Former Rep. George Santos (R-NY), who was expelled from Congress last year after extensive fraud revelations, received a hefty 87-month prison term on Friday.
Santos, 36, pleaded guilty last year to committing wire fraud and aggravated identity theft while also admitting he “filed fraudulent FEC reports, embezzled funds from campaign donors, charged credit cards without authorization, stole identities, obtained unemployment benefits through fraud, and lied in reports to the House of Representatives,” per a Department of Justice press <a href="https://www.justice.gov/archives/opa/pr/former-congressman-george-santos-pleads-guilty-fraud-and-identity-theft#:~:text=In%20pleading%20guilty%2C%20Santos%2C%2036,to%20the%20House%20of%20Representatives">release</a>.
As U.S. District Judge Joanna Seybert handed down the sentencing, Santos could be seen putting his hands over his head in apparent disbelief, The Wall Street Journal <a href="https://www.wsj.com/us-news/former-congressman-george-santos-sentenced-to-seven-years-for-fraud-90d88f55">reported</a>.
Despite Santos saying in a Monday <a href="https://www.scribd.com/document/852698897/Letter-From-George-Santos">letter</a> to the presiding judge that he &#8220;accepted full responsibility&#8221; for his crimes and was &#8220;profoundly sorry&#8221; for his actions, John J. Durham, U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of New York under President Donald Trump&#8217;s DOJ, had pushed for an 87-month sentence, characterizing Santos as “unrepentant,” and “blamed his circumstances on misplaced trust in others,” per The Wall Street Journal.
Judge Seybert reportedly concurred with this sentiment, saying at the sentencing, &#8220;Where’s the remorse? Where do I see it?&#8221;
After his expulsion from Congress, Santos attempted to monetize his notoriety, likely in an attempt to pay the $375,000 in restitution, through personalized videos on Cameo and launching a podcast aptly titled &#8220;Pants on Fire&#8221; – a possible reference to his numerous falsehoods about his education, work history, and personal background, <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/25/nyregion/george-santos-sentencing-prison.html">according</a> to The New York Times.
Santos was making &#8220;twice his congressional salary&#8221; through the personalized video platform, according to The Times, with the former congressman pushing a &#8220;last week on Cameo&#8221; promotion in a last-ditch effort to raise money before his sentencing.
Durham <a href="https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nyed.497086/gov.uscourts.nyed.497086.118.0.pdf">argued</a> in a supplemental court memo that Santos&#8217; recent social media posts claiming he is a “<a href="https://x.com/MrSantosNY/status/1909311390160240990">scapegoat</a>” and a victim of DOJ overreach and selective prosecution &#8220;suggested he had little remorse for his actions.&#8221;
“His actions speak louder than any words, and they cry out for a significant carceral sentence in this case,” the U.S. attorney said.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Hi my name is George Santos and the DOJ has had a hard on for me since December of 2022.
I refuse to let them break me or my spirit and that makes them big Mad… they have used elaborate language to drag me and hinder my ability to earn income…
Long story short, I will NOT…
&mdash; Pants On Fire with George Santos (@MrSantosNY) <a href="https://twitter.com/MrSantosNY/status/1908567430403596655?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 5, 2025</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Santos&#8217; dramatic fall began shortly after his 2022 election victory when it was <a href="https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/new-york-congressman-elect-santos-admits-to-lying-about-employment-history-and-college-education?utm_source=chatgpt.com">revealed</a> that he had fabricated much of his background, such as graduating from Baruch College, working for Goldman Sachs and Citigroup, and even playing collegiate volleyball.
“I didn’t graduate from any institution of higher learning. I’m embarrassed and sorry for having embellished my resume,&#8221; Santos admitted in 2023, adding, “I own up to that. … We do stupid things in life.”
Santos was expelled from the House of Representatives after fellow Republicans led the charge following a bipartisan House Ethics Committee report, which found that he had stolen hundreds of thousands of dollars from donors. Some funds were <a href="https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/onlyfans-botox-george-santos-ethics-report-b2457313.html">reportedly</a> spent on luxury goods, OnlyFans, and Botox.
His attorneys had requested the minimum 24-month sentence, arguing that his actions &#8220;stemmed largely from a misguided desperation related to his political campaign, rather than inherent malice,&#8221; <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/05/nyregion/george-santos-sentencing-prison.html">according</a> to The New York Times, with the judge ultimately accepting the prosecution&#8217;s recommended sentence.

