Massive demonstrations break out after police allegedly beat, kill black man in Memphis

Tyre Nichols’s interaction with five police black officers, all of whom have been fired, arrested and charged. Two additional Shelby County deputies are under investigation following the release of the footage.

The officers pulled Nichols over during a traffic stop in early January after which a “confrontation occurred.” police in the city beat a black man so badly he died three days later.

Video footage appears to show the officers beating Nichols, injuries which reportedly sent the 29-year-old to the hospital in critical condition. Nichols died three days later.

Demonstrations began Friday night as Memphis police released bodycam footage of

Protesters have shut down the Memphis-Arkansas Bridge, chanting “no justice, no peace,” causing hundreds of cars to stand still for hours at a time. Some stuck in traffic are concerned that the demonstrations will cause injury or death, although they say they support the aim of the protesters.

“I got two babies in the car…I mean no harm…but this right here, come on,” two women said in a video circulating on social media.

Another trucker pled with demonstrators to clear the highway saying, “look, man, holding up traffic don’t do nothing.”

The demonstrators began marching toward the upcoming traffic as the bodycam footage of Nichols’ interaction with police was released, chanting expletive, “...around and find out.”

Tyre Nichols’s mother, RowVaughn Wells, has called on protesters to remain peaceful following the release of the footage.

“But I want each and every one of you to protest in peace. I don’t want us burning up our cities, tearing up the streets because that’s not what my son stood for,” she said. “And if you guys are here for me and Tyre, you will protest peacefully.”

CNN’s Don Lemon spoke to Wells, her husband Rodney and their attorney, Ben Crump. Wells said Nichols called out for his mom several times, prompting her to become extremely emotional.

“That was my baby, he was a mama’s boy,” Wells said. “That boy loved me to death. He has my name tattooed on his arm. People don’t know what those five police officers did to our family. And they really don’t know what they did to their own families. They have put their own families in harm’s way. They have brought shame to their own families. They have brought shame to the black community. I just feel sorry for — I feel sorry for them. I really do. I really feel sorry for them.”

IRS says millions of Americans don’t realize they’re eligible for tax credit

Tom Ozimek The Epoch Times

The IRS has issued a reminder that millions of Americans are eligible for a tax credit that last year averaged more than $2,000, but 20 percent of those entitled to the money don’t claim it.

“This is an extremely important tax credit that helps millions of hard-working people every year,” IRS Acting Commissioner Doug O’Donnell said in a Jan. 27 statement. “But each year, many people miss out on the credit because they don’t know about it or don’t realize they’re eligible.”

The Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) was first approved by Congress in 1975, in part to offset the burden of Social Security taxes and to provide an employment incentive.

The tax credit is administered by the IRS, which stated that in 2022, roughly 31 million eligible Americans received about $64 billion in EITC payments. The tax credit amounted to more than $2,000 per eligible person on average. The IRS estimates that about 20 percent of eligible taxpayers don’t claim the EITC. People particularly prone to overlooking the tax credit include those living in nontraditional homes (such as a grandparent raising a grandchild), those whose earnings declined or whose marital or parental status changed, people living in rural areas, veterans, the self-employed, and those with earnings below the tax return filing requirement.

“In particular, people who have experienced a major life change in the past year—in their job, marital status, a new child or other factors—may qualify for the first time,” O’Donnell said. “The IRS urges people to carefully … review this important credit; we don’t want people to miss out.”

EITC Eligibility

The EITC is considered a tax credit for lower-income filers, although there are a number of variations of income, filing status, and the number of dependents that have an impact on eligibility.

The EITC is for workers whose income didn’t exceed the following limits in 2022:

$53,057 ($59,187 if married filing jointly) with three or more qualifying children who have valid Social Security numbers (SSNs).

$49,399 ($55,529 if married filing jointly) with two qualifying children who have valid SSNs.

$43,492 ($49,622 if married filing jointly) with one qualifying child who has a valid SSN.

$16,480 ($22,610 if married filing jointly) with no qualifying children who have valid SSNs.

