Tag: lawsuits

Leon Black Sues Congress To Avoid Epstein Testimony

Between 2012 and 2017 – after Jeffrey Epstein got out of prison – billionaire Leon Black paid him roughly $170 million. Black has not provided a credible explanation as to why he paid Epstein amounts vastly exceeding those paid to other professional advisors – and instead of sitting down to explain it to Congress on Thursday, he sued the House Oversight Committee.

Recall, Black:

  • Paid Epstein $158 million per Dechert, the law firm Apollo hired, or $170 million per Sen. Ron Wyden’s investigation.
  • Stepped down as Apollo CEO in 2021 after a Dechert review “cleared” him, which we called bullshit at the time.
  • Wrote the 2003 birthday book poem about “Blond, Red or Brunette, spread out geographically,” signed “Love and Kisses.”
  • Paid roughly $20 million to a dozen women, some via Epstein; at least three have accused him of assault.
  • Says he signed Guzel Ganieva’s 2015 NDA because she was extorting him; her rape suit was dismissed.
  • Paid $62.5 million to the U.S. Virgin Islands in 2023 to settle Epstein-related claims before any were made public.
  • Used Epstein to help structure his $106 million Picasso purchase through Narrows Holdings, as we reported in February.
  • Told Congress in June “I knew Jekyll. I didn’t know Hyde,” then walked out rather than discuss his NDAs.

The committee went ahead with a closed-door session anyway, with ranking Democrat Robert Garcia demanding an ‘immediate’ contempt vote against Black. Chairman James Comer (R) said that if it were up to him, “I would hold him in contempt right now,” but he wanted to discuss Black’s lawsuit with the committee’s lawyers first so as not to jeopardize the thing the committee actually wants: non-disclosure agreements that Black allegedly signed with several women. 

The lawsuit, filed in federal court in Washington against the committee and Comer, argues that the two subpoenas issued June 26 (one for Black’s sworn testimony, one for “all the NDAs” he is party to) are “invalid to the extent they exceed” the committee’s “delegated authority in seeking private information that bears no legitimate connection” to its legislative purpose. Producing the agreements, the suit says, “would also expose women who value their privacy, who have no known or public connection to Epstein.” Black’s lawyer Susan Estrich called the probe “a fishing expedition” and said, “This is no longer about finding the truth about Epstein. It is about trying to destroy Mr. Black.”

Comer hit back – saying that Black is “hiding behind litigation rather than provide answers to the American people.”

Black is the first Epstein witness to sue the committee rather than show up. Jes Staley and Kathy Ruemmler both sat for questions this summer. Which makes the timing of Thursday’s other Leon Black story hard to improve on.

asdfasdf

“You hired me to produce a work of art”

A few hours before the empty chair, Bloomberg Law published a piece about a May 2016 email in which Epstein described the tax plan he sold Black as, literally, art.

“Leon, you hired me to produce a work of art. it was not inexpensive. the value far exceeds any other piece in your collection.- by FAR . It took me 30 years to be able to craft such a work. I understand your desire to modifiy my work, in doing so you have brad telling me , just a bit more red., here let me show you, you yourself pick up a brush a add some strokes… however Im aware that you own the work and you have the right to paint over it. tear it up , put it in the closet in the basement . its yours.”

And on the price:

“Unfortunatley for us both, the price for my works has not changed since day one. 40m per year, I m willing to discount it to 35 as I did give you a bad number when asked and should pay an embarassment fine.”

And a weird line:

“you recently seemed shy to discuss certain things. , please be assured I make no judgement on any of your activities , whether or not i agree with them . not my role I am always on your side on the table. I hope your personal life quiets. you’ve had a rough 15 months.”

Keep reading

Federal court rules teachers’ Pride flag messages to children are not protected by 1st Amendment

A federal appeals court has ruled that teachers’ Pride flags, the pro-LGBT messaging they demanded to use on their public school students, are not protected by the First Amendment.

