(Reuters) &#8211; A federal judge on Tuesday temporarily blocked President Donald Trump from removing Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook, an early setback for the White House in an unprecedented legal battle that could upend the central bank&#8217;s long-held independence.
The preliminary ruling by U.S. District Judge Jia Cobb in Washington, D.C. found that the Trump administration&#8217;s claims that Cook committed mortgage fraud prior to taking office were likely not sufficient grounds for her removal.
Cook denies any wrongdoing.
&#8220;President Trump has not identified anything related to Cook’s conduct or job performance as a Board member that would indicate that she is harming the Board or the public interest by executing her duties unfaithfully or ineffectively,&#8221; Cobb wrote in her ruling.
Trump moved to fire Cook in late August, but the Fed has said she remains in her position. The Fed declined to comment on the decision.
The White House spokesman Kush Desai on Wednesday defended Trump&#8217;s actions, saying that the president had &#8220;lawfully removed&#8221; Cook for cause over the mortgage allegations and that &#8220;this ruling will not be the last say on the matter.&#8221;
Trump on Tuesday did not respond to a reporter&#8217;s question about the ruling.
Cobb&#8217;s ruling prevents the Fed from following through on Cook&#8217;s firing while her lawsuit moves forward.
The case, which will likely end up before the U.S. Supreme Court, has ramifications for the Fed&#8217;s ability to set interest rates without regard to politicians&#8217; wishes, widely seen as critical to any central bank&#8217;s ability to keep inflation under control.
Trump has demanded that the U.S. central bank cut rates immediately and aggressively, berating Fed Chair Jerome Powell for his stewardship over monetary policy. The central bank is expected to deliver a rate cut at its September 16-17 policy meeting.
&#8220;This ruling recognizes and reaffirms the importance of safeguarding the independence of the Federal Reserve from illegal political interference,&#8221; Cook&#8217;s lawyer Abbe Lowell said in a statement.
The law that created the Fed says governors may be removed only &#8220;for cause,&#8221; but does not define the term nor establish procedures for removal. No president has ever removed a Fed governor, and the law has never been tested in court.
Cobb found that the &#8220;best reading&#8221; of the law is that it only allows a Fed governor to be removed for misconduct while in office. The mortgage fraud claims against Cook all relate to actions she took prior to her U.S. Senate confirmation in 2022.
Trump and William Pulte, the Federal Housing and Finance Authority director appointed by the president, say Cook inaccurately described three separate properties on mortgage applications, which could have allowed her to obtain lower interest rates and tax credits.
The U.S. Justice Department has also launched a criminal mortgage fraud probe into Cook and has issued grand jury subpoenas out of both Georgia and Michigan, according to documents seen by Reuters and a source familiar with the matter.
Cook sued Trump and the Fed, saying the claims did not give Trump the legal authority to remove her and were a pretext to fire her for her monetary policy stance.
Cook, the first Black woman to serve as a Fed governor, has denied the fraud claims in court filings, saying that she &#8220;did not ever commit mortgage fraud.&#8221;
But she has said that even if the allegations were true, it would not be grounds for removal because the alleged conduct occurred before she was confirmed by the U.S. Senate.
The Trump administration has argued that the president has broad discretion to determine when it is necessary to remove a Fed governor, and that courts lack the power to review those decisions.
(Reporting by Daniel Wiessner in Albany, New York and Ismail Shakil. Additional reporting by Andrea Shalal, Howard Schneider, Mike Scarcella, Nate Raymond and Jeff Mason; Editing by Noeleen Walder, Alexia Garamfalvi, Paul Simao, Sam Holmes and Tomasz Janowski)

FILE PHOTO: Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City’s 2025 Jackson Hole conference

Judge Steps In To Block Trump From Ousting Fed Governor Lisa Cook

Courts

Donald Trump

Federal Reserve

Lisa Cook

Politics

The Supreme Court on Tuesday agreed to quickly take up a case on President Donald Trump&#8217;s wide-ranging tariffs, setting up a major decision on one of the biggest policies of Trump&#8217;s second term, NBC News <a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/supreme-court/supreme-court-agrees-consider-whether-trumps-tariffs-are-legal-rcna229069">reported</a>.
The Supreme Court will hear the case after the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ruled late last month that Trump overstepped his authority under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to impose tariffs on imports from dozens of countries. Last week, the Trump administration <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/trump-asks-scotus-to-take-swift-action-to-save-his-tariffs">asked</a> the Supreme Court to begin hearing arguments in the case as soon as November, arguing that the Appeals Court&#8217;s decision “gravely undermines the President’s ability to conduct real-world diplomacy and his ability to protect the national security and economy of the United States.”
The Supreme Court agreed to enter a streamlined process and will begin hearing oral arguments the first week of November.
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/supreme-court-ruling-against-trump-tariffs-could-trigger-1-trillion-economic-disaster-bessent-warns">warned</a> on Monday that if Trump&#8217;s tariffs are stopped, the United States would have to refund around $1 trillion to importers, a development that Bessent said would &#8220;cause significant disruption&#8221; to the U.S. economy. U.S. Solicitor General D. John Sauer agreed, saying, “With tariffs, we are a rich nation; without tariffs, we are a poor nation… The economic consequences would be ruinous.”
Trump also blasted the decision from the Appeals Court, arguing that “it would be a total disaster for the Country” if his tariffs were rescinded.
“If allowed to stand, this Decision would literally destroy the United States of America,” he added.
The Appeals Court delayed implementation of its order until October 14, giving the Trump administration time to appeal to the Supreme Court.
Many of Trump&#8217;s tariffs went into effect in early August before the the U.S. Court of Appeals stepped in and ruled that Trump does not have the authority to impose them. The Appeals Court ruled, “Absent a valid delegation by Congress, the President has no authority to impose taxes. Given these considerations, we conclude Congress, in enacting IEEPA, did not give the President wide-ranging authority to impose tariffs of the nature of the Trafficking and Reciprocal Tariffs simply by the use of the term ‘regulate … importation.’”
“The core Congressional power to impose taxes such as tariffs is vested exclusively in the legislative branch by the Constitution,” the court added.
The issue centers on the IEEPA, which was enacted in 1977 and allows the president to impose tariffs on any import to the United States after declaring a national emergency. On April 2, Trump “<a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/fact-sheets/2025/04/fact-sheet-president-donald-j-trump-declares-national-emergency-to-increase-our-competitive-edge-protect-our-sovereignty-and-strengthen-our-national-and-economic-security/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">declared</a> that foreign trade and economic practices have created a national emergency,” adding that he would impose “responsive tariffs to strengthen the international economic position of the United States and protect American workers.”
If Trump loses at the Supreme Court, his administration has been looking into other ways to impose tariffs, NBC News <a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/trump-administration/white-house-exploring-keep-trumps-tariffs-supreme-court-strikes-rcna229175">reported</a>. Trump could rely on laws under the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, which gives the president power to levy some tariffs. Some of the president&#8217;s tariffs already in effect fall under this law and would not be affected by a Supreme Court decision shooting down Trump&#8217;s tariffs under the IEEPA.

