Do you think you have a good handle on this week’s top news stories? Are you a regular RantCrush reader? Well, it’s time to test yourself and figure it out with our weekly news quiz! Check out the quiz below, and if you’re not already signed up to receive RantCrush each work day, click here.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post News Quiz, News Quiz, Get Your News Quiz! appeared first on Law Street.

Welcome to RantCrush Top 5, where we take you through today’s top five controversial stories in the world of law and policy. Who’s ranting and raving right now? Check it out below:

Trump Disbands Business Councils as More CEOs Quit

After President Trump seemed to defend white nationalists regarding the violence in Charlottesville, even more former allies are turning their backs on him. Yesterday, he closed down two business advisory councils as many CEOs quit in response to the president’s comments. The Strategy & Policy Forum and the Manufacturing Council are now disbanded. “Racism and murder are unequivocally reprehensible and are not morally equivalent to anything else that happened in Charlottesville,” said the CEO of Campbell Soup, Denise Morrison, as she resigned from the Manufacturing Council. Trump announced the disbandings on Twitter, even though the councils had reportedly decided to call it quits internally before that.

Rather than putting pressure on the businesspeople of the Manufacturing Council & Strategy & Policy Forum, I am ending both. Thank you all!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) August 16, 2017

Trump’s blaming of “both sides” also caused military officials and Republicans to issue their own statements condemning the alt-right violence and distancing themselves from the president. Even Fox News hosts criticized him in some broadcasts and revealed that they hadn’t found a single Republican to come on air in defense of Trump.

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post RantCrush Top 5: August 17, 2017 appeared first on Law Street.

There is no such thing as a perfect immigration policy. Even ones that have received praise from leaders of other countries have their cracks. Australia recently took note of a flaw in its system when an automated computer program determined that an Irish vet’s oral English fluency was not up to the standards of Australia’s immigration department, putting her residency in the country at risk.

Louise Kennedy has been working as an horse veterinarian on the Sunshine Coast in Queensland for the past two years. She is a native English speaker and has two university degrees in history and politics–both obtained in English. As her skilled workers visa was coming to an end, Kennedy decided to apply for permanent residency on the grounds that there is a shortage of her profession in the country.

Part of the process of applying for an Australian residency visa is a mandatory English proficiency test–administered by Pearson–with both a written and spoken portion. Kennedy got through the writing and reading portions rather easily, but it was during the oral portion that her troubles began.

The test utilizes an automated question system that asks applicants a series of questions on a monitor and records their vocal responses. The recordings are then analyzed by a system and a score is generated. Despite the fact that Kennedy has been speaking English her whole life, she scored a 74 on the oral section when the Australian government requires a 79 or higher to pass. Needless to say, she was shocked.

“There’s obviously a flaw in their computer software, when a person with perfect oral fluency cannot get enough points,” she said to The Guardian.

Anyone who has had their frustrations using voice-operated “intelligent assistants”–like Siri, Cortana, or Alexa–knows that there are still limits to what voice-analyzing technologies can do, especially when someone’s accent differs from the majority of the population. However, Pearson representatives stood by their programs saying the real problem was that the immigration department set the bar very high for people seeking permanent residency, according to Sasha Hampton, head of English for Pearson Asia Pacific.

Even with the Pearson test being as supposedly good as it is, Kennedy was given the opportunity to retake the test because there appeared to be construction noises that were audible in the background of her recording. Unfortunately, time became a bit of an issue. Her current visa would have expired in the timeframe it would take for all of the paperwork to be completed, even if she was recognized as a fluent English speaker by the testing company. Kennedy now has to resort to applying for a more expensive spouse visa.

“Because I’m married to an Aussie I luckily have a back-up visa to go to but there is a $3,000 cost over the skilled immigrant visa which we weren’t banking on 12 weeks before having our first baby,” she told the Ireland Independent.

This comes within days of Donald Trump announcing a move toward re-hauling the current immigration system into a skills and merits-based one. Though Australia’s system has been criticized for its inability to accurately determine the country’s employment needs, and is getting revamped to meet the demands of far-right politicians who want to ban Muslims from entering the country, Trump Administration officials have offered nothing but praise for the model and hope to enact a similar version in the U.S.

Gabe Fernandez

Gabe is an editorial intern at Law Street. He is a Peruvian-American Senior at the University of Maryland pursuing a double degree in Multiplatform Journalism and Marketing. In his free time, he can be found photographing concerts, running around the city, and supporting Manchester United. Contact Gabe at Staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Computer-Based Oral English Test Fails Irish Vet in Australia appeared first on Law Street.

Welcome to RantCrush Top 5, where we take you through today’s top five controversial stories in the world of law and policy. Who’s ranting and raving right now? Check it out below:

North Korea is Threatening a Strike on Guam After Trump’s Warning

North Korean officials say they are considering a missile strike against Guam, a U.S. territory, after President Trump issued a warning against the North that any threat to the U.S. would be met with “fire and fury.” After Trump’s harsh words, experts warned against taking part in rhetorical arguments with Kim Jong Un. North Korea has also claimed that the U.S. is planning a “preventive war” and if that becomes reality, Pyongyang will begin an “all-out war wiping out all the strongholds of enemies, including the U.S. mainland.”

About 163,000 people live on Guam, but it’s also the base of a submarine squadron, an airbase, and a Coast Guard group. U.S. officials have said they would prefer to use diplomatic means to solve any conflicts, but would not hesitate to use force if needed. However, Guam’s governor, Eddie Calvo, dismissed the threat and said the island is prepared for “any eventuality.”

North Korea says seriously considering plan to strike Guam: KCNA https://t.co/XLxpImmfG4 pic.twitter.com/qOiy7PJ0i0

— Reuters Top News (@Reuters) August 9, 2017

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post RantCrush Top 5: August 9, 2017 appeared first on Law Street.

Welcome to RantCrush Top 5, where we take you through today’s top five controversial stories in the world of law and policy. Who’s ranting and raving right now? Check it out below:

NAACP Issues Travel Advisory for Missouri

The NAACP has issued its first-ever statewide travel advisory for the state of Missouri. This announcement came after Senate Bill 43 passed the state legislature and was signed by Governor Eric Greitens. The new law makes it harder for employees to prove their protected class status in a lawsuit; critics, including the NAACP, say that it makes discrimination easier and dubbed it a “Jim Crow bill.”

The advisory is intended to let people of color and members of the LGBT community traveling through the state know what’s going on, and to be particularly vigilant. It cites recent instances of police brutality and discrimination in Missouri, and asks that everyone “warn your families, co-workers, and anyone visiting Missouri to beware of the safety concerns with travel in Missouri, notify members of your trade associations, social and civil organizations that they are traveling and living in Missouri at their own risk and subject to unnecessary search seizure and potential arrest, and file and seek help on any existing claims for discrimination, harassment, retaliation, and whistle blowing ASAP before your legal rights are lost.”

.@NAACP issues travel advisory for Missouri, the first in its 108-year history, after passage of “Jim Crow Bill” https://t.co/sEFbjOzQUa pic.twitter.com/N1UyXNEcqk

— New York Daily News (@NYDailyNews) August 2, 2017

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post RantCrush Top 5: August 3, 2017 appeared first on Law Street.

On Saturday evening, a woman in Minneapolis, Minnesota called 911 to report what she believed might be a sexual assault taking place in an alley close to her home. But when police arrived, an officer fatally shot her. Police have not explained what happened and the officers’ body cameras were turned off at the time. The woman, Justine Damond, was originally from Australia and lived in Minneapolis with her fiancé Don Damond.

Don Damond’s son, Zach, called Justine his best friend in a video posted on Facebook. He said that she called the police because she thought something bad was happening to someone else. “And then the next thing I know they take my best friend’s life,” he said. “I’m so done with all this violence. It’s so much bullsh*t. America sucks.”

Minneapolis Police said the shooting was not captured by the officers’ dashboard cameras and no one seems to know why the body cameras were turned off. The Minnesota Department of Public Safety is investigating the incident, but the investigation is only in its early stages. On Monday night, the county medical examiner said that the cause of death was a gunshot to the abdomen.

According to the Minneapolis Star Tribune, the officer who shot Justine Damond is named Mohamed Noor. Three sources who spoke to the Star Tribune said that Justine Damond was outside in her pajamas talking to the officer in the driver’s seat of the police car, when Noor, who was sitting in the passenger seat, suddenly drew his weapon and shot her. No weapon was found at the scene.

Justine Damond planned to marry Don Damond next month. Her maiden name was Justine Ruszczyk, but she went as Justine Damond. She reportedly held dual citizenship in both the United States and Australia, as her father is a U.S. citizen.

On Sunday night, neighbors and others held a vigil at the scene of the shooting.

Vigil crowd swelled to 200 strong, all praying for Justine – the woman neighbors identified as who a MPD officer killed last night. @WCCO pic.twitter.com/uVOM61gRhD

— Jeff Wagner (@Jeff_Wagner4) July 16, 2017

The Australian Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade said that it has been assisting Justine Damond’s family in Sydney and released a statement on behalf of her family members. “This is a very difficult time for our family. We are trying to come to terms with this tragedy and to understand why this has happened,” it said.

Minneapolis Mayor Betsy Hodges demanded answers from the police on Sunday. “As mayor of our city, a wife, and a grandmother, I am heartsick and deeply disturbed by what occurred last night,” she said. “There are still many questions about what took place, and while the investigation is still in its early stages, I am asking the BCA to release as much information, as quickly as they are able to.”

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Minneapolis Police Officer Killed an Australian Woman After She Called 911 appeared first on Law Street.

Cardinal George Pell has been charged with multiple sexual assault allegations by Australian authorities. Pell is the highest ranking member of the Catholic Church to be implicated in the child abuse scandal that has tarnished the church’s reputation throughout the past few decades.

Pell is accused of “historical sexual assault offenses.” These include at least two men who have come forward and described Pell inappropriately touching them at a swimming pool in the 1970s. Pell denied these allegations after an interview aired on Australian television in 2016 and he has denounced this “relentless character assassination,” according to the Washington Post.

Pope Francis did not release a statement on the issue, but the Vatican said that it feels “great regret” over the situation and that the Pope has appreciated what Pell did during his three years in Rome, according to the Washington Post.

Pell is set to appear at the Melbourne Magistrates Court on July 18. The magistrate will decide next week whether not to release the details of the investigation, according to BBC.

While he has repeatedly said he will fully cooperate with the investigation, Pell has also strongly denied the accusations. The Pope has granted him a leave of absence to fight the charges, according to BBC. Pell said that he would make the trip back to Australia if his doctor permits it. Last year doctors would not permit him to fly back to Australia last year so he answered questions from detectives via videochat.

“I’m looking forward finally to having my day in court,” Pell said. “I am innocent of these charges, they are false. The whole idea of sexual abuse is abhorrent to me.”

Pell, an adviser to the Pope and Prefect of the Secretariat of the Economy, is a native of Ballarat, Australia, and was the Archbishop of Melbourne and then Sydney before becoming a cardinal in 2004. Named the head of the Vatican’s finances in 2014, Pell is considered the third most powerful person in the church.

