Tag: judges

Biden Judge Orders Trump Administration to Restore Slavery, Climate Change Displays at National Parks

A left-wing activist federal judge on Friday ordered the Trump administration to restore propagandistic signs and exhibits related to slavery, climate change, and other contentious historical topics at America’s national parks and monuments across the country.

U.S. District Judge Angel Kelley, a Joe Biden appointee, issued a preliminary injunction requiring the Interior Department to reinstall the displays within 21 days after ruling that the removals likely violated federal law.

The lawsuit was brought by a coalition of conservation, historical, and scientific organizations, including the National Parks Conservation Association and the American Association for State and Local History.

In her ruling, Kelley said the administration had removed materials that “do not align with its preferred narrative,” and claimed that doing so undermined the integrity of the national park system.

“Removing these signs not only undermines the integrity of the National Parks; it sets a dangerous precedent of censorship and sanitization,” Kelley wrote.

The dispute stems from a March 2025 executive order signed by President Donald Trump directing federal agencies to eliminate what the administration described as “false revision of history” in parks, monuments, and memorials.

The White House pointed out that the exhibits portrayed the United States as “inherently racist, sexist, oppressive, or otherwise irredeemably flawed” and ordered a review of educational materials displayed at federal sites.

Keep reading

Meet The Left-Wing Organization Influencing Federal Judges On Science Litigation

he Federal Judicial Center (FJC) has had its fair share of controversies throughout the past year.

The taxpayer-funded agency was caught stuffing citations to left-wing climate activists into its most recent Reference Manual on Scientific Evidence, which offers guidance to federal judges on science-related cases. Subsequent Federalist investigations also revealed the radical left-wing partisanship of the authors tasked with writing manual’s climate and forensics sections.

The FJC is intended to serve as the unbiased educational and research arm of the judiciary. Although it doesn’t have any “policy-making or enforcement authority,” these findings have raised concerns about its objectivity and central role in providing “accurate, objective information and education” to judges across America’s federal court system.

But the deeper The Federalist digs into the FJC, the further removed the agency seems to be from its stated mission.

A new inquiry into the FJC unearthed that the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) — a left-wing advocacy group masquerading as an objective science organization — influenced the FJC’s aforementioned science manual. In line with The Federalist’s prior reporting, this investigation also uncovered that several of the AAAS fellows who worked on the manual have a history of supporting left-wing ideology.

Origins and Leadership

Before fleshing out the AAAS’s influence on the judiciary and FJC, it’s worth exploring the group’s left-wing background.

According to the Capital Research Center (CRC), the AAAS’s origins can be traced back to the mid-19th century, when it was created to “unify all scientific fields across the United States” and “rais[e] further resources for scientific inquiry.” The group later shifted its focus in the decades that followed from solely pursuing research funding to “general policy lobbying.”

During this step into activism, the AAAS “began to tilt towards socialism and the Soviet Union” in the late 1930s, according to CRC. The nonprofit watchdog noted the left-wing science group’s annual president at the time, Walter Bradford Cannon, “expressed his sympathies for socialism as a model of the scientific economy and society of the future, a position many of his fellow ‘science-activists’ in the AAAS shared.”

The AAAS has carried its partisan agenda forward by increasing its involvement in left-wing “‘science-activism,’ ideological activism performed in the guise of promoting science.” The group was notably involved in the 2017 “March for Science” that protested the first Trump administration’s pro-energy policies.

This left-wing activism is perhaps unsurprising when considering the partisanship displayed by the AAAS’s leadership. The group’s current CEO, Sudip Parikh, has regularly criticized the Trump administration and its policy agenda, including the president’s 2020 move to withdraw America from the World Health Organization over its mishandling of Covid. He also attacked a 2022 Supreme Court decision (West Virginia v. EPA) limiting the EPA’s regulatory authority over “greenhouse gas emissions.”

Parikh’s predecessor, former Rep. Rush D. Holt, Jr., D-N.J., appears to be cut from the same cloth. According to CRC, he criticized President Trump’s decision to withdraw from the Paris Climate Accords and “signed the AAAS as a supporter of an open letter” urging the president to revoke his travel ban during his tenure as CEO.

The AAAS is also bankrolled by numerous left-wing organizations and has inked contracts with the federal government, according to CRC. Its funders have reportedly included the left-wing John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, the Rockefeller Foundation, the David and Lucile Packard Foundation, and others.

