Tag: lawsuits

Jacksonville officials maintained illegal registry of gun owners, violating state’s firearm preemption laws

Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier has filed a lawsuit seeking a $5 million civil penalty against the City of Jacksonville, alleging that the municipality maintained an illegal registry of law-abiding gun owners.

The legal action stems from “log books” kept between 2023 and 2025 by city personnel, which reportedly recorded the personal information and firearm details of individuals carrying weapons into government buildings like City Hall.

Uthmeier argues that this practice violates Florida’s preemption laws, which prohibit local governments from creating firearm registries — a restriction designed to protect the privacy and Second Amendment (2A) rights of citizens.

While a prior local investigation by the State Attorney’s Office found no criminal intent, the attorney general’s lawsuit contends that city management was complicit in maintaining the registry, thereby triggering the multimillion-dollar fine permitted under state statute.

“We are taking the City of Jacksonville to court for knowingly and willfully keeping an illegal gun registry in violation of Florida law,” Uthmeier asserted.

Keep reading

Appeals court spares Trump from paying $83 million defamation award to E Jean Carroll — for now

President Donald Trump won’t have to pay an $83 million defamation award to a longtime advice columnist until the U.S. Supreme Court gets a chance to review the case or reject an appeal, according to a court entry Tuesday.

The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals agreed to a request by one of Trump’s lawyers that it let the president delay the payment to E. Jean Carroll, though it required that Trump post a $7.4 million bond to cover any additional interest costs, a request Carroll’s attorney had made.

The appeals court late last month refused Trump’s request for a rare meeting of the full 2nd Circuit to hear an appeal of a three-judge panel’s affirmance of the January 2024 verdict.

Afterward, Trump attorney Justin D. Smith asked the 2nd Circuit to stay the effect of its decision upholding the award so that Trump would not be forced to pay the judgment before the high court has a chance to consider an appeal.

Smith said last week there was a “fair prospect” that the Supreme Court will find in favor of Trump, who has called Carroll’s claims first made publicly in 2019 that she was sexually attacked by Trump in a Manhattan luxury department store dressing room in spring 1996 a “made up scam.”

The $83 million award to Carroll, 82, came from a jury that briefly heard Trump testify and observed his animated behavior for several days.

In upholding the verdict, a 2nd Circuit panel wrote last September that Trump continued his attacks against Carroll for at least five years, making them “more extreme and frequent as the trial approached.”

“He also continued these same attacks during the trial itself,” the appeals court said. “In one such statement, issued two days into the trial, Trump proclaimed that he would continue to defame Carroll ‘a thousand times.’ ”

The jury had been instructed to accept the findings of a jury that in May 2023 awarded Carroll $5 million after concluding Trump sexually abused her in the department store and then defamed her after she published her account of it in a 2019 memoir.

Trump is challenging the $83 million award on several grounds, asserting “absolute immunity” for comments he made while president as he disavowed knowing Carroll and attacked her motivations, saying they were politically driven or arose from a desire to promote her memoir.

Keep reading

Parents Sue OpenAI After Son Fatally Overdosed Following ChatGPT Drug Advice.

 WHAT HAPPENED: A Texas couple has filed a lawsuit against OpenAI, alleging that ChatGPTprovided their son with unsafe advice about drug use, leading to his fatal overdose in 2025. The family alleges that ChatGPT recommended a combination of kratom and Xanax, which proved lethal for their 19-year-old son, Sam Nelson.

 DETAIL: The lawsuit claims the teen repeatedly used ChatGPT for guidance on various substances and that the chatbot gradually shifted from refusing harmful requests to offering specific recommendations on drug intake and recovery. His parents, Leila Turner-Scott and Angus Scott, argue that the AI platform dispensed dangerous advice that it was unqualified to provide and failed to maintain adequate safety protections. The suit, filed in a California state court, seeks to hold OpenAI responsible for wrongful death and negligence, alleging their son would still be alive if stronger safeguards had been in place. OpenAI has not publicly responded in detail to the lawsuit, but it has previously stated that ChatGPT is designed to discourage harmful behavior and direct users to professional help. The case adds to a growing number of lawsuits accusing AI chatbots of contributing to dangerous or violent conduct, such as mass shootings and mental health crises, including recorded suicides.

 KEY QUOTE: “The chatbot is capable of stopping a conversation when it’s told to or when it’s programmed to… And they took away the programming that did that.” – Leila Turner-Scott, the victim’s mother.

 IMPACT: The case highlights growing concerns over the potential for AI platforms to provide unverified medical advice, raising questions about liability and the need for stricter safeguards. It also underscores broader debates about the role of AI and whether teenagers, the mentally ill, and other vulnerable people should have unsupervised access to it.