In the past decade Pell has played a prominent role on Vatican commissions created to combat sexual assault within the Roman Catholic community. In 2013 he was named one of eight cardinals charged with investigating ways to reform the church, according to CNN. However, he has also been criticized for his lack of impact on the investigations and supposed connections with known child-abusing priests.

Because of his powerful position within the Vatican and the Australian Catholic community, it is possible that these allegations will be the biggest obstacle the church faces when it comes to combatting child abuse. Peter Saunders, a British abuse survivor who served on a papal commission investigating the abuse, told the Washington Post:

[These charges] will probably rock the Vatican like nothing else has ever done…The fact that one of the pope’s right-hand men, the secretary for the economy, has in a sense been arrested and will be charged with such serious offenses, that surely has got to have some kind of effect on the Vatican and the hierarchy.

So, the coming months will be telling for how the Pope and the Catholic Church respond to the accusations against Pell and the recurring issues with abuse within the church. While they’ve dealt with past scandals within the Vatican and in other branches, such a high profile conviction brings with it new challenges in addition to worldwide attention. Pope Francis has made it one of his goals to cleanse the church of child abuse and this will likely set him back.

Josh Schmidt

Josh Schmidt is an editorial intern and is a native of the Washington D.C Metropolitan area. He is working towards a degree in multi-platform journalism with a minor in history at nearby University of Maryland. Contact Josh at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Cardinal George Pell Charged with Sexual Assault appeared first on Law Street.

Welcome to RantCrush Top 5, where we take you through today’s top five controversial stories in the world of law and policy. Who’s ranting and raving right now? Check it out below:

Will Trump Pull Out of the Paris Climate Deal?

This morning, news broke that President Donald Trump is expected to pull out of the Paris climate agreement. During his recent European trip, he had said he would announce his decision over the next few days. If confirmed, the decision to leave could have a disastrous impact on the environment and public health, but also on America’s status as a world leader. China is far ahead of the U.S. when it comes to developing renewable energy sources, so there are concerns that the relationship between Europe and China could deepen, at least when it comes to environmental collaboration.

Pulling out of #ParisAgreement is a massive moral, economic & leadership failure for Trump admin. Loss of business, jobs, & intl standing.

— Ed Markey (@SenMarkey) May 31, 2017

Trump has reportedly been torn between those who want him to stay in the deal, like his daughter Ivanka and tech billionaire Elon Musk, and those who want to leave, like EPA head Scott Pruitt and Steve Bannon. European leaders seemed frustrated after meeting with Trump. His stubbornness when it comes to climate change discussions is especially noteworthy–Germany’s Angela Merkel called their talks “very difficult, and not to say very unsatisfactory.”

In 100 years, Trump withdrawing from the Paris climate agreement will be considered the seismic event. This election will be a footnote.

— Ellie Mae O’Hagan (@MissEllieMae) May 31, 2017

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post RantCrush Top 5: May 31, 2017 appeared first on Law Street.

Jared Kushner Under FBI Scrutiny

Jared Kushner, President Donald Trump’s son-in-law and one of his closest advisers, is under FBI scrutiny regarding the Russia probe. This doesn’t necessarily mean that Kushner has done anything wrong, rather that investigators believe he has information related to the Trump campaign’s ties to Russia. According to people with knowledge of the investigation who spoke to the Chicago Tribune, Kushner “is being investigated because of the extent and nature of his interactions with the Russians.” The FBI has yet to comment.

Last week, sources told the Washington Post that one of Trump’s senior advisers was under scrutiny; many hypothesized that it was Kushner. There has also been speculation that the investigators are looking into possible financial crimes on Kushner’s part, including a possible failure to disclose certain loans and assets.

The FBI turns its attention to Jared Kushner, @ariabendix reports https://t.co/WuGpKn8Mqk pic.twitter.com/NbMiYWEFNG

— The Atlantic (@TheAtlantic) May 26, 2017

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post RantCrush Top 5: May 26, 2017 appeared first on Law Street.

Rebel Wilson, the Australian comedienne known for her roles in movies like “Pitch Perfect” and “Bachelorette” has spent the last few days in an Australian courtroom. Wilson has sued the parent company of Australian Magazine Woman’s Day, Bauer Media, for defamation. She claims that the magazine published false claims that she had lied about a variety of facts of her life–including her age and upbringing–and that as a result, she has lost work opportunities.

In 2015, Woman’s Day released a series of eight articles in three days about Wilson. The first, which was headlined “Just who is the REAL Rebel?” claimed that she had fabricated some of the details of her life, and according to Wilson’s lawsuit, essentially painted her as a serial or pathological liar. The articles specifically suggested she lied about her age, her real name, and her upbringing. But there doesn’t appear to be evidence that Wilson ever misrepresented her age, and she has been open that “Rebel” is not her birth name, but a nickname that she later changed her name to. The articles also claimed that she had attended an elite boarding school when she was younger, while Wilson has maintained that she was raised in a more rural area.

According to the lawsuit, the information used for the articles came from an anonymous source who claimed to have gone to school with Wilson. The writer of the articles, Shari Nementzik, saw an online comment made by the anonymous source on another Woman’s Day article, and reached out to her. Emails between Nementzik and the source revealed that the source was looking for money to talk about what she “knew.” Originally, it appears as though lawyers told Woman’s Day the story was too risky, legally speaking, to publish. But the information was still published in 2015.

Wilson claims that after the articles were released, her career took a hit. She testified in court earlier this week that she lost roles in the animated films “Trolls” and “Kung Fu Panda 3” after the articles came out, and she has struggled to find work ever since. The trial is ongoing, and Wilson is seeking unspecified damages.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Rebel Wilson Sues Australian Magazine for Defamation appeared first on Law Street.

Welcome to RantCrush Top 5, where we take you through today’s top five controversial stories in the world of law and policy. Who’s ranting and raving right now? Check it out below:

Trump to Comey: “You’re Fired”

Last night, President Donald Trump fired FBI Director James Comey, who was leading the investigation into his campaign’s connections to Russia. Comey’s firing was almost unprecedented–usually, FBI directors serve for 10 years, regardless of political affiliation. The only previous firing of an FBI director was in 1993, when President Bill Clinton fired William S. Sessions. Comey found out that he lost his job when it was broadcast on the news while he was meeting with FBI employees in Los Angeles.

A lot of people think this is very suspicious, especially since Trump cited Comey’s handling of Hillary Clinton’s emails as a reason to let him go. Trump himself praised the FBI’s investigation into Clinton during the campaign and said that she should be imprisoned. The move had many people drawing parallels to events during the Watergate scandal, when President Richard Nixon fired the special prosecutor who was investigating him. Now everyone is assuming Trump wants to hide something about the Russia collusion affair, and both Democrats and Republicans are calling for an independent investigation.

An incredibly ominous sign, no matter your view of Comey. He investigated + was removed by Sessions, who is implicated in interference case. https://t.co/zNgMqkCnus

— Sarah Kendzior (@sarahkendzior) May 9, 2017

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post RantCrush Top 5: May 10, 2017 appeared first on Law Street.

Welcome to RantCrush Top 5, where we take you through today’s top five controversial stories in the world of law and policy. Who’s ranting and raving right now? Check it out below:

Ted Cruz Learns Not to Mess With Sally Yates

Yesterday, former Acting U.S. Attorney General Sally Yates testified before the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime and Terrorism. The hearing was supposed to focus on ties between Trump associates and Russia. But Senator Ted Cruz wanted to hear more about Yates’ decision to stand against President Trump’s travel ban, which led to her dismissal. Cruz is also a lawyer and he tried to challenge Yates by citing the law that allows the president to block immigrants from coming to the U.S. if that is in the best interest of the country.

Ted Cruz tried to pick on Sally Yates. Big mistake. pic.twitter.com/ZmDP8wbQuI

— NowThis (@nowthisnews) May 9, 2017

But Yates pointed out that it’s illegal to deny someone entry based on their race, nationality, or place of birth. She pointed out that her main concern was whether the president’s order was constitutional, and said she was not convinced that the ban was lawful. The heated exchange had many people on social media applauding Yates for her cool demeanor and smart response.

This is so delicious it’s better than the chocolate cake at Mar-A-Lago. Sally Yates is having Ted Cruz for lunch.

— Charles P. Pierce (@CharlesPPierce) May 8, 2017

In my darkest hours I will think of Sally Yates destroying Ted Cruz on national television, and it will sustain me.

— Molly Knight (@molly_knight) May 8, 2017

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post RantCrush Top 5: May 9, 2017 appeared first on Law Street.

Welcome to RantCrush Top 5, where we take you through today’s top five controversial stories in the world of law and policy. Who’s ranting and raving right now? Check it out below:

Donald Trump Thought Being President Would be Easier

In an exclusive interview with Reuters, the president revealed what he thinks about his first 100 days in office. To sum it up, he said that he thought it would be easier than this to be the President of the United States. He seemed to miss his old job, and said that he would like to be able to drive a car again. He also admitted to feeling a little restricted by the massive security apparatus that surrounds a president. “You’re really into your own little cocoon, because you have such massive protection that you really can’t go anywhere.” Recently, Trump also warned that “There is a chance that we could end up having a major, major conflict with North Korea. Absolutely.” Now a lot of people are appalled–how could anyone not know that being POTUS is arguably the hardest job in the world?

Greatest superpower the world has ever known, and this is who we gave it to https://t.co/kUHVrA2KCF

— Ezra Klein (@ezraklein) April 28, 2017

In fairness, the rest of us thought impeaching Trump would be easier than it is.

— Dave Pell (@davepell) April 28, 2017

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post RantCrush Top 5: April 28, 2017 appeared first on Law Street.

“America First,” President Donald Trump’s ubiquitous campaign slogan, is apparently contagious. Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull proposed a set of rules on Thursday that would make it tougher for refugees and immigrants to become Australian citizens. And last week, Turnbull announced plans to raise the barriers for migrants hoping to come to Australia for high-skilled jobs on a temporary work visa.

Among the citizenship rules the prime minister proposed on Thursday is an “Australian values” test, more stringent requirements for the citizenship test, and a four-year wait period. Hopeful citizens would also be expected to have a greater knowledge of English than currently required. In a statement, Turnbull explained his crack down on migration:

“We must ensure that our citizenship program is conducted in our national interest,” he said. “Membership of the Australian family is a privilege and should be granted to those who support our values, respect our laws and want to work hard by integrating and contributing to an even better Australia.”

Australia is a multicultural bastion, often overshadowed by the “melting pots” of America, Canada, and other Western nations. In fact, 27 percent of the population is foreign-born, double the foreign-born rate in the U.S. and England. Australia is represented by migrants from 200 countries. The new rules, which must be approved by parliament, would stiffen an already stringent citizenship process.

