ReportWire

Tag: Lawsuits

  • Judge grants Duke’s bid to block QB Darian Mensah’s transfer until Feb. 2 hearing in contract fight

    [ad_1]

    A judge has granted Duke’s request for a temporary restraining order blocking quarterback Darian Mensah from enrolling to play football at another school until a court hearing set for early February.

    The school filed a lawsuit Monday in Durham County Superior Court against Mensah seeking to block his efforts to transfer and reach a contract with another school to play elsewhere next season. The complaint came three days after Mensah reversed his previously announced plan to return to the Blue Devils after leading them to the Atlantic Coast Conference title.

    Judge Michael O’Foghludha signed an order Wednesday that prevents Mensah from enrolling elsewhere, signing a licensing deal with another school or taking any other action breaching the two-season contract Mensah signed with Duke running through 2026.

    The order, formalizing a verbal ruling from Tuesday’s hearing, didn’t grant Duke’s additional request seeking to block Mensah from entering his name into the transfer portal entirely. But he otherwise can’t take additional steps in the process of reaching a deal to play at a new school, with the order designed to “preserve the status quo” until a Feb. 2 hearing.

    “Mr. Mensah has an existing contract with Duke which the university intends to honor, and we expect he will do the same,” Duke said in a statement Wednesday. “The court-ordered temporary restraining order issued (Tuesday) ensures he does not violate his contract. The university is committed to supporting all our student-athletes, while expecting each of them to abide by their contractual obligations.”

    The school argued its contract with Mensah — signed in July 2025 — paid him for exclusive rights to market Mensah’s name, image and likeness (NIL) tied to playing college football. Duke’s lawsuit argued that the contract requires parties to go through arbitration before any dispute can be resolved.

    “This case arises out of the decision of a star quarterback in the increasingly complex world of college athletics,” the complaint states in its opening. “But at its core, this is a simple case that involves the integrity of contracts.”

    In an email to The Associated Press on Tuesday, sports-law attorney Darren Heitner, who has worked with Mensah, noted Duke’s request for a temporary restraining order preventing Mensah from entering the transfer portal had been denied. Later in the day, however, Heitner said on social media that Mensah “is not, for the time being” allowed to enroll or play football elsewhere before a decision by a different judge set to preside over the next hearing.

    Mensah, who transferred in from Tulane and even faced his former team, finished second in the Bowl Subdivision ranks by throwing for 3,973 yards while ranking tied for second with 34 passing touchdowns.

    The Mensah-Duke case is the latest in what is becoming a more frequent occurrence in the revenue-sharing era of college sports: legal fights over contracts between schools and players seeking to transfer.

    Earlier this month, Washington quarterback Demond Williams Jr. announced plans to transfer before changing his mind two days later, coming amid multiple reports that the school was prepared to pursue legal options to enforce Williams’ NIL contract.

    And in December, Missouri pass rusher Damon Wilson II filed a lawsuit claiming the athletic department at Georgia was trying to illegally punish him for entering the portal in January 2025.

    ___

    Get poll alerts and updates on the AP Top 25 throughout the season. Sign up here. AP college football: https://apnews.com/hub/ap-top-25-college-football-poll and https://apnews.com/hub/college-football

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Judge rules against lawmakers pressing for monitor to ensure release of Epstein files

    [ad_1]

    NEW YORK — A judge overseeing Ghislaine Maxwell’s criminal case said Wednesday that two members of Congress lacked the legal right to intervene and press their demand for a court-appointed observer to ensure the government complies with a new law ordering release of its files on Jeffrey Epstein.

    But the lawmakers are free to bring a civil lawsuit or work through the tools they have in Congress to improve oversight, U.S. District Judge Paul A. Engelmayer ruled.

    U.S. Reps. Ro Khanna, D-Calif., and Thomas Massie, R-Ky., had co-sponsored the Epstein Files Transparency Act that was signed into law by President Donald Trump in November. It required the public disclosure of files related to the sex trafficking investigations into Epstein, the late financier, and Maxwell, his longtime confidant.

    Engelmayer largely agreed with the Justice Department’s insistence that he had no authority to grant the congressmen’s request to speed the release of that material. They had urged Engelmayer to name an independent monitor to ensure that the government immediately released the more than 2 million documents it has identified as investigative materials. Khanna and Massie said the slow disclosure of the documents violated the law and had caused “serious trauma to survivors.”

    A month after the deadline had passed for the materials to be made public, only about 12,000 documents have been made public. The department has said the release of the files was delayed by redactions required to protect the identities of those who were abused.

