California Democratic Governor Gavin Newsom filed a $787 million defamation lawsuit against Fox News on Friday, alleging the news network deliberately misrepresented the timeline of a phone call between him and President Donald Trump to make it appear the governor lied about their communication.
The lawsuit, first <a href="https://www.politico.com/news/2025/06/27/newsom-sues-fox-news-defamation-case-00429168">reported</a> by POLITICO, centers on Fox News&#8217; coverage of a June 7 phone call between Trump and Newsom during anti-ICE riots in Los Angeles County. President Trump said he <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/trump-vows-to-liberate-los-angeles-shut-down-migrant-riots-and-insurrectionist-mobs">deployed</a> thousands of National Guard troops and hundreds of Marines to the area to quell the violence despite the governor&#8217;s objections, but local officials say they are there to protect federal buildings and federal workers.
The dispute arose when Trump claimed on June 10 that he had called Newsom &#8220;a day ago.&#8221; Newsom subsequently denied any recent contact, stating: &#8220;There was no call. Not even a voicemail. Americans should be alarmed that a President deploying Marines onto our streets doesn&#8217;t even know who he&#8217;s talking to.&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
No more lies.
I’m suing Fox News for $787 million.<a href="https://t.co/L73VUsPsuB">https://t.co/L73VUsPsuB</a> <a href="https://t.co/qKoRaxHRDW">pic.twitter.com/qKoRaxHRDW</a>
— Gavin Newsom (@GavinNewsom) <a href="https://twitter.com/GavinNewsom/status/1938587950704677237?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 27, 2025</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Fox News then ran a segment on Jesse Watters&#8217; program that Newsom&#8217;s claims &#8220;willfully distorted&#8221; the timeline to the network&#8217;s viewers. According to the lawsuit, Watters aired a deceptively edited video that juxtaposed Trump&#8217;s &#8220;day ago&#8221; claim with call logs obtained by Fox host John Roberts showing the call occurred on June 7 — three days earlier, not one day as Trump had claimed. Newsom accuses the network of falsely claiming he lied about the phone call and violated California’s Unfair Competition Law, which outlaws “deceptive and unfair business practices.”
<a class="c-link" href="https://get.dailywire.com/freedom/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" data-stringify-link="https://get.dailywire.com/freedom/" data-sk="tooltip_parent" aria-describedby="sk-tooltip-6563">JULY 4 SALE: Get Six Months Of DW+ Free</a>
&#8220;If Fox News wants to lie to the American people on Donald Trump&#8217;s behalf, it should face consequences — just like it did in the Dominion case,&#8221; Newsom said in a statement to POLITICO, referencing Fox&#8217;s $787.5 million settlement with Dominion Voting Systems in 2023.
&#8220;I believe the American people should be able to trust the information they receive from a major news outlet. Until Fox is willing to be truthful, I will keep fighting against their propaganda machine,&#8221; the governor added.
Fox News dismissed the lawsuit in a statement to The Daily Wire, writing, &#8220;Gov. Newsom’s transparent publicity stunt is frivolous and designed to chill free speech critical of him. We will defend this case vigorously and look forward to it being dismissed.&#8221;
In Fox News&#8217;s initial reporting on the disputed call, headlined &#8220;Trump brings receipts he called Newsom amid LA riots as California gov claims there wasn&#8217;t &#8216;even a voicemail,'&#8221; the network did <a href="https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-brings-receipts-he-called-newsom-amid-la-riots-california-gov-claims-wasnt-even-voicemail">include</a> Newsom&#8217;s clarification that the call was from &#8220;3 days ago&#8221; rather than the &#8220;day ago&#8221; Trump had claimed.
POLITICO notes that defamation cases brought by public officials face a much higher legal standard than those filed by private citizens. Newsom has indicated he would retract the lawsuit if Fox News issues a formal retraction and Jesse Watters delivers an on-air apology.

California Governor Newsom Announces Lawsuit Challenging Trump Tariff Authority

Newsom Targets Fox News With Dominion-Sized Lawsuit Over Trump Phone Call Dispute

California

Defamation

Fox News

Gavin Newsom

Lawsuit

Los Angeles

National Guard

News

Riots

U.S.