For instance, prospective citizens must already have solid enough English skills to take the citizenship test, which is only offered in English. Under the proposed new rules, three test failures would spell the end of an immigrant’s or refugee’s chance at citizenship. According to Australia’s Department of Immigration and Border Protection, 102,029 people took the citizenship test between 2015-2016. Nearly 3,500 people failed it over three times. Prospective citizens must also sign an “Australian values statement.” Here is an excerpt:

Australian society values respect for the freedom and dignity of the individual, freedom of religion, commitment to the rule of law, Parliamentary democracy, equality of men and women and a spirit of egalitarianism that embraces mutual respect, tolerance, fair play and compassion for those in need and pursuit of the public good.

Around the world, populism and nationalism are on the rise. France may elect the populist, far-right firebrand Marine Le Pen. England left the European Union. Turkey’s president just effectively cemented his hold on power until 2029, a move likely to alienate Turkey from the West. But until now, at least to the outside world, Australia seemed to be eluding the populist trend. But some analysts see Turnbull’s proposals not as a turn toward nationalism, but as a way to placate Australia’s populists.

“These new laws are about trying to keep traditional coalition supporters from turning to the far-right parties,” Haydon Manning, a political analyst in Adelaide told Bloomberg. “Turnbull will be aware that he doesn’t have much to offer voters in the budget because the coffers are bare, so this is a way he can show that he’s still thinking about them and addressing their concerns about jobs and security.”

Alec Siegel

Alec Siegel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. When he’s not working at Law Street he’s either cooking a mediocre tofu dish or enjoying a run in the woods. His passions include: gooey chocolate chips, black coffee, mountains, the Animal Kingdom in general, and John Lennon. Baklava is his achilles heel. Contact Alec at ASiegel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Australian PM Malcolm Turnbull Proposes a More Difficult Path to Citizenship appeared first on Law Street.

Imagine taking this test: can you speak English? Can you code? Do you have a college degree? Do you have money saved away? For each “yes,” you get 10 points. If you score enough points, congratulations, you can become a legal resident of America. If not? Sorry, your merits are not up to snuff, and you must return to your home country. This is a crude example of what a “merit-based” immigration system, the kind President Donald Trump mentioned in his Tuesday speech to Congress, would look like.

The idea is hardly new–Congress almost reached a deal to implement such a system in 2007–but with Trump’s comments, it has been brought back to fore of the immigration conversation. Currently, most legal migrants come to the U.S. with immediate family members already living, legally, in the country to sponsor them. This so-called “family-based” system has been in place since the 1960s. Trump, in his remarks on Tuesday, suggested this system is an economic hindrance.

In championing a more “merit-based” system, Trump said “those seeking to enter a country ought to be able to support themselves financially, yet in America, we do not enforce this rule, straining the very public resources that our poorest citizens rely upon.” He said a “merit-based” model would “save countless dollars, raise workers’ wages and help struggling families, including immigrant families, enter the middle class.”

Traditionally politicians are split: some, mostly Democrats, see a shift to a more “merit-based” system as exclusionary and potentially discriminatory against poor people and people of color. Many Republicans support such a system, and say that wages for low-skilled jobs–like kitchen or agricultural work–that are often filled by migrants would increase. Instead of immigrants without high school diplomas filling those jobs, it would be Americans without high school diplomas.

Could Trump Change the System?

Lawmakers, for years, have agreed that the immigration system needs a make-over. But Trump’s tone on immigration, both legal and illegal, has been toxic and incendiary: he has called Mexicans “rapists” and “murderers.” He tried, and failed after a federal court stymied the effort, to enforce a temporary ban on visitors from seven largely Muslim countries. He has ordered a wall to be built on the Mexican border. And his chief strategist, Steve Bannon, sees the West as being “at war” with Islam.

And then there are Trump’s actions on illegal immigration. His administration recently issued an executive order to “take the shackles off” federal agents in deporting people in the U.S. illegally. While President Barack Obama deported record numbers of undocumented immigrants, he focused on high-level criminals, whereas Trump’s order broadens the scope to any lawbreaker–which could apply to all immigrants in the country illegally.

Has “Merit-Based” Been Tried Before?

In 2014, according to data from the Migration Policy Institute, 64 percent of legal immigrants living in the U.S. had been allowed in based on a family member’s sponsorship. Fifteen percent received employment-based preference, and 13 percent were refugees. So in Trump’s view, the weight of legally admitted immigrants to the U.S. would shift from “family-based” to “merit-based.” Such a shift has been attempted before.

President George W. Bush tried to reach a deal with Congress in 2007 to reform the immigration system to prioritize merits over family ties. In exchange for a system overhaul, to placate Democrats, his administration offered to create a legal path to citizenship for the roughly 11 million undocumented immigrants in the U.S. at the time. The legislation was defeated in the Senate. Republicans have intermittently introduced similar bills in subsequent years but, perhaps until now, have not had sufficient political capital to make real progress.

The Australia Example

In the U.S., where about one million immigrants are granted legal status each year, the economic benefits of a “merit-based” system are unclear. But in Australia, a country that Trump pointed to, along with Canada, as having a “merit-based” system, immigration has a “profound positive impact not just on population growth, but also on labour participation and employment, on wages and incomes, on our national skills base and on net productivity,” according to a recent Migration Council Australia report. 

But comparing the immigration models of the U.S. and Australia is comparing apples to oranges. The U.S. lets in about a million legal immigrants each year. Australia on the other hand let in around 262,000 in 2016. Over half of those were highly skilled; the rest are a hybrid of temporary workers, refugees, asylum-seekers, or people sponsored by family members already in the country legally.

As of today, Trump’s stance on legal immigration is foggy, as is the case with many of his views. Is Bannon or Stephen Miller, a highly influential voice in Trump’s policy proposals, running the show? Do Trump and his team really want more highly skilled immigrants in the U.S., to better its future and the future of other people, no matter their faith or cultural background? Or is it a shrouded attempt at limiting all immigration? These are questions that will take time to answer, but one thing is for sure: changing America’s immigration system is no easy feat, and will not happen overnight.

Alec Siegel

Alec Siegel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. When he’s not working at Law Street he’s either cooking a mediocre tofu dish or enjoying a run in the woods. His passions include: gooey chocolate chips, black coffee, mountains, the Animal Kingdom in general, and John Lennon. Baklava is his achilles heel. Contact Alec at ASiegel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post What Would a “Merit-Based” Immigration System Look Like? appeared first on Law Street.

When the police arrived at the Tromp family home, they were confused. The front door was unlocked, phones and credit cards still there, keys left in the ignition of the family’s cars, business papers strewn around, and a family nowhere to be seen. The case that left Australian police bewildered may now be one step closer to an explanation, as the father released a statement on Tuesday.

Police sergeant Mark Knight called it the most bizarre case that he’d seen in 30 years. “This is a really unusual case,” Knight said. “We know the family was obviously traumatized by something. We didn’t know what it was.”

On Monday, August 29, Mark and Jacoba Tromp left their farm in Silvan–a small town in Victoria, Australia–with their three adult children Riana, Mitchell, and Ella. They took one of the family cars on a road trip and ended up 825 kilometers away from Silvan in Bathurst, New South Wales. It was supposed to be a technology free trip, and although the son Mitchell brought his cell phone, he threw it out the window a half an hour into the drive.

The next day Mitchell left his family in a suburb of Bathurst and took the train back to Melbourne, where he talked to the police. He told them that his family had become increasingly paranoid and started to fear for their lives.

The two sisters Ella and Riana stayed with their parents until later on Tuesday. The family reached the Jenolan Caves where the two girls split from their parents. They reportedly stole a car near the Jenolan Caves and drove back south to Goulburn where they reported their parents missing. Keith Whittaker, a Goulburn resident, later found Riana in the backseat of his truck and called the police for help.

“I turned around and saw two legs stretched across the back between my seat and the floor. She was lying on the floor,” Whittaker told the Goulburn Post. “I got an extreme shock. I pulled over in a rest area. About 20 minutes later the young woman sat up and was staring straight ahead. I asked her who she was and if she was all right? She did not know her name and had no idea where she was.”

What’s going on with Mark Tromp and his family? pic.twitter.com/8LQSeMdxvV

— Amplify (@thisisamplify) September 6, 2016

Ella kept driving south until she reached their home.

On Wednesday night, a couple in Wangaratta claimed that someone who looked like Mark Tromp, the dad, was “stalking” them while they played Pokémon Go in their car.

“I could barely see his headlights because he was that close to my car,” the young man told The Age. He said the man then got out of his car and briefly stood still, staring at the middle of the road before disappearing into the woods.

On Thursday, September 1, mother Jacoba Tromp was found wandering around in Yass, a town outside Canberra. She was taken to a nearby hospital and was later transferred to the same facility as Riana in Goulburn, where she received psychiatric care.

On Saturday Mark Tromp was finally found walking the streets close to Warangatta airport. Then on Tuesday he released a statement apologizing for his behavior. In the statement he said:

In recent days my family has been through a difficult period. We will soon be reunited together, I hope that we will begin to make sense of our ordeal and return to a normal life […] More than anything, my family and I need time to recover and receive appropriate assistance, including mental health services.

While there has not been any official explanation for what happened or what caused an entire family to have what appears to have been a mental breakdown, speculation has ranged from drugs and environmental poisoning to a serious threat to their lives.

News.com.au argues that this may be a case of a phenomenon called folie à deux or folie à plusieurs–madness of two or madness of many. This syndrome can be shared by two or more people in a close relationship such as a married couple or family members. The affected fall into a spiral in which they reinforce each other’s delusions, which increases in cases of social isolation. All family members worked at their berry farm seven days a week.

Mark is now staying with his brother. The youngest daughter Ella has been charged with car theft and has a court date in April 2017.

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Bizarre Tromp Family Road Trip Comes to an End appeared first on Law Street.

Earlier this year a legal battle that spanned twenty years concluded in a major victory for Native American tribes in Washington. “Kennewick Man“–the remains of a 9,000 year old skeleton discovered in 1996–is considered one of the most important archaeological finds in North American history. The skeleton was found on federal land but multiple Native American tribes argued that the skeleton, which was officially determined to be Native American in 2015, belonged on tribal land. Under the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), Native American tribes are allowed to determine what to do with Native remains–either burying them in a traditional ceremony or displaying them in museum exhibits. Thanks to NAGPRA, many Native American artifacts have been brought back to tribal lands but after centuries of removal–both by individuals and archaeological missions–the work of repatriation has only just begun. Certain museums, most notably the Smithsonian Institution, have striven to catalog and repatriate collections but museums across the United States, and the world, are still in possession of contested artifacts. Take a look at the current state of repatriation.

What is NAGPRA?

NAGPRA, enacted in 1990 after being introduced by noted conservationist Morris Udall, requires organizations that receive federal funding to return Native American cultural artifacts to lineal descendants and affiliated tribes. Federal grant money is dedicated to repatriating artifacts, which can be human remains, sacred objects, or personal possessions. Some sacred objects are still used in modern-day ceremonies so they can be especially important for preserving the heritage of the tribes. Museums are required to keep an up-to-date inventory of all artifacts so that tribes can track them down and initiate the repatriation process. Furthermore, NAGPRA requires that Native American and Native Hawaiian organizations are notified by archaeologists whenever they find or expect to find indigenous cultural items (or when such items are unexpectedly discovered on federal or tribal lands). NAGPRA is incredibly important in the context of disturbing burial grounds. Native American graves were frequently unmarked and there was no protection under state or federal law regarding their exhumation.

