Tag: judges

Trump administration drops effort against law firms after judges find president’s orders unconstitutional

The Justice Department on Monday dropped the fight over President Donald Trump’s executive orders targeting firms he disliked, conceding to unanimous rulings from federal judges that found the orders violated the fundamental tenets of the Constitution.

The targeted firms included Perkins Coie, WilmerHale, Susman Godfrey and Jenner & Block. They had fought back against executive orders by Trump that took aim at their security clearances, government contracts and access to government buildings due to their clientele and hiring.

Perkins Coie has represented high-profile Democrats, including former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton; WilmerHale employed former special counsel Robert Mueller after he investigated Trump; and Jenner & Block hired Andrew Weissmann, who was a part of Mueller’s team.

The firms, which stood up to the administration at a time when many other major law firms caved, welcomed the administration’s capitulation.

“As we said from the outset, our challenge to the unlawful Executive Order was about defending our clients’ constitutional right to retain the counsel of their choosing and defending the rule of law. We are pleased these foundational principles were vindicated,” a WilmerHale spokesperson said in a statement Monday.

Keep reading

Appeals Court Allows ICE to Access Taxpayer Data

A federal appeals court has allowed Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to access taxpayer information.

In a 3–0 decision on Feb. 24, the court unanimously disagreed with several nonprofit organizations’ argument that ICE violated the Administrative Procedures Act, which governs how federal agencies develop regulations.

U.S. Circuit Judge Harry Edwards, who wrote the opinion for the court, said ICE did not engage in the type of final action subject to the Act and that the agency otherwise followed federal restrictions on data sharing.

“Furthermore, if we find, as we do, that the ‘best reading’ of the statute does not support Appellants’ position, then no agency action may countermand the court’s judgment,” the judge wrote in the ruling.

The court also cited a “straightforward” and “crystal clear” statute that outlines when it is acceptable for the IRS to disclose tax return information.

“[The statute’s] text unambiguously authorizes IRS to disclose taxpayer address information,” Edwards wrote.

Keep reading

 Biden Judge Rules Trump’s Policy of Deporting Illegal Aliens to ‘Third-Party Countries’ is Unconstitutional

A federal judge on Wednesday ruled that President Trump’s policy of deporting illegal aliens to ‘third-party countries’ is unconstitutional.

The Trump Administration has been deporting illegal aliens to countries where they are not citizens.

US District Judge Brian Murphy, a Biden appointee, sided with a group of illegal aliens who filed a lawsuit against the Trump Administration and said that the Trump Administration cannot deport illegals to ‘third countries.’

Judge Murphy halted his decision for 15 days so the Trump Administration can appeal.

CBS News reported:

A federal judge ruled Wednesday that a Department of Homeland Security policy that allows immigration authorities to deport migrants to “third countries” that are not their own, without first giving them notice or the opportunity to object, is unlawful.

U.S. District Judge Brian Murphy in Massachusetts sided with a group of noncitizens who filed a class-action lawsuit against the Department of Homeland Security last year. He ruled that the Trump administration’s policy regarding third-country removals must be set aside.

Murphy paused his ruling for 15 days to give the Trump administration time to appeal.

Under the policy issued last March and reaffirmed last July, immigration officers did not need to give notice or an opportunity for migrants to contest their removal to third countries, so long as the government had received word from that country that deportees would not be persecuted or tortured.

Third countries are those other than the ones designated on an immigrant’s order of removal.

Keep reading

Judge Rejects DOJ’s Request to Search Washington Post Reporter’s Electronic Devices in Leak Investigation

A judge on Tuesday denied the Justice Department’s request to search a Washington Post reporter’s electronics for sensitive documents as part of its investigation into national security leaks.

As previously reported, the FBI raided the home of a Washington Post reporter who obtained classified and illegally leaked information from a Pentagon contractor.

Feds executed a search warrant at the Alexandria, Virginia, home of WaPo reporter Hannah Natanson last month as part of an investigation into a Maryland system administrator who has a top security clearance.

The contractor who stashed the classified documents at his home, Aurelio Perez-Lugones, is currently in jail.

FBI agents reportedly found classified intelligence reports in Perez-Lugones’ lunchbox and basement.

Rubio said the Pentagon contractor leaked the Maduro capture plans.

The US Army’s Delta Force captured Maduro last month. The leaked plans could have put the special operators in harm’s way.

On Tuesday, a federal magistrate judge rejected the Justice Department’s request to search Natanson’s electronics.

“Accordingly, the Court rejects the government’s request to conduct an unsupervised, wholesale search of all Movants’ seized data using a government filter team. To gather the information the government needs to prosecute its criminal case without authorizing an unrestrained search and violating Movants’ First Amendment and attorney-client privileges, the Court will conduct the review itself,” judge William Porter wrote.

