC commissioners are subject to the same “for cause” removal provisions that Trump is flouting here. The case they would have to overturn—Humphrey’s Executor—is a case about the FTC.
npr.org NPR @npr.org · Jan 28
UPDATE: President Trump fired two Democratic EEOC commissioners and an NLRB board member, hobbling two independent agencies that are tasked with enforcing worker protections.
March 18, 2025 at 9:31 PM
Reposted by Austin Mooney
brianfung.me
BIG: FTC commissioner says he was just illegally fired by President Trump. x.com/bedoyaftc/st...
Post on X by FTC Commissioner Alvaro Bedoya: “I am a commissioner at the Federal Trade Commission. The president just illegally fired me. This is corruption plain and simple.”
March 18, 2025 at 9:22 PM
Reposted by Austin Mooney
joshuajfriedman.com
NEW: Judge Beryl Howell GRANTS TRO enjoining sections 1, 3, and 5 of Trump EO targeting law firm Perkins Coie
Addressing Risks from Perkins Coie LLP
By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, it is hereby ordered: Section 1. Purpose. The
www.whitehouse.gov
March 12, 2025 at 7:45 PM
Reposted by Austin Mooney
joshchafetz.bsky.social
With his permission, I'm sharing Dean Treanor's response to Ed Martin's letter:
March 6, 2025 at 8:17 PM
Reposted by Austin Mooney
charliesavage.bsky.social
The Trump admin says ICE has custody of migrants sent to Guantanamo, but it's DOD guards in Camp 6, a war-on-terror prison. It won't say who is being held incommunicado there, but we are publishing a list of 53 men in Camp 6.
w/ @carolrosenbergnyt.bsky.social
www.nytimes.com/2025/02/12/u...
Some Migrants Sent by Trump to Guantánamo Are Being Held by Military Guards
The Times has obtained a list of 53 Venezuelan men the Trump administration has put in a wartime prison built to hold Al Qaeda suspects.
www.nytimes.com
February 13, 2025 at 2:23 AM
Reposted by Austin Mooney
leahlitman.bsky.social
Trump DOJ confirms they will ask SCOTUS to overrule Humphrey’s Executor rather than defend independent agencies / multi member commissions like the FTC, etc.

(So they’re arguing Trump can fire the boards and commissioners that lead these agencies)
sisco.bsky.social Josh Sisco @sisco.bsky.social · Feb 12
This is a big deal. The DOJ will no longer defend for cause removal protections for commissioners of agencies like the FTC, removing a barrier to the President firing minority commissioners at will
February 13, 2025 at 12:00 AM