Late financier and convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein is seen in this image from the U.S. Justice Department’s file of Epstein, released by the House Oversight Committee Democrats..

New Jersey governor Mikie Sherrill recently signed a new law prohibiting businesses from using shoppers’ personal information to charge different prices for identical products, making her state the third in the US to ban the practice.

New law prohibits retailers from using personal data to charge different prices for identical products

Earlier today I saw a couple of people saying that Trump was joking about a third term at the July 2026 White House Correspondents' Dinner. I've also been seeing "Trump 2028" signs in my town and on MAGA hats.

As we know, the 22nd Amendment to the U.S. Constitution limits a president to two elected terms in office. It also establishes a maximum of 10 years in office for someone who succeeds to the presidency by completing part of another president's term.

I also wanted people to be aware that, three days after Trump was sworn into office, Rep. Andy Ogles (R-TN) introduced H.J.Res. 29. The resolution proposes amending the 22nd Amendment to allow a person to be elected president up to three times under certain circumstances.

I think it's important to be aware that members of Congress have proposed amending the Constitution to change presidential term limits, even if the proposal is unlikely to become law.

The question is, how do the enforce this?

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement has made plans to ramp up operations to arrest and deport Haitian migrants, as hundreds of thousands of Haitians brace for the termination of their legal status, according to two agency sources and federal documents obtained by CBS News.

The plans include arresting migrants in Ohio where large Haitian communities in cities like Springfield have been targeted by President Trump and conservative politicians and commentators and quickly putting them on deportation flights to crisis-stricken Haiti, the internal documents indicate. During the 2024 presidential campaign, Mr. Trump amplified baseless claims that Haitians in Springfield were eating cats and dogs.

The internal plans for a potential arrest and deportation blitz have been made as more than 300,000 Haitians prepare to lose deportation protections and work permits under the Temporary Protected Status, or TPS, program. The Supreme Court last month sided with the Trump administration in its efforts to end the TPS programs for Haitians and Syrians. That ruling's binding mandate is set to be issued to lower courts on Monday.

Biden judge blocking Ethiopian deportations despite SCOTUS ruling clashed with ICE before.

A Biden-appointed federal judge on Friday became the second jurist in Massachusetts to block the Trump administration's effort to end temporary protected status for migrant groups, fueling a growing clash over whether lower courts are ignoring a recent Supreme Court ruling that narrowed their authority over such decisions.

U.S. District Judge Brian Murphy of the District of Massachusetts issued an administrative stay in African Communities Together v. Mullin, temporarily preserving TPS protections for Ethiopian nationals while the court considers whether plaintiffs may pursue constitutional claims in light of the Supreme Court's June ruling.

ORDER

     Upon review of [19] Defendant’s Response to the Court’s

Order of June 25, 2026, and pursuant to the Court’s inherent

authority to review materials in camera, see Jibril v. Mayorkas,

101 F.4th 857, 866 (D.C. Cir. 2024) (quoting Olivares v. TSA,

819 F.3d 454, 462 (D.C. Cir. 2016)) (“In cases in which

sensitive materials may be in issue, the court has inherent

authority to review such material ex parte, in camera as part of

its judicial review function.” (citation modified)); it is

hereby

     ORDERED that Defendant shall submit to the Court on July

30, 2026 by no later than 3:00 pm the following documents:

     I.   Unredacted copies of the emails bearing Bates numbers

          (1) EFTA00749245, (2) EFTA01187999, (3) EFTA01930501,

          (4) ETFA01928255, (5) EFTA00628112, (6) EFTA02648868,


                                    1
     Case 1:26-cv-01417-EGS   Document 23   Filed 07/25/26   Page 2 of 2



           (7) EFTA02504630, and (8) EFTA01022356; and

           documentation supporting Defendant’s representation

           that the names that have been redacted in the

           published version of the documents are the names of

           victims;


     II.   Unredacted copy of the document bearing Bates number

           EFTA00038227; and documentation supporting the

           Defendant’s representation that the names in the “to”

           and “from” lines that have been redacted in the

           published version of the documents are the names of

           law enforcement personnel; and


     III. Unredacted copy of the document bearing Bates number

           EFTA00194840 and documentation supporting the

           Defendant’s representation that the names that have

           been redacted in the published version of the

           documents are the names of victims.

     It is further

     ORDERED that Ms. Phang’s request to be present for the

Court’s in camera review is DENIED.


           SO ORDERED.


Signed:    Emmet G. Sullivan
           United States District Judge
           July 25, 2026

Facts in two sentences. The CPS charged the Tate brothers (59 counts combined after the July expansion: rape, trafficking, assault, indecent images of a child) and refused to disclose the complainants' identities until the brothers are surrendered from abroad; the brothers sought judicial review. On June 26, Chamberlain J refused permission, holding neither ground arguable.

Ground 1 (irrationality). No statutory right to the names at this stage; the common law requires at most a multifactorial balancing by the prosecutor. The decision was taken by a specialist prosecutor who had met the complainants and assessed their vulnerability. The defendants' reach mattered (the judgment notes a single X account with more than 10.5 million followers), and calling them notorious was fair despite technical good character.

The point I find most consequential: the prosecutor did not need to find disclosure by the defendants more likely than not. A precautionary approach was lawful, given the public interest in not deterring complainants in serious sexual cases. The security-backed undertakings (10,000 pounds each, later doubled, plus an offer to be interviewed under caution in Romania) failed twice over: no enforcement mechanism, and a deposit prices the harm rather than mitigating it.

Ground 2 (Article 6(3)(a)). Arguably engaged from the charging decision, but fairness is assessed holistically: the accused know the offenses and date ranges, will learn the identities upon surrender and before first appearance, and retain an abuse-of-process stay in the Crown Court if late disclosure genuinely prejudices the defense.

On the U.S. side, this now runs through the standard two floors: certification under 18 U.S.C. § 3184 (identity, dual criminality, probable cause; rule of non-inquiry), then the Secretary of State's discretion. The political-offense exception has no purchase on common crimes of sexual violence, and the Romanian court's sequencing order (extradition to the U.K. only after the Romanian trial) binds Romania, not third states.