Scope Of Lawsuit Targeting Employers Using Facebook Targeting Tools Widens

A federal lawsuit filed on behalf of the Communication Workers of America alleges that Facebook and other employers discriminated against older workers by utilizing algorithms that prevented them from becoming aware of targeted ads with job postings.


The original complaint, filed in December, coincided with a published report in the New York Times that questioned the policies regarding elders of employers posting online job ads. Facebook would later limit the abilities of agencies posting ads for jobs to exclude app users in certain demographic groups but did not change the ability of job posters to use age as a discriminating factor.


The filing by CWA was amended on Tuesday to now include additional complaints that include the allegation that Facebook practices open discrimination against older workers by allowing job posters to post ads for what is known as “look-alike” audiences. Attorneys for CWA explain that these ads target a narrow demographic by setting their sites on people that similar to current employees of companies.


The lawsuit revision also includes language suggesting that Facebook algorithms further exacerbate discrimination against older workers by narrowing the age ranges chosen by job posters more than originally intended.


Enterprise, Ikea, and the Medical System of the University of Maryland were three companies added to the amended lawsuit to bring the total targeted entities to fifteen.


Ifeoma Ajunwa, a sociologist with Cornell University, says that this type of discrimination was exactly what proponents of online hiring said would be remedied by the practice. In reality, Ajunwa surmises, this discrimination against online job seekers is just as prevalent as it has become in “real-world” environments if not more.


Facebook and the other companies mentioned have not been named as defendants in the lawsuit that instead focuses on companies that CWA and its lawyers say have used the advertising targeting tools.


A spokesman for Facebook on Tuesday advised that the company had issued a response to the original allegations in December stating that age-related targeting for employment advertising is an accepted industry practice and when used responsibly does not result in discrimination.


Law School Grad With Seven Years Sobriety Leads Charge For Student Well-Being

When Michael Anspach was a new student at Marquette University he was told at orientation about a “bar review,” this was a weekly meeting of students at local bars surrounding the university for drinks. Anspach had ideas on his own and made the suggestion that a club promoting sobriety be started on campus.

Anspach, who now is a 2018 law school graduate says that he was originally discouraged by the lukewarm reaction. He altered his original plan and started a club that would promote the well-being of students which offered healthy ideas for dealing with stress. The club participates in activities like outings to museums, ice skating, and nature walks.

Anspach has been sober since February of 2011 and says that he now looks back and see that there was perhaps more interest in a sober group than he originally imagined. This, Anspach reasons, is because alcohol and law school is a bad mix for many students.

The thirty-two-year-old Anspach is fully aware of the dangers of alcohol and has participated in two stints in rehabilitation as well as an ongoing 12-step program. Anspach sought out sobriety while an undergraduate student attending Boston College where due to his problems with the substance, it took him eight years to complete his bachelor’s degree in philosophy.

The subject of law school students and substance abuse has been a hot topic lately. A study conducted in 2014 that both mental illness and substance abuse is prevalent among students attending law schools. The study also found that many of these students are unwilling to seek help for these problems.

A December pledge by student leaders studying law at elite universities is focused on mental health awareness and well-being for attendees of law school.

Anspach feels that the schools themselves can help students by providing healthy ways to alleviate their stress that do not include the use of alcohol. Anspach did his part while attending Marquette by teaching yoga classes on a weekly basis.

New York City DJ Duo the Chainsmokers

At the Billboard Music Awards over the weekend, the band The Chainsmokers gave an award for the Top 100 songs to the Swedish DJ, Avicii. The Billboard music awards took place in Las Vegas, Nevada at the Grand Garden arena. The Chainsmokers made a speech saying this person was a big inspiration to the EDM community. Further saying Avicii was a kind and caring guy to work with. Later on during the show The Chainsmokers mentioned Avicii again, while announcing the award for the Top Dance and Electronic act. In fact that particular award was dedicated to Avicii. Avicii is loved and missed by many.

Avicii passed away back in April at the young age of 28. It was later released that the reason for his death was apparent suicide. Avicii biological name was Tim Bergling and he has music that may still be released at a later time.

During the award show, host Kelly Clarkson mentioned the victims of the Santa Fe High school shooting in Texas. Stating that a change needs to be made to prevent other shootings in the future.

