Tag: lawsuits

Tulsi Gabbard Suing Biden/Harris Admin For Placing Her On Terrorist Watch List

Former Democratic Representative Tulsi Gabbard is taking legal action against the Biden/Harris Administration after she discovered that she has essentially been placed on a terrorist watch list.

Gabbard, a military veteran, had it brought to her attention by Federal Air Marshal whistleblowers that she has been marked under the Quiet Skies program, a TSA scheme that seeks to identify travellers who may pose a risk to aviation security.

Those on this watchlist are not banned from flying, but are subject to enhanced searches and surveillance at airports, including having armed Air Marshals accompanying them on flights.

The whistleblowers have informed Gabbard that she is being monitored by two Explosive Detection Canine Teams, one Transportation Security Specialist specializing in explosives, one plainclothes TSA Supervisor, and three Federal Air Marshals every time she flies.

Keep reading

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton Sues General Motors for Illegally Harvesting and Selling Drivers’ Private Data to Corporate Giants, Including Insurance Companies

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton has filed a lawsuit against General Motors (GM), alleging that the automotive giant engaged in deceptive and unlawful business practices by collecting and selling private driving data from over 1.5 million Texans without their knowledge or consent.

This lawsuit follows Paxton’s announcement in June 2024 that he had launched an investigation into several car manufacturers suspected of improperly harvesting vast amounts of data directly from vehicles.

The findings have been alarming, revealing a disturbing trend among companies leveraging invasive technologies to exploit unsuspecting consumers.

“Our investigation revealed that General Motors has engaged in egregious business practices that violated Texans’ privacy and broke the law. We will hold them accountable,” said Attorney General Paxton. “Companies are using invasive technology to violate the rights of our citizens in unthinkable ways.”

The crux of the lawsuit centers around GM’s use of technology installed in most vehicles manufactured since 2015. This technology allegedly collects, records, analyzes, and transmits detailed driving data every time a driver uses their vehicle, according to the press release.

Shockingly, GM sold this sensitive information to various third parties, including insurance companies, who used it to generate “Driving Scores” aimed at influencing insurance premiums.

“A customer’s Driving Score was based on a series of “factors” developed by General Motors that were supposedly indicative of “bad” driving behavior and included behavior such as (1) unique identifiers of a trip; (2) trip mileage; (3) hard braking and acceleration events; (4) speed events over 80 miles per hour; and (5) other behavior tracked by OnStar Vehicle Diagnostics (“OVD”). Under the Verisk Agreement, GM provided Verisk with the Driving Data necessary to determine whether a customer exhibited any “bad” driving behaviors,” according to the lawsuit.

This sensitive information includes location tracking, driving habits, personal communications within the vehicle’s system, customer ID, name, and home address.

Keep reading

Lawsuit Claims Indiana Unconstitutionally Seizes Millions in Cash From FedEx Packages Every Year

A new class action lawsuit accuses Indiana law enforcement of seizing millions of dollars a year in cash from FedEx packages without ever informing owners of what crime they’re suspected of violating.

Henry and Minh Cheng, who run a small California jewelry wholesaler business, allege in a class action countersuit filed in Indiana state court that police seized over $42,000 in cash from a FedEx package en route to them from a client in Virginia. County prosecutors then filed a lawsuit to forfeit their money through civil asset forfeiture, claiming the Chengs’ money was connected to a violation of a criminal statute, but the complaint never stated which statute.

The Chengs’ suit, though, says they’re not the only victims. The lawsuit says Indiana law enforcement officials “exploit Indianapolis’s location at the Crossroads of America to forfeit millions of dollars in currency being shipped from one side of the nation to the other.”

The Chengs’ countersuit against the Marion County Prosecutor’s Office and the State of Indiana was filed on their behalf by the Institute for Justice (I.J.), a libertarian public interest law firm that has challenged civil asset forfeiture laws in several states.

According to I.J., the Marion County Prosecutor’s Office has sued to forfeit $2.5 million in currency from at least 130 FedEx parcels in transit from one non-Indiana state to another over the past two years.

“This scheme is one of the most predatory we have seen, and it’s past time to put a stop to it,” I.J. senior attorney Sam Gedge said in a press release. “It’s illegal and unconstitutional for Indiana to forfeit in-transit money whose only connection to Indiana is the happenstance of FedEx’s shipping practices.”

Keep reading

Philly DA’s comments about ‘flat-out unscientific’ people come back to haunt in lawsuit over COVID-19 vaccine mandate, possible ‘anti-religious hostility’

A federal appeals court ruled Monday that the progressive Philadelphia District Attorney must face a lawsuit by an Orthodox Jewish former Assistant District Attorney for denying her religious exemption to the office’s COVID-19 vaccination mandate. Because it was unclear whether the office’s policy was rooted in hostility toward religion, the matter was sent for a jury to decide.