Keep reading

Conviction of Jackson Co. man tied to Whitmer kidnap plot gets vacated

The Michigan Court of Appeals on Tuesday vacated the conviction of a Jackson County man alleged to have provided aid to a 2020 plot to kidnap Gov. Gretchen Whitmer.

Joseph Morrison was convicted in 2022 of gang membership felonies, felony firearm and providing material support for terrorist acts in relation to his alleged role in support of a kidnapping plot of the Democratic governor that prosecutors said was led by Adam Fox and Barry Croft Jr. during the COVID-19 pandemic. Morrison was sentenced to four to 20 years in prison on the gang and terrorism support convictions and two years on felony firearm.

But the three-judge appellate panel on Tuesday ruled that kidnapping, under the letter of Michigan law, is not considered a “violent felony” and therefore cannot be presented to a jury to establish a terrorism-related charge.

The panel ― made up of Judges Thomas Cameron, Mark Boonstra and Brock Swartzle ― vacated Morrison’s conviction and remanded the case back to Jackson County Circuit Court for a new trial. All three judges are appointees of Republican former Gov. Rick Snyder.

“Given that the trial court specifically instructed the jury to consider kidnapping as a violent felony and that the jury heard considerable testimony about the plot to kidnap Gov. Whitmer, the likelihood that defendant was actually convicted, at least in part, on an invalid basis tainted the jury’s verdict,” according to the unanimous decision.

Michael Faraone, an appellate attorney for Morrison, said he was happy with the decisions and added, “It’s always a great day when a court delivers justice.”

“In over 30 years of practicing law, I have never reviewed a trial more violative of due process than this one,” Faraone said.

Keep reading

Obama Judge Blocks Trump’s $100,000 H-1B Visa Fee

A federal judge on Monday blocked President Trump’s $100,000 H-1B Visa fine.

US District Judge Leo Sorokin, an Obama appointee, said the $100,000 fee is an unauthorized tax.

CNBC reported:

A federal judge on Monday vacated President Donald Trump’s policy imposing a $100,000 fee for employers’ H-1B visa applications.

The visa payment policy violated the federal Administrative Procedure Act and the Constitution, Judge Leo Sorokin declared in the ruling in U.S. District Court in Massachusetts.

Sorokin agreed with the plaintiffs in finding “the substance and application of the $100,000 payment reveal that it is a tax,” and that Congress had not delegated that power to the executive branch.

The H-1B policy was created in 1990 and is heavily used by U.S. tech giants to bring in high-skilled workers from overseas. The program allows U.S. employers to seek government permission to hire a nonimmigrant workers in specialty occupations for up to six years.

Last September, President Trump announced new restrictions of certain nonimmigrant workers.

“American IT workers have reported they were forced to train the foreign workers who were taking their jobs and to sign nondisclosure agreements about this indignity as a condition of receiving any form of severance. This suggests H-1B visas are not being used to fill occupational shortages or obtain highly skilled workers who are unavailable in the United States,” the White House previously said.

“The abuse of the H-1B program is also a national security threat. Domestic law enforcement agencies have identified and investigated H-1B-reliant outsourcing companies for engaging in visa fraud, conspiracy to launder money, conspiracy under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, and other illicit activities to encourage foreign workers to come to the United States,” the White House said.

“Further, abuses of the H-1B program present a national security threat by discouraging Americans from pursuing careers in science and technology, risking American leadership in these fields. A 2017 study showed that wages for American computer scientists would have been 2.6 percent to 5.1 percent higher and employment in computer science for American workers would have been 6.1 percent to 10.8 percent higher in 2001 absent the importation of foreign workers into the computer science field,” the White House said.

President Trump required a $100,000 payment to accompany new H-1B Visa petitions.

Keep reading

Biden-Appointed Judge Dismisses Kennedy Center Lawsuit Against Jazz Musician Who Canceled Christmas Eve Show in Hatred for Trump Name – Orders Center to Pay All Legal Fees

District of Columbia Superior Court Judge Tanya Jones Bosier, a Biden appointee, on Friday tossed out a breach-of-contract lawsuit filed by the Kennedy Center against jazz musician Chuck Redd.

The judge ordered the Kennedy Center to pay all of Redd’s legal fees and court costs after ruling there was no signed contract and that the case qualified as a Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation (SLAPP) under D.C. law.

