Tag: judges

Trump Demands Criminal Charges Against Obama Judge Who Blocked Kennedy Center Renovations — Exposes Radical Wife’s Ties to Eric Holder, Russia Hoax, Jan. 6 Committee, Biden, and E. Jean Carroll Firm

In a fiery Truth Social post on Saturday morning, President Donald Trump unleashed on an activist Obama-appointed federal judge who just blocked the safety renovations and name change at the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts and demanded he face criminal charges for hiding massive conflicts of interest involving his radical left wife.

The development comes just one day after U.S. District Judge Christopher R. Cooper ruled that Trump’s hand-picked Kennedy Center board illegally added the President’s name to the venue and improperly voted to close it for two years of critical structural repairs.

Cooper sided with a lawsuit from Democrat Rep. Joyce Beatty and ordered Trump’s name stripped from the building, website, and all materials within two weeks. He claimed the renovations could proceed without shutting down the facility, despite expert warnings of imminent danger.

In the lengthy Truth Social post, the President laid out the shocking web of connections proving the judge cannot possibly be impartial and called for him to face justice.

The president began by explaining the needed repairs.

“Can you imagine? A Barack Hussein Obama Judge named Christopher Cooper has stopped a magnificent structural and aesthetic rebuilding of The Trump Kennedy Center where Millions of Dollars of material, marble, furniture, steel, air conditioning, heating, and so much else was ordered, or soon to be ordered, with the end result being a structure that would no longer be in a potential state of collapse, rusted, rotted, and rat and bug infested, to one that would be the Finest anywhere in the World. It was necessary to close the Center in order to get this work done. It is not possible to have a major and very dangerous Construction job, including the replacement of structural beams, with audiences innocently going in to watch a Play. The marble is in terrible shape, the pipes are gone, the air conditioning and heating systems are 65 years old, and no longer functioning. It was all being torn out to be replaced by brand new Carrier Equipment, at the highest standard.”

“Now that won’t happen anymore because a Judge, whose wife is an anti Trump Hater, and he is too, decided, unprecedentedly, to not allow a desperately needed Building Renovation to go forward. On top of that, he said, ‘Rip his name off the Building, he’s got 20 days to do so,’ even though a large Board of some of the most distinguished people in the Country voted unanimously to put the name up. I didn’t do it, the Board did because they thought it would be good for this dying Institution, which was doing Record Low Business and, especially after COVID, only getting worse — True for other such Institutions throughout the Country, but The Trump Kennedy Center was going to be a special one. It would have fully recovered, when none others will. It would have been a New Standard of Excellence, one of my many Gifts to Washington, D.C. The new Building would have been incomparable, beautiful marble, magnificent chandeliers, the finest carpets, rugs, and furniture, designed at the highest level but, perhaps most importantly, replaced steel on many beams, columns, and girders, making the Building structurally sound again. People shouldn’t be allowed to go into that Building until this is fixed, and yet the Trump Hating Judge wants to keep it open because his wife probably told him to do so!”

Trump went on to explain that Cooper’s wife, Amy Jeffress, is a Democrat activist who has been deeply embroiled in efforts to take the president down.

Keep reading

Judge Blocks DOJ Victim Restitution After Leftists Complained The Victims Were Conservatives

Afederal judge blocked the Trump administration’s $1.776 billion anti-weaponization restitution fund Friday after plaintiffs claimed the fund was politically discriminatory because it helped victims of Democrat administrations. The Department of Justice created the fund earlier this month to provide restitution for targets of federal political persecution regardless of political affiliation.

U.S. District Judge Leonie Brinkema, an appointee of President Bill Clinton with a history of ruling against the Trump administration, temporarily blocked the Justice Department from establishing the fund while Brinkema hears legal arguments.

Andrew Floyd, a fired assistant U.S. attorney and Jan. 6 prosecutor, John Caravello, a professor who was accused and acquitted of assaulting a federal agent, the National Abortion Federation, and far-left nonprofit Common Cause sued the Department of Justice last week to stop the fund.

With seemingly no sense of irony, the plaintiffs’ primary claim is that the fund is politically discriminatory against Democrats, apparently because the lion’s share of potential victims seeking restitution would be conservatives targeted by the Biden and Obama administrations. The plaintiffs’ argument implies that, because Democrat administrations decided to conduct large-scale political persecutions of normal Americans they perceived as their enemies — and there is a much larger number in that victim pool — restitution should not be allowed.

