Tag: judges

Federal judge blocks Trump from requiring Americans to provide proof of citizenship to vote

Afederal judge in Washington, D.C., on Friday blocked a part of one of President Donald Trump’s executive orders that required voters to show proof of citizenship through passports or other documents before voting.

The ruling comes in response to a controversial March executive order that intended to overhaul federal elections. Multiple lawsuits have been filed to block different aspects of the order, including a part that bars states from counting mail-in ballots received after Election Day.

U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly declined to block the part related to counting the mail-in ballots, but did permanently block the proof of citizenship aspect, which was brought by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU).

The judge ruled that the portion was illegal because the U.S. Constitution gives states, not the president, the power to oversee elections, according to Reuters.

“While we celebrate this victory, we remain vigilant and will keep fighting to ensure every eligible voter can make their voice heard without interference or intimidation,” ACLU’s Sophia Lin Lakin said. “No president can sidestep the Constitution to make it harder to vote.”

The White House and Trump have not yet commented on the ruling.

Keep reading

Federal Judge Weighs Forcing USDA to Pay SNAP Benefits Despite Shutdown

A federal judge considered ordering the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) to tap into a $5 billion contingency fund to avoid a lapse in the national food stamp program on Oct. 30.

U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani, during a hearing in Boston, said the government should find a way to continue giving limited benefits to recipients of the Supplemental Nutrition and Assistance Program (SNAP), rather than cutting it off completely.

“The steps involve finding an equitable way of reducing benefits,” she said.

Talwani is expected to issue a ruling by the end of Oct. 30.

Approximately 1 in 8 Americans benefit from SNAP, and at a cost of around $100 billion per year, it is one of the country’s most amply funded social service initiatives.

On Oct. 10, the USDA informed states that it would not disburse benefits for November because of the government shutdown.

The program is set to run out of funding on Nov. 1 if the shutdown continues. Senate Democrats have declined to support a House-passed bill to fund the government, and earlier this week, Republicans did not support a bill that provided standalone funding for SNAP.

As Republicans and Democrats continue to face off on the issue of reopening the government, 25 states sued on Oct. 27, insisting that the USDA could harness the $5 billion emergency fund to keep the program going.

However, Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) said this was illegal on Oct. 27, noting that those funds were meant to pay for school meals and infant formula.

A memo from the USDA echoed Johnson’s statement, noting that the emergency fund—along with $23 billion in tariff revenue—is being used to cover school breakfast and lunch programs, along with the Women and Infant Children (WIC) program, which provides infant formula and healthy foods to babies and their mothers.

That memo also notes that state governments cannot be reimbursed if they choose to cover SNAP benefits, a program that costs about $8 billion per month. Some states, such as Virginia, are planning to launch their own stop-gap programs to ensure food security.

The plaintiff states argue that, in addition to harming the tens of millions of Americans who rely on SNAP, the program’s suspension will harm the businesses where they shop.

Attorneys for the government argue that the program cannot be funded during the shutdown, since this is a violation of the Antideficiency Act, which dictates how the government operates during a funding lapse and “forbids the United States from making such an obligation without an appropriation.”

Keep reading

Judicial Misconduct And Christian Persecution Against A Single Mother. This Case Should Outrage Every American

If you needed another reminder that the federal justice system is broken, look no further than the case of Shana Gaviola. The Gateway Pundit has previously reported on Shana’s case, and yet more continues to be exposed.

What started as a custody dispute has exploded into a full-blown scandal involving federal prosecutors, judicial misconduct, and a system that seems more interested in protecting its own than delivering justice.

Gaviola, a California resident, is accused of violating a protective order involving her then-minor son in 2021. Prosecutors claim she conspired with Julio Sandoval, a Missouri boarding school dean, to remove her son from California against court orders. But instead of handling the case fairly, the government went nuclear. Why does the court have such an inappropriate interest in this case?