The rapper known as Fat Joe, whose real name is Joseph Antonio Cartagena, has been accused of multiple crimes, including the sexual assault of minors by his former hype man, Terrance “T.A.” Dixon.
Dixon filed a $20 million lawsuit in federal court on Thursday. Cartagena’s former employee made allegations of “coercive labor exploitation, financial fraud, sexual manipulation, violent intimidation, and psychological coercion,” per <a href="https://variety.com/2025/music/news/fat-joe-sued-former-hypeman-t-a-dixon-1236436310/">Variety</a>. The lawsuit comes after Cartagena sued Dixon for slander in April after he claimed his former employee posted on social media about the rapper transporting a minor across state lines for sex.
The outlet noted that the claims made in the 157-page document were so extensive that the filing included a trigger warning.
Dixon worked for Cartagena for 16 years as a hype man, commonly used by rap and hip hop artists to get the crowd revved up and help set the tone for performances. Dixon also reportedly contributed to some of Cartagena’s songs by assisting with lyrics and backing vocals.
The lawsuit asserts that Dixon was forced “into humiliating situations, including sex acts performed under duress and surveillance, accompanied by threats of abandonment in foreign countries if [he] refused compliance.” The plaintiff added that he was “coerced into more than 4,000 sexual acts to maintain his standing within the Enterprise.”
Dixon also accused his former employee of engaging in sexual acts with minors on multiple occasions.
Per the lawsuit, Dixon said he “personally witnessed [Fat Joe] engage in sexual relations with children who were fifteen and sixteen years old.” The lawsuit listed three specific minors identified as Jane Does.
He said Jane Doe 1 was a 16-year-old New York resident who interacted with the rapper “in exchange for cash, clothing, and payment of her cell phone bill.&#8221; The lawsuit said she &#8220;would [perform] oral sex and other sexual acts” on Cartagena. 
“[Fat Joe] began having sexual relations with Minor Doe 2 when she was 15 years old after a concert overseas. Defendant flew Minor Doe 2 to New York City and Miami, Florida, on multiple occasions. Due to Minor Doe 2’s body being adolescent and not fully formed, Defendant paid for her to get a Brazilian Butt Lift. Minor Doe 2 eventually left Defendant and is now married to a professional athlete,” the complaint says. 
Minor Doe 3 is described as having met Cartagena when “she was 15 years old, turning 16.”
Per the complaint, “Defendant was in love with Minor Doe 3. He even contemplated leaving his wife. The Defendant paid all Minor Doe 3’s bills and even took her overseas to his tour stops. He brought her to Florida and would put her up in a condo he rented a few blocks from his house with his wife.” 
“In a recorded conversation, Minor Doe 3 and her 15-year-old cousin describe in detail to Plaintiff how ‘inappropriate’ it was for Defendant, who was in his late 30s at the time, to be fawning over children,” the lawsuit said.
The lawsuit describes, “a wide spectrum of sexual coercion, psychological control, forced exhibitionism, and surveillance-based humiliation, including being compelled to perform sex acts under observation, being filmed, or directed by [Fat Joe] in the presence of others — tactics designed to control Plaintiff’s body, erode his autonomy, and ensure silence.” 
Dixon claims the recording artist “orchestrated repeated orgies involving Plaintiff, female dancers and minors. Defendant used.” 
“These incidents occurred under conditions that included the presence of corporate security staff, surveillance cameras, and Defendant’s management entourage, yet no intervention occurred, supporting the inference that these acts were facilitated by — and covered up by — the broader enterprise and its affiliates,” the lawsuit says. 
“[Dixon] did not willingly consent to participate in these acts; instead, Plaintiff submitted solely out of fear of immediate retaliation, which Defendant repeatedly demonstrated would include financial punishment, professional sabotage, abandonment in foreign countries, or physical harm.”
Cartagena has hired celebrity criminal attorney Joe Tacopina, who once served on Donald Trump&#8217;s legal team, to defend him in this case. The attorney released a statement denying any wrongdoing by his client. 
“The lawsuit filed by Tyrone Blackburn and Terrance Dixon is a blatant act of retaliation — a desperate attempt to deflect attention from the civil suit we filed first, which exposed their coordinated scheme to extort Mr. Cartagena through lies, threats, and manufactured allegations.”
The statement continues, “Law enforcement is aware of the extortionate demand at the heart of this scheme. The allegations against Mr. Cartagena are complete fabrications — lies intended to damage his reputation and force a settlement through public pressure. Mr. Cartagena will not be intimidated. We have taken legal action to expose this fraudulent campaign and hold everyone involved accountable.”
Fat Joe is a Bronx-born rapper and music executive who rose to fame in the 1990s with hits like “Lean Back” and “What&#8217;s Luv?” He has been married to his wife, Lorena, since 1995. They have one daughter together, and Cartagena has two children from previous relationships.

Fat Joe

Fat Joe’s Ex-Hype Man Accuses Rapper Of Having Sex With Minors In $20M Lawsuit

Fat Joe's Ex-Hype Man Accuses Rapper Of Having Sex With Minors In $20M Lawsuit

Celebrities

Child Sex Abuse

Entertainment

Rap Music

Rapper

Sexual Assault

Filmmaker Tyler Perry has been accused of sexual assault and is being sued for $260 million.
Actor Derek Dixon, who is best known for his work in “The Oval” and “Ruthless,” filed a lawsuit in Los Angeles accusing Perry of creating a “coercive, sexually exploitative dynamic” while he was working on those projects. 
Dixon claims to have turned down Perry’s “unwanted advances,” which he claims resulted in “escalating sexual harassment, assault and battery, and professional retaliation,” per <a href="https://apnews.com/article/tyler-perry-lawsuit-derek-dixon-oval-45c6b19ed17e728e67aceb0ab130aa0d">The Associated Press</a>. 
The actor said he met Perry while working at an event for Tyler Perry Studios in Atlanta in 2019. Dixon alleges that the media mogul made sexually explicit comments and advances at that time, which he rebuffed. 
The lawsuit lists several specific instances of alleged abuse, including what Dixon concluded to be threats over the future of his career.
“Mr. Perry made it clear to Dixon that if Dixon ignored Perry or failed to engage with the sexual innuendos, Dixon’s character would ‘die’ in the next season [of ‘The Oval],” the document states, adding that it was “always held this over Mr Dixon’s head, implying that [his character] ‘Dale’ would survive if Dixon kept Perry ‘happy.’”
“Dixon did his best to tiptoe around Mr. Perry’s sexual aggression while keeping on Mr. Perry’s good side,” the document says.
During another alleged incident described in the lawsuit, the plaintiff claims Perry “forcibly pulled off Mr. Dixon’s clothing, groped his buttocks, and attempted to force himself on Dixon.”
Perry’s attorney denied the allegations on behalf of his client, saying they were nothing more than a shakedown.
“This is an individual who got close to Tyler Perry for what now appears to be nothing more than setting up a scam,” Boyd said in a statement to AP. “But Tyler will not be shaken down, and we are confident these fabricated claims of harassment will fail.”
Perry is a filmmaker, playwright, and actor who gained national recognition with his stage plays in the early 2000s, particularly those featuring the character Madea. He has written, produced, acted in, and directed numerous films and television shows.
In 2019, he opened Tyler Perry Studios, a 330-acre production facility in Atlanta. Forbes listed him as the highest-paid man in entertainment in 2011, and in 2020, he became a billionaire, the outlet <a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/maddieberg/2020/09/01/from-poor-as-hell-to-billionaire-how-tyler-perry-changed-show-business-forever/">reported</a>.

