President Donald Trump spoke Thursday, March 20, 2025, to a crypto industry conference. (Photo illustration by Namthip Muanthongthae / Getty Images)
President Donald Trump signaled his continued support for cryptocurrency, saying at an industry conference Thursday morning he wanted to see the United States lead the world in digital asset technology.
In a brief recorded video broadcast to the Digital Assets Summit in New York, Trump, who launched his own meme coin in January that held an overall market value of $2.3 billion Thursday, noted some steps his administration has taken to encourage crypto. He positioned himself as a leading advocate for the technology but was vague about future policy proposals.
“It’s an honor to speak with you about how the United States is going to dominate crypto and the next generation of financial technologies,” he said. “And it’s not going to be easy, but we’re way ahead.”
Trump noted he held the first ever White House digital assets summit this month, appointed a White House artificial intelligence and crypto czar and created a Strategic Bitcoin Reserve and Digital Asset Stockpile.
The reserves would allow the government to retain the value of digital currencies, he said, adding that was impossible under his predecessor, Joe Biden.
Reversing policy
Trump said his administration would seek to loosen regulations, in a reversal from Biden policy.
“We’re ending the last administration’s regulatory war on crypto and bitcoin,” he said. “Frankly, it was a disgrace. But as of Jan. 20, 2025, all of that is over.”
He also said he’d asked Congress to create “simple, commonsense rules for stable coins and market structure.”
Despite looser regulations, the framework would lead to “greater privacy, safety, security and wealth for American consumers and businesses alike,” he said, calling the decentralized finance system “one of the most exciting technological revolutions in modern history.”
Trump’s ties to industry
The decentralized nature of cryptocurrency allows anyone to launch a currency, which has led to a series of so-called meme coins fronted by celebrities or tied to internet trends that form a particularly volatile segment of the crypto market.
Trump has a vested interest in the success of the crypto market, with a reported 80% stake in his own token.
Trump’s coin peaked at a value of $14.5 billion the day before his inauguration but has since lost nearly 85% of its value. The financial news service Reuters reported last month that firms generated nearly $100 million in trading fees associated with the Trump coin, even as its market value plummeted.
The seven members of the Wisconsin Supreme Court hear oral arguments. (Henry Redman | Wisconsin Examiner)
I’ve studied the rulings of the Wisconsin Supreme Court for well over a decade, and for most of that time, the court tended to put corporations and employers over workers or consumers. That has changed in the last couple of years. And now that voters have elected a pro-worker majority, billionaires like Elon Musk are spending big to return a pro-corporate majority to power.
In a 2023 report that I authored for People’s Parity Project Action, we found that the state Supreme Court had ruled for corporations or employers in most of the cases where individuals were on the other side. The report commented on the stakes of that year’s election: “Instead of the reactionary justices who’ve put corporations over workers, [Wisconsinites] could have a majority that gives everyone a fair shot.”
In the weeks after our report was released, around the time of the spring 2023 election, the high court ruled for workers or consumers in several cases. Later that year, Judge Janet Protaseiwicz was sworn in, forming a progressive, pro-democracy majority.
Around a year ago, this new majority ruled along ideological lines in a case that impacted workers across the state. The appeal involved unemployment insurance for Catholic Charities and some affiliated charities that help the poor and people with disabilities find jobs. The nonprofit employers tried to argue that they were exempt from the unemployment insurance system under the “ministerial” exception, which applies to employers that are both controlled by a religious organization and “operated primarily for religious purposes.”
The court ruled 4–3 that the organizations aren’t “operated primarily for religious purposes.” The justices examined the activities of the groups (job training, help with daily living activities, etc.) and concluded that they aren’t religious. As the court notes, the smaller charities weren’t even receiving funding from Catholic Charities and were primarily funded through government contracts.
The majority emphasized that the unemployment statute has always been interpreted broadly to cover as many workers as possible, ever since the state became the first to set up such a system in 1932. The statute says that unemployment compensation addresses an “urgent public problem” by sharing the burdens of unemployment.
This ruling meant that dozens of Catholic Charities workers and all of its sub-organizations’ employees — the people who help people in need find jobs — can get unemployment benefits if they lose their jobs through no fault of their own. The Freedom from Religion Foundation noted that a ruling in favor of Catholic Charities would have jeopardized unemployment insurance for thousands of workers at “religiously-affiliated hospitals and colleges.”
