Connect with us
[the_ad id="89560"]

Business

Disney settles wrongful termination lawsuit with conservative actress Gina Carano

Published

4 minute read

From LifeSiteNews

By Calvin Freiburger

Lucasfilm, owned by Disney, issued a statement opening the door to reviving the role Carano lost on ‘The Mandalorian’ for dissenting from woke orthodoxy.

Conservative actress Gina Carano and leftist entertainment giant Disney have settled the former’s wrongful termination lawsuit, with the latter issuing a statement opening the door to reviving the Star Wars role she lost for dissenting from woke orthodoxy.

In February 2021, the Disney-owned Lucasfilm terminated its association with Carano following online activists’ uproar over a social media post in which the former MMA fighter warned that “to get to the point where Nazi soldiers could easily round up thousands of Jews, the government first made their own neighbors hate them simply for being Jews. How is that any different from hating someone for their political views?”

In response, Lucasfilm issued a statement saying Carano, who co-starred as heroic mercenary Cara Dune in the popular Star Wars streaming series The Mandalorian and had been slated to helm her own spinoff, “is not currently employed by Lucasfilm and there are no plans for her to be in the future. Nevertheless, her social media posts denigrating people based on their cultural and religious identities are abhorrent and unacceptable.” No such denigration in her remarks had ever been identified, but The Hollywood Reporter quoted one source as saying Lucasfilm had “been looking for a reason to fire her for two months, and today was the final straw.”

The move sparked a backlash against Disney among conservatives, and with the exception of small projects such as a role in a streaming movie produced by conservative outlet The Daily Wire, Carano’s acting career languished.

In February 2024, Carano took tech mogul Elon Musk up on his public offer to finance lawsuits for those “canceled” over their free speech on Twitter/X, and filed a wrongful termination suit against the company, alleging Disney “bullied Ms. Carano, trying to force her to conform to their views about cultural and political issues, and when that bullying failed, they fired her.”

On Thursday, Variety reported that the parties have reached a settlement in the suit. While no details of the terms have been released, Lucasfilm issued a statement that “The Walt Disney Company and Lucasfilm are pleased to announce that we have reached an agreement with Gina Carano to resolve the issues in her pending lawsuit against the companies. Ms. Carano was always well respected by her directors, co-stars and staff, and she worked hard to perfect her craft while treating her colleagues with kindness and respect. With this lawsuit concluded, we look forward to identifying opportunities to work together with Ms. Carano in the near future.”

The statement falls short of an explicit retraction or apology, but hints at the possibility of bringing back Carano as Dune in some capacity. Moreover, Carano herself was pleased by the outcome, first posting “and the truth shall set you free,” then issuing a full statement of her own.

“I believe [this] is the best outcome for all parties involved. I hope this brings some healing to the force,” Carano said, before thanking Musk, her attorneys at Schaerr|Jaffe, her fans for their support, and God “for His love and grace in this outcome.”

“I am excited to flip the page and move onto the next chapter. My desires remain in the arts, which is where I hope you will join me,” she said. “Yes, I’m smiling.”

Banks

New executive order takes aim at debanking

Published on

From The Center Square

By 

Among the executive orders President Donald Trump signed Thursday was one instructing federal banking regulators to shed language from their guidance documents that the administration believes can lead to the debanking of people or institutions for political reasons.

“It is the policy of the United States that no American should be denied access to financial services because of their constitutionally or statutorily protected beliefs, affiliations, or political views, and to ensure that politicised or unlawful debanking is not used as a tool to inhibit such beliefs, affiliations, or political views,” the order reads.

Debanking individuals or institutions on the basis of political and personal views has become more visible in the U.S. since 2020, following similar reported trends in the U.K. and Europe where organizations like BankTrack and Bankwatch have monitored and reported on banks’ clients’ compliance with certain climate and human rights initiatives for decades.