Former Representative George Santos Faces Sentencing For Fraud

Disgraced Ex-Congressman George Santos Sentenced To More Than 7 Years In Prison

Corruption

Courts

Department of Justice

Fraud

George Santos

New York

Politics

U.S. House of Representatives

Federal agents arrested a former New Mexico Democrat judge and his wife on Thursday after they were accused of harboring a suspected member of Tren de Aragua at their home. 
Former Dona Ana County Magistrate Judge Jose “Joel” Cano and his wife, Nancy, were taken into custody by Immigration and Customs Enforcement at their home in Las Cruces, KFOX14 <a href="https://kfoxtv.com/news/local/home-of-ex-judge-raided-after-claims-of-hosting-tren-de-aragua-gang-member-in-las-cruces-cristhian-ortega-lopez-dona-ana-county-venezuela-joel-cano-nancy-tda-nm-hsi-homeland-security" target="_blank" rel="noopener">reported</a>. Both the 67-year-old former judge and his wife are <a href="https://apps.donaanacounty.org/www/sites/all/modules/dac/dac_inmates/dac_create_pdf.php?&amp;GCode=4&amp;FelonID=2500003171&amp;FelonPIC=387831&amp;CurrentFlag=0">charged</a> with tampering with evidence. 
The couple is currently in custody at the Dona Ana County Jail, awaiting their appearance in federal court. They were arrested as part of a probe by Homeland Security Investigations into their association with 23-year-old Cristhian Ortega-Lopez, who authorities say is linked to Tren de Aragua, a Venezuelan gang that has been designated as a foreign terrorist organization by the Trump administration. Ortega-Lopez was arrested at the Canos&#8217; home in February. 
“Under President Trump, we have arrested over 150,000 aliens—including more than 600 members of the vicious Tren de Aragua gang,” Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem <a href="https://x.com/Sec_Noem/status/1915559976229052564">said</a>, commenting on the arrest. “If you are here illegally and break the law, we will hunt you down, arrest you and lock you up. That’s a promise.”
Cano resigned from his judgeship earlier this week and was banned by the New Mexico Supreme Court from holding any judicial office again. The court <a href="https://www.foxnews.com/us/new-mexico-supreme-court-bans-judge-after-alleged-tda-member-arrested-home">ordered</a> that Cano “shall never again hold, become a candidate for, run for, or stand for election to any New Mexico judicial office in the future.”
Ortega-Lopez, originally from Venezuela, <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/dem-judge-resigns-after-harboring-alleged-tren-de-aragua-gang-member" target="_blank" rel="noopener">was accused</a> of illegal entry to the United States near Eagle Pass, Texas. He spent three days in Border Patrol custody before he was released because of overcrowded facilities at the Border Patrol’s South Laredo, Texas, processing center, according to court records, the Albuquerque Journal <a href="https://www.abqjournal.com/news/article_47926b51-d481-4aa9-8d76-5de8cc13809b.html?fbclid=IwY2xjawJwuu9leHRuA2FlbQIxMQABHn4jO0OhVrwODcJdaJgEwwkzhtKl5MdUs320h3z25_0FkfgnT9xnpoaAox6a_aem_F7zjdLNkrsY9LSG6RfZRmA">reported</a>. He met Nancy in El Paso, where he was working as a construction worker and handyman, and she offered for him to stay in a small house behind their home.
Ortega-Lopez has been charged with being an unlawful alien in possession of a firearm and ammunition, and is seen in court documents holding guns.
Cano has denied any knowledge of the suspected ties between Ortega-Lopez and Tren De Aragua. Investigators have said that they have text messages and voice mail messages that confirm the links to the notorious gang.
“Let me be as crystal clear as possible,” Cano <a href="https://www.koat.com/article/las-cruces-former-judge-allegations-gang-new-mexico/64583129" target="_blank" rel="noopener">told</a> the New Mexico Supreme Court. “The very first time I ever heard that the boys could possibly have any association with Tren de Aragua was when I was informed of that by [the] agents on the day of the raid.”

MixCollage-25-Apr-2025-09-44-AM-6237

Former Judge And Wife Arrested, Accused Of Housing Suspected Venezuelan Gang Member

Department of Homeland Security

Illegal Immigation

Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE)