“No easy remedy exists here. Movants’ First Amendment rights have been restrained. The government seized all of Ms. Natanson’s work product, documentary material, and devices, terminating her access to the confidential sources she developed and to all the tools she needs as a working journalist. The government’s proposed remedy—that she simply buy a new phone and laptop, set up new accounts, and start from scratch—is unjust and unreasonable,” the judge wrote.

Keep reading

Judge Denies Tyler Robinson’s Request to Disqualify Utah Prosecutors from Kirk Murder Case

Judge Tony Graf on Tuesday denied Tyler Robinson’s request to disqualify Utah prosecutors in the Charlie Kirk murder case.

Last month Charlie Kirk assassin Tyler Robinson sought to disqualify Utah prosecutors on the case over a conflict of interest.

Robinson fatally shot TPUSA founder Charlie Kirk on September 10, 2025 during an event at Utah Valley University.

A child of one of the Utah County Attorney’s Office prosecutors was 85 feet away from Charlie Kirk and police rushed in to protect her.

Robinson was charged with:

– Count 1: Aggravated murder (capital offense)
– Count 2: Felony reckless discharge of a firearm causing bodily injury
– Count 3: Felony obstruction of justice for hiding the firearm
– Count 4: Felony obstruction of justice for discarding the clothing he wore during the shooting
– Count 5: Witness tampering for asking roommate to delete incriminating messages
– Count 6: Witness tampering for demanding trans roommate stay silent, and not speak to police
– Count 7: Commission of a violent offense in the presence of a child

Utah prosecutors are also seeking the death penalty.

Robinson, 22, has three public defenders: Kathy Nester, Michael Burt, and Richard Novak.

On Tuesday, Judge Graf denied Robinson’s motion to disqualify the Utah County prosecutors office.

“Because the defendant has not established a factual basis for a finding of a conflict of interest or an objective appearance of impropriety rising to a constitutional concern, his motion is respectfully denied,” Judge Graf said.

Keep reading

Judge Cannon Permanently Blocks Release of Jack Smith’s Report, TORCHES Former Special Counsel in Latest Ruling

Judge Aileen Cannon on Monday permanently blocked the release of Jack Smith’s report on the classified documents case against President Trump.

Cannon, a Trump appointee, slammed Jack Smith for compiling the Trump report after she dismissed the case.

“Special Counsel Smith and his team went ahead for months, undeterred, preparing [the classified documents report] using discovery collected in connection with this proceeding and expending government funds in the process,” Judge Cannon wrote in a 15-page ruling.

“To say this chronology represents, at a minimum, a concerning breach of the spirit of the Dismissal Order is an understatement, if not an outright violation of it.”

“While it is true that former special counsels have released final reports at the conclusion of their work, it appears they have done so either after electing not to bring charges at all or after adjudications of guilt by plea or trial. The Court strains to find a situation in which a former special counsel has released a report after initiating criminal charges that did not result in a finding of guilt,” Cannon wrote.

Keep reading

Trump DOJ Axes NY Immigration Judge Who Rubber-Stamped an Absurd 97 Percent of Asylum Claims

The Trump administration has fired New York immigration Judge Vivienne Gordon-Uruakpa, who boasted the highest asylum approval rate in the state at a staggering 97%.

The 66-year-old judge, known for her soft-on-asylum rulings, was terminated in September without fanfare, as part of a broader purge of lenient judges under Attorney General Pam Bondi.

Gordon-Uruakpa’s ousting came to light after she vanished from the downtown Manhattan courthouse website, where she had presided over cases.

A Justice Department spokesperson confirmed the site is up to date but declined to elaborate on the specific reasons for her firing, though an unnamed government official speaking to the New York Post pointed to her prolific record of granting asylum as the key factor.

Unlike lifetime-appointed federal judges, immigration court judges serve at the pleasure of the Attorney General and can be hired or fired, a power the Trump team is using as another tool to restore order.

Gordon-Uruakpa graduated from Fordham University and Howard University School of Law. Her courtroom became a virtual rubber stamp for asylum seekers, approving claims at a rate far exceeding her colleagues and contributing to the backlog of cases that critics say enabled illegal immigration under previous administrations.

This firing is not an isolated incident.

The Trump administration has axed more than 100 overly permissive immigration judges during his term.

Meanwhile, tougher judges like John Burns, known for denying asylum at high rates, have been promoted. He was named Acting Assistant Chief Judge in January.

The results are undeniable. Deportation rates are soaring, with nearly 80% of migrants seeking asylum being deported in the last quarter, according to Syracuse University’s TRAC program.

Illegal border crossings have also plummeted under Trump’s renewed enforcement policies.

Keep reading

Judge Rules on Evicting Residents Because Maryland Police Wouldn’t Clean up a Homeless Camp

We have bad news for you.

