Members of Meta’s team faced a stern warning Wednesday after wearing Ray-Ban Meta AI glasses, which contain cameras, while entering a Los Angeles courtroom.

The trial focuses on whether Meta and YouTube intentionally designed social media platforms to encourage addictive usage among children.

Jacob Ward, a technology journalist and host of the Rip Current Podcast, told CBS News that Judge Carolyn Kuhl “upbraided the Meta team and said if you guys have recorded anything, you have to dispose of it or I will hold you in contempt,” calling the incident “an extraordinary misstep” by the company.

It is unclear whether the glasses were worn inside the courtroom or just during entry. Meta has not immediately responded to requests for comment. In Los Angeles County Superior Court, the use of cameras and recording devices is typically prohibited.

A spokesperson for the Superior Court of Los Angeles County said, “Judicial officers have the discretion to place limitations on video recording and photography in their courtroom,” citing local and state rules.

Ray-Ban Meta Glasses Raise Privacy Concerns

Judge Kuhl emphasized the seriousness of the issue and ordered anyone wearing the AI glasses to remove them, particularly to prevent any facial recognition of jurors. “This is very serious,” she said.

Ray-Ban Meta glasses, priced between $299 and $799, can capture photos and record video, raising concerns about privacy and courtroom protocol.

Zuckerberg’s presence in court coincided with testimony over Instagram’s age verification practices and the platforms’ impact on young users.

The lawsuit, filed by a plaintiff identified only by her initials “KGM,” alleges that exposure to social media at a young age caused addiction and harmed her mental health.

Zuckerberg defended Instagram, stating that the platform has never allowed children under 13, TheWrap reported.

He acknowledged, however, that some users may lie about their age to access the service.

“There’s a distinction about whether someone is allowed to do something and whether we’ve caught them for breaking the rule,” Zuckerberg said, according to the Los Angeles Times.

“I don’t see why this is so complicated. It’s been our clear policy that people under the age of 13 are not allowed.”

Originally published on vcpost.com

The Supreme Court dealt a blow to President Donald Trump’s trade agenda on Friday, siding against him in a case challenging the legality of tariffs that have shaped global markets and U.S. supply chains.

The White House did not immediately respond to Fox News Digital’s request for comment.

TRUMP DEFENDS TARIFFS, SAYS US HAS BEEN ‘THE KING OF BEING SCREWED’ BY TRADE IMBALANCE

President Donald Trump announced his “Liberation Day” reciprocal tariffs in April 2025. (Brendan Smialowski/AFP/Getty Images / Getty Images)

The two cases, which Trump has described as “life or death” for the United States, have forced the Supreme Court to confront how far a president can go in reshaping U.S. trade policy.

The challenges — Learning Resources Inc. v. Trump and Trump v. V.O.S. Selections Inc. — were brought by an educational toy manufacturer and a family-owned wine and spirits importer challenging the legality of Trump’s tariffs.

Both cases turn on a central question: whether the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) gave the president authority to impose the tariffs, or whether that move crossed constitutional lines. The disputes followed Trump’s so-called “Liberation Day” tariffs in April, a sweeping package of import duties he said would address trade imbalances and reduce reliance on foreign goods.

US TARIFF REVENUE UP 300% UNDER TRUMP AS SUPREME COURT BATTLE LOOMS

Trump has promised to use some of the revenue from tariffs to issue $2,000 checks to Americans and to pay down the nation’s debt. (Mark Ralston/AFP/Getty Images)

The ruling comes as tariff revenue and the economic stakes associated with it have surged to record levels. 

Duties jumped from $9.6 billion in March to $23.9 billion in May following the rollout of the tariffs. For fiscal 2025, which ended Sept. 30, collections reached $215.2 billion, according to Treasury data, and the upward trend has continued into fiscal 2026, with receipts already outpacing last year.

Since Trump’s return to office, tariff collections have risen roughly 300%, delivering a major windfall to federal coffers. In January alone, duties totaled $30.4 billion — up 275% from a year earlier — and revenue for the current fiscal year has reached $124 billion, a roughly 304% increase from the same period last year.

TRUMP SAYS SUPREME COURT CASE ON TRADE IS ‘LIFE OR DEATH’ FOR THE US

Tariffs function as a tax on imports, and in many cases, U.S. importers absorb the upfront cost and then pass it along through higher prices for wholesalers, retailers and, ultimately, consumers. That means households and businesses may face increased costs for goods ranging from electronics to raw materials.

