Maine Drops Transgender Lawsuit After Federal Funds Released

The state of Maine and President Donald Trump struck a deal over ‘transgender’ athletes in girls’ sports.

Maine dropped its April 7 lawsuit after the USDA agreed to restore the federal funds it had frozen.

The funding freeze came because Maine refused to bar trans athletes from girls’ teams.

Now the money’s flowing again, and the lawsuit’s out.

Another win against woke!

The state of Maine and President Donald Trump reached an agreement in their dispute over transgender athletes in girls sports.

In exchange for the U.S. Department of Agriculture agreeing to restore federal funds to Maine that it had frozen, the state dropped its lawsuit against the Trump administration.

The lawsuit was filed April 7 after a federal funding freeze in response to the state’s refusal to keep trans athletes out of girls sports.

Federal Judge John Woodcock ordered the Trump administration to restore those funds April 12. Woodcock, a senior judge of the United States District Court for the District of Maine, was appointed by former President George W. Bush in 2003.

Maine Attorney General Aaron Frey’s office released a statement addressing the settlement Friday afternoon.

“It’s unfortunate that my office had to resort to federal court just to get USDA to comply with the law and its own regulations,” Frey said. “But we are pleased that the lawsuit has now been resolved and that Maine will continue to receive funds as directed by Congress to feed children and vulnerable adults.”

However, the state is still facing other legal battles related to the issue.

Keep reading

More Climate Litigation Silliness From Academia

A recent article published in Nature claims that climate liability lawsuits, such as the ones various U.S. states and municipalities continue to pursue, are on rock-solid legal grounds, thanks to the authors’ new research “proving” that the world would be $28 trillion richer today but for carbon emissions from fossil fuels over a 30-year period, 1991 -2020. Ignoring the emissions from developing countries, notably China, which today accounts for one-third of all energy-related greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, the authors focus instead on oil companies, which they call the “carbon majors” – especially Saudi Aramco, Chevron, ExxonMobil, BP, and Gasprom.

For example, according to the authors Chevron has caused an estimated $2 trillion in damages, and perhaps as much as $3.6 trillion. Exxon Mobil is right behind at $1.9 trillion. Similarly, Saudi Aramco and Gazprom are each responsible for $2 trillion in damages. BP is the laggard, at just under $1.5 trillion in damages. Levying fines of those amounts, which greatly exceed these companies’ market values, would lead to their immediate bankruptcy. While the authors may consider such an outcome a “win,” bankrupting these companies would not change the physical and economic realities that the world depends on fossil fuels and will continue to do so for the foreseeable future. (Moreover, it is not clear who would levy the fines and who would receive the monies received – other than trial lawyers.)

Keep reading

Trump DOJ Suing Blue States Over Unconstitutional Climate Laws That Threaten U.S. Energy Security

The Trump Justice Department is suing multiple blue states over ridiculous progressive climate laws that they claim are unconstitutional and which threaten United States energy security.

Returning the country to a state of energy independence was one of the pillars of Trump’s 2024 presidential campaign. It’s extremely important and not just to our economy. Energy independence is a national security issue.

The left wants to destroy the fossil fuel industry and they’ve been quite open about that. Yet as we just saw in Spain, using only green and renewable energy sources doesn’t work.

FOX News reports:

DOJ sues four blue states over ‘unconstitutional’ climate laws threatening US energy security

The Justice Department (DOJ) has filed lawsuits against four Democrat-led states: Hawaii, Michigan, New York and Vermont, over what it calls unconstitutional climate policies that threaten U.S. energy independence and national security.

The move follows President Donald Trump’s Executive Order 14260, Protecting American Energy from State Overreach, directing federal action against state laws that burden domestic energy development.

“These burdensome and ideologically motivated laws and lawsuits threaten American energy independence and our country’s economic and national security,” said Attorney General Pam Bondi…

The DOJ filed complaints Tuesday against New York and Vermont over newly passed “climate superfund” laws, which would impose strict liability on fossil fuel companies for alleged contributions to climate change.

New York’s law alone seeks $75 billion in damages from energy firms. According to the DOJ, these laws are preempted by the federal Clean Air Act, violate the Constitution, and infringe on federal foreign affairs powers.