As The Gateway Pundit previously reported in December 2025, Redd abruptly canceled his long-running free Christmas Eve Jazz Jam after the Kennedy Center Board of Trustees voted unanimously to rename the facility the Donald J. Trump and John F. Kennedy Memorial Center for the Performing Arts.

The board acted to honor President Donald Trump’s transformative work in saving and revitalizing the once-troubled national performing arts center.

Former Kennedy Center President Ric Grenell called the cancellation exactly what it was: a “political stunt.” He sent Redd a letter giving “official notice that we will seek $1 million in damages from you for this political stunt” that harmed the nonprofit and the families who counted on the free Millennium Stage holiday tradition.

Now Judge Bosier has ruled the lawsuit itself was improper political retribution.

Keep reading

Girl Kept from Church, Bible, and Christian Friends by Portland Judge Awaits Appeals Court Ruling

Despite her love of Christianity, a young Maine girl has been prevented since 2024 from going to church, attending religious holidays, being “exposed” to the Bible or other scriptural literature, and even having Christian friends — all because of a judge’s order in a parental rights case.

The draconian restrictions have been in place for some 18 months as Emily Bickford and her daughter Ava, 13, wait for a decision on an appeal to the state’s Supreme Court eight months ago after Portland District Judge Jennifer Nofsinger issued the shocking ruling in late 2024 as part of a dispute between the girl’s parents.

Not only has the ruling impacted the lifestyle and pursuit of happiness by both mother and daughter, on its face it appears incompatible with the founding principles of the United States.

The right to worship granted by the First Amendment is not in the grip of any judge to grant or abolish, the Portland mother told Breitbart News in an exclusive interview this week.

“That is not theirs to take away,” Bickford said. “It’s in our Declaration of Independence. Our forefathers knew we had inalienable rights given by God. God gave us the freedom to worship him, and there’s no government that can take that away from us.”

Keep reading

A Quiet Rewrite That Could Shape a Thousand Climate Cases

An under-the-radar legal switcheroo should concern every business leader, investor, and taxpayer in America. Now, 23 state attorneys general have taken notice and sent a letter  to the Administrative Office of U.S. Courts   that bolsters the efforts of three eminent scientists who sounded the alarm.

Climate activists have found a way to get their preferred evidence standards into the hands of roughly 6,000 federal and state judges—before those judges hear more than 1,000 pending climate cases that could reshape the American economy.

They did it through a handbook.

The Federal Judicial Center (FJC) and the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) jointly publish the Reference Manual on Scientific Evidence. Likely very few Americans realize Congress established the FJC in 1967 as the research and education arm of the federal courts and made the Chief Justice of the U.S. its chair. For decades, the FJC collaborated with the NAS to give judges objective, apolitical guidance on how to evaluate scientific claims in the courtroom. The motivation is obvious, if often taken for granted by the American public: give judges the tools and standards to admit scientific evidence that is objectively true, and reject quackery and scientifically invalid hypotheses that would bias the judicial proceedings.

The manual is that guidance, and the fourth edition has just been released.

Three eminent scientists who’ve read the manual immediately started ringing alarm bells. According to Richard Lindzen of MIT, William Happer of Princeton, and Steven Koonin of Stanford’s Hoover Institution, its new chapter on “How Science Works” has a problem. In an April 1 letter to Chief Justice John Roberts, the three scientists argue that the chapter—which balloons from 18 pages in the prior edition to 65—quietly swaps out the scientific method for something inherently more political: “scientific consensus.”

In so doing, the new version flies in the face of Supreme Court precedent that has shaped the legal evaluation of scientific evidence since 1993.

Keep reading

Biden-Appointed Judge Blocks Trump Admin from Conditioning Billions in SNAP on Stopping Gender Ideology, Benefits for Illegal Aliens, and Attacks on Girls’ Sports – 20 Democrat States Celebrate Win for Woke Agendas

In yet another blatant example of judicial activism and lawfare against the will of the American people, U.S. District Judge Myong Joun – a Biden appointee with a well-documented history of blocking President Trump’s agenda – sided with 20 Democrat states and the District of Columbia on Friday, granting a preliminary injunction that halted the Trump administration’s efforts to tie federal food assistance funding to basic common-sense conditions.

The ruling stops the U.S. Department of Agriculture from enforcing requirements on states receiving tens of billions in SNAP (food stamps), school lunch, WIC, and other nutrition program dollars.

