On Friday, the defense rested in the murder trial of Lindsay Clancy, who has admitted to strangling her three young children to death. Closing arguments are expected early next week, after which the case will go to the jury.
The 36-year-old former labor and delivery nurse is on trial for three counts of first-degree murder in the January 2023 deaths of her children at the family&#8217;s home in Duxbury, Massachusetts. Clancy’s children were 5 years old, 3 years old, and 8 months old. She has pleaded not guilty.
The case has become a lightning rod with the public, largely because Clancy&#8217;s defense argues that she had postpartum psychosis at the time of the killings. Clancy&#8217;s defense team is relying on what’s commonly referred to as the insanity defense to argue that she was not criminally responsible because of her mental state. The state says Clancy was aware of what she was doing when she killed her children.
Here are the most shocking moments from the trial so far:
<h3>The 911 call</h3>
One of the most emotional moments of the trial came when jurors heard Patrick Clancy’s frantic 911 call after he returned home and discovered his three children had been strangled.
The call has not been released to the public after the judge granted Patrick’s request to keep the recording private, meaning jurors and those inside the courtroom were among the only people to hear it. During the call, Patrick could be heard searching for his children before discovering them in the basement and screaming that “she killed the kids.”
The recording prompted tears and visible distress in the courtroom, with Lindsay Clancy herself sobbing as she listened. Several jurors were visibly shaken, and the judge called a recess.
<h3 class="mol-para-with-font">&#8216;Go to God&#8217;</h3>
A state psychiatrist delivered chilling testimony about what Clancy said happened as she killed her children, telling the court that she <a href="https://www.dailymail.com/news/article-16070853/Lindsay-Clancys-chilling-final-words-children-revealed-trial.html">said</a> “Go to God” repeatedly as she strangled her 3-year-old son, Dawson, with an exercise band.
Dr. Avram Mack testified that Clancy told him she had heard a male voice telling her, “You should kill the kids. This is your last chance so you can kill yourself,” before she took Dawson to the basement and killed him, then went on to strangle her other two children.
Mack said he believed Clancy was capable of being held criminally responsible for the killings, arguing that she acted “methodically” when she killed her three children before attempting to take her own life.
<h3>Bloodied Baby Clothes</h3>
Another shocking moment occurred when prosecutors displayed the bloodied clothing the children were wearing on the night they were killed.
Jurors were shown 5-year-old Cora’s pajamas and pink robe, 3-year-old Dawson’s long-sleeve shirt and dinosaur underwear, and 8-month-old Callan’s red snowflake onesie. The clothing was presented to the jury in evidence bags alongside the exercise bands Clancy used to strangle the children.
Clancy did not look up as the evidence was displayed, while the courtroom was visibly shaken.
<h3>Clancy&#8217;s 57 bpm Heart Rate</h3>
Clancy had a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/chilling-testimony-reveals-lindsay-clancys-physiological-state-at-time-of-child-killings?author=Amanda+Prestigiacomo&amp;category=News&amp;elementPosition=3&amp;row=0&amp;rowType=Vertical+List&amp;title=Chilling+Testimony+Reveals+Lindsay+Clancy’s+Physiological+State+At+Time+Of+Child+Killings">heart rate of just 57 beats per minute</a> just before, or potentially as, she started to fatally strangle her three young children.
Testimony from digital forensic specialist Ian Whiffin revealed that Clancy’s Apple Watch recorded a heart rate of 57 bpm at 5:23 p.m. on the day of the killings. Prosecutors’ digital timeline appears to place the killings in the roughly 5:23-5:38 p.m. window, although the Apple Watch did not record a heart rate throughout that period.
The data offers a glimpse into Clancy’s physiological state around the time of the killings and prompted intense reaction online. Some suggested it showed Clancy’s methodical and planned approach, while others viewed it as evidence that could bolster the defense’s case that Clancy was experiencing psychosis rather than acting in a fit of rage.
<h3>Clancy Supporters</h3>
Hundreds of women have lined up outside the courthouse in support of Clancy. As highlighted by The Daily Wire, women dressed in pink held a silent vigil for her, standing in a circle for a moment of silence in Clancy&#8217;s honor.
She has also received a flood of support online from mothers who insist they relate to her mental health struggles. Clancy&#8217;s defense maintains that she suffered from postpartum psychosis, which is far less common and more serious than postpartum depression.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-media-max-width="560">
Supporters wave and cheer for Lindsay Clancy, who killed her 3 young children, as her defense team and family members arrive
The demonstration involved moments of silence, prayer, and applause 
<a href="https://t.co/wKii0iMWlR">pic.twitter.com/wKii0iMWlR</a>
— Defiant L’s (@DefiantLs) <a href="https://x.com/DefiantLs/status/2090522506566213744?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">August 20, 2026</a></blockquote>
Clancy&#8217;s parents have <a href="https://www.newsnationnow.com/crime/lindsay-clancy-parents-gofundme-reaches-nearly-1-million/">raised</a> nearly $1 million in the wake of the children&#8217;s murders.
&nbsp;

