|
|
|
Former FBI Director Comey indicted on charges of making false statement
Court News |
2025/09/25 13:01
|
Former FBI Director James Comey was charged Thursday with crimes connected to his Senate testimony in 2020 about an investigation, a major strike against a high-profile figure who has long been the target of President Donald Trump’s anger.
“No one is above the law,” Attorney General Pamela Bondi said.
The indictment accuses Comey of making a false statement to Congress and obstruction of a criminal proceeding. He declared his innocence Thursday night and said, “Let’s have a trial.”
“My family and I have known for years that there are costs to standing up to Donald Trump,” Comey said in a video posted to Substack.
Comey, who was FBI director from 2013 to 2017, was fired by Trump during the president’s first term amid the government’s probe into allegations of ties between Russian officials and Trump’s 2016 campaign.
Trump mentioned Comey last weekend in a social media post in which he complained that no charges had been filed against him yet.
Prosecutors led by special counsel Robert Mueller did not establish that Trump or his associates criminally colluded with Russia in 2016, but they found that Trump’s campaign had welcomed Moscow’s assistance.
Trump and his supporters have called the investigation a “hoax” despite multiple government reviews showing Moscow interfered on behalf of the campaign.
The indictment against Comey accuses him of having lied to a Senate committee when he said he never authorized anyone to serve as an anonymous source to a reporter about an investigation.
Before the charges emerged Thursday, Trump told reporters that Comey was a “bad person.” He later reveled in news of the indictment.
“He has been so bad for our Country, for so long, and is now at the beginning of being held responsible for his crimes against our Nation,” Trump said on his social media platform.
Comey’s disgust for Trump was laid out in his 2018 memoir, “A Higher Loyalty.”
“This president is unethical, and untethered to truth and institutional values,” Comey wrote. “His leadership is transactional, ego driven and about personal loyalty.”
He recalled a private meeting with Trump early in his first presidency in which Trump demanded allegiance. Comey likened it to a Mafia induction.
Earlier this year, the Trump administration said it was investigating a social media post by Comey that Trump and his allies interpreted as a call for violence against the president.
In an Instagram post, Comey wrote “cool shell formation on my beach walk” under a picture of seashells that appeared to form the shapes for “86 47.” The Merriam-Webster dictionary says 86 is slang meaning “to throw out,” “get rid of” or “refuse service to.”
Comey deleted the post and said he didn’t know “some folks associate those numbers with violence.”
Comey’s daughter was a federal prosecutor for 10 years until she was fired in July by the Justice Department. Maurene Comey is suing to get her job back, saying her dismissal was unconstitutional and connected to Trump’s hostility toward her father.
“If a career prosecutor can be fired without reason, fear may seep into the decisions of those who remain,” Maurene Comey said in a note to her colleagues. “Do not let that happen. Fear is the tool of a tyrant, wielded to suppress independent thought.”
The White House said the decision came from Justice Department officials.
Separately, James Comey’s son-in-law, Troy Edwards, resigned Thursday as a federal prosecutor, minutes after the former FBI director was indicted.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Man is arrested and charged in deadly New Hampshire country club shooting
Topics in Legal News |
2025/09/21 13:01
|
Patrons at a restaurant acted quickly and selflessly to stop a gunman who opened fire while a wedding was taking place at a New Hampshire country club, averting a worse tragedy, authorities said Sunday.
One person was killed and two others were wounded by gunfire Saturday night before a suspect was taken into custody in a nearby neighborhood not long after the shooting, authorities said.
The gunfire killed Robert Steven DeCesare, 59, at Sky Meadow Country Club in Nashua, said New Hampshire Attorney General John Formella and Nashua Police Chief Kevin Rourke. They said the suspect was Hunter Nadeau, 23, of Nashua, and that he had been arrested and charged with one count of second-degree murder for knowingly shooting DeCesare.
Nadeau was a former employee of the club, Formella said, adding that Nadeau made a number of statements during the shooting and appeared to be attempting to cause chaos in the moment as opposed to showing a hate-based motivation. Witnesses reported that Nadeau said “Free Palestine” during the confusion.
Some witnesses said someone struck Nadeau with a chair in an attempt to subdue him. Formella cited “selfless acts of courage by the patrons in the restaurant who put aside care for their own safety and worked to intervene and stop the shooter.”
The shooting happened adjacent to a wedding that was taking place at the club. Wedding DJ Michael Homewood credited the chair strike with preventing an even worse shooting.
“He hit him over the head with a chair, and he probably saved a bunch of lives just doing that,” Homewood told WCVB-TV.