A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit unanimously overturned a lower court ruling that dismissed Rachel Spivack’s case against Larry Krasner (D), the elected District Attorney of Philadelphia whose 2022 impeachment was overturned as constitutionally unsound. As a result, the case will move toward trial.

The panel included Barack Obama appointee U.S. Circuit Judge Cheryl Ann Krause, and Joe Biden appointees U.S. Circuit Judges Arianna J. Freeman and Tamika Montgomery-Reeves. Freeman penned the 42-page ruling for the panel.

Keep reading

Pro-Gun Organization Wins Lawsuit Against ATF’s Trigger Prohibition

On July 23, 2024, The National Association for Gun Rights was victorious in a summary judgment from the Federal District Court, Northern District of Texas, which overturned the ATF’s prohibition on forced reset triggers.

The ruling was issued by Judge Reed O’Connor, which vacated the ATF’s prohibition on forced reset triggers, declaring resoundingly that the ATF went beyond the scope of its statutory powers by redefining forced reset triggers as machine guns. The ruling was partly based on the Supreme Court’s recent Cargill decision overturning the ATF’s bump stock prohibition regulation.

Hannah Hill, Executive Director of the National Foundation for Gun Rights (the legal arm of NARG) declared, “We are absolutely thrilled that the court has dealt such a decisive blow to the ATF’s unconstitutional agency overreach. The ATF under the Biden/Harris regime has utterly trampled the Constitution and the rule of law in their eagerness to destroy the Second Amendment. The ATF may appeal this ruling, but precedent and momentum are both on our side, and we fully anticipate the absolute end of the ATF’s unlawful, unconstitutional ban on forced reset triggers.”

Keep reading

Man Who Was Arrested for Flipping Off Cop Settles for $175,000

A man who was arrested and charged for flipping off a Vermont State Police (VSP) officer settled his case last month for $175,000.

“Far too often, police abuse their authority to retaliate against and suppress speech they personally find offensive or insulting,” Lia Ernst, the legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Vermont, tells Reason about the case. “This settlement demonstrates that violating these rights does not come without a cost.”

Through the settlement, Gregory Bombard will receive $100,000 in damages. The ACLU of Vermont and the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE), which both represented Bombard in his suit, will receive the remaining $75,000.

All told, Bombard spent “about a year fighting the criminal charges and more than three years seeking declaratory relief,” a spokesperson for FIRE tells Reason.

Jay Riggen, the officer who arrested Bombard, “retired from VSP effective May 31, 2024,” a spokesperson for the Vermont State Police tells Reason. “We have no additional comment on this case.”

In February 2018, Bombard was stopped by Vermont State Trooper Riggen, who believed Bombard had given him the finger while driving—an allegation Bombard denies. However, after Riggen walked away from the car, Bombard flipped Riggen off and swore at the officer in frustration for having been pulled over.

In response, Riggen pulled Bombard over again and arrested him for disorderly conduct. “The first one may have been an error,” said Riggen during the arrest, referring to the reason for the initial stop, but “the second one certainly was not.”

Keep reading

Watchdog sues Treasury Dept. for records on foreign purchases of US farmland

A Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit has been filed by the watchdog Judicial Watch against the Department of Treasury for records of communication between the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) and the Department of Agriculture (USDA) regarding the purchase of US farmland by foreign entities.

Judicial Watch filed the lawsuit after the Treasury Department failed to respond to an April 10, 2024, FOIA request for:

  • Any and all records of communications between the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) and the U.S. Department of Agriculture concerning, regarding, or relating to the purchase of U.S. agricultural real estate by foreign entities.  

On January 19, 2024, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) released a report which found significant gaps in information collection and timely information sharing between the Committee on Foreign Investment and other government agencies, including the USDA, concerning foreign investment in U.S. agricultural land.

Keep reading

Rachel Maddow and Her Co-Stars Made ‘Verifiably False’ Statements About a Doctor They Called the ‘Uterus Collector.’ Now His $30 Million Lawsuit Is Headed For Trial.

NBCUniversal is headed for trial after a judge ruled in favor of a Georgia doctor who MSNBC’s biggest stars accused of performing “mass hysterectomies” on women at a Trump-era immigration facility in Georgia. The judge ruled that Rachel Maddow, Nicolle Wallace, and Chris Hayes made “verifiably false” statements about the doctor, who is suing NBC for $30 million.