SCOTUS Agrees To Hear Case On Trump’s Tariffs After Admin Asks For ‘Swift’ Action

Economy

Supreme Court

Tariffs

Trump Administration

Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett defended the 2022 decision overturning landmark abortion cases Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey during a recent interview — and also admitted that the public protest in reaction to that case caused her to invest in a bulletproof vest for her own protection.
Barrett, in her first interview since joining the court in 2020, told CBS anchor Norah O&#8217;Donnell that the Court&#8217;s decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women&#8217;s Health Organization had not outlawed abortion at all, but rather had returned it to the democratic process. She also said that both Roe and Casey had wrongfully defended a &#8220;right&#8221; that did not exist under the Constitution.
WATCH:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Must Watch: Justice Amy Coney Barrett sets the record straight on the majority&#8217;s message to the American people in the Dobbs decision:
“The central message of Dobbs: Dobbs did not render abortion illegal. Dobbs did not say anything about whether abortion is immoral. Dobbs said… <a href="https://t.co/isFjhf8NdM">pic.twitter.com/isFjhf8NdM</a>
— Carrie Severino (@JCNSeverino) <a href="https://twitter.com/JCNSeverino/status/1965062438266527828?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 8, 2025</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
&#8220;The central message of Dobbs: Dobbs did not render abortion illegal. Dobbs did not say anything about whether abortion is immoral. Dobbs said that these are questions that are left to the states. &#8230; What Dobbs says is that those calls are properly left to the democratic process, and the states have been working those out,&#8221; Barrett said.
&#8220;The Supreme Court’s decision in Dobbs gave that decision to the democratic process and to the states,” Barrett said. “It didn’t roll back rights. It didn’t render abortion illegal, unconstitutional, or anything else. And in effect, many states very fully protected abortion rights, more than under the regime of Roe since the time of the decision in Dobbs.&#8221;
O&#8217;Donnell pushed back, arguing that overturning Roe had stripped away &#8220;a federal right to abortion. A constitutional right to an abortion.&#8221;
Barrett argued that such a right had never existed in the first place — and that both Roe and Casey &#8220;had been in error&#8221; to assert that it had.
&#8220;Well, what it said is that the Constitution had not protected the abortion right under the Due Process Clause. And it said that Roe had been an error and Casey had been in error to hold otherwise,&#8221; she said.
The protests that erupted both before and after the decision was rendered — particularly after a leaked draft of the decision went public — prompted Barrett to take action to protect herself. She told O&#8217;Donnell that she&#8217;d purchased a bulletproof vest — and then had to explain to her own children why she&#8217;d felt the need to do so.

Supreme Court Justices Pose For Formal Group Photo

Justice Barrett Defends Dobbs Decision, Admits She Had To Buy Bulletproof Vest Afterward