Among the blocked conditions: restrictions on promoting “gender ideology,” preventing illegal aliens from accessing taxpayer-funded benefits, and ensuring “fair athletic opportunities” for women and girls.

This is the same Judge Myong Joun who previously blocked Trump administration efforts to reform and downsize the Department of Education, as The Gateway Pundit has reported.

The Trump administration, under Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins, has been working to clean up these massive federal programs.

As The Gateway Pundit previously detailed, the USDA put ALL programs under review to ensure only American citizens receive food stamps and other benefits. New requirements from Republican-backed legislation had already reduced SNAP rolls by nearly 4.3 million beneficiaries between January 2025 and January 2026 through basic eligibility enforcement.

The new conditions were straightforward America First policy:

  • States had to certify they were not using federal funds to promote gender ideology, including programs that would deprive women and girls of fair athletic opportunities (i.e., keeping biological males out of girls’ sports).
  • States could not allow illegal aliens to obtain taxpayer-funded benefits or create incentives for illegal immigration.
  • Broader compliance with federal anti-discrimination laws and Trump executive orders on these issues.

In short, the administration was simply saying: if you want billions in federal food aid, you don’t get to use it to push radical transgender ideology or subsidize illegal immigration on the taxpayers’ dime.

Keep reading

Rep. Clay Fuller Introduces Articles of Impeachment Against Radical Obama-Appointed Judge Eleanor Ross for Shocking Sexual Misconduct in Federal Courthouse Chambers and Lying to Investigators

Georgia Congressman, working alongside Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan, moves to remove unfit judge who carried on an affair with high-ranking Atlanta PD official during business hours while actively presiding over criminal cases.

The Gateway Pundit previously reported that a special committee for the Eleventh Circuit discovered that Eleanor Ross of the Northern District of Georgia 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. The entire affair created a major conflict of interest and made the judge vulnerable to extortion.

Ross, who is married to a DeKalb County judge and former prosecutor, 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.

Despite these damning findings, Ross has refused to resign.

Freshman Rep. Clay Fuller (R-GA) announced Friday that he is dropping articles of impeachment against U.S. District Judge Eleanor L. Ross of the Northern District of Georgia on Monday.

Rep. Fuller wrote on X:

I am dropping an article of impeachment against Eleanor L. Ross, a Judge of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia. I have been working on this alongside [Jim Jordan] since the news broke and will be introducing this on Monday.

Judge Ross is alleged to have engaged in an extramarital affair with a high-ranking official of the Atlanta Police Department inside her federal courthouse chambers during office hours, within earshot of her judicial staff, while actively presiding over criminal cases.

This radical judge has no place in power and is unfit to sit on the federal bench.

Keep reading

Arizona Attorney General Shot Down by AZ Supreme Court in Lawfare Case Against 2020 Trump Electors – Plans to Seek New Grand Jury Indictment

The Arizona Supreme Court has denied Arizona Attorney General’s bid to revive her lawfare against 2020 electors in Arizona after an appeals court dismissed the case, saying Mayes misled and improperly improperly a grand jury. 

In April, 18 individuals, including Trump White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows, former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani, RNC attorney Christina Bobb, conservative attorney John Eastman, and Trump campaign adviser Boris Epshteyn, were indicted by Kris Mayes’ grand jury for challenging the stolen 2020 election and casting an alternative slate of electors for President Trump.

The charges include nine counts of conspiracy, fraudulent schemes and artifices, fraudulent schemes and practices, and forgery. “Defendants and unindicted coconspirators schemed to prevent the lawful transfer of the presidency to keep Unindicted Coconspirator 1 in office against the will of Arizona’s voters,” Mayes’s indictment alleged. President Trump was named “Unindicted Coconspirator 1.”

But her case fell apart after a far-left judge allowed the defendants to argue that the charges were politically motivated. The same judge later recused himself after he was busted bashing white men and making demands that other judges in Arizona support Kamala Harris against her conservative critics.

A judge later ruled that state prosecutors improperly presented the case to a grand jury and failed to inform jurors of the Electoral Count Act, which dictates the rules of electoral vote counting and exonerates the defendants. An appeals court sided with the lower court judge, refusing even to consider the case in September.

The Gateway Pundit previously reported that Mayes sought to revive her case by appealing to the state’s high court last November.

Keep reading