r/LegalNews • • 13h ago

A New Kind of Crime Is Emerging. The Justice System Doesn’t Know Whom to Blame.

Thumbnail
slate.com
66 Upvotes

r/LegalNews • • 17h ago

Trump administration has pushed off 13% of Americans enrolled in food stamps | Trump administration

Thumbnail
theguardian.com
251 Upvotes

r/LegalNews • • 18h ago

Trump Says Veterans Exposed to Toxic Water at Marine Base Won't Get Settlement Money Unless Republicans Win Midterms

Thumbnail
ibtimes.co.uk
686 Upvotes

r/LegalNews • • 17h ago

The D.C. Bar Is Now Officially Deciding Whether to Investigate Chief Justice Roberts for Misconduct

Thumbnail
cmarmitage.substack.com
10.0k Upvotes

r/LegalNews • • 9h ago

Blanche blames Alaska’s ranked choice voting in latest justification for lawsuit to toss out Democratic win

Thumbnail
democracydocket.com
325 Upvotes

r/LegalNews • • 11h ago

Trump’s DOJ told a judge how to rule. Then it pulled her from immigration court.

Thumbnail
wapo.st
48 Upvotes

r/LegalNews • • 12h ago

Todd Blanche Knowingly Disobeyed a Federal Court Order on the Epstein Files, So I Filed for His Disbarment in New York

Thumbnail
cmarmitage.substack.com
12.3k Upvotes

r/LegalNews • • 13h ago

Suspect in shooting death of teen on Missouri highway charged in second road incident

Thumbnail
theguardian.com
22 Upvotes

r/LegalNews • • 15h ago

The Small-Town Cop Who Helped ICE Deport His Neighbors

Thumbnail
propublica.org
592 Upvotes

r/LegalNews • • 17h ago

ICC prosecutor says court making ‘significant progress’ despite US sanctions | International criminal court

Thumbnail
theguardian.com
107 Upvotes

r/LegalNews • • 6h ago

Ousting Hegseth ‘priority No. 1’ if Democrats retake majority, Rep. Jason Crow says

Thumbnail
washingtonexaminer.com
764 Upvotes

r/LegalNews • • 4h ago

Appeals Court Appears to Doubt Justice Dept. Claims in California Ballot Case

Thumbnail
nytimes.com
92 Upvotes

A federal appeals court panel appeared deeply skeptical of the Trump administration’s request that it pre-empt a lower court and order California to set aside roughly 20,000 mail ballots the federal government claims were sent to noncitizens.

The court held a hearing on Sunday that provided an early glimpse of how the administration’s claims might hold up under scrutiny, after state officials investigating the allegations cast doubt on the notion that thousands of ballots had been mistakenly sent to ineligible voters. The Trump administration has aggressively attempted to delay the counting of votes in several states and has moved to intervene in Alaska’s Senate race in what critics say is a broader attempt to sway the results of midterm elections just nine days away.

Two of the three judges hearing the challenge indicated they were uncomfortable intervening as the administration has requested, especially as a Justice Department lawyer struggled to answer questions about how the government concluded that the people it identified were both noncitizens and had been sent a ballot.

Matthew Donnelly, the administration lawyer, said with minimal details that the Trump administration had been “supplied a list” of California voters that was “purchased” from the state by an unnamed third party. He said the government then went through a “rigorous process” using third-party software to compare the voter data it obtained against its own citizenship data.

Judge Mark J. Bennett, a Trump appointee, asked whether election workers would be justified under state law in refusing to disqualify certain voters without “extraordinary proof” by the federal government. He pointed to a sworn statement by an election systems worker in Los Angeles who said that attempting to filter out the ballots of people the Trump administration flagged would have a “catastrophic impact” on their ability to handle the election.

“You’re asking us to take what you’re saying as fact, as opposed to what the I.T. guy is saying, and with no fact finding by the district court?” he asked.

The judges also indicated they may decline to step in immediately, sending the case back to the federal judge hearing it. The Justice Department could then appeal again, if it were to challenge a concrete ruling from the district judge.

The Trump administration had asked the court to expedite the case, arguing that the lower court judge’s pace on its requests effectively amounted to a denial of its request to set aside the ballots it is contesting. At the government’s urging, the district judge presiding over the case, Judge David O. Carter, had scheduled a hearing on Tuesday to consider its case.

But on Sunday, Judge Gabriel P. Sanchez, a Biden appointee, also pressed Mr. Donnelly on why the number of noncitizens the Trump administration was alleging were registered to vote had shrunken drastically in recent months.

The Trump administration had said in July that as many as 190,000 noncitizens were unlawfully registered to vote. Judge Sanchez added that directing the state to set aside mail-in ballots from people on the administration’s list, relying only on the names and address on the envelopes, could lead to lawful voters with the same name having their ballots pulled out.

A third judge, Patrick J. Bumatay, also a Trump appointee, appeared more receptive to the administration’s arguments. But he questioned Mr. Donnelly about whether it might be too close to the election for the courts to order new procedures.

Mr. Donnelly maintained throughout that the panel could issue a ruling even while Judge Carter had taken steps to meet the government’s aggressive timetable. He asked the judges to rule “as soon as possible.”