This is absolutely necessary. When the power goes out, all bets are off.

Keep reading

President Trump Announces He’s Stripping Harvard’s Tax-Exempt Status After Woke College Defied Five Key Demands From Trump and Sued Instead

One of the nation’s premier colleges is about to learn that defying President Trump is a grave mistake.

This morning, Trump posted on Truth Social that he will be taking away far-left Harvard University’s tax-exempt status after the school refused to comply with five key demands from his administration and sued instead.

“We are going to be taking away Harvard’s Tax Exempt Status,” Trump wrote. “It’s what they deserve!”

As The New York Post notes, Harvard’s tax exemptions have played a key role in helping the school amass the largest university endowment in the entire country. It currently stands at roughly $53 billion, with $2.4 billion ‘earned’ in the 2024 fiscal year.

As ABC notes, Trump had previously demanded Harvard lose its tax-exempt status after the university refused to comply with the administration’s commonsense demands, including actions on antisemitism and the use of DEI on campus.

The Gateway Pundit previously reported that the Department of Health and Human Services on April 11, along with other federal agencies, issued Harvard a letter demanding five key reforms if it wished to continue receiving federal research funding.

The demands were:

  • Shuttering of all diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs;
  • A university-wide “viewpoint audit” to eliminate leftist ideological monocultures;
  • Forced hiring and admissions practices to ensure conservative representation;
  • Defunding and disbanding of radical pro-Hamas student groups;
  • And complete transparency on foreign funding sources.

After Harvard refused, the Trump administration on April 15 froze $2.2 billion</> in federal grants to Harvard due to its coddling of antisemitism and bigotry on campus.

Harvard sued the Trump Administration a week later to restore the funding.

Keep reading

Hunter Biden drops lawsuit against IRS whistleblowers, who say suit was ‘attempt to intimidate’

Hunter Biden has agreed to drop his federal lawsuit against IRS whistle-blowers who publicly argued federal investigations against then-President Joe Biden’s son were being mishandled by their agency and by the Justice Department.

“Intimidation and retaliation were never going to work,” IRS supervisory special agent Gary Shapley and IRS special agent Joseph Ziegler, who publicly raised concerns about what they considered the federal government’s slow-walking of the investigation, they said following the announcement Wednesday evening that the suit had been dismissed.

The lawyers for Hunter Biden filed a joint notice with the IRS telling the federal judge that they “hereby give notice of the dismissal with prejudice of all claims asserted in the Amended Complaint” that had been filed by their client. 

The dismissal being made “with prejudice” essentially means that the lawsuit cannot be brought again.

“It’s always been clear that the lawsuit was an attempt to intimidate us,” Shapley and Ziegler said. “However, we were always motivated by doing the right thing, defending our work, and honoring our duty to the American people.” 

Biden attorneys filed a lawsuit against the IRS in September 2023, alleging “agents have targeted and sought to embarrass Mr. Biden via public statements to the media in which they and their representatives disclosed confidential information about a private citizen’s tax matters.”

“While Mr. Biden has been the victim of various leaks regarding the IRS investigation previously, most recently, two IRS agents – Mr. Gary Shapley and Mr. Joseph Ziegler – and their attorneys raised the stakes to unprecedented levels with their numerous public appearances,” they said.

The lawyers doubled down on these claims in a February 2024 amended complaint to the federal court.

The legal team for the IRS whistle-blowers, at Empower Oversight, on Wednesday said: “Hunter Biden brought this lawsuit against two honorable federal agents in retaliation for blowing the whistle on the preferential treatment he was given by President Biden’s Department of Justice,” they said. “Shapley and Ziegler did nothing wrong.”

Keep reading

CBS News owner Paramount ready to settle Trump’s $20 billion lawsuit over ’60 Minutes’: report

CBS News owner Paramount Global is reportedly ready to settle President Trump’s $20 billion lawsuit over the “60 Minutes” interview last year with then-Vice President Kamala Harris.

Paramount’s board has drafted acceptable financial terms for a potential settlement with Trump, The New York Times reported Tuesday, citing anonymous sources. However, the exact dollar amount is unclear.

Trump’s lawsuit alleges the TV news network deceptively edited a “60 Minutes” interview with Harris, who at the time of the interview was also the Democratic nominee in the presidential race.

