Tag: judges

Radical Woke Bexar County Judge – The County’s First Openly LGBT Activist on the Bench – Resigns in Disgrace and Accepts LIFETIME BAN from Judiciary

Bexar County Court-at-Law No. 13 Judge Rosie Speedlin-Gonzalez, the self-proclaimed “first openly LGBT judge” in the county, has been forced to resign in disgrace and accept a permanent, lifetime disqualification from ever holding judicial office in the State of Texas again.

According to the Texas State Commission on Judicial Conduct, Speedlin-Gonzalez signed off on the deal on April 20, 2026, quietly slinking off the bench effective immediately.

In exchange, prosecutors dropped felony unlawful restraint and misdemeanor official oppression charges against her.

The scandal stems from a December 2024 courtroom meltdown during a domestic violence probation revocation hearing. Defense attorney Elizabeth Russell dared to try changing her client’s plea mid-hearing.

Speedlin-Gonzalez flew into a rage, accused the attorney of “coaching” her client, and ordered bailiffs to slap handcuffs on Russell right there in open court.

The attorney was then marched into the jury box and detained like a common criminal, all because she had the audacity to advocate for her client in front of this power-drunk judge.

The downfall was politically humiliating as well. Speedlin-Gonzalez had already lost her Democrat primary reelection bid earlier this year.

Keep reading

Utah Supreme Court Justice Who Had Romantic Relationship with Leftist Redistricting Lawyer Involved in Helping Democrats Steal Congressional Seat Resigns

The Utah Supreme Court Justice who had a romantic relationship with a leftist lawyer involved in helping the Democrats steal a congressional seat has resigned.

In November, the Utah Third District Court struck down the congressional map crafted by the Republican-led state legislature, labeling it an unconstitutional “gerrymander” and replacing it with a map drawn by left-wing plaintiffs.

The Democrats gained a seat in bright red Utah.

The Utah Supreme Court did not block the new congressional map that gave Democrats a seat.

Last month, it was revealed that Utah Supreme Court Justice Diana Hagen had an inappropriate relationship with a man named David Reymann, a leftist redistricting attorney who helped the Democrats take a congressional seat amid the gerrymandering wars.

Utah Governor Spencer Cox and other state officials launched an investigation into Hagen’s relationship with Reymann.

KSL reported last month:

Utah’s governor, Senate president and House speaker are launching an investigation into Supreme Court Justice Diana Hagen and allegations that she had a relationship with an attorney arguing cases before the high court.

Those allegations are detailed in a complaint submitted late last year to both Chief Justice Matthew Durrant and the Judicial Conduct Commission.

The complaint, which was obtained exclusively by KSL through a public records request, came from a Provo-based attorney who said Hagen’s ex-husband told him the justice had exchanged “inappropriate” text messages with David Reymann, one of the attorneys involved in a case about redistricting, which led to Utah getting a new congressional map.

Hagen strongly denies allegations of an inappropriate relationship of any kind. Reymann also called the allegations “false.” He does outside legal work for KSL and as an attorney for the Utah Media Coalition, of which KSL is a member.

On Friday, Governor Cox announced that he received a resignation letter from Diana Hagen.

Keep reading

Judge Rules Trump DOJ Can Retain 2020 Georgia Ballots Seized by FBI

A federal judge has ruled that the Department of Justice can keep possession of the 2020 election ballots seized earlier this year from Fulton County, Georgia, as part of an ongoing federal investigation into alleged irregularities surrounding that election.

This decision comes despite concerns raised about flaws in the process the FBI used to obtain its search warrant, as reported by Breitbart.

U.S. District Judge J.P. Boulee, who was appointed by President Donald Trump, issued a 68-page opinion explaining his decision.

He acknowledged that the FBI’s affidavit authorizing the search was not without “shortcomings,” but he stopped short of accusing the agency of acting in “callous disregard” of the county’s rights—a legal threshold that could have compelled him to return the original ballots.

“While the Affidavit was certainly far from perfect, this is not a situation where an officer left out all the facts that might undermine probable cause or where an officer intentionally lied,” Boulee wrote.

In other words, the judge found procedural errors but not enough evidence of misconduct or bad faith to nullify the FBI’s actions.

The ruling represents a notable moment in the ongoing push by federal authorities to investigate what they describe as “electoral improprieties” in the 2020 race.

Keep reading

Another Activist Judge Issues Laughable Ruling About DOGE Grant Terminations

We’re getting tired of activist judges undermining the Trump administration and its work to control wasteful spending, end fraud, and right America’s fiscal ship. Countless judges have ruled against the Trump administration not because the administration is wrong, but because they don’t like the President and his policy choices, and another judge did that with a ruling against Elon Musk’s DOGE.

Here’s more:

Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency “blatantly used” race, gender and other protected characteristics to execute the largest mass termination of federal grants in the history of the National Endowment for the Humanities, a federal judge ruled on Thursday. 

