Issues Inspired by the Popular Podcast

California and 11 other states have filed a multistate antitrust lawsuit to block the proposed $110 billion merger between Paramount Skydance and Warner Bros. Discovery — what would be the largest media consolidation in U.S. history. The complaint alleges the merger violates Section 7 of the Clayton Act, a federal antitrust law that prohibits mergers likely to substantially reduce competition. Opponents argue the combined studio giant would dominate film production, theatrical distribution, and cable television in ways that harm consumers and workers alike. Specifically, the merger is expected to raise prices for movie tickets and cable subscriptions, reduce the volume of films and content produced, and eliminate thousands of creative industry jobs — threatening the livelihoods of writers, directors, crew members, and other entertainment professionals who depend on a competitive, multi-studio marketplace. Constituents are urging their state attorneys general and legislators to support the multistate antitrust lawsuit and use every available legal and legislative tool to prevent this merger from proceeding. Preserving competition in the entertainment industry is essential to keeping consumer costs down, sustaining American creative jobs, and ensuring that no single corporate entity gains outsized control over what stories get told and how they reach the public.

consumer-protection · antitrust · federal · competition-policy · state · us-congress · entertainment-industry · labor · media-consolidation

As the average age of members of Congress continues to rise, public concern has grown over whether some legislators are physically and cognitively capable of fulfilling their duties. High-profile cases — including Senators Dianne Feinstein and Mitch McConnell — drew national attention to the absence of any formal mechanism to assess or disclose a member's fitness to serve. Unlike the Executive Branch, which has the Twenty-Fifth Amendment as a framework for presidential incapacity, Congress has no equivalent safeguard for its own members. Advocates and legal scholars have proposed that Congress address this gap through ordinary statute or internal chamber rules — no constitutional amendment required. Proposals include mandatory, age-thresholded cognitive and physical fitness evaluations (for example, at age 70 or 75) conducted by independent medical panels, with results publicly disclosed to constituents. Representative Marie Gluesenkamp Perez introduced a 2024 amendment in the House Appropriations Committee to establish cognitive acuity standards for representatives; it was voted down, but it demonstrated that this reform is achievable through the normal legislative process. Constituents are urging their senators and representatives to support legislation or chamber rule changes that would require members of Congress above a defined age threshold to undergo standardized, independent cognitive and physical fitness evaluations, with results made publicly available. This is a matter of democratic accountability: voters deserve to know that the officials casting votes on their behalf are capable of doing so.

federal · us-congress · cognitive-fitness · legislative-reform · public-disclosure · congressional-accountability · government-transparency · aging-in-office

The rapid growth of the artificial intelligence industry has exposed serious gaps in federal law governing trade secret protection. The Defend Trade Secrets Act (DTSA), enacted in 2016, established a federal civil cause of action for trade secret misappropriation, but it was written before today's AI-sector dynamics existed. Increasingly, companies are accused of systematically coaching departing employees to extract proprietary AI models, training data, prototypes, and confidential technical components — a pattern of coordinated misappropriation that current DTSA language and private civil litigation alone are poorly equipped to address. Meanwhile, AI platform providers face growing scrutiny for using data and work product submitted by their own customers to develop competing products — a practice that raises serious questions about unfair competition and breach of trust that existing federal law does not clearly prohibit. Congress should act on three fronts. First, amend and strengthen the DTSA to explicitly cover AI-sector misappropriation patterns, including coordinated employee solicitation schemes designed to extract confidential information, and provide clearer evidentiary standards and remedies suited to digital and algorithmic trade secrets. Second, increase Department of Justice funding and enforcement authority to prosecute companies that systematically misappropriate competitors' intellectual property, reducing sole reliance on costly private civil litigation that disadvantages smaller innovators. Third, establish clear federal liability standards prohibiting AI firms from using customer-submitted data and work product to build products that compete directly against those same customers. These reforms would protect American innovation, preserve competitive fairness in the AI sector, and ensure that the United States maintains its technological edge in a global AI arms race. Witnesses before the House Judiciary Committee in May 2025 specifically highlighted the need to modernize federal trade secret law to address AI-era threats. Constituents urge their representatives to support legislation advancing all three of these objectives.

doj-enforcement · tech-industry · federal · innovation · intellectual-property · artificial-intelligence · us-congress · trade-secrets

Prediction market and online gambling platforms are flooding social media with paid influencer content that obscures sponsorship relationships and portrays unrealistic financial gains — without clearly disclosing that creators are being compensated. A Wall Street Journal investigation found that platforms like Polymarket partnered with paid creators to produce videos that made gambling profits appear routine and attainable, exploiting loopholes in social media moderation guardrails. A national survey by the National Council on Problem Gambling found that more than four in five Americans believe prediction market platforms should be held to consumer protection standards comparable to those applied to gambling. Under current federal law, prediction market platforms are classified as financial "event contract" markets rather than gambling venues, which allows them to sidestep the consumer protection and advertising disclosure requirements that apply to traditional sports betting and casino gambling. This regulatory gap has enabled aggressive and deceptive marketing — particularly through influencer partnerships — that disproportionately reaches young people. Research from ISD Global documents how these companies exploit influencer channels to circumvent age-related advertising safeguards on major social media platforms. Congress should act to close this loophole by: (1) directing the FTC to enforce existing endorsement disclosure rules against prediction market and online gambling platforms and their paid influencers; (2) enacting legislation that mandates clear, prominent disclosure of paid sponsorships in all gambling and prediction market advertising; (3) requiring that any depiction of financial outcomes in such advertising accurately reflect typical user results; and (4) prohibiting marketing practices that are designed to target or are likely to reach minors. Representatives Kevin Mullin (CA-15) and Gabe Vasquez (NM-02) have already called on the FTC to investigate these platforms. Congress should build on that momentum with durable statutory protections.

us-congress · consumer-protection · youth-safety · gambling · online-platforms · financial-regulation · advertising · federal