Abortion

Amy Coney Barrett

The brutal murder of a Ukrainian refugee in Charlotte highlights the deadly consequences of &#8220;soft-on-crime&#8221; policies in Democrat-run cities. The Supreme Court gives the green light for Trump&#8217;s ICE raids in Los Angeles as the U.S. and its allies coordinate on a global immigration crackdown. HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. fires back at Democrats who are demanding his resignation, vowing to continue his &#8220;Make America Healthy Again&#8221; agenda.
It’s Tuesday, September 9, 2025, and this is the news you need to know to start your day.
Morning Wire is available on video! You can watch today’s episode here:
<iframe loading="lazy" title="Charlotte Tragedy Fallout &amp; LA ICE Raids Enabled" width="500" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/wxxC88rvvUE?feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen></iframe>
If you’d rather listen to your news, today’s edition of the Morning Wire podcast can be heard below:
<iframe style="width: 100%; max-width: 660px; overflow: hidden; border-radius: 10px;" src="https://embed.podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/charlotte-tragedy-fallout-la-ice-raids-enabled-9-9-25/id1576594336?i=1000725677207" height="175" frameborder="0" sandbox="allow-forms allow-popups allow-same-origin allow-scripts allow-storage-access-by-user-activation allow-top-navigation-by-user-activation"></iframe>
<h2>Charlotte Murder Highlights Failures of ‘Soft-on-Crime’ Policies</h2>
<div class="image"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" class="alignnone size-large wp-image-969907" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/09/MRN-9.9.25-Tue-SH-1024x576.jpg" alt="" width="1024" height="576" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/09/MRN-9.9.25-Tue-SH-1024x576.jpg 1024w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/09/MRN-9.9.25-Tue-SH-300x169.jpg 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/09/MRN-9.9.25-Tue-SH-768x432.jpg 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/09/MRN-9.9.25-Tue-SH-1536x864.jpg 1536w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/09/MRN-9.9.25-Tue-SH.jpg 1920w" sizes="auto, (max-width: 1024px) 100vw, 1024px" /></div>
Topline: The brutal, unprovoked murder of a Ukrainian refugee on a light rail train has left the city of Charlotte in shock and anger, putting a national spotlight on the deadly consequences of Democrat-led &#8220;soft-on-crime&#8221; policies. 
Iryna Zarutska, a 23-year-old Ukrainian refugee, was stabbed to death last month by DeCarlos Brown Jr., a homeless man with a lengthy and violent criminal record. The horrific attack took place in what was once a safe, trendy part of the city, but residents say rising crime and a growing homeless population have made them feel unsafe. Charlotte saw a 25% increase in its homicide rate last year, and robberies in the city center are up 54%. 
The city&#8217;s Democratic mayor, Li Vyles, responded to the murder by calling for empathy for the perpetrator&#8217;s mental health issues, and did not mention the victim in her initial statement. Brown was on the streets despite at least 14 previous arrests for crimes, including armed robbery and assault with a deadly weapon. A judge gave him pre-trial release on his most recent arrest in January, and police had referred him &#8220;to resources&#8221; rather than jail after three other encounters in 2024. The policies that kept Brown out of jail were recommended by a &#8220;Task Force for Racial Equity in Criminal Justice,&#8221; which was created by North Carolina&#8217;s now-Governor, Democrat Josh Stein, in 2020. 
<h2>Supreme Court Upholds Trump’s ICE Raids in Los Angeles</h2>
<div class="image"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" class="alignnone size-large wp-image-969905" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/09/MRN-9.9.25-Tue-SH2-1024x576.jpg" alt="" width="1024" height="576" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/09/MRN-9.9.25-Tue-SH2-1024x576.jpg 1024w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/09/MRN-9.9.25-Tue-SH2-300x169.jpg 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/09/MRN-9.9.25-Tue-SH2-768x432.jpg 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/09/MRN-9.9.25-Tue-SH2-1536x864.jpg 1536w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/09/MRN-9.9.25-Tue-SH2.jpg 1920w" sizes="auto, (max-width: 1024px) 100vw, 1024px" /></div>
Topline: The Supreme Court handed the Trump administration a major victory on Monday, ruling that federal immigration officials can continue their sweeping raids in the Los Angeles area and can consider factors like ethnicity and accent when detaining suspected illegal immigrants. 
The Court’s ruling overturns a lower court judge’s decision that had blocked the raids. Writing for the liberal minority, Justice Sonia Sotomayor issued a dramatic dissent, claiming the court was subjecting people to the &#8220;indignities&#8221; of being handcuffed &#8220;simply because of their looks, their accents.&#8221; 
Border Czar Tom Homan pushed back on that characterization, stating that ICE is focused on public safety. &#8220;Seventy percent of everybody ICE is arresting is a criminal,&#8221; Homan said. The raids have yielded significant results, with over 1,600 arrests in D.C. alone, many of whom are suspected gang members and other violent offenders. 
The ruling comes as Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem meets with the &#8220;Five Eyes&#8221; intelligence alliance in London to coordinate a global crackdown on human smuggling. The U.K.&#8217;s new Home Secretary has signaled a tougher stance on immigration that is more aligned with the Trump administration&#8217;s policies. 
<h2>RFK Fires Back as Democrats Demand His Resignation</h2>
<div class="image"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" class="alignnone size-large wp-image-969909" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/09/MRN-9.9.25-Tue-SH3-1024x576.jpg" alt="" width="1024" height="576" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/09/MRN-9.9.25-Tue-SH3-1024x576.jpg 1024w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/09/MRN-9.9.25-Tue-SH3-300x169.jpg 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/09/MRN-9.9.25-Tue-SH3-768x432.jpg 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/09/MRN-9.9.25-Tue-SH3-1536x864.jpg 1536w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/09/MRN-9.9.25-Tue-SH3.jpg 1920w" sizes="auto, (max-width: 1024px) 100vw, 1024px" /></div>
Topline: HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is pushing back against a coordinated campaign by Democrats demanding his resignation, vowing to continue his &#8220;Make America Healthy Again&#8221; (MAHA) agenda and restore integrity to public health. 
At least a dozen Democratic senators, including Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren, have signed a letter calling Kennedy’s agenda &#8220;dangerous&#8221; and &#8220;anti-science.&#8221; Former Republican Chris Christie also attacked Kennedy, calling him a &#8220;joke&#8221; and a &#8220;human middle finger to everybody who opposed&#8221; Trump. 
Blue state governors are also pushing back against Kennedy&#8217;s reforms. New York Governor Kathy Hochul signed an executive order to override new FDA guidance on COVID shots, and Illinois Governor JB Pritzker signed legislation to ensure access to the abortion pill mifepristone, regardless of future FDA safety assessments. 
Kennedy, who enjoys broad public support for his agenda, has fiercely defended his actions. He has accused major medical organizations of being compromised by their Big Pharma sponsors and has vowed to bring in &#8220;new blood&#8221; and people &#8220;who are committed to public health, and integrity, and gold-standard science.&#8221; His department has already reformed baby formula standards, required drug price transparency, and stopped federal funding for gender surgeries for minors, among other changes.

