Latest news with #UnitedStatesConstitution
Business Wire
13 hours ago
- Business
- Business Wire
Ellis George LLP: Proven Problem Solver, Gubernatorial Candidate Villaraigosa Stands on First Amendment to Fight Trademark Suit by Political Rival
LOS ANGELES--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Democratic California Gubernatorial candidate Antonio Villaraigosa, the former Los Angeles Mayor and Speaker of the California Assembly, demanded in a court filing (Case No. 2:25-cv-03790) the dismissal of a lawsuit seeking to prevent him from using the phrase 'proven problem solver' in his campaign for California governor. 'Cloobeck's lawsuit is without merit, and his shotgun attempt to register a trademark on some 70 phrases is an insult to the First Amendment." Share In his motion to dismiss filed by Ellis George LLP, Century City, CA, Mr. Villaraigosa says the commonly used phrase 'proven problem solver' is not subject to trademark protection and that preventing him from using the phrase infringes on his rights under the First Amendment of the United States Constitution. Political opponent Stephen Cloobeck earlier filed to try to trademark the phrase, 'I am a proven problem solver,' and filed his trademark infringement lawsuit against Mr. Villaraigosa and Antonio Villaraigosa for Governor 2026 on April 29, 2025. Additionally, in preparing the filing, attorneys for Mr. Villaraigosa uncovered a number of occasions, sometimes sordid, where Mr. Cloobeck has used the courts and legal system in an attempt to weaken political, business and even personal rivals. Villaraigosa lawyer Eric M. George stated: 'Cloobeck's lawsuit is without merit, and his shotgun attempt to register a trademark on some 70 phrases is an insult to the First Amendment. Commonly-used words, phrases, speech that are part of political debate and elections cannot be trademarked. Californians are entitled to and deserve robust public debate from candidates when electing a governor.' According to the brief filed by Villaraigosa, '(U)nder Mr. Cloobeck's urged scenario, Mr. Villaraigosa would be violating a court order by describing himself as a 'proven problem solver' in a press conference, in campaign literature, in response to a journalist's questions, or in a campaign debate. To such draconian requests, Mr. Villaraigosa responds: 'Not in this country. Not under our First Amendment—no matter the bullying or wealth used in an attempt to silence a candidate for elected office. And not in keeping with anything I have witnessed during my more than 30 years of public service-including as Mayor of Los Angeles and as Speaker of the Assembly.'' In disputing Mr. Cloobeck's claim on the 'proven problem solver' phrase, Mr. Villaraigosa's brief cites countless instances over prior decades in which politicians before him have used the phrase in speeches, campaign materials and interviews. Mr. Villaraigosa's brief also notes that Mr. Cloobeck's suit is part of a pattern of frivolous litigation to drain rivals of finance and resources. In a text to Mr. Villaraigosa, Mr. Cloobeck said he was prepared to fight this case 'to the Supreme Court… which has been my consistent business practice for decades upon decades.' Mr. Villaraigosa and his campaign seek to have the trademark suit dismissed immediately. About Ellis George LLP Ellis George LLP is an elite litigation and trial firm based in Los Angeles and with offices in San Francisco and New York. Whether plaintiff or defendant, individual, Fortune 500 corporation or entrepreneur, clients call upon Ellis George when seeking litigation counsel of the highest quality, creativity, dedication, and ethics. Visit for more information.