In January, The Times reported that Paramount was having conversations with Trump to settle the lawsuit, which at the time was for $10 billion, before Trump increased it to $20 billion in February.

Last week, the executive producer for “60 Minutes” said he was stepping down from his role because he could no longer objectively oversee the show as it faces backlash over Trump’s lawsuit.

Earlier this month, Trump posted on Truth Social that he is “so honored to be suing 60 Minutes, CBS Fake News, and Paramount, over their fraudulent, beyond recognition, reporting,” adding that the network did everything possible to “illegally elect” Harris and that it “must be responsible for what they have done and are doing.”

Keep reading

‘Reminiscent of the KKK’: Columbia Janitors Sue Protesters Who Took Over Hamilton Hall

The Columbia University janitors who were held hostage during the violent takeover of a campus building last spring are suing their alleged captors for battery, assault, and conspiracy to violate their civil rights, according to a copy of the suit reviewed exclusively by The Free Press.

The lawsuit was filed in federal court on Friday evening by Torridon Law and the Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law on behalf of Columbia janitors Mario Torres and Lester Wilson. It alleges that over 40 Columbia students and “outside agitators,” some but not all of whom were arrested by police following the takeover of Columbia’s Hamilton Hall last April 29, “terrorized” both Torres and Wilson “into the early morning of April 30th, assaulted and battered them, held them against their will, and derided them as ‘Jew-lovers’ and ‘Zionists.’ ”

The occupation of Hamilton Hall occurred almost exactly a year ago, and both Torres and Lester say they have been struggling to cope ever since. The lawsuit states both men suffered physical injuries the night of the occupation, and that they have also been suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder that has required ongoing medical care. Neither has been able to return to work, and are instead “subsisting on interim Workers Compensation payments” which are “inadequate” to pay for their basic needs and medical bills, according to the suit.

“Mario and Lester are decent, honest, hardworking men who have been through hell. None of this ever should have happened,” said Tara Helfman, one of the Torridon lawyers on the case.

The lawsuit describes the protesters, the majority of whom “donned masks and hoods to conceal their identities,” as “reminiscent of the Ku Klux Klan.” It claims they “are part of a broad pro-Hamas, anti-Semitic network of organizations, groups, and cells that are connected through a largely untraceable underground communications system. They promote and resort to violent and illegal tactics, and are motivated by invidious discrimination against Jews and supporters of Jews.”

The Brandeis Center also filed a federal lawsuit late Friday on behalf of two students, a professor, and a rabbi at the University of California, Los Angeles, alleging that several groups, including National Students for Justice in Palestine, Faculty for Justice in Palestine Network, American Muslims for Palestine, and Westchester People’s Action Coalition, engaged in “a coordinated campaign of egregious acts of racial exclusion, intimidation, and assault” to “intimidate Jewish students, faculty, and staff.”

The “occupiers” named in Torres and Wilson’s lawsuit include leaders of Columbia’s most vocal anti-Israel groups like the Columbia University Apartheid Divest Coalition, Students for Justice in Palestine and Jewish Voices for Peace. Other defendants are people not associated with the university who were allegedly involved in the building takeover, including James Carlson, described in a New York Post story as a “longtime anarchist” and as the son of millionaires, and Lisa Fithian, a professional protest trainer and “lifelong agitator.” Also named in the suit is The People’s Forum, a far-left activist group responsible for organizing many of the anti-Israel protests at Columbia and across New York City.

Over 40 protesters, including Carlson, were arrested and charged with trespassing in the days after the Hamilton Hall occupation. But Manhattan district attorney Alvin Bragg’s office dropped the charges, claiming the charges would have been “extremely difficult” to prove because the protesters wore masks and covered security cameras.

Keep reading

Trans baby killer filed $3.5M lawsuit against Trump for ‘transphobic’ views that led to alleged sexual assaults behind bars

A transgender woman convicted of killing her infant filed a handwritten lawsuit against President Trump, claiming his “transphobic hate speech” fueled repeated instances of sexual assault she endured at an all-male prison in Indiana.

Autumn Cordellionè, also known as Jonathan C. Richardson, alleged that the president’s “extremist rhetoric” emboldened her assailants to violently assault and rape her in January shortly after she was transferred from protective custody to Westville Correctional Facility to serve out her 55-year sentence.

