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:

Paris Man Who Rammed Car of Explosives into Police Vehicle Was on Terror Watch List

Yesterday, a man rammed a car full of explosives into a police vehicle, although he only ended up killing himself. The incident is being investigated as a terror attack. It took place on the historic Champs-Elysees. In April, the famous avenue saw another attack, when a man shot a police officer. Authorities had previously flagged the perpetrator, who was identified as Adam Dzaziri, 31, for potential extremism. There were also knives, pistols, and an assault rifle inside the vehicle.

Guns are not easily accessible in Europe and this morning Prime Minister Edouard Philippe said he is “dismayed” that someone on a terror watch list had so many weapons. “Nobody can be satisfied–and certainly not me–that someone who had been flagged as radicalized had not been stripped of his right to own a gun,” he said. France has remained under a state of emergency since 2015 following a string of terror attacks. For many Europeans, these terror attacks have become the new normal.

Suspect’s family members detained after Champs-Elysees attack in Paris https://t.co/w8TZQneypO pic.twitter.com/gBMikNzhVX

— Los Angeles Times (@latimes) June 20, 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: June 20, 2017 appeared first on Law Street.

On Tuesday, a man attacked a police officer outside of the Notre-Dame Cathedral in Paris. The man reportedly swung a hammer at the officer, and also had knives on him. Another quick-thinking officer shot him in the chest and the first officer was not seriously injured. French Interior Minister Gerard Collomb later said the man shouted, “This is for Syria” as he attacked.

The man was taken to the hospital and the situation was quickly contained, but as it happened, many feared a larger terrorist attack was taking place, only days after the attack in London. People on social media said they were escorted inside the cathedral and asked to put their arms in the air. Nancy Soderberg, a former White House Deputy National Security Adviser under President Clinton, was among those in the cathedral.

Locked inside #notre dame cathedral in #paris while police investigate attack outside against a policeman. All calm pic.twitter.com/Z4B8wUzPTV

— Nancy Soderberg (@nancysoderberg) June 6, 2017

France has been in a state of emergency ever since the terror attacks that shook Paris in November 2015, and Tuesday’s incident caused panic on the streets of central Paris. However, thanks to the high-security alert, a lot of officers were patrolling the streets and the attacker was rendered harmless quickly. The 900 people inside the cathedral reportedly remained calm until they were allowed to exit again.

Notre-Dame: de nombreux effectifs se dirigent vers le lieu pic.twitter.com/FWWAGJzoW0

— David Perrotin (@davidperrotin) June 6, 2017

Authorities have not released the name of the suspect but said he was carrying identification that showed he is an Algerian student. His motives remain unclear but he seemed to be acting by himself and it didn’t seem like a very well planned attack. “One sees that we have gone from a very sophisticated terrorism to a terrorism where, in the end, any tool can be used to carry out attacks,” said Collomb, the Interior Minister. Prosecutors launched an anti-terrorism investigation into the incident.

France has seen several separate attacks recently, many of which targeted police officers or soldiers. A man stabbed two police officers, a couple, to death last June; a month later, another man drove a truck into a crowd in Nice killing more than 80 people; in March, a man attacked a soldier at the Orly airport; and a gunman fired shots at a police van on the Champs-Élysées in April.

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 Paris Anti-Terrorism Prosecutor Launches Probe into Hammer Attack 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:

Cities Go Green in Support of the Paris Climate Agreement

Yesterday, President Donald Trump announced that he will withdraw the United States from the Paris climate deal. In a speech announcing the news, he focused once again on putting America first. “I was elected to represent the citizens of Pittsburgh, not Paris,” he said. But Trump’s decision has come under heavy criticism–world leaders, climate experts, corporate executives, and members of his own party have criticized it. Trump also said he wants to renegotiate the deal to better suit America, but France, Germany, and Italy immediately issued a statement saying that renegotiation isn’t on the table.

Trump thinks the climate deal is an attack on America’s sovereignty: “We don’t want other leaders and other countries laughing at us anymore. And they won’t be,” he said. Business heavy-hitters like Elon Musk and the leaders of General Electric and Goldman Sachs said the decision will harm the U.S. by de-emphasizing jobs in the clean energy sector. Musk said he will no longer be a part of Trump’s business council. And last night, major buildings around the globe lit up in green in support of the climate deal and in protest of Trump’s decision.

PHOTO: Paris’ city hall shines green in support of the climate deal. pic.twitter.com/LpF2z1nsw1

— Eyewitness News (@ABC7NY) June 1, 2017

World: the Empire State stands with you. New York shines green for our planet, our health and our children’s future. #ParisAgreement pic.twitter.com/Ubw7WSPgu0

— Andrew Cuomo (@NYGovCuomo) June 2, 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: June 2, 2017 appeared first on Law Street.

Earlier in February, a French police officer was charged with raping a 22-year-old man with no criminal record during a violent arrest at the Aulnay-sous-Bois housing estate, located in the Parisian suburbs. Three other officers were charged with assault during the same arrest and all four officers, who denied the charges, have been suspended. However, the suspension has not satisfied the desire for justice in the banlieues, the suburbs of Paris that are often compared to the ghettos of American cities, areas of primarily low income housing that the far-right National Front have condemned as hotbeds of crime. The rape of the young man arrested in Aulnay-sous-Bois month has sparked mass protests across multiple suburbs.

Protesters clashed with police, and French academics are concerned that these protests may just be the precursor to riots on a greater scale, especially with the presidential elections just two months away. The victim, identified only as Theo, has asked the public to obey the law and not turn to violence, in a statement reminiscent of Rodney King’s “can’t we all get along” comments in 1992.

Conflict between the police and residents of the banlieues is always colored by the legacy of the 2005 riots, which began with the death of two teenagers who were electrocuted while hiding from the police in a power station. Young people took to the streets across multiple cities, burning buildings and cars, fighting police officers and even in ransacking the police station of Aulnay-sous-Bois. An estimated 3,000 people were arrested and a state of emergency was declared for several weeks. Thousands of extra police officers were called to duty and the images of burning neighborhoods were broadcast worldwide, painting the banlieues as almost apocalyptic.

The suburbs contain a diverse mix of incomes and ethnicities but in the past several decades they have become symbols of violence, unrest, and inequality. The Muslim and immigrant populations of the suburbs have frequently been vilified by politicians from across the country, who associate them with both acts of terrorism and petty crime. The revelation that Samy Amimour, one of the shooters in the November 2015 Paris attacks, came from the banlieues, added fuel to the fire.

This culture of fear combined with soaring unemployment rates has increased the isolation of the suburban population. Although the 2005 riots may have made the world sit up and take notice of the banlieues, they did not garner the community respect or sympathy from politicians or the greater French public. The riots only served to increase fear of the suburban population, to the point that any protest, even a justified one, is automatically considered to be a potential riot. The potential for a riot is by no means nonexistent but the fear of the banlieues has reached the point where even peaceful protest is feared. In an era where the far right is steaming ahead as a seemingly unstoppable force, the voices of the banlieues are getting pushed out of the traditional political sphere. When excluded from normal channels, populations have always relied on civil disobedience–but no one seems willing to frame the protests in the banlieues as such because of the pervasive legacy of 2005.

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 Will Riots Engulf the Parisian Suburbs Once Again? appeared first on Law Street.

The robbery of Kim Kardashian in Paris in October is one step closer to being resolved after police arrested 17 suspects in the beginning of the week following a close review of security footage. On Thursday, four of them were charged. Investigators believe the robbery to be an inside job. Most of the suspects, three of whom are women, are professional criminals who have previously committed armed robbery or drug and counterfeit trafficking. A 40-year-old limousine driver from a company the Kardashians frequently use when visiting Paris was arrested, but he was subsequently released. However, his younger brother remains in custody, and police believe he is the one who told the experienced robbers about Kardashian’s whereabouts.

One of the four people charged on Thursday was a 63-year-old man referred to by the name “Yunice A.,” who was charged with armed robbery in an organized gang, kidnapping, and criminal association. He will stay in custody for the time being. Available information about the other suspects include that one 62-year-old and one 27-year-old are facing the same charges as Yunice A. A 44-year-old is charged with concealment/fencing by an organized gang and association with criminals. Six more suspects are still being questioned.

Reportedly, police were able to identify some DNA from the tape used to tie Kardashian, and also from a piece of jewelry that one of the thieves dropped in the street as they fled on rented bicycles. The DNA combined with the surveillance footage led to the arrest of the thieves.

Charges have been filed against 4 suspects involved in the Kim Kardashian Paris robbery. https://t.co/JxKuN9QUou pic.twitter.com/a228pTmPiR

— Complex (@Complex) January 13, 2017

According to the Daily Mail, French authorities won’t let an eyewitness who could testify against the robbers into France. An Algerian concierge at the place where Kardashian was staying, known as Abdulrahman, saw the robbers’ faces. After the robbery, he left France to go home and recover from the stress of being held at gunpoint. Now, the French government won’t issue a visa to let him back in and testify, even though he previously was a legal resident in France. His lawyer Henri de Beauregard said:

I don’t know if this is incompetence or just a bad decision. He is the best witness, he saw the criminals much longer than Miss Kardashian. I hope the police have a lot of solid proof and evidence, because if they don’t, it will be seen as a crazy decision.