NAGPRA also criminalizes the trafficking of Native American remains (without right of possession/legal ownership). In 2003, the FBI returned a host of stolen Native American artifacts valued at over $400,000 on the black market to eight tribes. A well-known art gallery in Santa Fe, New Mexico had been selling the artifacts out of a back room by the gallery owner and a prominent art dealer. NAGPRA was augmented by the National Museum of the American Indian Act Amendments of 1996, which extends repatriation to include “unassociated” objects that are not tied to a particular tribe. The National Museum of the American Indian operates a six-step process for repatriation which has led to the repatriation of more than 2,000 objects to 100 different Native communities throughout North and South America.

Why Kennewick Man Matters

Multiple tribes, including the Umatilla, Colville, Yakima, Wanapum and Nez Perce tribes, have all claimed the remains of Kennewick Man as their own. The remains were found on Umatilla ancestral land, but that does not guarantee that the skeleton was actually of Umatilla descent as multiple tribes visited that land. The tribes have advocated for the skeleton’s immediate reburial, claiming that holding him in a laboratory and museum environment is disrespectful to his memory. Scientists and archaeologists argue that they can learn a great deal from his remains, as his is one of the oldest and most complete skeletons ever discovered on the continent. The first scientists to study the skeleton argued that it lacked “Native American characteristics” which infuriated tribal advocates. Umatilla trustee and religious leader Armand Minthorn told Archaeology that 

If this individual is truly over 9,000 years old, that only substantiates our belief that he is Native American. From our oral histories, we know that our people have been part of this land since the beginning of time….We already know our history

The tribes’ assertion that the skeleton was Native American was often considered to be suspect until a 2015 DNA study found that Kennewick Man’s genome was more closely related to modern Native Americans than any other modern human demographic. The DNA testing was not specific enough to confirm a specific tribe but the groups that have claimed ownership over the skeleton agreed to band together for his burial.

Over the years, Kennewick Man became not only an important artifact but a symbol of the Native American battle for credibility in repatriation. Advocates hope the repatriation of Kennewick Man will hopefully set a precedent for future cases, both in the United States and abroad.

Repatriation Failures at the British Museum

Native Americans are not the only indigenous groups who seek to reclaim their history through repatriation. The British Museum, which houses some of the most incredible collections of artifacts in the world, has frequently been criticized for its failure to return objects to the governments of  former British colonies.

Artifacts from India, Africa, and Australia have become contested since the end of colonialism, as indigenous groups argue that they deserve to display their heritage in their own museums. India has asked for the return of the Kohinoor Diamond, Greece has requested the Elgin Marbles. and the statue Hoa Hakananai’a  still stands in the British Museum rather than its ancestral home of Rapa Nui (Easter Island). The British Museum has launched some repatriation efforts, but is still in possession of thousands upon thousands of contested artifacts. Earlier this year, the British Museum launched an exhibition entitled Indigenous Australia: Enduring Civilisation which stirred controversy over the museum’s ownership of over 6,000 artifacts that were acquired from Indigenous Australian populations during the colonial era. That community is divided in their reaction to the exhibition: some claim that the British preserved objects that otherwise would have been lost or destroyed while others argue that the artifacts, which were often stolen during violent periods of repression, should be sent back to Australia. There are plans for the exhibition to travel to Canberra in November, but the artifacts will be sent under the 2013 Protection of Cultural Objects on Loan Act, which blocks the repatriation process while the artifacts are on Australian soil. Shane Mortimer, an elder of the Ngambri people, stated that

If the Ngambri people went to England, killed 90 percent of the population and everything else that is indigenous to England and sent the crown jewels back to Ngambri Country as a prize exhibit … what would the remaining 10 percent of English people have to say about that? The exhibition should not proceed without the permission of the owners of all of the items.

Conclusion

The repatriation of artifacts and human remains is a battle that has been fought for decades yet is far from over. Certain archaeologists argue that artifacts need to be preserved in major museums in order to share history with future generations. The idea that a skeleton discovered on an archaeological dig might be buried once again (according to tribal custom) is seen as irresponsible and distasteful. However, advocates for the Native population believe that repatriating artifacts will do much more to preserve culture than holding them in a museum and that the burial of human remains is a sign of respect.

There is no doubt that museums are invaluable to preserving our history but we cannot ignore the fact that a majority of their collections were taken without permission and artifacts are essentially being held hostage under the guise of preservation. There are museums that have engaged in extensive repatriation–the National Museum of the American Indian, for example, has fewer than 300 human remains in its collection, most of which have yet to be claimed by South American tribes–so the process is clearly feasible. Repatriation is a reaction to theft, not preservation, and indigenous tribes deserve support as they try to reclaim their history.

Resources

Primary

National Park Service: NAGPRA

National Museum of the American Indian:  Act Amendments of 1996

National Museum of the American Indian: Repatriation

Additional

NewHistorian: Kennewick Man Will Return Home to Native American Tribes

Annenberg Classroom: Who should own Native American artifacts?

National Geographic: When Is It Okay to Dig Up the Dead?

Smithsonian Magazine: Over 9,000 Years Later, Kennewick Man Will Be Given a Native American Burial

The Guardian: Rreservation or plunder? The battle over the British Museum’s Indigenous Australian show

NDTV: London Point Of View: Give Back Kohinoor? Fat Chance!

Jillian Sequeira

Jillian Sequeira was a member of the College of William and Mary Class of 2016, with a double major in Government and Italian. When she’s not blogging, she’s photographing graffiti around the world and worshiping at the altar of Elon Musk and all things Tesla. Contact Jillian at Staff@LawStreetMedia.com

The post Stolen Identities: The Repatriation of Indigenous Artifacts appeared first on Law Street.

Welcome to RantCrush Top 5, where we take you through today’s top five controversial stories in the world of law and policy. Who’s ranting and raving right now? Check it out below:

Good Guy Apple Replaces Pistol Emoji With Water Gun

Apple is finally getting rid of the pistol emoji after a year of pushback from anti-gun activist groups. Most notably, New Yorkers Against Gun Violence, which launched a campaign aimed specifically at “disarming the iPhone.” In an open letter, the group asked Apple to remove the gun emoji “as a symbolic gesture to limit gun accessibility.” The gun emoji and other weapons emojis have been blamed for inciting violence among young people. This week, Apple announced that it would be replacing the pistol with a toy water gun as an ethical measure in its next iOS. Although this is a great step for the tech giant, there is still a lot of work to do in gun violence prevention. Apple will release iOS 10 this fall.

Apple will replace its pistol emoji with a squirt gun: https://t.co/gLdlFU7Jni pic.twitter.com/7TBUHRi6tu

— New York Magazine (@NYMag) August 2, 2016

Rant Crush

RantCrush collects the top trending topics in the law and policy world each day just for you.

The post RantCrush Top 5: August 2, 2016 appeared first on Law Street.

Welcome to the RantCrush Top 5, where we take you through the top five controversial and crazy stories in the world of law and policy each day. So who is ranting and who is raving today? Check it out below:

Samantha Bee Rips the Religious Right

Samantha Bee is back at it again with a scathing critique on everyone’s favorite topic: the religious right. Beginning with a hilarious history of evangelical Christianity’s relationship with politics, Donald Trump, and the GOP, Samantha Bee gives some important insight how the religious right has been losing its grasp on the White House in recent years. Check it out:

Philip Morris Blows Whistle on New Cigarette Packaging and Gets Shutdown

Philip Morris, a tobacco giant known for Marlboro cigarettes, made headlines today after it tried to sue Australia for its creepy looking cigarette packaging rules. If you’ve seen them, you may never want to go near cigarettes again! That is exactly why Philip Morris is filing suits left and right, claiming the countries that apply these rules are impinging on their trademark intellectual property rights. Do they have a point?

Australia versus Philip Morris: How we took on big tobacco and won. https://t.co/GCIE8iHjhW pic.twitter.com/JugLUFO5FE

— smh.com.au (@smh) May 17, 2016

Australia Wraps It Up Ahead of Rio Olympics

The 2016 Summer Olympics are about to get crazy. Along with Brazil’s increased financial burdens, Zika is in the back of everyone’s mind. This is why Australia pharma company Starpharma and a leading condom company are taking aggressive precautions in creating a Zika-proof condom for the Australian Olympic team. Hopefully, protection will be available to everyone when the games begin.

Zika-proof condoms to be standard issue for Australia’s Olympic team. https://t.co/6fy0a2t4s2 pic.twitter.com/UZSDj0n49S

— VICE Sports (@VICESports) May 17, 2016

Viral Video Shows Woman Denouncing Trans Bathroom Use In Local Target

Attention Target customers! Do not be deceived! Target is amazing, you can literally get anything there. You can also, as a transperson, have access to the bathroom. Which is great, right?  

Well, some folks beg to differ. Particularly this woman whose video went viral today after marching through a local Target with a raised Bible warning mothers to get their children out of the store and away from Target’s “homosexual perverted agenda.” Besides scaring some people, all this woman and her posse accomplished was creating a nuisance.

Snapchat Drops The Ball Again!

Admit it, you love Snapchat filters. You spend hours taking pics as a slobbering puppy or with a perpetual frowny face, because it’s fun and hilarious! However, some people are not taking the apps “pretty” or beauty filters so lightly. Many claim that the filters make individuals with deeper tones look lighter instead of enhancing present features. This comes only a few weeks after Snapchat’s Bob Marley “blackface” scandal. Will Snapchat get it together already?

Rant Crush

RantCrush collects the top trending topics in the law and policy world each day just for you.

The post RantCrush Top 5: May 17, 2015 appeared first on Law Street.

Australian athletes will be generously provided with free anti-Zika virus condoms during the 2016 Olympics in Rio. As reported from previous Olympic games, the athletes will almost certainly use them. The Australian Pharmaceutical Company Starpharma teams up with the world’s second biggest condom maker Ansell in supplying the team with condoms treated with a gel that seems to give almost total protection against the virus, as well as other viruses including HIV and herpes.

The 2016 summer Olympics will, as most know, be held in Rio De Janeiro this year. Brazil has been the center of the outbreak of the Zika virus that causes microcephaly, a disease that causes babies to be born with abnormally small heads. The virus particularly affects pregnant women and is passed on via mosquitos, from a man to his sex partners, or from a woman to her child during pregnancy or when giving birth.

The large-scale outbreak of the virus in Brazil has prompted arguments from some that the Olympics Game should be cancelled:

"Zika virus means Brazil's 2016 Olympics should not proceed" https://t.co/PJvzEEnYz8

— TIME.com (@TIME) May 14, 2016

Starpharma’s spokesperson pointed to the increasing importance of protection against the Zika virus, which is now proven to be sexually transmitted. The Australian Olympic Committee said that blood testing of the athletes will not be necessary when they return to Australia, since there is a low risk of catching the virus as long as you follow precautions. The AOC have already sent out a total of 450,000 condoms for the Olympic Village.