The Chainsmokers

The Chainsmokers is a DJ duo group from New York City, made up of Alex Pall and Andrew Taggart. Their first single “Selfie” made the top 20 in many different countries throughout the world. In the beginning the duo included Alex Pall and DJ Rhett Bixler. Later on in 2012, this group was re-invented by Adam Alpert. This is when Alex Pall was introduced to Andrew Taggart. In 2013 they released their single “Selfie” for free in late 2013. The duo had their first live performance during fall of 2014. The song “Selfie” was picked up by Dim Mak records and later redone by Republic records. Eventually they decided to sign with Disruptor records.

Illinois Becomes 37th State To Ratify The Equal Rights Amendment

Lawmakers for the state of Illinois ratified the Equal Rights Amendment on Wednesday despite the fact that the 1982 deadline for ratification was well over 30 years ago. The Prairie State became the 37th state in the nation to give its stamp of approval to the amendment.

Geoffrey Stone, a law professor at the University of Chicago, while speaking to the Chicago Tribune says that it is not quite clear whether the amendment can become part of the United States Constitution. Stone added that there are many other provisions that guarantee equal rights for women but says the amendment could make a significant difference in some instances.

Supporters of the amendment have raised the argument that the deadline is now a moot point following 1992 ratification of the Madison Amendment that restricts changes in the salaries of sitting Congressmen. This amendment was originally introduced in 1789.

The decision to ratify the Madison Agreement sets the precedence that Congress does, in fact, have the authority to decide for itself whether or not a large passing of time causes an amendment to become less valid. The thinking is that the U.S. Congress could similarly decide that the ERA is still a viable amendment.

Legal opposition on the matter points out that the Madison Agreement had no deadline set for ratification which is not true for the Equal Rights Amendment.

An article in the William & Mary Journal made the additional supporting argument that the time limits placed on a proposing clause of proposed amendments are not legally relevant due to the fact that states vote to ratify amendments and not the proposal.

Attorney Alice Paul was credited with the original drafting of the Equal Rights Amendment and contains clauses that give Congress the power to use legislation to enforce the amendment. This power is effective two years following the ratification of the amendment.

The proposed ERA was originally sent to states for ratification in 1972 by Congress and was given a seven-year deadline at the time. This deadline was eventually extended to 1982.

Harvey Weinstein Indictment Opens Possibility Of Past Accusers Testifying At Trial

Movie producer Harvey Weinstein made the choice Wednesday to not provide testimony to the grand jury that found cause to indict him on criminal sexual assault and rape charges.

Benjamin Brafman, a lawyer working for Weinstein, says that his client chose not to testify before the grand jury after being denied vital information that would have given him the opportunity to properly prepare.

The most serious acts charged by the grand jury is a first-degree felony resulting from allegations that Weinstein forced a woman to perform oral sex on him in 2004. Additional first and third-degree charges were added to the docket against Weinstein for incidents taking place in 2013 in which Weinstein is said to have committed rape by means of “forcible compulsion.”

The most serious charges filed against Weinstein can possibly result in a sentence from five to 25 years in the New York State Prison system.

Brafman says that all sexual acts were consensual and went on to say that one of the alleged victims was in a ten-year physical relationship with Weinstein and that the relationship continued long after the alleged sexual assault.

A recent story published by the Hollywood Reporter speculated about whether prior incidents involving abuse of women by Weinstein could be introduced by prosecutors. The story referred to the recent conviction of comedian and television star Bill Cosby of a similar crime in which five women were allowed to testify about “prior acts” committed against them by Cosby.

Many legal experts believe that the additional testimony by the five women from previous acts was the single most significant factor leading to the conviction of Cosby.

Former Manhattan prosecutor, Mark Bederow, says that this type of testimony involving prior bad acts is something that is generally not allowed in New York courts. However, there are times when this testimony is admissible to establish that a defendant commits a signature type of crime.

Bederow added that it is his thoughts that in the Weinstein case prosecutors will paint the “casting couch scenario” in an attempt to have this evidence heard by jurors.

Owners Of Face Extortion Charges

Four men who are the alleged owners of the website have been arrested on charges of identity theft, money laundering, and extortion and are awaiting extradition to California.


Xavier Becerra, Attorney General for the state of California used a prepared statement to say that the “pay-for-removal” process used by the website is an obvious attempt to profit financially by humiliating others. Individuals without the financial capability to pay for the removal of these images from the website have their future employment and housing prospects damaged by the exploitive methods used by these men.