The robbery happened when Kardashian was in Paris to attend Fashion Week in the beginning of October. Five men disguised as police officers entered the mansion she was staying in, had the concierge take them to Kardashian’s room and stole jewelry worth $10 million after holding her at gunpoint and tying her up in the bathroom. Among the stolen items was her 20-carat engagement ring, worth $4 million.

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 Four Charged in Kim Kardashian Paris Robbery Case appeared first on Law Street.

The locks left in the chain links of Paris’s iconic Pont des Arts bridge have long been contentious–they were seen as an eyesore, a tourist trap, and a threat to the structural integrity of the bridge, as the weight of hundreds upon hundreds of metal locks weighed down the balustrades. Romantics see the love locks as a symbol of commitment, but locals see them as a form of littering. The city began removing the locks en masse last year but the “love lock trend” still exists across Paris and has spread to practically every major city with an attractive set of bridges. Yet as of this month, the Parisian locks will take on a new identity–they are being bundled together and auctioned for charity, specifically to raise money for refugees living in Paris.

The auction is slated for the spring of 2017 and Bruno Julliard, first deputy mayor of Paris, expects to raise approximately 100,000 euros for the refugee community–but there have been no specific plans released for which organizations will receive the profits. Nor has there been a clear outline of what specifically the money would go toward. Refugees are in need of shelter, food, medical care and supplies, legal representation, job training and placement–which of these efforts will be prioritized when the love lock funds roll in?

Julliard has essentially two options before him: donate a massive sum to a single organization, or donate multiple small amounts to the various charities working to secure housing and employment for the thousands of refugees living in Paris. The general statement Julliard released made a vague reference toward funding “organizations” (plural not singular) working to support refugees in Paris but gave no information about whether that means local, neighborhood organizations or larger, international charities. If several different organizations are going to receive funding, then orchestrating the auction becomes a much more challenging task. What if those bidding on the locks only want to give to certain charities that are benefitting from the funds and not others?

While several small donations to multiple causes can help with immediate issues like purchasing supplies, there is an economic argument that a one-time large donation to a single organization will be more impactful in the long run. However, the true efficacy of the donation has more to do with how the organization spends it money than the sum itself. The websites Givewell and CharityNavigator  only exist because we have seen charities mishandle funds time and again, making us wary of where we donate our money.

At the moment, the sale of the love locks may read as a feel-good publicity stunt but if the auction truly does raise the money that Julliard expects, the funds will become an object of public debate, with every non-profit that even tangentially works with refugees looking for a grant and every anti-refugee National Front supporter arguing that the funds should be spent elsewhere. Unless there is a clear plan of which charity the money is going to and how it will be spent when it gets there, the love lock auction will be, at best, a shallow gesture that does not effectively help Paris’s refugees.

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 Auctioning the Love Locks: The Challenges of Charity appeared first on Law Street.

In Paris, officials are making use of excess heat from electrical appliances to heat up the city’s swimming pools. This environmentally friendly move is spearheaded by Jean-François Martins, deputy mayor in charge of sports. He wants to make swimming pools more sustainable. Paris is in the running to host the 2024 Olympic Games, and becoming more eco-friendly would help its chances both to win the bid, and to save money in the process.

Specifically, France is utilizing the excess heat from computer servers and sewage systems. Wastewater coming from 2.2 million Parisians’ sinks, toilets, washing machines, and dishwashers keep a temperature of about 55 to 68 degrees Fahrenheit. Some swimming pools are being built on top of the sewers, so that the water and waste run directly underneath the pool, where the heat gets captured through metal plates in the pipes. Then, a pump system transfers the warmth to the pool water. Next year, a start-up company is planning to install several hundred computer servers in the basement of a building with a swimming pool in the city’s 13th Arrondissement. The heat generated by the servers will be captured and transferred to a boiler that warms up the water as well as locker rooms. “We wish to reduce the environmental impact and ecological footprint of these facilities, while reducing chemical product use,” said Martins.

On the whole, Paris is making an effort to be progressive on climate issues. The city’s mayor, Anne Hidalgo, recently announced a ban on car traffic on a two-mile stretch along the Seine. The area will be transformed into a river promenade for pedestrians and cyclists. As a part of Hidalgo’s anti-pollution campaign “Paris Breathes,” the plan had the support of 55 percent of Parisians, even though some on the right opposed it. Paris is actually one of the most polluted cities in the European Union and air pollution is calculated to contribute to 2,500 deaths in the inner city every year.

Décision historique au #ConseildeParis : la fin d’une autoroute urbaine à Paris et la reconquête de la Seine. pic.twitter.com/Q0TQLzuHjA

— Anne Hidalgo (@Anne_Hidalgo) September 26, 2016

Monday, December 12 marks the one-year anniversary of the adoption of the Paris agreement, the first global deal aimed at battling climate change. Representatives from 200 nations met in Paris and agreed to cut greenhouse gas emissions. President-elect Donald Trump has previously said that he will withdraw from the Paris agreement when he takes office. On Sunday he said, “nobody really knows” why climate change happens, but claimed that he is “open-minded.” Both France’s President Francois Hollande and its former president, Nicolas Sarkozy, reacted to the statement. Sarkozy suggested a tariff on imported American products in case Trump backs out. Hollande said: “The United States, the most powerful economy in the world, the second-largest emitter of greenhouse gases, must respect the commitments that were made. It’s not simply their duty, it’s in their interest.”

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 Paris is Reusing Energy From Wastewater to Heat Swimming Pools appeared first on Law Street.

On Sunday night Kim Kardashian was robbed at gunpoint in her hotel room in Paris; she was there to attend Fashion Week. The robbers, who were wearing masks and were dressed as police officers, stole jewelry totaling $10 million.

Kardashian was staying at a nine-apartment mansion that is often frequented by celebrities like Madonna and Leonardo DiCaprio. Around 2:30 AM on Sunday, the concierge let a couple of men in. They then threatened him with a gun, handcuffed him, and made him take them to Kardashian’s apartment, where they tied her up in the bathroom while holding a gun to her head. After going through her jewelry, they left. Allegedly her stylist managed to alert the real police, who later found the night guard in a staircase with hands and feet bound.

Kim was shaken but physically okay, according to a statement from her spokeswoman. Her children were not in the apartment. She later left Paris on her private jet and flew home to New York.

On Sunday night, her husband Kanye West cut his show at Meadows Music and Arts Festival in New York short with the words “I’m sorry, family emergency, I have to stop the show.” Fans initially reacted with confusion and anger.

Here’s a photo of Kanye West’s show right before it ended. Like everyone was shock it just ended. No reason given, just “family emergency.” pic.twitter.com/y4Rfk5n3h9

— Frank Pallotta (@frankpallotta) October 3, 2016

Last week was not an easy one for Kim Kardashian West. She was the recipient of a prank by internet celebrity prankster Vitalii Sediuk, who tried to kiss her butt when she exited her car. Her bodyguard quickly wrestled him to the ground, but she said she wants to file a report and get a restraining order. Apparently Sediuk was protesting plastic surgery and wanted the Kardashians to promote a more natural look for the millions of young girls who look up to them.

As news of the robbery broke on Monday morning, the internet started reacting not with compassion, but with mockery.

Kim Kardashian gets robbed and the whole world is in an uproar.

Harambe was brutally murdered and the world was silent.

— ædonis | hotep (@lordaedonis) October 3, 2016

Luckily, tweets defending Kim later surfaced on social media, pointing out how bizarre it is to make fun of someone being robbed just because she’s a celebrity.

People making jokes about @KimKardashian tonight would do well to remember that she’s a mother,a daughter,a wife,a friend.Be nice or shut up

— James Corden (@JKCorden) October 3, 2016

Kinda loving @kanyewest for jumping off that stage for his wife… yes sir… love that. Family first.

— Jaime Primak (@JaimePrimak) October 3, 2016

Don’t make memes out of Kim Kardashian being robbed at gunpoint it really isn’t funny. One click and 2 kids could’ve been motherless

— Girls be like… (@girlhoodposts) October 3, 2016

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 Kim Kardashian Robbed at Gunpoint in Paris appeared first on Law Street.

At the St. Pancras train station in London on Tuesday, a tanned Englishman with silver hair and a French woman born in Spain walk and talk about a number of pressing topics. Among them: Donald Trump. Anne Hidalgo, Mayor of Paris, and Sadiq Khan, her London counterpart, met for the first time since Khan’s mayoral victory over the weekend.

Hidalgo seems to be in the same camp as Khan in her views of the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, albeit with a slightly blunter delivery: “Mr. Trump is so stupid, my God, my God,” she said.

