Hillary Clinton says she wants to be Facebook CEO. Is Zuckerberg listening?

Former US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton might be willing to swap a life in politics to lead the world's largest social-networking company, a media report said.

On being asked by Attorney General Maura Healey, a Democrat from Massachusetts, which company she would want to be the CEO of, Clinton didn't pause before quickly answering "Facebook", CNET reported on Friday.

"It's the biggest news platform in the world. Most people in our country get their news -- true or not from Facebook," Clinton was quoted as saying.

The former US presidential candidate was at Harvard on Friday receiving the Radcliffe Medal, which honours people who have "had a transformative impact on society".

Facebook is working to win back its users' trust following a series of recent controversies, including the Cambridge Analytica scandal, in which data from as many as 87 million Facebook users were improperly shared with the political consultancy.

Has the moment for environmental justice been lost?

Given how President Donald Trump has taken aim at the Environmental Protection Agency with regulatory rollbacks and deep proposed budget cuts, it may come as no surprise that the Office of Environmental Justice is on the chopping block.

This tiny corner of the EPA was established 24 years ago to advocate for minorities and the poor, populations most likely to face the consequences of pollution and least able to advocate for themselves.

It does so by acting as a middleman, connecting vulnerable communities with those who can help them. It heads a group that advises EPA officials about injustices and another that brings together representatives from other federal agencies and the White House to swap proposals.

When it works, all the talk leads to grants, policies and programs that change lives.

In the Arkwright and Forest Park communities in Spartanburg, South Carolina, residents were living near contaminated industrial sites and a landfill — and dying of respiratory illnesses and cancer at extraordinary rates. They used a $20,000 environmental justice grant from the EPA as seed money to form partnerships with local businesses and government agencies. Those alliances, in turn, helped bring more than $250 million in infrastructure, community health centers, affordable housing, environmental cleanups and job training to the area.

Trump's budget proposal would effectively eliminate the office and the $2 million it takes to operate it. An EPA spokesperson suggested in a statement that the agency doesn't need a special arm devoted to environmental justice to continue this work.
READ MORE

Trump's travel ban: Immigration not a one-person show, rules 9th US Court

The San Francisco-based 9th Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled against reinstating President Donald Trump's revised executive order limiting travel from six-Muslim majority countries, the media reported.

The ruling on Monday from the three-judge — Judges Michael Daly Hawkins, Ronald Gould and Richard Paez — panel is yet another stinging loss from a court that similarly refused to reinstate Trump's original executive order on travel in February, reports CNN.

"We conclude that the President, in issuing the Executive Order, exceeded the scope of the authority delegated to him by Congress," the three judges, all appointed by former President Bill Clinton, wrote in the ruling.

"Immigration, even for the President, is not a one-person show."

The judges cited Trump's latest tweets in the travel ban saga.

"Indeed, the President recently confirmed his assessment that it is the 'countries' that are inherently dangerous, rather than the 180 million individual nationals of those countries who are barred from entry under the President's 'travel ban'," the judge wrote.

They also cited White House press secretary Sean Spicer's confirmation that Trump's tweets are "considered official statements by the President of the United States".

On June 6, Trump tweeted: "That's right, we need a travel ban for certain dangerous countries, not some politically correct term that won't help us protect our people!", reports CNN.

The judges largely affirmed US District Court Judge Derrick Watson's decision from March which found the core provisions of the revised executive order likely violated the Constitution because its primary purpose was to disfavour Muslims, but on slightly different grounds.
READ MORE