Kristi Noem

New Mexico

Tren De Aragua

Venezuela

In a reversal from the Biden administration’s policy, the Trump administration&#8217;s Department of Justice has stripped the United Nations Relief Works Agency (UNRWA) — which has been accused of working with Hamas during the October 7, 2023, massacre of more than 1200 people in Israel — of immunity from prosecution. That decision will enable the billion-dollar lawsuit filed by the October 7 victims&#8217; families to move forward.
In a  letter from the United States Attorney, Southern District of New York, to U.S. District Judge Analisa Torres regarding the case Estate of Tamar Kedem Siman Tov et al. v. UNRWA, the text stated:
<blockquote>
The complaint in this case recounts atrocious crimes committed by Hamas on October 7. And its factual allegations, taken as true, detail how the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine (&#8220;UNRWA&#8221;) played a significant role in those heinous offenses. Previously, the Government expressed the view that certain immunities shielded UNRWA from having to answer those allegations in American courts. The Government has since reevaluated that position, and now concludes UNRWA is not immune from this litigation. Nor are the bulk of other defendants.
</blockquote>
The lawsuit<a href="https://unwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/001-UNRWAComplaint.pdf"> states</a>:
<blockquote>The atrocities committed by Hamas in the October 7 Attack were not only acts of terror, genocide, and crimes against humanity, they were torts in violation of the law of nations. Because, as detailed below, the Defendants’ actions aiding and abetting those torts in violation of the law of nations, including but not limited to their funding of Hamas, occurred in significant part in the State of New York and in this federal judicial district, this Court has subject matter jurisdiction and venue over Plaintiffs’ claims against these Defendants. Many of the Plaintiffs separately have claims against Defendants for aiding and abetting Hamas’ violations of the Torture Victim Protection Act of 1991 (“TVPA”), which requires no such New York nexus.</blockquote>
“The US administration&#8217;s determination that UNRWA lacks diplomatic immunity could substantially facilitate Israel&#8217;s efforts to end the agency&#8217;s operations within Israeli territory,” Israel Hayom <a href="https://www.israelhayom.com/2025/04/25/trumps-doj-strips-unrwa-of-immunity/">pointed out</a>. “The lawsuit presents evidence alleging UNRWA orchestrated a $1 billion money laundering operation that funded Hamas, while simultaneously reducing humanitarian aid to Gaza residents and playing a critical role in the October 7 attack.”
Documents shared with <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2024/12/08/world/middleeast/hamas-unrwa-schools.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">The New York Times</a> last December impelled the media outlet to admit that senior staff at UNRWA schools doubled as members of Hamas’ military wing.
As shown by the detailed records kept by the Qassam Brigades, Hamas’ military wing, which were seized by Israel, at least 24 people employed by the anti-Israel UNRWA in their schools were members of Hamas or Islamic Jihad. “A majority were top administrators at the schools — principals or deputy principals — and the rest were school counselors and teachers, the documents say,” The Times reported. “Almost all of the Hamas-linked educators, according to the records, were fighters in the Qassam Brigades.”
“The Constitution does not grant immunity to foreign sovereigns or organizations. Instead, such immunity &#8216;is a matter of grace and comity on the part of the United States,’” the letter continued. “The interactions among two treaties, one statute, and one proposed convention govern whether UNRWA is entitled to such grace here. First, the International Organizations Immunities Act of 1945 (‘IOIA’) creates the ‘default rules’ for the immunity enjoyed by international organizations in the United States. Although apparently aimed at many of the same entities that now comprise the United Nations (‘UN’) system, id., the JOIA applies to any ‘public organization in which the United States participates pursuant to any treaty or under the authority of any Act of Congress &#8230; and which shall have been designated by the President through appropriate Executive order as being entitled to enjoy the privileges, exemptions, and immunities provided in this subchapter.’&#8221;
“In other words, Congress controls in the first instance whether the United States participates in such ‘public organizations’ and it empowered the President to decide whether to extend immunity to these organizations including ‘at any time to revoke the designation’ entitling the organizations to immunity,” the letter explains.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
The Trump DOJ has reversed the Biden admin&#39;s position and made it clear that UNRWA and its employees are not entitled to immunity for their atrocious terroristic conduct. 
File this under the category of &quot;things that should not have to be said but thank God someone said them.&quot; <a href="https://t.co/iRVSFZdV4v">pic.twitter.com/iRVSFZdV4v</a>
&mdash; Mark Goldfeder (@MarkGoldfeder) <a href="https://twitter.com/MarkGoldfeder/status/1915591397521969386?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 25, 2025</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
&nbsp;

UNRWA – Palestine – Photo Illustration

Trump DOJ Strips Hamas-Linked UN Agency Of Immunity For October 7 Massacre

Hamas

Lawsuit

October 7

Trump Administration

United Nations

UNRWA

World

A federal judge has ordered the Trump administration to facilitate the return of a second illegal alien who the Trump administration deported to El Salvador and says is a gang member.
United States District Court Judge Stephanie Gallagher <a href="https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us-judge-orders-return-second-migrant-deported-el-salvador-2025-04-24/">issued the decision</a> Wednesday, ruling that the deportation of the Venezuelan national violated a previous court settlement. Gallagher argued that a settlement agreement she approved in November on behalf of thousands of migrants required the man’s asylum case to be heard before he was deported.
“A core purpose of the Settlement Agreement would be nullified if Class Members with pending asylum applications could be summarily removed from the United States and thus rendered ineligible for asylum,” Gallagher said as she addressed the case of the Venezuelan national, identified only as Cristian.
The Trump administration argues that Cristian’s deportation did not violate federal law, as it had invoked the 1798 Alien Enemies act, thereby making the Venezuelan national ineligible to receive asylum and remain in the United States.
The administration is also locked in a battle with United States District Court Judge James Boasberg, who recently <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/leftist-judge-threatens-to-hold-trump-admin-in-criminal-contempt-of-court-over-deportation-flights?author=Spencer+Lindquist&amp;category=News&amp;elementPosition=8&amp;row=0&amp;rowType=Vertical+List&amp;title=Liberal+Judge+Threatens+To+Hold+Trump+Admin+In+Criminal+Contempt+Of+Court+Over+Deportation+Flights">threatened</a> to hold the Trump administration in contempt of court over its use of the Alien Enemies Act to expedite the removal of more than 250 suspected gang members to the El Salvadoran prison.
The new ruling from Gallagher comes after a different judge ordered the Trump administration to facilitate the return of El Salvadoran national Kilmar Abrego Garcia, who the White House says is a member of MS-13.
Salvadoran president Nayib Bukele said that he had no intention of returning Garcia to the United States. “How can I smuggle a terrorist into the United States?” Bukele said in response to a journalist while meeting with Trump in the White House, also adding that he also will not release him from El Salvador’s Terrorism Confinement Center.
“I’m not very fond of releasing terrorists into our country … we just turned the murder capital of the world into the safest country in the western hemisphere and you want us to go back?” Bukele noted. “That’s not going to happen.”