GettyImages-2289661751

The Most Shocking Moments From The Lindsay Clancy Trial

The Most Shocking Moments From The Lindsay Clancy Case 

Courts

Lindsay Clancy

murder trial

trial

The prosecution is making a final push for the death penalty, asking a Utah judge to send Tyler Robinson to trial on all seven charges in the assassination of Charlie Kirk, while accusing Robinson’s attorneys of misrepresenting evidence and violating their ethical duty of candor to the court.
In a 19-page <a href="https://www.foxnews.com/us/prosecutors-hammer-tyler-robinson-bid-derail-death-penalty-charlie-kirk-murder-case">filing</a> Tuesday, prosecutors sharply rejected the defense’s arguments that the evidence is insufficient to support the charges or the aggravating circumstance that could make Robinson eligible for the death penalty. 
The state specifically accused Robinson’s lawyers of relying on a Utah Court of Appeals decision that the Utah Supreme Court later rejected, while failing to inform the judge of the subsequent ruling. “Defendant’s counsel ignore this controlling caselaw and have therefore violated their ethical duty of candor to the court,” prosecutors wrote.
The dispute centers in part on the legal standard governing Robinson’s preliminary hearing. His attorneys argued that prosecutors were asking the judge to speculate when choosing between competing interpretations of the evidence. Prosecutors countered that the Utah Supreme Court has explicitly rejected that reasoning, holding that choosing between reasonable inferences is a normal part of determining guilt.
Prosecutors also argued that the evidence overwhelmingly supports the charges, saying Robinson does not dispute the substance of evidence showing that he allegedly crawled to the Losee Building rooftop, fired the fatal shot, hid the rifle, discarded clothing, and instructed his roommate to delete incriminating text messages.
The state’s filing also added to its argument that Robinson knowingly placed other people in danger when he allegedly shot at Kirk from the rooftop. Prosecutors allege Robinson had previously taken practice shots with the suspected murder weapon and “seldom hit the bullseye and sometimes missed the target completely.” The state argues that his poor accuracy demonstrated he knew firing toward Kirk from a rooftop, with thousands of people gathered below and around him, created a substantial risk that someone other than Kirk could be killed.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
🔎Accused Charlie Kirk assassin Tyler Robinson allegedly &#8220;seldom hit the bullseye and sometimes missed the target completely&#8221; when taking practice shots with the suspected murder weapon, according to Utah prosecutors, who are trying to show that Robinson allegedly knew shooting… <a href="https://t.co/S3D3NbwT92">https://t.co/S3D3NbwT92</a> <a href="https://t.co/2ENUhKyRB5">pic.twitter.com/2ENUhKyRB5</a>
— Michael Ruiz (@mikerreports) <a href="https://x.com/mikerreports/status/2090073665647816895?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">August 19, 2026</a></blockquote>
That allegation is particularly significant because prosecutors must establish the aggravating circumstance that Robinson knowingly created a great risk of death to others for him to potentially face the death penalty upon conviction.
Robinson, 23, is accused of killing Kirk, 31, at Utah Valley University on September 10, 2025. He has not entered a plea. Judge Tony Graf is expected to decide at a September 1 hearing whether prosecutors have established sufficient probable cause to send Robinson to trial.

Tyler Robinson

Prosecutors Make Final Push For Death Penalty In Tyler Robinson Case

Utah Prosecutors Make Final Push For Death Penalty, Slam Robinson Defense For Ethics Violation