Tyler Perry

Tyler Perry Sued For $260M By Actor Claiming Sexual Harassment, Assault

Tyler Perry Sued $260M By Actor Claiming Sexual Harassment, Assault

Courts

Sexual Harassment

Disney and Universal are teaming up to sue the AI image generation firm Midjourney for what they’re describing as copyright infringement.
Midjourney is a popular AI platform which utilizes user prompts to create original images in seconds. But the entertainment companies claim the model uses their copyrighted content to spit out images that are incredibly similar to the originals, representing a violation of copyright in their estimation.
The lawsuit filed Wednesday in California described Midjourney as a “quintessential copyright free-rider and a bottomless pit of plagiarism” that’s responsible for “endless unauthorized copies of Disney’s and Universal’s copyrighted works,” per <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2025/06/11/business/media/disney-universal-midjourney-ai.html">The New York Times</a>.
While this is not the first AI-based lawsuit, this represents the first time any major entertainment company has filed this type of complaint. In the case of other lawsuits, AI companies <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2025/06/11/disney-universal-sue-midjourney-ai-copyright/">claimed</a> that their tools are generating new creations and that the resulting output counts as “fair use” per copyright law.
The entertainment companies disagree.
“We are bullish on the promise of A.I. technology and optimistic about how it can be used responsibly as a tool to further human creativity,” Disney’s general counsel Horacio Gutierrez told NYT in an email. “But piracy is piracy, and the fact that it’s done by an A.I. company does not make it any less infringing.”
<a href="https://get.dailywire.com/gift/?utm_medium=website&amp;utm_source=wisepops&amp;utm_campaign=dad&amp;utm_content=fathersdaygiftpopups" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Gift Dad an All Access Membership. Use code DAD40 at checkout to save 40%!</a>
Kim Harris, general counsel at Universal, expanded on this in a separate email statement, saying, “We are bringing this action today to protect the hard work of all the artists whose work entertains and inspires us and the significant investment we make in our content.”
Motion Picture Association Chairman and CEO Charles Rivkin voiced support for the lawsuit, calling copyright protection “the backbone of [the entertainment] industry,” per <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2025/06/11/tech/disney-universal-midjourney-ai-copyright-lawsuit">CNN</a>.
“A balanced approach to AI that both protects intellectual property and embraces responsible, human-centered innovation is critical for maintaining America’s global leadership in creative industries,” he added.
The lawsuit is demanding $150,000 per infringed work in addition to Midjourney ceasing copyright infringement in the future. If Disney and Universal win the case, the payout could total up to $20 million for 150 protected images they claim have been infringed upon.