Investment income must be

$10,300 or less.

Taxpayers who meet the income requirements and have qualifying children can receive a maximum of $6,935.

For taxpayers with no dependents, the maximum EITC is $560.

Married but separated spouses who don’t file a joint tax return may also be eligible if they meet certain qualifications.

In order to qualify, people who don’t earn enough to be obligated to file a tax return must file one in order to claim the credit.

In order to navigate EITC eligibility, the IRS has a tool called the EITC Assistant that people can use to check if they qualify and how much they can expect to receive.

Other Updates

The IRS recently cautioned that many taxpayers should expect a smaller refund this tax season because of tax law changes. This includes the expiration of pandemic-related stimulus payments and changes to the Child Tax Credit (CTC) that would otherwise have boosted refund balances.

The Recovery Rebate Credit was a way for millions of Americans to receive pandemic support if they didn’t receive their full amount via stimulus checks. This credit was available for missing amounts and 17 in 2021.

Some taxpayers may be eligible for an Additional Child Tax Credit, which would allow them to receive up to $1,500 of the CTC as a refund on their tax return.

Also, a tax credit that working parents can use to help cover child care costs or that people with adult dependents can use for that purpose is lower in 2022.

Adobe Stock photo from the first-, second-, and thirdround stimulus checks and could only be claimed on 2020 and 2021 tax returns. The stimulus checks were discontinued in December 2021 and the missing third-round amounts could only be claimed on a 2021 tax return filed in 2022. However, people who may have missed the opportunity to claim missing third-round stimulus payments can review their 2021 tax return and consider filing an amended return.

The CTC for 2022 tax returns has been reduced to $2,000 per child, down from the expanded amount of $3,600 for children younger than 6 and $3,000 for children between 6

Tom Ozimek is a senior reporter for The Epoch Times. He has a broad background in journalism, deposit insurance, marketing and communications, and adult education.

Copyright 2023 - Reprinted with permission from Epoch Times.

Breaking: Federal judge blocks California law punishing doctors for ‘COVID misinformation’

Michael Nevradakis Ph.D.

Children’s Health Defense

California Chapter’s request for a preliminary injunction to block a California law that would have allowed the state’s medical boards to punish doctors for spreading “COVID-19 misinformation.”

In his 30-page opinion, Senior U.S. District Judge William Shubb determined the defendants in the case — California Gov. Gavin Newsom, Attorney General Rob Bonta and California Medical and Osteopathic Boards — provided “no evidence that ‘scientific consensus’ has any established technical meaning,” and that the law provides “no clarity” on the meaning of the word “misinformation.”

Judge Shubb also found the “plaintiffs have established a likelihood of success on the grounds of their Fourteenth Amendment vagueness challenges.”

The ruling pertains to a lawsuit filed on Dec. 1, 2022, in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California on behalf of plaintiffs CHD-California Chapter, Dr. LeTrinh Hoang and Physicians for Informed Consent.

The lawsuit was filed after Newsom, on Sept. 30, 2022, signed California Assembly Bill 2098 (AB 2098), which was set to take effect Jan. 1.

AB 2098 bars doctors “from providing ‘treatment or advice’ ‘to a patient’ ‘related to COVID-19’ when that treatment or advice includes (1) ‘false information’ (2) ‘that is contradicted by contemporary scientific consensus’ (3) ‘contrary to the standard of care.’ If a doctor goes against this ill-defined ‘consensus,’ the doctor is guilty of ‘unprofessional conduct’ and can face disciplinary action.”

Judge Shubb’s ruling prevents enforcement of AB 2098 pending resolution of the lawsuit.

According to lead counsel Rick Jaffe, “Judge Shubb looked at the law and correctly determined that the COVID misinformation was unconstitutionally vague, in large part because the plaintiffs in both cases showed there is no ‘current scientific consensus,’ given the fast-changing pace of the pandemic.”

“The case will now proceed on two tracks,” Jaffe said, adding:

“The parties will continue to litigate the case before Judge Shubb and we will be filing a motion for summary judgment in the not-too-distant future.