CECOT

Baltimore Judge Gets In The Way Of Another Trump Gang Member Deportation

Border

Deportations

Donald Trump

Illegal Immigration

Immigration

Judge

A federal judge on Thursday blocked President Donald Trump from implementing an executive order that requires voters to show documentation proving their U.S. citizenship to cast a ballot in federal elections.
U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly, a Bill Clinton appointee, granted a preliminary injunction stopping the Trump administration from going forward with the proof-of-citizenship requirements as a lawsuit plays out, the Associated Press <a href="https://apnews.com/article/trump-elections-executive-order-citizenship-lawsuit-4b683fe2e1106316fdb05621be9b7d0e" target="_blank" rel="noopener">reported</a>. The <a href="https://apnews.com/article/trump-executive-order-elections-voting-lawsuit-769caf1eceec29a13b4df78a931deb0b" target="_blank" rel="noopener">lawsuit</a>, filed by the Democratic National Committee and leftist voting rights groups, claims that Trump&#8217;s order is &#8220;an unlawful action that threatens to uproot our tried-and-tested election systems and silence potentially millions of Americans.&#8221;
Trump&#8217;s <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/03/preserving-and-protecting-the-integrity-of-american-elections/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">executive order</a>, which he signed in March, aims to eliminate voter fraud in U.S. elections.
&#8220;Under the Constitution, State governments must safeguard American elections in compliance with Federal laws that protect Americans’ voting rights and guard against dilution by illegal voting, discrimination, fraud, and other forms of malfeasance and error. Yet the United States has not adequately enforced Federal election requirements that, for example, prohibit States from counting ballots received after Election Day or prohibit non-citizens from registering to vote,&#8221; the order states.
Another part of Trump&#8217;s order — requiring those enrolled in public assistance to have their citizenship assessed before receiving a voter registration form — was also blocked by Judge Kollar-Kotelly. The judge denied the plaintiff&#8217;s request to block the part of Trump&#8217;s order that tightens deadlines on mail ballots, according to the AP.
Opponents of the executive order argue that states can establish their own election processes and that only Congress can take action to override state laws related to federal elections.
The judge&#8217;s move means that yet another Trump action will be tied up in the courts and prevented from taking effect. Federal judges have blocked numerous Trump orders, including on cuts to federal agency staff, deportations, and birthright citizenship. As of Thursday, 108 different rulings have blocked or temporarily frozen Trump&#8217;s attempts to carry out his agenda, according to <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2025/us/trump-administration-lawsuits.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">The New York Times</a>.

Federal Judge Blocks Trump’s Proof-Of-Citizenship Voting Requirement

Election Fraud

Executive Orders

Voter ID

The Trump administration was dealt a blow after a federal judge ruled against its efforts to dismantle taxpayer-funded international media.
U.S. District Judge Royce Lamberth <a href="https://ecf.dcd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/show_public_doc?2025cv1015-98" target="_blank" rel="noopener">ordered</a> the Trump administration on Tuesday to restore funding and staff at the United States Agency for Global Media, blocking efforts to gut the organization. In March, President Donald Trump signed an <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/03/continuing-the-reduction-of-the-federal-bureaucracy/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">executive order</a> that directed the USAGM to be “eliminated to the maximum extent possible consistent with federal law. &#8220;
Lamberth placed a preliminary injunction against the administration, stating that it must rehire previously fired USAGM staffers and restore any grants cut after Trump’s executive order. 
“They took immediate and drastic action to slash USAGM, without considering its statutorily or constitutionally required functions as required by the plain language of the EO, and without regard to the harm inflicted on employees, contractors, journalists, and media consumers around the world,” Lamberth said. “It is hard to fathom a more straightforward display of arbitrary and capricious actions than the Defendants’ actions here.”
The United States Agency for Global Media operates networks like Voice of America, Radio Free Europe, and Middle East Broadcasting Networks. 
Lamberth said that the Trump administration “likely” violated the Administrative Procedures Act and the International Broadcasting Act with its actions to reduce the scope of the agency. The judge also asserted that scaling back the agency would cause irreparable harm to “the health and safety of its journalists and employees, and the interests of the millions of reporters and listeners who depend on USAGM’s programming.”
The Trump administration <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/articles/2025/03/the-voice-of-radical-america/">has argued</a> that agency-run outlets like Voice of America have become increasingly partisan and pushed radical leftist ideologies. In a fact sheet, the White House pointed to segments the outlet has run on transgender-identifying migrants wanting asylum in the United States and another one on “white privilege.” 
A day after Trump’s executive order, the agency issued a press release saying it was “not salvageable.” 
“From top-to-bottom this agency is a giant rot and burden to the American taxpayer—a national security risk for this nation—and irretrievably broken,” the press release <a href="https://www.usagm.gov/2025/03/15/u-s-agency-for-global-media-complies-with-presidential-executive-order-to-reduce-the-federal-bureaucracy/#:~:text=From%20top%2Dto%2Dbottom%20this,exception%20rather%20than%20the%20rule.">said</a>. “While there are bright spots within the agency with personnel who are talented and dedicated public servants, this is the exception rather than the rule.”
After Trump’s executive order, hundreds of contractors with the USAGM and Voice of America stopped producing reports.

