Tag: judges

GOP Rep. Andy Ogles to File Articles of Impeachment Against Obama Judge For Blocking Trump Admin From Ending Temporary Protected Status For Somalis

GOP Rep. Andy Ogles (TN) said he will file Articles of Impeachment against Judge Allison Burroughs on Monday for blocking the Trump Administration from ending

A federal judge on Friday once again blocked the Trump Administration from terminating Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for Somalis.

The termination was supposed to take effect on March 17, however, a federal judge previously halted the termination.

On Friday, US District Judge Allison Burroughs, an Obama appointee, issued a new administrative stay after the plaintiffs filed an amended complaint and an emergency motion.

There are more than 100,000 Somalis living in the US. An estimated 5,000 Somalis are eligible for Temporary Protected Status.

Judge Burroughs’ order came after the US Supreme Court ruled that the Trump Administration is allowed to end Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for hundreds of thousands of Haitians and Syrians.

The high court, in a 6-3 vote, ruled that the Temporary Protected Status is… temporary.

Keep reading

Kentucky Releases Child Killer AGAIN, Father of Slain Six-Year-Old Logan Tipton Says It May Be His Breaking Point

The father of a six-year-old Kentucky boy stabbed to death in his own bed is publicly breaking down after the man who did it was released from prison for the second time, this time with no supervision.

Dean Tipton took to Facebook on Wednesday and wrote that the killer of his son Logan being released again may be his breaking point.

Tipton wrote that the justice system handed his family a life sentence while giving the killer, Ronald Exantus, a slap on the wrist.

Exantus broke into the Tipton family’s Versailles home on December 7, 2015, stabbed Logan Tipton to death as he slept and also attacked Dean and Logan’s sisters. He did not know the family prior to the attack.

The deranged murderer walked free from the Kentucky State Reformatory last week after completing an adjusted sentence.

In 2018, a jury found Exantus not guilty by reason of insanity on the murder and first-degree burglary charges related to Logan’s death, citing his schizophrenia, while convicting him of being guilty but mentally ill on assault charges against the other family members.

Exantus received a 20-year sentence on those assault counts.

Keep reading

Obama Judge Blocks Trump Admin From Ending Temporary Protected Status for Somalis – DHS Responds

A federal judge on Friday once again blocked the Trump Administration from terminating Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for Somalis.

The termination was supposed to take effect on March 17, however, a federal judge previously halted the termination.

On Friday, US District Judge Allison Burroughs, an Obama appointee, issued a new administrative stay after the plaintiffs filed an amended complaint and an emergency motion.

There are more than 100,000 Somalis living in the US. An estimated 5,000 Somalis are eligible for Temporary Protected Status.

The Justice Department responded to the judge’s order.

“Judge Allison Burroughs just entered yet another order preventing the termination of Somalia TPS. There is no serious debate about what is going on in these cases—defiance, obstruction, and delay,” Homeland Security general counsel James Percival said.

Keep reading

D.C. Circuit Court Hands Trump Win In Battle Over Mail-In Voting Order

A federal appellate court handed President Trump a decisive win on Tuesday in an ongoing legal battle over his mail-in voting executive order.

In a unanimous ruling, a three-judge panel for the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals shot down Democrats’ lawfare against Trump’s March elections order. That directive, as summarized by the court, “directs the Department of Homeland Security, the United States Postal Service, and other agencies to begin developing new rules and procedures for mail voting in the upcoming midterm and future elections.”

The Democrat plaintiffs filed their lawsuit a day after the order was issued. They subsequently asked the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia a week later to issue a preliminary injunction blocking its enforcement.

The district court rejected that request.

In affirming the lower court’s ruling, the D.C. Circuit panel noted that “while Plaintiffs have identified a number of serious questions concerning the lawfulness of proposed actions if implemented on the threshold of the upcoming federal election, this case likely is unripe for review in its present posture.” In other words, the case is unreviewable at this time because the named agencies haven’t implemented their official rules as required by the president’s order.

“In particular, Plaintiffs’ request for preliminary relief ‘is premised on the threatened impact’ of the Executive Order after it is implemented and if in violation of federal law,” the court ruled. “In addition, the Executive Order, which is not self-executing, directs the agencies to act only to ‘the extent feasible and consistent with applicable law, including but not limited to the Privacy Act of 1974,’ and so requires compliance with the very legal limitations about which Plaintiffs are concerned.”

The appellate court said that plaintiffs may seek relief “[i]f the defendant agencies take steps to implement the Executive Order in a manner that violates federal law or the Constitution.” The panel was comprised of Judges Patricia Millett (Obama appointee), Robert Wilkins (Obama appointee), and Gregory Katsas (Trump appointee).

The ruling was handed down a day after the Trump administration filed an emergency application with the U.S. Supreme Court to pause a Massachusetts-based judge’s injunction against the mail-in voting order. Similar to the D.C. Circuit, the Justice Department argued that “the injunction is especially indefensible because the agencies are still deliberating over how (if at all) to implement the Order.”

Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, who oversees emergency applications from the 1st Circuit Court of Appeals, has given respondents until 4 p.m. ET on Aug. 3 to file a response to the government’s application.

Keep reading

OBAMA JUDGE PROTECTS PORTLAND’S BIASED POLICING: Rules Trump DOJ Acted in “Bad Faith” and with “Unclean Hands” for Demanding Records on Anti-Conservative Discrimination at ICE Protests

An Obama-appointed federal judge has handed Portland’s far-left political machine a major legal victory, denying the Trump Justice Department’s attempt to obtain police body-camera footage and internal records tied to allegations of anti-conservative viewpoint discrimination.

U.S. District Judge Michael H. Simon rejected the Justice Department’s motion to compel Portland officials to turn over evidence connected to protests outside the city’s Immigration and Customs Enforcement facility.

Simon accused the DOJ of acting in “bad faith and with unclean hands” and claimed the department’s request appeared intended to intimidate the Portland Police Bureau.

“The Court finds by clear and convincing evidence that the United States has brought this motion in bad faith and with unclean hands,” Simon wrote in his July 24 opinion. He added that the purported reasons for the nearly 30 document requests were “pretext.”

The extraordinary ruling effectively shields Portland officials from having to comply with the DOJ’s 29 demands for body-camera footage, police reports, complaints, internal communications, and other records—at least through this motion under Portland’s longstanding police-reform settlement.

The Gateway Pundit previously reported that Dhillon sent a scathing letter to Portland City Attorney Robert Taylor and Police Chief Bob Day following the controversial arrest of conservative journalist Nick Sortor.

Sortor was arrested outside Portland’s ICE facility in October 2025 after he said Antifa terrorists shoved him into a flower bed, damaged his camera, and threw punches at him.

Keep reading

Far-Left Activist First Circuit Judges Block Trump’s Historic Election Integrity Executive Order in 23 Blue States — Protecting Mail-In Ballot Chaos Ahead of 2026 Midterms

A Biden-appointed majority on the First Circuit Court of Appeals handed President Donald Trump a major setback Saturday, refusing to lift an injunction blocking key election-integrity provisions of his executive order in 23 states and the District of Columbia.

The three-judge panel denied emergency stay requests filed by the Trump administration and 12 Republican-led states, leaving in place a lower-court order that prevents the Department of Homeland Security from distributing federal citizenship lists and blocks the U.S. Postal Service from applying new mail-ballot requirements in the plaintiff states for elections held on or before November 3, 2026.

Judges Gustavo Gelpí and Julie Rikelman, both appointed to the First Circuit by Joe Biden, formed the majority.

Trump-appointed Judge Joshua Dunlap concurred in part and dissented in part, arguing that the states lacked standing to block DHS from merely providing citizenship information.

The ruling is not a final decision on the administration’s appeal. Instead, the 20-page court order denies the administration’s request to suspend the injunction while the appeal proceeds.

The administration could now seek emergency relief from the U.S. Supreme Court.

President Trump issued Executive Order 14399, titled “Ensuring Citizenship Verification and Integrity in Federal Elections,” on March 31 to enforce existing federal law that reserves federal elections exclusively for U.S. citizens and to bring basic accountability to the chaotic, fraud-prone mail-in ballot process.

Keep reading

Federal judge accused of defying Supreme Court with pro-TPS agenda

A federal judge is being accused of defying the U.S. Supreme Court with a pro-TPS agenda.

“Another rogue district judge just postponed the termination of TPS (Temporary Protected Status) for South Sudan,” DHS general counsel James Percival wrote on X, slamming the decision. “This is open defiance of the Supreme Court, plain and simple!”

The judge is temporarily blocking the Trump administration’s plans to end TPS protection for people from South Sudan.

That’s despite a Supreme Court ruling that significantly narrowed the circumstances when judges can do that.

U.S. District Judge Patti Saris has ordered an administrative stay in the case brought by African Communities Together. She ordered continued special protections for South Sudanese nationals while she considers whether plaintiffs may amend their lawsuit and seek renewed relief.

A Fox report said Hans von Spakovsky, a senior legal fellow at Advancing American Freedom, explained Saris lacks authority to issue any relief after the Supreme Court’s recent TPS ruling.

While the judge claimed she wanted the “status quo,” that’s what she has no right to have, he said.

“No jurisdiction (as ordered by the Supreme Court) means no jurisdiction and under the applicable law, the only proper course of judicial action is to dismiss the lawsuits, explaining that based on the law and the Supreme Court’s decision, she has no jurisdiction to entertain any claims in her courtroom,” he said.

The expert said the ruling from Mullin v. Doe at the high court “reaffirmed that federal law largely bars courts from reviewing or blocking the government’s decisions to end Temporary Protected Status,” the report said.

Keep reading

HUGE WIN FOR AMERICANS: Federal Judge Strikes Down Illinois Laws Giving Illegal Aliens In-State Tuition, Financial Aid, and Scholarships — Deals Major Blow to Pritzker’s Sanctuary-State Agenda

A federal judge just delivered a crushing blow to Illinois Governor JB Pritzker and the state’s radical open-borders agenda.