Justice Rebecca Bradley, whose dissent was partially joined by the other conservatives, began with a Bible verse and an invocation of “Jesus Christ himself.” She argued for deferring to an employer’s stated motivations to determine if its workers are ministerial.
Bradley also argued that the majority’s ruling violates the First Amendment right to the free exercise of religion. The case is now headed to the U.S. Supreme Court, which has expanded the First Amendment rights of religious employers at the expense of their workers. Though this case implicates the First Amendment, most cases involving workers only involve state law. This means that the Wisconsin Supreme Court gets the final say.
Right now, billionaires and corporations are spending big to end the pro-worker majority and put the state Supreme Court’s power back in the hands of right-wing justices who will rule in their favor. With Musk-aligned groups pouring in at least $12 million, spending in the race is on track to break the record for spending in a U.S. judicial election — a record set in 2023 in Wisconsin, the election that changed control of the court.
The pro-corporate majority that presided over the state for a decade-and-a-half first came to power in 2008. In that year’s election, corporate interests deliberately targeted a justice who had ruled against the manufacturers of dangerous lead paint. This majority was mired in conflicts of interest and bitter interpersonal conflicts. In 2010, they adopted an ethics rule that was literally written by a corporate-funded group that backed the conservative justices. A few years later, they shut down a campaign finance investigation into big business groups that had spent millions to get them elected.
For billionaires and corporations, the stakes are clear in this year’s high court election. Wisconsin judges are ruling on cases affecting voters, workers, and people facing criminal charges.
In one case, Musk’s Tesla car company is currently appealing a judge’s decision to deny it an exemption to a state law that prohibits car companies from owning car dealerships. Musk’s company wants to open four dealerships throughout the state — at a time when those dealerships are facing hundreds of protests in states around the country. If a Tesla customer sues the company, Musk would probably prefer that a pro-corporate judge hear the case.
With the court’s current majority in power, workers and consumers actually have a shot at justice. The justices have made progress in protecting democracy. They finally struck down gerrymandered election districts and overturned a prior ruling that barred the use of ballot drop boxes.
Musk and his wealthy friends want to take all of that away. But in Wisconsin, the voters decide who sits on their state’s highest court.
Ohio’s school districts are facing an uphill battle to meet state student transportation requirements amid a persistent school bus driver shortage, resulting in financial penalties and a high-profile lawsuit filed by the state attorney general.
The lawsuit and related fines levied against school districts for noncompliance with state regulations detail how the struggles in providing timely and reliable bus services for both public and non-public school students.
The compliance issues are in the spotlight after Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost filed a lawsuit against Columbus City Schools in September, accusing the district of failing to fulfill its statutory transportation obligations. This lawsuit has added to the urgency for Ohio’s school districts, which are already contending with a shortage of qualified school bus drivers, to find solutions that will ensure the safety and punctuality of school transportation across the state.
Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost
Attorney General Yost’s lawsuit claims that Columbus City Schools failed to provide transportation for students attending charter and private schools, a legal requirement under Ohio law. According to the lawsuit, Columbus City Schools labeled the transportation of these students as “impractical” and did not notify parents until days before the school year began, which left families scrambling to find alternate transportation.
“As a parent and grandparent, I understand the importance of making sure every child has a safe way to get to and from school,” Yost said at the time. “These families have a right to choose what school is best for their child, and the law is clear that transportation is to be provided.”
The lawsuit seeks a writ of mandamus compelling Columbus City Schools to resume transportation services for affected students immediately and to properly notify parents of their rights. The Attorney General’s office also issued a cease-and-desist letter to the district on Sept. 3, suggesting that the district’s failure to comply is suspected of being a deliberate attempt to circumvent legal obligations.
Last month, Columbus City Schools extended transportation service to about 100 students who were previously denied service and filed a motion to dismiss the lawsuit. Yost in a statement said he is not convinced and remains undeterred.
“It remains to be seen whether the district will live up to its press release and really transport these children,” he said. “The state already has received some information suggesting that it is not. … Simply put, this case is far from over.”