U.S. District Judge Colleen McMahon declared the terminations unlawful, concluded that the DOGE staffers lacked the authority to make those decisions, and blocked the Trump administration from carrying out the grant terminations. 

“There can be no serious dispute that the review process implemented by DOGE did not conform to, or even resemble, NEH’s ordinary grant-review process,” Judge McMahon wrote.

So, awarding grants on the basis of certain characteristics is good. But ending discriminatory grants is bad. Got it.

Keep reading

Federal Court Strikes Down Trump’s 10 Percent Global Tariffs

A U.S. trade court has ruled against President Donald Trump’s 10 percent global tariffs.

The U.S. Court of International Trade ruled 2-1 that a 1970s law doesn’t allow the president to enact sweeping tariffs worldwide.

The State of Oregon, a spice company called Burlap and Barrel, and a toy company named “Basic Fun Inc.” challenged the tariffs.

Article 1, Section eight of the U.S. Constitution gives Congress the power to levy duties, collect taxes, and more.

Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974 gives some of that power to the president. It allows the president to impose temporary surcharges up to 15 percent.

On Feb. 20, Trump announced a 10 percent tariff on imports effective on Feb. 24 through July 24. 

Trump justified the tariffs because the U.S. runs a trade deficit with many other countries.

The plaintiffs claimed that the president doesn’t have the authority to invoke those tariffs “because large and serious balance-of-payments deficits cannot occur in a floating exchange rate monetary system,” according to the 88-page ruling.

The plaintiffs suffered economic harm, price erosion, a loss of goodwill, damaged reputation, and more, the court ruled.

“Finally, considering the balance of hardships, a remedy in equity is warranted, and the public interest would be served by a permanent injunction,” the ruling said.

The U.S. Supreme Court has also ruled against Trump’s tariffs. That ruling ordered the U.S. to refund tariffs, which is expected to cost about $166 billion.  

Keep reading

California Immigration Judge Sues Trump DOJ; Claims She Was Fired for Being a Registered Democrat Woman Over 40

A California immigration judge has filed a federal lawsuit against the Department of Justice, alleging she was terminated because she is a registered Democrat, a woman over 40, fluent in Spanish, and had ties to immigrant-rights groups.

Kyra Lilien had been in the San Francisco Immigration Court since 2023, before transferring to the Concord Immigration Court in 2024.

Last July, Lilien was notified that her two-year probationary period would not be converted to a permanent appointment.

The 14-page lawsuit, filed this week, names the DOJ and Acting U.S. Attorney General Todd Blanche as defendants.

Lilien claims she met or exceeded all performance standards and received the highest possible ratings in her probationary reports for fiscal years 2024 and 2025.

According to TRAC Immigration data, she denied just 34% of asylum claims brought before her.

Despite this, she alleges her removal violated her civil and First Amendment rights.

Lilien’s attorney, Kevin Owen of Gilbert Employment Law in Maryland, told local station KTVU that Lilien “didn’t fit their mold” and that the actions taken against her were “impermissible and unlawful.”

“She didn’t fit their mold,” Owen said. “And what they did to her was impermissible and unlawful.”

The suit claims that immigration judges who were terminated or not retained around the same time were overwhelmingly female and points to internal memos issued by then-acting EOIR Director Sirce Owen in early 2025.

Those memos criticized “extremist leftist organizations” involved in illegal alien advocacy and Biden-era hiring practices that promoted illegal immigration and DEI hires.

Lilien, KTVU reports, “used to be program director for Jewish Family and Community Services, which largely helps Afghan refugees settle in the United States, and was the immigration program director for Centro Legal de la Raza in Oakland.”

The complaint also names nearly 30 other immigration judges from across the country who were similarly fired or not converted from probationary status, including 14 from the Concord and San Francisco courts.

Keep reading

Biden-Appointed Federal Judge Tosses Lawsuit That Would Have Forced Hunter Biden to Register as Foreign Agent Over Burisma and China Deals

A Biden-appointed federal judge has dismissed a lawsuit that sought to compel Hunter Biden to register as a foreign agent under the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) for his work with Ukrainian energy giant Burisma and a Chinese Communist Party-linked energy fund.

U.S. District Judge Jia M. Cobb issued the ruling Tuesday in Washington, D.C., shutting down the case brought by the America First Legal Foundation, the conservative legal group founded by former Trump advisor Stephen Miller.

The lawsuit, filed in 2023, argued that Hunter Biden’s business dealings, including his board seat at Burisma Holdings and payments from the China Energy Fund Committee, required him to register as a foreign agent with the Department of Justice.