Disney

‘Bottomless Pit Of Plagiarism’: Disney And Universal Sue AI Image Generator

'Bottomless Pit Of Plagiarism': Disney And Universal Sue AI Image Generator

Artificial Intelligence

copyright

We have all seen the images this past week. They have become a far too common sight in America’s largest cities: cars ablaze, small businesses looted and vandalized, city centers held hostage by violent mobs, all while local law enforcement stands idly by.
President Trump took decisive action to protect the public from lawless rioters by activating the National Guard, but many of the rioters continue to engage in blatant criminality, correctly guessing they face only a remote risk of prosecution. Congress and state legislatures, however, can step in by making it ruinously expensive to riot.
For decades, the federal government has used private litigation as a tool to further public policy objectives. Disabled Americans can sue businesses for violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Consumers who suffer even the most trivial losses from deceptive advertising can bring class actions against manufacturers. Litigation is expensive, often ruinously so, and the government therefore outsources much of its law enforcement to private citizens, armed with statutes that award attorneys’ fees and civil penalties.
Rioting is first and foremost a criminal matter, and local police departments and district attorneys should quell riots through vigorous, evenhanded enforcement of criminal law. But they do not. Congress should thus fill this void by creating a private right of action, that is, the ability to bring a lawsuit against individuals who create disruptions in the form of riots.
The first step would be to define a riot, taking care to draw a clear line between criminality and First Amendment activity. Fortunately, the law already makes this distinction: expressing one’s thoughts using signs or chants is legal, but trespassing, assault, and vandalism are not. A riot should therefore be defined as a gathering of two or more people who are present in a location where they lack legal permission to be (whether private property or public property without a required permit) who engage in or aid and abet trespass, assault, and vandalism that results in property damage and obstructed rights of way. If Congress is the body passing the law, it can add a requirement that the riot affects interstate commerce (a very broad and easily satisfied requirement) to ensure the law is upheld.
The second step would be to identify the parties who can bring suit under this law. Riots result in many kinds of harm. Workers are unable to make it to work on time. Business owners contend with shattered windows, stolen inventory, and lost revenue when law-abiding residents stay home. Parents are unable to take their children to school. Police officers are assaulted. The law must recognize each of these harms by allowing anyone who suffers a harm to their person or property to bring suit.
The third step would be to craft a remedy that gives the law teeth. A challenge with enforcing criminal rioting laws is the difficulty of determining precisely which member of a riot committed which act of criminality. Civil law need not be so exacting. A participant in a riot — or those who provided material support to rioters (the deep-pocketed unions and nonprofits who help organize the protests that quickly become riots) — should face civil liability for harm that occurred during the riot. While some victims face tremendous financial harm, like a small business owner whose shop or restaurant is looted, others face smaller, harder-to-quantify harms. Plaintiffs should therefore be able to recover not only their actual damages, but a civil penalty in the tens of thousands of dollars, sufficient to deter rioters. Like almost all civil enforcement statutes, there should be a mandatory award of attorney’s fees to prevailing plaintiffs to ensure that anti-rioting cases are financially viable for attorneys.
The coddling of rioters by state and local authorities has caused tremendous destruction in American cities. In the past five years, we have seen riots ostensibly related to policing, race relations, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and, now, the enforcement of immigration laws. As long as rioters know they can act with impunity, the riots will continue. A law that makes funding or participating in riots financially devastating will make many rioters—and those who fund them—think twice before blocking a bridge or smashing a storefront window.
* * *
Jesse Franklin-Murdock is counsel at Dhillon Law Group Inc. and he is also a resident of San Francisco, where violent riots have taken place over the course of the last week.
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.
<a href="https://get.dailywire.com/gift/?utm_medium=website&amp;utm_source=wisepops&amp;utm_campaign=dad&amp;utm_content=fathersdaygiftpopups">Gift Dad an All Access Membership. Use code DAD40 at checkout to save 40%!</a>

Protests Erupt In L.A. County, Sparked By Federal Immigration Raids

Want To End The Riots? Hit The Mob Where It Hurts

Illegal Immigation

Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE)

Looting

Opinion

San Francisco

Both Justin Baldoni’s attorney and Blake Lively have reacted publicly to the court’s decision to dismiss Baldoni’s $400 million countersuit against his former “It Ends With Us” co-star. The director’s $250 million libel lawsuit against The New York Times was also dismissed.
&#8220;While the Court dismissed the defamation related claims, the Court has invited us to amend four out of the seven claims against Ms. Lively, which will showcase additional evidence and refined allegations,&#8221; Baldoni’s attorney Bryan Freedman said in his <a href="https://people.com/blake-lively-lawyers-victory-judge-tossing-justin-baldoni-lawsuit-11750734">statement</a> shared with People on Monday.
&#8220;This case is about false accusations of sexual harassment and retaliation and a nonexistent smear campaign, which Ms. Lively’s own team conveniently describes as &#8216;untraceable&#8217; because they cannot prove what never happened,&#8221; he continued.
&#8220;Most importantly, Ms. Lively’s own claims are no truer today than they were yesterday, and with the facts on our side, we march forward with the same confidence that we had when Ms. Lively and her cohorts initiated this battle and look forward to her forthcoming deposition, which I will be taking,&#8221; Freedman went on. &#8220;We are grateful for the organic show of support from the public and for the dedication of the internet sleuth community who continue to cover the case with discernment and integrity.&#8221;
Judge Lewis J. Liman granted motions to dismiss both lawsuits, but noted that Baldoni’s legal team would still be able to amend the claims before June 23.
While Baldoni’s statement did not imply defeat, Lively&#8217;s legal team called the judge’s decision “a total victory and a complete vindication.”
<a href="https://get.dailywire.com/gift/?utm_medium=website&amp;utm_source=wisepops&amp;utm_campaign=dad&amp;utm_content=fathersdaygiftpopups" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Gift Dad an All Access Membership. Use code DAD40 at checkout to save 40%!</a>
&#8220;As we have said from day one, this &#8216;$400 million&#8217; lawsuit was a sham, and the Court saw right through it,” her attorneys’ <a href="https://people.com/blake-lively-lawyers-victory-judge-tossing-justin-baldoni-lawsuit-11750734">statement</a> said.
The actress also addressed the dismissal on Monday, sharing about “the pain of a retaliatory lawsuit” on her Instagram Stories.
“While the suit against me was defeated, so many don&#8217;t have the resources to fight back. I&#8217;m more resolved than ever to continue to stand for every woman&#8217;s right to have a voice in protecting themselves,” she shared with followers.
&#8220;With love and gratitude for the many who stood by me, many of you I know. Many of you I don&#8217;t. But I will never stop appreciating or advocating for you,” Lively wrote.
The drama started in December when Lively filed a lawsuit against Baldoni accusing him of sexual harassment, retaliation, and attempting to “destroy” her reputation. This came after she starred opposite Baldoni in “It Ends With Us,” a film he was also directing.
Baldoni fervently denied the claims, responding with a countersuit against his co-star and her husband, actor Ryan Reynolds. He also sued The New York Times for $250 million in a defamation claim for an article about the situation, which he says is “rife with inaccuracies, misrepresentations, and omissions.”
A trial is set to begin March 9, 2026.