assassination

Charlie Kirk

Criminal Justice

Death Penalty

Judge

Murder

Political Violence

Utah

Luigi Mangione is expected to plead guilty Friday to federal stalking charges carrying life sentences in connection with the assassination of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson — a move that could have major implications for his upcoming murder trial. 
A guilty plea would mark a dramatic turnaround for the 28-year-old, who has long maintained his innocence and previously pleaded not guilty as he barrels towards a separate high-stakes murder trial in New York state court. 
The Department of Justice does not know whether Mangione will agree to plead guilty, but prosecutors would pursue a life sentence if he does, a source familiar with the matter told The Daily Wire.
The New York Times <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2026/08/13/nyregion/luigi-mangione-guilty-plea-federal.html">stressed</a> that negotiations over a potential plea remain “sensitive” and could collapse at any moment. 
In his federal case, the Maryland native faces one count of interstate stalking resulting in death and one count of stalking through the use of interstate facilities resulting in death. Both charges carry a maximum sentence of life in prison, <a href="https://www.justice.gov/archives/opa/pr/luigi-mangione-charged-stalking-and-murder-unitedhealthcare-ceo-brian-thompson-and-use">according to the Department of Justice.</a> A judge tossed out a firearms charge that would’ve made Mangione eligible for the federal death penalty.
“Mangione planned his attack for months and stalked his victim for days before murdering him — methodically planning when, where, and how to carry out his crime,” then-Attorney General Merrick B. Garland said at the time. 
In state court, Mangione faces eight charges, including second-degree murder, which carries a maximum sentence of 25 years to life. If he pleads guilty in federal court, his lawyers may argue that New York’s double-jeopardy protections prevent state prosecutors from trying him for murder because the state charges stem from the same criminal act as the federal case, the Times reported. 
“If a plea in the Federal case against Luigi Mangione is indeed being announced tomorrow, it sure seems the timing is intended to block the State trial,” Rich Schoenstein, a trial lawyer, <a href="https://x.com/LawfulRiches/status/2087899313259069841?s=20">said</a> on X. “Whether that succeeds remains to be seen.” 
“The State is a separate sovereign, and the charges are arguably quite different. If New York wants the trial to go forward anyway, it has an argument, and the issue will be hotly contested,” he added. 
The legal drama comes days after <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/luigi-mangione-trial-gets-anonymous-jury-over-fears-of-intimidation">The Daily Wire</a> reported that the high-profile murder case will proceed with an anonymous jury and expanded courtroom access after a judge finalized several key details ahead of the September proceedings.
Manhattan Supreme Court Justice Gregory Carro ruled that the identities of jurors will be kept from the public during the trial, which is scheduled to begin September 8 and is expected to last roughly six weeks. 
The anonymous jury comes as prosecutors warn that Mangione’s sizable and highly vocal supporter base could pressure witnesses and potential jurors. 
“The media attention surrounding this case — and the efforts of some of the defendant’s supporters both to intimidate witnesses and to interfere with the functioning of the jury — will place extraordinary pressure on witnesses and potential jurors alike,” Manhattan Assistant District Attorney Joel Seidemann wrote in a Monday letter to Carro obtained by <a href="https://www.foxnews.com/us/prosecutors-warn-luigi-mangione-supporters-may-intimidate-witnesses-jurors-murder-trial">Fox News</a>.
Prosecutors had asked the court to limit access to the proceedings and raised concerns that supporters could secretly record proceedings in an overflow room and distribute the footage. Carro nevertheless ordered that an overflow room be made available for members of the media and the public, after Mangione’s attorneys argued that limiting courtroom access would unfairly restrict coverage of the case.
The judge also warned that anyone who takes out a cellphone in either the courtroom or the overflow room will be removed.

Luigi Mangione Appears In Court Ahead Of September Trial For United Healthcare CEO Killing

Luigi Mangione Weighs Unusual Plea Move That Could Derail State Murder Trial

Luigi Mangione Could Plead Guilty To Federal Charges To Derail State Murder Trial

Brian Thompson

Crime

Luigi Mangione

New York

News

True Crime

United Healthcare

Lindsay Clancy&#8217;s emotional outburst brought trial proceedings to a halt on Wednesday as she sobbed throughout the testimony given by the medical examiner who performed autopsies on two of her three children.
As medical examiner Barbara Olson delivered details about the autopsy performed on Cora Clancy (age 5), Clancy could be heard crying intermittently — and at one point, she cried out, &#8220;I can&#8217;t do this!&#8221;
Olson testified that Cora Clancy had died of asphyxiation, and she explained that the child had likely felt pain until she passed out from the lack of oxygen — which could have been as brief as ten seconds or as long as 30 seconds.
&#8220;There is a component of pain present until loss of consciousness occurs,&#8221; Olson said.
Olson testified a short time later that Dawson (3) had also died of asphyxiation.
Video showed Clancy&#8217;s lawyer, high-profile defense attorney Kevin Reddington, holding Clancy&#8217;s hand as she wept throughout the testimony, her head resting on her arms on the table.
<div style="max-width: 728px; margin: 0 auto;">
<iframe style="aspect-ratio: 16/9; max-width: 100%; width: 100%; margin: 20px auto 5px; border: 0;" src="https://player.mux.com/Mii00Ch02HKYJ4rQqme4ZqBmGIz300MwqKH?metadata-video-content-type=embed_video&amp;metadata-video-id=a7f798ea-04d1-4306-954e-0ee5d0cd132e&amp;metadata-video-stream-type=on-demand&amp;metadata-video-title=2026-08-13%20Lindsay%20Clancy%20Breaks%20Down%20In%20Court&amp;poster=https%3A%2F%2Fdailywireplus-v2.imgix.net%2Fimages%2Fembedded-videos%2F17d841f8-0127-47af-b401-c2355ffd7900.jpg&amp;autoplay=false&amp;accent-color=%23DB3D3B&amp;primary-color=%23ffffff&amp;secondary-color=%23000000" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe>
Credit: Lindsay Clancy Breaks Down In Court
</div>
Twice during Wednesday&#8217;s proceedings, as Clancy showed visible emotional reactions to the testimony, Judge William Sullivan brought the trial to a halt, sending the jury out as two women came in and tried to console the defendant.
Clancy is on trial for strangling all three of her young children with exercise bands — Cora (5), Dawson (3), and Callan (eight months) — before cutting her own wrists and throat and jumping from the second-story window. The fall did not kill her, but left her paralyzed from the waist down — and she has been attending court in a wheelchair.
The defense has not argued that Clancy did not strangle her three young children, but has instead argued that she is not criminally responsible for the killings by reason of insanity. Clancy, the defense says, was suffering from severe postpartum psychosis — made worse by a series of mood-altering medications — at the time of the killings.
Clancy had also been turned away after calling a suicide hotline twice because she reportedly did not have concrete plans at the time to act on her suicidal thoughts.