Donald Trump Campaigns For President In Georgia Ahead Of November Election

Judge Deals Blow To Trump Plan To Dismantle Taxpayer-Funded International Media

Voice of America

The conservative majority on the Supreme Court indicated that it would side with parents who want the option of keeping their children away from LGBTQ-themed books in schools.
The justices offered their comments during <a href="https://www.c-span.org/event/public-affairs-event/supreme-court-hears-case-on-lgbtq-books-in-public-schools/432473" target="_blank" rel="noopener">oral arguments</a> in the case of Mahmoud v. Taylor, which revolves around parents in Montgomery County, Maryland, near Washington, D.C. In 2022, the county’s school board approved LGBTQ-themed books for its language arts curriculum. In 2023, the board refused parents the option of having their children excused from such instruction.
“One book describes the story of a girl attending her uncle’s same-sex wedding, for example, while another book, Pride Puppy, tells the story of a puppy that gets lost during a Pride parade,” <a href="https://www.scotusblog.com/2025/04/supreme-court-likely-to-rule-for-parental-opt-out-on-lgbtq-books-in-schools/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">SCOTUSblog</a> noted.
A lower court ruled that the school board did not have to notify parents when the storybooks would be used, as such notification would have allowed parents to opt their children out of the curriculum. “A federal appeals court reasoned that on the ‘threadbare’ facts before it, the parents had not demonstrated that exposing their children to the storybooks compelled the parents to violate their religion,” SCOTUSBlog reported.
Eric Baxter, an attorney for the parents, told Justice Clarence Thomas that teachers were required to use the books and the school board suggested they do so five times in the school year. Justice Samuel Alito bluntly stated the county’s policy permitted schools to teach children moral principles that were “highly objectionable to parents and they can’t opt out,” and asked simply, “What is the big deal about allowing them to opt out of this?” while pointing out that students could opt out of health classes.
Meanwhile, the defendants’ attorney argued there was a difference between “exposure” and “coercion.” Justices Amy Coney Barrett and Neil Gorsuch contended that the presentation of the curriculum was more than just exposing children to the ideas, making coercion a possibility. Gorsuch asked the attorney for the school board, “The exposure versus coercion line that you ask us to draw, how does that play out in the case of the Mohammed image for the Muslim student?”
“In those circumstances, the school is coercing the individual to act contrary to a religious belief,” the attorney replied.
“Just being exposed to the image? The exposure there is coercion, in your view?” Gorsuch asked.
“I think it’s the difference between exposure to ideas and activity that coerces you to engage in conduct that is in violation of your belief,” the attorney answered.
“So the idea is the image of the prophet?” Gorsuch asked. “So it’s the image that makes the difference, rather than an idea?”
“I think it’s conduct that makes the difference. &#8230; So if there were a book that described someone making an image of the prophet Mohammed, I don’t think the parent would have the ability to object, even given the religious prohibition at issue, on simply being exposed to the idea that people might depict the image of Mohammed. Being required to view the image of the prophet Mohammed in contravention of a religious objection, is being required to engage in conduct,” the attorney replied.
“The child is sitting passively and the teacher’s just reading a storybook,” Gorsuch pointed out, prompting the attorney to admit, “I think if the storybook features the depiction of the prophet Mohammed, that is a compulsion to engage in conduct that violates your religious belief.”
Gorsuch pointed out, “You say this is only about exposure, but we also have in the records some guidance materials for teachers, one of which is if a students says that a boy says a boy can’t be a girl because if he was born a boy, a teacher is to respond, ‘That comment is hurtful, and we shouldn’t use negative words to talk about people’s identities.’ Is that exposure, or is that something else for a 3 to 5-year-old?”
Chief Justice John Roberts declared that even if the school did not require students “to affirm what is being taught in books or lessons,” that may not be “a realistic concept for a five-year-old.”
Meanwhile, leftist Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson “asked how far the parents’ rule would extend. For example, she inquired, could a parent ask to have her child not placed in a classroom with a gay teacher who has pictures of her same-sex wedding in the classroom?” SCOTUSblog reported.

