A federal appeals panel reversed a lower court decision, moving the government closer to potentially detaining and deporting former Columbia University graduate student Mahmoud Khalil. The panel ruled a federal judge in New Jersey lacked jurisdiction at this time, requiring Khalil to exhaust immigration court proceedings first. The ruling, a major win for the Trump administration’s campaign, does not immediately result in Khalil’s detention, though the government may seek it again. Khalil and his lawyers expressed disappointment, stating they would pursue all legal avenues, including a possible appeal to a larger panel or the Supreme Court.
Read More
A recent court ruling determined that Donald Trump cannot revoke a lawyer’s security clearance simply because he disapproves of their clients. The court found that such actions violate First Amendment rights, as the government failed to provide an individualized assessment of the lawyer’s eligibility for clearance and instead targeted him for his past legal work. The judge’s decision, based on the preliminary injunction record, also highlighted the lack of due process in the clearance revocation process. The ruling specifically stated that the government’s actions were retaliatory in nature.
Read More
Luigi Mangione’s pretrial hearing concludes as judge says he’ll issue ruling on evidence in May: Okay, so the dust has settled on the pretrial hearing for Luigi Mangione, and the big takeaway is that the judge is going to take a bit of time to make a ruling on the evidence. Specifically, he’s aiming to deliver that ruling in May.
Now, let’s break down that timeline. The defense team has until January 29th to submit their final arguments in writing. Then, the prosecutors get their turn with a deadline of March 5th. After that, the defense gets two weeks to respond to the prosecution’s arguments.… Continue reading
A federal appeals court has upheld nearly $1 million in penalties against Donald Trump and his attorneys for their racketeering lawsuit against Hillary Clinton and other Democrats. The court agreed with the lower court’s dismissal of the lawsuit, deeming many of its legal arguments frivolous. The suit alleged Clinton conspired to create a false narrative about Trump and Russia. The presiding judge found the suit to be filled with frivolous claims intended to harass and serve a political purpose, and that Trump knew of the suit’s shortcomings.
Read More
Donald Trump’s legal team has formally requested a state appeals court to overturn his conviction for falsifying business records in an attempt to influence the 2016 presidential election. The filing outlines multiple reasons for dismissal, including claims of a “convoluted legal theory” employed by Manhattan prosecutors and judicial bias due to the judge’s alleged political affiliations. Trump’s attorneys argue the case was politically motivated and violated his constitutional rights, also contending that certain evidence was improperly admitted. The legal team also targets the judge, claiming he should have recused himself.
Read More
In a recent ruling, a federal judge in Virginia denied the Justice Department’s request for extended discovery deadlines in the case against former FBI Director James Comey. The court ordered prosecutors to provide all discovery materials to the defense by October 13. This decision came after disagreements between the prosecution and defense regarding evidence sharing, with the judge emphasizing fairness and the need to keep the trial on schedule. The first round of motions is due on October 20, with a trial date set for January 5, 2026.
Read More
The federal appeals court upheld the $83 million defamation verdict against Donald Trump, rejecting his appeal. The court found that Trump failed to demonstrate grounds for reconsidering the previous holding on presidential immunity and that the district court’s rulings were appropriate. The appeals court also concluded that the jury’s damages awards were fair, and the punitive damages award was appropriate due to the reprehensibility of Trump’s conduct. This ruling leaves Trump responsible for the full amount of the judgment, which has increased since the initial verdict.
Read More
In a recent ruling, a federal judge invalidated the Trump administration’s freeze of $2.2 billion in grant funds to Harvard University. The judge determined the funding freeze was an illegal and ideologically motivated action targeting universities. The court found that the administration’s focus on antisemitism served as a pretext for imposing demands that violated First Amendment protections. The court’s decision vacated the freeze orders and barred their enforcement, though the White House has announced plans to appeal.
Read More
Appeals court throws out Trump’s $454 million civil fraud judgment.
Well, here we are, wrestling with another twist in the ongoing saga that is the legal battles surrounding Donald Trump. The Appeals Court has spoken, and the headline reads: the $454 million civil fraud judgment against Trump has been, essentially, tossed out. Now, before anyone starts cheering or throwing their hands up in despair, let’s break down what this actually *means*. The initial ruling found Trump, along with his sons and his business, guilty of a decade’s worth of business fraud. The court unequivocally stated that they had the intent to defraud.… Continue reading
A divided appeals court panel overturned a contempt finding against the Trump administration regarding deportations to an El Salvador prison, deeming the lower court judge had overstepped his authority. The decision followed the arrival of Venezuelan migrants at the prison despite a judge’s order for their return to the U.S. The majority opinion, written by judges nominated by Trump, argued the lower court intruded on executive branch foreign affairs powers. This ruling came after the Attorney General celebrated the win on social media.
Read More
John Q. Hosedrinker 
Matt Underwood