law firms

The United Nations has added more than 60 companies to its blacklist of firms operating in Israeli settlements in the occupied Palestinian territories. The move, published by the UN Human Rights Council, lists businesses it says are involved in settlement-related activities that Palestinians and rights groups consider illegal under international law. Israel has condemned the listing, while supporters see it as accountability.

The United Nations has added several major Israeli companies to a blacklist of firms linked to Israeli settlements, a move condemned by Israel and closely watched internationally. The listings concern companies operating in or tied to settlements in the occupied West Bank, which the UN considers illegal under international law, a position Israel rejects.

The UN has blacklisted 61 additional companies over their ties to Israeli settlements in the West Bank, bringing the total number of listed firms higher. The move is part of the UN Human Rights Council's database of businesses operating in or linked to settlements, which it deems illegal under international law. Israel has reacted angrily, condemning the blacklist as biased and politically motivated, while rights groups welcomed the step as accountability for corporate complicity.

Artificial intelligence is making law firms significantly more efficient, but corporate clients are now questioning why their legal bills have not dropped accordingly. The New York Times reports that clients expect savings from faster document review and research to be passed on to them, putting pressure on firms' traditional billable-hour models and sparking debate over who benefits from A.I.-driven productivity gains.

Senators Ed Markey and Jeff Merkley, along with Representatives Pramila Jayapal, Rashida Tlaib and Ayanna Pressley, have reintroduced legislation that would stop federal government use of facial recognition and other biometric surveillance technology. The measure, first put forward in earlier sessions of Congress, targets concerns over misidentification, privacy violations and disproportionate policing of communities of color, renewing a debate among civil liberties groups, law enforcement agencies and technology firms.

United States authorities have arrested executives of the forensics software firm Oxygen Forensics, charging them with concealing that the company was controlled by Russian interests and that its software was developed in Russia. The case is drawing attention because the firm's tools are reportedly used by law enforcement and security agencies, raising questions about undisclosed foreign control in sensitive technology supply chains.

A federal bill has been proposed that would ban the corporate practice of medicine across the United States. If enacted, the legislation would restrict corporations from owning or employing physicians, a model that has expanded rapidly through private equity investment in healthcare. Law firms and healthcare industry observers are examining the proposal's potential effects on hospital ownership, staffing companies and patient care.

The Federal Reserve has put forward proposed rules for stablecoins under the GENIUS Act, the US legislation establishing a federal framework for dollar-pegged digital tokens. The proposal would set requirements for issuers operating under US oversight. The move marks a key step in implementing the new stablecoin law and is being closely watched by banks, crypto firms, and regulators assessing how the market will be supervised.

Survivors of the Tumbler Ridge school shooting have filed a negligence lawsuit against OpenAI, alleging the company failed to alert authorities when the shooter's activity involved ChatGPT. The case, reported by the Business and Human Rights Centre, raises questions about AI companies' responsibility to flag potentially dangerous user behaviour to law enforcement before violence occurs.

A startup has filed a legal claim accusing AI search company Perplexity of misappropriating its voice technology for use in AI assistants. The suit, reported by Bloomberg Law, alleges the company took the startup's voice tech without authorization. The case adds to a growing list of intellectual property disputes between startups and larger AI firms.