Latest news with #USDepartmentofJustice
Mint
a day ago
- Politics
- Mint
Trump Admin seeks Epstein, Maxwell grand jury testimony release amid growing controversy
In a move aimed at addressing mounting public pressure and criticism, US President Donald Trump's administration has asked two federal judges to unseal grand jury testimony in the sex trafficking cases of Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell. The request comes amid renewed controversy surrounding the late financier's connections and the US Department of Justice's recent acknowledgment that no definitive 'Epstein client list' exists. Late Tuesday night, federal prosecutors filed motions with US District Judges Richard Berman and Paul Engelmayer in Manhattan, urging them to permit the release of confidential grand jury transcripts. Prosecutors argued that the "abundant public interest" in the Epstein-Maxwell case justified lifting the usual secrecy surrounding grand jury proceedings. The effort follows Trump's public pledge to declassify Epstein-related documents if reelected. Earlier this month, Trump directed Attorney General Pam Bondi to push for the release of grand jury materials, a move spurred by the DOJ's announcement that there is no incriminating client list — a statement that angered many of Trump's conservative backers who suspect a cover-up. While grand jury proceedings typically remain sealed to protect the integrity of investigations, exceptions can be made when public interest outweighs privacy concerns. Ghislaine Maxwell, who is currently serving a 20-year sentence in a Florida prison after her 2021 conviction for sex trafficking, has filed an appeal with the US Supreme Court seeking to overturn her conviction. She had pleaded not guilty. Meanwhile, Deputy US Attorney General Todd Blanche — formerly Trump's personal lawyer — recently met with Maxwell to assess whether she holds information implicating other individuals. Maxwell's attorney, David Markus, has not disclosed the contents of those discussions. Last week, US District Judge Robin Rosenberg in Florida denied a separate request to unseal records from earlier grand jury investigations into Epstein dating back to 2005 and 2007. The judge concluded that the case did not meet the narrow legal standards that would allow the release of such material.
Time of India
2 days ago
- Business
- Time of India
"Simply not a..." Apple's 49-page reply to DOJ argues that US government "fundamentally misunderstand" iPhone
Apple has formally responded to the US Department of Justice's antitrust lawsuit, calling the government's smartphone monopoly allegations both "misguided" and potentially "dangerous." The iPhone maker's formal court filing dismisses the government's monopoly allegations as both "wrong on the facts and the law" while arguing the DOJ misunderstands how modern smartphones actually work. The company warns the lawsuit could "set a dangerous precedent" and fundamentally reshape how Americans experience technology. The tech giant's 49-page response systematically challenges the government's case, repeatedly stating that regulators "fundamentally misunderstand" the technologies they're trying to regulate. Apple argues the case isn't about consumer protection, it's about forcing the company to redesign its products to benefit competitors at users' expense. "This lawsuit seeks to attack a random collection of Apple's design choices, degrade the privacy and security benefits of iPhone that customers value, and eliminate the competitive differentiation and consumer choice that currently exist in the marketplace," the company states in its filing. DOJ's five claims gets reply from Apple The government's case focuses on five areas where prosecutors claim Apple stifles competition: super apps, cloud gaming, messaging apps, smartwatches, and digital wallets. Apple counters that federal prosecutors simply don't understand how the iPhone ecosystem actually works. Take super apps, those multi-service platforms that can handle everything from messaging to payments in one place. The DOJ claims Apple blocks them, but Apple fires back that these apps are "widely available and enormously popular on iPhone already." Cloud gaming? Apple says it not only allows game streaming but actively supports it both through web browsers and dedicated App Store apps. The messaging controversy gets particularly heated. While the DOJ points to the infamous "green bubble" stigma affecting Android users, Apple maintains that third-party messaging apps like WhatsApp and Signal thrive on its platform. The company even notes it recently added RCS support, directly addressing one of the government's key complaints. Apple insists its design choices stem from protecting user experience, not crushing competition. Apple contests "monopolist" characterisation