In a previous piece called ‘Horror Show in Maryland: Police Neglect of a Homeless Camp Might Lead to Nearby Residents Being Evicted,’ we talked about a condominium community called Marylander Condominiums, in Prince George’s County, Maryland, east of Washington, D.C. On the same grounds, there was an area nicknamed The Mountains which was a homeless encampment and open-air drug market, where criminal gangs allegedly rule. People from that camp would absolutely terrorize residents, even knocking out their heating system right as people in the greater D.C. area were digging slowly out of a pretty vicious snow/ice storm a few weeks back. Furthermore, officials were seeking to throw the presumably law-abiding residents out of their homes, by seeking a court order, because the homeless encampment had rendered their homes unliveable.

All of this was based on the absolutely excellent reporting of Aaron Sibarium…

Keep reading

Thanks to Woke Judge and DA, Cold-Blooded Killer with Chilling Manifesto Receives NO PRISON TIME Despite Gunning Down CEO While He Slept by His Wife in Bed

The legal system in Northern Virginia has allowed an evil man to completely get away with a cold-blooded murder despite overwhelming evidence.

As WUSA9 reported, a cowardly judge in Fairfax County, Virginia, accepted a plea agreement on Thursday that found a man not guilty by reason of insanity in the 2022 shooting death of DonorSee CEO Glen Glyer.

37-year-old Joshua Danehower, who killed Glyer, will go to a mental health facility after awaiting his future inside a prison cell, where he belonged.

This decision comes after the prosecution led by Soros-funded Fairfax County District Attorney Steve Descano and the defense struck a deal last month that would allow Danehower to escape justice.

In the proceedings, the clinicians from both sides claimed that Danehower was legally insane at the time of the killing.

But the evidence strongly suggests that Danehower knew precisely what he was doing. For example, Danehower had authored a chilling manifesto called “The Plan” detailing the murder plot before carrying it out.

He also had a gun and a lock-picking kit.

Moreover, prosecutors were able to establish that Danehower committed this act because he had worked up an unhealthy obsession with Glyer’s wife after seeing her for the first time in a decade at a church function.

The two had previously gone on a date several years ago.

A jealous Danehower then decided Gret needed to die. Danehower broke into Gret’s home and shot him 10 TIMES as he slept in bed next to his wife.

WUSA9 noted that the couple’s young kids were home the night their father was murdered.

Does this sound like an insane individual or a calm, calculating assassin? Most people would say the latter.

The victim’s mother, Silvia Glyer, was rightfully furious after this outrageous travesty of justice.

“Justice is not served today,” she said outside the courthouse. “An evil man took his life in the middle of the night. A coward.”

“Somebody who planned step by step a murder and who is backed up by the justice system in Virginia.”

Heather Glyer, the victim’s wife, said on the stand she was “robbed of her life partner” and her kids were “robbed of their father.”

Keep reading

Boasberg Rubber-Stamps DOJ Request To Keep FBI-Twitter Payments Secret

When the Twitter files hit in December of 2022, they revealed that the Biden administration had paid Twitter at least $3.4 million between October 2019 and February 2021 to reimburse the pre-Musk, left-leaning social media giant for a flood of requests. 

During this period, the Biden DOJ was going after vaccine skeptics, lab-leak proponents, 2020 election ‘deniers,’ Catholic parents, Hunter Biden laptop / Burisma content, and conservative news outlets. We also learned that the FBI’s Elvis Chan and crew were holding weekly meeting with Twitter on “misinformation,” and flagged thousands of accounts for the above. 

Days after the Twitter files were released, watchdog group Judicial Watch sued the Biden DOJ, which oversees the FBI, over a FOIA request demanding to know how much the FBI paid Twitter from 2016 onward. The FBI initially refused, but eventually released 44-pages of documents with the key payment details redacted – claiming the data was protected under FOIA’s “Exemption 7(E),” which lets agencies hide info about law enforcement methods if releasing it could help criminals or enemies dodge detection.

Judicial Watch then narrowed their claims to just those redacted payment amounts (JW dropped other issues such as vendor names), however in December of 2025, the Trump DOJ asked Judge James Boasberg for a Motion for Summary Judgement to deny Judicial Watch’s request – effectively concealing the extent to which the FBI, under Trump and Biden, was going after Americans. 

In its request for summary judgement, US Attorney Jeanine Pirro’s office (say it ain’t so!) argued that revealing payments that are tied to real investigations could reveal super secret investigative methods – such as how much the FBI is “engaging” with Twitter vs. other platforms, which could lead to ‘bad guys’ (criminals, hackers, foreign spies) to switch to platforms with less FBI activity, and that it might reveal shifts in FBI priorities over time.

Revealing the quarterly totals could also betray “mosaic theory,” where seemingly harmless info (like one quarter’s payment) can be pieced together with public data (e.g., Twitter’s transparency reports) to form a big picture of FBI strategies.

Earlier this month, Boasberg agreed – ruling that revealing the payments could expose FBI “techniques and procedures” (how they monitor online threats) and help bad actors figure out what the FBI is focused on, allowing them to adapt and change strategies. 

Boasberg wrote in his opinion that the 7(E) exemption is valid because it could “risk circumvention of the law.” 

Keep reading