    Engelmayer said the questions raised by Khanna and Massie raised about whether the department was complying with the law were “undeniably important and timely.” But, he said, the way in which the members of Congress were trying to intervene was not permitted.

    The judge, who inherited Maxwell’s case after the trial judge was appointed to an appeals court, ruled that has no authority to supervise the department’s compliance with the new law, and that Massie and Khanna have no standing, or legal right, to insinuate themselves into Maxwell’s case.

    Engelmayer said he has received letters and emails from Epstein abuse survivors in support of the lawmakers’ request for appointment of a neutral overseer.

    “These express concern that DOJ otherwise will not comply with the Act,” wrote the judge, who was nominated by Democratic President Barack Obama.

    The department has been “paying ‘lip service’ to the victims” and “failing to treat us ‘with the solicitude’ we deserve,” survivors wrote, according to Engelmayer.

    Maxwell is serving a 20-year prison sentence after her December 2021 sex trafficking conviction. She recently petitioned the federal court for her release, maintaining that new information has emerged that warrants her release. A jury found that she had helped to recruit girls for Epstein to abuse over the past quarter-century and had also participated in some of the abuse.

    Epstein died in a federal jail in New York in August 2019 as he awaited trial on sex trafficking charges. The death was ruled a suicide.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Tennessee Judge Grants Expanded Media Access to State-Run Executions

    [ad_1]

    A judge ruled Friday that Tennessee prison officials must grant expanded access to media members to view state-run executions, after a coalition of news organizations including The Associated Press sued on claims that state execution protocols unconstitutionally limit thorough and accurate reporting.

    Before Chancellor I’Ashea L. Myles’ order, reporters witnessing lethal injections were limited to a short time period during which they could view the execution process. The coalition’s lawsuit argued the protocols violate the public and press’s constitutional rights to witness the entirety of executions conducted by the Tennessee Department of Correction, “from the time the condemned enters the execution chamber until after the condemned is declared dead.”

    The lawsuit sought a judgment that the protocols are unconstitutional and an injunction to allow the press to see the full execution process. Myles’ order granted a temporary injunction allowing media members and other witnesses to see most of the execution process, with security procedures in place for those carrying out the procedures.

    The lawsuit, filed in Davidson County Chancery Court in Nashville, names as defendants Kenneth Nelsen, warden of Riverbend Maximum Security Institution in Nashville that houses Tennessee’s execution chamber, and Frank Strada, commissioner of the Tennessee Department of Correction.

    The department did not immediately respond to a request for comment sent after hours Friday to a department spokesperson.

    During previous executions, media members began seeing what happens once the condemned person is already strapped to a gurney and hooked up to IV lines. They don’t know at which precise moment the injections begin and those administering the injections are in a separate room.

    The protocol says that after the syringes of saline and pentobarbital are administered, a team leader signals to the warden and a five-minute waiting period begins. After that period, the blinds are closed, the camera is turned off and then the doctor comes in to determine if the person is dead. If that is the case, the warden announces on the intercom system that the sentence was carried out and witnesses are directed to exit.

    Essentially, the process granted witnesses a 10 to 15 minute window where they could observe the process.

    Prison officials argued that the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution does not grant the press a right of special access to information not regularly available to the public. They claimed that the restrictions are necessary because allowing the press to see the full execution would endanger prison security and people involved in the process.

    The judge’s order says members of the execution team shall wear a disposable protective suit covering the members’ regular work uniform, identification badge and hair. Team members also will be offered a mask “to further conceal his or her identity should they so choose to wear one,” the judge wrote.

    During executions involving lethal injection, curtains to the official witness room shall be opened to the execution chamber at 10 a.m., which, according to protocols, is when the inmate is secured with restraints on a gurney and the IV insertion process begins.

    The curtains must remain open until the pronouncement of death, the judge ruled.

    “This Court finds that a meaningful and full observation of executions allows the public to assess whether the state carries out death sentences in a lawful and humane manner and ensures that the execution process remains subject to democratic oversight,” the judge wrote.

    In addition to AP, the media coalition includes Gannett Co., Inc.; Nashville Public Media, Inc.; Nashville Public Radio; Scripps Media, Inc.; Six Rivers Media, LLC; and TEGNA INC.

    Copyright 2026 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

    Photos You Should See – January 2026

    [ad_2]

    Associated Press

    Source link

  • New York Attorney General Sues Trump Administration Over Offshore Wind Project Freeze

    [ad_1]

    NEW YORK (AP) — New York‘s attorney general sued the Trump administration on Friday over its decision to halt two major offshore wind projects expected to power more than 1 million homes in the state.