The discovery process in the lawsuit, which has received little attention, has drawn back the curtain on the inner workings of MSNBC, revealing how the liberal cable network works hand in hand with NBC News, which seeks to portray itself as nonpartisan. NBCUniversal’s standards department reviewed and approved the reporting on the Georgia doctor, before it was published on NBCNews.com and then broadcast on MSNBC programs. The NBC News correspondents, Jacob Soboroff and Julia Ainsley, worked closely with a standards executive during their reporting. Soboroff is also an MSNBC correspondent.

Furthermore, Maddow—who was deposed for the lawsuit—and Hayes were personally involved in the off-camera vetting and editorial conversations around the segment to an extent that can be unusual for on-camera hosts.

Maddow is reportedly paid about $30 million a year by NBCUniversal to host her show one evening a week and work on longer-range projects. 

In her ruling last month, the judge, Lisa Godbey Wood of the Southern District of Georgia,  found that Maddow, Hayes, and Wallace made 39 “verifiably false” allegations about Mahendra Amin, a gynecologist who treated detainees at a Georgia Immigration and Customs Enforcement facility. 

A nurse at the facility had made a whistleblower complaint alleging that Amin was performing “mass hysterectomies,” many of which were medically unnecessary, and that he was known as “the uterus collector.” The nurse’s claims, which she admitted were based on hearsay, were later found to be false.

“In the end, we are left with this: NBC investigated the whistleblower letter’s accusations; that investigation did not corroborate the accusations and even undermined some; NBC republished the letter’s accusations anyway,” Wood wrote in a scathing 108-page ruling on June 26. She ordered a jury trial to determine if MSNBC engaged in “actual malice,” the standard to determine defamation. 

Keep reading

COVID panel recommends ending Chinese immunity against U.S. lawsuits, but invokes strange statistics

Republican and Democratic heavy-hitters from the intelligence and political worlds are calling for legislative changes to hold China accountable for the economic harm caused by its ongoing lack of transparency on COVID-19, which they estimate to have cost $18 trillion in the U.S. alone.

Convened by the conservative Heritage Foundation, the nine-member Nonpartisan Commission on China and COVID-19 is dominated by former Trump administration officials but also includes a former Clinton administration National Security Council director and ex-Democratic Sen. Heidi Heitkamp of North Dakota.

Their report Monday calls for Congress to create and fund a “bipartisan U.S. National COVID-19 Commission” and a “Reparations/Compensation Task Force,” and revise the Foreign Sovereign Immunity Act to allow civil claims against China in U.S. courts, paid with “a deduction on interests or debts owed to China or through deductions from foreign aid funds to China.”

Lawmakers should establish an audit of U.S.-funded biomedical and related research in China, with a “rebuttable presumption” that funding should be cut unless sponsors can show the research projects are “overwhelmingly in the public interest and entail extremely low risk of harm.” Another federal commission would oversee the review. 

House Speaker Mike Johnson mentioned one of their recommendations, passing the Biosecure Act to decouple supply chains from Chinese state-backed companies, at a Hudson Institute speech Monday.

“China poses the greatest threat to global peace” and “Congress must keep our focus on countering China with every tool in our code,” the Louisiana Repubican said. “Our goal is to have a significant package of China-related legislation signed into law by the end of this year.”

The commission recommends the president demand, as a “diplomatic priority,” that China allow a “comprehensive, unfettered scientific and forensic investigation” into COVID origins, economic sanctions on officials and entities involved with the “cover-up,” and recognizing the pandemic as “similar to the dawning of the nuclear age,” with corresponding changes to law and commerce.

The report makes curious choices with its statistics, however, possibly to inflate the amount of damages for which China could be held liable.

Keep reading

Court: Doctors Threatened For Questioning The Covid Regime Can Sue Tyrannical Credentialing Boards

In a landmark case, an appellate court judge has ruled that physicians threatened by credentialing boards for speaking out against Covid policies and abortion have sufficient standing in court.

A year after the case was dismissed by a district court, the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS) Educational Foundation filed an appeal for the right to sue the American Board of Internal Medicine, the American Board of Obstetrics and Gynecology, the American Board of Family Medicine, and the secretary of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security for “coordinated” attempts to “censor and chill the speech of physicians,” especially those “who spoke critically of positions taken by Dr. Anthony Fauci, lockdowns, mask mandates, Covid vaccination, and abortion.”

A district court judge had ruled AAPS lacked standing and denied AAPS’s attempt to amend the claim. But in a decision filed June 3, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit reversed the dismissal, and the case has now been remanded to a lower court for discovery and potentially a full trial.

Keep reading