“Plaintiffs-Appellants Christopher Dolce, Sarah Ecke, and Shinaide McAleavey-Polley allege that the Connetquot Central School District and its officials violated their First and Fourteenth Amendment rights and Title VII when it ordered them to remove the pride flags and stickers that decorated the walls of their public high school classrooms,” said the opinion from the 2nd U.S Circuit Court of Appeals.

“The United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York (Gonzalez, J.) dismissed their complaint for failure to state a claim, and the teachers appealed. Applying Garcetti v. Ceballos, 547 U.S. 410 (2006), we conclude that the teachers’ classroom wall decorations constituted speech pursuant to their official duties as Government employees. As a result, the District did not violate their First Amendment rights when it ordered the teachers to remove them.

“We also conclude that the teachers have not plausibly pled that the District selectively enforced its policies against them because of an impermissible motivation, or that they suffered any adverse employment actions.”

Then a commentary at Twitchy revealed the surprise: The ruling was from “a Biden appointee who is a lesbian. That’s refreshing common sense.”

This surprise comes in an age when judges appointed by Barack Obama and Joe Biden routinely rule against President Donald Trump no matter the issue, the question or the legal dispute. One Washington-based leftist judge even has defied the U.S. Supreme Court in ruling politically against Trump.

The decision said, “Under Garcetti v. Ceballos … and its progeny, when public employees’ speech ‘owes its existence’ to their ‘professional responsibilities,’ the government – their employer – can control the content of that speech without implicating their Frist Amendment rights. The question in his case is whether that same principle applies to displays hung on the walls of a public high school teacher’s match classroom. We hold that it does.”

Keep reading

Meta Settlement Ignites Global “Child Safety” Digital ID Push

The ink on the multi-billion dollar settlement agreement that Meta struck with 47 US states, the District of Columbia and a number of US territories has barely had time to dry – and already, officials and campaigners in the US, the EU, the UK, and at the UN are using it to press for similar rules to be imposed elsewhere.

In the UK, Work and Pensions Secretary Pat McFadden said that Meta should apply the new rules in that country as well, while the government there has its own plans to ban social media for under-16s and impose nighttime curfews.

“We don’t want a situation where young people in America have got a higher rate of protection than young people in the UK,” he said.

The British plan is to ban social media for those under 16 by spring 2027, and impose nighttime curfews on older teenagers, the Independent is reporting. To enforce this, platforms will have to know whether a user is a child or an adult, stepping up the pressure on companies to introduce age checks.

In the EU, the Commission is also piling on the pressure on Meta to “export” the US deal.

“We expect adequate management of screen time, appropriate parental controls on these platforms,” said digital spokesperson Thomas Regnier. “It is now up to the company to propose these commitments within the European Union in order to also protect our children here.”

The official revealed that the Commission has already been in talks with Meta since the US agreement was announced, and that the goal is to give children in the EU “at least” the same protections as those in the US.

Meanwhile, UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Volker Türk is using the settlement to call for global protections for children from what he says is the harm caused by excessive social media use.

In the US, District of Columbia Attorney General Brian Schwalb, one of those behind the lawsuit that led to the settlement, said that Meta “will not be the last” company to be forced to agree to such terms.

His California counterpart, Rob Bonta, said that Meta is “not the only player in the industry” to have “visited enormous mental health harms on kids through their products and their designs,” and added, “others rightfully must be held accountable.”

The settlement contains financial incentives for states to bring similar cases against other companies. Snap, TikTok, and YouTube are mentioned by name in this context.

Not everyone is happy with the deal, however. Arturo Béjar, a former Meta employee who was a witness in the trial, said the protections are insufficient and that the product remains harmful.

“The limitations that are in the agreement are the equivalent of saying: ‘Well, you can smoke as many cigarettes as you can in two hours a day,'” he said. “It doesn’t make the cigarettes any safer.”

Meta responded by saying that Béjar is ignoring some of the other provisions of the settlement, such as non-algorithmic feed defaults and stronger parental controls.

“We have a huge raft of built-in protections,” a spokesperson said, and argued that teenagers also derive “substantial” benefits from using social media.