Preschool children playing with colorful shapes

SCOTUS Hints It Will Side With Parents Who Want Opt-Out For Kids Exposed To LGBT Materials

Elementary Schools

LGBTQ

SCOTUS

Supreme Court

U.S.

On Monday, the Justice Department made remarks before the court, urging a U.S. district judge to force Google to relinquish its ownership of the Chrome web browser.
“Google, which controls about 90% of the global search market, has used illegal agreements to sideline its rivals and harmed consumers and advertisers in the process,” The Wall Street Journal <a href="https://www.wsj.com/tech/google-justice-department-search-monopoly-hearing-d527c010?mod=hp_lead_pos5" target="_blank" rel="noopener">noted</a>. “A trial last year, focused just on liability, revealed that Google has paid Apple more than $20 billion a year for Google’s search engine to be the default on Apple’s Safari web browser.”
Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche, Assistant Attorney General for Antitrust Gail Slater, and Justice Department official David Dahlquist made their remarks to U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta, who <a href="https://www.wsj.com/tech/google-loses-federal-antitrust-case-27810c43" target="_blank" rel="noopener">stated</a> last year, “Google is a monopolist, and it has acted as one” as he ruled that Google had illegally preserved its search engine monopoly.
“President Trump took the first big step in 2020 when his Justice Department filed an antitrust lawsuit against Google to challenge its dominance over internet search,” Blanche <a href="https://www.justice.gov/opa/speech/deputy-attorney-general-todd-blanche-delivers-remarks-opening-arguments-google-search" target="_blank" rel="noopener">told</a> Mehta. “Today, as the remedies phase of that case begins, President Trump’s Justice Department will finish the job.”
“As a monopolist, Google uses its market power against the American people,” Blanche continued. “It has control of an extraordinary amount of data about ordinary Americans. Google has deplatformed conservative speech and has put its thumb on the scale politically for years. All of this behavior is downstream from Google’s monopoly power over internet search. This antitrust case addresses that monopoly power. The Department has asked the court to impose remedies that will ensure Google can never again wield such dominance over internet search.”
“This case was filed during President Trump’s first term and litigated across three administrations,” Slater <a href="https://www.justice.gov/opa/speech/assistant-attorney-general-gail-slater-delivers-remarks-opening-arguments-google-search" target="_blank" rel="noopener">pointed out</a>. “It has unified our nation. Forty-nine states, two territories and the District of Columbia have all joined the Department of Justice in prosecuting Google here. And for good reason. Each generation has called for the DOJ to challenge a behemoth that crushed competition. In decades past, it was Standard Oil and AT&amp;T. Today’s behemoth is Google. It is a gatekeeper for our commerce and our information. It is so ubiquitous and so powerful that it interacts with millions of Americans, billions of times per day. Fortunately, DOJ’s Antitrust Division exists for cases just like this one.”
“We’re at an inflection point,” Dahlquist told Mehta. “This court has an opportunity to remedy a monopoly that has controlled the internet for today’s generation and restore competition for decades to come.”

General view of the Google headquarters in King’s Cross as

Trump’s DOJ Targets Google, Urges Judge To Force Sale Of Chrome Browser

Business

Chrome

Google

The United States Supreme Court early Saturday morning blocked President Donald Trump from deporting illegal Venezuelan immigrants who are suspected of being in the brutal gang Tren de Aragua.
Trump promised during his campaign to deport criminal illegal aliens, and has invoked the 1798 Alien Enemies Act to help fulfill that promise. The high court, though, sided with the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), arguing that the administration did not give the suspected gang members proper notice.
&#8220;Without this Court&#8217;s intervention, dozens or hundreds of proposed class members may be removed to a possible life sentence in El Salvador with no real opportunity to contest their designation or removal,&#8221; the suit from the ACLU said.
&#8220;The Government is directed not to remove any member of the putative class of detainees from the United States until further order of this Court,&#8221; the court wrote.
Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito were the only two judges to dissent from the majority opinion.
Earlier this month, the Supreme Court <a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/czd3rdjn81lo" target="_blank" rel="noopener">ruled</a> that Trump could use the Alien Enemies Act to deport alleged gang members, but said potential deportees must be given a chance to challenge such removal.
The ACLU claims the illegals, who are being detained in Texas, were given notices about their deportation in English, despite one detainee only speaking Spanish, <a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/czd3rdjn81lo" target="_blank" rel="noopener">according</a> to a BBC report. The challenge also said the suspected gang members hadn&#8217;t been told about their right to contest the decision in court.
The Trump administration says it has already deported 137 suspected Tren de Aragua gang members under the Alien Enemies Act.
The Supreme Court ruled on April 7 that Trump could use the act for such deportations, if he gives proper notice. The case landed at 5-4, with all but Justice Amy Coney Barrett from the court’s conservative wing ruling in the majority. Barrett partially dissented from the majority. The court’s three liberal justices dissented together, according to <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/07/us/politics/supreme-court-trump-venezuelan-deportations.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">The New York Times</a>.
The order reversed a lower court ruling from U.S. District Judge James Boasberg. Boasberg temporarily blocked the Trump administration from enforcing the <a href="https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?path=/prelim@title50/chapter3&amp;edition=prelim" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Alien Enemies Act</a> in a case involving five Venezuelan nationals, as well as on anyone else who may be affected.
Tim Pearce contributed to this report.
Related: <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/gop-leaders-deny-taxpayer-money-for-dems-to-make-el-salvador-prison-trip?author=Daniel+Chaitin&amp;category=News&amp;elementPosition=0&amp;row=0&amp;rowType=Vertical+List&amp;title=GOP+Leaders+Deny+Taxpayer+Money+For+Dems+To+Make+El+Salvador+Prison+Trip" target="_blank" rel="noopener">GOP Leaders Deny Taxpayer Money For Dems To Make El Salvador Prison Trip</a>