Yahoo
2 days ago
- General
- Yahoo
DOJ threatens California public schools with legal action over participation of trans athletes
The U.S. Department of Justice has warned California's public schools that permitting transgender students to participate in girls' sports could result in legal consequences. Harmeet K. Dhillon, assistant attorney general in the DOJ's Civil Rights Division, stated in a letter Monday that a bylaw from the California Interscholastic Federation, a state organization that oversees high school sports, permitting student-athletes to compete in CIF activities that align with their gender identity violates the 14th Amendment. 'The Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex. Knowingly depriving female students of athletic opportunities and benefits on the basis of their sex would constitute unconstitutional sex discrimination under the Equal Protection Clause,' the letter said. In the letter, Dhillon stated that the public school district must certify in writing by June 9 that the CIF will not implement the bylaw, 'to ensure compliance and avoid legal liability.' 'Let's be clear: sending a letter does not change the law,' California Superintendent of Public Instruction Tony Thurmond said in a statement. 'The DOJ's letter to school districts does not announce any new federal law, and state law on this issue has remained unchanged since 2013. California state law protects all students' access to participate in athletics in a manner that is consistent with their gender identity. We will continue to follow the law and ensure the safety of all of our athletes.' The latest back and forth between federal and state officials comes after President Donald Trump against 16-year-old AB Hernandez, a junior at Jurupa Valley High School, who won the girls' long jump and triple jump events at the California Interscholastic Federation's Southern Section Masters on May 24, qualifying for the state championships that will take place May 30-31, The Hill reported. Hernandez went on to win two gold medals and a silver medal at the state track and field finals on Saturday. In February, Trump signed an executive order that states that 'it is the policy of the United States to oppose male competitive participation in women's sports' and threatens to 'rescind all funds from educational programs that deprive women and girls of fair athletic opportunities.' California is one of 22 states that have laws requiring transgender students to participate in sports consistent with their gender identity. The law was signed by former Gov. Jerry Brown in 2013. According to Gov. Gavin Newsom's office, out of the 5.8 million students in the state's K-12 public school system, the number of active transgender student-athletes is estimated to be in the single digits. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
2 days ago
- Health
- Yahoo
Trump Administration Targets California After Trans Athlete Wins Track Events
The Trump administration is going after California following a 16-year-old trans athlete's victories in a state track and field championship over the weekend. The 16-year-old, AB Hernandez, a junior at Jurupa Valley High School in Riverside County, has made headlines and been at the center of protests in recent months simply for competing. Despite protests on Saturday, Hernandez won first place in the girls' high jump and triple jump at the State Track and Field Championships at Buchanan High School in Clovis, California. Hernandez also finished second in the long jump. But because of a new rule instituted by the California Interscholastic Federation, multiple other student athletes also received medals in the categories that Hernandez competed in. As such, Jillene Wetteland and Lelani Laruelle also won first place in the high jump, and Kira Gant Hatcher also won first in the triple jump. Brooke White also placed second in the long jump. 'A Biological Male competed in California Girls State Finals, WINNING BIG, despite the fact that they were warned by me not to do so. As Governor Gavin Newscum fully understands, large scale fines will be imposed!!!' the president wrote on Truth Social on Monday. On the same day, Harmeet K. Dhillon, the head of the Civil Rights Division at the Department of Justice, sent a transphobic letter to public school districts in California claiming that the state's law allowing students to compete in sports based on their gender identity rather than the identity assigned to them at birth is 'facially unconstitutional.' 'The Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex,' Dhillon, a legal adviser to Trump, an anti-voting rights and anti-LGBTQ rights extremist, argued in the letter. 'Knowingly depriving female students of athletic opportunities and benefits on the basis of their sex would constitute unconstitutional sex discrimination under the Equal Protection Clause.' 'Scientific evidence shows that upsetting the historical status quo and forcing girls to compete against males would deprive them of athletic opportunities and benefits because of their sex,' she also wrote, without clarifying where to find the evidence. The letter gives California a week to fall in line with the Justice Department's interpretation of the Equal Protection Clause, which seems to complement Trump's February executive order. Trump's order aims to block 'male competitive participation in women's sports' and 'rescind all funds from educational programs that deprive women and girls of fair athletic opportunities.' In a letter to superintendents and administrators in the state on Tuesday, Tony Thurmond, the California superintendent of public instruction, reportedly said that the department would review the request and respond by June 9, but that the letter isn't the law. According to The Athletic, Thurmond argued that the Equal Protection Clause 'does not require that athletic teams be segregated by 'biological sex.'' 