Patrick Clancy describes ex-wife’s mental health struggles leading up to children’s deaths in her murder trial

Lindsay Clancy’s Courtroom Outburst Brings Trial To A Halt

murders

postpartum depression

A criminal trial fanatic ambushed the attorney for Lindsay Clancy in her high-profile murder trial, asking one question that first got laughs — and then a detailed story.
Defense attorney Kevin Reddington immediately recognized &#8220;CourtDawgDaniel&#8221; when he came out of the building, and agreed to walk with him down the street. Reddington&#8217;s reaction made it clear he was not prepared for the question that followed.
&#8220;I met you the other day,&#8221; Daniel said, after getting Reddington&#8217;s attention.
&#8220;Court Dawg!&#8221; Reddington replied, realizing he was on camera and adding, &#8220;At least my shirt&#8217;s tucked in.&#8221;
&#8220;Can I walk with you down to the —?&#8221; Court Dawg asked, gesturing toward the end of the street.
&#8220;Of course you can,&#8221; Reddington replied. &#8220;Whatever you want.&#8221;
Court Dawg went on to explain that he loved to attend criminal trials, traveling from court to court in his RV to see as many as he could: &#8220;So I&#8217;ve been coming to your trial and just really enjoying it, but I just have one question for you that probably has nothing to do with this case. Did you always know you wanted to be a lawyer?&#8221;
Reddington, clearly taken aback, laughed: &#8220;That&#8217;s a great question.&#8221;
&#8220;I have a distinct memory of when I was in high school, I think probably junior year,&#8221; Reddington continued, adding that he&#8217;d found himself in a bit of trouble and landed in the dean&#8217;s office. &#8220;And while I was sitting there waiting for him to come in and yell at me, I was bored so I happened to pull out a book — and it was careers, and I read the thing about lawyers, and it had a picture of Abraham Lincoln, and I said, &#8216;Hey, that might be fun.'&#8221;
&#8220;That was the only time I ever thought about it really,&#8221; he said.
&#8220;And you never went back [and changed your mind],&#8221; Court Dawg prompted.
&#8220;Nope, I went to Boston College, and back then everybody wanted to be a lawyer, so then you take the LSATs, you go to law school, and here we are,&#8221; Reddington replied.
Court Dawg admitted that he was trying to &#8220;live vicariously&#8221; through the attorneys he watched, saying, &#8220;I&#8217;m an engineer. I wish I had been a lawyer.&#8221;
Reddington interrupted then: &#8220;But can I tell you, I don&#8217;t want to live vicariously through you as an engineer.&#8221;
Reddington&#8217;s current trial — involving Massachusetts mother <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/lindsay-clancy-diary-entries-puts-focus-on-psych-meds">Lindsay Clancy</a> — is expected to last six to eight weeks. The defense is arguing that Clancy, who was reportedly suffering from postpartum depression at the time, is not criminally responsible for strangling her three young children before attempting suicide herself.