On Friday May 13, the first US case of microcephaly due to locally transmitted Zika was reported in Puerto Rico. The United States Olympic Committee said in March that they would give the American athletes guidelines regarding the virus ahead of the games, but whether to attend or not would be up to the individual.

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Anti-Zika Treated Condoms to be Handed out to Australian Olympic Team appeared first on Law Street.

Amber Heard and Johnny Depp’s Australian puppy-smuggling saga is finally over.

Heard plead guilty Monday to knowingly producing a false and misleading document, and received a one-month $1,000 good behavior bond. Luckily for the actress, prosecutors dropped the more serious illegal importation charges, which carried a maximum penalty of 10 years in prison and a fine of 102,000 Australian dollars (that’s $75,000.)

Australian officials’ #WarOnTerrier began back in late April 2015, when Heard flew the couples tiny terriers “Pistol and Boo” into Australia without a permit to visit Depp, who was in the country filming of the next installment of “Pirates of the Caribbean.” The dogs’ secret arrival, however, was in direct violation of the country’s strict Quarantine Act, which is designed to prevent infectious diseases, such as rabies, from spreading.

At the time, Australia’s Agriculture Minister Barnaby Joyce famously threatened to put the dogs down if they weren’t sent back to the U.S. within a 72-hour window. The combination of Depp and Heard’s celebrity status and the intensity behind the minister’s comments helped propel the unusual illegal immigration story into the national spotlight, as well as offered up plenty of material for online parodies.

But the jokes didn’t stop there.

During the trial, Heard and Depp recorded a video apology that was heard by the court and later released by the Australian government. In the video the couple stated that they were “truly sorry that Pistol and Boo were not declared.” However, the couple’s unusual biosecurity-focused script and overall awkward demeanor didn’t help people take them seriously.

Here’s the full transcript:

Heard: “Australia is a wonderful island with a treasure trove of unique plants, animals and people.”

Depp: “It has to be protected.”

Heard: “Australia is free of many pests and diseases that are commonplace around the world. That is why Australia has to have such strong biosecurity laws.”

Depp: “Australians are just as unique; both warm and direct. When you disrespect Australian law, they will tell your firmly.”

Heard: “I am truly sorry that Pistol and Boo were not declared. Protecting Australia is important.”

Depp: “Declare everything when you enter Australia…thanks.”

Watch the full video below

It didn’t take long before social media began mocking the couples’ sincerity and joking that the pair looked like they were being held hostage. Here are some of the best tweets below.

The Johnny Depp apology feels like a hostage video.

— Ricky Gervais (@rickygervais) April 18, 2016

That Johnny Depp apology video… pic.twitter.com/8dPUZor4QU

— Jason Tin (@jasonthetin) April 18, 2016

I think my favourite bit is right at the start when Depp goes to read Heard’s line but then realises he is a second tier character

— Helen Davidson (@heldavidson) April 18, 2016

Ranking of Johnny Depp’s worst acting performances:

4. The Tourist
3. Pirates 3
2. Apology to Australia video
1. Mordecai

— Mark Di Stefano (@MarkDiStef) April 18, 2016

When Johnny Depp apologises for Charlie & The Chocolate Factory, we’ll know he’s serious about making it up to Australians #waronterrier

— The Shovel (@The_Shovel_) April 18, 2016

The weirdest thing about Johnny Depp’s Australia apology video was that it didn’t also star Helena Bonham Carter.

— Periwinkle Jones (@peachesanscream) April 18, 2016

Ultimately it doesn’t really matter whether the couple’s apology was sincere or not since Heard already succeeded in getting off with barely a slap on the wrist. That being said, the couple’s definitely learned their lesson when it comes to what not to do when flying their pampered pooches by private jet.

Alexis Evans

Alexis Evans is an Assistant Editor at Law Street and a Buckeye State native. She has a Bachelor’s Degree in Journalism and a minor in Business from Ohio University. Contact Alexis at aevans@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Amber Heard & Johnny Depp Issue Strange Apology For Pet Smuggling appeared first on Law Street.

Pope Francis has received accolades from around the world regarding his message of tolerance and his commitment to opening the Catholic church to populations that were historically excluded. However, there is a shadow hanging over his tenure that has yet to be fully addressed: decades of sexual abuse scandals involving Catholic priests that have come to light over the past decade.

Pope Francis has publicly condemned the perpetrators but has also been criticized for not doing more to renounce the culture of turning a blind eye to sexual abuse. This weekend, one of Pope Francis’ most trusted advisers, Cardinal George Pell, former Archbishop of Sydney, was asked to reckon with the consequences of participating in that culture. In Rome, Pell is known as the Secretariat of the Economy and has led sweeping reforms of the traditional Vatican system but in the city of Ballarat, Australia, Pell has become a household name for a much more sinister reason.

Pell provided testimony in Rome this weekend regarding an alleged cover-up of a sexual abuse scandal in Australia. Victims of clerical sexual assault claim that Pell knowingly let pedophile priests escape legal punishment and continue to assault numerous children throughout Australia. One of the most chilling examples of abuse comes from Ballarat, a town where dozens of survivors have stepped forward over the past five years, after decades of abuse. Read on for an introduction to the Ballarat abuse scandal.

Abuse in Ballarat

Ballarat is a city in the state of Victoria, Australia. As of May 2015, 14 Catholic priests have been accused of sexual abuse. Survivors provided testimony in 2015, citing abuse that spanned from the 1960s to the 1990s. Multiple abuse victims from Ballarat committed suicide before they ever saw their day in court, but those who did presented names, dates, and precise details about their abusers. The most prolific offender was Gerald Ridsdale, who was accused of over one hundred acts of abuse. Ridsdale pleaded guilty in 2006 to 35 charges of assault but many victims felt that his sentence of a maximum of thirteen years in jail was too lenient.

Cardinal Pell has been accused of moving Ridsdale from parish to parish for two decades rather than reporting his activities to law enforcement or removing him from the Church entirely. David Ridsdale, who was abused by his uncle, has stated that he attempted to speak about his abuse in 1993 but was silenced by Cardinal Pell. After David Ridsdale reported his uncle, Pell allegedly replied “I want to know what it will take to keep you quiet.” Pell has stated that he never bribed either Ridsdale or his family, but that accusation was bolstered by testimony from another witness who cited Pell brushing off a report of sexual abuse at St. Patrick’s College. The Royal Commission that is overseeing the abuse cases in Ballarat has discovered that abuse committed by several other priests was reported to their superiors but each time, the abuse was ignored and the priests were either moved to different parishes or sent on “treatment” trips.

Pell was summoned to give evidence in Melbourne earlier this year, but his legal team declared he was not healthy enough to fly and instead organized a video-conference from Rome. Upon realizing that Pell would not be coming to Australia, a national crowd-funding campaign was launched to fly Australian sexual abuse victims to Rome to speak with Pell face-to-face. The campaign raised over $200,000 in a matter of days, which paid for the travel expenses of 14 victims and their advisors. The stage was set for a significant confrontation between the upper echelon of the Catholic hierarchy and the survivors whose stories were denied for most of their lives.

Controversial Coverage 

The controversy over Pell has led to significant rifts in public discourse. Columnist Andrew Bolt, who calls himself a close friend of Pell, wrote a piece earlier this month claiming that Pell is an innocent man who has become the target of a national “witch hunt.” Bolt argues that public opinion has turned harshly against Pell, who he considers to be an advocate for sexual abuse victims. Bolt describes how Pell has met with abuse victims in the past and how, in 1996, Pell founded the Melbourne Response initiative, which was tasked with investigating sexual abuse allegations made against priests.

However, questions have been raised about how independent the Melbourne Response has been during its tenure, especially after a controversial “60 Minutes” interview (featured below) that explored Pell’s involvement in the Ballarat cases. Bolt also accused reporter Lucie Morris-Marr of launching a smear campaign against Pell after she reported that police were investigating reports that Pell himself had abused children. Morris-Marr defended her story, arguing that she published the piece after a thorough investigation with no intention of libel. Multiple news outlets picked up Morris-Marr’s piece, which led the Victoria police to announce a crackdown on leaking information to the media, even though the police have not formally acknowledged if they are investigating Pell for abuse. Cardinal Pell denied the allegations, but as press attention shifts towards his testimony in Rome this weekend, they may resurface in the coming days.

Pell has not yet been formally charged with obstructing justice or failing to report abuse but there are already calls for his resignation. Victims of the Ballarat abuse scandal have already named the priests who assaulted them and some, such as Ridsdale, have already received sentences, but many argue that the rift between these survivors and the Catholic Church will not be truly healed unless Pell is asked to accept responsibility for his failure to remove these priests.

Other Vatican Controversies Over Abuse

Ballarat is not the only parish where reports of sexual abuse have allegedly been swept under the rug. In 2011, a 1997 letter from Vatican leadership was released to the public.  The letter told Irish bishops not to report suspicions of child abuse to the police, but instead to handle abuse as they saw fit under canonical religious law. The letter came as a response to a 1996 initiative of “mandatory reporting” that Irish priests enacted to identify sexual abuse within the church.

There is also criticism over a recently released Vatican document that holds that even though bishops should be aware of local legal procedures, they are not obligated to report clerical child abuse to law enforcement. The document was part of training program for new bishops and was written by Tony Anatrella, a consultant to the Pontifical Council on the Family. The Guardian reports that

While acknowledging that ‘the church has been particularly affected by sexual crimes committed against children,’ the training guide emphasizes statistics that show the vast majority of sexual assaults against children are committed within the family and by friends and neighbors, not other authority figures.

Anatrella’s training document was published just a few days after Peter Saunders, a British victim of abuse serving on the papal advisory commission on clerical sexual assault, was forced out of his position via a vote of no confidence. The vote of no confidence came after Saunders was accused of being difficult to work with and too familiar with the media. The commission announced publicly that Saunders would be taking a leave of absence but Saunders told the press that he had no knowledge of that decision and that he refuses to step down unless Pope Francis officially asks him to. Saunders has been critical of the commission since it was formed two years ago, but as one of two survivors appointed to the commission by Pope Francis, his presence was considered an important victory for victims who want to participate in the discussion. His removal, whether or not it gets Pope Francis’ stamp of approval, may be viewed as a significant step backward in creating open dialogue and building trust between abuse survivors and the bureaucracy of the church.

Conclusion

The sexual abuse that Catholic priests engaged in for decades around the world is a heinous crime not only in its nature but because of the sheer scale on which it was committed. It is not only the priests who abused children who must be held accountable in court, it is also their superiors who ignored allegations of sexual assault over extended periods of time. The last decade has seen a sharp rise in victims coming forward, sharing their stories and formally testifying in court about their experiences, which will hopefully hold the Church accountable for its actions. As Pope Francis tries to usher in a new brand of Catholicism, investigations like the Ballarat case serve as a constant reminder of exactly how much reform is still needed to redress the past crimes. Pell’s testimony in Rome this weekend may not have deviated from the statements he made last year during the investigation conducted by Australia’s Royal Commission but the attention that the conference has garnered has put Pell in the spotlight, not just in Australia, but on the world stage.