“By its own terms, the Anti-Weaponization Fund is available only to claimants who assert that they were targeted by ‘Democrat’ administrations, even though the current administration has weaponized the awesome power of the federal government against its perceived political opponents like no other administration before it,” the lawsuit states. The suit declines to acknowledge how the Biden administration sent its federal thugs after Americans peacefully praying outside abortion facilities, or parents concerned about their children’s public schools, or Catholics who attend Latin Mass, or Jan. 6 protesters who were wildly overcharged and over-sentenced, and much more. It also does not meaningfully mention the Obama administration’s targeting of the Trump campaign, the Russia collusion hoax, or any other abuse that effectively stripped the American people of proper representation in the White House by kneecapping Trump’s first term.

Vice President J.D. Vance has said that the fund is open to anyone who believes he was unfairly targeted by the federal government, explicitly stating it was open to Democrats as well. Each claim, he said, would be decided on a case-by-case basis. A DOJ overview of the fund explicitly states that “Democrats can submit claims, too.” It also notes that the fund is for victims of “use of government power to target them for ‘improper and unlawful’ reasons,” without mentioning a requirement that a particular party have wielded the power.

Floyd, through public statements, may be inadvertently making the case for the fund, as he has been displaying the zeal with which prosecutors like himself wanted to punish Jan. 6 protesters.

“First, hundreds of people attacked the foundation of an ordered society by trying to stop the results of a free and fair election — committing serious assaults on law enforcement and other crimes as they did so,” he said. “Then, this administration pardoned them — removing the accountability that had been hard earned by victims, witnesses, law enforcement, and prosecutors and imposed by impartial jurors and judges. Now they are asking taxpayers to illegally reward them for their crimes.”

Keep reading

Obama Judge Launches Investigation Into Trump Settlement with IRS

A federal judge on Friday launched an investigation into the Trump Administration’s settlement with the IRS that led to the $1.77 billion anti-weaponization fund.

Earlier this month, President Trump dropped his $10 billion lawsuit against the IRS over the leak of his tax returns in exchange for a deal.

Trump dropped his blockbuster lawsuit against the agency in exchange for a $1.7 billion taxpayer-funded fund to pay people who were unfairly targeted by the Biden Regime.

In January, President Trump, Eric Trump, Don Jr., and the Trump Org filed a lawsuit against the IRS for leaking their tax returns.

They sought $10 billion in damages.

After Trump agreed to drop his lawsuit in exchange for the anti-weaponization fund, a group of former judges asked a federal judge to launch an inquiry to determine whether the Trump Administration defrauded the court.

On Friday, Miami-based US District Judge Kathleen Williams, an Obama appointee, launched the inquiry.

Politico reported:

A federal judge is demanding answers to allegations that President Donald Trump defrauded her court by filing a lawsuit against the IRS as a pretext to reach a settlement that resulted in a $1.8 billion “anti-weaponization” fund to make payouts to his political allies.

U.S. District Judge Kathleen Williams launched the inquiry Friday, after closing the lawsuit on her docket last week. The Miami-based Obama appointee cited a request by 35 former federal judges who urged her to reopen the case to determine whether Trump’s effort amounted to “serious misconduct” and an abuse of the court system.

In September 2023, federal prosecutors charged a former IRS contractor who worked for the agency from 2018 to 2020 with unlawfully obtaining and disseminating the tax details of a high-ranking public official and numerous affluent Americans to media outlets.

Keep reading

Judge Blocks Kennedy Center from Closing for Repairs, Orders Trump Name Removed From Venue

A federal judge issued a ruling blocking the Donald J. Trump and John F. Kennedy Memorial Center for the Performing Arts from closing for repairs, and also ordered Trump’s name removed from the institution.

In a ruling on Friday, U.S. District Judge Christopher Cooper argued that while the trustees of the institution “might have assessed the propriety of closure in a number of prudent ways,” the decision for the center to close for two years beginning July 4, to address repairs “was not one,” NBC News reported.

The judge also noted that “the preliminary injunction will not prevent the Center from moving forward with the capital repair work it has planned,” adding that it was “sorely needed.”

The preliminary injunction granted by the judge will also not “prohibit the Board from closing the Center should it come to this decision anew after independently balancing its multiple obligations to the Center,” according to the outlet.