Apple directly challenges the core premise of the case. "Apple is simply not a monopolist," the company states, arguing the DOJ uses misleading metrics that measure market share by revenue rather than actual device sales. The company suggests prosecutors are creating artificial market categories, separating "smartphones" from "performance smartphones" in ways that "do not correspond to economic reality." Apple argues this approach ignores major competitors like Samsung and Google in the US, along with various lower-cost manufacturers globally. Apple characterises the lawsuit as benefiting "a few large companies free-riding on Apple's technology and innovation" rather than genuinely helping consumers. The filing suggests the case represents an attempt by competitors to gain through litigation what they couldn't achieve through market competition. As the case now enters the discovery phase, both sides will gather evidence for what could become a years-long legal battle. Apple's response indicates the company intends to vigorously defend what it calls the "careful balance" that has made the iPhone a popular consumer product. AI Masterclass for Students. Upskill Young Ones Today!– Join Now
The Guardian
2 days ago
- Politics
- The Guardian
UCLA agrees to $6.5m settlement with Jewish students over pro-Palestinian protests
The University of California, Los Angeles, will pay nearly $6.5m to settle a lawsuit by Jewish students and a professor who said the university allowed antisemitic discrimination to take place on campus during last year's pro-Palestinian protests. The lawsuit alleged that with the 'knowledge and acquiescence' of university officials, protesters prevented Jewish students from accessing parts of campus, and made antisemitic threats. Under the settlement agreement announced on Tuesday, the university admitted it had 'fallen short' and agreed to pay $2.33m to eight groups that support UCLA's Jewish community, $320,000 to a campus initiative to fight antisemitism, and $50,000 to each plaintiff. 'We are pleased with the terms of today's settlement. The injunction and other terms UCLA has agreed to demonstrate real progress in the fight against antisemitism,' the parties said in a joint statement provided by the University of California. On Tuesday, the Trump administration announced the US Department of Justice's civil rights division found UCLA violated the equal protection clause of the 14th amendment and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 'by acting with deliberate indifference in creating a hostile educational environment for Jewish and Israeli students'. 'UCLA failed to take timely and appropriate action in response to credible claims of harm and hostility on its campus,' said Harmeet K. Dhillon, assistant attorney general of the justice department's civil rights division. The university has said that it is committed to campus safety and will continue to implement recommendations. UCLA was the site of massive protests last year amid a wave of campus demonstrations nationwide in response to the war in Gaza, in which Israeli forces have killed more than 60,000 Palestinians, which experts say is probably an undercount. The protests at UCLA attracted national attention, particularly after counter-protesters staged a violent attack on pro-Palestinian demonstrators. UCLA also faces a lawsuit from more than 30 pro-Palestinian protesters who say the university was negligent during the 'brutal mob assault' on the encampment and that officials did not intervene. 'This was four-plus hours of unmitigated violence while UCLA private security stood sometimes feet away and did nothing to protect the faculty, students and community members protesting genocide,' Thomas Harvey, a lawyer for the plaintiffs, said earlier this year. The lawsuit that was settled this week was filed last year. This spring the Department of Justice announced it would investigate the University of California system for possible antisemitic discrimination and violations of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The university said it had taken 'substantive action' to combat antisemitism, including publicizing information about campus bans on encampments, opposing calls to boycott Israel and publishing a systemwide anti-discrimination policy. 'Antisemitism, harassment and other forms of intimidation are antithetical to our values and have no place at the University of California. We have been clear about where we have fallen short, and we are committed to doing better moving forward,' said Janet Reilly, the UC board of regents chair. 'Today's settlement reflects a critically important goal that we share with the plaintiffs: to foster a safe, secure and inclusive environment for all members of our community and ensure that there is no room for antisemitism anywhere.'
