Tag: judges

YOU CAN’T MAKE THIS UP: 92-Year-Old Clinton Judge Who Denied Trump’s Hush-Money Removal to Federal Court and Blocked Venezuelan Gang Deportations Now Assigned to Preside Over Maduro Case in New York

In the latest episode of the Deep State circus that’s turned our justice system into a bad joke, a 92-year-old federal judge appointed by none other than Bill Clinton back in the ’90s has been assigned to oversee the high-profile case against Venezuelan socialist dictator Nicolás Maduro in New York.

This is the same judge who has a track record of rulings that seem tailor-made to thwart President Trump’s agenda and protect left-wing interests.

U.S. District Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein, who took senior status way back in 2011, but somehow keeps popping up in major cases.

He has issued several controversial rulings adverse to Donald Trump and his administration. These rulings have spanned Trump’s time as a private citizen, his first presidency, and his current second term.

Keep reading

Trump judges blast peers for letting California impose ‘state-sanctioned groupthink’ in medicine

The federal government’s refusal to register a supposedly offensive trademark for the Asian-American rock band The Slants prompted the Supreme Court to issue a sweeping precedent that protected First Amendment rights from the government-speech doctrine.

Now eight years later, that ruling is center stage again as the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals extended the doctrine that steamrolls individual speech under the banner of government speech to validate California medical training. And some dissenting judges nominated by President Donald Trump on that court are raising deep concerns.

A majority of the full appeals court, whose jurisdiction stretches from the Pacific to the Rockies, refused to rehear a challenge to California’s imposition of “implicit bias” training in continuing medical education, which doctors must receive to keep their licenses, leaving intact a three-judge panel’s ruling that deemed the private courses to be government speech.

The 9th Circuit has become less liberal with Trump’s 11 nominees but Democrat nominees still dominate the largest federal appeals court, which has 29 active judges. The rehearing denial doesn’t specify the vote count.

“A proper analysis—as prescribed by the Supreme Court, our own court’s prior cases, and our sister circuits—reveals that California’s prior CME regulations did not meaningfully express or shape messages through CME courses” before the Golden State made implicit-bias training a statutory requirement in 2019, the first dissent from refusal to rehear said.

Physicians in CME courses would also be “unlikely to perceive the instructor’s message as the government’s” and the Medical Board of California’s “regulations otherwise exert very little control over CME instructors’ messages,” Judge Lawrence VanDyke wrote.

He was joined by Judges Patrick Bumatay and Eric Tung, the latter only confirmed in November.

The Trump appointees blasted the “improperly anemic governmental speech analysis” by the panel, which relied on the “mere scope of California’s regulatory scheme” to conclude that “CME attendees perceive instructors as relaying the government’s views,” at odds with the “well-pleaded allegations” of the challengers.

Tung also wrote a dissent, joined by VanDyke and Bumatay, that scolded the panel for rebranding private instructors as government agents and sidestepping the scientific debate over the validity of implicit bias, which the California law asserts with no evidence is responsible for healthcare “outcome disparities” by race and sex.

Keep reading

Judge Who Helped Illegal Migrant Escape ICE Resigns

A Wisconsin judge who helped an illegal alien escape from U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officials announced she would be resigning from her position in response to “unprecedented federal legal proceedings” brought against her.

Matt Smith, the political director with WISN 12 News, shared a letter addressed to Wisconsin Gov. Tony Evers (D) from Milwaukee Circuit Judge Hannah Dugan on X. In her letter, Dugan expressed that the citizens of Wisconsin “deserve to start the year with a judge on the bench in Milwaukee County Branch 31.”

“As you know, I am the subject of unprecedented federal legal proceedings, which are far from concluded but which present immense and complex challenges that threaten the independence of our judiciary,” Dugan said. “I am pursuing this fight for myself and for our independent judiciary. However, the Wisconsin citizens that I cherish deserve to start the year with a judge on the bench in Milwaukee County Branch 31 rather than have the fate of that Court rest in a partisan fight in the state legislature.”

Dugan continued on to state that it was “with a heavy heart” that she was submitting “this letter of resignation.”

