Latest news with #FederalDistrictCourt
New York Times
5 days ago
- Politics
- New York Times
Trump Administration Sues New York City Over Sanctuary Laws
The Justice Department on Thursday sued Mayor Eric Adams, claiming that New York City's immigration policies are hindering the Trump administration's enforcement of the law, in an escalation of efforts to crack down on the country's largest sanctuary city. In a 37-page lawsuit filed in Federal District Court in Brooklyn, the Trump administration said the city's policies had violated the supremacy clause of the Constitution, which it said gives the administration 'well-established, pre-eminent and pre-emptive authority to regulate immigration.' 'New York City has long been at the vanguard of interfering with enforcing this country's immigration laws,' the administration said in its suit. 'Its history as a sanctuary city dates back to 1989, and its efforts to thwart federal immigration enforcement have only intensified since.' In 2014, Mayor Bill de Blasio signed bills into law that all but stopped the police and jail officials from helping federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents deport undocumented immigrants. The law expelled ICE from offices it had maintained at the Rikers Island jail complex and strictly limited the communication allowed between ICE and the city's Department of Correction. The measures also restricted city agencies from honoring ICE's requests to detain undocumented immigrants who had been charged with crimes so that they could be deported. Under the law, the city could honor requests to detain only those who had been convicted of 'violent or serious' crimes — a list of more than 170 offenses that includes rape and murder. ICE also now had to present a warrant signed by a federal judge with each request. Efforts to reach New York officials on Thursday afternoon were not immediately successful. This is a developing story and will be updated.
New York Times
18-07-2025
- Politics
- New York Times
State Dept. Official Says Criticism of Israel Can Lead to Visa Revocations
A senior State Department official testified Friday that his office, which the Trump administration has tasked with vetting foreign students' social media posts and revoking student visas, has operated this year without a working definition of 'antisemitism' and routinely considers criticism of Israel as part of its work. The testimony, at the end of a two-week trial focused on the Trump administration's efforts to deport students such as Mahmoud Khalil, Rumeysa Ozturk and others, helped build the case by the academic groups behind the lawsuit, who have argued that the government systematically targeted students based on their remarks about Israel. During a heated back-and-forth in Federal District Court in Boston, John Armstrong, the senior bureau official in the Bureau of Consular Affairs, said that the State Department regularly took into account speech or actions that it saw as hostile toward Israel. Pushed for examples of things he might consider in weighing whether to deny or revoke a student's visa, Mr. Armstrong testified that calls for limiting military aid to Israel or 'denouncing Zionism' could all factor in his agency's decisions. 'In your view, a statement criticizing Israel's actions in Gaza could be covered depending on the statement, right?' asked Alexandra Conlon, a lawyer representing the organizations behind the lawsuit. 'Yes, depending on the statement, it could definitely,' he said. 'You say that they're worse than Hitler with what they're doing in Gaza? — that would be a statement that, I think, would lead in that direction that you seem to be going, counselor.' Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
Time of India
10-07-2025
- Politics
- Time of India
US Supreme Court hits out at Donald Trump, puts Florida law jailing undocumented immigrants on the backburner for now
Donald Trump's harsh immigration agenda faced some pushback from the United States Supreme Court, which ruled against a contentious Florida law passed by Governor Ron DeSantis that attempted to outright criminalize undocumented immigrants who set foot in the state. Ron DeSantis had passed the law earlier in the year, which instituted a mandatory minimum nine-year sentence if an undocumented immigrant committed the misdemeanor offense of entering the state for the first time. Repeated re-entry into the state would be treated as felony offenses that would mandate escalating prison sentences. This law was legally challenged by two individual immigrants, as well as two immigrant advocacy groups. As a result, its enforcement was blocked by Judge Kathleen Williams of the Federal District Court in Miami. When Florida's Government attempted to appeal this block by escalating things to the Supreme Court, their efforts ultimately failed, with Supreme Court responding: "The application for stay presented to Justice [Clarence] Thomas and by him referred to the Court is denied." The Supreme Court refuses to revive Florida immigration law By refusing to stay the Federal District Court order blocking the Florida law's enforcement, the Supreme Court has dealt a blow to Donald Trump's ambitions of instituting the largest immigration crackdown in American history. As a consequence of this decision, Florida currently will not be able to bring up state charges against undocumented immigrants who enter the state, resulting in immigration enforcement remaining strictly under federal jurisdiction. Supreme Court declines to let Florida enforce its new immigration law Donald Trump has been heavily pushing for states to comply with his anti-immigration platform, to the point of deploying the National Guard and United States Marines to California in response to protests against Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) raids. As this Supreme Court decision shows, however, even states willing to cooperate with President Trump's agenda will have legal hurdles to face. The Supreme Court has a mixed record on Donald Trump's policies While the Supreme Court has hindered Trump's agenda with its recent ruling, it has also enabled it on other occasions. On June 23, the Supreme Court stayed a federal judge's order that blocked the Trump administration from deporting immigrants to South Sudan. BREAKINGThe Supreme Court green lights the Trump admin sending immigrants to war-torn and human-rights abusing South Sudan without process, even though most aren't from there. Doc Background While the Supreme Court's recent decision will be taken as a victory by immigration advocates and Donald Trump's opponents, the long-term legal ramifications of these immigration cases remain unclear.