Keep reading

11th Circuit Denies Rehearing in President Trump’s MEGA RICO Lawsuit Against Crooked Hillary Clinton, James Comey, and the Russia Hoax Cabal

The 11th Circuit Court of Appeals has just DENIED President Donald Trump’s petition for rehearing en banc in his landmark lawsuit against Hillary Clinton, James Comey, the Democratic National Committee, Perkins Coie, Fusion GPS, Christopher Steele, and the rest of the Deep State operatives who orchestrated the greatest political hoax in American history, the Russia collusion lie that stole years from Trump’s first term and targeted him with endless lawfare.

The court’s denial of both panel rehearing and en banc review means the outrageous nearly $1 million sanction slapped on Trump and his former attorney, Alina Habba, stands.

In March 2022, President Trump filed it in federal court in Miami, naming Hillary Clinton, James Comey, the Democratic National Committee, Perkins Coie, Fusion GPS, Christopher Steele, and a host of other co-conspirators in a sprawling racketeering scheme to fabricate the Russia collusion narrative, spy on his campaign, and derail his presidency.

Trump asked for triple damages of expenses and losses of more than $24 million.

In April 2022, President Trump requested the Clinton-appointed judge overseeing his Russiagate case against Hillary Clinton and others be removed from the case due to obvious conflicts of interest.

Somehow, Clinton-appointed Judge Donald Middlebrooks and Judge Ryon McCabe received this case.

Middlebrooks refused to recuse himself from the case despite an obvious conflict of interest being that he was appointed by Hillary Clinton’s husband, Bill Clinton.

Judge Donald Middlebrooks DISMISSED President Trump’s lawsuit against Hillary Clinton and several FBI-DOJ crooks who manufactured the Russia Collusion hoax to influence the 2016 election and then to bring down his presidency in a government coup.

Judge Middlebrooks also threatened Trump’s attorneys with “consequences” for daring to file the case against Hillary Clinton.

Keep reading

OpenAI sued over ChatGPT’s alleged role in guiding FSU shooter

OpenAI is being sued by the family of a victim killed in the April 2025 mass shooting at Florida State University that left two people dead. The lawsuit alleges that OpenAI’s ChatGPT enabled the attack.

Vandana Joshi, the widow of Tiru Chabba, who was killed alongside the university dining director Robert Morales, filed the federal lawsuit against OpenAI in Florida on Sunday.

The complaint also names Phoenix Ikner, the man accused in the shooting, as a defendant, citing his “extensive conversations” with ChatGPT. The suit says that OpenAI failed to effectively detect a threat in ChatGPT’s conversations with Ikner, claiming the chatbot “either defectively failed to connect the dots or else was never properly designed to recognize the threat.”

According to the complaint, Ikner, then a student at FSU, shared with ChatGPT images of firearms he had acquired. The chatbot then allegedly explained how to use them, “telling him the Glock had no safety, that it was meant to be fired ‘quick to use under stress’ and advising him to keep his finger off the trigger until he was ready to shoot.”

The suit said Ikner began his attack at FSU by following the instructions.

At one point, the lawsuit alleges, ChatGPT said that it’s much more likely for a shooting to gain national attention “if children are involved, even 2-3 victims can draw more attention.” Later, on the day of the shooting, the lawsuit says, Ikner asked about what “the legal process, sentencing, and incarceration outlook” would be.

Keep reading

DOJ Sues New Mexico and Albuquerque Over Laws Blocking Federal Immigration Enforcement

The United States has filed a complaint and motion for preliminary injunction against the State of New Mexico, New Mexico Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham, New Mexico Attorney General Raul Torrez, the City of Albuquerque, and Albuquerque Mayor Timothy Keller, alleging that the implementation of House Bill 9 (HB9), entitled the “Immigrant Safety Act,” and Albuquerque City Ordinance O-26-15, entitled the “Safer Community Places Ordinance (SCPO),” infringes on federal immigration enforcement authority.

Through HB9, the State of New Mexico is trying to abolish decades of long-standing, voluntary partnerships between local governments and federal authorities that are essential for enforcing immigration laws and keeping the federal immigration system running as Congress intended.

“New Mexico is attempting to regulate immigration policy, something the federal government is clearly and uniquely empowered by the Constitution to do,” said Assistant Attorney General Brett A. Shumate of the Justice Department’s Civil Division. “Our filings seek to halt the state’s unconstitutional actions by preserving cooperation between federal, state, and local law enforcement and allowing federal immigration officials to enforce the law.”

Both HB9 and the SCPO seek to block federal agents from using any local government property to carry out their work. Additionally, by unlawfully requiring private businesses to tip off illegal aliens about immigration enforcement activities, the SCPO attempts to harbor and shield illegal aliens from detection by federal immigration authorities and poses an obstacle to the enforcement of federal immigration law.