Resources

New York Times: After Criticism, Pope Francis Confronts Priestly Sexual Abuse

New York Times: Vatican Letter Warned Bishops on Abuse Policy

LA Times: Catholic Sex Abuse Hearing Will Take Place in the Dead of Night in a Hotel in Rome

The Age: Ballarat Abuse Survivors Head to Rome to see Cardinal George Pell Give Evidence

The Age: Victoria Police Refer Leak of Investigation into Cardinal George Pell to IBAC

ABC: Child Abuse Sex Inquiry: Bishop Paul Bird Denies as Many as 14 Ballarat Priests Involved in Abuse as Hearings Wrap Up

The Guardian: George Pell Tried to Bribe Abuse Victim, Royal Commission Hears

The Guardian: Ballarat Priests Involved in Child Sex Abuse sSent on ‘Treatment’ Trips, inquiry told

FT: Australia Clerical Sex Abuse Victims Travel to Rome

Herald Sun: Cardinal George Pell is the Victim of a Vicious Witch Hunt

News.Com.Au: 60 Minutes Reporter Tara Brown Digs Deep into George Pell’s Melbourne Response

Reuters: Critic of Vatican Refuses to Step Down from Sex Abuse Commission

Jillian Sequeira

Jillian Sequeira was a member of the College of William and Mary Class of 2016, with a double major in Government and Italian. When she’s not blogging, she’s photographing graffiti around the world and worshiping at the altar of Elon Musk and all things Tesla. Contact Jillian at Staff@LawStreetMedia.com

The post Reckoning in Rome: A Look at the Ballarat Abuse Scandal appeared first on Law Street.

Amber Heard, actress and wife of Johnny Depp, is pleading not guilty to illegal animal importing charges, after being accused by Australian officials of smuggling the couple’s two Yorkshire terriers into the country on a private jet. Heard was charged this week with two counts of illegally importing “Pistol and Boo” into Australia and one count of producing a false document.

Amber Heard pleads not into Brguilty to illegally importing dogs into Australia and begs for… https://t.co/2rCwUgvW2T pic.twitter.com/QBsAYFiiQm

— Eye Witness Reporter (@eyewitnessblog) December 7, 2015

The whole matter came about after the “Friday Night Lights” actress flew to Australia with the tiny terriers in May 2015 to visit Depp, who was in the country filming the next installment in the “Pirates of the Caribbean” franchise. Heard allegedly falsified her immigration arrival card to conceal the arrival of the two tiny pups, as they traveled to Brisborne by private jet.

By doing so, she bypassed Australia’s strict Quarantine Act, which requires pet owners to apply for a pet permit and quarantine their animals on arrival for at least ten days. The act was designed to prevent infectious diseases, such as rabies, from spreading.

Authorities were tipped off to the dogs’ illegal arrival after photos surfaced of the pampered pooches at an Australian groomer’s shop. Officials gave the couple 72 hours to send Boo and Pistol back to the U.S., threatening that they would euthanize the dogs if they didn’t comply. In the words of Australia’s Agriculture Minister Barnaby Joyce,” if we start letting movie stars–even though they’ve been [voted] the Sexiest Man Alive twice–to come into our nation, then why don’t we just break the laws for everybody?” Joyce added, ” it’s time that Pistol and Boo buggered off back to the United States.”

Watch Joyce’s full comments below

Joyce’s intensity over the matter quickly became parodied worldwide and social media responded with the ironic hashtag #WarOnTerrier. The dogs were eventually flown back to the U.S. under the guardianship of Heard’s father in order to avoid potential harm from the Australian government.

Even though the matter came off as joke for some, the potential sentence is no laughing matter. According to NBC, Heard could face a maximum penalty of 10 years in prison and a $75,000 fine for the importation charges, while the false document charge carries a penalty of a year in prison and a fine of $7,500. Depp, however, was able to avoid charges altogether because the dogs are solely registered under Heard’s name.

Despite the severity of the charges, Depp didn’t shy away from firing back at the Australian minister during an interview at the Venice Film Festival joking, ” I killed my dogs and ate them, under direct orders of some kind of, I don’t know, sweaty, big-gutted man from Australia.”

Heard on the other hand seem to be taking the charges more seriously. In a statement released by her lawyers Heard said,

Whilst I am unable to comment on the specific matters before the court I would like to say that I respect the importance of Australia’s laws. My decision to defend these charges, as will become apparent in the appropriate forum of the court, is not intended to in any way diminish the importance of Australia’s laws. I look forward to attending the hearing of these matters. However as the matters are to be determined by the court, I will not be making any further statements.

Alexis Evans

Alexis Evans is an Assistant Editor at Law Street and a Buckeye State native. She has a Bachelor’s Degree in Journalism and a minor in Business from Ohio University. Contact Alexis at aevans@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Amber Heard Will Plead Not Guilty to Illegally Bringing Dogs to Australia appeared first on Law Street.

“Avengers: Age of Ultron,” the latest hit in the Avengers franchise, debuted in theaters recently and made more than $200 million in a single weekend. The surprising part however, is that it earned that $200 million outside the U.S., before the movie even opened stateside. The increasing globalization of the film industry is abundantly clear. But the changes in the film industry aren’t just reflected in the exports of American movies to foreign audiences. There are also many nations expanding into the industry. Read on to learn about the globalization of the film industry, and its worldwide ramifications.

The American Film Industry: Changes From Sea to Shining Sea

While Hollywood is facing greater competition from abroad in almost every aspect of the film industry, it is still the dominant player globally. In 2014, for example, the top ten most profitable movies were all made in the United States.

Hollywood has had to adjust to a changing customer base. Nearly 60 percent of the box office hauls taken in by these big productions came from abroad. This means that the success of the Hollywood movie industry is driven more by foreign markets than domestic. In fact, the number two market for Hollywood films, China, is predicted to surpass the American market by 2020.

In response to this changing environment, Hollywood is increasingly relying on big-budget blockbusters. These movies have been particularly marketable specifically because of their simple plot lines, which often avoid nuanced or culturally specific stories that might get lost in translation. Additionally, Hollywood often adds extra scenes to movies released in other countries, sometimes featuring actors from those countries, in order to make them more relatable. This has meant making changes to movies, too. For example, in the remake of “Red Dawn,” the nationality of the invading soldiers was changed from Chinese to North Korean in order to avoid alienating the Chinese movie audience.

Foreign Film Industries: The Veterans

Although Hollywood, as a result of globalization, is facing stiffer competition abroad, there has long existed a traditional foreign film industry. The center of this industry is located in Europe

European Film Industry

While every country in Europe makes movies, five countries in particular make up 80 percent of the market: France, Germany, the United Kingdom, Italy, and Spain. The industry itself is also massive in scope, including 75,000 companies and 370,000 workers across Europe.

In addition to the number of people involved, Europe is also home to some of the most prestigious events in cinema. Perhaps the most famous is the Cannes Film Festival in France. This event has taken place nearly every year since 1946, with filmmakers from all walks of life competing for the coveted Palme d’Or prize for the best film in the competition.

Despite the success of the film industry in Europe, it has struggled to deal with foreign competition, particularly Hollywood. As of 2013, 70 percent of the European film market was dominated by American films. This is in stark contrast to a much smaller 26 percent coming directly from European sources.

But as Hollywood has made efforts to keep its industry relevant, so has Europe. One of the most prominent attempts has been through the LUX competition. Seeking to address one of the most glaring problems in Europe’s film industry–distributing and dubbing movies in all the languages spoken in Europe–the films involved in this competition are sub-titled in 24 different languages so as to be accessible to a wide audience.

Film Industries Down Under

Australia and New Zealand also have prominent film industries. While Australia is currently dealing with losing out on some projects because its tax credits are not competitive enough, there is a strong tradition already in place. For example, “Star Wars: Revenge of the Sith” as well as the “Matrix” trilogy were both filmed there.

The New Zealand film industry is strong and thriving. This has been the result of two forces. First, home-grown production of films such as “The Piano,” which won three Oscars in 1993, has helped promote the industry. There has also been a rise of recognizable talent coming out of the country, including director Peter Jackson. Like Australia, New Zealand has also been the location of major Hollywood productions such as “Avatar,” “King Kong,” and “The Last Samurai” to name just a few.

Rising Stars

Other countries are continuing to create voices of their own through national film industries. Three of the most successful countries in creating major movie industries of their own have been India, Nigeria, and South Korea.

India

Although Hollywood is the most profitable film industry worldwide, India’s is the most productive based on its sheer number of films. India’s film production is so prodigious that it has earned a nickname of its own: Bollywood, in reference to the city of Mumbai. In fact, India’s industry is so expansive that the Bollywood moniker is really only applicable to Mumbai–other regions and cities have film industries of their own that have spawned similar nicknames, such as “Kollywood” and “Sandalwood.”

While the Indian film industry has been a compelling force for more than 100 years, it has seen a huge jump in growth recently. From 2004-2013, gross receipts tripled and revenue is estimated to reach $4.5 billion next year. With those kinds of numbers, India’s film industry promises to continue its upward trajectory in money and influence.

Nigeria

The Nigerian film industry also produces more films per year than Hollywood, and it has the similar nickname “Nollywood.” Nigeria’s films are often lower-budget productions that are released directly to DVD and often not even filmed in a studio. Nonetheless, the Nigerian film industry is influential enough regionally that neighboring countries fear a Nigerianization effect on their own cultures.

The Nigerian film industry is so popular that the World Bank believes that with the proper management it could create a million more jobs in a country with high unemployment levels. The film industry in Nigeria already employs a million people, making it the second-largest employer in the country behind the agricultural sector. Still, for Nigeria to be on the same level as Hollywood or Bollywood, many issues would have to be addressed, in particular the high rate of film pirating. The video below explores Nollywood and its impact on Hollywood.

South Korea

South Korea also has a strong film industry, although it doesn’t have a catchy nickname. While it does not generate the volume of films of Bollywood or Nollywood, it does have the advantage of being the go-to destination for entertainment for much of Asia, particularly China and Japan. South Korea’s movies resonate both domestically and regionally because they often play on historical conflicts that affected the region as a whole. The film industry there also received a boost when a law was passed stating that at least 40 percent of films shown in South Korea had to be produced there, forcing local companies to step up and fill the void.

What does film industry globalization mean?

Money

One of the most obvious implications of globalization is financing. Several major Hollywood studios including Disney have bankrolled films in Bollywood. This is in an attempt to harness the massive potential audience there. Financing is a two-way street however, and when Hollywood struggled for funds following the 2008 recession it received loans and financing from Indian sources.