Both Thomas Keesee and Shar Sarid were taken into custody in South Florida on Thursday and held on a nearly $2 million bail. Kishore Vidya Bhavnanie faced arraignment in Pennsylvania on Wednesday and was also given a $1.86 million bail. The fourth owner, David Usdan, was arrested in Connecticut and held on bail amounting to $150,000.


The business scheme of and similar sites is the charging of money to “depublish” information regarding arrests and criminal complaints lodged against individuals that are published on their site. According to an affidavit filed with courts, in most cases, whenever individuals ante up and pay the money to have the embarrassing mugshot removed from one website it simply appears on another that again requests payment.


The Attorney General’s office in California says that the four men collected $64,000 from 175 California residents over a three-year period. During the same period, the quartet collected $2 million throughout the nation from more than 5,000 individuals.


Sarid, on a personal website, says that he last worked with in 2013 but did not challenge the assertion by the court that he was the owner of the website during the appeal of a 2016 civil case brought against him in Illinois.


The website said that Said lived in Thailand and had never received payment from However, a group of people including Said’s mother, sister, and Thomas Keesee connect Said to a bank account that received $27,000 in monthly payments from

Randal Nardone’s Trajectory at Fortress Investment Group.

Hard work and steadfast dedication have established an upward trajectory for Randal Nardone success-wise. The Boston University School of Law alumnus who is also an alumnus of the University of Connecticut with a Bachelor of Arts in English and Biology chose a path of finance.This has led him to earn a coveted spot in the Forbes list, ranking at number 557, with a net worth of $1.8 billion. At just 51 years old is given a self-made status. Mr. Nardone is currently the Chief executive officer of Fortress Investment Group.Randal Nardone Co-founded this company with Wes Edens, another big name in the financial business and Rob Kauffman. He started off as a Principal and co-founder, before being named interim CEO in 2011 and becoming its CEO in 2013.He takes charge of all legal and financial matters of the company. Before he got to the stage of forming this company, he held an esteemed position of Managing Director at the Union Bank of Switzerland, for about a year between May 1997 to May 1998.The same year he left UBS, is when Fotress Investment Group LLC was formed. Prior to this, he was a Principal at Blackrock Financial Management. Before fully joining the financial market, Randal Nardone was a partner and a member of the executive committee at Thacher Proffitt & Wood law firm.With such a status, experience and skills come the demand for your services. It is no different for Mr. Nardone who currently has a number of positions that he currently holds. Such are;

  • The President and chairman of SpringLeaf Financial Holdings LLC
  • President of NSC1 LLC
  • Fortress Registered Investment Trust Co-founder, CEO, and Principal.
  • previously being its Vice president,Chief OPerations officer, and secretary.

He has led his company to achieve various milestones like The sale to Japanese Owned Soft Bank Group. This deal had Soft Bank owning the Fortress shares at a cost of $3.3 billion. The management was kept in place upon completion of the deal.The outstanding shares were bought for $8.08 per share from the original price of $5.83. Sharing according to each one’s investment, the executives of Fortress made $1.39 billion in this deal.Randal Nardone said that this would open up sources for greater credit on top of speeding the growth of the company. He feels optimistic about the deal and its impact on his company. Under its leadership, it has created a good, challenging, and creating opportunities to learn for its employees, who help the company grow further.

A Gaze At The Considerable Fortune Made by Randal Nardone

To achieve every height in this world, you must start low unless you are digging your grave where you start upwards. What this basically means is that no prominent person just happened; they have gone through the ladder of life until they have reached their apex. The co-founder of Fortress Investment Group, Mr. Randal Nardone is no exception; he has undergone through the fire of life and has come out refined as gold. He is now one of the key leaders setting the pace for our generation.Many don’t know that this renowned icon was a lawyer at first before shifting gears and dashing into the business world. Randal Nardone studied at the University of Connecticut for Bachelor Arts in English and Biology. He later proceeded to the School of Law at Boston University for his JD. After his education, he has served a number of organizations and positions like in BlackRock Financial Management, UBS, Thacher Proffitt and Wood which is a law firm where he served on the executive committee. He has also served at GAGFA S.A., Brookdale Senior Living, and Alea Group Holdings Limited among others.