Daily Mirror
03-07-2025
- Entertainment
- Daily Mirror
Diddy supporters' sick Cassie comments as they clash with critics outside court
Sean 'Diddy' Combs has been found guilty of two of the five counts he was charged with, but the prosecution is still seeking a maximum sentence of 20 years Ugly scenes broke out outside a federal court in New York, as Sean 'Diddy' Combs fans and critics clash following 12 jurors delivering a verdict earlier today. Combs has been found guilty of just two of the five counts he was charged with, however the prosecution is still seeking a maximum sentence of 20 years. The 12 jurors in his sex-trafficking trial continued their deliberations for just 56 minutes today after struggling to come to a unanimous decision regarding count one. Combs dropped to his knees inside court as he learned he had avoided life behind bars today. The jury found the Last Night singer not guilty of racketeering, and not guilty of sex trafficking ex-partner Casandra Ventura and another woman referred to as "Jane" As Combs' family reacted to the news, a furious clash broke out outside court moments after the verdict was delivered, with two men screaming at one another while referring to Cassie's testimony that Combs beat her on multiple occasions. CCTV footage from an LA hotel in 2016 showed Combs attacking Cassie near the lift doors. One man shouted that "he beat her", with the opposing man responding: "It doesn't matter." The initial man continued to shout: "He beat her, he kicked her." While the other man screaming back: "And she liked it, how about that?" Another male supporter was seen holding a bottle of baby oil as they celebrated the verdict. The trial, held at the Federal District Court in Lower Manhattan starting May 5, saw testimony from 34 witnesses, among them stars like Kid Cudi and Cassie herself. During her emotional testimony, Cassie recounted an assault by Diddy at a Los Angeles hotel back in 2016. She further detailed to the court how Diddy had sexually assaulted her in her own living room. Now, with Combs convicted on two counts and cleared of others, her legal representative has released a statement: "This entire criminal process started when our client Cassie Ventura had the courage to file her civil complaint in November 2023. "Although the jury did not find Combs guilty of sex trafficking Cassie beyond a reasonable doubt, she paved the way for a jury to find him guilty of transportation to engage in prostitution. By coming forward with her experience, Cassie has left an indelible mark on both the entertainment industry and the fight for justice. "We must repeat – with no reservation – that we believe and support our client who showed exemplary courage throughout this trial. She displayed unquestionable strength and brought attention to the realities of powerful men in our orbit and the misconduct that has persisted for decades without repercussion. This case proved that change is long overdue, and we will continue to fight on behalf of survivors." After her testimony concluded on May 17, Cassie's solicitor, Doug Wigdor, issued a statement acknowledging the difficulty of her experience: "This week has been extremely challenging, but also remarkably empowering and healing for me. "For me, the more I heal, the more I can remember. And the more I can remember, the more I will never forget. I want to thank my family and my advocates for their unwavering support, and I'm grateful for all the kindness and encouragement that I have received. "I'm glad to put this chapter of my life to rest. As I turn to focus on the conclusion of my pregnancy, I ask for privacy for me and for my growing family."