    State Attorney General Letitia James said in legal challenges filed in federal court in Washington that the U.S. Department of the Interior’s Dec. 22 order suspending construction on the projects off Long Island, citing national security concerns, was arbitrary and unwarranted.

    The Democrat said Sunrise Wind and Empire Wind projects had already cleared more than a decade of security and safety reviews by federal, state and local authorities. She said pausing them now threatens New York’s economy and energy grid, and she asked the court to intervene.

    “New Yorkers deserve clean, reliable energy, good-paying jobs, and a government that follows the law,” James said in a statement. “This reckless decision puts workers, families, and our climate goals at risk.”

    Spokespersons for the Interior Department and its Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, which are both named in the litigation, declined to comment Friday, citing the pending litigation.

    The Interior Department’s order last month suspended Sunrise Wind, Empire Wind and three other offshore wind projects under construction along the East Coast. The department maintains that the movement of massive turbine blades can cause radar interference called “clutter” that can obscure legitimate moving targets and generate false ones.

    Empire Wind is located about 14 miles (22.5 kilometers) southeast of Long Island and is projected to power more than 500,000 homes. Equinor, the Norwegian company developing the project, has said it’s about 60% complete.

    Sunrise Wind is located about 30 miles (48 kilometers) east of Montauk and is expected to power about 600,000 homes. Orsted, the Danish energy company developing the project, has said it’s roughly 45% complete.

    James previously led a coalition of attorneys general from 17 states and Washington, D.C., in challenging Trump’s executive order pausing approvals, permits and loans for all wind energy projects, both onshore and offshore.

    Last month, a federal judge in Massachusetts sided with the attorneys general and vacated the Jan. 20, 2025, order. Days later, the Trump administration issued the stop-work order on the East Coast projects.

    Copyright 2026 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

    Photos You Should See – January 2026

    [ad_2]

    Associated Press

    Source link

  • Supreme Court will take up Cisco’s bid to shut down lawsuit by Falun Gong

    [ad_1]

    WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court agreed Friday to take up an appeal from tech giant Cisco seeking to shut down a lawsuit claiming that the company’s technology was used to persecute members of the Falun Gong spiritual movement in China.

    The justices, who will hear arguments in the spring, will review an appellate ruling that would allow the lawsuit against Cisco to go forward in U.S. courts.

    The court acted after the Trump administration weighed in on Cisco’s behalf to urge the justices to hear the case.

    An Associated Press investigation last year showed that American tech companies, to a large degree, designed and built China’s surveillance state, encouraged by Republican and Democratic administrations, even as activists warned such tools were being used to quash dissent, persecute religious groups and target minorities.

    In 2008, documents leaked to the press showed Cisco saw the “Golden Shield,” China’s internet censorship effort, as a sales opportunity. The company quoted a Chinese official calling the Falun Gong an “evil cult.” A Cisco presentation reviewed by AP from the same year said its products could identify over 90% of Falun Gong material on the web.

    Other presentations reviewed by AP show that Cisco represented Falun Gong material as a “threat” and built out a national information system to track Falun Gong believers. In 2011, Falun Gong members sued Cisco, alleging the company tailored technology for Beijing that it knew would be used to track, detain and torture believers.

    The issue before the Supreme Court is whether an American company can be held liable under two separate laws for aiding and abetting human rights violations. Cisco argues it isn’t liable under those laws, the 18th-century Alien Tort Statute (ATS) or the Torture Victim Protection Act (TVPA), first enacted in 1991.

    In recent years, the Supreme Court and presidential administrations of both parties have been skeptical of lawsuits seeking to use U.S. courts as a venue to seek justice over the acts of foreign governments, especially those that took place abroad. To try to overcome that skepticism, Falun Gong members have argued that a substantial portion of Cisco’s activities involving China took place in the United States.

    A decision is expected by early summer.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Florida awaiting federal approval for 3rd immigration detention center

    [ad_1]

    ORLANDO, Fla. — Florida is awaiting approval from federal officials to open a third immigration detention center, following “Alligator Alcatraz” and “Deportation Depot,” and the state also is looking into a potential fourth detention facility, Gov. Ron DeSantis said Monday.

    Florida officials were waiting for the U.S. Department of Homeland Security to sign off on the third detention center in the state’s Panhandle, DeSantis said at a news conference outside the facility which was Florida’s second immigration detention center, dubbed “Deportation Deport,” at the former Baker Correctional Institution in northeast Florida.

    “So, if they approve, we will open,” DeSantis said. “If they don’t, then we will stand by, and that’s fine. But I think it should be approved since I don’t think they’re where they need to be on detention space.”