Investigators were working to determine a motive, Formella said. Police did not immediately respond to a question about whether Nadeau is represented by an attorney, and attempts to reach family members of Nadeau were not immediately successful. Authorities said there is no known connection between Nadeau and DeCesare.
Authorities had initially thought there could be two shooters but later said there was only one.
“Additional charges likely will be brought, including for the additional shooting victims,” Formella and Rourke said in a statement. They said they expect Nadeau to be arraigned at the Ninth Circuit Court in Nashua on Monday.
One of the surviving gunshot victims was an employee and the other was a patron, Formella said. The employee is hospitalized in critical but stable condition while the other victim’s status is unknown, Formella said. He said at least four other people at the scene suffered non-gunshot wounds that were not expected to be life threatening.
In addition to the three gunshot victims, others suffered injuries including lacerations, a broken hand and blunt force trauma, Nashua Fire Rescue said Sunday. The agency said it assisted about 100 people from the scene to a nearby firehouse, mostly on foot.
Gov. Kelly Ayotte said in a statement Sunday that the attorney general’s office will assist Nashua police with the investigation and that she and her husband were “praying for the victims and their families.”
Nashua is about 45 miles (70 kilometers) northwest of Boston, just across the Massachusetts border.
The mother of DeCesare, the man who was killed, had earlier described not being able to find her son after he was shot.
“He went down. My daughter-in-law and granddaughter escaped. ... They saw my son go down and they saw blood,” said Evie O’Rourke of Salem, New Hampshire.
Sophie Flabouris told WCVB-TV that someone hit the suspect over the head with a chair to subdue him. Flabouris said the suspect then fled the scene.
“We had just gathered around the dance floor. We were about to do a Greek smashing of the plates and throwing the dollar bills. The bride had just come up to me and gave me the plates to say, ‘All right, you give this to my husband.’ And all of a sudden we heard ‘pop, pop, pop, pop, pop.’ Heard five shots,” Flabouris said. “All of a sudden heard ‘Gun!’ Chaos, screaming, and then running.”
Emily Ernst said she saw a gunman in all black.
“He had a mask on. We just saw him raise the gun and then we ran,” Ernst said. “I ran through the kitchen for my life.”
Tom Bartelson of Pepperell, Massachusetts, described a chaotic scene that unfolded near his nephew’s wedding. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senate rejects competing bills, increasing risk of shutdown on Oct. 1
Topics in Legal News |
2025/09/18 13:02
|
The Senate rejected competing measures on Friday to fund federal agencies for a few weeks when the new budget year begins on Oct. 1, increasing prospects for a partial government shutdown on that date.
Leaders of the two parties sought to blame the other side for the standoff. Democrats accused Republicans of not negotiating with them to address some of their priorities on health care as part of the funding measure, even though they knew Democratic votes would be needed to get a bill to the president’s desk.
Republicans said Democrats were making demands that would dramatically increase spending and were not germane to the core issue of keeping agencies fully running for a short period of time while negotiations continued on a full-year spending package.
It’s unclear how the two sides will be able to avoid a shutdown. Republicans are planning on what amounts to a do-over vote on their proposal close to the deadline in the hopes that more Democrats will have second thoughts. Democrats are repeating their demand that Republicans sit down with them and work on a compromise.
“The theater must end,” Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said after the vote. “Let’s sit down and negotiate.”
Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., gave no indication of a change in course.
“All it takes is a handful of Democrats to join the Republicans in keeping the government open and funded, and to ensure we have a chance to get the appropriations process completed in the way it was intended,” Thune said.
The Senate action came after the House earlier in the day passed the Republican-led funding bill. The measure would extend government funding generally at current levels for seven weeks. The bill would also add about $88 million in security funding for lawmakers and members of the Supreme Court and executive branch in the wake of the assassination of conservative activist Charlie Kirk.
The vote was 217-212. Rep. Jared Golden of Maine was the lone Democratic member to support the bill. Rep. Marie Gluesenkamp Perez, D-Wash., also said she tried to vote for the bill but was not recognized by the presiding officer. She was listed officially as not voting.
House Speaker Mike Johnson of Louisiana said he knew he had few votes to spare as he sought to persuade fellow Republicans to vote for the funding patch, something many in his conference have routinely opposed in past budget fights. But this time, GOP members saw a chance to portray the Democrats as responsible for a shutdown.
“The ball is in Chuck Schumer’s court. I hope he does the right thing. I hope he does not choose to shut the government down and inflict pain on the American people,” Johnson said.
President Donald Trump had urged House Republicans to pass the bill and put the burden on Democrats to oppose it. GOP leaders often need Trump’s help to win over holdouts on legislation.