Daily Mail
2 days ago
- Business
- Daily Mail
Florida heiress, 60, gets tiny prison sentence for hiding her $90MILLION fortune from IRS
A Florida heiress has been sentenced to just two and a half years behind bars after conspiring to hide more than $90 million from the IRS for more than a decade. Gilda Rosenberg, 60, of Golden Beach, pleaded guilty to orchestrating a massive fraud scheme along with her family, hiding millions in secret bank accounts across multiple countries including the UK and Switzerland to evade the US government. On Friday she was handed a surprisingly light sentence of just 30 months in prison, according to the US Department of Justice. While Rosenberg's family had maintained offshore accounts since the 1970s, she became the official owner and authorized signer on several of these accounts by the late 1990s. The dual US-Colombian citizen was aware that her family had failed to inform the US government about these foreign accounts. By law they were required to pay taxes on any income earned from those assets - something they never did. Then, in the 2000s, Rosenberg's family moved their assets into accounts in the UK and Switzerland, openly informing the Swiss bank they were US residents intent on concealing their assets from authorities. Their assets remained secure and undiscovered inside the Swiss account for more than a decade, until the bank eventually closed it in 2013 due to their status as US residents. But the scheme didn't stop there. After the Swiss account was closed, the family moved their assets across multiple countries, including Israel, Geneva and Andorra. According to the DOJ Rosenberg was the official account holder for assets held in Geneva and Andorra, where she opened faulty accounts by falsely claiming to be solely a Colombian citizen and concealing her US citizenship. During this period her family continued filing false tax returns that failed to report income generated by their international accounts. As the scheme persisted Rosenberg continued to evade taxes - particularly by transferring assets between family members. She signed documents to make it appear as though she and a relative were gifting hidden assets to another family member after he surrendered his US citizenship. The scheme spanned 12 years, from 2010 to 2022, and involved unreported income exceeding $5.5million belonging to Rosenberg and two family members, resulting in a tax loss of $1,927,342. In March she pleaded guilty to conspiring to defraud the IRS. Prior to her sentencing Rosenberg agreed to pay $1,927,342 to the IRS. Shealso agreed to pay interest on the restitution. As part of her plea agreement Rosenberg was also ordered to pay $5,857,045 in civil penalties for failing to disclose her foreign bank accounts. Rosenberg (pictured with vending machine), whose family owns Miami-based Gilly Vending Inc, also pleaded guilty last year to a separate conspiracy charge after filing false reports on vending machine sales of snacks and beverages in order to avoid paying full commissions Rosenberg, whose family owns Miami-based Gilly Vending Inc, also pleaded guilty last year to a separate conspiracy charge tied to a scheme to defraud the US Army and Air Force Exchange Service in Texas. According to the Miami Herald, Rosenberg filed false reports on vending machine sales of snacks and beverages in order to avoid paying the full amount due. In 2019 a civil court judge ordered Rosenberg's company to pay NBA star Alonzo Mourning approximately $590,000 after he sued over an unpaid 2015 deal that named him the face of the company's healthy vending program, as reported by Local 10 News. In a case brought by federal prosecutors in Texas last year Rosenberg admitted as part of a plea deal that she conspired to defraud the Army and Air Force Exchange Service, the agency that operates vending machines on US Army, Air Force and Space Force bases worldwide. Rosenberg is still awaiting sentencing in the Texas case, scheduled for Wednesday, though the sentence is expected to run concurrently with the prison term imposed by US District Judge Beth Bloom.
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
3 days ago
- Politics
- First Post
Trump's deep cuts threaten efforts to combat gun violence even as US battles mass shootings
The Trump administration has abruptly terminated over half of all federal funding for gun violence prevention, cutting $158 million in grants to community programs across major US cities. read more A bus belonging to the Think Outside Da Block gun violence prevention program sits parked outside of the organization's office, in Chicago, Illinois, US. Reuters The Trump administration has cancelled more than half of all federal funding for gun violence prevention programs in the United States, including $158 million in grants to nonprofits in cities such as New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, Washington, DC, and Baltimore. According to official data analysed by Reuters, 69 of the 145 community violence intervention (CVI) contracts totalling more than $300 million given by the US Department of Justice were abruptly discontinued in April. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD The elimination of CVI programs is part of a broader rollback at the department's grant-issuing Office of Justice Programs, which terminated 365 grants valued at $811 million in April, impacting a range of public safety and victim services programs. A DOJ official told Reuters the gun violence grants were eliminated because they 'no longer effectuate the program's goals or agency's priorities.' Thousands of Office of Justice Programs grants are under review, the official said, and are being evaluated, among other things, on how well they support law enforcement and combat violent crime. The majority of CVI grants were originally funded through the 2022 Bipartisan Safer Communities Act and part of a push by former President Joe Biden to stem the rise of gun violence in America, including establishing the first White House Office for Gun Violence Prevention. That office was 'dismantled on day one' of Trump taking office, said former deputy director of the office, Greg Jackson. Prior to the Biden-era funding, most gun violence prevention programs were funded on the state level. 