Fines and Compliance Challenges Across Ohio
According to data from the Ohio Department of Education, Columbus City Schools is not the only district facing compliance challenges. The department has collected substantial fines from several districts over the past couple of years due to delays in meeting transportation standards, which the school districts claimed were the result of school bus driver shortages.
In fiscal year 2024 alone, over $7.3 million in penalties were imposed on Columbus City Schools for failing to meet timing and operational requirements under Ohio Revised Code 3327.021. Youngstown School District was fined $1.91 million, while the state will collect nearly $250,000 from Middleton City Schools. The total of $9.5 million was 472 percent more than the state collected for fiscal year 2023 ($1.66 million) and 70 percent more than for fiscal year 2022 ($5.6 million).
An Ohio Department of Education spokesperson confirmed that refunds received by Columbus City Schools, Dayton City Schools and Toledo Public Schools were were the result of litigation settlement agreements.
So far for fiscal year 2025, the data indicates a $2.2 million fine to Columbus City Schools.
Under Ohio law, school districts are considered “out of compliance” if students arrive at school more than 30 minutes late or are picked up more than 30 minutes after dismissal for five consecutive days or 10 total days within a school year. Additionally, if a school bus fails to arrive at all, the district may also face penalties. These regulations are intended to ensure the reliability of transportation for all students, including those attending charter and private schools.
An accounting of fines levied against Ohio school districts over the past three fiscal years for noncompliance with school bus timing regulations. Source: Ohio Department of Education
Todd Silverthorn, the second vice president of the Ohio Association for Pupil Transportation and director of transportation for Kettering Local City Schools, provided additional context on the challenges facing Ohio school districts. He explained that the Ohio Department of Education and Workforce is conducting a timing study to assess district compliance with Ohio Administrative Code 3301-83-05. This study evaluates whether routes are practical and efficient based on the most direct path between public and non-public schools.
Silverthorn emphasized the complexities of the timing study, as fluctuating student enrollment and significant bus driver shortages complicate compliance efforts. He noted that while state regulations are meant to uphold standards, the severe staffing shortfall has left school districts like Columbus City scrambling to cover essential routes, often falling short of the required timing standards.
“While state lawmakers may argue that there is adequate funding for transportation, the core issue is not funding but staffing,” Silverthorn said. “Districts are facing increasing difficulty in attracting and retaining qualified bus drivers. This isn’t about budget limitations but about the challenges inherent in the role [of driving] itself.”
The Impact of Ohio’s Decreased School Bus Driver Staffing Level
The statewide bus driver shortage has intensified the transportation crisis. Before the pandemic, Ohio employed 25,706 active bus drivers. By August, that number had dropped to 18,817. This shortfall is affecting the 612 public school districts and over 1,000 chartered non-public schools statewide, many of which depend on reliable transportation services.
The role of an Ohio school bus driver requires a Class B commercial driver’s license, criminal background checks, drug and alcohol screenings, and the responsibility of managing student safety and behavior. The part-time hours and split shifts many school bus drivers receive combined with a high level of responsibility have deterred many potential applicants, creating a pipeline problem that exacerbates the staffing crisis.
As a result, school districts face challenges in meeting the compliance standards set forth by Ohio law, especially when drivers resign or retire. Schools have reported delays, cancellations and logistical obstacles that disrupt the school day and create stress for families.
In response to these challenges, school districts have implemented various strategies to optimize transportation resources. Some districts have consolidated school bus routes, modified school start times, and offered incentives such as signing bonuses and wage increases to attract and retain bus drivers. However, these adjustments are only temporary solutions to a deep-rooted problem.
“The reality is that we need a multi-faceted approach. This means not only increasing recruitment efforts but also rethinking the job to make it more appealing,” Silverthorn said.
If or until that happens, school districts like Columbus City Schools will continue to face pressure from state to provide transportation services on time and consistently.
“It shouldn’t take a lawsuit and an emergency motion to decide to follow the law. Columbus City Schools admitted the law was to transport the children. Glad these kids are finally getting the transportation they were entitled to,” Yost added last month. “But this is not the end. There are more kids who still are not receiving transportation despite the district’s clear obligation to provide it.”
Login