Lindsay Clancy’s Attorney Asked Unexpected Question After Fiery Cross-Examination

A federal appeals court on Friday blocked further above-ground construction of President Donald Trump’s planned White House ballroom, ruling that the administration cannot move forward with the project without congressional authorization.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit <a href="https://media.cadc.uscourts.gov/opinions/docs/2026/08/26-5123-2187096.pdf">ruled 2-1</a> that Congress, not the president alone, has authority to approve the ballroom project, siding with the National Trust for Historic Preservation, which challenged the construction. The court paused its ruling for two weeks to give the Trump administration time to seek emergency relief from the Supreme Court.
“Whether or not a massive ballroom should be constructed is for Congress to decide and is not a matter for executive self-help,” the court wrote. 
The ruling, however, does not completely halt all work at the site. The panel allowed below-ground construction to continue, including work related to security infrastructure, while permitting above-ground construction only when strictly necessary to protect those facilities or ensure the safety and structural integrity of the White House complex.
The decision came from a three-judge panel consisting of U.S. Circuit Judges Patricia Millett, Neomi Rao, and Bradley Garcia. Millett, appointed by former President Barack Obama, and Garcia, appointed by former President Joe Biden, formed the majority. Rao, a Trump appointee, dissented.
“Each president is a temporary tenant, not the owner, of the White House and its executive residence,” Millett and Garcia wrote in their opinion. 
The judges argued that the White House belongs to the American people and that major structural changes require congressional approval. 
“We are aware of no instance in American history in which a President unilaterally and using privately collected funds demolished substantial portions of the White House that Congress authorized to be built and American taxpayers paid for,” the majority wrote.
Rao argued that the courts had overstepped their authority by intervening in a presidential construction project and said Trump had sufficient authority to proceed. 
“The district court seized supervision of construction at the White House, and my colleagues affirm this judicial overreach,” Rao wrote. “Because the injunction is beyond the proper province of the federal courts, construction should be allowed to continue.”
Trump announced plans for the 90,000-square-foot ballroom as part of a broader effort to expand event space at the White House. Trump has said the ballroom would cost roughly $400 million and would be funded through private donations rather than taxpayer money, though subsequent reporting has raised questions about the extent of public funding for security work associated with the broader project. 
The administration has argued that the ballroom is necessary for both practical and national security reasons, citing the difficulty of hosting large events in temporary structures and the need for additional security capabilities.
Government attorneys have argued that the project includes protections against threats including drones, ballistic missiles, and other attacks targeting the president and White House personnel.
The National Trust for Historic Preservation argued that the administration lacked authority to demolish the East Wing and begin construction without additional approvals.
The White House demolished the East Wing last fall to make way for the new structure, sparking criticism from preservation groups that said the project represented an unprecedented alteration of the historic complex.
The appeals court’s decision leaves the future of the ballroom uncertain as the administration continues to weigh whether to seek intervention from the Supreme Court.

White House East Wing

Trump’s White House Ballroom Plans Just Hit A Major Legal Roadblock

Congress

Donald Trump

Executive

federal judge

Judges

Judicial Branch

Judiciary

President Trump

Trump Administration

U.S.

White House

White House Ballroom

Assassin Vance Boelter was sentenced Thursday to two consecutive life sentences without parole for murdering former Minnesota House Speaker Melissa Hortman (D) and her husband, Mark, and wounding state Sen. John Hoffman (D) and his wife, Yvette, in what prosecutors called a politically motivated attack. 
Boelter was convicted on six federal charges stemming from the murders of the Hortmans and the shooting of the Hoffmans, as well as the attempted shooting of the couple&#8217;s daughter, Hope, <a href="https://www.justice.gov/usao-mn/pr/vance-boelter-indicted-murders-melissa-and-mark-hortman-%20shootings-john-and-yvette-0">according</a> to the Department of Justice. 
At Thursday&#8217;s sentencing hearing, Colin and Sophie Hortman, the children of Melissa and Mark Hortman, described how their lives had been shattered by the murders.  
“In one night, our family went from whole to shattered,” Colin <a href="https://kstp.com/kstp-news/top-news/vance-boelter-to-be-sentenced-for-lawmaker-attacks-is-expected-to-receive-over-2-life-sentences/">said</a>, describing his parents as “the best” a child could ask for.
“My mom will never bake me another cake … She was supposed to bake my wedding cake. That was the one wish that I had,” Colin said. “They would have been the best grandparents. They will never meet my children. They would have traveled more, they would have mentored more leaders.”
Sophie Hortman also spoke about the trauma of losing her parents.
 “What I cared about was that my entire life had just been shattered in 30 seconds … We had to stand up and keep going,” she said.
Boelter <a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/vance-boelter-sentencing-man-killed-minnesota-democratic-lawmaker-face-rcna588852">apologized</a> in court to the Hortman family and his other victims. 
“To every person I have caused loss, pain, heartache, confusion, sadness, shame, or loneliness, I am truly sorry,” he said.
According to court documents, Boelter researched the homes and routines of top Democratic lawmakers before embarking on what prosecutors described as a &#8220;murderous rampage” while disguised as a police officer conducting wellness checks.
In addition to targeting the Hortmans and the Hoffmans, Boelter also went to the homes of Rep. Kristin Bahner and Sen. Ann Rest, both Democrats, but neither answered the door.
A two-day manhunt ended with Boelter&#8217;s arrest near his family home in Green Isle, Minnesota.
Officers found a list of 45 Democratic state officials and their addresses in his car, along with “No Kings” protest signs in the back of his car. Authorities have said Boelter was not a supporter of the demonstrators and had told family members before the shootings to “pray that something takes the wind out of these protests’ sails.” 
Prosecutors argued Boelter carried out the attacks in an effort to tip  Minnesota’s “delicate” balance of power in Republicans’ favor, KTSP news <a href="https://kstp.com/kstp-news/top-news/an-attack-on-representative-democracy-itself-filing-details-boelters-motives-for-night-of-terror/">reported</a>. They noted that the state House was evenly split 67-67 while Democrats held a one-seat Senate majority. Had Boelter succeeded in killing all four Democratic lawmakers he targeted, prosecutors argued, “the inevitable result would be a shift in the balance of power in both legislative houses.”  