MRN 9.09.25 Thumbnail V1

Morning Brief: Charlotte Train Murder, SCOTUS Upholds ICE Raids, Dems vs MAHA

Charlotte

Crime

Democrats

Illegal Immigration

Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE)

Murder

North Carolina

Robert F. Kennedy Jr.

Within hours of the Supreme Court&#8217;s decision allowing Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents to resume sweeps in Los Angeles, California, several prominent Democrats across the city and the state issued statements complaining about the ruling.
Fox News National Correspondent Bill Melugin shared a few of their comments — from Los Angeles Democratic Mayor Karen Bass, Governor Gavin Newsom (D-CA), and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) — in a post on X.
&#8220;Reactions to SCOTUS allowing immigration sweeps to restart in LA: Mayor Bass: &#8216;Today&#8217;s ruling is not only dangerous, it&#8217;s un-American.&#8217; Gov. Newsom: &#8216;Trump&#8217;s hand-picked SCOTUS majority just became the Grand Marshal for a parade of racial terror in LA.&#8217; ACLU: &#8216;Outrageous.'&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Reactions to SCOTUS allowing immigration sweeps to restart in LA:
Mayor Bass: &#8220;Today&#8217;s ruling is not only dangerous, it&#8217;s un-American&#8221;.
Gov. Newsom: &#8220;Trump&#8217;s hand-picked SCOTUS majority just became the Grand Marshal for a parade of racial terror in LA&#8221;.
ACLU: &#8220;Outrageous&#8221;
— Bill Melugin (@BillMelugin_) <a href="https://twitter.com/BillMelugin_/status/1965132720113418548?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 8, 2025</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Newsom&#8217;s full statement went a bit further, claiming that the Trump administration planned to hunt down anyone who looked Latino: &#8220;Every person is now a target.&#8221;
&#8220;@realDonaldTrump&#8217;s hand-picked SCOTUS majority just became the Grand Marshal for a parade of racial terror in LA. His administration is targeting Latinos — and anyone who doesn’t look or sound like @StephenM&#8217;s idea of an American — to deliberately harm our families and economy.&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Trump&#8217;s private police force now has a green light to come after your family.
Every person is now a target.
California will continue to do all we can fight these abhorrent attacks on Californians.
— Governor Gavin Newsom (@CAgovernor) <a href="https://twitter.com/CAgovernor/status/1965127262531092507?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 8, 2025</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
&#8220;Trump&#8217;s private police force now has a green light to come after your family. Every person is now a target. California will continue to do all we can fight these abhorrent attacks on Californians,&#8221; Newsom continued.
&#8220;I want the entire nation to hear me when I say this isn’t just an attack on the people of LA, this is an attack on every person in every city in this country. Today’s ruling is not only dangerous – it’s un-American and threatens the fabric of personal freedom in the U.S.,&#8221; Mayor Bass said.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
I want the entire nation to hear me when I say this isn’t just an attack on the people of LA, this is an attack on every person in every city in this country.
Today’s ruling is not only dangerous – it’s un-American and threatens the fabric of personal freedom in the U.S. <a href="https://t.co/mFU4ZCh93L">https://t.co/mFU4ZCh93L</a>
— Mayor Karen Bass (@MayorOfLA) <a href="https://twitter.com/MayorOfLA/status/1965129986307936354?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 8, 2025</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
At the nation&#8217;s highest court, Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor registered her complaint as well, sounding quite a bit like the elected Democrats who object to federal immigration agents being permitted to enforce federal immigration laws.
&#8220;Instead of allowing the District Court to consider these troubling allegations in the normal course, a majority of this Court decides to take the once-extraordinary step of staying the District Court’s order. That decision is yet another grave misuse of our emergency docket,&#8221; Sotomayor protested. &#8220;We should not have to live in a country where the Government can seize anyone who looks Latino, speaks Spanish, and appears to work a low wage job. Rather than stand idly by while our constitutional freedoms are lost, I dissent.&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Sotomayor dissent on SCOTUS decision on ICE raids in LA: “We should not have to live in a country where the Government can seize anyone who looks Latino, speaks Spanish, and appears to work a low wage job. Rather than stand idly by while our constitutional freedoms are lost, I…
— Jesse Rodriguez (@JesseRodriguez) <a href="https://twitter.com/JesseRodriguez/status/1965094959817572823?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 8, 2025</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

