in the courts

Lawyers for President Donald Trump's administration have withdrawn subpoenas attempting to compel testimony from New York Times reporters who wrote about security concerns involving the new Air Force One plane.

The move came as a federal judge questioned why Trump officials were seeking records from three journalists and their families.

A federal appeals court has revived a major challenge to the U.S. military’s HIV enlistment ban, reopening a closely watched case that could determine whether people living with HIV can continue to be categorically barred from serving.

In an order issued May 18, the full U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit agreed to rehear Wilkins v. Hegseth, vacating a February ruling by a three-judge panel that upheld the Pentagon’s restrictions on recruits living with HIV. The rare move resets the case and gives advocates another opportunity to dismantle one of the military’s last remaining HIV-specific exclusions.

Attorneys for former CNN host turned independent journalist Don Lemon argued in a court filing Wednesday that recent examples of grand jury misconduct by the U.S. Department of Justice across the country warrant the release of transcripts from the normally secretive proceedings in his case.

Lemon pleaded not guilty in February to federal civil rights charges, following a protest at a Minnesota church where an Immigration and Customs Enforcement official is a pastor. He is one of 39 people charged in the January incident.

Lemon insists he was at the Cities Church in St. Paul to chronicle the Jan. 18 protest but was not a participant.

Lemon and another independent journalist, Georgia Fort, filed a motion in February seeking transcripts of the grand jury proceedings that resulted in the indictments against them and seven others.

In the latest filing in U.S. District Court in Minneapolis, Lemon’s attorneys argue that “the past 15 months have seen an unprecedented and growing distrust in the Justice Department’s use of the grand jury process.” For that reason, the transcripts from Lemon’s grand jury should be released, his attorneys said.

WASHINGTON ‒ A bipartisan group of 35 federal judges asked a federal court in Florida to reopen the legal case between President Donald Trump and the IRS and investigate whether the two parties' out-of-court settlement was an act of fraud against the court.

In a May 27 court filing, the ex-judges contend Trump and coplaintiffs failed to mention a planned settlement in their motion to withdraw the lawsuit against the IRS. In exchange for Trump voluntarily withdrawing the lawsuit, the Department of Justice last week agreed to create a much-criticized $1.766 billion "anti-weaponization" fund that could funnel payments to Trump's political allies.

"The Court was deceived," the 24-page motion reads, adding that the settlement "commandeers the contrived sum of $1.776 billion from the United States Treasury, to be handed out to recipients chosen by a commission effectively controlled by the President."

While the Trump administration has argued that new restrictions on the size of federal student loans will lower tuition costs, public health officials and Democrats say the measures will exacerbate the country’s serious nursing shortage.

As such, a group of 24 Democratic-led states and the District of Columbia recently sued the federal government seeking to block the new rule, which is set to take effect on 1 July.

A federal judge in Tennessee on Friday dismissed criminal charges against Kilmar Abrego García, an immigrant who was wrongfully deported to El Salvador.

Abrego Garcia was charged last year with human smuggling after being returned to the U.S. The charges stem from a 2022 traffic stop in Tennessee. He didn't face charges then, but the Justice Department reopened an investigation into the traffic stop after a federal judge in Maryland ordered the Trump administration to facilitate his return from El Salvador.

In his ruling Friday, U.S. District Judge Waverly Crenshaw said the actions by then-Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche "taints the investigation with a vindictive motive."

"The reopening of the closed HSI investigation is the source of the vindictiveness," Crenshaw said, referring to Homeland Security Investigations, which conducts federal criminal probes.

Crenshaw said the government would not have prosecuted Abrego Garcia if not for his successful lawsuit challenging his deportation to El Salvador.

"Blanche's now unrebutted public statements tying the reopened investigation to Abrego's successful lawsuit taints the investigation with a vindictive motive," Crenshaw said. "The evidence before this Court sadly reflects an abuse of prosecuting power."

A federal appeals court has temporarily blocked the re-detention of Mahmoud Khalil as his legal team prepares to petition his case with the US supreme court.

The decision on Tuesday from the third circuit court of appeals gives the 31-year-old activist and US green card holder a temporary reprieve as the broader legal fight over his detention and immigration status continues.

Two police officers who helped defend the U.S. Capitol from an attack by a mob of Trump supporters sued on Wednesday to block anyone — including Jan. 6, 2021, rioters — from receiving payouts from a new $1.776 billion settlement fund for people who claim to be victims of politically motivated prosecutions.

The officers' attorneys filed the federal lawsuit a day after Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche defended the fund's creation during a congressional hearing. Blanche, a personal attorney for President Donald Trump before joining the Justice Department, wouldn't rule out the possibility that rioters who assaulted police on Jan. 6 would be eligible for fund payouts.

The lawsuit claims the government's "Anti-Weaponization Fund" is an illegal slush fund that Trump will use to "finance the insurrectionists and paramilitary groups that commit violence in his name." It describes the fund's creation as "the most brazen act of presidential corruption this century" and calls for dissolving it.

The judge found four of six challenged regulations to be unlawful, saying they contradict the text of the ESA or were “arbitrary and capricious.” Some of these regulations included provisions where federal agencies could propose non-binding plans to protect species from development projects or regulations that could shrink parts of critical habitats.

“The moment Executive Order 35 was issued, our coalition didn’t hesitate. ​The Virginia Election Protection Coalition, under the leadership of the Virginia Civic Engagement Table (VCET), mobilized immediately, standing shoulder to shoulder with neighbors and organizations on the frontlines of this fight," said Michelle Moffit, director of civic engagement for VCET. "We knocked doors, made calls, sent postcards, and had real conversations about what this order meant for our communities — making sure every eligible voter could check their registration status and re-register if they’d been wrongfully purged. That swift, coordinated response is community care in action: showing up for democracy, for each other, and for every Virginian whose voice deserves to be heard."