“My faith in God and in our legal system leads me to trust that in the long run justice will be served for our independent judiciary and for me,” Dugan added.

Keep reading

Judge Blocks White House’s Attempt To Defund Consumer Watchdog Agency

A federal judge ruled Tuesday that the White House cannot lapse its funding of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), a watchdog that has long drawn the ire of congressional Republicans.

In a ruling, U.S. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson wrote that the CFPB should continue to receive its funding from the Federal Reserve despite the central bank operating at a loss. The Trump administration has argued that the CFPB should be dissolved because how it gets its funds is invalid.

The CFPB has largely been inoperable since President Donald Trump was sworn into office nearly a year ago. Its employees are mostly forbidden from doing any work, and most of the bureau’s operations this year have been to unwind the work it did under President Joe Biden and even under Trump’s first term.

The head of the White House’s budget office, Russell Vought, is currently the acting head of the CFPB. The White House earlier this year issued a “reduction in force” for the CFPB, which would have furloughed or laid off much of the bureau.

In November, the Trump administration’s attorneys said in a court filing that a Department of Justice (DOJ) memo had concluded there were no legally available funds at the Federal Reserve for the CFPB to request.

The memo, which was issued by the DOJ’s Office of Legal Counsel, stated that “if the Federal Reserve has no profits, it cannot transfer money to the CFPB.”

“Because the only lawful source of funding from the Federal Reserve has dried up,” the memo added, “the proper method for obtaining additional funds is to request them from Congress pursuant to the Appropriations Clause, not to draw funds from the Federal Reserve without a congressional appropriation.”

The White House has also said that the CFPB cannot lawfully draw funds to fund its operations from the Fed if the Fed does not have “combined earnings” to allocate to the bureau. Without additional funds, the CFPB is expected to deplete its operating funds completely in January.

But in her order, Jackson wrote that the government “manufactured” arguments to allow for a lapse in funding for the CFPB.

Keep reading

Judge Orders Release of Secret Tyler Robinson Hearing in Charlie Kirk Assassination Case, Transparency Wins Over Defense Objections

A Utah judge has ruled that transcripts and audio from a previously sealed hearing in the high-profile assassination case of conservative icon Charlie Kirk will be made public, albeit with redactions.

Fourth District Court Judge Tony Graf announced during a Monday video hearing that a redacted transcript of an October 24 closed-door session will be released by the end of the following day, with audio potentially released within two weeks.

The decision comes amid intense scrutiny of the case against 22-year-old Tyler James Robinson, who is accused of fatally shooting Kirk, the 31-year-old founder of Turning Point USA, during a speaking event at Utah Valley University on September 10.

Kirk was struck by a single bullet to the neck while addressing thousands on campus as part of his “American Comeback Tour.” He leaves behind his wife, Erika Kirk, and two young children.

Robinson faces seven felony charges, including aggravated murder, a capital offense in Utah, where prosecutors are seeking the death penalty, potentially by firing squad.

The secret October hearing focused on whether Robinson could appear in future court proceedings in civilian clothing and without visible restraints.

Judge Graf ultimately ruled that Robinson could wear street clothes but must remain shackled for security reasons, citing the “extraordinarily serious” nature of the charges.

Defense attorney Staci Visser has vigorously fought against media access, arguing that cameras and public scrutiny could prejudice potential jurors and create an unfair trial.

During earlier proceedings, Visser complained about media capturing images of Robinson in shackles, stating, “We don’t want the chaos that is out in the media in this courtroom,” according to a report from the New York Post.

However, Kirk’s widow, Erika, has been a strong advocate for openness, pushing for cameras in the courtroom to allow the public to see Robinson and counter any emerging conspiracy theories surrounding her husband’s murder.

Media coalitions, including local and national outlets, have also demanded greater access, requesting limited redactions to sealed materials and the opportunity to challenge future closures.

Robinson has appeared mostly via video or audio from jail. His first in-person court appearance earlier this month showed him calm, even chuckling with his lawyers, while family members attended in support.

A preliminary hearing is scheduled for May 18, with ongoing debates over media coverage expected to continue into January.