On Monday, Khan, London’s first Muslim mayor, expressed disapproval of Trump’s “banning Muslims” tactic and the overall tone of his campaign, comparing him to Zac Goldsmith, the Conservative Party mayoral candidate he beat out on Saturday.

“I’m confident that Donald Trump’s approach to politics won’t win in America,” Khan said in an interview with Time magazine. “I think to try and look for differences, to try and turn communities against each other is not conducive to living successfully and amicably.”

Hidalgo and Khan lead two of the world’s most diverse cities, Paris and London, and Khan especially has highlighted his background and multi-faceted identity as proof that Islam and Western democratic values are indeed compatible.

The son of Pakistani parents–a bus driver and a seamstress–a lawyer, a Muslim, and now the mayor of London, Khan views his new success as the antithesis to Trump’s calls for banning Muslims from entering the U.S., which he said he would do if elected president.

“What I think the election showed was that actually there is no clash of civilization between Islam and the West,” he said.

Khan and Trump engaged in a minor, press proxy scuffle earlier this week when Khan mentioned to Time he’d better visit America before January because “I’ll be stopped from going there by virtue of my faith.” Trump’s response: “There will always be exceptions,” he told the New York Times. Khan scoffed at Trump’s offer.

Whether Trump grants him a pass to his proposed Muslim ban or not was not the message Hidalgo and Khan aimed to send the billionaire with their meeting at the London train station. “Our message to Donald Trump is: this is how you work together; this is the best of humanity; this is the best of the west,” Khan said.

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 Paris Mayor Anne Hidalgo and London Mayor Sadiq Khan Meet; Diss Donald Trump appeared first on Law Street.

The attacks in New York City on 9/11 brought together a nation that every year since has unified on social media and internet outlets under “#9/11” and “#NeverForget.” When a mass shooting at an elementary school in Newtown, Connecticut claimed the lives of 20 children, as well as six adults on December 14, 2012, we prayed and posted: “#PrayForSandyHook” and “SandyHook.” The terrorism in Paris on November 13, 2015 bonded the world through posts and photographs captioning “#PrayForParis.”

“Pray for Paris” courtesy of [Bensun Ho via Flickr]

Following the police shootings and misconduct of Trayvon Martin, Michael Brown, Eric Garner, Tamir Rice, Walter Scott, and so many more, a movement ensued highlighting “#BlackLivesMatter,” which morphed into the debated “#AllLivesMatter” movement. We picketed. We rioted. We protested and stood divided across the nation. We demanded societal change. When a mass shooting claimed the lives of nine people at the Emanuel African Methodist Episcopalian Church, we worked to mend the broken community and sent virtual support with “#PrayforCharleston” demanding more stringent gun control laws and mental health screening.

We have been victims and survivors. We have been divided, yet banded together. We have fought and we have been loud. So where is our unifying and our fighting fervor now? Where is our voice recognizing the 380,000 Nigerian brothers and sisters living within the United States whose families and friends in Nigeria are experiencing sheer terror at the hands of Boko Haram?

Boko Haram, an Islamic militant group whose name loosely translates into “Western education is a sin,” has been waging a murderous war in the poorest part of Nigeria in an effort to overthrow the Nigerian government. While the group has been slowly establishing itself between 2005-2009, it gained worldwide recognition in 2014 when it kidnapped 276 schoolgirls, most of whom have not returned to their families to date.

Mohammed Yusuf, has, over the years, rallied a following to the group through the widespread distribution of his speeches on tapes. So far, his followers have treated human beings like animals–slitting throats without reprieve. In 2009, Yusuf was killed in a security bust, which left the elusive and merciless Abubakar Shekau in charge of Boko Haram. His unforgiving and relentless tactics to make Northern Nigeria an Islamic state have left almost 20,000 people dead–slaughtered. There have been approximately 2.5 million people displaced from their homes and villages, children parentless, mothers widowed, and mass graves full of innocent bodies.

Image courtesy of [EU/ECHO/Isabel Coello via Flickr]

The scariest part? Boko Haram has made good on essentially every threat and every hellish promise made. Most recently, Boko Haram took to bombing the village of Dalori, in the northeastern part of Nigeria, where 86 people were shot, burned, or killed by suicide bombs. A man hiding in a tree heard the shrieks and screams of the children trapped in burning huts as Boko Haram soldiers and supporters destroyed the city. Government troops were unsuccessful in overpowering the militant group.

Boko Haram has pledged its allegiance to ISIS/ISIL and its members have set out to spread terror upon all those who are not willing to join them in their absolutely extremist path to form an Islamic state.

So where is the coverage? Why has the U.S. mainstream media failed to highlight this horrific situation in any detailed capacity? Where are the Twitter feeds and Facebook posts flooding with “#PrayforNigeria” statuses? And where is the action? There has been no lack of military action against ISIS and its ideologies, so where is the same level of response to a terrorist organization that has pledged allegiance to ISIS and has killed thousands? Forget the basic human need and the widespread teachings of terror–are we just willing to help if we have some personal or political interest in mind?

As media dictates the important issues that today’s society will focus on, particularly during election year, has our censorship failed the people of Nigeria?

Ajla Glavasevic

Ajla Glavasevic is a first-generation Bosnian full of spunk, sass, and humor. She graduated from SUNY Buffalo with a Bachelor of Science in Finance and received her J.D. from the University of Cincinnati College of Law. Ajla is currently a licensed attorney in Pennsylvania and when she isn’t lawyering and writing, the former Team USA Women’s Bobsled athlete (2014-2015 National Team) likes to stay active and travel. Contact Ajla at Staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Boko Haram and Widespread Terror in Nigeria: Where is the Outrage? appeared first on Law Street.

On Saturday, 195 countries managed to reach an unprecedented climate change agreement that intends to unite the international community around the goal of reducing emissions and preventing the most severe consequences of global warming. But despite the agreement, much work remains to be done to meet previously established targets. So was this agreement a success and will it solve climate change?

The short answer to that questions is yes and no–the agreement was in some ways a success, but it won’t solve climate change by itself. Evaluating climate change progress is particularly difficult because there are multiple ways to measure success. Committing all countries to the goal of limiting climate change is a massive step forward that should not be understated, but if you ask climate scientists, it is becoming increasingly unlikely that the world will be able to meet its intent to limit global temperatures to 2°C (3.6°F), above pre-industrial levels.

Let’s first look at what the agreement will require and where some gray areas remain. The legally-binding portion of the agreement mandates that all countries must submit plans to reduce their emissions, consistently monitor their progress, and then regularly report reductions to the international community. The agreement outlines a plan for regular international meetings at which additional measures will be discussed. While that step, by itself, is significant, the agreement has no binding mechanism to compel countries to meet their own standards. Moreover, based on the 185 plans that were submitted before the Paris conference, global warming will most likely continue past the agreed upon goal of 2°C.

If we proceed according to each country’s emissions plans, formally referred to as the intended nationally determined contributions (INDCs), temperatures will rise an estimated 3.5°C, but due to uncertainty in predictions, it could be as much as 4.6°C (Take a look at this graphic from the Climate Interactive for a visual representation). Because counties must track and update their emissions progress, countries could conceivably change their targets to become much more ambitious, making the 2°C goal attainable. But doing so would take a massive amount of political will and would need to happen sooner rather than later. The Climate Interactive refers to that as the “Ratchet Success” scenario. Check out this explanation to see what that would actually entail.

It is appropriate to question whether 2°C is a reasonable goal, as it was created somewhat arbitrarily. But the available evidence suggests that once the earth warms to that point significant changes will occur. Vox’s Brad Plumer has a pretty succinct breakdown:

Critics grumbled that the 2°C limit seemed arbitrary or overly simplistic. But scientists were soon compiling evidence that the risks of global warming became fairly daunting somewhere above the 2°C threshold: rapid sea-level rise, the risk of crop failure, the collapse of coral reefs. And policymakers loved the idea of a simple, easily digestible target. So it stuck.

While the 2°C threshold marks a certain point of no return for some climate-related consequences, scientists argue that significant effects will likely come before the earth warms that much. Generally, predicting the exact temperature at which changes will occur is difficult because rising temperatures could actually accelerate warming even further. Some manifestations of climate change, like permafrost melting, could actually speed up warming, which can be difficult for models to account for. Most models give a range for the potential consequences of warming, but even those may be revised upwards.

While it’s clear that in order to meet the U.N.’s target of 2°C much more needs to be done, that does not render the recent Paris agreement useless. The mere fact that nearly every major country has committed to reducing global warming is a significant achievement. This is particularly true when you look at the history of these talks and how they have failed in the past.

There have been several monumental steps that made the recent Paris deal possible in the first place. An agreement between the two largest CO2 emitters, the United States and China, bridged some of the disagreement between developed and developing countries. China recently announced a plan to let its emissions peak by 2030 and began working on a cap and trade system to do so. The Obama administration created a stringent Clean Power Plan, which aims to reduce electricity sector emissions by 32 percent from 2005 levels by the year 2030, as well as a 26 percent reduction in all emissions before 2025. Moreover, the fact that 185 countries managed to commit concrete plans to reduce their emissions is a remarkable a show of international commitment.