US deports 17 gang-linked criminals in joint operation with El Salvador

SCOTUS Blocks Trump From Deporting Alleged Tren De Aragua Gang Members 

Supreme Court Blocks Trump From Deporting Alleged Tren De Aragua Gang Members 

The Kansas City Star has intervened in abortionists&#8217; lawsuit against the state, demanding the abortion providers reveal hidden court records.
The abortion providers are suing over new state abortion requirements that are currently suspended as the lawsuit makes its way through the courts, including that a woman must wait 24 hours before getting an abortion and that doctors must tell women the abortion pill is reversible.
The Star objected to an agreement between the abortion providers and Kansas Attorney General Kris Kobach to allow certain exhibits to be filed under seal.
&#8220;The public has a right to know what is happening in judicial proceedings,&#8221; the Kansas City Star&#8217;s executive editor Greg Farmer <a href="https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/the-kc-star-moves-to-intervene-in-kansas-abortion-lawsuit-over-hidden-court-records/ar-AA1CLQTW?ocid=BingNewsSerp" target="_blank" rel="noopener">said</a>. &#8220;The efforts in this case to hide records from public view are an attack on long-established democratic principles.&#8221;
&#8220;Our goal with this motion is to fight for our readers and all Kansans and to ensure and advocate for transparency on their behalf,&#8221; Farmer said.
In a court filing, the newspaper asked a Johnson County District Court judge to unseal the exhibits filed under seal, with redactions for patients&#8217; names and personal information.
The abortion providers had filed certain court records as &#8220;confidential&#8221; or &#8220;attorneys&#8217; eyes only.&#8221;
The suit was <a href="https://www.kansascity.com/news/politics-government/article276149576.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">filed</a> back in 2023 against several state officials by three Kansas abortion providers, Planned Parenthood Great Plains, Hodes and Nauser Women’s Health, and the Center for Reproductive Rights.
The abortion providers are suing over a group of new state restrictions around abortions.
The new rules <a href="https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/the-kc-star-moves-to-intervene-in-kansas-abortion-lawsuit-over-hidden-court-records/ar-AA1CLQTW?ocid=BingNewsSerp" target="_blank" rel="noopener">require</a> doctors to meet with a woman 24 hours before her abortion and provide her with detailed information about her pregnancy. The rules also require that abortion providers survey women and ask their most important reason for choosing abortion with options like financial stress, rape, fetal disability, or health of the mother.
The doctor <a href="https://www.kansascity.com/news/politics-government/article276149576.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">must</a> also listen to the baby&#8217;s heartbeat 30 minutes before performing an abortion and post information in the abortion clinic and on its website that abortion could increase the risk of breast cancer and premature birth in future pregnancies. The rules also require that women be told the abortion pill is &#8220;reversible&#8221; if they have only taken the first pill of the two-dose regimen.
“This legislation ensures that women in this situation are provided with all medical information and it’s appalling that Planned Parenthood would attempt to block this information to satisfy their donor base,” Kansas House Speaker Dan Hawkins, a Republican, <a href="https://www.kansascity.com/news/politics-government/article276149576.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">said</a>.
Kansas currently <a href="https://states.guttmacher.org/policies/kansas/abortion-policies" target="_blank" rel="noopener">allows</a> abortions up to 22 weeks.