In 1998 Randal Nardone with other visionary leaders co-founded Fortress Investment Group which has grown to unassailable heights. The group is basically a firm that specializes in the financial management of highly diversified investments and assets which are worth over $43.6 billion. Mr. Randal stepped into the realm of billionaires back in 2007 when Fortress Group went public through its initial public offering. This is when he graced the Forbes list of various billionaires at number 557 having a net worth of over$1.8 billion. Besides being one of the major principles at the Group, he serves as the Chief Operating Officer where he oversees structured finance and all the legal matters in the firm because he is a law expert by profession and training.

Randal Nardone also serves at EuroCastle Investment Limited, Spring Leaf Finance Inc. and at Spring Leaf Finance Corporation as the director. Recently in December 2017, Fortress Investment Group hit the headlines as a result of the interest raised by Softbank Group Corp. to acquire it at $ 3.3 billion. This Japanese firm was appealed by the heavy investment of Fortress in mortgages, infrastructure, senior living and other permanent assets like vehicles which are worth more than $7 billion. He praised the whole process and the leadership of Softbank led by Masayoshi Son where he said that they will add value to the Group. The whole operations of Fortress will continue running independently.

Attorney General Sessions Decreases Power Of Immigraton Judges

Jeff Sessions, United States Attorney General, ordered on Thursday that judges overseeing immigration hearings cease the practice of suspending cases on their docket without issuing a judgment.


Advocates for the rights of immigrants are upset with the move on the part of Sessions as they view it as a way to unjustly influence immigration courts which are under the jurisdiction of the Department of Justice. Advocates say the desired result is to expedite the deportation of more immigrants.


The practice that has been used by immigration judges is known as “administrative closures.” Judges would often close the cases of immigrants who are awaiting visas or green cards, a process that can sometimes take years, in order to avoid any deportation before their resident status can be upgraded.


Critics of the practice point out that in many cases immigrants have been allowed to remain in the U.S. longer than they legally should have.


Attorney General Sessions has been an ardent critic of administrative closures and even took the unprecedented step in January of having a case being heard by the Board of Immigration Appeals to be diverted to himself. The case involved a citizen of Guatemala who resided in America and had failed to show up for five immigration hearings. An immigration judge provided the respondent with an administrative closure ruling that attempts to deliver notice of hearings were inadequate.


In his Thursday order, Sessions acknowledged that the courts could not properly deal with the volume of cases that would need adjudication if prior administrative closures were to be reopened and ordered them to remain closed.


NAIJ President Ashley Tabaddor, says that Sessions’ decision effectively undermined years of efficient and effective operations and that there has been no evidence of any type of immigration abuse that would warrant the action that was taken.


The number of administrative closures greatly increased during the presidency of Barack Obama and reached 200,000 closures. The backlog for immigration hearings is presently well over 600,000 cases.

Q&A with Dr. Rod Rohrich

Dr. Rod Rohrich is a very popular plastic surgeon based out of Dallas, Texas and is a professor of plastic surgery at the renowned University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center. He has served as an ex-president of the American Society of Plastic Surgeons and is also the current chairperson of the Dallas Rhinoplasty Symposium. He has been a three-time recipient of the Plastic Surgery Foundation Distinguished Service Award and has been consistently rated as the Best Plastic Surgeons in Dallas by the D Magazine. He is also listed in the Castle Connolly’s list of top doctors as well as US News and World Report Best Plastic Surgeons. These are some of the many national and international recognition that Dr. Rohrich is widely known for.

Scarring is one of the most common things to deal with during the post-surgery period. According to Dr. Rohrich, a majority of your healing depends on your genetics and where exactly the incision is located. The incisions which are placed in the nasal and eyelid areas are likely to heal quite well and most of the patients shall not have any scarring issues in these areas. But the practitioner strongly comments about the higher scarring incidence in the neck and shoulder area and advises all his patients to be extra careful when it comes to these areas. But the thing he stresses the most is the prevention of infection and avoiding of the sun to prevent any kind of further damage to the skin.

A lot of patients confuse themselves between liposculpture and liposuction as they sound similar in not only how they are pronounced but also in surgical terms to a certain extent. Dr. Rohrich clearly differentiates between the two. He says that liposuction is just the removal of excessive fat from the right places while liposculpture is a more precision form of surgery that requires an experienced eye to make sure that best results are obtained for both the genders. And while you are considering to go for any type of plastic surgery, do not hesitate to contact Dr. Rohrich as he would make the procedure quite simpler and easier for you.