Despite recent progress, there are several key obstacles that remain in the way of a meaningful solution, arguably the most notable of which is the U.S. Congress. While negotiators were working in Paris to hash out a deal, the Republican-led Congress sought to dispel any optimism that might come from the deal. Earlier this month, the Republican party held a, notably symbolic, vote to block President Obama’s clean energy plan. Afer the Paris agreement was reached, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said,

Before his international partners pop the champagne, they should remember that this is an unattainable deal based on a domestic energy plan that is likely illegal, that half the states have sued to halt, and that Congress has already voted to reject.

While the stark disagreement between Republicans and the rest of the world on climate change hasn’t stopped all U.S. attempts to reduce emissions, a comprehensive strategy will need support from Congress. President Obama has largely managed to pursue his clean energy agenda through executive action, but when he leaves office the next president could easily reverse his progress. Another key part of the Paris agreement is the goal to provide $100 billion in climate-related aid to developing countries, yet U.S. funding for that must be approved by Congress. It’s true that the most important parts of the Paris agreement are not legally binding–there is no way to punish a country that does not meet its emissions plan–but that is largely a result of political reality.

So yes, the Paris agreement was a success in the sense that it marks a historic commitment to fight global climate change. The United Nations received climate reductions plans from 185 countries, which will continue to be revised and monitored in an effort to mitigate the negative effects of global warming. But at the same time, it is becoming increasingly clear that we will not meet our established goal to limit warming to 2°C. More to the point, there are several significant barriers to enacting the legislation needed to reduce emissions and transition to clean energy. Perhaps the Paris agreement is accurately a starting point, and if the international community is able to build momentum going forward, pressure could help force necessary change.

Read more: The Paris Climate Change Conference: What Should We Expect?

Kevin Rizzo

Kevin Rizzo is the Crime in America Editor at Law Street Media. An Ohio Native, the George Washington University graduate is a founding member of the company. Contact Kevin at krizzo@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Was the Paris Climate Agreement a Success? appeared first on Law Street.

The hunt intensified in Brussels Sunday as Belgium underwent the country’s highest level of terror alert. Authorities investigated an unspecified “serious and imminent threat” that many believe was in connection with ISIS and the alleged gunmen involved in the Paris attacks.

Steven Vandeput, Belgium’s minister of defense, and police in Brussels asked residents to refrain from posting any information on social media that would expose police whereabouts and activities during the raids for security purposes.

Police are asking the public not to report their movements on social media, please support & rt #BrusselsLockdown

— Steven Vandeput (@svandeput) November 22, 2015

However, in the midst of an intense lockdown, Belgians had the purr-fect response–cat photos.

Belgian police asks users to post cute cat pics with the hashtag #BrusselsLockdown to show terrorists some love. RT! pic.twitter.com/omisqm83m0 — jochem maes (@hetjoch) November 22, 2015

Instead of going completely silent, Belgians used humor to defuse the situation by flooding Twitter with a stream of hilarious cat photos using #Brusselslockdown. The tweets showcased memes and gifs portraying trapped Belgians, the police, and suspected terrorists all as cats, and we’ve gathered some of the best below.

so now we wait. #BrusselsLockdown pic.twitter.com/xUhmh1mlPm

— sjeel (@whatkindafukery) November 22, 2015

Stay inside they said. #BrusselsLockdown pic.twitter.com/hpAfV417Hf

— Julia Reda (@Senficon) November 22, 2015

BREAKING NEWS : Belgium Police using the new 200mph Hovercat during terrorist operations #BrusselsLockdown pic.twitter.com/MnIpiOZT3x — Jayce le Satirique (@jaycelight) November 22, 2015

You can’t keep hiding. #BrusselsLockdown pic.twitter.com/4ls1e9qB3s — Lore Vonck (@lorevonck) November 22, 2015

They got him #BrusselsLockdown pic.twitter.com/qrKBKRh0Tc — Geert Van Bondt (@Geertvanbondt) November 22, 2015

Meanwhile in Belgium … #BrusselsLockdown pic.twitter.com/9RIU4nD1WZ — Paul Taquet (@au_taquet) November 22, 2015

Picture of Belgium’s National Security Council when the door opens in the middle of the meeting #BrusselsLockdown pic.twitter.com/4oWuBRtipO — Florence (@flowindey) November 22, 2015

Don’t tell them I’m there!!! #BrusselsLockdown pic.twitter.com/SNfoXCISjl — Emmanuel Di Pretoro (@edipretoro) November 22, 2015

Residents told to stay away from windows. Not sure they got the message #BrusselsLockdown pic.twitter.com/kv3Mosk5mZ — Matteo Albania (@m_albania) November 22, 2015

BREAKING: Belgian police have released a photograph of the main supect #BrusselsLockdown pic.twitter.com/8FDAjZglZn — Jeroen Flamman (@jflamman) November 22, 2015

Suspicious backpack found in #Molenbeek #BrusselsLockdown pic.twitter.com/kbUvVYtsSg — Parliamonster (@Parliamonster) November 22, 2015

Belgian police snipers at the #GrandPlace #BrusselsLockdown pic.twitter.com/CYsY3kxTWi — Idafe Martín Pérez (@IdafeMartin) November 22, 2015

Major police operation underway in #BrusselsLockdown pic.twitter.com/DUZwfi0lOO — Harry Boone (@towersight) November 22, 2015

#BrusselsLockdown supporting Belgian Police. We’re stronger than we think! #Brave pic.twitter.com/x5Lq7pKKb1 — Wendy Carrara (@wcarrara) November 22, 2015

https://t.co/w5LF7a5qNa  when searching for the latest news on  #BrusselsLockdown! pic.twitter.com/vy9etNyHmk — Ruta Ly (@rutaly) November 22, 2015

May the force be with us. #BrusselsLockdownpic.twitter.com/m9OuEVhfXS — TineEeckhout (@TineEeckhout) November 22, 2015

On Monday, Belgium’s police tweeted out a big bowl of cat food “for the cats who helped us yesterday” to show their gratitude for the trending hashtag.

Voor de katten die ons gisteren geholpen hebben… Alsjeblieft! #BrusselsLockdown pic.twitter.com/QlwY9EtzEZ

— Federale Politie (@FedPol_pers) November 23, 2015

But the search is not over. Brussels’ schools, universities, and subway system remain closed Monday as authorities continue to search for individuals suspected of planning Paris-like attacks on the city.

Let’s hope the kitties scared all the bad guys away.

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 Belgians Respond to Terror Lockdown By Flooding Twitter With Cat Photos appeared first on Law Street.

This weekend, vigils were held all over the country in honor of the victims of last week’s ISIS attacks. There were hundreds of remembrance events held across the world: flags flew at half-mast, monuments were lit up with the image of the French flag, flowers were laid outside of French embassies, and candles burned through the night. These moments let us stand in solidarity with the populations of Paris, Beirut, and Baghdad but they also represent a global commitment to peace. Yet this commitment is already dissolving as the 24-hour news cycle spins onward and our attention is diverted by new issues. Read on to explore the fleeting nature of solidarity in the wake of tragedy, and what can be done to carry that solidarity forwards after the fact.

 What Solidarity Looks Like

In the aftermath of many tragic events, informal memorials spring up across the globe.  We are all familiar with the images of teddy bears, flowers, and posters stacked at the scenes of mass shootings and natural disasters. A vigil, or any form of remembrance event, takes these memorials a step farther by requiring the prolonged presence of activists and onlookers. Vigils–which commonly involve lighting candles and holding moments of silence–mark a unified act that includes an entire community. There is no membership requirement for participating in a remembrance event, all are welcome to grieve collectively–whether or not they lost a friend or family member during the event.

Remembrance events let us engage in collective empathy outside of our personal social circles. The word empathy evolved from the German einfühlung which describes observers projecting themselves “into” that which they observe–essentially, the experience of putting ourselves in someone else’s shoes. Empathy is considered a deliberate cognitive process, in which we take an active role, striving to share the emotions of another person in order to better understand them. This week, people around the world have sung the French anthem, painted the French flag on their faces and carried signs bearing the peace symbol through the streets of their respective cities. They sought to adopt the mentality of the victims of last week’s attacks, turning the mourning process into a global moment of empathy. But how do we transform this moment into a more lasting commitment?

From Empathy to Commitment

James Hawdon and John Ryan have studied the processes behind generating and sustaining solidarity in the wake of mass tragedy, using web-based surveys to study public sentiment in the wake of the 2007 shooting at Virginia Tech. They argue that:

Event-specific parochial and event-specific public activities generate solidarity after heinous crimes. However, general parochial activities, such as attending local organizational meetings and frequenting local businesses, sustain solidarity…displays of communal bereavement are collective acts that increase the ritual intensity of social interaction and therefore promote solidarity. They are collective displays of the community’s resiliency, and the emotional intensity of these solidarity-producing rituals likely helps the collective. Yet, general parochial relations, such as participating in neighborhood clubs, religious organizations, civic organizations and even eating at local restaurants, also appear to promote social solidarity. Participating in these parochial activities shortly after a tragedy also has lasting benefits for the community.

