A federal judge has ruled that former President Trump filed a $10 billion lawsuit against the IRS for an improper purpose, aiming to legitimize a settlement that lacked legal or factual basis. This settlement, which granted Trump and his entities immunity from audits and investigations, was viewed by the judge as an attempt to leverage presidential power over government agencies to secure benefits. The judge also noted that provisions of the settlement potentially violate federal law regarding presidential compensation and audit interference, referring Trump’s lawyer for disciplinary review.
Read More
A recent development in the legal world has seen a U.S. judge void a settlement agreement between former President Donald Trump and the IRS. This significant ruling not only nullified the agreement but also prompted the judge to refer the lawyers involved, including a Trump attorney named Alejandro Brito, and senior Justice Department officials who had signed off on the settlement, to state bar authorities for potential disciplinary action. The core of the judge’s concern appears to stem from the settlement’s lack of a true adversarial nature, suggesting a potential sidestepping of normal legal and tax enforcement processes.
This decision is being met with strong reactions, with many expressing a sense of vindication and a hope for greater accountability.… Continue reading
Todd Blanche has sought to prevent state bar regulators from investigating ethical breaches by government lawyers, even proposing a rule to strip local disciplinary officials of their authority. This effort is seen as an attempt by Trump’s lawyers to avoid professional discipline, their only potential accountability. Despite these actions, the Campaign for Accountability has requested investigations into Blanche’s role in the prosecution of Kilmar Abrego Garcia, citing a federal judge’s findings that the prosecution was vindictive. This complaint highlights the tension between the Justice Department’s actions and the legal profession’s oversight mechanisms, questioning whether state bar associations will uphold their responsibilities when powerful individuals are involved.
Read More
The lead prosecutor on the case involving former FBI Director James Comey has withdrawn, and the reason for his departure remains unexplained, leaving many to speculate. This situation, especially concerning the infamous “seashells” reference, has raised eyebrows across legal and political spheres, fueling discussions about the integrity and motives behind the prosecution. It appears that the administration might be more interested in creating a public spectacle than in pursuing a legitimate legal action, with the entire endeavor seeming to be a matter of optics rather than substance.
There’s a strong sentiment that the charges against Comey, particularly in light of the “seashells” detail, are either non-existent or incredibly weak, making a courtroom battle unlikely.… Continue reading
Public defenders have raised concerns that Illinois State Police Trooper Kevin Bradley, recognized for his high number of DUI arrests, may have plagiarized portions of his arrest reports. An investigation into nearly 500 reports revealed striking similarities and what appears to be verbatim copying of case details, including incorrect information. This pattern has led to challenges in court, with dozens of drivers claiming innocence and some facing significant personal and professional repercussions. The potential for financial gain through overtime pay for court appearances is also cited as a motive for the alleged misconduct.
Read More
Following an alleged attempt to breach a security checkpoint and discharge a firearm at a US Secret Service agent during an event at the Washington Hilton hotel, the defendant, Allen, was apprehended. The federal agent sustained a non-fatal injury in the ensuing exchange of gunfire. Subsequent to the incident, the President, Vice-President, cabinet members, and White House officials were evacuated from the premises. Allen’s legal team has filed motions seeking the disqualification of the US attorneys in the Washington office and Attorney General Todd Blanche from prosecuting the case, citing concerns of bias due to public statements made by the prosecution.
Read More
Lawyers for Leon Black successfully petitioned a federal judge in 2024 to investigate claims made by an alleged victim in a separate lawsuit, leading to the reversal of a significant financial award granted to her. This intervention, conducted privately, also resulted in sanctions against the alleged victim and her former attorney for misconduct, including the falsification of evidence. Despite these setbacks, the judge ruled that the victim’s civil lawsuit against Black could proceed.
Read More
The California Supreme Court has disbarred John Eastman, a lawyer who advised President Trump on efforts to overturn the 2020 election results. The court’s decision upholds a recommendation from the State Bar Court, which found Eastman advanced false claims about the election to mislead officials and the public. Eastman’s attorney plans to seek review in the U.S. Supreme Court, arguing the ruling infringes upon First Amendment rights. The State Bar stated that Eastman’s misconduct was incompatible with the integrity required of attorneys in California.
Read More
The news that a key lawyer involved in the efforts to overturn the 2020 election has been permanently disbarred is finally bringing some much-needed accountability, and frankly, it’s about time. For too long, it seemed like those who actively sought to undermine democratic processes would face few significant repercussions. This particular lawyer, who was instrumental in crafting the legal strategies to keep Donald Trump in power despite the election results, now faces the professional consequence of having his license to practice law revoked.
Many have expressed that disbarment, while a serious professional penalty, might not fully equate to the gravity of the actions taken.… Continue reading
Newly filed court documents reveal that lawyers for Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) provided false information to justify the arrests and detentions of thousands of individuals leaving immigration court. Federal prosecutors acknowledged that a key agency memo, previously cited as authorization for these arrests, actually provided no such backing. This admission comes as part of a lawsuit challenging ICE’s practice of targeting individuals seeking legal status, which has prevented them from continuing their cases and resulted in detention.
Read More
John Q. Hosedrinker 
Matt Underwood
ICE Lawyers Provided False Information, Detaining Thousands Illegally
Newly filed court documents reveal that lawyers for Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) provided false information to justify the arrests and detentions of thousands of individuals leaving immigration court. Federal prosecutors acknowledged that a key agency memo, previously cited as authorization for these arrests, actually provided no such backing. This admission comes as part of a lawsuit challenging ICE’s practice of targeting individuals seeking legal status, which has prevented them from continuing their cases and resulted in detention.
Read More