In addition to his federal conviction, Boelter still faces multiple state charges, including two counts of murder, four counts of attempted murder, impersonating a police officer, and animal cruelty for allegedly killing the Hortmans&#8217; golden retriever, Gilbert.  

Boelter also previously served on Minnesota&#8217;s Workforce Development Board after being appointed by Democratic Gov. Tim Walz. Walz has said he did not know Boelter personally, with his office noting that the board has more than 60 members and that governors do not personally interview applicants for such positions. 
&nbsp;

Two Minnesota State Legislators And Spouses Shot In Targeted Attacks

Assassin Sentenced In Minnesota Political Killings

Democrat

Democrats

Minnesota

No Kings

Shooting

Tim Walz

Vance Boelter

Paramount Skydance Corp’s $110 billion takeover of Warner Bros. Discovery Inc. is temporarily halted by a federal judge.
On Monday, U.S. District Judge Araceli Martínez-Olguín paused the merger between the two media giants for 14 days after they hoped to seal the deal on July 22, according to <a href="https://news.bloomberglaw.com/ip-law/paramount-warner-bros-deal-temporarily-paused-by-federal-judge">Bloomberg Law</a>. Fearing that the merger would harm cable and film competition, 12 states, including California, Arizona, Massachusetts, and Washington, sued Paramount and Warner Bros. on July 13, blocking the deal. 
Though Warner Bros. has already agreed to sell to Paramount, the judge is preventing Paramount from finalizing the decision. A pre-existing merger-agreement provision mandates Paramount pay WBD shareholders if the deal isn&#8217;t closed by September 30. 
The hearing is scheduled for Aug. 3, determining whether the deal will be blocked indefinitely. 
The deal would allegedly result in 90% of the media market controlled by four companies: Walt Disney Co., Universal, Sony Pictures Entertainment, and the Paramount-Warner merger. The lawsuit also claims that the merged company would control 27% alone of the “market for films widely released to theaters” as well as 30% of anticipated blockbusters, according to Bloomberg Law.
New York Attorney General Letitia James, one of the 12 state attorneys general, <a href="https://ag.ny.gov/press-release/2026/attorney-general-james-wins-court-order-halting-paramounts-merger-warner-bros">celebrated</a> the judge’s decision, saying the deal would harm industries, workers, artists, businesses, and consumers. 
“Paramount’s unlawful merger with Warner Bros. would mean more expensive theater tickets, higher cable bills, fewer opportunities for workers, and fewer original stories shared with audiences across the country,” James said. 
This merger would bring two streaming platforms, two movie studios, and two news organizations under <a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm1911103/bio/?ref_=nm_ov_bio_sm">David Ellison’s</a> control, the chief executive officer of Skydance Media.

Several States Are Preparing Lawsuit To Challenge Paramount’s Purchase Of Warner Bros. Discovery