She said Trump is “negligent due his alleged knowledge that others may act on his words,” the baby killer scribbled in the 13-page suit filed in the Southern District of Indiana on April 1.

Cordellionè is seeking $3.5 million in damages from the commander in chief.

“President Trump has vowed to defend biological women from gender ideology extremism and restore biological truth to the Federal government,” a White House spokesperson told The Post when asked to comment on the lawsuit.

Keep reading

Harvard Sues Trump Administration Over $2.2 Billion Federal Funding Freeze Amid Crackdown on Woke Campuses

Harvard University has filed suit against nine federal agencies in the Trump administration after the federal government froze more than $2.2 billion in multi-year research grants and $60 million in contracts.

The move was led by a coalition of executive departments, including Defense, Education, and Health and Human Services.

On April 11, the Department of Health and Human Services, along with other federal agencies, issued Harvard a letter demanding sweeping reforms if it wished to continue receiving federal research funding. The demands included:

  • Shuttering of all diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs;
  • A university-wide “viewpoint audit” to eliminate leftist ideological monocultures;
  • Forced hiring and admissions practices to ensure conservative representation;
  • Defunding and disbanding of radical pro-Hamas student groups;
  • And complete transparency on foreign funding sources.

These measures, according to the government, were necessary to combat antisemitism and restore ideological balance in an institution long captured by left-wing radicals.

President Garber of Harvard fired back, stating, “The administration’s prescription goes beyond the power of the federal government. It violates Harvard’s First Amendment rights and exceeds the statutory limits of the government’s authority under Title VI.

“And it threatens our values as a private institution devoted to the pursuit, production, and dissemination of knowledge. No government—regardless of which party is in power—should dictate what private universities can teach, whom they can admit and hire, and which areas of study and inquiry they can pursue,” he added.

But the Trump administration isn’t backing down. Sources told Harvard that an additional $1 billion in research funding may soon be revoked, and the Department of Homeland Security is now threatening to revoke Harvard’s international student program. The IRS is also reportedly eyeing Harvard’s tax-exempt status.

Keep reading

Catholic hospital drops legal argument that a fetus is not a person

Catholic Health Initiatives-Iowa has dropped its argument in a medical malpractice case that the loss of an unborn child does not equate to the death of a “person” for the purpose of calculating damage awards.

The nonprofit, tax-exempt entity is one of several defendants in a Polk County malpractice case involving the death of an unborn child.

Last month, attorneys for CHI and MercyOne Des Moines Medical Center argued an unborn child should not be considered a “patient” for purposes of calculating damages in the case. They also argued that “finding an unborn child to be a ‘person’ would lead to serious implications in other areas of the law.”

That position appeared to clash with CHI’s mission statement and ethics guidelines, both of which are based on the concept that human life begins at the moment of conception.

In Iowa, court-ordered awards for noneconomic losses stemming from medical malpractice are capped at $250,000, except in cases that entail the “loss or impairment of mind or body.” Initially, CHI and MercyOne argued the cap on damages applied in cases where the “loss” was that of a fetus or an unborn child.

However, during a court hearing on Friday, an attorney for CHI and MercyOne, Christine Conover, informed the court it was withdrawing from the motion to cap damages in the case on that basis.

“We are a Catholic hospital and obviously the Catholic faith believes that life begins at conception,” Conover told Polk County District Judge Scott J. Beattie.

“To be honest, I had wondered about that stance,” Beattie told Conover, referring to the hospital’s previously filed motion seeking to cap damages. “It seemed like kind of an odd stance,” he added, noting that it seemed to contradict the position that CHI had taken in other legal matters.

In a written statement issued Friday, Bob Ritz, president and CEO of MercyOne, stated “we are heartbroken that our belief that human personhood begins at conception would ever be called into question. As a Catholic health system, the sanctity of life is not just a belief we hold; it is the foundation of every action we take.

“While the motion (to limit damages) was accurate from a purely legal standpoint, it has caused confusion and concern. That is why we have asked our counsel to withdraw the motion with respect to MercyOne. No courtroom argument should ever cast doubt on the deeply held Catholic values that guide MercyOne.

Keep reading