Irish Daily Mirror
02-07-2025
- Entertainment
- Irish Daily Mirror
Jury reaches verdict on all five charges as Diddy prays with family in court
Sean 'Diddy' Combs has been found guilty of just two of the five counts he was charged with. The 12 jurors in his sex-trafficking trial continued their deliberations for just 56 minutes today after struggling to come to a unanimous decision regarding count one. The embattled rapper, 55, was charged with sex trafficking, racketeering conspiracy and transportation to engage in prostitution. He was found not guilty of sex trafficking and racketeering conspiracy, but found guilty of transportation to engage in prostitution. During the trial at the Federal District Court in Lower Manhattan, which began on May 5, the jury heard from 34 witnesses - including celebrities like Kid Cudi and Combs' ex-girlfriend Cassie. Diddy's lawyer Marc Agnifilo has requested that Diddy is released from federal detention now that he is no longer charged with sex trafficking. Agnifilo has asked that he is released on house arrest in Miami and offered a $1million bond. However, the government has asked for him to remain in custody. Prosecutor Maurene Comey has said that the government will be seeking a 20-year maximum sentence for Combs. Judge Arun Subramanian addressed the jury after the verdict was read out regarding the oncoming press attention. He told the group that they are free to refuse interviews if asked by members of the media. The judge further warned the press against asking jurors about their specific deliberations, reminding all that what happened in the jury room stays in the jury room. Judge Subramanian finished by asking them to go to the jury room so that he could personally meet with them and thank them for their contribution over the weeks. Combs was found guilty on count three, the Mann Act Transportation of Casandra Ventura. Combs has been found guilty of Count 5, the Mann Act transportation of former girlfriend Jane. Diddy has been found not guilty on counts 1, 2 and 4. The jury has returned to the courtroom after sending a note to the judge just 52 minutes into deliberations today confirming that they had reached a verdict on all counts. Diddy and his defense team are back in the courtroom. The music mogul held his hands in a prayer position as his family watched on. The court has been alerted by the jury that they have decided on a verdict for all five of Diddy's charges, including racketeering. Diddy prayed with his family court as jury deliberations continue. He said: "Let us pray, please watch over my family. Amen.' Afterwards, his family and some of their supporters clapped. Sean 'Diddy' Combs is back at the defense table and spoke to lawyer Marc Agnifilo. Diddy appeared tense as he looked through a file folder while Agnifilo paced. His other attorneys chatted amongst themselves in a huddle. Diddy's mum Janice Combs has been pictured back at court to support her son as the jury continues its third day of deliberations. The rapper's lawyers, Xavier Donaldson and Alexandra Shapiro, were also spotted making their way into the courtroom flanked by a horde of press waiting outside. Cassie Ventura's lawyer Douglas Wigdor was also seen outside court as he made his way inside. The jury will continue its closed-door discussions in just minutes at 9am Eastern Time (2pm GMT). It will be the third day for deliberations for the four women and eight men on the jury, who have come to a decision on four of the five counts. They have been unable to reach a consensus on the racketeering conspiracy count. A partial verdict may be allowed if the jury are unable to agree on the racketeering charge, according to ABC News. This would mean that the jury would be allowed to give a verdict on the charges they do agree on, however a mistrial may be declared on any charges - in this instance, potentially racketeering - that they don't. If Combs is found not guilty on the other charges, it is more likely that the prosecution will push for a retrial on the racketeering charge. Yet if he is found guilty and the length of his sentence satisfies the prosecution, they may decide not to go for a retrial. Diddy is facing five counts with various potential sentences. These include: Count 2 - Sex-trafficking of Cassie Ventura - a minimum of 15 years and maximum of life in prison Count 3 - Transporting individuals including but not limited to Cassie Ventura to engage in prostitution - a maximum sentence of 10 years in prison Count 4 - Sex-trafficking of Jane* - a minimum of 15 years and maximum of life in prison Count 5 - Transporting individuals including but not limited to Jane to engage in prostitution - a maximum of 10 years in prison If Diddy is found not guilty, he will be immediately released from custody, criminal appellate attorney Jason Ostendorf has told the Mirror US. However, any belongings that Diddy came into jail with would need to be retrieved. Ostendorf said: "Belongings would typically be retrieved by his attorney or