MicroWave
What you’re saying tracks with the article as well:
Charlene Harrington, a professor emeritus at the nursing school of the University of California-San Francisco, said: “In their unchecked quest for profits, the nursing home industry has created its own problems by not paying adequate wages and benefits and setting heavy nursing workloads that cause neglect and harm to residents and create an unsatisfactory and stressful work environment.”
I don’t think so. There are other important parts in the article:
For the first time, the annual event will also involve troops from the Australian and French military. Fourteen other countries in Asia and Europe will attend as observers. The exercises will run until May 10.
…
The 2024 exercises are also the first to take place outside of Philippine territorial waters.
“Some of the exercises will take place in the South China Sea in an area outside of the Philippines’ territorial sea. It’s a direct challenge to China’s expansive claims” in the region, Philippine political analyst Richard Heydarian told DW.
He added that some of the exercises this year will also be close to Taiwan.
This year’s exercises have a “dual orientation pushing against China’s aggressive intentions both in the South China Sea but also in Taiwan,” he added.
According to ProPublica, it’s commonly done using Leahy Laws:
The recommendations came from a special committee of State Department officials known as the Israel Leahy Vetting Forum. The panel, made up of Middle East and human rights experts, is named for former Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., the chief author of 1997 laws that requires the U.S. to cut off assistance to any foreign military or law enforcement units — from battalions of soldiers to police stations — that are credibly accused of flagrant human rights violations.
…
Over the years, hundreds of foreign units, including from Mexico, Colombia and Cambodia, have been blocked from receiving any new aid. Officials say enforcing the Leahy Laws can be a strong deterrent against human rights abuses.
https://www.propublica.org/article/israel-gaza-blinken-leahy-sanctions-human-rights-violations
Archive link: https://archive.ph/7mQ8M
FWIW the most recent analysis I came across from a law professor makes me think the emergence of the “major questions doctrine” is more concerning:
In Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, the US Supreme Court will decide whether to overrule one of its most frequently cited precedents—its 1984 opinion in Chevron v. NRDC. The decision in Loper may change the language that lawyers use in briefs and professors use in class, but is unlikely to significantly affect case outcomes involving interpretation of the statutes that agencies administer. In practice, it’s the court’s new major questions doctrine announced in 2021 that could fundamentally change how agencies operate.
…
I am much more concerned about the court’s 2021 decision to create the “major questions doctrine” and to apply it in four other cases than I am about the effects of a potential reversal of Chevron in Loper. Lower courts are beginning to rely on the major questions doctrine as the basis to overturn scores of agency decisions. That doctrine has potential to make it impossible for any agency to take any significant action.
No, the case is still pending: https://www.oyez.org/cases/2023/22-451