Culture

Another implication is cultural. In many countries, the government has posted quotas or imposed tariffs on foreign films to limit their dominance domestically. These laws are aimed specifically at American movies. One of the motivations for these rules is the competition American films provide. In basically every domestic market worldwide, Hollywood movies have a larger share than the domestic industry. Secondly, movies are seen as cultural pillars, so leaders are interested in preserving, and even promoting their own culture over that of a foreign entity like the one presented by Hollywood.

Like financing, cultural considerations also have a return effect on Hollywood. In order to attract more foreign viewers, Hollywood movies have simplified story lines and included more actors from different locales. In effect, Hollywood has had to become more diverse and open in order to appeal worldwide. This effect may actually dilute any would-be American cultural overload as well, as these movies are incorporating more global cultures in order to be competitive.

Globalization is a give and take. There has been a long-standing fear of globalization leading to Americanization; however, as the film industry has shown, for American filmmakers or any others to be competitive globally their themes and characters must be global, too. Additionally the invasion of Hollywood movies has also encouraged many domestic industries to build up their own audiences and industries that had been neglected before.

Conclusion

Hollywood has long dealt with issues, ideas, and events that have stretched the world over, and it is now dealing with competition as diverse and far reaching as the topics of the movies it produces. The Hollywood film industry had remained the dominant player in the industry by leveraging foreign markets. Globally this has also meant the incorporation of more films and actors from traditional markets such as Europe. It also means the rise of movies and stars from non-traditional markets as well. Thus the globalization of the film industry has meant many things to many different people, but what it has meant to everyone involved from production to consumption is greater access and opportunity. Hopefully, the global film industry will continue along this path.

Resources

Arts.Mic: Three Countries With Booming Movie Industries That Are Not the U.S.

BBC: How the Global Box Office is Changing Hollywood

Vanity Fair: Avengers Age of Ultron is Already a Huge, Hulking Hit at the Box Office

Business Insider: The Highest Grossing Movies of 2014

Grantland: All the World’s a Stage

Law Without Borders: The Intersection of Hollywood and the Indian Film Industry

Los Angeles Daily News: Why TV, Film Production is Running Away From Hollywood.

European Parliament Think Tank: An Overview of Europe’s Film Industry

BBC: Australia Film Industry Hurt by Strong Currency

International Journal of Cultural Policy: Cultural Globalization and the Dominance of the American Film Industry

UN: Nigeria’s Film Industry a Potential Gold Mine

Festival De Cannes: History of the Festival

100% Pure New Zealand: History of New Zealand Screen Industry

Michael Sliwinski

Michael Sliwinski (@MoneyMike4289) is a 2011 graduate of Ohio University in Athens with a Bachelor’s in History, as well as a 2014 graduate of the University of Georgia with a Master’s in International Policy. In his free time he enjoys writing, reading, and outdoor activites, particularly basketball. Contact Michael at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post The Globalization of Cinema: What’s Next? appeared first on Law Street.

The devastating 7.8 earthquake that recently struck Nepal caused untold damage to buildings and has killed thousands of people, with many more missing. Following the devastation, the usual influx of aid began, as did finger pointing over who was to blame for the devastation. However, what this catastrophe has revealed most clearly is the disparate ways in which countries respond to disasters. Read on to learn about the response to the Nepalese earthquake, and the various global responses to disasters.

Responding to a Disaster

Emergency Management

Disasters, natural and man made, have been around since the beginning of time. However, the response to these disasters has not always been the same, and methods have varied as widely as the civilizations that have suffered them.

In the United States for example, we have FEMA (the Federal Emergency Management Agency). FEMA was founded in 1979 when five separate agencies that dealt with disasters consolidated into one. Although it perhaps best known now for its poor handling of Hurricane Katrina in New Orleans, it has served as the point agency for every natural disaster the United States has dealt with since its inception.

Emergency Management Cycle

While the methods for emergency management vary, one of the commonly accepted tools is the emergency management cycle. The cycle’s origins go back to the 1930s when phases were first used to describe the ideal response to a disaster. The cycle gained its central place in the emergency management lexicon in 1979 when FEMA was created by President Jimmy Carter following recommendations from the National Governors Association, and versions have now expanded to other nations. This cycle is generally broken into three or four parts, although newer variations can include more steps. Usually the four steps are mitigation, preparedness, response, and recovery. You can see an example here.

The first two phases, mitigation and preparedness, actually occur before the potential disaster strikes. In the preparedness and mitigation phases a country plans for a potential disaster through steps such as developing evacuation plans, raising awareness and improving current infrastructure.

Once the disaster actually strikes, there’s a response section of the cycle. During this time, emergency management workers attempt to rescue people, provide basic services, and prevent any further damage. The final phase is recovery. In this final stage, once the disaster has passed, authorities go to work returning basic services to full operational capabilities. Additionally, infrastructure and other institutions that were damaged during the devastation are rebuilt.

While these distinctions seem clear, steps often overlap and become blurred, further complicating the process. In addition, it’s important to remember that these steps apply equally to both man-made and natural disasters. However, maintaining an appropriate balance of preparedness for the two types is important, otherwise one can become neglected at the expense of the other. A chilling example is the focus on defending against terrorism in the United States that left other shortcomings unnoticed. Critics claim this led to an underfunding of the levee system in New Orleans, which ultimately failed during Hurricane Katrina and had devastating results.

The Finger Pointers and the 20/20 Crowd

Unfortunately not every country has such a system or even a plan in place, including Nepal. These programs are very expensive. For example, in 2015 FEMA’s requested budget was $10.4 billion. To put that into context, Nepal’s entire GDP for 2013, the most recent year available from the World Bank, was only $19.3 billion. While no one expects Nepal to have an agency or program on the scale of FEMA given the lower population and wealth gap between it and U.S., in the wake of this disaster, concerns have arisen that the nation was unprepared.

These considerations did not stop the criticism from pouring about the failure of the Nepalese government. These criticisms have come from several high profile sources, including numerous relief agencies, namely the United Nations. Criticisms range from insufficient infrastructure to the difficulty aid groups have delivering supplies to those who need them. Despite the disaster, many protective tariffs are still in place, making it difficult to distribute goods. There are also concerns over widespread corruption and the reported looting of supply convoys by authorities who want to disperse the aid along ethnic lines.

These criticisms should not be entirely surprising given Nepal’s governmental history. The country only just began recovering from a civil war in 2006, which had lasted ten years. That conflict pitted the newly established democratic government against Maoist insurgents. Since the end of the civil war, there have been a succession of ineffectual governments who have been unable to create any sort of a unified front. For example, in January 2015, the current government was unable to agree on changes to its constitution because of political infighting.  The video below depicts many of the issues facing Nepal’s relief efforts:

International Community

When countries such as Nepal and others suffer a horrendous disaster, the international community usually steps up to aid them in their suffering. While variations of aid can be separated into many different branches, the two clearest distinctions are financial and direct intervention.

Financial Assistance

While not every country has an emergency response team to spare to help in a disaster zone, many can offer another valuable commodity: money. As of April 28^th 60 million dollars in financial assistance had already been pledged to the earthquake ravaged area. This type of giving is not surprising, especially following natural disasters such as earthquakes. In fact two other examples, the deadly 2013 typhoon in the Philippines, and the 2008 cyclone in Myanmar (Burma) illustrate that in circumstances such as these, it is not uncommon for the aid a country receives to as much as quintuple from one year to the next.

Although this is good news for Nepal, it may not be enough. While financial pledges can be easily won in the immediate aftermath of a disaster, the ability to continue to elicit them tends to fade as the story does from the headlines. Costs to repair the damage in Nepal have been estimated to be as much as five billion dollars. This massive undertaking is especially difficult for a nation like Nepal whose GDP, as previously mentioned, is only around 20 billion total each year, with a significant portion of that coming from now-lost tourist revenue.

In addition to these considerations, a working paper on the political economy of disaster preparedness by Charles Cohen and Eric Werker of the Harvard Business School also raises additional considerations. While money is useful in dealing with a disaster, giving away large sums reduces the incentive of a government to be adequately prepared in the first place. According to the study, rich countries as well as poor would be better off if more aid was provided for preparedness than response–it’s smarter to be proactive than reactive.

Concerns also abound over a dishonest government stealing aid money. In some cases, leaders want to reward their constituents first in order to maintain their good graces. Thus, it is also imperative in these types of situations to have a decentralized aid distribution system as much as possible. The video below provides some dos and don’ts in regards to helping following a disaster:

Physical Intervention

Another means to assist an ailing nation is through direct assistance by countries and private organizations. In the case of Nepal, this aid can be divided into three sub-categories. First, countries such as Japan and Australia sent experts and aid teams to help recovery. Relief organizations such as the Red Cross provided money and experts to help, basically serving as microcosms of the nations they represent. Lastly corporations such as Coca-Cola and Kellogg provided bottled water and food to satiate survivors whose access to basic goods may have vanished in the wake of the disaster.

Like financial assistance, direct intervention can also have drawbacks. An example of this comes from the 2010 Haitian earthquake. In that case, relief efforts were hampered and stagnated due to an inefficient infrastructure in place. The United States took full control of the response efforts, at one point legally taking possession of the main airport in the capital Port-au-Prince during the relief efforts. However, subsequent American prioritizing of its own relief planes over other nations’ led to an international row that threatened to divert focus from the main crisis as hand. The accompanying video depicts the controversy:

The Wealth of Nations

Additionally the acceptance of aid either through financial aid or direct intervention can also be influenced by the existing wealth of a nation. For example, while Nepal is basically dependent on other countries for assistance, richer nations who are less beholden may refuse aid when it is offered. A prime example is the United States, which politely declined nearly one billion dollars in aid from allies following Hurricane Katrina in 2005. While part of this was due to government inefficiency in distributing assistance, most offers were simply declined out of hand.

The U.S. declined most of the aid because, while it was adept at distributing aid to other countries, it was less skilled at dispensing aid within its own.  Thus rather than accept more aid that would often spoil or remain unclaimed, it instead declined many offers.  While this stagnation is criticized in other countries as a result of underdeveloped agencies, in the U.S. it was accepted because the U.S. is perceived as being a more capable nation due to its relative wealth.

Conclusion

Although countries such as Nepal and Haiti may serve as examples of how not to handle a disaster, there is no telling how any nation will respond once it actually experiences one. The prime example here is the United States. Even with its large bureaucracy dedicated to disaster relief and readiness, with an equally large budget, the U.S. has repeatedly been accused of being unprepared.

There are numerous examples of these failings, perhaps the two most glaring in recent memory are Hurricane Katrina and Hurricane Sandy. Hurricane Katrina essentially wiped out one of the most historic cities in the US, New Orleans, while also killing over a 1000 people and causing over $135 billion dollars in damage. Hurricane Sandy saw a lower fatality count, approximately 100 dead, but saw major parts of eastern states such as New York and New Jersey effected to the point of $50 billion dollars in damages.

Disasters, whether they are man made or natural, can strike anywhere, anytime. While some nations, either through financial means or previous experience are more prepared than others, ultimately no nation is ever ready for something as deadly as Nepal’s earthquake or a massive hurricane. This is a global issue, and one that has no easy answer.