delivered by the facility." Diddy was arrested in September 2024, remaining jailed in Metropolitan Detention Center in Brooklyn after multiple failed attempts at bail. If he's found not guilty, the time behind bars might seem wrong to him. However, there's not necessarily financial compensation in these situations from the state. Eric M. Mark, the founder of the Law Office of Eric M. Mark, told the Mirror US, "While it seems fair and just to compensate persons found not guilty, that is not how the system works." Mark added: "He could only be compensated if he sued for wrongful prosecution and was successful. The reason for both of these things is that being found not guilty is not the same as actually being innocent and it is not a finding of innocence. "Not guilty means the prosecution did not meet its high burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt. But a civil lawsuit is subject to a lower burden of proof." The jury is struggling to come to a unanimous decision regarding Diddy's racketeering charge, but what exactly does it mean? According to Cornell Law School, racketeering is "a set of illegal activities aimed at commercial profit that may be disguised as legitimate business deals". It is defined by a "coordinated effort by multiple people to repeatedly earn a profit", typically through fraud, bribery, extortion, violence, threats or other illegal means. RICO, also known at Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organization Act, is the primary law that outlines and criminalises racketeering activities. Drug trafficking, money laundering and other forms of organised crime are all examples of racketeering activity. In order for someone to be convicted of racketeering, prosecutors must prove five different criteria, according to the US Justice Department: Diddy's dramatic case is finally nearing its conclusion nearly two months on from Cassie Ventura giving evidence during the first week of the trial in May. Singer Cassie, who was called as an early witness due to being eight months pregnant at the time, testified about her on-off decade-long relationship with Combs. During her testimony, Cassie told the court that their loving relationship quickly spiralled into him becoming violent towards her. She claimed that Combs pressured her to take part in drug-fuelled parties famously dubbed 'freak-offs'. Following their split, Cassie claimed that Combs had sent threatening texts in 2019, one reading: "If I as you, I would get me my money." Reports suggest he was seeking repayment from his ex following her nuptials with Alex Fine. Combs had originally enlisted the fitness guru for Cassie. Within her testimony, a number of celebrity names popped up. This included her recounting an incident from 2013 involving preparations to travel to Drake's music festival in Canada, which allegedly resulted in him throwing her onto a bed frame and causing a severe cut above her eye. She also referred to an image where she appears beside French Montana at the event. Combs' full alleged attack on Cassie was also shown in new unedited footage from the Los Angeles hotel in 2016. Prosecutors initially played the entire video before replaying it while the hotel's assistant security director at the time, Israel Florez, narrated the sequence of events. Comnbs' lawyer later replayed the video and attempted to find discrepancies in Florez's account of the incident. Legal experts now say they can understand why jurors may still be undecided on the racketeering charge - which carries a maximum sentence of life in prison. "You have to prove that there was this big mass conspiracy where you have different people doing... different criminal acts, which I'm not sure that the prosecution did a very good job of," legal analyst, Eric Guster told CBS News. "They may not have brought all of that evidence that they needed to prove that point." A legal analyst has cited a grim clue in the jury's note to Judge Arun Subramanian on Tuesday which indicates that jurors have likely found him guilty on at least some of the charges against him. Yesterday, jurors sent a note to say they had reached verdicts on two charges of sex trafficking and two charges of transportation for prostitution, but had been unable to reach a unanimous decision on the charge of racketeering conspiracy. Writing to US District Judge Arun Subramanian, they explained that there were those with 'unpersuadable opinions on both sides' of the issue. Federal prosecutor Neama Rahmani gave his opinion on the jury, telling ABC their verdicts likely meant that Diddy would be found guilty on four of the five counts, saying: "It is possible that the jurors have returned a guilty verdict on prostitution and sex-trafficking and they're just trying to find that criminal enterprise or criminal agreement." Meanwhile, CNN analyst Ellie Honig, said: "It is hard for me to fathom, logically, that there are multiple jurors who basically say he is guilty of racketeering, but he's not guilty of all the other crimes, the