Keep reading

Clinton Judge Blocks DOJ from Searching Comey Media Mole Daniel Richman’s Materials for Classified Information

A federal judge will not allow the Justice Department to search James Comey’s mole Daniel Richman’s data for classified information.

US District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly, a Clinton appointee, won’t let the feds search Richman’s personal computer hard drive for additional classified information without a search warrant.

Earlier this month, Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly ordered the DOJ to return all materials it seized from Comey’s media mole a week after she blocked federal prosecutors from accessing key evidence in the criminal case against James Comey.

Comey’s secret media mole, Daniel Richman, recently sought to block the Justice Department from accessing his files as the Trump Administration prepares to hit James Comey with a new indictment.

The feds seized materials from Daniel Richman several years ago, and he asked a judge to block the DOJ from accessing his files.

A grand jury in the Eastern District of Virginia indicted former FBI Director James Comey in September. He was indicted on two counts – false statements and obstruction of a congressional proceeding.

The charges are related to Comey’s testimony to Senate investigators in September 2020 about whether he authorized leaks to the media.

Newly released November 2016 emails reveal that James Comey was guiding his media mole, Daniel Richman, and authorized leaks to the media.

Comey’s case was thrown out after a separate Clinton judge dismissed the case based on the Appointments Clause.

Earlier this month, Judge Kollar-Kotelly ordered the DOJ to return all data it seized from Daniel Richman.

Over the weekend, Kollar-Kotelly blocked the DOJ from searching Richman’s materials.

“ORDERED that the Government shall not review Petitioner Richman’s materials for any additional classified material beyond the single classified memorandum from Mr. Comey that was originally contained in Petitioner Richman’s personal computer hard drive without first obtaining a valid search warrant,” Kollar-Kotelly wrote.

Judge Kollar-Kotelly also gave Attorney General Pam Bondi until January 5, 2026, to certify the transfer of Richman’s data.

Keep reading

Black Privilege: Canadian Judge Reduces Sex Offender’s Sentence Over Race

A former university football player who choked a woman until she was almost unconscious and forced another one to give him a blowjob was given a reduced sentence by a Canadian judge of just two years in prison because he’s black and was ‘feeling intense pressure’ at the time of the attacks.

“It should be noted that but, for the contents of the Impact of Race and Culture Assessment (IRCA), the pre-sentence report and all the mitigating factors surrounding Omogbolahan (Teddy) Jegede, this sentence would have been much higher,” Justice Frank Hoskins said in his Nova Scotia Supreme Court decision last Wednesday, the National Post reports. 

The author of an Impact of Race and Culture Assessment, a report funded under a new initiative from the Trudeau Liberals, wrote that Jegede was feeling intense pressure around the time of the assaults and did not have culturally appropriate support to turn to.

Of note, IRCAs are relatively new in Canadian law – and have become popular thanks to an initiative which began under the Justin Trudeau liberals. 

The attacks happened in 2022 and 2023 at residences at St. Francis Xavier University in Antigonish, N.S. – with one woman testifying that Jegede choked her, and the other testifying that she was forced to perform oral sex. Both women said they were physically dominated by Jegede, who is much larger than they are. 

In addition to his two-year jail sentence, Hoskins added three years of probation – which can be reduced if Jegede makes significant progress in counseling. 

The Crown had requested a sentence of up to 36 months, while Jegede’s defense asked the judge to reduce his sentence to community service. 

“In my view, this is a case where the need for denunciation is so pressing the incarceration is the only civil way in which to express society’s condemnation of Mr. Jegede’s conduct,” said Hoskins, noting that Jegede came from a strong, church-going family with strict parents that had stable careers. The now-convicted sex offender told the court that he grew up feeling loved by his family. 

He then began a degree in kinetics at St.FX, however those studies were interrupted by his sex crimes and subsequent charges. 

Jegede was born in Lagos, Nigeria and immigrated to Canada in 2010. His mother said that the transition to Canada was a significant adjustment for the family, and their youngest son “experienced bullying in elementary school due to his accent and racial identity as a black child.”

Keep reading

Indicted Democrat Judge Seeks Reelection as Texas Vote-Harvesting Case Expands

In Frio County, Texas, a suspended county judge facing multiple felony election-fraud charges has decided to seek reelection—not after exoneration, not after trial, but while under indictment and barred from office without pay. 