Whether tariffs ultimately help or hurt the economy depends on how much of that burden consumers absorb, how domestic producers respond and whether the intended economic or geopolitical advantages are worth the added costs to consumers.

That dynamic makes the high court’s ruling especially consequential for households and businesses already navigating elevated costs.

The revenue surge underscores how central tariffs have become to Trump’s economic agenda, with the administration arguing that duty collections can help fund domestic priorities, reduce the nation’s debt and even deliver a proposed $2,000 dividend to Americans.

But with total obligations hovering just north of $38 trillion, tariff revenue amounts to little more than a rounding error — billions collected against trillions owed.

CLICK HERE TO GET FOX BUSINESS ON THE GO

The president maintains, however, that aggressive tariffs are necessary to confront what he considers years of unfair global trade, a stance that shows how firmly trade policy is embedded in his broader economic strategy.

With affordability a central concern for voters heading into the midterm elections, any policy that raises consumer prices is likely to face heightened political scrutiny.

Read the Supreme Court decision:

This article was written by

Follow

Analyst’s Disclosure: I/we have no stock, option or similar derivative position in any of the companies mentioned, and no plans to initiate any such positions within the next 72 hours. I wrote this article myself, and it expresses my own opinions. I am not receiving compensation for it (other than from Seeking Alpha). I have no business relationship with any company whose stock is mentioned in this article.

Seeking Alpha’s Disclosure: Past performance is no guarantee of future results. No recommendation or advice is being given as to whether any investment is suitable for a particular investor. Any views or opinions expressed above may not reflect those of Seeking Alpha as a whole. Seeking Alpha is not a licensed securities dealer, broker or US investment adviser or investment bank. Our analysts are third party authors that include both professional investors and individual investors who may not be licensed or certified by any institute or regulatory body.

One of the most acclaimed and successful American filmmakers in history has left California for New York. 

Steven Spielberg and his wife, Kate Capshaw, officially became New York residents on Jan. 1, according to a report by the Los Angeles Times. The couple relocated to the San Remo co-op on Central Park West in Manhattan, which has previously housed celebrities including Bono, Mick Jagger, Warren Beatty and Tiger Woods.

On the same day that Spielberg reportedly established residency, his production company Amblin Entertainment opened an office in New York City, marking a notable transition away from Hollywood.

Spielberg has owned homes on both the East and West coasts since at least the mid-1990s.

TOP DEMS SANDERS AND REICH RAMP UP BILLIONAIRE TAX PUSH, SAY WEALTHY HAVE ‘ADDICTION’ TO GREED

Speculation around the timing of the move can be linked to a proposed one-time 5% wealth tax on California residents worth $1 billion or more. While it has not yet qualified for the November ballot, the proposal — backed by the Service Employees International Union–United Healthcare Workers West — would take effect in 2027, and taxpayers could spread payments over five years, with additional costs, according to the Legislative Analyst’s Office.

Steven Spielberg arrives on the red carpet for the Oscars Nominees Luncheon at The Beverly Hilton on Tuesday, Feb. 10, 2026. (Getty Images)

If the measure is approved by voters, anyone who was a California resident on Jan. 1, 2026, would owe the tax, according to the proposal.

However, Spielberg’s representative said the move has no connection to the potential tax.

“Steven’s move to the East Coast is both long-planned and driven purely by his and Kate Capshaw’s desire to be closer to their New York-based children and grandchildren,” spokesperson Terry Press told the Los Angeles Times.

Press also declined to comment on Spielberg’s position regarding the wealth tax initiative.

If the measure passes, determining who qualifies as a California resident could be complex. The state’s Franchise Tax Board considers multiple factors when evaluating residency, including voter registration, time spent in California, driver’s license issuance, vehicle registration, the location of a spouse and children, and social ties such as religious institutions or country clubs.

It is not publicly known how Spielberg’s relocation would affect any potential exposure should the measure pass, but with a Forbes-estimated net worth of $7.1 billion, he could be expected to pay the Golden State approximately $355 million.

GET FOX BUSINESS ON THE GO BY CLICKING HERE

Spielberg, who was born in Ohio, lived in several states before moving to California and attending California State University, Long Beach, where he later left to take a contract with Universal Studios.

His most impactful films include titles like “Schindler’s List,” “Jaws,” “Jurassic Park,” the “Indiana Jones” franchise, “Saving Private Ryan” and “Catch Me If You Can,” among others.

READ MORE FROM FOX BUSINESS

Britain recorded its largest monthly budget surplus on record in January as rising tax receipts and a sharp fall in debt interest costs boosted the public finances.