Justin Baldoni Blake Lively

Justin Baldoni’s Lawyer, Blake Lively React To Judge Dismissing Defamation Lawsuit

Blake Lively

Hollywood

California filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration on Monday, alleging the president &#8220;is trying to manufacture chaos and crisis&#8221; after he deployed 2,000 National Guard troops to quell anti-ICE riots in Los Angeles over the weekend.
The lawsuit argues that President Donald Trump unconstitutionally called in the National Guard and infringed on Democratic Governor Gavin Newsom&#8217;s role without there being a clear threat of &#8220;invasion&#8221; or &#8220;rebellion,&#8221; The Washington Post <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2025/06/09/california-newsom-trump-lawsuit-national-guard/">reported</a>. Trump deployed the National Guard, a power typically exercised by governors, on Saturday as anti-ICE protests turned into riots and agitators attacked federal, state, and local law enforcement and set fire to cars in the street.
“Let me be clear: There is no invasion. There is no rebellion,” California Democratic Attorney General Rob Bonta said. “The President is trying to manufacture chaos and crisis on the ground for his own political ends.”
Newsom <a href="https://x.com/GavinNewsom/status/1932147258033934643">added</a>, &#8220;This is a manufactured crisis. He is creating fear and terror to take over a state militia and violate the U.S. constitution. The illegal order he signed could allow him to send the military into ANY STATE HE WISHES. Every governor &#8212; red or blue &#8212; should reject this outrageous overreach. There’s a lot of hyperbole out there. This isn’t that. This is an unmistakable step toward authoritarianism that threatens the foundation of our republic. We cannot let it stand.&#8221;
On Monday, Trump <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/trump-says-newsom-bass-should-thank-him-for-deploying-national-guard-to-keep-our-citizens-safe?author=Zach+Jewell&amp;category=News&amp;elementPosition=3&amp;row=0&amp;rowType=Vertical+List&amp;title=Trump+Says+Newsom%2C+Bass+Should+Thank+Him+For+Deploying+National+Guard+%E2%80%98To+Keep+Our+Citizens+SAFE%E2%80%99">defended</a> his decision to send National Guard troops to Los Angeles, saying that the city “would have been completely obliterated” without his action.
“The very incompetent ‘Governor,’ Gavin Newscum, and ‘Mayor,’ Karen Bass, should be saying, ‘THANK YOU, PRESIDENT TRUMP, YOU ARE SO WONDERFUL. WE WOULD BE NOTHING WITHOUT YOU, SIR,&#8217;” Trump <a href="https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/114654277401980803">wrote</a> on Truth Social. “Instead, they choose to lie to the People of California and America by saying that we weren’t needed, and that these are ‘peaceful protests.&#8217;”
<a href="https://get.dailywire.com/gift/?utm_medium=website&amp;utm_source=wisepops&amp;utm_campaign=dad&amp;utm_content=fathersdaygiftpopups" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Gift Dad an All Access Membership. Use code DAD40 at checkout to save 40%!</a>
In his order to deploy the National Guard, Trump <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/10/12406">cited</a> U.S. Code Title 10, Section 12406, which allows the president to call in the National Guard under invasion from a foreign nation, a rebellion &#8220;or danger of rebellion&#8221; against the U.S. government, or if &#8220;the President is unable with the regular forces to execute the laws of the United States.&#8221; The statute has not faced much judicial scrutiny, according to Bonta, but he said he feels confident that the courts will side with California.
Trump could also point to the Insurrection Act of 1807, which allows the president to federalize the National Guard and deploy the U.S. military to quell domestic disorder or violence. Asked about invoking the Insurrection Act on Sunday, Trump <a href="https://www.c-span.org/program/white-house-event/president-trump-speaks-to-reporters-in-morristown-new-jersey/660975">replied</a>, &#8220;It depends on whether or not there&#8217;s an insurrection.&#8221; At the time, he said that the current situation didn&#8217;t amount to an insurrection, adding, &#8220;But you have violent people and we&#8217;re not going to let them get away with it.&#8221;

Donald Trump/Gavin Newsom

California Sues Trump Over National Guard Deployment, Says President ‘Manufactured Crisis’