other sex trafficking crimes and interstate prostitution crimes. "So honestly, that would be the conversation I'd be having right now if I was in the prosecution room. I would take some heart in that. "I would be encouraged by that as a prosecutor, that that suggests we might have guilty verdicts on the other counts." No one is following Diddy's court case more than his arch nemesis 50 Cent. The rapper, real name Curtis James Jackson III, couldn't resist taking aim at the music mogul by sharing an AI picture of himself staring down at his phone. He wrote as the jury continued to deliberate yesterday: "Diddy just told me to tell Yall don't worry about him, he gonna hold it down Real s*** ! @50centaction." The beef between the two artists stems from a feud stretching back roughly two decades. Their conflict first emerged in 2006, when 50 Cent unleashed the diss track 'The Bomb." Judge Arun Subramanian agreed to hold off on proposing scheduled scenarios to the jury while meeting with the defense and prosecutors before the end of court on Tuesday. This was suggested should the jury deliberate past today. Both sides are open to the jury deliberating on Thursday, even though the courthouse is closed. If the jury declined to deliberate on Thursday, they would need to return on Monday due to the Fourth of July holiday. Diddy's fate is still yet to be decided as the jury will continue to deliberate, with a verdict expected sometime today. Combs, who denies all charges, could spend the rest of his life behind bars if he is found guilty. Deliberations began on Monday, but things took an unexpected turn when the jury passed two notes to the presiding judge. The trial has seen a number of star witnesses, including Diddy's ex-girlfriend Cassie and Kid Cudi. Yesterday, however, those following the case were hit with a number of bombshell moments. From the judge's demand to the jury to Diddy's five-word comment to his mum... The judge overseeing Sean 'Diddy' Combs' trial has urged the jury to continue deliberating after they revealed they had only reached verdicts on four of the five charges. This process will begin again at 9am local time (2pm GMT) to see if the 12 jurors can reach a consensus on the first and most serious of the five charges, a complex racketeering conspiracy allegation that has previously been used to put away mobsters. 'I received your note that you have reached verdicts on count 2-5 but not on count 1. I ask at this time that you keep deliberating,' Judge Arun Subramanian told the panel. The P Diddy verdict is set to be delivered in the coming days. The jury was expected to announce its decision on Tuesday after a second day of deliberation. However, they have since gone home for the day after deciding on four of the five charges made against the rapper, 55. They had reached a decision regarding counts two, three, four, and five, but had remained unable to decide on count one. At the end of Tuesday, Judge Arun Subramania instructed the jury to continue deliberating, saying: "I received your note that you have reached verdicts on counts two to five but not on count one. I ask at this time that you keep deliberating." Before leaving the court, Diddy turned to his children, who were sitting in the second row behind him, and whispered. He told his mother, who had leaned in to ask him something: "I'll be alright. Love you," before tapping his chest. The jury has sent a note to the judge, stating they have done their deliberations for the day and will continue at 9am local time on Wednesday (2pm UK time). When dismissing the jury, the judge said he will not bring them all out in the morning and they can get started once everyone has arrived. Judge Arun Subramania has instructed the jury to continue with their deliberation. He said: "I received your note that you have reached verdicts on count 2-5 but not on count 1. I ask at this time that you keep deliberating." They have now left the courtroom. Meanwhile, Subramania is remaining on the bench as he may receive a note in the next couple of minutes. The Mirror are bringing you the latest from outside the New York courthouse. The jury is back in the room, and the judge is set to instruct them to continue their deliberation and to tell them if they're done for the day. Judge Subramanian and the lawyers are now talking about how they will respond to the note from the jury to say they cannot reach a full verdict. Subramanian said: "There's not much there," when responding to the defence team's proposed instruction. He added that telling the jury to "keep deliberating" would be non-responsive to their note which stated "unpersuadable opinions" to Count One. Diddy's defence, Marc Agnifilo, said he believes the jury has been productive and efficient, so they do not need any more encouragement to continue with their deliberation. Meanwhile Subramanian, said that the government's proposal isn't an Allen charge as such but reiterates the section of the jury instructions relating to the duty of deliberation.