'The DOJ assertions are not in themselves law, and the letter by itself cannot be an enforcement mechanism,' Thurmond also reportedly said. The news comes after the California Interscholastic Federation, California's high school sports governing body, expanded eligibility for the 2025 CIF State Track and Field Championships rather than excluding anyone from the competition. 'The CIF values all of our student-athletes and we will continue to uphold our mission of providing students with the opportunity to belong, connect, and compete while complying with California law and Education Code,' the organization continued. On Sunday, Nereyda Hernandez, AB Hernandez's mom, told local outlet KCRA that she was a Trump supporter, but her daughter's perspective and treatment changed her views. 'Just talking to AB, and I started analyzing things differently,' Nereyda Hernandez said. 'It's too much for me because we're people and I don't feel we're being treated as such.' She also told KCRA that the protests during her daughter's big day were a little distracting, but that she was 'proud of her.' 'A kid is more mature than a lot of these adults putting her in this situation. So I'm just happy, yeah, I could brag. That's my baby,' she added. Representatives for the Jurupa Unified School District and the California Interscholastic Federation, respectively, did not immediately respond to HuffPost's request for comment. California Sports Org Expands Finals Eligibility After Trump Tantrum Over Trans Athlete California Is Investigating Paramount Over Its Alleged Settlement Offer To Trump Judge Rules Federal Prisons Must Continue Providing Hormone Therapy To Transgender Inmates
Newsweek
29-05-2025
- Business
- Newsweek
Trump Official Erupts at Reporter Who Asked About Attacks on Judges
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. A senior White House trade official erupted on Thursday after a reporter questioned him about the administration's attacks on judges who issue rulings that run counter to President Donald Trump's agenda. The Context Multiple Trump administration officials and congressional Republicans renewed their attacks on the judiciary after the U.S. Court of International Trade unanimously ruled that Trump exceeded his authority when he levied sweeping global tariffs by invoking an emergency-powers law. The court ruled on the issue after two groups of plaintiffs—businesses and states—sued the Trump administration, accusing the president of violating the United States Constitution by sidestepping Congress to impose the tariffs. The court's three-judge panel ruled Wednesday that Trump does not have "unbounded authority" to levy the duties and ordered most of them to be paused. One of the judges is a Trump appointee. The other two were appointed by former Presidents Ronald Reagan and Barack Obama. Less than 24 hours later, a federal appeals court stayed the lower court's ruling, reinstating Trump's tariffs while it awaits arguments from the plaintiffs and defendants. What To Know Peter Navarro, senior counselor for trade and manufacturing and a key proponent of Trump's tariffs, was disparaging "rogue judges" on the trade court during an interview on Fox Business Network on Thursday, before the host cut in to let him know a federal appeals court had stayed the ruling. "As we expected, because they're wrong on the law..." Navarro said of the lower court ruling. White House trade counselor Peter Navarro speaks with reporters at the White House, Thursday, May 29, 2025, in Washington. White House trade counselor Peter Navarro speaks with reporters at the White House, Thursday, May 29, 2025, in Washington. AP/Evan Vucci Shortly after that interview, when Navarro was addressing reporters at the White House, The Independent's Andrew Feinberg grilled him about the administration's attacks on judges. "Every time you get a court decision you don't like, you and your colleagues come out here and rail against rogue judges—" Feinberg began, before Navarro cut him off. "See, who is this guy?" Navarro said while pointing at Feinberg. "Tell me who you are, sir." After Feinberg identified himself, Navarro said: "Ok, so, that is such a biased question. That is not a journalist question." "That was like an op-ed, sir, so I won't even respond to that," he said, while appearing to shoo Feinberg away. Peter Navarro snaps at @AndrewFeinberg after Feinberg points out that the administration always responds to court orders they don't like by railing against judges — Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) May 29, 2025 The White House also excoriated "unelected judges" in its initial statement responding to Wednesday's ruling from the trade court, telling Newsweek in a statement: "It is not for unelected judges to decide how to properly address a national emergency. President Trump pledged to put America First, and the Administration is committed to using every lever of executive power to address this crisis and restore American Greatness." What People Are Saying Kevin Hassett, the director of the National Economic Council, said on Fox News: "We're very pleased with the ruling. We expected it. The bottom line is that our U.S. trade representative, Jamieson Greer, is the best trade thinker in the business. President Trump's case is ironclad. The appeals court took almost no time at all, in fact, we're surprised it took until the end of the [trading] day for them to overturn this previous ruling." The Liberty Justice Center, which is representing several companies that sued to block the tariffs, said in a statement Thursday: The appeals court's ruling is "merely a procedural step as the court considers the government's request for a longer stay pending appeal." The statement continued: "We are confident the Federal Circuit will ultimately deny the government's motion shortly thereafter, recognizing the irreparable harm these tariffs inflict on our clients." What Happens Next Trump's global tariffs have been reinstated—for now—while the appeals court waits for both the plaintiffs and defendants to submit written arguments on blocking Trump's tariffs. The arguments must be filed by early June.