Donald Trump

Immigration

Military

Politics

Trump Administration

A man who exceeded the weight limit for a water slide at Walt Disney World is now suing the park, citing injuries he sustained during his visit to the amusement park.
Eugene Strickland filed the complaint on May 29, per <a href="https://nypost.com/2025/06/02/us-news/334-pound-man-sues-walt-disney-world-over-injuries-sustained-on-waterslide-that-allegedly-didnt-support-his-weight/">the New York Post</a>, and is seeking $50,000 in monetary damages.
The plaintiff claimed he suffered “catastrophic” injuries after riding the Downhill Double Dipper at Disney’s Blizzard Beach Waterpark in July 2021. It says he “became momentarily airborne&#8221; and hit “exhilarating speeds,” which caused “permanent catastrophic injuries as a result.”
He claims this caused his inner tube to come out from underneath him and made him “land with force onto the hard plastic surface of the slide.&#8221;
Strickland claims he weighed 334 pounds at the time of the incident, but the weight limit for the ride was 300 pounds. It’s not clear based on the lawsuit whether he was aware of the weight restrictions when he got onto the ride.
The Disney World website describes the attraction as “side-by-side high-speed slides.”
“A retractable starting gate is all that stands between you and victory. Anticipation builds as you and your opponent wait on inner tubes at the top of twin enclosed waterslides. Suddenly, the gates retract—and you’re off,” the ride description says. “Disappear into a black hole and plummet 50 feet downhill at exhilarating speeds. Hurtle through darkness, then emerge just in time for the big splashdown.”
The plaintiff claims to have “suffered serious bodily injury and resulting pain and suffering, disability, scarring, disfigurement, mental anguish, [and] loss of capacity for the enjoyment of life” that he still grapples with today.&#8221;
Strickland also claims Disney World is negligent for failing to establish safe premises, which resulted in his injuries.
In a <a href="https://people.com/man-suing-disney-world-over-alleged-water-slide-injury-11746095">statement</a> to People on behalf of Strickland, Morgan &amp; Morgan founder John Morgan and attorney Alberto Oliveri said, “Our client was severely injured on a ride at Disney’s Blizzard Beach. He has filed a lawsuit alleging that it was the defendant’s lax safety measures and oversight that contributed to those injuries. We are pursuing justice for him and working to hold Disney accountable for their alleged negligence.”
This isn’t the only water park-related lawsuit <a href="https://nypost.com/2025/04/26/us-news/long-island-mom-scarred-at-disney-by-mammoth-wave-lawsuit/">pending</a> against Walt Disney World. A Long Island mother is seeking $2 million for injuries she allegedly sustained from a “mammoth” wave at Typhoon Lagoon.

Water slides

Man Sues Disney For Water Slide Injury, Says He Exceeded Weight Limit And Hit ‘Exhilarating Speeds’

Man Sues Disney For Water Slide Injury, Says He Exceeded Weight Limit And Hit 'Exhilarating Speeds'

Disney World

Florida

Injury

Motown singer Smokey Robinson is counter-suing four women who accused him of sexual assault in a cross-complaint filed on Wednesday.
The 85-year-old recording artist was hit with a lawsuit from four former employees earlier this month. The unnamed plaintiffs are seeking $50 million for charges including rape and sexual abuse, which they said occurred between 2007 and 2024, per <a href="https://apnews.com/article/smokey-robinson-sexual-misconduct-investigation-la-72bebfd2659f2c8b324557395ceb37bc">The Associated Press</a>. 
Now it’s being reported that Robinson and his wife, Frances Gladney, are suing the women for $500 million.
&#8220;The Robinsons did not abuse, harm, or take advantage of plaintiffs; they treated plaintiffs with the utmost kindness and generosity,&#8221; the lawsuit says, per <a href="https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/smokey-robinson-hits-back-500-million-lawsuit-against-sexual-assault-accusers">Fox News</a>.
The singer said he treated the women as his “extended family” and claimed to have given them gifts, including concert tickets, vehicles, and money, during their tenure, as the New York Post <a href="https://nypost.com/2025/05/29/entertainment/smokey-robinson-sues-his-accusers-for-elder-abuse-defamation-in-500m-countersuit/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">reported</a>. As proof, Robinson provided screenshots of friendly text exchanges and images of his wife on a tropical vacation with one of the accusers. The celeb said he footed the bill for the trip.
The singer’s lawyer, Christopher Frost, previously described the lawsuit as representing “unadulterated avarice.”
“We feel confident that a determination will be made that Mr. Robinson did nothing wrong, and that this is a desperate attempt to prejudice public opinion and make even more of a media circus than the Plaintiffs were previously able to create,” Frost said at the time of the original lawsuit being filed.
Meanwhile, the attorney representing the four plaintiffs says the women kept quiet due to fear of humiliation and losing their employment.  
John Harris said his clients believe Robinson to be “a serial and sick rapist and must be stopped.” 
<a href="https://get.dailywire.com/subscribe/plus/?utm_medium=website&amp;utm_source=editorial&amp;utm_campaign=memorial&amp;utm_content=editorialmemorialday&amp;_gl=1*1qdq03s*_gcl_au*MTYyNDg0MTE0OS4xNzQxODk4NTMz*_ga*MTEzOTk1NjkxNi4xNzI2MzI1MDQz*_ga_CZKR9ZYKJP*czE3NDgzNzg2NDgkbzEwMDMkZzEkdDE3NDgzODEwMTckajU4JGwwJGgw" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Get 40% Off New DailyWire+ Annual Memberships</a>
“Having to tell their [spouses] and children of these despicable actions left them filled with shame and embarrassment. So throughout their dreadful experiences with Mr. Robinson, all four women remained silent,” he said.
Robinson is a legendary singer, songwriter, and record producer who played a key role in shaping the Motown sound as the frontman of The Miracles. He also served as a songwriter for artists like The Temptations (Robinson cowrote the single “My Girl”) and Mary Wells, for whom he wrote “My Guy.” 
With a career spanning more than six decades, he’s known for timeless hits like “Tracks of My Tears” and “Cruisin&#8217;.”