'These programs five years ago, if they did exist, had very small budgets and didn't have large, multimillion-dollar federal investments,' said Michael-Sean Spence, managing director of community safety initiatives at Everytown for Gun Safety, which has worked with 136 community-based violence intervention organizations since 2019. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Twenty-five of the groups were impacted by funding cuts. The grants supported a wide range of CVI programming to prevent shootings such as training outreach teams to de-escalate and mediate conflict, social workers to connect people to services and employment, and hospital-based programs for gun violence victims. '[It's] preventing them from doing the work in service of those that need it the most at the most urgent, and deadliest time of the year,' Spence said, referring to summer months when there's typically an uptick in shootings. Gun violence deaths in the US grew more than 50% from 2015 to the pandemic-era peak of 21,383 in 2021, according to the Gun Violence Archive., opens new tab Since then, deadly shootings have been in decline, falling to 16,725 in 2024, which is more in line with the pre-pandemic trend. As of May 2025, deaths are down 866 from the same period last year. Defunded programs While cities like New York City, Chicago and Los Angeles received the bulk of gun violence prevention funding, southern cities like Memphis, Selma, Alabama and Baton Rouge, Louisiana also received millions and were more reliant on the grants due to limited state support for the programs, experts told Reuters. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD 'Very few state legislatures are passing funding right now, that's why the federal cuts were such a tragic hit,' said Amber Goodwin, co-founder of Community Violence Legal Network, who's part of a coalition of lawyers working to get grants reinstated. Nearly a dozen interviews with legal experts, gun violence interventionists, and former DOJ officials said funding cuts threaten the long-term sustainability of community violence intervention initiatives that have taken years to establish and are embedded in predominantly Black and Latino communities. Pha'Tal Perkins founded Think Outside Da Block in 2016, a nonprofit based in Chicago's violence-plagued Englewood neighborhood. Federal funding allowed him to hire full-time staff, but when grants were stripped, he was forced to lay off five team members. 'Being able to have outreach teams at specific places at the right time to have conversations before things get out of hand is what people don't see,' Perkins said. The programs initiated in 2022 marked the first time grassroots organizations could apply for federal community violence prevention funding directly, without going through law enforcement or state intermediaries, according to three former DOJ officials. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Aqeela Sherrills, co-founder of Community Based Public Safety Collective in Los Angeles, provided training on implementing violence intervention strategies to nearly 94 grantees, including states, law enforcement agencies, and community-based organizations. Prior to the cuts, 'we were onboarding 30 new grantees through the federal government. Many of these cities and law enforcement agencies have no idea how to implement CVI,' Sherrills said. Police support Some critics of CVI argue that the programs aren't effective and that federal dollars would be better spent on law enforcement to stymie gun violence. Others view the initiatives as inherently 'anti-gun' and are 'nothing more than a funnel to send federal tax dollars to anti-gun non-profits who advocate against our rights,' said Aidan Johnston, federal affairs director of the Gun Owners of America. That view is not universally shared by law enforcement, however. In June, a letter signed by 18 law enforcement groups and police chiefs in Louisville, Minneapolis, Tucson and Omaha called on Attorney General Pam Bondi to reinstate funding that has resulted in 'measurable and significant reductions in violence and homicides.' STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD 'These aren't feel-good programs; they're lifesaving, law-enforcement-enhancing strategies that work,' they wrote. Columbia, South Carolina Deputy Police Chief Melron Kelly, who was unaware of the letter, told Reuters that CVI programs were relatively new in the city, but as a result, the police began collaborating more with community organizations. Kelly said Columbia's CVI programs focused on preventing retaliatory shootings that can escalate a neighborhood conflict. 'Public safety really starts in the neighborhood before police get involved. CVI work is very important; we've seen a drastic reduction in violent crime post-COVID and shootings are almost at a 10-year low,' Kelly said. Now, organizations are trying to figure out how to keep the doors open now that federal money has run dry. Durell Cowan, executive director of HEAL 901, a community violence prevention nonprofit in Memphis, received a $1.7 million CVI grant in October 2024. Cowan's organization received $150,000 in federal funds since the beginning of the year before his grant was canceled. He's had to dip into his personal savings to keep his 14-person staff on payroll, he said. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Recently, he secured funding from an out-of-state nonprofit as well as a $125,000 emergency grant from the city. Still, he may be forced to conduct layoffs if federal government dollars don't start flowing again. 'We shouldn't be pulling from our own personal finances and life insurance policies to cover the cost of public safety,' he said.