Debanking occurs when a financial institution either closes or restricts an account or refuses to provide services to a potential client. Perhaps the most well-known, large-scale example occurred in 2022, when the Canadian government seized and froze the bank accounts of some participating in the Freedom Convoy, a convoy of thousands of truckers across Canada protesting the country’s vaccine mandates.

Financial institutions can and have also debanked clients independently of government involvement or direction. The order, however, focuses on federal reforms to prevent the government from encouraging or inciting debanking, as it claims it did in Operation Choke Point. The operation, which took place under the Obama administration, designated certain industries as high-risk for fraud and money laundering.

Republicans say the administration used it to target individuals, businesses and industries it opposed politically – like the gun industry – while Democrats say it was simply aimed at protecting consumers.

The Small Business Administration and other federal banking regulators are to “remove the use of reputation risk or equivalent concepts” from documents they use to “regulate or examine” financial institutions to avoid encouraging the debanking of clients for political or “unlawful” reasons.

The order also directs the SBA to ensure the reinstatement of clients’ accounts at financial institutions that debanked them for such reasons.

Thirty-two members of the State Financial Officers Foundation from 24 states signed onto a joint statement commending the executive order.

“President Trump’s executive action directly confronts this abuse of regulatory authority,” they said. “By reaffirming that banks must evaluate customers based on objective financial criteria, not political or religious views, his leadership marks a crucial step toward restoring viewpoint neutrality and putting an end to unlawful discrimination in our financial sector.”

Financial institutions can debank clients if those clients are found to be engaged in illegal activity.

Continue Reading

Business

Plan That Whole World Seemed To Hate Wasn’t Even Reviewed, EU Officials Now Admit

Published on

 

From the Daily Caller News Foundation

By Melissa O’Rourke

European Union (EU) officials are pushing forward with a major climate proposal, even though they apparently did not bother to study the policy’s costs or environmental impacts, according to Politico.

In July, the European Commission unveiled a sweeping plan to slash the EU’s carbon footprint by 90% by 2040, partly by allowing member states to use carbon credits earned by funding climate projects in developing countries to offset emissions. Despite the policy’s potentially massive economic and environmental ramifications, EU officials admitted they did not conduct an internal analysis of its impacts before proposing it, Politico reported.

The Commission admitted its climate department, DG CLIMA, held no documents analyzing the program’s cost or effectiveness when Politico requested internal assessments of the policy’s potential impacts.

Dear Readers:

As a nonprofit, we are dependent on the generosity of our readers.

Please consider making a small donation of any amount here.

Thank you!

The idea was spearheaded by Climate Commissioner Wopke Hoekstra, but climate department head Kurt Vandenberghe admitted in June that they were “not entirely prepared” for the move, Politico reported. Key details, including how much the credits will cost and whether taxpayers or companies will foot the bill, also remain unclear, according to the outlet.

U.S. officials have raised broader concerns about the EU’s climate agenda, warning that certain regulatory mandates could impact American businesses. Some have called on the Trump administration to examine the implications of the EU’s environmental policies as part of its trade negotiations.

Critics argue that carbon credit policies impose significant compliance costs on businesses, forcing them to participate in a system that many consider deeply flawed. Companies have spent millions on carbon offset projects that deliver little to no real emissions reductions, and in some cases, have exaggerated or outright fabricated their environmental impact.

“The cost of high-quality carbon credits that deliver sustainable and long-term mitigation outcomes can be very high,” the EU’s scientific advisory board on climate change warned about the carbon credits in June. “Purchasing such credits from abroad could therefore come at the expense of domestic investment opportunities.”

European Commission spokesperson Anna-Kaisa Itkon told the Daily Caller News Foundation that the Commission consulted various stakeholders on its carbon credit proposal and that an impact assessment would be conducted.

“Following extensive engagement on the part of the Commissioner with Member States, Members of the European Parliament and stakeholders since then, the Commission’s proposal to amend the European Climate Law includes provision to consider the possible inclusion of a limited amount of high-quality international credits in the design of the post-2030 policy framework,” Itkoen said.

Continue Reading

Trending

X