Hawdon and Ryan raise an obstacle to international sustained solidarity. The Virginia case focused on a relatively small community, in which it was easier to sustain solidarity. Anyone from the Virginia area can probably attest to the powerful bond that survivors of the attack feel for one and other, even eight years after the shooting. When we look at a global case–for example, ISIS attacks–it is much more difficult to sustain interest in the crisis and solidarity with the victims. It is admirable to hold a march or a vigil that represents support for the bereaved, but we don’t organize them on a daily basis. There are simply too many of us and it would take up too large a time commitment. How do we sustain solidarity, if it was not our community that was attacked, but multiple cities around the world?

Can Solidarity Be Sustained?: Selma as a Case Study

In the modern era, we are accustomed to remembrance events being beautiful but fleeting. A town square may be filled with candles and banners the night after a tragic event, but within a matter of days, it returns to its original state–a functional space devoid of political activism. But there have been some exceptions in which solidarity has been transformed into mass protest and action.

On February 18, 1965, a young activist named Jimmie Lee Jackson, was shot to death by a state trooper during a peaceful protest march organized in Selma, Alabama by the Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC). Martin Luther King, Jr. spoke at Jackson’s funeral, mourning the man lost but also calling for an end to the systemic racial violence that had led to his death. Jackson’s death sparked the organization of another march on March 7, 1965–which has gone down in American history as “Bloody Sunday.” Images of civil rights protesters in Selma being beaten with excessive force by police officers were broadcast worldwide. Instead of momentarily grieving for the violence in Selma and then moving on, activists across the nation got off of their living room couches and came to Selma. The initial group of 600 marchers on March 7 swelled to 2,000 by March 21. When the marchers reached Montgomery, they found a crowd of 50,000 supporters waiting for them. Those supporters continued to march and advocate for civil rights throughout 1965, achieving success with the passage of the Voting Rights Act in August.

The Selma to Montgomery march could have been a blip in the Civil Rights movement–a story that made the cover of the newspaper for a single day and then disappeared into a historical void. Yet, the images of violence in Selma inspired action–they recruited Americans to become members of a movement, rather than passive observers. The Selma march is a unique case, in that it elicited immediate action and it secured legislation in alignment with its goals within a year. Yet the lesson from Selma can seemingly be applied to any violent scenario that plays across our television screen: our solidarity can have teeth. It is important to remember the victims but those who remember can also strive to change the conditions that led to their deaths.

In the case of last week’s ISIS attacks, those who wish to help are presented with a complex challenge. They cannot march to end their bombings, they cannot hold a rally or a vigil that will turn back the tide of violence that they embrace. Instead, supporters have to think on how we can actively improve the lives of those living in cities destroyed by the attacks. These populations will need us over the coming weeks: Parisians will need blood donations in the coming weeks, aid organizations in Beirut and Baghdad need staff and support, and police forces will be relying on civilians to report suspicious activity in their neighborhoods. The greatest demonstration of solidarity will be committing to the victims in the coming months and years, not just for the week after the violence.

Conclusion

Solidarity can sometimes just be a fleeting after-effect of a tragic event. The moment of silence, the vigil, the lit candle–all of these symbols are an important starting point. However, in order for solidarity to be transformed into action–eliminating the forces that attacked, and promoting peace and acceptance in the coming months and years–it will take effort, patience, and hard work.

Resources

James Howdon and John Ryan: Social Relations That Generate and Sustain Solidarity After a Mass Tragedy

Mark. H. Davis: Empathy: A Social Psychological Approach 

History: Selma to Montgomery March

Civil Rights Museum: Who Mourns for Jimmie Lee Jackson?

The New York Times: After Paris Attacks, Vilifying Refugees

Mashable: Here’s How You Can Help Victims of the Paris Terror Attacks

New York Times: At Virginia Tech: Remembering While Moving On 

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 Sustaining Global Solidarity: Can Vigils Incite Activism? appeared first on Law Street.

The fallout from the Paris attacks is continuing to stir up some pretty strong opinions from both liberals and conservatives over the Syrian migrant crisis as it relates to U.S. borders. Even as President Obama has already committed to take in 10,000 refugees, more than half of state governors are reportedly opposed to allowing Syrian refugees to enter their states.

There’s only one problem–it’s not up to them.

The U.S stance on immigration ultimately falls to the federal government to regulate, therefore regardless of whether or not your state’s governor opposes it, they have no say over allowing or barring them. They can, however, make the process more difficult.

As a result President Obama launched into a long-winded Twitter rant Wednesday afternoon to remind the American public (and maybe a few elected officials) why the U.S. has morally decided to provide refuge to Syrian evacuees.

Protecting the American people is my top priority. With our 65 global partners, we’re leading the campaign to degrade and destroy ISIL.

— President Obama (@POTUS) November 18, 2015

We also win this fight with our values. America can ensure our own security while welcoming refugees desperately seeking safety from ISIL. — President Obama (@POTUS) November 18, 2015

We will provide refuge to at least 10,000 refugees fleeing violence in Syria over the next year after they pass the highest security checks.

— President Obama (@POTUS) November 18, 2015

We also win this fight with our values. America can ensure our own security while welcoming refugees desperately seeking safety from ISIL. — President Obama (@POTUS) November 18, 2015

Here, our focus is giving safe haven to the most vulnerable Syrians – women, children, and survivors of torture.

— President Obama (@POTUS) November 18, 2015

Welcoming the world’s vulnerable who seek the safety of America is not new to us. We’ve safely welcomed 3 million refugees since 1975. — President Obama (@POTUS) November 18, 2015

Slamming the door in the face of refugees would betray our deepest values. That’s not who we are. And it’s not what we’re going to do.

— President Obama (@POTUS) November 18, 2015

And he’s not the only one arguing today in support of the Syrian Refugees. Google used a clever fortunetelling search engine to draw attention to the issue, by forcing users to “take a moment to think of [the refugees’] future.”

What’s the #FutureofPolitics? We asked @Google Fortune Telling. Check it out: https://t.co/nBd1QhnHtP pic.twitter.com/4y7jI7iZVg — InstituteOfPolitics (@HarvardIOP) November 18, 2015

While the current administration has made its stance on immigration pretty clear, the polarizing topic will most likely continue to dominant the rhetoric of current candidates seeking the prestigious office.

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 President Obama Launches Into Twitter Rant Over Syrian Refugees appeared first on Law Street.

On Friday night, as the throngs of terrified Parisians sprinting through the streets scrambled to find safe haven in the midst of the attacks, #PorteOuverte  (“Open Door”) erupted across Parisian Twitter and Facebook accounts. Parisians tweeted out their neighborhood, their phone numbers, which languages they speak, and the number of free beds they could spare for the night. Some even tweeted out their exact addresses, aiming to get victims off of the streets as quickly as possible (although there was a rapid shift toward using direct messages  for address information to ensure that terrorists could not track the whereabouts of those fleeing them). Messages were sent out in multiple languages, and within hours, the hashtag was being promoted internationally. Twitter users across the world promoted #PorteOuverte, encouraging friends and family in Paris to use the feed to find safety. The hashtag was also used to circulate the phone numbers of foreign embassies, so that tourists could connect to their representatives and locate friends and family in the midst of the chaos.

As the hashtag spread, Twitter users Janyk Steenbeek and Pascal Schwientek used it to create a city-wide interactive map of the homes marked as #PorteOuverte. The hashtag was quickly followed by the creation of a Twitter handle, @PortOuverteFRA, which tweeted important phone numbers and news updates during the attacks. In collaboration with the individual homeowners who opened their doors, Sikh temples functioned as temporary shelters and the infamous bookstore Shakespeare and Company sheltered approximately 20 customers during the attack. On the other side of the globe, #PorteOuverte was used by Americans in the vicinity of international airports, who offered to take in travelers bound for Paris whose flights were grounded on Friday. French citizens were encouraged to use the #strandedinUS, which connected them to Americans who volunteered to house them while the French borders remained closed. It has been said that the desperate look for any port in a storm, but it certainly helps if that port is equipped with beds, food, and comfort in the face of brutality.

On Saturday morning, Parisians returned to social media, this time using the French #dondusang and the English #donateblood to ask for blood donations for the victims of the attacks. Hundreds of Parisians left their homes (despite government advice to stay indoors) and queued in front of hospitals and donation centers for hours to donate. In fact, many donors were asked to go home and return to donate in the coming weeks–blood has a relatively short shelf life, so continual blood donations must be made over the coming weeks and months in order to meet the blood banks’ needs. The lines of Parisians waiting to give blood in a virtually empty city lent a note of optimism to the surreal photos of the city on Saturday.