In a post on Truth Social, President Donald Trump criticized the judge’s decision, and shared that his administration would be “working with Congress to transfer” the center “back to them so they can make a determination as to what to do” with it.

“Shockingly, a Judge appointed by Barack Hussein Obama, Christopher Cooper, ruled that The Kennedy Center, which was going to close in early July for largescale renovations and construction due to years of neglect, decay, and poor maintenance, and which was to be transformed by the Trump Administration into the Finest Facility of its kind, anywhere in the World, is not allowed to close for these renovations, which would not be possible to properly do without such a closure,” Trump said.

Keep reading

Meet the Prominent Police Officer Who Carried Out a Steamy, Two-Year Sexual Affair with Married Obama Judge in Her Chambers

The individual who carried out a loud, steam >affair with an Obama federal judge has been unmasked as a prominent Atlanta policeman, causing the scandal to take another turn for the worse.

As The Gateway Pundit reported, a special committee for the Eleventh Circuit discovered that a judge nominated by former President Barack Obama carried out a two-year sexual affair in her “chambers and during business hours” with a police commander.

According to Bloomberg Law, the incidents all occurred within “earshot” of law clerks.

On Thursday, Bloomberg Law identified the judge as Eleanor Ross of the Northern District of Georgia. She is married to a DeKalb County judge and former prosecutor.

Ross was also found by the committee to have attended a partisan political event hosted by a district attorney’s campaign and to have lied to judges investigating her conduct.

Now, Bloomberg Law has identified the person who carried out this graphic affair with the Obama judge: 55-year-old Kelley Collier, a deputy chief in the Atlanta Police Department (APD).

Collier has worked for the APD since 1998.

More from Bloomberg Law:

The officer was identified by the person familiar with the situation as Atlanta Police Department Deputy Chief Kelley Collier, who commands the department’s community services division, according to the department’s website.

The report said the officer had worked for the police department since 1998, serving as the “commander of a certain division” since 2025.

Those years align with Collier’s biography on the police department’s website and his now-deleted LinkedIn profile.

The APD said on Thursday that it is now investigating Collier.

“The Atlanta Police Department has launched an investigation to determine if the person mentioned in the Committee on Judicial Conduct and Disability of the Judicial Conference of the United States is indeed an employee of the Atlanta Police Department,” the department announced on its website.

Despite the taxpayer-funded scandal, neither Collier nor Ross has resigned to date.

Keep reading

Federal Judge Given “Private Reprimand” After Holding Sexual Trysts In Chambers… And Then Lying About It

There is a bizarre controversy out of the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, where a federal judge has been reprimanded for engaging in repeated, loud sexual encounters during office hours in chambers with a police officer. While the judge lied to investigators and disrupted the work of court staff, the Eleventh Circuit decided to give only a “private reprimand” and to withhold the identity of the district court judge. However, legal sleuths have pieced together clues and identified one judge in Atlanta as the likely culprit.

In February, the Judicial Council issued an order with a “private reprimand.” The order contained an array of details that law professor John Blackman analyzed with impressive research. While he admits that he cannot conclusively prove that she is the referenced judge, he declared that “there is only one judge who checks all of those boxes: District Court Judge Eleanor Ross.”

Ironically, among the clues about the judge’s identity, the order mentions that the judge attended the “victory party for a District Attorney” in 2024, the night before “the judge’s summer interns’ first day.” The Georgia primary was on May 21, 2024, and the date coincides with the victory party for Fani Willis, who won the Democratic primary for Fulton County District Attorney. The irony would be crushing since Willis destroyed her own case against Trump and his associates after appointing an attorney with whom she had a sexual relationship.

Putting the judge’s identity aside, I am more concerned with the Circuit’s conclusion that the judge should be left with a private, anonymous reprimand, given the astonishing scope of the misconduct found by the Judicial Council.

The Court describes repeated sexual encounters during office hours that were so audible that clerks and staff were left in uncomfortable silence. The other individual is described as “a high-ranking PD officer.” The court states that

“It is also worth noting the fact that the Subject Judge created a vulnerability to extortion. For two years, the Subject Judge was a federal district judge who routinely heard criminal cases engaged in a secret extramarital relationship with a prominent officer of a large law enforcement agency in the judge’s district—with the affair consisting of sexual intercourse in the Subject Judge’s chambers during working hours.”