Keep reading

Biden Judge Dismisses Trump DOJ Lawsuit Challenging California Policy Allowing Biological Males to Compete in Girls’ Sports

A Biden-appointed federal judge has dismissed the Trump Justice Department’s lawsuit challenging California’s policy allowing transgender-identifying biological males to compete on girls’ school sports teams.

U.S. District Judge Cynthia Valenzuela of the Central District of California dismissed the Justice Department’s case against the California Department of Education and the California Interscholastic Federation (CIF) with prejudice, handing California officials a major victory in their ongoing battle with the Trump administration over women’s sports, the New York Post reported.

Valenzuela was nominated to the federal bench by Joe Biden and confirmed by the Democrat-controlled Senate in December 2024.

The Trump Justice Department filed the lawsuit in July 2025, accusing California education officials and the CIF of violating Title IX by allowing biological males who identify as female to compete against girls.

According to the DOJ complaint, California’s policies deprive female athletes of equal athletic opportunities by forcing them to compete against biological males for victories, podium placements, recognition, and potentially college opportunities.

But Valenzuela rejected the administration’s argument.

The Biden judge concluded that California had not received sufficiently clear notice that federal education funding was conditioned on excluding transgender-identifying biological males from girls’ athletic teams.

Keep reading

Judge Tosses Lawsuit Over State Investigations into Texas Teachers’ Posts About Charlie Kirk

Following the murder of conservative icon Charlie Kirk in 2025, The Gateway Pundit reported that more than 100 educators across the state of Texas faced investigations for their vile, hateful, and violent content celebrating his assassination.

Texas Governor Greg Abbott (R) announced that the Texas Education Agency (TEA) began the investigations into teachers who cheered Kirk’s murder and potentially incited additional violence online.

In a strongly worded letter to superintendents, TEA Commissioner Mike Morath condemned the educators’ despicable behavior, noting that such conduct may constitute violations of the Educators’ Code of Ethics.

Not wanting to be held accountable for their behavior, in January 2026,  the Texas American Federation of Teachers (Texas AFT) filed a First Amendment lawsuit in federal court against the Texas Education Agency and Commissioner Morath, asking a judge to stop the state investigations so they can be as grotesque on social media as they want.

Texas AFT, along with the national AFT president, the far-left radical Randi Weingarten,  and Texas president Zeph Capo, claimed Morath’s letter created a “vague, overbroad crackdown on off-duty political speech, chilled teachers, and led to leave, reprimands, doxxing, a temporary ‘do not hire’ flag,” and at least one firing.

The state, however, argued the letter was not a new policy and pointed to existing ethics rules. Districts, not TEA, made most employment decisions.

Keep reading

Lawsuit: Elon Musk’s xAI Trained Grok AI Using Child Pornography

A woman identified as “Jane Doe” sued Elon Musk’s xAI this week, alleging the company trained its Grok AI chatbot on child pornography depicting her, in what appears to be the first case accusing xAI of training its AI on child sexual abuse material (CSAM).

Ars Technica reports that the proposed class-action lawsuit filed against Musk’s xAI, now part of SpaceX, centers on abuse Doe suffered as a preschooler in the early 2000s, when adult men raped her to produce images later sold to pedophiles online. Those images were hashed by the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children (NCMEC) and the Canadian Centre for Child Protection, groups that track known child pornography so it can be identified and removed wherever it resurfaces.

Doe gets alerts through the U.S. Department of Justice Victim Notification System whenever her abuse material turns up somewhere new. The Canadian Centre for Child Protection told her that AI-generated CSAM depicting her had shown up on xAI. According to the complaint, offenders on online forums discussed “creating AI generated CSAM of Plaintiff and other similarly situated known, legacy, victims of CSAM.”

The lawsuit claims xAI stores images Grok generates and reuses them to further train the model. A press release from Doe’s lawyers described the material as “that same material,” referring to the CSAM depicting her that investigators say fed into Grok’s outputs. The complaint itself alleges that “CSAM depicting Plaintiff with its longstanding well-known hash values has been used as a part of the dataset used by xAI.”