Trump predicted Friday that there could be “a closed country for a period of time.” He said the government will continue to “take care” of the military and Social Security payments in a closure.
Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., said that in opposing the continuing resolution, Democrats were working to protect the health care of the American people. He said that with Republicans controlling the White House and both branches of Congress, “Republicans will own a government shutdown. Period. Full stop.”
The Senate moved quickly after the House vote to take up the measure plus the Democratic counter. Both bills fell far short of the 60 votes required for passage.
The Democratic proposal would extend enhanced health insurance subsidies set to expire at the end of the year, plus reverse Medicaid cuts that were included in Republicans’ big tax breaks and spending cuts bill enacted earlier this year.
The Democratic measure actually received more votes than the Republican one due to absences. The 47-45 vote went strictly along party lines.
“The American people will look at what Republicans are doing, look at what Democrats are doing, and it will be clear that public sentiment will be on our side,” Schumer said.
The Republican measure gained 44 votes, including from Democratic Sen. John Fetterman of Pennsylvania. But 48 voted against it, including two Republicans, Sens. Rand Paul of Kentucky and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Call of Duty Maker Seeks Dismissal in Texas School Shooting Case
Court Watch |
2025/09/16 13:00
|
A lawyer for the maker of the video game Call of Duty argued Friday that a judge should dismiss a lawsuit brought by families of the victims of the Robb Elementary School attack in Uvalde, Texas, saying the contents of the war game are protected by the First Amendment.
The families sued Call of Duty maker Activision and Meta Platforms, which owns Instagram, saying that the companies bear responsibility for promoting products used by the teen gunman.
Three sets of parents who lost children in the shooting were in the audience at the Los Angeles hearing.
Activision lawyer Bethany Kristovich told Superior Court Judge William Highberger that the “First Amendment bars their claims, period full stop.”
“The issues of gun violence are incredibly difficult,” Kristovich said. “The evidence in this case is not.”
She argued that the case has little chance of prevailing if it continues, because courts have repeatedly held that “creators of artistic works, whether they be books, music, movies, TV or video games, cannot be held legally liable for the acts of their audience.”
The lawsuit, one of many involving Uvalde families, was filed last year on the second anniversary of one of the deadliest school shootings in U.S. history. The gunman killed 19 students and two teachers. Officers finally confronted and shot him after waiting more than an hour to enter the fourth-grade classroom.
Kimberly Rubio, whose 10-year-old daughter Lexi was killed in the shooting, was among the parents who came from Texas to Southern California, where Activision is based, for the hearing.
“We traveled all this way, so we need answers,” Rubio said outside the courthouse. “It’s our hope that the case will move forward so we can get those answers.”
An attorney for the families argued during the hearing that Call of Duty exceeds its First Amendment protections by moving into marketing.
“The basis of our complaint is not the existence of Call of Duty,” Katie Mesner-Hage told the judge. “It is using Call of Duty as a platform to market weapons to minors.”
The plaintiffs’ lawyers showed contracts and correspondence between executives at Activison and gunmakers whose products, they said, are clearly and exactly depicted in the game despite brand names not appearing.
Mesner-Hage said the documents show that they actually prefer being unlabeled because “it helps shield them from the implication that they are marketing guns to minors,” while knowing that players will still identify and seek out the weapons.
Kristovich said there is no evidence that the kind of product placement and marketing the plaintiffs are talking about happened in any of the editions of the game the shooter played.
The families have also filed a lawsuit against Daniel Defense, which manufactured the AR-style rifle used in the May 24, 2022, shooting. Koskoff argued that a replica of the rifle clearly appears on a splash page for Call of Duty.
Josh Koskoff, the families’ Connecticut-based lead attorney, also represented families of nine Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting victims in a lawsuit against gunmaker Remington and got a $73 million lawsuit settlement.
He invoked Sandy Hook several times in his arguments, saying the shooters there and in Uvalde shared the same gaming obsession.
Koskoff said the Uvalde shooter experienced “the absorption and the loss of self in Call of Duty.”
He said that immersion was so deep that the shooter searched online for how to obtain an armored suit that he didn’t know only exists in the game.
Koskoff played a clip from Call of Duty Modern Warfare, the game the shooter played, with a first-person shooter gunning down opponents.
The shots echoed loudly in the courtroom, and several people in the audience slowly shook their heads.
“Call of Duty is in a class of its own,” Koskoff said.
Kristovich argued for Activision that the game, despite its vast numbers of players, can be tied to only a few of the many U.S. mass shootings.
“The game is incredibly common. It appears in a scene on ‘The Office,’” she said. She added that it is ridiculous to assert that “this is such a horrible scourge that your honor has to essentially ban it through this lawsuit.”