Smokey Robinson

Smokey Robinson Files $500M Lawsuit Against Rape Accusers

Smokey Robinson Countersues Sexual Assault Accusers $500M For Defamation, Elder Abuse

Sexual Misconduct

A “Horizon” stunt performer is suing Kevin Costner and film producers for what she’s describing as “a violent, unscripted, unscheduled rape scene&#8221; directed by Costner in the film.
Stunt performer Devyn LaBella filed the sexual harassment lawsuit in the Superior Court of California for Los Angeles County on Tuesday, citing an alleged incident from 2023 during the filming of “Horizon: An American Saga – Chapter 2.”
LaBella claims she was hired by the production company as a stand-in for lead actress Ella Hunt &#8220;during physical scenes&#8221; and that during that time, her SAG agreement terms were violated. Those include a ban on “any last minute requests for nudity or simulated sex.&#8221; The terms also require producers to give a 48-hour notice and get the performer&#8217;s permission for any changes to intimate scenes, along with providing an intimacy coordinator for sex scenes, People <a href="https://people.com/horizon-stuntperformer-files-sexual-harassment-lawsuit-against-kevin-costner-and-film-producers-11742855">reported</a>.
Per the complaint, LaBella was slated to cover Hunt’s non-intimate scenes on the day in question. But when Hunt arrived on set, the actress learned that Costner had requested new scenes which would require actor Roger Ivens to climb on top of her, &#8220;violently raking up her skirt.” 
Hunt was allegedly upset by the &#8220;ad hoc and violent nature of the sudden script change request&#8221; and refused to film the new scenes. After she left the set, Costner is said to have asked LaBella to stand in, which she agreed to without knowing why Hunt had departed without filming, per <a href="https://www.usatoday.com/story/entertainment/movies/2025/05/28/kevin-costner-horizon-stunt-performer-lawsuit/83895723007/">USA Today</a>.
The lawsuit says LaBella did not know that &#8220;involvement in the impromptu shot would go beyond standing in as a standard body-double.&#8221;
<a href="https://get.dailywire.com/subscribe/plus/?utm_medium=website&amp;utm_source=editorial&amp;utm_campaign=memorial&amp;utm_content=editorialmemorialday">Get 40% Off New DailyWire+ Annual Memberships</a>
&#8220;She was not warned or prepared for Mr. Ivens to perform or engage in any action on top of her and first learned that Ivens would mount her and violently pull her skirt up when he was already on top of her doing so,&#8221; the complaint says. 
It added that Costner directed Ivens to &#8220;repeatedly perform a violent simulated rape&#8221; on LaBella &#8220;without proper notice, consent, preparation, or appropriate safeguard measures in place, such as the project&#8217;s intimacy coordinator being called in.&#8221;
LaBella further asserted that Costner provided &#8220;no clear direction of when the scene began or ended,&#8221; and said she was &#8220;never given the opportunity to prepare for or consent to participate in this scene, much less to object to it.&#8221;
The stunt double said the incident was &#8220;especially humiliating&#8221;  because &#8220;she was menstruating at the time, compounded by the fact that between takes, Mr. Ivens&#8217; hands rested on top of the bundled-up skirt above her vagina.&#8221;
The complaint also says the scene was &#8220;broadcast publicly on monitors for the entire crew to witness,&#8221; but asserts the &#8220;set should have been closed&#8221; due to the content being filmed.
LaBella is suing for an unspecified amount of money over the alleged incident and has asked for a trial by jury.
&#8220;Horizon: An American Saga &#8211; Chapter 2&#8221; is the second part in Costner’s passion project, a four-part Western film series he wrote, directed, and financed with his own money. The first installment premiered in June 2024. &#8220;Chapter 2&#8221; was initially slated to debut in August 2024, but the sequel was pulled from release after the first chapter struggled at the box office, as The Daily Wire previously <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/kevin-costners-second-part-of-western-saga-pulled-from-theaters-ahead-of-august-release">reported</a>.
&#8220;Chapter 2&#8221; was shown at the Venice International Film Festival in September, but so far, it is not scheduled for a theatrical release as initially planned.

Kevin Costner

Kevin Costner Sued For ‘Violent, Unscripted’ Rape Scene In ‘Horizon 2’

Kevin Costner Sued For 'Violent, Unscripted' Rape Scene In 'Horizon 2'