California Governor Newsom Announces Lawsuit Challenging Trump Tariff Authority

SCOTUS Decision On LA ICE Raids Triggers All The Right People

ACLU

Gavin Newsom

Karen Bass

Sonia Sotomayor

A federal appeals court issued a ruling on Thursday allowing an illegal alien detention center in Florida dubbed Alligator Alcatraz to remain “open for business” while a lawsuit against the state and the Trump administration makes its way through court.
An Obama-appointed federal district court judge <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/obama-appointed-judge-orders-alligator-alcatraz-to-shut-down-within-60-days">issued</a> a temporary restraining order last month ordering Florida and the Trump administration to stop placing illegal aliens in the facility. The 11th Circuit Court of Appeals blocked that judge’s order in a 2-1 decision on Thursday.
The judges <a href="https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.ca11.92709/gov.uscourts.ca11.92709.42.1.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">ruled</a> that a lawsuit brought by environmental groups and an American Indian tribe “failed to state a viable claim” that Florida and the Department of Homeland Security violated federal environmental laws.
“Given that the federal government has an undisputed and wide-reaching interest in combatting illegal immigration, and that illegal immigration is a matter of national security and public safety, we think the injunction issued below goes against the public interest,” the majority wrote in the court’s decision.
Both the Department of Homeland Security and Florida Governor Ron DeSantis celebrated the ruling.
“Today’s order is a win for the American people, the rule of law and common sense,” the Department of Homeland Security posted on X. “This lawsuit was never about the environmental impacts of turning a developed airport into a detention facility. It has and will always be about open-borders activists and judges trying to keep law enforcement from removing dangerous criminal aliens from our communities, full stop.”
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
HUGE VICTORY FOR ALLIGATOR ALCATRAZ. Today’s order is a win for the American people, the rule of law and common sense. This lawsuit was never about the environmental impacts of turning a developed airport into a detention facility. It has and will always be about open-borders…
— Homeland Security (@DHSgov) <a href="https://twitter.com/DHSgov/status/1963695670923026455?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 4, 2025</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
“The mission continues on immigration enforcement. The media was giddy that somehow Alligator Alcatraz was ‘shutting down.’ And we told them that wasn’t true,” DeSantis <a href="https://x.com/GovRonDeSantis/status/1963688691542401406">said</a> in a video message. “There have been illegal aliens continuing to be there and being removed and returned to their home country. But they ran with the narrative because some leftist judge ruled, implausibly, that somehow Florida wasn’t allowed to use our own property to help the federal government in this important mission.”
“So Alligator Alcatraz is, in fact, like we’ve always said, open for business. The mission continues and we’re going to continue leading the way when it comes to immigration enforcement,” DeSantis added.
The Trump administration has partnered with states across the country to open up similar detention centers with names like the Cornhusker Clink in Nebraska and the Speedway Slammer in Indiana.

Protesters rally against “Alligator Alcatraz” in Florida, Everglades

Court Allows Florida’s Alligator Alcatraz To Remain ‘Open For Business’

Department of Homeland Security

Florida

Illegal Immigation

Ron DeSantis

U.S.

Washington, D.C., filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration on Thursday, arguing that the president’s National Guard deployment in the nation’s capital is an “illegal federal overreach.”
D.C. Attorney General Brian Schwalb, a Democrat, <a href="https://oag.dc.gov/release/attorney-general-schwalb-sues-end-illegal-national">argued</a> that the deployment “is not only unnecessary and unwanted, but it is also dangerous and harmful to the District and its residents.” The lawsuit claims that Trump’s move to send in National Guard troops to help address D.C.’s violent crime problem deprives “the District of the local autonomy granted under the Home Rule Act.”
“No American city should have the US military – particularly out-of-state military who are not accountable to the residents and untrained in local law enforcement – policing its streets,” Schwalb added. “It’s D.C. today but could be any other city tomorrow. We’ve filed this action to put an end to this illegal federal overreach.”
President Donald Trump said he deployed the National Guard to the nation’s capital on August 11 to “reestablish law, order and public safety.” Trump also ordered federal law enforcement officers to assist in making arrests. The White House fired back after the lawsuit was filed, telling <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2025/09/04/us/dc-trump-national-guard-suit.html">The New York Times</a> that D.C.’s move was “nothing more than another attempt — at the detriment of D.C. residents and visitors — to undermine the President’s highly successful operations to stop violent crime in D.C.”
The White House said last week that <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/in-less-than-a-month-trumps-federal-d-c-force-makes-more-than-1k-arrests?author=Mary+Margaret+Olohan&amp;category=News&amp;elementPosition=11&amp;row=0&amp;rowType=Vertical+List&amp;title=In+Less+Than+A+Month%2C+Trump%E2%80%99s+Federal+D.C.+Force+Makes+More+Than+1K+Arrests">more than 1,000 arrests</a> have been made, including apprehensions of many suspected illegal immigrants, in D.C. since Trump deployed the National Guard. An administration official told Daily Wire White House Correspondent Mary Margaret Olohan that authorities also seized more than 100 firearms and cleared nearly 50 homeless encampments.
On Wednesday, Trump <a href="https://www.newsnationnow.com/crime/trump-dc-crime-down-100-percent-heres-what-numbers-show/">declared</a> that D.C. “is a totally safe city” following his executive action. “You are not reporting any crime because there is none,” Trump said. “They said crime is down 87%, then I said ‘no it’s not. It’s down 100%.’”
According to <a href="https://mpdc.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/mpdc/publication/attachments/9.1.2025%20Surge%20Report.pdf">data</a> released by the Metropolitan Police Department, violent crime has gone down 39% during Trump’s deployment of the National Guard and federal law enforcement agents compared to the same time last year. Homicides dropped 58% and burglaries decreased by 49%, according to the Metropolitan Police Department’s statistics. President Trump has questioned the D.C. police department’s crime data after allegations surfaced earlier this year that officials “cooked the books” to keep crime numbers down.
The lawsuit follows a ruling from a federal judge on Tuesday who said that Trump broke the law when he deployed the National Guard and Marines to Los Angeles during violent anti-ICE protests in June, The Daily Wire previously <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/judge-rules-trump-illegally-deployed-us-military-to-los-angeles">reported</a>. The order from Judge Charles Breyer, the younger brother of former liberal Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer, takes effect next week.
Breyer’s order blocks the Trump administration from using around 300 National Guard troops left in Los Angeles to engage “in arrests, apprehensions, searches, seizures, security patrols, traffic control, crowd control, riot control, evidence collection, interrogation, or acting as informants, unless and until Defendants satisfy the requirements of a valid constitutional or statutory exception.”
The lawsuit filed by D.C. against Trump makes similar arguments as the case brought against the president in California, claiming that the National Guard deployment to cities violates the Posse Comitatus Act by using the military for domestic law enforcement. While Trump’s move is challenged in D.C., he is also considering deploying the National Guard to tackle violent crime in other cities, such as New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, New Orleans, and Baltimore.