Resources

Primary

FEMA: The Four Phases of Emergency Management

World Bank: Nepal

Ottawa County Sheriffs’ Office: Four Phases of Emergency Management

Central Intelligence Agency: World Factbook Nepal

Additional

Time: These are the Five Facts That Explain Nepal’s Devastating Earthquake

Brookings: Counter-Terrorism and Emergency Management Keeping a Proper Balance

MNMK: Disaster Management – A Theoretical Approach

VOA: Nepal Officials Slammed Over Aid Response

Fierce Homeland Security: 2015 Budget Request

Harvard Business School: The Political Economy of Natural Disasters

CNN Money: Nepal Earthquake Donations, Who’s Sending What

Vanderbilt Center for Transportation Research: The Phases of Emergency Management

Guardian: US Accused of Annexing Airport as Squabbling Hinders Aid Effort in Haiti

Washington Post: Most Katrina Aid from Overseas went Unclaimed

The Data Center: Fact for Features Katrina Impact

Michael Sliwinski

Michael Sliwinski (@MoneyMike4289) is a 2011 graduate of Ohio University in Athens with a Bachelor’s in History, as well as a 2014 graduate of the University of Georgia with a Master’s in International Policy. In his free time he enjoys writing, reading, and outdoor activites, particularly basketball. Contact Michael at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post How Do Nations Respond When Disaster Strikes? appeared first on Law Street.

Even though the holidays are fast approaching and a lot of things are starting to slow down in anticipation, the news last week definitely didn’t. The beginning of the week saw the aftermath of a tragic hostage situation in Sydney, Australia, and the Sony hack continued to dominate the news cycle for the rest of the week. Our number one story this week was by Hannah R. Winsten, who wrote about Australia’s amazing response to the horrifying hostage crisis. The number two spot went to Ashley Shaw, with a piece on an off-duty cop arresting a man for stealing his parking spot. Finally, number three went to Anneliese Mahoney, who wrote about the continuing Sony Hacking scandal. ICYMI: check out what everyone was reading on Law Street last week.

#1 Australians School the World on How To Not Be Racist

This is a terrible, awful thing that happened in Sydney, and I think it’s safe to say that our hearts are collectively with the hostages and their families. However, the people of Sydney are handling this tragedy remarkably well. And I mean like, really, REALLY well. People of the United States—and actually, the whole rest of the world—take note. Read the full article here.

#2 Off-Duty Cop Arrests Man for Taking Parking Spot

Frank Maio saw what my sisters would tell you was Princess Parking out in front of a Deerfield Beach shoe store. (Princess Parking, as defined by Urban Dictionary, is “just like rock star parking or prime parking; when one finds the perfect parking spot, right next to or in front of the entrance to wherever he or she is going.”) But when he went to claim the spot, something horrible occurred: Clausel Pierre pulled into the spot first! Read the full article here.

#3 Disturbing New Developments in the Continuing Sony Hacking Scandal

Another day, another leak. It seems like the leaking of some information to do with Hollywood–whether it be nude photos, salaries, or emails–happens on pretty much a weekly basis now. However, this leak from entertainment super-company Sony is probably going to go down in history to top all others. And I don’t think it’s quite done spitting out Hollywood gossip and insider information. Read the full article here.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post ICMYI: Best of the Week appeared first on Law Street.

Folks, Christmas is right around the corner. Unlike my awesome, totally not annoying friend on Facebook who has had a daily countdown to Christmas going since like, October (I shit you not), I am kind of freaking out right now.

Oh come on, like you aren’t. Gift buying is hard.

However! Despite the stress of Christmas money-spending and family-schmoozing, there is some holiday time awesomeness happening in the world this week.

And it’s happening in—wait for it…

Australia!

The land of terrifying spiders and other freakishly large insects is setting a really great example for the rest of the world this week, as they respond to the hostage crisis that’s currently unfolding in Sydney.

In case you haven’t been following the news, Man Haron Monis, an Iranian political refugee, held 17 hostages at gunpoint inside a Lindt Chocolat Café in downtown Sydney early Monday morning. After 16 hours, Australian police stormed the café.

Three people were killed—Monis being one of them—and four were injured. Monis had an extensive prior record with law enforcement in Sydney, and officials currently believe he acted alone.

This is a terrible, awful thing that happened in Sydney, and I think it’s safe to say that our hearts are collectively with the hostages and their families.

However.

The people of Sydney are handling this tragedy remarkably well. And I mean like, really, REALLY well. People of the United States—and actually, the whole rest of the world—take note.

Here’s what’s happening.

Muslims in Sydney were feeling understandably concerned about their safety in the aftermath of this hostage crisis. In countries like the U.S., every time Muslims are in the news, for literally any reason—whether it’s a terrorist attack or an innocent debate about where to build a new mosque—anti-Muslim hate crimes increase.

So, to recap, whenever Americans are reminded that there are Muslims among them, they start attacking them at significantly higher rates.

Seriously, guys? This is some racist bullshit. Stop it.

But, in Sydney, they tend to handle things a little better. Or, you know, a LOT better. Instead of attacking Muslim Australians or vandalizing their homes, businesses, and mosques, non-Muslims in Sydney decided to step up and protect their fellow residents.

A Twitter hashtag, #IllRideWithYou, started when a single, non-Muslim person offered to walk with a woman wearing a Hijab who presumably felt unsafe.

Muslim removed her hijab, out of fear. Passenger told her to put it back on and offered to walk w her #IllRideWithYou http://t.co/h3uGyTjUmC

— Jeremy Duncan (@duncanjeremy) December 15, 2014

Tweets started to follow, as other non-Muslims throughout Sydney started to post their commuting routes, offering to ride with any Muslims in religious clothing who were concerned about their safety.  

Anybody concerned for their safety going to work in Brisbane tomorrow morning from the Northside, #illridewithyou — Ben Clark (@scouse_roar) December 15, 2014

If you wear religious attire, & need to get from #Adelaide‘s west suburbs to the city on Tues but don’t want to travel alone #illridewithyou

— Sharna Bremner (@sharnatweets) December 15, 2014

Practical thing: I’ve made a temporary sticker for my bag so people who need me can spot me #illridewithyou pic.twitter.com/aVldEn9wVU — Kristen Boschma (@Kristen_Boschma) December 15, 2014

The hashtag has since gone viral, and that’s really fucking awesome.

#illridewithyou anytime. This campaign makes me proud to be an Aussie in the face of something truly… http://t.co/YDsD8FC1VE

— Ms Darlinghurst (@msdarlinghurst) December 15, 2014

“Small acts, if multiplied by millions, can transform the world”#illridewithyou [pic] — https://t.co/NrF8jgNW5A — Linda Sjahreza (@lindasjahreza) December 15, 2014

The people of Sydney are using social media to let Muslims in their communities know that they’re safe in their homes and on the streets. No need to fear retaliation in the name of this hostage crisis—the people of Australia understand that the actions of one disturbed human being don’t translate to an entire religion of people who have nothing to do with him.

For those who still struggle, here’s a better illustration. #illridewithyou pic.twitter.com/5DiHn6BfS3

— Junaid (@Its_JunaidS) December 15, 2014

In short, Australians are responding to the Lindt hostage crisis by doing the opposite of what many Americans would do.

They’re being actively anti-racist.

I’ll be in the city/Craigieburn line/59 tram today with this on. Sorry the writing isn’t very big! #illridewithyou pic.twitter.com/GCJ6sjCgvo

— Neezus. (@thatnem0kid) December 15, 2014

So, people of Sydney, we salute you. You’re restoring our collective faith in humanity today. Keep being awesome.

Everyone else—let’s follow Sydney’s example, mmkay?

Hannah R. Winsten

Hannah R. Winsten is a freelance copywriter, marketing consultant, and blogger living in New York’s sixth borough. She hates tweeting but does it anyway. She aspires to be the next Rachel Maddow. Contact Hannah at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Australians School the World on How To Not Be Racist appeared first on Law Street.

Yesterday, the city of Sydney–and the entire world–watched as a lone gunman with likely terroristic motives took over a cafe in the city and held hostages. It’s believed that approximately 17 customers and employees were held captive. It happened in Lindt cafe in the financial district. Details are still uncertain, but it seems like the incident ended with the gunman and two of the hostages dead and others injured. The stand-off lasted for over sixteen hours before police stormed the cafe and got out the hostages. Some had escaped earlier, others were there the full sixteen hours.

The shooter is believed to be one man, acting alone, named Man Haron Monis. He was an Iranian immigrant, and had been in trouble with the law before. He was involved in the murder of his ex-wife, and he had gotten caught writing offensive letters to the families of soldiers who had died in Afghanistan.

While it’s being called a “terrorist” attack by many, it’s hard to determine if that’s actually true. At one point, the hostages were forced to hold up a banner with writing in Arabic on it. It’s called the Shahada, and it’s described by The New York Post as follows:

The Shahada translates as “There is no god but God and Muhammad is his messenger.” It is considered the first of Islam’s five pillars of faith, and is similar to the Lord’s Prayer in Christianity. It is pervasive throughout Islamic culture, including the green flag of Saudi Arabia. Jihadis have used the Shahada in their own black flag.

Unfortunately, it’s been misappropriated and used by some terrorist groups, including an Al-Qaeda linked group in Syria. However, it seems that this was just the act of one crazy man, and not necessarily linked to a wider group of any sort. Australia has purportedly had some issues with Islamist extremism recently, and it’s estimated that at least 70 Australians are fighting for ISIS.

Luckily, many members of Australian society have been admirably non-reactionary. In order to combat prejudice and anger today, the hashtag #illridewithyou was born out of reports that some Muslims were experiencing harassment on public transportation today. The hashtag has now gone viral, as an attempt to show support for the Muslim community in Australia. Here are, presumably, the tweets that started it:

If you reg take the #373 bus b/w Coogee/MartinPl, wear religious attire, & don’t feel safe alone: I’ll ride with you. @ me for schedule.

— Sir Tessa (@sirtessa) December 15, 2014

Maybe start a hashtag? What’s in #illridewithyou?

— Sir Tessa (@sirtessa) December 15, 2014

There have been remarkable examples of a community coming together through this hashtag.

This is not about religion. This is about a madman who should've been locked up years ago. Please be good to each other. #illridewithyou

— Evalicious (@deliciouslybad) December 15, 2014

#illridewithyou is a beautiful reminder that our compassion should precede our prejudice. Religions do not kill people. People kill people.

— Kushaan Shah (@kushaanshah) December 15, 2014

#illridewithyou is one of the most humane reactions to terrorism ever. Way to go #Australia

— Marcel LeJeune (@MarcelLeJeune) December 15, 2014

It’s heartening to see that Australia, despite reeling from yesterday’s tragedy, is still coming together as a country. Many other nations, the United States included, could do well to learn from our friend down under.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Australian Hostage Situation Ends: A Community Stands Together appeared first on Law Street.