western

Harvard University filed a lawsuit on Friday in the United States District Court to challenge the Trump administration’s revocation of Harvard’s capacity to enroll students from abroad.
The lawsuit from Harvard <a href="https://www.harvard.edu/research-funding/wp-content/uploads/sites/16/2025/05/Harvard-Visa-Complaint.pdf">claimed</a> Noem’s revocation was a “blatant violation of the First Amendment, the Due Process Clause, and the Administrative Procedure Act. It is the latest act by the government in clear retaliation for Harvard exercising its First Amendment rights to reject the government’s demands to control Harvard’s governance, curriculum, and the ‘ideology’ of its faculty and students.”
On Thursday, Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem alerted the public of the revocation, writing on X:
<blockquote>
This administration is holding Harvard accountable for fostering violence, antisemitism, and coordinating with the Chinese Communist Party on its campus. It is a privilege, not a right, for universities to enroll foreign students and benefit from their higher tuition payments to help pad their multibillion-dollar endowments. Harvard had plenty of opportunity to do the right thing. It refused. They have lost their Student and Exchange Visitor Program certification as a result of their failure to adhere to the law. Let this serve as a warning to all universities and academic institutions across the country.
</blockquote>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
This administration is holding Harvard accountable for fostering violence, antisemitism, and coordinating with the Chinese Communist Party on its campus. 
It is a privilege, not a right, for universities to enroll foreign students and benefit from their higher tuition payments… <a href="https://t.co/12hJWd1J86">pic.twitter.com/12hJWd1J86</a>
&mdash; Secretary Kristi Noem (@Sec_Noem) <a href="https://twitter.com/Sec_Noem/status/1925612991703052733?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 22, 2025</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
&nbsp;
In her letter to Harvard, Noem noted:
<blockquote>
As I explained to you in my April letter, it is a privilege to enroll foreign students, and it is also a privilege to employ aliens on campus. All universities must comply with Department of Homeland Security requirements, including reporting requirements under the Student and Exchange Visitor Program regulations, to maintain this privilege. As a result of your refusal to comply with multiple requests to provide the Department of Homeland Security pertinent information while perpetuating an unsafe campus environment that is hostile to Jewish students, promotes pro-Hamas sympathies, and employs racist &#8220;diversity, equity, and inclusion&#8221; policies, you have lost this privilege.
</blockquote>
In April, Harvard sued the Trump administration after the administration froze $2.2 billion in federal funding.
On May 5, Education Secretary Linda McMahon wrote Harvard University president Alan Garber, “The Federal Government has a sacred responsibility to be a wise and important steward of American taxpayer dollars. Harvard University, despite amassing a largely tax-free $53.2 billion dollar endowment (larger than the GDP of 100 countries), receives billions of dollars of taxpayer largess each year. Receiving such taxpayer funds is a privilege, not a right. Yet instead of using these funds to advance the education of its students, Harvard is engaging in a systemic pattern of violating federal law. Where do many of these &#8220;students&#8221; come from, who are they, how do they get into Harvard, or even into our country—and why is there so much HATE?”
<a class="c-link" href="https://get.dailywire.com/subscribe/plus/?utm_medium=website&amp;utm_source=editorial&amp;utm_campaign=memorial&amp;utm_content=editorialmemorialday" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" data-stringify-link="https://get.dailywire.com/subscribe/plus/?utm_medium=website&amp;utm_source=editorial&amp;utm_campaign=memorial&amp;utm_content=editorialmemorialday" data-sk="tooltip_parent" aria-describedby="sk-tooltip-5165">Memorial Day Sale – Get 40% Off New DailyWire+ Annual Memberships</a>
“These are questions that must be answered, among many more, but the biggest question of all is, why will Harvard not give straightforward answers to the American public?” she continued. “Harvard University has made a mockery of this country&#8217;s higher education system. It has invited foreign students, who engage in violent behavior and show contempt for the United States of America, to its campus. In every way, Harvard has failed to abide by its legal obligations, its ethical and fiduciary duties, its transparency responsibilities, and any semblance of academic rigor.”
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Dear <a href="https://twitter.com/Harvard?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@Harvard</a>: <a href="https://t.co/XmMimXfkX0">pic.twitter.com/XmMimXfkX0</a>
&mdash; Secretary Linda McMahon (@EDSecMcMahon) <a href="https://twitter.com/EDSecMcMahon/status/1919517481313427594?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 5, 2025</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
&nbsp;

US-ISRAEL-PALESTINIANS-CONFLICT-EDUCATION-HARVARD

Harvard Sues After Trump Admin Blocks University From Admitting Foreign Students

antisemitism

foreign students

Harvard University

Kristi Noem

A liberal billionaire with a long history of funding left-wing organizations has been accused of repeatedly sexually harassing a former employee, according to a new lawsuit.
Hansjorg Wyss, the 89-year-old Swiss billionaire who has dumped heaps of cash behind liberal organizations in the United States, stands <a href="https://www.sfchronicle.com/food/wine/article/hansjorg-wyss-halter-ranch-lawsuit-20327267.php">accused</a> of harassing a former employee of a winery in Paso Robles, California, that he owns.
Madison Busby, a former project manager at Halter Ranch Winery, alleges that Wyss groped her, exposed himself to her, and told her stories about his sexual activities, including “his many sexual affairs outside his marriage.” The lawsuit goes on to claim that Wyss, who critics say <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/bill-aims-to-close-loopholes-to-ensure-u-s-elections-are-free-from-foreign-influence">supplied</a> a left-wing dark money organization with hundreds of millions of dollars and poured <a href="https://freebeacon.com/issues/memo-reveals-100-million-effort-by-clinton-foundation-donor/">another $100 million</a> into an effort to bolster the Democrat Party&#8217;s electoral chances, even suggested that Busby and her husband engage in group sex with him and another woman.
Then, Busby says, the leftist billionaire retaliated against her after she rejected his sexual advances. Busby’s lawyer says that Wyss’ harassment of his client caused her emotional distress and financial damage in the form of lost wages.
“Madison has suffered severe emotional distress from the harassment which took place over the course of many years, and also from lost wages and then future damages,” Busby’s attorney John Ly said. “She’s been harmed immensely.” The complaint alleges that Wyss even admitted to Busby in 2022 that “if you ever went after me for sexual harassment, you would win.”
Halter Ranch denies the claims of the lawsuit against its owner. “The allegations in the complaint are not true and we intend to vigorously advance the facts that surround their time at the winery and their departure,” the winery said in response to the complaint.
Busby and her husband Bryce Mullins lived in a house on the Halter Ranch property, the complaint says, adding that Wyss would stay at the house with them when he was in town. But when the couple got married and had a baby, they moved into a smaller house on the property that wasn’t large enough for Wyss to stay with them on his trips. Then Wyss charged the couple $1,650 a month in rent instead of the usual $300 per month, the lawsuit says.
Then when Busby voluntarily resigned and filed her complaint against Wyss, Mullins’ employment at Halter Ranch was allegedly terminated.
Mullins filed a claim of his own, alleging that Wyss failed to honor an agreement that would have provided Mullins with equity in Halter Ranch that eventually would have been worth $30 million.

Menu