National Guard

D.C. Files Suit To End Trump’s National Guard Deployment

Police

Violent Crime

Washington D.C.

Irish comedian Graham Linehan trolled a British court on Thursday when he arrived outside the Westminster courthouse wearing a sandwich board proclaiming, &#8220;There is no such thing as a transgender child.&#8221;
Standing outside the court, Linehan turned the sign around after several moments to reveal another that read, &#8220;Keep men out of women&#8217;s sports.&#8221; The underside of one of the signs was also briefly visible: &#8220;Gender ideology does not belong in schools.&#8221;
WATCH:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Father Ted co-creator Graham Linehan arrives for trial over alleged harassment of a transgender woman <a href="https://t.co/dOTDtXoDK9">pic.twitter.com/dOTDtXoDK9</a>
— Irish Daily Mirror (@IrishMirror) <a href="https://twitter.com/IrishMirror/status/1963528987658874997?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 4, 2025</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/irish-comedian-recounts-shocking-arrest-over-anti-trans-social-media-posts">Linehan</a> was approached by armed officers upon his arrival at London&#8217;s Heathrow airport, some of whom apparently were unable to even explain to him what he&#8217;d done to warrant being &#8220;arrested at an airport like a terrorist.&#8221;
&#8220;The moment I stepped off the plane at Heathrow, five armed police officers were waiting. They escorted me to a private area and told me I was under arrest for three posts on X,&#8221; Linehan wrote in an op-ed for <a href="https://www.thefp.com/p/i-posted-on-x-the-british-police-arrested-me-free-speech" target="_blank" rel="noopener">The Free Press</a>. “In a country where pedophiles escape prison, where knife crime is out of control, the state had mobilized five armed officers to arrest a comedy writer for these three posts.&#8221;
The posts that prompted the arrest, as The Daily Wire previously reported, include one that says, &#8220;If a trans-identified male is in a female-only space, he is committing a violent, abusive act. Make a scene, call the cops and if all else fails, punch him in the balls.&#8221;
Another has a photo of a trans activist gathering and includes the caption, &#8220;A photo you can smell.&#8221;
The third one says, &#8220;I hate them all. Misogynists and homophobes. F*** em.&#8221;
Former NCAA swimmer Riley Gaines commented on the video of Linehan outside the court, cheering him on.
&#8220;This is how Graham Linehan shows up for trial in the UK just days after being arrested in the London airport for posting &#8216;offensive tweets.&#8217; This is how you deal with the trans mob. Double down. We&#8217;re cheering you on, @glinner.&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
This is how Graham Linehan shows up for trial in the UK just days after being arrested in the London airport for posting &#8220;offensive tweets&#8221;
This is how you deal with the trans mob. Double down. We&#8217;re cheering you on, <a href="https://twitter.com/Glinner?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@Glinner</a> 👏🏼🔥<a href="https://t.co/vWVItcwUGK">pic.twitter.com/vWVItcwUGK</a>
— Riley Gaines (@Riley_Gaines_) <a href="https://twitter.com/Riley_Gaines_/status/1963571669571612847?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 4, 2025</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
&#8220;Nigel Farage flew across the Atlantic to discuss British censorship. Graham Linehan came the other way to head to court, and was arrested by armed police over a set of posts. Politicians who pretend Britain doesn&#8217;t have a free speech problem are only fooling themselves,&#8221; Sam Ashworth-Hayes of The Telegraph added.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Nigel Farage flew across the Atlantic to discuss British censorship. Graham Linehan came the other way to head to court, and was arrested by armed police over a set of posts.
Politicians who pretend Britain doesn&#8217;t have a free speech problem are only fooling themselves: <a href="https://t.co/MlOX5SK50m">pic.twitter.com/MlOX5SK50m</a>
— Sam Ashworth-Hayes (@SAshworthHayes) <a href="https://twitter.com/SAshworthHayes/status/1962950250961740138?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 2, 2025</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
&#8220;The more I think about the #GrahamLinehan case, the more disgusted I feel. An Irish citizen, living in the USA, is arrested by 5 ARMED cops when he arrives in the UK, because of some tweets he wrote on a website that&#8217;s owned by an American &amp; based in the USA. Total clownery!&#8221; another posted.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
The more I think about the <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/GrahamLinehan?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#GrahamLinehan</a> case, the more disgusted I feel. An Irish citizen, living in the USA, is arrested by 5 ARMED cops when he arrives in the UK, because of some tweets he wrote on a website that&#8217;s owned by an American &amp; based in the USA. Total clownery!
— Simon Fox (@SimonFoxWriter) <a href="https://twitter.com/SimonFoxWriter/status/1963134862522519914?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 3, 2025</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Graham Linehan court case