In 2023, Gaviola alleged that Assistant U.S. Attorney Michael Tierney, one of the prosecutors assigned to her case, made highly inappropriate advances of a sexual nature toward her at a Fresno bar. He chose to become intoxicated and continue the inappropriate behavior. Rather than investigate the claim transparently, the entire Eastern District of California was quietly removed from the case. Every judge. Every prosecutor. Gone. Just like this flagrantly appalling behavior never happened.

Gaviola’s legal team filed a motion to dismiss the charges, arguing that the prosecution (more than) violated her constitutional rights as a parent and her religious liberty by criminalizing her decision to send her son to a religious boarding school. That motion was denied even after her team cited the Supreme Court decision of TAMER MAHMOUD, ET AL., PETITIONERS v. THOMAS W. TAYLOR, ET AL.

Then came the venue shuffle. A Fresno-based judge initially ordered the case moved to the Northern District of California due to the misconduct allegations. But Chief Judge Troy Nunley overstepped his authority and reversed that decision, stating the case would remain in Fresno. Instead of transferring it, the Ninth Circuit’s Chief Judge assigned Seattle-based, Reagan-appointed Judge John C. Coughenour to be flown in to preside over the trial, setting a new precedent.

So, while the courtroom stays in Fresno, the people running it are outsiders brought in because the local bench was too compromised to continue.

Keep reading

Appeals Court to Lefty Judge and Her Insane Border Patrol Ruling: Lady, You’re Not Doing This Right Now

A federal appeals court ruled that a lunatic judge’s ruling for the Border Patrol can be ignored at this time. Judge Sarah Ellis decided that she had appointed herself the chief of operations for immigration enforcement at the Department of Homeland Security with her silly ruling about mandatory body cameras for ICE agents. On this ruling, she ordered Border Patrol Commander Gregory Bovino to meet with her daily. Luckily, the Seventh Circuit put the kibosh on that, at least for now (via CBS News).

A federal appeals court granted a request from the U.S. Department of Justice for an administrative stay pausing an order that requires Border Patrol Commander Gregory Bovino to meet in person with Judge Sara Ellis each day.

Judge Ellis ordered the meetings after a hearing on Tuesday in federal court over alleged violations by Bovino and other federal agents of her temporary restraining order largely prohibiting the use of tear gas and other riot control measures on journalists, protesters and clergy during Operation Midway Blitz in Chicago. 

In response to numerous filings regarding violations of that order, Ellis instructed Bovino to meet with her every weekday evening to go over the events of the day until a preliminary injunction hearing on Nov. 5. 

In their filing to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, lawyers for the government argue the order “far exceeds the recognized bounds of discovery” and “significantly interferes” with Bovino’s function, which the government argues is “ensuring the Nation’s immigration laws are properly enforced.” 

They also argue the meetings are “untethered to the plaintiffs’ underlying claims” and go beyond reasonable necessity to comply with the court orders already in place.

Keep reading

Ted Cruz EXPLODES on Rogue Activist Judge Boasberg — Demands Immediate IMPEACHMENT After Secret Subpoena of Senators’ Private Phone Records and Barring AT&T from Notifying Them

Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, erupted Wednesday in a fiery press conference, calling for the immediate impeachment of U.S. District Judge James Boasberg, an Obama appointee, after revelations that the activist judge signed an order secretly authorizing the seizure of his private phone records and other GOP records while blocking AT&T from notifying them.

Cruz revealed during the press conference that the Biden DOJ, under the direction of former special counsel Jack Smith, had targeted him and eight other Republican senators in a blatant fishing expedition.

The subpoenas, issued as part of the sham “Arctic Frost” investigation tied to President Trump’s rightful challenge of the 2020 election fraud, sought cellphone data that Cruz insists is protected under the Speech and Debate Clause of the Constitution.

Ted Cruz:
“The Biden Justice Department signed off on issuing subpoenas for the phone records of at least nine U.S. senators. Twenty percent of the Republicans in the United States Senate were the target of this fishing expedition. They did so in complete contravention of the Constitution—of separation of powers, of the Speech and Debate Clause, of free speech, of basic rights of privacy.