Figures from the Office for National Statistics show government revenues exceeded spending by £30.4bn in January, the highest surplus since monthly records began in 1993 and well above City forecasts of £23.8bn.

January is typically a strong month for receipts because of self-assessment tax payments, but this year’s figure far surpassed the £14.5bn surplus recorded in January 2025.

The improvement was driven partly by a steep drop in debt interest payments, which fell to £1.5bn from £9.1bn in December. Lower borrowing costs have eased pressure on the Treasury’s balance sheet after last year’s market volatility.

Total government revenues rose nearly 14 per cent year-on-year to £133.3bn. Income tax receipts increased by £12bn, while national insurance contributions rose by £2.9bn following higher payroll levies introduced last spring.

Grant Fitzner, chief economist at the ONS, said January had delivered the strongest surplus since records began, with revenue gains offsetting higher spending on public services and benefits.

Across the first ten months of the financial year, borrowing totalled £112.1bn — 11.5 per cent lower than the same period a year earlier and below the £120.4bn forecast by the Office for Budget Responsibility at the November budget.

The improved position strengthens the Treasury’s hand ahead of the spring statement on 3 March, although analysts caution that fiscal headroom remains fragile.

Dennis Tatarkov, senior economist at KPMG UK, said weaker-than-expected growth in late 2025 may have eroded part of the government’s £22bn fiscal buffer, though falling interest rates have provided some offset.

The chancellor, Rachel Reeves, is not expected to announce fresh tax rises or spending cuts at the spring statement. Government U-turns on business rates for pubs and inheritance tax changes have narrowed some of the available headroom.

James Murray, chief secretary to the Treasury, said the government was ensuring taxpayers’ money was spent wisely and that borrowing this year was on track to be the lowest since before the pandemic.

While January’s surplus reflects seasonal factors, the combination of robust tax receipts and easing debt costs provides a temporary lift to the public finances at a critical point in the fiscal year.

Amy Ingham

Amy is a newly qualified journalist specialising in business journalism at Business Matters with responsibility for news content for what is now the UK’s largest print and online source of current business news.

Advertisement

Dimon famously didn’t sell any of his stock in the bank for most of the 20 years he’s been in charge of JPMorgan. But that changed at the end of 2023, when Dimon announced that he was selling 1 million shares in the bank, worth around $180 million. He also sold around $233 million of stock last February, too.

He still owns about 6.2 million shares in the bank, worth around $1.9 billion. The shares are held by family trusts, as well as by himself directly and his wife.

Depop has been sold to eBay for $1.2bn, marking a 25 per cent discount to the price paid five years ago by Etsy.

Etsy acquired the London-founded second-hand fashion platform for $1.6bn in 2021 at the height of pandemic-era ecommerce growth. The resale comes as Etsy refocuses on its core handmade and vintage marketplace.

Founded in 2011 by English-Italian entrepreneur Simon Beckerman, Depop built a strong following among younger consumers seeking sustainable and affordable fashion. The platform counted roughly seven million active buyers at the end of last year, nearly 90 per cent of whom were under 34.

For eBay, the deal represents an attempt to deepen its appeal with Gen Z shoppers and strengthen its position in the fast-growing resale segment. Fashion accounts for more than $10bn of eBay’s annual gross merchandise volumes, with second-hand clothing a key driver of growth.

Jamie Iannone, chief executive of eBay, said Depop would benefit from the group’s scale and operational capabilities. “We are confident that as part of eBay, Depop will be well positioned for long-term growth,” he said.

However, analysts suggest the acquisition is partly defensive. Aliyah Siddika of GlobalData described the transaction as “as much about defence as growth”, noting Depop faces intense competition from rivals such as Vinted.

Etsy shares rose nearly 10 per cent after the announcement, reflecting investor support for the decision to exit a business that has delivered lower profitability than its core operations. Major shareholders in Etsy include BlackRock, Goldman Sachs and activist investor Elliott.

Depop is expected to retain its brand and operate with a degree of autonomy under eBay’s ownership, subject to regulatory approval. The all-cash transaction is scheduled to close in the second quarter of 2026.

Peter Semple, Depop’s chief executive, said the deal marked a new chapter. “This transaction is a testament to the growth we have delivered and the strength of our brand and community,” he said.

The sale underscores the shifting valuations within ecommerce, as pandemic-era premiums give way to a more measured approach to growth and profitability.

Amy Ingham

Amy is a newly qualified journalist specialising in business journalism at Business Matters with responsibility for news content for what is now the UK’s largest print and online source of current business news.