Comedian Trolls Court, Doubles Down After Arrest For ‘Anti-Trans’ Posts

Irish Comedian Trolls British Court, Doubles Down After Arrest For 'Anti-Trans' Posts

comedian

Comedy

Social Media Censorship

Transgender

The Trump administration urged the Supreme Court on Wednesday to quickly review a lower court ruling that <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/appeals-court-strikes-down-sweeping-trump-tariffs-setting-up-battle-at-supreme-court">invalidated</a> the president’s tariffs.
President Donald Trump wants the Supreme Court to begin hearing arguments in the case as soon as November, a major request for the justices who typically wait until as late as next summer to make a decision, CNBC <a href="https://www.cnbc.com/2025/09/03/trump-tariffs-trade-supreme-court.html">reported</a>. The Trump administration argues that the 7-4 U.S. Court of Appeals ruling “gravely undermines the President’s ability to conduct real-world diplomacy and his ability to protect the national security and economy of the United States.”
&#8220;That decision casts a pall of uncertainty upon ongoing foreign negotiations that the President has been pursuing through tariffs over the past five months, jeopardizing both already-negotiated framework deals and ongoing negotiations,&#8221; the administration added in its filing. &#8220;Few cases have so clearly called out for this Court’s swift resolution.&#8221;
Last week, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ruled that Trump overstepped his authority under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to levy tariffs.
“Absent a valid delegation by Congress, the President has no authority to impose taxes. Given these considerations, we conclude Congress, in enacting IEEPA, did not give the President wide-ranging authority to impose tariffs of the nature of the Trafficking and Reciprocal Tariffs simply by the use of the term ‘regulate … importation,’” the ruling stated.
“The core Congressional power to impose taxes such as tariffs is vested exclusively in the legislative branch by the Constitution,” the court added.
The <a href="https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/R45618">IEEPA</a>, enacted in 1977, allows the president to impose tariffs on any import to the United States after declaring a national emergency. On April 2, Trump &#8220;<a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/fact-sheets/2025/04/fact-sheet-president-donald-j-trump-declares-national-emergency-to-increase-our-competitive-edge-protect-our-sovereignty-and-strengthen-our-national-and-economic-security/">declared</a> that foreign trade and economic practices have created a national emergency,&#8221; adding that he would impose &#8220;responsive tariffs to strengthen the international economic position of the United States and protect American workers.&#8221;
The appeals court delayed implementation of its order until October 14, giving the Trump administration time to appeal to the Supreme Court. If the ruling goes into effect, Trump&#8217;s sweeping &#8220;Liberation Day&#8221; tariffs that hit numerous countries around the world would be rescinded, dealing a significant blow to one of the president&#8217;s top priorities during his second term.
Attorney Jeffrey Schwab, whose libertarian-leaning firm Liberty Justice Center represented the plaintiffs in the case, said he is &#8220;confident&#8221; that the legal arguments against Trump&#8217;s tariffs &#8220;will prevail.&#8221;
&#8220;Both federal courts that considered the issue agreed that IEEPA does not give the President unchecked tariff authority,&#8221; Schwab said. A federal trade court also ruled in May that Trump did not have the authority to impose his &#8220;Liberation Day&#8221; tariffs.
Trump ripped the “Highly Partisan Appeals Court” following the decision last week, arguing that &#8220;it would be a total disaster for the Country&#8221; if his tariffs were rescinded.
&#8220;If allowed to stand, this Decision would literally destroy the United States of America,&#8221; he added.

Trump Asks SCOTUS To Take ‘Swift’ Action To Save His Tariffs

Executive

A federal appeals court on Tuesday blocked the Trump administration from deporting suspected members of the Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua under the Alien Enemies Act. 
In a 2-1 <a href="https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.ca5.224134/gov.uscourts.ca5.224134.507678079.1.pdf">decision</a>, the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals sided with three illegal immigrants accused of being members of Tren de Aragua. The majority said that the wave of illegal immigrants from Venezuela who have entered the United States in recent years should not be considered an invasion under the terms of the Alien Enemies Act of 1798. In March, President Donald Trump <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/03/invocation-of-the-alien-enemies-act-regarding-the-invasion-of-the-united-states-by-tren-de-aragua/">invoked</a> the 18th-century law to classify members of Tren de Aragua as alien enemies to be removed under the 227-year-old statute.
“A country’s encouraging its residents and citizens to enter this country illegally is not the modern-day equivalent of sending an armed, organized force to occupy, to disrupt, or to otherwise harm the United States. There is no finding that this mass immigration was an armed, organized force or forces,” wrote Judge Leslie Southwick. 
The case is likely to end up before the Supreme Court.
Judge Andrew Oldham wrote a dissenting opinion criticizing the majority and arguing that federal judges were usurping Trump’s lawful authority. 
“The majority’s approach to this case is not only unprecedented — it is contrary to more than 200 years of precedent. It reflects a view of the Judicial power that is not only muscular — it is herculean. And it reflects a view of the Executive power that is not only diminutive — it is made subservient to the foreign-policy and public-safety hunches of every federal district judge in the country,” Oldham wrote. 
Oldham said that the danger that Tren de Aragua posed to the United States was clear based on their record of kidnappings, murders, rapes, and theft in the country. The Trump appointee also questioned the practicality of allowing judges to hold up the process of declaring an invasion. 
“Does that mean the United States could be beset by a predatory incursion for the entirety of the Trump Administration and that the President would remain powerless to act until given the green light by one or more federal judges?” he wrote. 
The Trump administration <a href="https://www.state.gov/designation-of-international-cartels">classified</a> Tren de Aragua as a foreign terrorist organization in February, saying that it “has conducted kidnappings, extorted businesses, bribed public officials, authorized its members to attack and kill U.S. law enforcement, and assassinated a Venezuelan opposition figure.”
On Tuesday, Trump <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/u-s-drone-strikes-cartel-drug-boat-trump-posts-video-for-world-to-see-beware?author=Tim+Pearce&amp;category=undefined&amp;elementPosition=2&amp;row=3&amp;rowHeadline=Latest+News&amp;rowType=Vertical+Carousel&amp;title=U.S.+Drone+Strikes+Cartel+Drug+Boat%2C+Trump+Posts+Video+For+World+To+See%3A+‘BEWARE%21’" target="_blank" rel="noopener">announced</a> that the U.S. military took out a boat leaving Venezuela with 11 members of Tren de Aragua allegedly transporting drugs headed for America. The strike took place in international waters.