Breitbart News previously reported on AI training datasets that were found to contain child pornography:

The Stanford Internet Observatory, in collaboration with the Canadian Centre for Child Protection and other anti-abuse charities, conducted a study that found more than 3,200 images of suspected child sexual abuse in the AI database LAION. LAION, an index of online images and captions, has been instrumental in training leading AI image-makers such as Stable Diffusion.

This discovery has raised alarms across various sectors, including schools and law enforcement. The child pornography has enabled AI systems to produce explicit and realistic imagery of fake children and transform social media photos of real teens into deepfake nudes. Previously, it was believed that AI tools produced abusive imagery by combining adult pornography with benign photos of kids. However, the direct inclusion of explicit child images in training datasets presents a more direct and disturbing reality.

Much of Doe’s legal argument turns on how Grok’s terms of service handle user content. The complaint says Grok treats public posts on X, along with the outputs Grok itself generates, as training data by default. As the filing puts it, “Because Grok’s terms treat public X posts and Grok’s own outputs as training data by default, publicly posting an image does not just expose it to viewers, but also feeds [it] directly into the pipeline xAI uses to train and improve its model and thereby generate further images.” xAI filters violent content out of its training data, but its terms do not specifically exclude CSAM, non-consensual intimate imagery, or other sexual or inappropriate material.

Keep reading

Pennsylvania Sues Snapchat Over Lack of Age Verification

Child safety is an extremely powerful weapon used to force private companies to implement age verification digital ID checks and, in some cases, change the design of their platforms. And once this is done, it’s not clear that children are any safer, but one thing is certain: online privacy and anonymity are weakened, and in some cases, lost.

This is the context in which the latest legal action against a major US tech company should be seen. Pennsylvania Attorney General Dave Sunday has sued Snap, the maker of the Snapchat app, accusing it of violating the state’s Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law (UTPCPL).

The filing, in Philadelphia County on August 25, 2026, is framed as consumer protection, but it is about pressing Snap to verify its users’ ages and to change how the app is designed.

“Child safety” is a broad and vague banner that can cover a lot of ground – from protecting minors from predators and inappropriate content, to shielding them from features that the state decides are “addictive.”

But before it gets to the “addictive” part, the complaint states that Snapchat’s age gate is not good enough – specifically, that it defaults to 18, and that this makes it “unreliable.”

The filing further states that this has “helped render Snap’s efforts to protect young users from predatory adults practically useless for any safety features that depend on accurate age-gate information.”

The remedy the state wants is a court order forcing Snap to implement reliable age verification for all users.

Other claims made in the suit are that Snap has misrepresented how often adult-themed content appears on the platform in order to get the app a 13+ rating in stores – and that it has built “addictive” features into the app, such as infinite scroll and autoplay.

“Snap deliberately designed Snapchat to be addictive,” the complaint says, adding that the company “knows that minor users especially are susceptible to Snapchat’s addictive features.”

The features that the state wants a court to stop Snap from using are: Snapstreaks, push notifications, infinite scroll, autoplay, ephemeral content, and Snapchat+’s Friend Solar System.

The suit also wants the court to order Snap to pay civil penalties and cover the costs of the suit.

Keep reading

Fifteen NY Sheriffs Sue Kathy Hochul Over New Anti-ICE Law

Fifteen New York sheriffs are suing Gov. Kathy Hochul over a state law that took effect this week banning formal agreements between local governments and federal agencies.

The Federation for American Immigration Reform in Washington, D.C., filed the lawsuit on behalf of the sheriffs of St. Lawrence, Wayne, Broome, Madison, Cattaraugus, Orange, Jefferson, Saratoga, Lewis, Franklin, Delaware, Fulton, Oswego, Cayuga and Rensselaer counties, according to the Albany Times-Union.

Rensselaer County Executive Steve McLaughlin said Hochul had “escalated her administration’s war on the police and she expanded policies to put criminals before the citizens of New York.”