Judge Throws Hollywood’s Biggest Media Deal Into Limbo

David Ellison

Paramount

Warner Bros

A federal appeals court ruled Friday that New Jersey’s ban on semiautomatic rifles and high-capacity magazines violates the Second Amendment, marking the first time a federal appellate court has struck down a state ban on so-called assault weapons. 
The Third Circuit reached the decision by a 10-5 vote, expanding a lower court ruling that had found New Jersey&#8217;s <a href="https://law.justia.com/codes/new-jersey/title-2c/section-2c-39-1/">ban</a> on Colt AR-15 rifles unconstitutional.
A lower court had previously ruled that New Jersey&#8217;s ban on Colt AR-15 rifles violated the Second Amendment while upholding the state&#8217;s large-capacity magazine restriction. The appeals court went further, concluding the constitutional protection extends to all semiautomatic rifles covered by the law.
“We agree with the District Court that New Jersey’s ban on Colt AR-15s violates the Second Amendment,&#8221; the court <a href="https://www2.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/242415p.pdf">wrote</a>. It added that &#8220;the same result&#8221; applies to the broader class of semiautomatic rifles covered by the state&#8217;s assault weapons ban.  
The appeals court relied heavily on the Supreme Court’s 2022 decision in New York State Rifle &amp; Pistol Association v. Bruen, which held that modern gun laws must be &#8220;consistent with this nation&#8217;s ⁠historical tradition of ​firearm regulation,&#8221; US News <a href="https://www.usnews.com/news/top-news/articles/2026-07-17/us-appeals-court-declares-new-jerseys-ban-on-assault-rifles-unconstitutional">reports</a>. 
New Jersey Attorney General Jennifer Davenport, a Democrat, blasted the ruling, saying it was “as unfortunate as it is legally incorrect”
“Assault weapons and large-capacity magazines play a dangerous role in the modern epidemic of mass shootings, and New Jersey acted reasonably and lawfully in restricting them,&#8221; Davenport said.
She added that the state was already exploring its legal options following the ruling.
The Firearms Policy Coalition, one of the plaintiffs in the case, celebrated the decision.
“This is a massive victory for the People and another devastating blow to the authoritarian war on gun owners,” FPC’s President Brandon Combs <a href="https://www.firearmspolicy.org/fpc-wins-major-third-circuit-victory-against-new-jersey-assault-weapon-ban">said</a>. 
The Supreme Court is currently considering challenges to similar bans in Connecticut and Illinois.

Second Amendment Concepts – Firearm on a scale

Gun Owners Just Scored A Huge Court Victory

Gun Control

Gun Laws

New Jersey

An illegal immigrant from India who killed three people in a Southern California semi-truck crash was sentenced Tuesday to four years and eight months in prison, less than half the maximum sentence he faced. 
Jashanpreet Singh, 21, faced up to 10 years in prison after pleading guilty to three felony counts of vehicular manslaughter with gross negligence in connection with the October 2025 crash. 
Singh illegally crossed the U.S. border in March 2022 and was released into the country by the Biden administration after being apprehended by Border Patrol, according to the Department of Homeland Security. 
<a href="https://x.com/BreannaMorello/status/2077187320193695933?s=20">Dramatic dashcam footage</a> captured Singh&#8217;s semi-truck barreling into stopped traffic on Interstate 10 in Ontario, California, triggering an eight-vehicle pileup that killed three people and injured four others, <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/illegal-immigrant-released-by-biden-caused-fatal-california-truck-crash">The Daily Wire reported. </a>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-media-max-width="560">
🚨SICKENING🚨
An illegal alien was sentenced to ONLY 4 years 8 months in prison for KILLING 3 people in a horrific 8-vehicle pileup on SoCal’s 10 Freeway.
Jashanpreet Singh was under the influence of drugs when he plowed a semi into slowed traffic with no attempt to stop or… <a href="https://t.co/z0k8YNt8MZ">pic.twitter.com/z0k8YNt8MZ</a>
— Breanna Morello (@BreannaMorello) <a href="https://x.com/BreannaMorello/status/2077187320193695933?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">July 15, 2026</a></blockquote>
“It didn’t stop. It didn’t swerve. It didn’t make any kind of maneuvers. It just went straight in,” eyewitness Jason Calmelat <a href="https://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/local/driver-tied-to-fatal-multi-car-crash-in-ontario-gets-nearly-5-years-in-prison/3917298/">told NBC4. </a>
Although the Indian national was initially arrested under suspicion of DUI, <a href="https://www.cbsnews.com/losangeles/news/semi-truck-driver-deadly-crash-southern-california-toxicology-test/">toxicology reports came back negative </a>for drugs or alcohol, according to CBS News. An investigation from the California Highway Patrol found that Singh failed to stop his truck before plowing into traffic.
The judge cited Singh&#8217;s age and the absence of evidence that he was using a cellphone at the time of the crash in imposing the lighter sentence, <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ll0WvnzXZY4">according to NBC4.</a>
The case became a flashpoint in the Trump administration&#8217;s effort to prevent illegal immigrants from obtaining commercial driver&#8217;s licenses.
“It is a terrible tragedy three innocent people lost their lives due to the reckless open border policies that allowed an illegal alien to be released into the U.S. and drive an 18-wheeler on America’s highways,” former Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin said at the time. “This accident follows a disturbing trend of illegal aliens driving 18-wheelers and semi-trucks on America’s roads.” 
San Bernardino County District Attorney Jason Anderson said Singh should never have been in the country.
“Had the rule of law been followed by State and Federal officials, the defendant should have never been in California at all,” <a href="https://da.sbcounty.gov/2025/10/31/semi-truck-driver-charged-in-multi-vehicle-crash-that-killed-three-and-injured-multiple-victims-in-ontario/">he said.</a>

