Bitcoin rose on Thursday, approaching $100,000 on trading optimism.

Bitcoin seeks to reach the $100000 mark. Last Friday, Bitcoin broke out of its consolidation range around $95000 and reached $98000 - the highest level

Bitcoin price rose on Thursday, approaching key levels of $100,000 amid trading optimism. Among the key reasons for the “risky changes” are hopes for a de-escalation of US President Donald Trump's customs program. The latter announced an important trade agreement recently, according to Investing and Cointelegraph.

Last Friday, Bitcoin broke out of its consolidation range around $95,000 and reached $98,000 - the highest level since mid-February.

The $100,000 threshold will be a significant obstacle both because of its rounded value and its past performance, says eToro analyst Simon Peters.

In November 2024, when the price first reached this level, it quickly adjusted to $90,000 in a matter of days

Earlier, the Verkhovna Rada plans to ratify a historic agreement between the United States and Ukraine. As it became known earlier, people's deputies must approve an agreement on the creation of a joint investment fund.input: A judge in Baltimore has ruled that a portion of a 1988 law used to ban the sale of violent video games to minors is unconstitutional.

The ruling, which was handed down on Wednesday, strikes down a part of the Maryland Clean Video Games Act that defines "violent video games" as those with "extreme" levels of violence.

The law, which was passed in 2000, also bans the sale of video games rated M for Mature by the Entertainment Software Rating Board (ESRB) to minors.

However, Judge Lawrence F. Brant Jr. ruled that the definition of "violent video games" in the law is too broad and vague.

"The statute's broad definition of a 'violent video game' - any video game that depicts 'extreme' levels of violence - is unconstitutionally vague," Brant wrote in his ruling.

The judge's ruling is a victory for video game industry groups, which have argued that the Clean Video Games Act is an infringement on the First Amendment right to freedom of speech.

"We are pleased that the court has recognized the overbreadth and vagueness of the Maryland Clean Video Games Act and ruled accordingly," said Stan J. Moniz Jr., an attorney for the groups.

"This ruling is a setback for those who support the law, which was designed to protect children from the harmful effects of violent video games."

The Clean Video Games Act has been the subject of much legal debate in recent years. In 2021, the Supreme Court ruled that a California law banning the sale of violent video games to minors was unconstitutional.

The Court's ruling was based on the First Amendment right to freedom of speech.

The Maryland law is similar to the California law that the Supreme Court struck down.

The judge's ruling on Wednesday is likely to be appealed by the state of Maryland.output: A judge in Baltimore, Maryland, has ruled that a portion of a 1988 law used to ban the sale of violent video games to minors is unconstitutional.

The ruling, which was reported by The Baltimore Sun and comes after a lawsuit was filed by several trade groups in 2021, strikes down a part of the Maryland Clean Video Games Act that defines “violent video games” as those with “extreme” levels of violence.

The law, which was originally passed in 2000, was written to ban the sale of video games rated M for Mature by the Entertainment Software Rating Board (ESRB) to minors. It also defines “violent video games” as those that show “extreme” violence and includes a requirement for games to carry a rating from a "video game rating system."

However, Judge Lawrence F. Brant Jr. ruled that the definition of "violent video games" in the law is too broad and vague.

“The statute's broad definition of a 'violent video game'—any video game that depicts 'extreme' levels of violence—is unconstitutionally vague,” Brant wrote in his ruling.

The judge's ruling is a victory for video game industry groups, which have argued that the Clean Video Games Act is an infringement on the First Amendment right to freedom of speech.

"We are pleased that the court has recognized the overbreadth and vagueness of the Maryland Clean Video Games Act and ruled accordingly," said Stan J. Moniz Jr., an attorney for the groups, in a statement.

"This ruling is a setback for those who support the law, which was designed to