“But because we won, and because a judge in the Central District of California denied a similar challenge to AB 2098, the attorney general will certainly appeal and argue that the central district judge was right. So, there is much more to come.”

CHD Chairman and Chief Litigation Counsel Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., who also litigated the case, said: “CHD and the California chapter are excited and proud to be a part of this groundbreaking litigation, especially since there are other states also trying to censor physicians for speaking out against the mainstream medical’s position of safety and efficacy while downplaying if not ignoring the harm caused to many who have taken the COVID shots and every booster.”

Kennedy said CHD’s efforts are not limited to California law. “We are looking into challenging other state laws on the same grounds as we asserted in this case,” he said.

Mary Holland, CHD president and general counsel, also applauded Judge Shubb’s decision:

“This is not only a victory for California doctors, but for professionals and citizens around the world in this battle for freedom. The right to share and receive truthful information, no matter how uncomfortable it may be for those currently in power, must remain inviolate.”

Holland singled out this statement in the ruling: “Because the term ‘scientific consensus’ is so ill-defined, physician plaintiffs are unable to determine if their intended conduct contradicts the scientific consensus, and accordingly ‘what is prohibited by the law.’”

Judge Shubb’s ruling technically is limited only to “the plaintiffs, all persons represented by the plaintiffs, and members of the organizations that filed the lawsuits.”

Judge: AB 2098 ‘operates to inhibit exercise of First Amendment freedoms’

AB 2098 was introduced in February 2022, by California Assemblymember Evan Low, who had previously formed the Vaccine Work Group with six other Democratic lawmakers, with the intent of developing legislation promoting COVID-19 vaccines and “battling misinformation.” The bill, which garnered the support of the American Medical

Association for its efforts to address public health “disinformation,” passed the California Assembly in May 2022, and the California Senate in late August 2022, before Newsom signed it into law.

CHD-California’s motion for preliminary injunction included a declaration by Dr. Sanjay Verma, who highlighted numerous examples of public health authorities walking back recommendations that were previously deemed the “consensus” view.

Judge Shubb cited Verma’s declaration in his order, stating that it “explains in detail how the socalled ‘consensus’ has developed and shifted, often within mere months, throughout the COVID-19 pandemic.”

“Because COVID-19 is such a new and evolving area of scientific study, it may be hard to determine which scientific conclusions are ‘false’ at a given point in time,” Judge Shubb wrote. As a result, “drawing a line between what is true and what is settled by scientific consensus is difficult, if not impossible.”

“Because the term ‘scientific consensus’ is so ill-defined, physician plaintiffs are unable to determine if their intended conduct contradicts the scientific consensus, and accordingly ‘what is prohibited by the law,’” the judge said.

“Vague statutes are particularly objectionable when they ‘involve sensitive areas of First Amendment freedoms’ because ‘they operate to inhibit the exercise of those freedoms,’” he added.

Wednesday’s ruling also raised questions about who determines what constitutes a “consensus,” and how they make that determination:

“Who determines whether a consensus exists to begin with?

If a consensus does exist, among whom must the consensus exist (for example practicing physicians, or professional organizations, or medical researchers, or public health officials, or perhaps a combination)?

“In which geographic area must the consensus exist (California, or the United States, or the world)?

What level of agreement constitutes a consensus (perhaps a plurality, or a majority, or a supermajority)?

How recently in time must the consensus have been established to be considered ‘contemporary’?

“And what source or sources should physicians consult to determine what the consensus is at any given time (perhaps peer-reviewed scientific articles, or clinical guidelines from professional organizations, or public health recommendations)?

“The statute provides no means of understanding to what ‘scientific consensus’ refers.”

Michael Nevradakis, Ph.D., based in Athens, Greece, is a senior reporter for The Defender and part of the rotation of hosts for CHD. TV’s “Good Morning CHD.”

Sign up for free news and updates from Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and the Children’s Health Defense. CHD is planning many strategies, including legal, in an effort to defend the health of our children and obtain justice for those already injured. Your support is essential to CHD’s successful mission.