“The State of New Mexico and the City of Albuquerque seek to intentionally obstruct federal law enforcement by preventing cooperation between local governments and the federal government,” said First Assistant U.S. Attorney Ryan Ellison for the District of New Mexico. “HB9 and the SCPO unlawfully interfere with federal immigration enforcement, illegally discriminate against federal operations, and violate constitutional protections regarding contracts and federal supremacy. Additionally, by barring public entities from participating in federal immigration detention in New Mexico, HB9 jeopardizes nearly 300 jobs and the economy of Otero County. Our lawsuit asks the court to declare these laws invalid and issue an immediate injunction to stop them from being enforced.”

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

Top DOJ official predicts Supreme Court will declare AR-15 rifles legal everywhere in America

The Justice Department’s top civil rights lawyer believes the Trump administration’s lawsuit this week against the city of Denver’s gun ban will one day soon lead to a Supreme Court decision legalizing the AR-15 semiautomatic rifle – revered by gun owners and reviled by liberals – in every jurisdiction in America.

“We intend to make sure they do that,” Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon said in an interview set to be aired Wednesday night on the Just the News, No Noise television show.

Dhillon spoke just hours after her office filed a lawsuit against the city of Denver over its ban on “assault rifles,” arguing the ban violates residents’ Second Amendment rights. 

The ban covers AR-15-style rifles, which the complaint argues are owned by “tens of millions” of Americans, 

The complaint also describes the use of the term “assault rifle” in the Denver law’s language as a “rhetorically politically charged” term used by “anti-gun publicists.” 

In addition, the suit cites the 2008 Supreme Court decision in District of Columbia v. Heller, which held that the Second Amendment protects the right of law-abiding citizens to possess weapons that are in common use for lawful purposes.

Keep reading

JPM Tried $1 Million Payoff To Bury Banker’s Sexual Assault Claims Before Daily Mail Bombshell

Why?

The Wall Street Journal has released a new report stating that JPMorgan reportedly offered former investment banker Chirayu Rana $1 million to settle his sexual assault, harassment, and racial discrimination claims against Hajdini before he filed the lawsuit.

Rana’s lawsuit was refiled on Monday after being withdrawn for a week. The lawsuit went viral after a Daily Mail report, which was later followed by a New York Post article citing sources who said the bank “found no evidence of wrongdoing” and Hajdini’s lawyer, who rejected the claims in the suit.

“The original lawsuit was not withdrawn,” said David Kramer, Rana’s lawyer. “After filing, the court clerk informed us that the suit required review and sign-off from the judge before being formally filed under a pseudonym. Upon signature by the judge yesterday, the suit was formally filed under a pseudonym.”

Rana alleges that Hajdini sexually assaulted him and that co-workers subjected him to racial harassment related to his Nepalese background.

JPM’s settlement offer was reportedly intended to avoid litigation and reputational damage. JPM maintains that the claims are baseless.

The report stated that Rana’s lawyers did not accept the $1 million offer and later countered JPM with a proposed settlement of $11.75 million.

Rana joined JPM’s leveraged finance team in May 2024, filed an internal HR complaint in May 2025, was placed on paid leave, and later left the bank. He then joined private equity firm Bregal Sagemount in October 2025 but was reportedly let go last month.

“If you don’t f— me soon, I’m going to ruin you… Never forget, I f—ing own you,” Hajdini allegedly said, as detailed in the suit. “If you don’t f— my brains out tonight, I’m going to sabotage your promotion.”

The lawsuit continued, “She then told Plaintiff to suck her toes, repeating that she would facilitate his promotion and bonus.”

Keep reading

Government Sues New York Times for Alleged Discrimination Against White Man

The New York Times is making news itself these days, with a “diversity and inclusion” drive that’s dragged it into court.

One of the most influential liberal news outlets in the nation is facing a federal lawsuit from President Donald Trump’s administration over alleged discrimination against an unidentified white male employee in favor of women, blacks, and other nonwhites when a promotion was at stake.

And the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission clearly isn’t fooling around.

In the lawsuit, according to the New York Post, the alleged victim claimed the Times employee had been passed over for a promotion in favor of a final panel of candidates that included “a white woman, a Black man, an Asian female and a multiracial female.”

According to a New York Times report about the suit, the alleged victim claimed that the promotion of a white man would fail to follow the newspaper’s own goals as described in a 2021 document called “Call to Action.”

“A decrease in the percentage of White male employees (whether new hires, existing employees, or those in leadership, as appropriate) was a necessary consequence for the NYT to achieve these results,” the article noted, citing the lawsuit.

The man at the heart of the issue has been working at the newspaper since 2014, according to the New York Times report. Last year, he applied for a job as deputy real estate editor, the newspaper stated. He did get one interview for the job, but never made it to the panel interview stage.

The EEOC lawsuit claims he is more qualified than the person who received the promotion.

Keep reading