#PorteOuverte is being hailed as a shining example of humanity and kindness in the midst of unthinkable violence but I would take it a step further: #PorteOuverte is one of the most impressive, albeit short-lived, protest movements of the past several years. It united people across socioeconomic and national divides, across neighborhoods and languages. It grew organically and rapidly, without formal organization or development, but it restored a basic right to the Parisian population within a matter of hours: the right to safety, to peace of mind, to breathing without fear within their own city. The murder of civilians is designed to make a populace feel weak and insecure, to throw them into a panic wherein their terror engulfs their rationality and compassion. When terror reigns, we are expected to lose our will to think and resist. We are expected to capitulate to the architects of violence. Yet, on Friday night, Parisians stood together. Those who opened their homes to strangers denied the terrorists of the satisfaction of seeing Parisians terrified and friendless in the streets. Fear feeds on intolerance and paranoia, but it cannot survive when we are sensible and selfless in moments of crisis. #PorteOuverte is a protest against the violence that tore through Paris, but it is also a protest against fear itself.

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 #PorteOuverte: Fighting Fear in the Heart of Paris appeared first on Law Street.

Last night, news of a horrific series of terror attacks in Paris, France, shook the world. The final death toll is unknown, but as of now, it is at 127, with over 300 injured. According to French authorities, there were eight attackers, all of whom are now dead. The attacks occurred at places of joy and celebration: like a soccer stadium, a concert hall, and restaurants. ISIL has taken responsibility for the acts of terror, although that claim has yet to be verified. However, the Islamic State claims that the attacks were in retribution for France’s involvement in Syria.

President Francois Hollande called the attacks by ISIL an “act of war.” He stated that they were:

Committed by a terrorist army, the Islamic State group, a jihadist army, against France, against the values that we defend everywhere in the world, against what we are: A free country that means something to the whole planet.

Shock, awe, compassion, and sadness still dominate the international conversation. Prominent world leaders have made statements in support of France, devoting aid and support in these horrible circumstances.

President Obama gave a brief statement in the White House briefing room on Friday night. He stated:

This is an attack not just on Paris, it’s an attack not just on the people France, but this is an attack on all of humanity and the universal values we share. We stand prepared and ready to provide whatever assistance that the government and the people of France need to respond.

British Prime Minister David Cameron echoed the same sentiments, pledging British support for France:

Shocked, but resolute. In sorrow, but unbowed. My message to the French people is simple: Nous sommes solidaires avec vous. Nous sommes tous ensemble. We stand with you. United.

Others who spoke against the attack included Pope Francis, who called the attacks a piece of the “piecemeal World War Three.” Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu pledged solidarity, and Russian President Vladimir Putin wrote to Hollande that the acts of terror were “proof of the barbarian nature of terrorism, which challenges the human civilization.”

The world also took to social media to show its support for the people of France–Facebook users are adorning their photos with a blue, white, and red filter, the colors of the French flag. Others took the time to share their thoughts on Twitter:

“When Paris turned off its lights, the rest of the world turned them on.” pic.twitter.com/Ed7uHzQtHq

— chilly (@billyganbold_) November 14, 2015

Don’t allow this horrific act allow you to be drawn into the loss of your humanity or tolerance. That is the intended outcome. #ParisAttacks — Mark Ruffalo (@MarkRuffalo) November 14, 2015

Powerful Image: The U.S. stands with France after the #ParisAttacks by cartoonist Steve Benson. pic.twitter.com/xngRW9XHTx

— Luis (@LuisANavia) November 14, 2015

Details are still coming out about the specifics of the attacks, as well as the ultimate response. For now, thoughts are with the people of Paris, as they struggle to get through this troubling time.

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 Terror Attacks in France: The World Reacts appeared first on Law Street.

Ladies, imagine you are all dressed up and ready to hit the town. You’ve got on your short skirt, your stilettos, and your low cut top. You’re looking good. Now, you can’t just sit around when you look this nice, so you have to decide: where are you going to go? Do you know yet? Good! (I really, really hope that nobody said France.)

Courtesy of Giphy.

If your night on the town does consist of a visit to France, it is advisable to bring bail money. Because France is set to pass a law that would make “looking like a prostitute” illegal. So no more standing on corners in your high heels and sexy dress–no matter how innocent your plans are. The French cops don’t want to have stop, examine your motives, and decide if there is a problem. Just arresting you is a whole lot easier.

Courtest of Giphy.

If this anti-vice law is passed, it will be illegal to appear to be offering sex for sale. Because in France, while it is legal to pay for sex, it is illegal to be paid for sex. Moreover, it may soon be illegal to look like you’re the type of person that would accept pay for sex.

The purpose of the law is to clean up red light districts where hookers line the streets. Having a law like this, however, obviously does not mean that prostitution will disappear in France, so if your vacation plans include visiting one, do not despair. (But also, probably reevaluate your plans, for obvious reasons). While it won’t disappear, it could, however, drastically change the hooker look. It is assumed that when the law is implemented, prostitutes will start to wear jeans and sneakers. So instead of wearing “hooker heels,” ladies will now go out on the town in their “hooker sneakers” and, as far as my feet are concerned, that’s a great deal!

The concern I would have is that if casual dress is the new prostitute attire, but it is illegal to look like a prostitute, then wouldn’t casual dress become illegal? And if casual dress became illegal, then prostitutes would have to find some other mode of dress. Perhaps business, which is fitting since it is the oldest profession, but then eventually business wear would cause you to look like a prostitute, and that would be banned. And so on and so on until your only choice is to go naked. And if running around naked doesn’t scream sex appeal, I don’t know what does.  But maybe I’m overthinking things.

To sum it up, in the words of Justin Bieber, “Stay sexy, girl.” Unless you are in France. In which case, stop looking sexy immediately.

Courtesy of Giphy.

—

Ashley Shaw (@Smoldering_Ashs) is an Alabama native and current New Jersey resident. A graduate of both Kennesaw State University and Thomas Goode Jones School of Law, she spends her free time reading, writing, boxing, horseback riding, playing trivia, flying helicopters, playing sports, and a whole lot else. So maybe she has too much spare time. Contact Ashley at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

Featured iImage courtesy of [Seth Anderson via Flickr]

Ashley Shaw

Ashley Shaw is an Alabama native and current New Jersey resident. A graduate of both Kennesaw State University and Thomas Goode Jones School of Law, she spends her free time reading, writing, boxing, horseback riding, playing trivia, flying helicopters, playing sports, and a whole lot else. So maybe she has too much spare time. Contact Ashley at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post France Considers Law Banning “Looking Like a Prostitute” appeared first on Law Street.

In the aftermath of the terrorist attacks in Paris, various governments have come together in support of the freedom of expression. Most notably, world leaders attended a rally in Paris on January 11, and various members of Congress raised number two pencils into the air during President Obama’s State of the Union address last week.

Global media has also supported freedom of speech. In particular, in the United States, Publishers Weekly published a tribute to freedom of expression in its most recent issue that ran on January 19, seen here. Moreover, Publishers Weekly started a Je Suis Charlie campaign in which media companies could purchase full-length and half-age tributes that display the company’s name and logo. One hundred percent of the contributions for this campaign are donated to international nonprofits dedicated to freedom of expression, such as the American Booksellers for Free Expression, International Federation of Library Associations, International PEN, International Publishers Association, and the National Coalition Against Censorship.

With that said, some media companies have taken a step back. Last week, Oxford University Press announced that its authors should not mention the words “pork,” “sausage,” or “anything else which could be perceived as pork,” according to the International Business Times, to avoid offending Jews and Muslims. OUP claims that it made its decision to hopefully sell more books by taking global cultures into consideration.

While being sensitive to other cultures is noble, Oxford University Press’ ban is by far the wrong thing to do. The publisher is tied to Oxford University, which is arguably the most prestigious university in the world. Universities–western universities in particular–are traditionally places that foster debate and open discussions, where professors and students are free to speak about controversial topics and words. So for the publishing arm of a university to prohibit the words “pork,” “sausage,” or any mention of pork in its books is ludicrous. Professors and authors constantly write about offensive words in scholarship. In particular, authors in the humanities may attempt to write books and articles that deconstruct distasteful words culturally and historically. These books and articles are keys to how we understand the world around us. Although words such as racial epithets, for example, may be unpleasant to read or write about, they do unfortunately exist, and authors who attempt to confront these words through scholarship make society better by helping readers become more empathetic and sensitive to others. The same goes for innocuous words like “pork” and “sausage.”

Moreover, the OUP ban is the decision that terrorists desire. Although the publisher’s decision is allegedly to sell more books around the world, its decision came just days after the Paris attacks. Thus, readers may not think of Oxford University Press’ gallant pursuit to curb offending cultures in its book, but may think that Oxford University Press surrendered to the terrorists who so vehemently oppose freedom of expression.

Oxford University Press should end its ban. There is too much at stake for freedom of expression globally. The terrorists cannot win.