The Court describes the awkward moments as staff were subjected to moans and noises from the judge’s chambers as these trysts took place. The court recounts:

“The Subject Judge characterized the allegations as ‘outrageous’ and ‘baseless’ and specifically denied each one.11 Apparently aware that Law Clerk A was the source of the allegations, the Subject Judge noted that the judge had repeatedly chastised Law Clerk A for performance issues, including ‘being on [the clerk’s] cell phone in court and in the office,’ ‘arriving to the office late,’ and wearing attire that the judge considered ‘too casual.’ The Subject Judge implied that Law Clerk A might have made allegations as a means of retaliating against the Subject Judge.”

So this judge not only lied but attacked the clerk. The court order contained emails and communications in which the judge states that the clerk is disgruntled and unreliable. The result was an investigation as the judge continues to lie about the long-standing affair.

The other individual is described solely as a high-ranking police officer.

This is an extraordinary and serious series of ethical violations. It directly undermined the integrity of the court and created a dysfunctional work environment. The officer and the department are likely parties in cases before the court. The judge must be independent in dealing with officers and the department. The use of the chambers for sexual encounters must have created a hostile work environment for many clerks and staff.

Then there are the repeated lies to fellow judges and investigators. Lying to federal investigators can be a crime under 18 U.S.C. 1001, and such cases can come before this judge.

Keep reading

Corporations Can Vote in Some Delaware Elections, Judge Says

Corporations, partnerships, trusts, limited liability companies, and other “artificial entities” have the right to vote in Delaware elections under some circumstances, a judge said in a novel ruling Tuesday.

Judge Craig A. Karsnitz rejected an ACLU challenge to a charter permitting voting in local elections by the entities that own most of the property in the Town of Fenwick Island, one of several municipalities in the state with similar provisions. Karsnitz dismissed the lawsuit from Delaware’s Superior Court, citing “the principle of one person/entity/one vote.”

“Visions of faceless large corporations or even HAL controlling a small town are frightening and the stuff of science fiction,” but “trusts, partnerships, limited liability companies, and corporations are expressly recognized as ‘persons’ in the Delaware Code,” the judge said.

The dispute over municipal voting in a tiny coastal community represents an unusual flashpoint in the decades-long fight over the free speech rights of corporations and the dark money flooding the American electoral system. The US Supreme Court held in 2010’s Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission that political spending counts as constitutionally protected speech.

Ever since that ruling effectively ended corporate campaign finance regulation, the prospect of outright voting by business entities has served as fodder for both critics and comedians.

Delaware, home to more corporations than people, is a fitting place for reality to outpace satire. The state constitutional provisions expressly enshrining corporate personhood reflect Delaware’s budgetary reliance on the billions in fees it raises annually from the more than 2 million business entities chartered there.

Karsnitz, writing in a 19-page opinion Tuesday, rejected an array of constitutional arguments advanced by the ACLU, including the claim that entity voting dilutes the political power of living people.

The lawsuit “does not allege discrimination based on race or political partisanship,” show “that entity property owners vote sufficiently as a bloc to usually defeat the preferred candidates of natural persons,” or assert “that Fenwick’s charter distinguishes between natural persons and entity property owners with the discriminatory intent to fence out natural persons,” the judge said.

Keep reading

Alabama Judge Who Called Herself “Ultimate Authority” Suspended After Making Racist Remarks Against White Clerk

An Alabama judge was suspended after making a racist remark against a White clerk.

Probate Judge Yashiba Blanchard was hit with a 120-page complaint after she delayed cases to walk her dog and even attacked a White woman with racially charged comments.

Blanchard called herself the “ultimate authority” in conversations with her staff.

Judge Blanchard is accused of ethical and judicial misconduct by delaying cases so she could walk her dogs.

In one case, a patient was hospitalized for an additional two weeks because of Blanchard’s delays.

“This patient will now remain hospitalized for an additional two weeks solely due to the lack of timely access to the hearing process,” an email from hospital staff read, according to the complaint.

“This not only prevents her from being home with her family for Thanksgiving, but it also generates unnecessary hospitalization costs and creates avoidable emotional distress for the patient,” the email read.

Blanchard attacked a chief clerk named Amanda Reid.

“Oh, I forgot you all like kissing white ass,’” Blanchard said to her staffer about her fondness of Reid.