    The governor said there was “another option potentially” in South Florida, where state officials already have constructed an immigration detention center dubbed “Alligator Alcatraz” at a remote airstrip in the Florida Everglades.

    When asked by email about the specific locations of the two potential detention facilities, DeSantis press secretary Molly Best said the Panhandle location would be announced once it’s approved by federal officials.

    “Until this and the proposed additional South Florida location have been approved and finalized, we are unable to provide additional details. Stay tuned!” Best said.

    DeSantis said that there had been 10,000 arrests of people in the U.S. illegally in Florida during the past year through a state initiative with federal law enforcement, and that local law enforcement had made an additional 10,000 arrests for a total of 20,000 arrests. Under the state initiative, 63% of those arrested had a criminal arrest or conviction, DeSantis said.

    Florida has led other states in constructing facilities to support President Donald Trump’s immigration crackdown, with DeSantis saying the Trump administration needs the additional capacity to hold and deport more immigrants. The Trump administration has trumpeted the Republican governors’ efforts to expand their immigration detention capacity, calling Florida’s partnership a model for other state-run holding facilities.

    Attorneys for detainees at the Everglades facility have called the conditions deplorable, writing in court documents that rainwater floods their tents and officers go cell-to-cell pressuring detainees to sign voluntary removal orders before they’re allowed to consult their attorneys.

    Three federal lawsuits in Florida are challenging practices at the Everglades facility.

    In one lawsuit, detainees are asking for the facility to be closed since immigration is a federal issue, and Florida agencies and private contractors hired by the state have no authority to operate it under federal law. In a second lawsuit, detainees were seeking a ruling that would ensure that they have access to confidential communications with their attorneys.

    In the third lawsuit, a federal judge in Miami last summer ordered the facility to wind down operations over two months because officials had failed to do a review of the detention center’s environmental impact. But an appellate court panel put that decision on hold for the time being, allowing the facility to stay open.

    ___

    Follow Mike Schneider on the social platform Bluesky: @mikeysid.bsky.social

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Paris court to rule in case involving alleged cyberbullying of Brigitte Macron

    [ad_1]

    PARIS — A Paris court is to rule on Monday in a case involving 10 people accused of cyberbullying French first lady Brigitte Macron by spreading false online claims about her gender and sexuality, allegations her daughter said damaged her health and family life.

    The defendants, eight men and two women aged 41 to 65, are accused of posting “numerous malicious comments” falsely claiming that President Emmanuel Macron ’s wife was born a man and linking the 24-year age gap with her husband to pedophilia. Some of the posts were viewed tens of thousands of times.

    Brigitte Macron did not attend the two-day trial in October.

    Her daughter, Tiphaine Auzière, testified about what she described as the “deterioration” of her mother’s life since the online harassment intensified. “She cannot ignore the horrible things said about her,” Auzière told the court. She said the impact has extended to the entire family, including Macron’s grandchildren.

    Defendant Delphine Jegousse, 51, who is known as Amandine Roy and describes herself as a medium and an author, is considered as having played a major role in spreading the rumor after she released a four-hour video on her YouTube channel in 2021.

    The X account of Aurélien Poirson-Atlan, 41, known as Zoé Sagan on social media, was suspended in 2024 after his name was cited in several judicial investigations.

    Other defendants include an elected official, a teacher and a computer scientist. Several told the court their comments were intended as humor or satire and said they did not understand why they were being prosecuted. They face up to two years in prison if convicted.

    The case follows years of conspiracy theories falsely alleging that Brigitte Macron was born under the name Jean-Michel Trogneux, which is actually the name of her brother. The Macrons have also filed a defamation suit in the United States against conservative influencer Candace Owens.

    The Macrons, who have been married since 2007, first met at the high school where he was a student and she was a teacher. Brigitte Macron, 24 years her husband’s senior, was then called Brigitte Auzière, a married mother of three.

    Emmanuel Macron, 48, has been France’s president since 2017.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Paris Court to Rule in Case Involving Alleged Cyberbullying of Brigitte Macron

    [ad_1]

    PARIS (AP) — A Paris court is to rule on Monday in a case involving 10 people accused of cyberbullying French first lady Brigitte Macron by spreading false online claims about her gender and sexuality, allegations her daughter said damaged her health and family life.

    The defendants, eight men and two women aged 41 to 60, are accused of posting “numerous malicious comments” falsely claiming that President Emmanuel Macron ’s wife was born a man and linking the 24-year age gap with her husband to pedophilia. Some of the posts were viewed tens of thousands of times.

    Brigitte Macron did not attend the two-day trial in October.