Midsection of Pregnant Woman Holding Her Belly

Media Outlet Steps In To Demand Planned Parenthood Reveal Hidden Court Records

Abortion

Kansas

Media

Planned Parenthood

New Jersey on Thursday became the first state to sue gaming platform Discord, alleging the company failed to protect children from online predators despite marketing itself as a &#8220;fun and safe space for teens.&#8221;
The civil suit, <a href="https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/25900134-2025-0417-discord-complaint/">filed</a> by New Jersey Attorney General Matthew Platkin, alleges that Discord violated the state&#8217;s Consumer Fraud Act by failing to protect minors, according to a report by NBC News.
Discord is a popular messaging platform used by millions to chat via text, voice, and video. It is especially popular among young gamers, who use the platform to converse while playing games like Roblox and Minecraft, both of which are heavily used by children.
The gaming chat platform officially <a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/security/nj-attorney-general-sues-discord-messaging-app-child-predator-concerns-rcna201762">bans</a> users under 13 and claims a zero-tolerance policy toward those who exploit minors, per NBC News.
&#8220;They&#8217;ve waged a very extensive PR campaign to tell the public all the features that they put in place to protect kids on their app,&#8221; Platkin said. &#8220;They know that they&#8217;re not working, and they know that they&#8217;re not actually protecting kids the way they say they are.&#8221;
Discord defended its safety measures, saying the company is &#8220;proud&#8221; of its &#8220;continuous efforts and investments in features and tools that help make Discord safer.&#8221;
A spokesperson added that the platform disputes the claims in the lawsuit and looks &#8220;forward to defending the action in court.&#8221;
According to Platkin, children under 13 can create accounts by simply checking a box claiming they are older.
The platform&#8217;s &#8220;Sensitive Media&#8221; filter, designed to blur explicit material, often doesn&#8217;t work and is &#8220;very easy to evade.&#8221;
A 2023 NBC News investigation <a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/social-media/discord-child-safety-social-platform-challenges-rcna89769">uncovered</a> 35 cases where adults were prosecuted for kidnapping, grooming, or sexual assault allegedly involving Discord communications, plus more than 100 additional cases of child sexual abuse material.
Following heavy public scrutiny, Discord made several policy updates, including banning teen dating and artificial intelligence-generated child sexual abuse material on the service.
The company&#8217;s CEO, Jason Citron, called reports of exploitation on the platform &#8220;horrifying&#8221; at the time.
In January, Citron was among several tech executives called to testify before the Senate Judiciary Committee about child safety policies alongside leaders from Meta, Snapchat, TikTok, and X.
The New Jersey lawsuit is seeking civil penalties, restitution for affected users, and court-mandated changes to Discord&#8217;s policies and features to better protect minors on the platform.

Twitter Alternatives Photo Illustrations

New Jersey Sues Online Platform Discord Over Child Predator Concerns

Child Abuse

New Jersey

Social Media

The Supreme Court announced on Thursday it will hear arguments next month on whether judges overstepped by blocking President Donald Trump&#8217;s birthright citizenship policy with sweeping nationwide injunctions.
The high court will <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/041725zr1_4gd5.pdf">hear</a> arguments on May 15 on whether judges overstepped their authority in issuing sweeping nationwide injunctions, but opted to delay addressing the legal merits of Trump&#8217;s birthright citizenship plan, which remains blocked while litigation continues.
Then-acting Solicitor General Sarah Harris, with the backing of 21 other states, <a href="https://www.scotusblog.com/2025/04/justices-will-hear-arguments-on-trumps-effort-to-end-birthright-citizenship/">asserted</a> in court papers that judges lack the authority to issue nationwide injunctions and that the suing states have no legal standing.
Harris argued that the far-reaching injunctions “transgress constitutional limits on courts’ powers” and “compromise the Executive Branch’s ability to carry out its functions.”
She urged the justices to “declare that enough is enough before district courts’ burgeoning reliance on universal injunctions becomes further entrenched.”
Trump’s January executive order seeks to grant citizenship only to children born with at least one parent who is a U.S. citizen or permanent resident.
The order was immediately <a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/supreme-court/supreme-court-hear-oral-arguments-whether-trump-can-implement-birthrig-rcna199498">challenged</a> in Maryland, Massachusetts, and Washington state, with courts consistently blocking its implementation on the basis that it violated the 14th Amendment, per NBC News.
Central to the dispute is the 14th Amendment&#8217;s text: &#8220;All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States.&#8221;
The traditional interpretation has granted citizenship to virtually everyone born on United States soil except children of diplomats.
However, the Trump administration <a href="https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us-supreme-court-hear-trump-bid-enforce-birthright-citizenship-order-2025-04-17/?utm_source=chatgpt.com">contends</a> the phrase &#8220;subject to the jurisdiction thereof&#8221; creates a narrower scope for birthright citizenship than previously recognized.
They argue that this clause excludes children born to undocumented immigrants or those on temporary visas, asserting that such individuals are not fully subject to United States jurisdiction.
The 21 states supporting Trump&#8217;s policy include Texas, Florida, and Georgia, which argue that unlimited birthright citizenship creates incentives for illegal immigration and places financial burdens on their resources.
The administration argues that nationwide injunctions allow a single district judge to effectively veto presidential actions, pointing out that such injunctions have been used to derail the agendas of presidential administrations regardless of party.
If the Supreme Court rules in Trump&#8217;s favor on the injunction question, the administration could implement the policy in states that haven&#8217;t secured injunctions while litigation on the underlying constitutional question continues, according to NBC News.
The high court&#8217;s decision on nationwide injunctions could have implications far beyond immigration policy, potentially affecting how future presidential administrations implement controversial executive actions across numerous policy areas.

The Supreme Court of the United States

SCOTUS To Hear Case On Judges Blocking Trump’s Plan To End Birthright Citizenship

birthright citizenship

Menu