WBRC reported:

A judge in Jefferson County who reportedly told her staff she was the “ultimate authority” with “no boss” has been suspended following a 120-page complaint filed by the Judicial Inquiry Commission.

Probate Judge Yashiba Blanchard is out of the courtroom indefinitely and through this complaint, is formally accused of ethical and judicial misconduct.

Judge Elisabeth French, the presiding judge in Jefferson County, appointed retired Probate Judge Sherri Friday to serve temporarily in Blanchard’s place and appointed retired Judge Carole Smitherman to temporarily serve as Chief Election Official for Jefferson County.

The complaint lays out dozens of allegations against Blanchard that claim she ran the Probate Court in an incompetent and unprofessional manner, routinely targeting attorneys and staff, and manufacturing a backlog that created havoc in involuntary commitments.

The commission charges Blanchard with pattern and practice of failing to diligently discharge judicial duties, pattern and practice of failing to follow the law, pattern and practice of exhibiting bias against attorneys appearing in Blanchard’s court, failure to disqualify from a case in which Blanchard served as an attorney, harassment, intimidation, and retaliation against probate court staff, allowing other court officials subject to Blanchard’s direction and control to engage in harassment and intimidation of probate court staff, and failure to maintain professional competence in judicial administration.

Keep reading

Federal Court Strikes Down Landmark Fluoride Ruling on Technicality — ‘Not the Science’

 A federal appeals court has vacated a landmark decision that found fluoridated drinking water poses an “unreasonable risk” to children’s health under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA).

The decision by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals did not challenge the substance of the lower court’s findings — that fluoride is toxic to children and ought to be regulated. Instead, the court based its decision on procedural issues related to the lower court’s handling of the litigation.

The case will now go back to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, where District Judge Edward Chen will be required to exclude all scientific evidence that became available after 2020.

Michael Connett, attorney for the plaintiffs, told The Defender the court “instructed Judge Chen to travel back in time to 2020 and make this ruling based on a stale factual record.”

Connett said the directive to ignore years’ worth of evidence on fluoride’s dangers runs counter to the intent of the TSCA — which is to protect hundreds of millions of Americans from substances that are harmful to human health.

The federal appeals court ruling, handed down late Thursday, stemmed from a lawsuit against the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) brought by consumer advocacy groups including Food & Water Watch, the Fluoride Action Network (FAN), and Moms Against Fluoridation.

The groups sued after the EPA refused to consider their 2016 citizens’ petition asking the agency to regulate fluoride.

After two bench trials, Chen ruled that fluoride at the federally recommended concentration of 0.7 milligrams/liter (mg/L) posed an “unreasonable risk” to children’s health and ordered the EPA to regulate it accordingly.

However, the 9th Circuit panel said the lower court violated the “party presentation principle” — a legal doctrine requiring courts to act as neutral arbiters rather than taking control of a case’s factual development.

Connett said the decision was “a very expansive and unprecedented application of the party presentation principle.” He said that to date, “this principle has really only been applied to situations where judges raise new legal issues, not where judges use procedural mechanisms to resolve the issues presented.”

Keep reading

Panel of Leftist Federal Judges Defy Supreme Court, Order Alabama to Reinstate its Rigged and Racially Gerrymandered Congressional Map

A panel of leftist judges decided to snub the United States Supreme Court and throw out a perfectly constitutional redistricting map today.

As The Associated Press reported, a three-judge panel in Alabama’s redistricting case issued a preliminary injunction barring the state from switching maps.

It requires Alabama to continue using the 5-2 racially gerrymandered map the court ordered for congressional elections in 2024. The state had recently voted to reinstate its old map, which was 6-1 Republican.

This also means Democrats will regain an additional Black-majority seat for now.

This is after the Supreme Court SPECIFICALLY ruled that racial gerrymandering was unconstitutional.

The AP reported:

Federal judges on Tuesday temporarily blocked Alabama’s plan to use a new congressional map that could give Republicans an advantage in a key House race in the midterm elections.

A three-judge panel in the state’s long-running redistricting case issued the preliminary injunction that prevents the state, at least for now, from switching maps. It requires the state to continue using the same court-ordered districts that were used for congressional elections in 2024.

Lawyers representing Black voters in the state’s lengthy redistricting case had sought the preliminary injunction, arguing the same panel in 2023 found the state map was intentionally discriminatory against Black voters. They also argued Alabama was creating chaos by trying to change lines in the middle of an election year.

Keep reading