Joseph Perry

Joseph Perry is a graduate of St. John’s University School of Law whose goal is to become a publishing and media law attorney. He has interned at William Morris Endeavor, Rodale, Inc., Columbia University Press, and is currently interning at Hachette Book Group and volunteering at the Media Law Resource Center, which has given him insight into the legal aspects of the publishing and media industries. Contact Joe at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Oxford University Press Bans the Mention of Pork and Pigs appeared first on Law Street.

UPDATE: Press Secretary Admits that Administration should have sent higher ranking official to rally.

Less than a week after the attack at magazine Charlie Hebdo, France is still dealing with the aftermath, but Paris has showed that its people are nothing if not resilient. As an act of memorial for the slain Charlie Hebdo staff, as well as the hostages killed at a Kosher market in Paris on Friday, there was a gigantic march in the city yesterday. The rally also served as a show of unity against terrorism. It was a huge, notable world event with a ton of support from around the world. But where was the United States?

Chanting & applause in Paris as huge crowds begin unity march against terror attacks http://t.co/VeXcJu1QK6pic.twitter.com/gC9Ca8HGR0

— BBC Breaking News (@BBCBreaking) January 11, 2015

It’s estimated that about 1.6 million people took part. To us Americans, that doesn’t sound like that much, but you have to remember that France is roughly one-fifth of the size of the United States. So, comparably, that would mean around 8 million people marching here. That’s massive, and incredibly moving.

It wasn’t just Paris either. Marches took place around the world. In the French city of Lyon, roughly one-fourth of the population marched.

Of course, not everyone involved in the march was French either. Other word leaders, including British Prime Minister David Cameron, German Chancellor Angela Merkel, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, Malian President Ibrahim Boubacar Keita, EU President Donald Tusk, and Jordan’s King Abdullah II, came as well.

Photo shows a very different perspective on world leaders at the #ParisMarchhttp://t.co/pxZoV21ZKCpic.twitter.com/VyJk1iOrxN

— The Independent (@Independent) January 12, 2015

But there was one thing notably missing from the rally: the presence of a high profile official from the United States.

There was no President Barack Obama. No Vice President Joe Biden. No Secretary of State John Kerry. The U.S. was represented by Jane Hartley, the American Ambassador to France, and Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland. No offense to Ambassador Hartley or Assistant Secretary of State Nuland, but they’re both a noticeable pay grade below the 40-plus heads of state who attended. Merkel and Cameron are two of the most prominent figures in the Western world. For god’s sake, the respective leaders of Israel and Palestine both showed up in a mini-act of solidarity in their own right, despite reports that they were asked not to. But the United States sent mostly unrecognizable figures, one of whom who was probably there anyway.

If you’re looking for a truly insipid study into the way that conspiracy theorists’ minds work, a look at the hashtag #ReasonsObamaMissedFranceRally might be in order. Theories range from Obama secretly being racist to Obama being Muslim (seriously, we’re still on that?). These are stupid theories.

But the hashtag does get one teeny, tiny thing right. The absence was not only noticeable, it was incredibly embarrassing. The White House is scrambling to come up with reasons why Obama didn’t attend, including citing his participation in a few interviews yesterday, and mentioning concerns that the security at the event would be difficult to manage. Obama has put out statements showing his support for France, but his absence from the event still looks pretty bad. Now there’s news that Secretary of State Kerry will be visiting France this week, possibly in an attempt to placate critics.

Honestly, I highly doubt there was some weird alternative motive here, but mostly just an incredibly bad PR move. Maybe the White House thought that Americans are self-absorbed enough to not really care what was happening in Paris. Or maybe Obama didn’t want to take such an overtly political stance. Or maybe Obama didn’t attend out of fear of drawing attention from ISIS, which still holds some Western hostages like John Cantlie, after all.

I honestly don’t know what it was that motivated not only President Obama to skip the rally, but also not to send a high profile emissary in his place. Sure, he’s made some heartening statements in support of France in the last few days, but he should know by now that actions speak louder than words. His actions yesterday signaled a massive underestimation of the power of solidarity, and a complete lack of foresight.

UPDATE: Press Secretary Admits that Administration should have sent higher ranking official to rally.: The White House clarified Obama’s absence from the rally on Sunday during a press conference this afternoon. White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest admitted, “I think it’s fair to say that we should have sent someone with a higher profile to be there.” He also cited security concerns as the reason that Obama himself didn’t attend.

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 Obama’s Absence From France Unity Rally Was a Massive PR Failure appeared first on Law Street.

Update: 3:40 pm
Update: 1:30 pm
Update: 12:28 pm

As Paris is still reeling from the tragedy at satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo on Wednesday, and the manhunt is still on to find the brothers believed to responsible, a second incident has unfolded within the city limits themselves.

There were two hostage situations in France today. One was Northeast of Paris in Dammartin-en-Goële where it was believed that the Kouachi brothers are holed up. They ended up in an industrial estate, and they took a hostage.

Meanwhile, another shooting and hostage situation occurred in eastern Paris, inside a Kosher market. The suspect in that case is believed to have shot a policewoman yesterday, and is linked to the Kouachi brothers. The suspect in that case is named Amedy Coulibaly, and reports say he has a female accomplice Hayat Boumeddiene. Boumeddiene is Coulibaly’s girlfriend, and it is believed that Coulibaly may have shared a mentor with Cherif Kouachi, explaining the link between the two situations.

#PHOTO These police images show Hayat Boumeddiene (L) and Amedy Coulibaly (R), suspects in the death of a policewoman pic.twitter.com/qZXyEXlqnv

— Agence France-Presse (@AFP) January 9, 2015

It seems very clear that these two incidents are linked, according to the AP:

A police official told the Associated Press the gunman is threatening to kill hostages if authorities launch an assault on the small printing warehouse northeast of the citywhere the two brothers suspected in the shooting on Charlie Hebdo are holed up in the second hostage standoff in France on Friday.

In response to these two separate hostage situations, the police moved  to save the hostages. At the same time, they attacked, sending in explosives. Le Monde and Reuters are reporting that the Kouachi brothers are dead, although that is not confirmed, and the status of the hostages are unknown. There are also reports from the grocery store that the “hostage-taker,” presumably Coulibaly, is also dead, although Boumeddiene’s status appears to be unknown.

The status of the hostages from both standoffs appear to be unknown as well, although there are reports of emergency vehicles arriving at the scene of the market.

Update: 3:40 PM: The hostage situation in Montpellier does not appear to be related to the earlier situations in Paris, but rather a robbery gone wrong. Montpellier Prosecutor Christophe Barrett has confirmed that this is a wholly separate situation, and it’s under control.

Meanwhile, French cops continue their search for Hayat Boumeddiene, the Kosher market hostage-taker’s accomplice.

Update: 1:30 PM: There are currently reports of a hostage situation in a jewelry store in Montpellier, France. Montpellier is located in the south of France. There’s no word yet if there’s any connection to the terrorist attacks or earlier hostage situations in Paris and northeast of Paris that ended with the hostage takers killed earlier today. However, there are believed to be two people held in the jewelry store.

FRANCE: A hostage situation is being reported right now inside a jewelry store in Montpellier, France. PHOTOS – pic.twitter.com/x2jDkxNd1X

— KolHaolam (@KolHaolam) January 9, 2015

Update: 12:28 PM: Multiple news sources are now reporting that at least four of the hostages taken at the supermarket are dead. Two cops are also being reported as injured. In addition, some reports are saying that Hayat Boumeddiene escaped the supermarket, although that remains unconfirmed.

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 Two Hostage Situations in France: Suspects Reported Killed appeared first on Law Street.

Just over 24 hours after the attack on French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo, the search for the attackers wages on. The two main suspects are brothers Cherif and Said Kouachi, both in their early thirties. They are French citizens who visited Syria this summer, although whether they had any connections to terrorist groups while there is unclear.

UPDATE: Two Charlie Hebdo Suspects Last Seen In Northern French Town #ParisShootings – http://t.co/sE6VO1lIQV pic.twitter.com/tXl0ulo6ZA

— MV Ortega (@MVOrtega1) January 8, 2015

Cherif Kouachi has had legal problems before; he was convicted of helping funnel fighters to Iraq.  There was originally thought to be a third man, an 18 year old, working with them, but he has since turned himself in, and reports say that he’s the brother-in-law of one of the main suspects. French media is now questioning his involvement.

After fleeing Paris, the Kouachi brothers are believed to have held up a gas station, stealing food and fuel. They may have also shot a police officer in a Parisian suburb, but that’s unconfirmed at this point. 

The manhunt has now turned to the areas north of Paris. A town called Crépy-en-Valois, to the northeast of Paris, has become the focus, as reports speculate that the Kouachi brothers are holed up in some sort of home or other building. While it appears that police are narrowing in, the search is by no means over. 