aeb33c38-6d74-41ab-acce-2faa84ae7cca

Sentence Raises Eyebrows After Illegal Immigrant Kills 3 In Semi Crash

California

illegal immigrant

Truckers

President Donald Trump has paid more than $5.6 million owed to E. Jean Carroll after the Supreme Court declined to hear his appeal in the 2023 sexual abuse and defamation case, closing one chapter of the legal battle while a separate $83 million judgment remains under appeal.
Court records filed Tuesday show $5.625 million — including accrued interest — was released to Carroll on July 9 after U.S. District Judge Lewis Kaplan ordered the funds disbursed.
The money had been held in the court&#8217;s registry investment system while Trump pursued his appeals. 
Trump&#8217;s legal team sought to delay the payment, arguing the funds should remain in escrow while it asked the Supreme Court to reconsider its decision. Kaplan rejected that request and ordered the money released.
&#8220;Three years ago, a unanimous nine-person jury found President Trump liable for sexually assaulting and defaming E. Jean Carroll. Today, we are pleased to report that she has received the damages payment the jury awarded her as a result of that verdict,&#8221; Carroll attorney Roberta Kaplan said in a <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/jul/14/e-jean-carroll-trump-payment">statement</a>.
Trump has denied Carroll&#8217;s allegations and has maintained the case was politically motivated.
The case stems from Carroll&#8217;s claim that Trump sexually assaulted her in a Bergdorf Goodman dressing room in the mid-1990s. 
In May 2023, a federal jury found Trump liable for sexual abuse and defamation, awarding Carroll $5 million in damages. With interest accrued during the appeals process, the judgment grew to more than $5.6 million.
Last month, the Supreme Court declined to review the case, leaving the lower court&#8217;s judgment intact. Following that decision, Trump vowed to continue fighting.
&#8220;Surprisingly, the Supreme Court declined to &#8216;review&#8217; a Fake Case brought against me by a woman I never met,&#8221; Trump wrote on <a href="https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/116834055569312013">Truth Socia</a>l. &#8220;I will continue the fight against this Weaponization and Lawfare Case.&#8221;
Trump and Carroll remain embroiled in a second lawsuit. In January 2024, another federal jury ordered Trump to pay Carroll $83.3 million after finding he defamed her through statements made while serving as president in 2019.
Trump is expected to seek Supreme Court review of that judgment as well. Until then, that separate award remains tied up in the appeals process.

E. Jean Carroll

Trump’s Long Fight With E. Jean Carroll Just Took Another Turn

Politics

Lance Twiggs, the trans-identifying former boyfriend of accused assassin Tyler Robinson, said in audio released during Thursday&#8217;s preliminary hearing that Robinson had claimed he wanted to engrave bullets ahead of a planned &#8220;hunting&#8221; trip.
A police interview with Twiggs, originally recorded several months after the late Turning Point USA founder Charlie Kirk was assassinated, was played for the first time during preliminary hearings ahead of Robinson&#8217;s trial.
Twiggs said that Robinson had mentioned a hunting trip he was planning with his family, and asked whether he had a Dremel tool that he could use to engrave bullets before they went. He confirmed that he did have the tool, and had told Robinson where he could find it — and that all of that had transpired about a month or so prior to the shooting.
&#8220;He said he was going hunting with his family and he asked if we had a Dremel he could borrow because he said he wanted to engrave messages on bullets,&#8221; Twiggs explained. &#8220;I just told him where the Dremel was and told him to make sure he doesn&#8217;t set off the bullet on accident in the house, but I didn&#8217;t really think about it until then.&#8221;
He recalled seeing Robinson the day after the shooting, and said that he&#8217;d appeared restless — as if he&#8217;d been attempting to keep himself busy, or to distract himself from what he had done.
Twiggs also said that he&#8217;d asked Robinson directly whether the things he&#8217;d said via text the night before — namely that he&#8217;d been the one to shoot Kirk — had been true.
&#8220;[He] didn’t go into detail. I just asked him in person if what he said was true the night before and he said it was, starting crying a little bit, and he says he wishes he hadn’t done it,” Twiggs said.
Some portions of the interview were redacted pursuant to an earlier ruling from Judge Tony Graf, in which he stated that about 16 minutes of the recorded interview — which initially took place earlier in the year — would be redacted in order to balance transparency of the proceedings with the rights of the defendant.
Robinson, 23, will potentially face the death penalty if he is convicted.

Charlie Kirk Shooting Suspect Tyler Robinson Arraigned In Utah Court

Tyler Robinson’s Trans Furry Boyfriend Reveals Engraved Bullet Details

Tyler Robinson Claimed Engraved Bullets Were For 'Hunting,' Trans Furry Boyfriend Says

Menu