In a press release at the time of filing, America First Legal Vice President and General Counsel Gene Hamilton wrote:

“As a result of AFL’s dedicated investigation and litigation against the National Archives, it is now crystal clear that Hunter Biden should have registered as a foreign agent while his father served as Vice President. This is just another example of influence peddling and politicians and their families exploiting their positions of power for personal gain and wealth. It is crucial that the DOJ examine this new evidence and take appropriate action based on what appears to be a clear violation of FARA. We’ve only just scratched the surface of the Biden family’s influence peddling and corruption and will continue to conduct rigorous oversight to ensure no one is above the law – not even the President’s son.”

Keep reading

More Bad News From Virginia That Gives Another Major Blow Against The 2nd Amendment And Against Pardoned J6er.

The U.S. Fourth Circuit has Upheld Hatchet Speed’s Ridiculous Conviction for Possessing Three Firearm Silencers (which were actually Solvent Drip Containers).

The case originated with a search over January 6, so Speed should be pardoned anyway! But Speed’s case has been forgotten.

Hatchet Speed of Virginia holds several records among J6ers. He is the only J6er who was subjected to THREE (3) trials and the only remaining J6er whose J6 pardon has never been applied to his clearly related case outside Washington, D.C.

Now the U.S. Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals (which covers federal courts in Maryland, North Carolina, South Carolina, Virginia, and West Virginia) has issued a disgraceful ruling against Speed, the Second Amendment, and common sense. The 4th Circuit has upheld Speed’s “silencer” conviction and ruled that the Second Amendment does not apply to silencer possession.

Speed’s case has profound impacts on the status of the Second Amendment and firearm regulation nationwide.

Prior to Speed’s case, Americans have been able to purchase gun-cleaning solvent containers which can be threaded onto the barrels of firearms to catch and filter gun-cleaning fluids. Several manufacturers make variations that resemble firearm silencers in appearance. A purchaser could, with enough tools and ingenuity, drill and convert such containers into firearm silencers. The BATFE under the Biden Administration issued an “open letter” proclaiming a new interpretation that many solvent traps qualify as “firearm silencers” in November 2023. This means that every similar device must be registered, or its possessor faces up to five years in federal prison.

Despite Hatchet Speed’s case, these solvent traps are still sold over the counter at gun stores and online. Untold thousands of them are certainly in people’s drawers and on people’s shelves today. Little do the owners know that they can now be imprisoned for up to five years under the Fourth Circuit’s new ruling.

Keep reading

Judge Agrees to Cancel Comey’s Court Appearance in Trump Assassination Post Case

A federal judge on Thursday agreed to cancel James Comey’s scheduled court appearance on May 11 on criminal charges related to his Trump assassination Instagram post.

Comey asked the North Carolina judge to cancel the court appearance since he already appeared in an Alexandria court.

The Justice Department backed Comey’s request.

US District Judge Louise Flanagan, a George W. Bush appointee agreed to cancel Comey’s appearance.

The Hill reported:

A federal judge in North Carolina conditionally agreed to cancel former FBI Director James Comey’s upcoming court appearance on charges of threatening President Trump at his request and with the government’s support.

Comey asked to call off the hearing because he already made an initial appearance in Alexandria, Va., last week over the allegations. He said that federal criminal procedure rules provide “for an initial appearance in the singular.”

U.S. District Judge Louise Flanagan, an appointee of former President George W. Bush, said she would cancel the initial appearance if Comey files a waiver for the hearing in the district by Friday. She said the hearing would proceed as scheduled if no waiver is filed.

In Comey’s initial request, his attorneys said he would be willing to execute any necessary waiver “to give the Court additional comfort if the Court so desires.”

The Justice Department backed the request, according to Comey’s attorneys.

Comey was under arrest at his arraignment in a federal courthouse in Alexandria, Virginia, last week.

James Comey posted his threatening ‘8647’ Instagram post last May.

“Cool shell formation on my beach walk,” Comey said.

’86 47′ is a threat to ‘eliminate/kill’ the 47th president.

Keep reading

Gov. Whitmer-Appointed Judge Forces Michigan SOS Jocelyn Benson to Stop Hiding Critical Voting Data from the Public

In yet another major victory for election integrity warriors and government transparency, the Michigan Court of Claims just slammed the brakes on the Michigan Bureau of Elections’ blatant attempt to hide how voters actually cast their ballots.

In an Opinion and Order Granting Summary Disposition to Plaintiff, Court of Claims Judge Christopher P. Yates ruled in favor of longtime election integrity advocate Phani Mantravadi, Founder of Check My Vote,  in his Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the Michigan Bureau of Elections.

The fight was over the Bureau’s sudden decision in March 2024 to begin redacting the all-important “Voting Type” column from the Qualified Voter File (QVF). This column shows whether each voter cast their ballot on Election Day (ED), Early In-Person (EV), or by Absentee ballot (A).

For years, this critical information was publicly available. Then, under Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson, the Bureau quietly started stripping it out — claiming it was necessary to protect the “secret ballot.”

Keep reading