This is an executive who believes it is justified in spying on their opponents in the legislature because they’ve convinced themselves the ends justify the means.

I want to talk to you about one of those subpoenas. One of those subpoenas went from Jack Smith to AT&T, seeking my cell phone communications. It went to AT&T, and I actually want to commend AT&T for doing the right thing. AT&T is based in Texas. AT&T looked at that subpoena, and they went to their legal counsel and said, “What should we do with this subpoena?” And their legal counsel said, “You cannot comply because this is protected by the Speech and Debate Clause of the U.S. Constitution.”

And so AT&T declined to comply—did not hand over my cell phone records. Now, one might ask: ordinarily, a phone company being asked to hand over the phone records of a sitting senator would notify that senator.”

Judge Boasberg, notorious for his leftist activism and nationwide injunctions against President Trump’s America First agenda, slapped a gag order on AT&T, barring the company from alerting Cruz and others to the subpoena for at least a year.

In his order, Boasberg ludicrously claimed there were “reasonable grounds” to believe disclosure would lead to “destruction of or tampering with evidence, intimidation of potential witnesses, and serious jeopardy to the investigation.

Keep reading

Woman who screamed ‘f–k these cops’ after purposely mowing down NYPD officer handed light sentence

A woman who screamed “F–k these cops” after purposely running down a police officer and breaking his leg with her car got “not nearly enough” time in prison at her sentencing Wednesday, a cop union said.

Sahara Dula, 25, was sentenced two years behind bars after she admitted to intentionally plowed over an NYPD cop while driving high into oncoming traffic on the Upper East Side in January 2024.

“The sentence is not nearly enough. This individual tried to run down a New York City police officer. She could have killed him,” railed Police Benevolent Association President Patrick Hendry.

“We’re glad she is going behind bars instead of walking free, but our justice system needs to send a message that there will be zero leniency for attacks on police officers.”

Dula, who infamously admitted to mowing into police “on purpose,” appeared for sentencing before Manhattan Supreme Court Judge Melissa T. Lewis, after she pleaded guilty to assault in the second degree on June 16.

Keep reading

Fed Judge Releases Dangerous Criminal Arrested for Soliciting Bondi’s Assassination

One of the many federal judges involved in an immigration case with the Trump administration has released a TikTok user who, federal authorities allege, put a $45,000 bounty on the head of U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi.

Magistrate Douglas Micko released Tyler Maxon Avalos on a personal recognizance bond, court documents show.

The case against Avalos is solid. Micko’s lax conditions for release suggest that Avalos, a violent criminal with a lengthy criminal record, can easily flee the country if he has half a brain.

Avalos is the third person arrested this month for soliciting the murder of a federal official.

Whether Micko knew it, he released a dangerous criminal who was, the FBI affidavit says, planning to murder Bondi.

Avalos’ trouble began on October 9, when a TikTok user in Detroit reported the plot to the FBI National Threat Operations Center. The user reported “a threatening post against United States Attorney General Pam Bondi that had come across the user’s TikTok feed,” the affidavit alleges:

The TikTok user reported the threat as a murder for hire of US Attorney General Pam Bondi. The TikTok user reported that the threatening post was “Imposing a hit on Pam bondi for $45,000 posting it on tiktok his user name is @liminalvoidslip.”

Screenshots of the post show a photo “with a sniper-scope red dot on AG Bondi’s forehead,” the affidavit alleges.

The caption says “WANTED: Pam Bondi” / “REWARD: 45,000” / “DEAD OR ALIVE” / “(PREFERABLY DEAD).” 

Strangely, the screenshot shows a comment that says “*cough cough*” / “when they don’t serve us then what?”

Keep reading

 Federal Judge Rules Los Angeles-Based US Attorney Bill Essayli Has Been in Role Unlawfully

A federal judge on Tuesday evening said Los Angeles-based US Attorney Bill Essayli has been in the role unlawfully and disqualified him.