Yahoo
29-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Federal Job Seekers Will Be Quizzed on Trump's Executive Orders
(Bloomberg) — The Trump administration is adding four essay questions to applications for civil service jobs, asking applicants about their favorite executive orders and their commitment to government efficiency. NYC Congestion Toll Brings In $216 Million in First Four Months Now With Colorful Blocks, Tirana's Pyramid Represents a Changing Albania NY Wins Order Against US Funding Freeze in Congestion Fight The Economic Benefits of Paying Workers to Move NY Congestion Pricing Is Likely to Stay Until Year End During Court Case The essay requirements apply even to relatively lower-level jobs starting at the GS-5 pay scale or above — positions that can begin at base salaries as low as $32,357. Those jobs include nursing assistants, park rangers and firefighters. The new questions, outlined in a memo from the Office of Personnel Management on Thursday, include ones that could give insight into the applicant's political philosophy for civil service jobs that are supposed to be nonpartisan. Among them: 'How has your commitment to the Constitution and the founding principles of the United States inspired you to pursue this role within the Federal government? Provide a concrete example from professional, academic, or personal experience.' Another question, about how a job seeker would advance the president's executive orders or policy initiatives — is similar to a question asked of applicants for top political jobs as a loyalty test. It asks applicants to 'Identify one or two relevant Executive Orders or policy initiatives that are significant to you, and explain how you would help implement them if hired.' Two other questions ask how applicants would improve government efficiency and about their personal work ethic. Responses must be 200 words or fewer and the memo seeks to prevent any cheating. 'Applicants will be required to certify that they are using their own words, and did not use a consultant or AI,' the memo says, referring to artificial intelligence. The 30-page memo, from White House Domestic Policy Council Director Vince Haley and OPM acting director Charles Ezell, implements President Donald Trump's executive order ending diversity, equity and inclusion in federal hiring. The order also required that the government prioritize hiring people 'committed to improving the efficiency of the Federal government, passionate about the ideals of our American republic, and committed to upholding the rule of law and the United States Constitution.' But Trump is also reshaping the US government's workforce in other ways, overhauling the civil service system by giving him power to directly hire and fire as many as 50,000 jobs previously reserved for career federal employees. 'What we've seen is an overwhelming effort to cow the workforce and frankly ensure that there's a loyalty to the president of the day more than anything else,' said Max Stier, president of the Partnership for Public Service, a nonpartisan group focused on improving the federal workforce. Asking the new questions is 'deeply problematic,' he said. 'Bluntly, it's an almost partisan and ideological overlay without understanding the responsibilities they're hiring for.' For example, there's no reason why a dental hygienist at the Department of Veterans Affairs should have an understanding of Trump's executive orders, Stier said. Beyond the content of the questions, Stier said adding four essay questions to an already burdensome federal hiring process can only make it more difficult for the government to hire the best workers, calling it 'a recipe for dysfunction.' But OPM says the questions aren't much different from those any employer would ask to make sure that a prospective employee fits with company culture. 'It is a best practice in hiring to ask all applicants the same questions,' said OPM spokeswoman McLaurine Pinover. 'The answers can then be evaluated by the hiring manager and agency leadership to evaluate whether the candidate would be a good fit for the role.' The federal personnel agency said the plan's overall goal is to reduce the length of the hiring process to less than 80 days and create 'a federal workforce that reflects the highest standards of merit and service.' The memo also implements new skill-based assessments, consisting of at least two tests of technical skills for many jobs, and eliminates unnecessary college degree requirements for many positions. YouTube Is Swallowing TV Whole, and It's Coming for the Sitcom Mark Zuckerberg Loves MAGA Now. Will MAGA Ever Love Him Back? Millions of Americans Are Obsessed With This Japanese Barbecue Sauce Inside the First Stargate AI Data Center How Coach Handbags Became a Gen Z Status Symbol ©2025 Bloomberg L.P. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