Meanwhile, acts of support and defiance have been seen all over the city, the country, and the world at large. Other journalists, cartoonists, and members of the media reacted in solidarity yesterday, for example: 

Cartoonists draw in solidarity with #CharlieHebdo: http://t.co/uWJgT9BUQG pic.twitter.com/EXixSDAHnx — CBS This Morning (@CBSThisMorning) January 8, 2015

RT @Beltrew: A few of the best cartoons drawn & shared in solidarity with #CharlieHebdo after yesterday’s massacre pic.twitter.com/4Dq68GL9mT — Anton La Guardia (@AntonLaGuardia) January 8, 2015

12 powerful political cartoons responding to the Charlie Hebdo attack http://t.co/neUlubZmW9pic.twitter.com/Pb8fErXv5t

— Vox (@voxdotcom) January 8, 2015

Amazingly, Charlie Hebdo has announced that it is going to go to print next week as planned, according to one of its columnists, Dr. Patrick Pelloux. Despite the fact that eight of the staff members were killed, including editor-in-chief Stephane Charbonnier, those who survived plan to honor their memory by showing that those who attacked did not win.

And not only will the publication print, it will print even more than usual. The normal Charlie Hebdo circulation is around 60,000–it plans on printing one million copies for this issue. It will, however, be half the length of a regular issue.

Google and French newspaper publishers are donating money to help print the issue. The distributors are not planning on charging Charlie Hebdo for their services. Pelloux said the following about the decision to move forward:

It’s very hard. We are all suffering, with grief, with fear, but we will do it anyway because stupidity will not win.

These acts of bravery, of solidarity, and of support prove that.

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 Day Two: Manhunt for Shooters in Charlie Hebdo Tragedy appeared first on Law Street.

A bomb went off at a Colorado chapter of the NAACP yesterday. The office is located in Colorado Springs, Colorado, and although there were no injuries or deaths reported, there was minor damage to the offices, as well as to a hair salon located in the same building. The FBI has announced that it believes that the bomb was “deliberate.”

What exactly that means, however, no one is completely sure. The FBI has said that it could have been some sort of domestic terrorism, but they’re not able to be sure yet. Amy Sanders, media coordinator for the Denver office said:

Certainly domestic terrorism is one possibility, among many others. We are investigating all potential motives at this time.

Members of the NAACP have hinted that it could it have been a hate crime. Sandra Yong, President of the Denver Chapter of the NAACP said:

This certainly raises questions of a potential hate crime. But at this point we’re still gathering information. It’s a very sad situation, but we’re happy our people in Colorado Springs are safe.

She also stated that her branch:

Stands tall with the community of Colorado Springs in rejecting an attempt to create fear, intimidation and racial divisiveness. Although this is an active investigation, one thing is clear: This is an act of domestic terrorism.

However, the President of the Colorado Springs NAACP chapter, Henry Allen Jr., said on Tuesday after the incident that he wasn’t ready to call it a hate crime.

So, what exactly happened? What we know is that witnesses heard a booming sound around 10:45am and then saw smoke. In addition, the side of the building where the NAACP office is located appeared to be burnt. The bomb has been called by many news sources “makeshift” or “homemade.” It was placed next to a gas can, but luckily did not cause the gas can to ignite or explode.

There is a person of interest in the investigation. He has been described as a white man in his forties who drove a dirty white pickup truck and had a license plate that was covered or obstructed in some way. One witness said that he looked on the heavier side, and that he was wearing a Carhartt type jacket.

While no one’s certain that it was the NAACP that was targeted, it seems like the most likely target for the bomb. Most onlookers have pointed out that the nearby hair salon probably wasn’t the target.

The bigger story that has seemed to come out of the incident was the media coverage, or more accurately, the lack thereof. While this happened yesterday, it didn’t really get covered on last night’s news lineup. According to ThinkProgress:

A ThinkProgress search of television databases suggests CNN gave one cursory report on the incident at 6:34 a.m., while MSNBC and Fox News appear to have not mentioned the incident on air since it happened. Other networks, including Headline News, (HDLN) mentioned the incident in the morning news.

There were obviously other big news stories happening at the same time–the start of open-season on Congress, for example–but it still seems like a possible domestic terrorist attack should have gotten more than a “cursory report.” The hashtag #NAACPBombing is trending on Twitter, where many are coming forth to say that the social media tag is the first time that they’ve heard about the bombing.

Seriously, we should all be questioning WHY it took a trending hashtag for us to learn about the #NAACPBombing. We know the answer though…

— Derrick Clifton (@DerrickClifton) January 7, 2015

Here’s all the best media coverage of the #NAACPBombing that I’ve seen so far –> pic.twitter.com/6AtGymj8Jk

— Eric Wolfson (@EricWolfson) January 7, 2015

Despite the fact that the manhunt is still underway in Paris for the men who committed a terrorist attack there this morning, it is a bit weird that there’s been little coverage of the NAACP incident.

Given that the suspect is still at large, one of the best ways to keep people on alert and on the lookout is to spread the news. While the proliferation through Twitter has been great, and an amazing look at the way in which the internet has made it so much easier to communicate, it’s not quite enough.

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 NAACP in Colorado Bombed: No Injuries But Also No Coverage appeared first on Law Street.

Hey y’all!

Sometimes I run across a story that gives me a chuckle that I feel needs to be shared. This is one of those times. Last Tuesday evening in Paris, France, two men walked into the Cartier store located on one of the most iconic streets in the world, the Champs-Élysées, and robbed the place. Not only did they steal from Cartier but they led police on a brief chase and even took a hostage.

Both men were armed with AK-47s when they walked into Cartier demanding the jewelry be taken out of the display cases. Of course the men were interrupted by the sirens of the police who were on their way. The men dashed out of Cartier with the store manager as their hostage, but they let him go so the two guys could hop on their getaway scooter. The robbers fired shots into the air before losing their balance and toppling over. Forced to flee on foot, the robbers eventually made their way into a hair salon where they took a second store manager hostage.

One hundred French police were mobilized to the hair salon–even a helicopter was sent out. A hostage negotiator was able to talk the guys into releasing the manager and turning themselves in. The whole episode went down in under two hours.

One police officer was wounded by a bullet fragment and of course one of the suspects was injured during the scooter fall. France has seen several high-profile robberies of luxury jewelry stores in recent years. I wonder if this is a trend? Paris does have some of the best high-end shopping in the world!

I love a story like this because it is so dramatic and feels like it really should have been a scene in a movie and not reality. Only in Paris would men rob a Cartier store, flee on a scooter, and give up in a matter of hours. Oh how I love the French!

Allison Dawson

Allison Dawson was born in Germany and raised in Mississippi and Texas. A graduate of Texas Tech University and Arizona State University, she’s currently dedicating her life to studying for the LSAT. Twitter junkie. Conservative. Get in touch with Allison at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Cartier Jewelry Heist in Paris Sparks Hostage Capture and Police Chase appeared first on Law Street.

Previous fun facts about French life have let us in on a little secret: French people are picky. Each French city’s mayor or maire possesses the authority to establish policies that maintain public order. In Paris, rules vary according to arrondissement, or district.

So, the French are detail oriented. They like their rules and that’s okay.

However, their latest regulation—on copyright—is so strict that it’s funny. La Tour Eiffel, the Eiffel Tower’s official website states that although snapping some photos of the famous landmark is alright in the daylight, pictures are off limits when the sun goes down. My deepest condolences to anyone who ever dreamed of having a nighttime Parisian wedding photo shoot. The website explains, “its various illuminations are subject to author’s rights as well as brand rights. Usage of these images is subject to prior request from the “Société d’Exploitation de la Tour Eiffel.”

The structure of the Eiffel Tower itself is in the public domain. What isn’t in the public domain is the show put on at night during which different color lights are projected onto the landmark. That, instead, belongs to an artist who takes liberties and utilizes style to determine which lights, colors, speed the illuminations take place. Therefore, a reproduction of the work would require permission—and perhaps compensation—of said artist.

Essentially, it’s a time issue. The Eiffel Tower was built long before pretty lights were shone on it. This EU Information Society Directive includes a clause asserting that buildings in public spaces are to be in the public domain. However, France is one of the countries that refrained from adopting the directive into its law.  Italy and Belgium also refused the directive and retained their stricter policies. Belgium experiences the same issues with its Atomium, delineating on its website that “the image of the Atomium is protected and can only be used under certain conditions…Prices depend on whether it is to be used for a cultural, educational or commercial purpose.”

One must ask: when copyright law restricts something so large, so famous, and so iconic, how can it truly be enforced?

Wikipedia pages are being careful about it. Atomium pages include censored images or photographs of Atomium models. Poor Instagram will probably never see the legal light show. Illegal, however, can be found by a simple search of #eiffeltower. Google Images is chock-full o’ examples.

Ultimately, the regulation probably isn’t causing any tourists severe angst. That doesn’t, however, detract from the fact that it is copyrighted and nighttime Eiffel Tower pictures constitute infringement. We may take for granted our ability to legally Instagram post Lady Liberty at 3:00am with abandon.

The post Your Nighttime Eiffel Tower Pictures Are Illegal appeared first on Law Street.