President Trump chose California Republican Assemblyman Bill Essayli to serve as the acting US attorney for the Central District of California earlier this year.

Bill Essayli is a staunch Trump supporter who has been aggressively investigating and prosecuting illegal aliens and criminals.

US District Judge Michael Seabright, a George W. Bush appointee, said Essayli has been unlawfully serving since July.

Judge Seabright did not dismiss Essayli’s indictments because they were signed by other attorneys for the government.

The judge, however, said Essayli remains the First Assistant US Attorney and may perform the function of that office.

“For the reasons stated, however, the court does not dismiss Defendants’ indictments, as they were lawfully signed by other attorneys for the government and there has been no showing of due process violations or other irregularities in Defendants’ prosecutions resulting from Essayli’s unlawful service as Acting United States Attorney. Moreover, Essayli remains the FAUSA and may perform the functions and duties of that office,” the judge wrote.

Bill Essayli responded to the judge’s ruling.

“For those who didn’t read the entire order, nothing is changing. I continue serving as the top federal prosecutor in the Central District of California. It ‘s an honor and privilege to serve President Trump and Attorney General Bondi, and I look forward to advancing their agenda for the American People,” Bill Essayli said.

Keep reading

OUTRAGEOUS: Oklahoma Teen Rapist Avoids Nearly 80-Year Sentence After Assaulting Two Girlfriends — Judge Grants Youthful Offender Status

The case of 18-year-old Jesse Mack Butler has ignited anger and accusations of systemic failure after a “sweetheart plea deal” allowed a young man facing what could have been nearly 80 years behind bars to avoid serious prison time.

In early 2024, Butler, then 17 and a student at Stillwater Public Schools, was charged with 11 counts, including rape, attempted rape, rape by instrumentation, sexual battery, forcible oral sodomy, strangulation, and domestic assault/battery by strangulation, KJRH reported.

The allegations spanned two high-school girlfriends, and court documents say one victim was left near death after being choked; another victim alleges she was strangled unconscious and that Butler even bragged he wanted to film the act, according to

Initially charged as an adult, the potential sentence at trial reportedly approached 78 years, according to KOCO News.

In a turn that has provoked outrage, Butler’s case was reclassified under Oklahoma’s “youthful offender” statute, effectively treating offenses committed as a minor with much lighter consequences.

He pleaded “no contest,” meaning he neither admitted guilt nor disputed the charges, under the deal.

While originally facing adult charges, that status change removed the possibility of a full prison sentence. The result: only one year of rehabilitation and community service in lieu of decades behind bars, the New York Post reported.

Keep reading

Ohio judge could face further consequences over Charlie Kirk comments

Judge Ted Berry, a municipal judge for Hamilton County, is closer to being removed from the bench for social media posts celebrating the death of Charlie Kirk, thanks to a resolution filed by state representatives.

Among his other comments, Berry declared, with a clown emoji, “Rest in Hatred & Division!” He also claimed that Kirk “spewed hate & division.” Another post asked, “How’s he feel about gun violence and gun control in Hell, now?”

State Rep. Adam Mathews, one of the Republicans who introduced the resolution to remove Berry, has shared screenshots of the judge’s remarks from his own Facebook page.

Mathews spoke with The Daily Signal about his resolution, which he initiated with state Rep. D.J. Swearingen, a fellow Republican. “We have given the judge more than a month,” Mathews reminded, having called for Berry to resign Sept. 12. “And now to defend the courts and the trust that the people must have in them with an unbiased judiciary, we are moving forward with the process to remove the judge as outlined by the Ohio constitution.”

The removal process is laid out in Article IV, Section 17 of the state constitution. “Judges may be removed from office, by concurrent resolution of both houses of the general assembly, if two-thirds of the members, elected to each house, concur therein; but, no such removal shall be made, except upon complaint, the substance of which shall be entered on the journal, nor, until the party charged shall have had notice thereof, and an opportunity to be heard,” the section reads.

Keep reading