“Under the New York Constitution’s guarantees of Home Rule (Article IX) and Separation of Powers, and under the independent status of their office, they possess the authority to make their own judgments about whether and how to participate in the cooperative framework Congress created,” the lawsuit said, according to WSTM-TV.

The lawsuit said the constitutional overreach to ban what are known as 287(g) agreements harms public safety.

Keep reading

Mark Zuckerberg’s Meta Agrees to $18 Billion Settlement with 29 States to End Teen Social Media Addiction Lawsuit

Mark Zuckerberg’s Meta agreed to pay roughly $18 billion to settle a lawsuit brought by 29 states over allegations that Facebook and Instagram harmed children through addictive design.

NBC News reports that the settlement, which still needs a judge’s approval, came one day after Instagram chief Adam Mosseri testified in a California courtroom. Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg had also been expected to take the stand before the deal was reached.

In a statement, Meta said “the agreement includes a payment of approximately $18 billion, which can be used to fund youth online safety initiatives, among other state priorities.” The company said the deal is part of a broader agreement with 52 attorneys general nationwide, extending well beyond the 29 states that sued in California.

Meta did not concede wrongdoing. A court filing states the company “denies the allegations against it and that it has any liability to the Plaintiffs.”

Attorneys general from California, Colorado, Kentucky, New Jersey and other states had accused Meta of designing addictive products that harmed children and of violating federal privacy and consumer protection laws. Meta pushed back, arguing the states were cherry-picking features while ignoring safety tools it already offers, including teen accounts that default to private, time-limit reminders, parental supervision options, and restrictions on who can contact minors and what content they see.

Under the settlement, Meta will build in daily limits and nighttime blocks for teenage users. The court filing says the company “commits to establishing daily limits and blocks on nighttime use for teenage users.” Teen accounts on Facebook and Instagram will default to a combined two-hour daily use limit, and teens will need parental permission to turn that limit off.

Keep reading

New York Counties Sue Governor to Protect Cooperation with ICE

Two New York counties are suing Democrat Governor Kathy Hochul to stop a new state law that bars them from working with federal immigration officers.

Officials of Rensselaer County and Broome County have announced that they intend to join a federal lawsuit challenging the new state law sponsored by state Democrats, according to PIX 11.

The federal lawsuit seeks to void a New York state law that bars police departments and other state law enforcement agencies from entering into the federal 287(g) program which formalizes a working relationship between the departments and federal immigration law enforcement branches.

Officials of Nassau County have also expressed interest in the lawsuit, but have not yet committed to joining the other two counties in the filing.

The law, called the Local Crimes, Local Cop Act, went into effect on August 25, and would summarily nullify agreements with ICE that are already in place for 13 New York counties.

“Local police will assist ICE only if a real crime has been committed,” Gov. Hochul said. “But on civil immigration matters, ICE is on their own.”

The New York Attorney General’s Office has also issued subpoenas to the counties that have not yet officially confirmed that they have terminated any agreements with Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or will abide by newly implemented state law.

Nassau County Executive Bruce Blakeman, who is running for Gov. against Hochul, strenuously opposed the Local Crimes, Local Cop Act and says that his county has taken a serious bite out of crime by working with ICE.

“We got rid of 2,000 illegal migrants with criminal records in Nassau County without raiding a church, a school, a daycare center, a hospital, because we cooperated with ICE,” Blakeman recently said.

Blakeman also railed against Hochul and said her law will make New Yorkers less safe.

“Kathy Hochul, where do you want those guns? What neighborhood do you want to destroy? Where do you want those drugs? What community do you want to destroy? Where do you want those illegal migrants with criminal records to live? You want them back in New York? We say no!” he said at a recent rally.

Hochul, though, is warning the counties to knuckle under to the new law and said of any lawsuit filed to stop her law: “Bring it on.”

“No county executive should think that they are above the law in the state of New York,” the Gov. said. “The attorney general will be fully responsible for enforcement.”

Keep reading