U.S. District Judge David W. Dugan ruled Friday that multiple Illinois laws granting illegal aliens preferential access to in-state tuition, financial aid, and scholarship programs violate federal law and the Supremacy Clause of the United States Constitution.

The ruling marks a major victory for President Trump’s Justice Department, Illinois taxpayers, and American students forced to compete for limited educational resources while Springfield Democrats rolled out the red carpet for people living in the country illegally.

In his 27-page memorandum and order, Judge Dugan denied Illinois’ motion to dismiss the case and granted the federal government’s cross-motion for summary judgment in part.

The court declared the following provisions unconstitutional and invalid as applied to aliens who are not lawfully present in the United States:

  • Current in-state tuition provisions covering Illinois public universities
  • The Acevedo Act provision governing public community colleges
  • The Retention of Illinois Students and Equity Act, or RISE Act, including its 2025 amendments
  • The Illinois DREAM Act and its scholarship program

The judge permanently barred Illinois, Pritzker, Attorney General Kwame Raoul, state education agencies, and the named university and community-college boards from enforcing the challenged provisions for illegal aliens.

“Put simply, U.S. citizens or nationals must be treated no worse than illegal aliens,” Judge Dugan wrote.

Keep reading

Meet the Woke Judge Who Sentenced Minnesota Mother Shiloh Hendrix for Speech ‘Crimes’ and Learn About Her Sordid Judicial History

The far-left judge at the center of the alarming verdict in the Shiloh Hendrix case is going viral, and much has come about her judicial past. And it is not pretty.

As The Gateway Pundit’s Cassandra MacDonald reported, a Minnesota jury on Thursday night delivered a split verdict in the disorderly conduct trial of Shiloh Hendrix.

The jury found the 37-year-old mother not guilty on the count related to her words directed at the eight-year-old Somali boy who was stealing from her, but guilty on the count stemming from her comments to the man who filmed and confronted her at a Rochester playground.

Last April, Hendrix was at the park with her toddler when the boy reached into her diaper bag and took an applesauce pouch. She confronted the child and allegedly used the N-word.

A Somali man named Sharmake Beyle Omar, who was not the child’s father, began recording the scene, became extremely confrontational with Hendrix as she was holding her toddler, and continued filming as he demanded and provoked her to repeat the slur.

Following the verdict, Judge Christa M. Daily sentenced Hendrix to a $1,000 fine, 200 hours of community service, supervised probation, and a stayed 90-day jail term.

While racism is horrible and no one should condone racial slurs, punishing someone for uncouth speech is precisely what our Founders fought against. Yet, Hendrix will pay a legal price unless the sentence is overturned.

This outrageous travesty of justice becomes even more glaring when one learns of Judge Daily’s past cases.

Back in January 2023, Daily sentenced a pervert named Thomas Lee Meyer to NO JAIL TIME even though he was convicted of four felony charges of possessing pornographic work.

The victims were reportedly 6 to 8 years old.

Back in August 2024, a 22-year-old Mississippi man named Trashun Haywood was convicted of first and second-degree assault and sentenced to 5 years in prison.

Haywood had repeatedly stabbed a 26-year-old Rochester man with a pocket knife after the two men got into an argument at an apartment complex in northwest Rochester on Christmas Eve of 2021.

The victim suffered stab wounds to his neck, abdomen, and arm. The injuries were so severe that medical personnel at the St. Mary’s Hospital Emergency Department had to perform “life-saving measures.”

But Daily decided to waive 4-1/2 years of the sentence. She said she did so because Haywood eventually admitted to the stabbing and expressed remorse.

Keep reading

Far-Left Activist First Circuit Judges Block Trump’s Historic Election Integrity Executive Order in 23 Blue States — Protecting Mail-In Ballot Chaos Ahead of 2026 Midterms

A Biden-appointed majority on the First Circuit Court of Appeals handed President Donald Trump a major setback Saturday, refusing to lift an injunction blocking key election-integrity provisions of his executive order in 23 states and the District of Columbia.

The three-judge panel denied emergency stay requests filed by the Trump administration and 12 Republican-led states, leaving in place a lower-court order that prevents the Department of Homeland Security from distributing federal citizenship lists and blocks the U.S. Postal Service from applying new mail-ballot requirements in the plaintiff states for elections held on or before November 3, 2026.

Judges Gustavo Gelpí and Julie Rikelman, both appointed to the First Circuit by Joe Biden, formed the majority.

Trump-appointed Judge Joshua Dunlap concurred in part and dissented in part, arguing that the states lacked standing to block DHS from merely providing citizenship information.

The ruling is not a final decision on the administration’s appeal. Instead, the 20-page court order denies the administration’s request to suspend the injunction while the appeal proceeds.

The administration could now seek emergency relief from the U.S. Supreme Court.

President Trump issued Executive Order 14399, titled “Ensuring Citizenship Verification and Integrity in Federal Elections,” on March 31 to enforce existing federal law that reserves federal elections exclusively for U.S. citizens and to bring basic accountability to the chaotic, fraud-prone mail-in ballot process.

Keep reading