White House US President Donald Trump

Court Blocks Trump From Deporting Suspected Venezuelan Gang Members

Terrorism

Tren De Aragua

Venezuela

A federal judge on Tuesday said that President Donald Trump broke the law by deploying the National Guard and Marines to Los Angeles County amid violent protests targeting immigration enforcement operations. 
Judge Charles Breyer, the younger brother of former liberal Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer, <a href="https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/70496361/176/newsom-v-trump/">issued</a> a ruling that Trump was using the military to enforce domestic law in violation of federal law. The Trump administration had argued that the deployment of about 4,000 National Guard members and 700 Marines to Los Angeles was only to protect federal property and personnel. 
“Nevertheless, at Defendants’ orders and contrary to Congress’s explicit instruction, federal troops executed the laws,” wrote Breyer, a Clinton-appointed judge. “The evidence at trial established that Defendants systematically used armed soldiers (whose identity was often obscured by protective armor) and military vehicles to set up protective perimeters and traffic blockades, engage in crowd control, and otherwise demonstrate a military presence in and around Los Angeles.”
The specific law that Breyer said Trump violated was the 1878 Posse Comitatus Act, which limits the use of the military to enforce domestic law. 
Breyer’s order, which takes effect in 10 days, blocks Trump from using the approximately 300 National Guard troops left in Los Angeles from “engaging in arrests, apprehensions, searches, seizures, security patrols, traffic control, crowd control, riot control, evidence collection, interrogation, or acting as informants, unless and until Defendants satisfy the requirements of a valid constitutional or statutory exception.”
The case came to Breyer after California Democratic Governor Gavin Newsom sued Trump.
“DONALD TRUMP LOSES AGAIN,” Newsom posted on X. “The courts agree — his militarization of our streets and use of the military against US citizens is ILLEGAL.”
Responding to the ruling, Acting U.S. Attorney for the Central District of California Bill Essayli said that Breyer’s decision was misleading and that the National Guard would not be leaving Los Angeles. 
“The military will remain in Los Angeles,” he <a href="https://x.com/USAttyEssayli/status/1962891988291957185">wrote</a> on X. “This is a false narrative and a misleading injunction. The military has never engaged in direct law enforcement operations here in LA. They protect our federal employees our properties so our federal agents can safely enforce federal laws in the face of the thugs being unleashed and encouraged by state and local politicians.”
A previous decision from Breyer blocking Trump from taking control of the National Guard from Newsom was <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/trump-scores-big-win-against-newsom-in-california-national-guard-clash">overturned</a> by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. That court agreed with the Trump administration that the National Guard was only being used to protect federal property and personnel.

National Guard in Los Angeles amid protests over ICE raids

Judge Rules Trump Illegally Deployed US Military To Los Angeles

Los Angeles

Riots

A federal judge on Sunday blocked the Trump administration’s plan to return 76 unaccompanied illegal immigrant children found at the U.S. southern border to Guatemala.
U.S. District Judge Sparkle Sooknanan sided with attorneys for the children, who argued that returning them to Guatemala would put them at risk. The Justice Department maintained that the children were being reunited with their parents and guardians.
“Here, Plaintiff children have demonstrated clear and irreparable harms if removed to Guatemala,” Sooknanan, a Biden appointee, <a href="https://www.nilc.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/08/LGML-v.-Noem-TRO.pdf">wrote</a>. “Several plaintiffs lack guardians who can provide safety and care. Many fear return and wish to continue pursuing their asylum claims before the immigration courts. Facing risks of persecution and torture. Further, Defendants have failed to comply with legal obligations to ensure safe repatriation to Guatemala.”
Sooknanan claimed that the Trump administration was discriminating against the children based on their nationality and had not given them due process. 
Justice Department lawyer Drew Ensign <a href="https://www.foxnews.com/politics/biden-judge-halts-surprising-illegal-alien-minor-repatriation-plan-after-advocacy-groups-sue" target="_blank" rel="noopener">stated</a> that the parents or guardians of the children had requested the return of their children. The kids are being represented by the Young Center for Immigrant Children&#8217;s Rights. 
&#8220;These are not removals under the statute,” he said. “These are repatriations. All of these children have parents or guardians in Guatemala who have requested their return.&#8221;
The Associated Press <a href="https://apnews.com/article/immigration-unaccompanied-children-trump-deportations-guatemala-3790909d69f19fd8cd8edffb6b3215c3">reported</a> that many of the children set to be returned to Guatemala had already boarded their planes and were awaiting takeoff when the judge’s order came through. 
White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller ripped into the judge for the decision. 
“The Biden judge is effectively kidnapping these migrant children and refusing to let them return home to their parents in their home country,” he posted on X. 
Under President Joe Biden, the number of unaccompanied children encountered at the U.S. southern border surged. More than 500,000 children were found at the border under Biden, according to numbers <a href="https://www.grassley.senate.gov/news/news-releases/bombshell-report-confirms-grassley-oversight-of-biden-harris-admins-failure-to-protect-migrant-children">released</a> by Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA). Of those children, the Department of Homeland Security failed to properly track at least 233,000, while tens of thousands were released to unrelated sponsors or distant relatives.

US-MEXICO-POLITICS-IMMIGRATION

Biden Judge Blocks Trump Admin From Returning Unaccompanied Children To Home Country

Guatemala

Joe Biden

Judges

Menu