Highberger told the lawyers he was not leaning in either direction before the hearing. He gave no time frame for when he will rule, but a quick decision is not expected.
The judge did tell the plaintiffs’ lawyers that their description of Activision’s actions seemed like deliberate malfeasance, where their lawsuit alleges negligence. He said that was the biggest hurdle they needed to clear.
“Their conduct created a risk of exactly what happened,” Mesner-Hage told him. “And we represent the people who are exactly the foreseeable victims of that conduct.”
Meta’s attorneys will make arguments on a similar motion next month.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Military lawyers will serve as immigration judges as courts face massive backlog
Court News |
2025/09/12 10:33
|
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has approved sending up to 600 military lawyers to the Justice Department to serve as temporary immigration judges, according to a memo reviewed by The Associated Press.
The military will begin sending groups of 150 attorneys — both military and civilians — to the Justice Department “as soon as practicable,” and the military services should have the first round of people identified by next week, according to the Aug. 27 memo.
The effort comes as the Trump administration more regularly turns to the military as it cracks down on illegal immigration through ramped-up arrests and deportations. Its growing role in the push includes troops patrolling the U.S.-Mexico border, National Guard members being sent into U.S. cities to support immigration enforcement efforts, housing people awaiting deportation on military bases and using military aircraft to carry out deportations.
The administration’s focus on illegal immigration has added strain to the immigration courts, which were already dealing with a massive backlog of roughly 3.5 million cases that has ballooned in recent years. An organization for immigration lawyers called the new directive a “destructive” move meant to undermine the courts.
At the same time, more than 100 immigration judges have been fired or left voluntarily after taking deferred resignations offered by the Trump administration, their union says. In the most recent round of terminations, the International Federation of Professional and Technical Engineers said in July that at least 17 immigration judges had been fired “without cause” in courts across the country.
That has left about 600 immigration judges, union figures show, meaning the Pentagon move would double their ranks.
The Justice Department, which oversees the immigration courts, requested the assistance from the Defense Department, according to the memo sent by the Pentagon’s executive secretary to his DOJ counterpart. The military lawyers’ duties as immigration judges will initially last no more than 179 days but can be renewed, it said.
A DOJ spokesperson referred questions about the plan to the Defense Department, where officials directed questions to the White House.
A White House official said Tuesday that the administration is looking at a variety of options to help resolve the significant backlog of immigration cases, including hiring additional immigration judges. The official, who was not authorized to comment publicly and spoke on condition of anonymity, said the matter should be “a priority that everyone — including those waiting for adjudication — can rally around.”
The head of the American Immigration Lawyers Association decried bringing in temporary judges who lack expertise in immigration law, saying “it makes as much as sense as having a cardiologist do a hip replacement.”
“Expecting fair decisions from judges unfamiliar with the law is absurd. This reckless move guts due process and further undermines the integrity of our immigration court system,” said Ben Johnson, the organization’s executive director.
The memo stressed that the additional attorneys are contingent on availability and that mobilizing reserve officers may be necessary. Plus, the document said DOJ would be responsible for ensuring that anyone sent from the Pentagon does not violate the federal prohibition on using the military as domestic law enforcement, known as the Posse Comitatus Act.
The administration faced a setback on its efforts to use troops in unique ways to combat illegal immigration and crime, with a court ruling Tuesday that it “willfully” violated federal law by sending National Guard troops to Los Angeles in early June.
It is not immediately clear what impact shifting that number of military attorneys would have on the armed forces’ justice system. The attorneys, called judge advocates, have a range of duties much like civilian lawyers, from carrying out prosecutions, acting as a defense attorney or offering legal advice.
Pentagon officials did immediately offer details on where any of the 600 attorneys will be drawn from and whether they will come from active duty or the reserves.
Until she was abruptly fired in July, former supervising judge Jennifer Peyton administered the intensive training that all judges in Chicago undergo before working in some of the busiest immigration courts in the country. After the weekslong training, new judges are paired with an experienced mentor and have a two-year probationary period.
Peyton doubted that military attorneys would be able to master the complexities of immigration law without that rigorous process. She also said it wasn’t clear how they would handle the hundreds, or sometimes thousands, of cases on just a Chicago immigration judge’s docket each year.
“Six months is barely enough time to start to figure out the firehose of information and training,” she said.
Peyton also was concerned that Trump’s move didn’t supply more administrative workers, including translators, whom judges rely on to make decisions. The stakes, she said, were life or death for people who would come before the new judges.
“None of it makes sense unless you were intentionally trying to weaken the immigration courts,” Peyton said.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legal News RSS Feed