The decision is legally permissible, but the implications are far more troubling.

On Dec. 5, Rochelle Lozano Camacho filed paperwork to run again for Frio County judge. 

The filing came just days before the state’s Dec. 8 primary deadline and months before her next court appearance, scheduled for March 12, 2026—nine days after Texas primary voters cast their ballots.

Camacho is currently suspended from office by the State Commission on Judicial Conduct following her May 2025 arrest in one of the most expansive vote-harvesting prosecutions in recent Texas history. 

According to indictments returned by a Frio County grand jury, Camacho faces three felony counts of vote harvesting, stemming from a two-year investigation led by the office of Ken Paxton.

The suspension order is unambiguous. 

Camacho is barred from exercising judicial authority and is receiving no compensation until her criminal case is resolved, dismissed, or reconsidered by the commission. 

Yet under Texas election law, suspension does not prohibit a candidate from seeking reelection. Camacho has chosen to exploit that gap.

Keep reading

Federal Judge Blocks Texas App Store Digital ID Age Verification Law, Citing First Amendment Violations

A new Texas statute aimed at inserting the state into routine decisions about app downloads has been stopped at the courthouse door, at least for now.

A federal judge ruled days before the law’s scheduled launch that its design collides with the First Amendment and cannot be enforced while the case moves forward.

Robert Pitman of the Western District of Texas issued a preliminary injunction blocking Senate Bill 2420, the Texas App Store Accountability Act, which was set to take effect on January 1.

We obtained a copy of the order for you here.

The law would have required app stores to verify every user’s age (which would mean digital ID checks or biometric scans) and forced minors to obtain parental approval before downloading apps or buying in-app content.

In a detailed written ruling, Pitman concluded the statute is both constitutionally defective and structurally unworkable.

“The Act is akin to a law that would require every bookstore to verify the age of every customer at the door and, for minors, require parental consent before the child or teen could enter and again when they try to purchase a book,” he wrote.

He added that “when considered on the merits, SB 2420 violates the First Amendment.”

SB 2420 does not target a narrow category of online services. It applies to nearly every app store and app developer operating in Texas, bringing in news outlets, streaming platforms, educational tools, fitness apps, and digital libraries alongside social media and games.

Under the statute, developers must assign state-defined age ratings, explain the reasoning behind each rating, and report significant changes to content or features.

Keep reading

Judge Finally Allows Access to Fulton County 2020 Physical Ballots and Related Documents

It has been 1,071 days since the Georgia Supreme Court remanded the VoterGA.org lawsuit back to the lower courts after determining Garland Favorito’s voter integrity group did, in fact, have standing.  That lawsuit was asking the court to unseal the physical paper ballots and allow inspection.

Last year, the Georgia State Election Board also sought to unseal the physical paper ballots when it issued a subpoena to Fulton County demanding the ballots, ballot stubs, envelopes, and digital images.  Fulton County’s Board of Registration and Elections, without a vote from the board, filed a lawsuit challenging that subpoena.

Today, Judge Robert McBurney granted the State Election Board access to the physical ballots and related documents; however, the Board would be on the hook for the estimated $400,000 in “document costs,” as estimated by the county.

Fulton County has until January 7th to provide the State Election Board with the estimated costs.

Fox 5 Atlanta reported:

As 2025 draws to a close, there is no end in sight to the prolonged legal challenges surrounding Fulton County’s 2020 presidential election.

Last year, the Republican-led Georgia Election Board reopened an investigation into Fulton County’s handling of the 2020 election.

On Friday, they scored a court victory.

Fulton County Superior Court Judge Robert McBurney’s decision grants the election board access to Fulton County’s 2020 ballots and related documents.

Fulton County Chairman Rob Pitts seemed irritated with the decision, telling FOX 5, “This nonsense has to stop at some point.  I assured the public then, reassure the public today, those elections are open and fair and transparent, and every vote was counted.”

This decision from Judge McBurney comes as Fulton County admitted to the State Election Board that it was missing signatures from poll managers on poll tapes for more than 315,000 ballots.

Keep reading