    Her daughter, Tiphaine Auzière, testified about what she described as the “deterioration” of her mother’s life since the online harassment intensified. “She cannot ignore the horrible things said about her,” Auzière told the court. She said the impact has extended to the entire family, including Macron’s grandchildren.

    Defendant Delphine Jegousse, 51, who is known as Amandine Roy and describes herself as a medium and an author, is considered as having played a major role in spreading the rumor after she released a four-hour video on her YouTube channel in 2021.

    The X account of Aurélien Poirson-Atlan, 41, known as Zoé Sagan on social media, was suspended in 2024 after his name was cited in several judicial investigations.

    Other defendants include an elected official, a teacher and a computer scientist. Several told the court their comments were intended as humor or satire and said they did not understand why they were being prosecuted. They face up to two years in prison if convicted.

    The case follows years of conspiracy theories falsely alleging that Brigitte Macron was born under the name Jean-Michel Trogneux, which is actually the name of her brother. The Macrons have also filed a defamation suit in the United States against conservative influencer Candace Owens.

    The Macrons, who have been married since 2007, first met at the high school where he was a student and she was a teacher. Brigitte Macron, 24 years her husband’s senior, was then called Brigitte Auzière, a married mother of three.

    Emmanuel Macron, 48, has been France’s president since 2017.

    Copyright 2026 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

    Photos You Should See – December 2025

    [ad_2]

    Associated Press

    Source link

  • Will Smith sued over allegations he retaliated against violinist who reported sexual harassment

    [ad_1]

    A violinist accused Will Smith of retaliation after he said he was fired for reporting sexual harassment while on tour with the actor and rapper, according to a lawsuit filed earlier this week.

    The suit, filed in Los Angeles County Superior Court, is linked to what the complaint describes as a “hotel intrusion” in Las Vegas last March that the suit says Brian King Joseph immediately reported to hotel security, police and the artist’s representatives.

    Days later, according to the complaint, a representative for Smith accused Joseph of lying and fired him.

    A management company associated with Smith, 57, is also named as a defendant in the suit. The complaint does not specify damages.

    Representatives for Smith declined to comment.

    According to the suit, Joseph began performing with Smith in December 2024 and joined the artist’s tour for his most recent album, “Based on a True Story,” last year. They began spending time alone together, the complaint states, and Smith allegedly told Joseph that they had a “special connection” that the artist had with no one else.

    On or around March 20, while in Las Vegas for a performance, Joseph said he returned to his hotel room around 11 p.m. to find that someone appeared to have unlawfully entered while he was gone, the complaint states. According to hotel security, there were no signs of forced entry and only people who were part of Smith’s management team had access to the room while he was gone, the suit says.

    Among the items Joseph said he found were wipes, a beer bottle, an earring, a red backpack, HIV medication with another person’s name, hospital discharge paperwork for someone Joseph didn’t know and a note that said: “Brian, I’ll be back no later [sic] 5:30, just us (drawn heart), Stone F,” the complaint states.

    “Plaintiff feared that an unknown individual would soon return to his room to engage in sexual acts with Plaintiff,” the complaint states.

    After Joseph reported the apparent intrusion to hotel security, Smith’s representatives and police, the complaint alleges, a representative for Smith blamed him for the incident and said he was being terminated.

    The suit quotes the representative allegedly saying, in part, “Everyone is telling me that what happened to you is a lie, nothing happened, and you made the whole thing up. So, tell me, why did you lie and make this up?”

    There was no effort to verify Joseph’s safety concerns, the suit alleges, and after he was fired, another violinist was hired, even though the complaint says Joseph was told the tour was “moving in a different direction.”

    Amanda Sidman contributed.

    [ad_2]

    Tim Stelloh | NBC News

    Source link

  • Federal ruling blocks Hawaii’s climate change tourist tax on cruise ships

    [ad_1]

    HONOLULU — A federal appeals court ruling on New Year’s Eve blocked Hawaii from enforcing a climate change tourist tax on cruise ships passengers, a levy that was set to go into effect at the start of 2026.

    Cruise Lines International Association challenged the tax in a lawsuit, arguing that the new law violates the U.S. Constitution by taxing cruise ships for entering Hawaii ports. They also argued it would make cruises more expensive. The lawsuit notes the law authorizes counties to collect an additional 3% surcharge, bringing the total to 14% of prorated fares.

    The levy increases rates on hotel room and vacation rental stays but also imposes a new 11% tax on the gross fares paid by a cruise ship’s passenger, prorated for the number of days the vessels are in Hawaii ports. The lawsuit notes the law authorizes counties to collect an additional 3% surcharge, bringing the total to 14% of prorated fares.

    In the nation’s first such levy to help cope with a warming planet, Hawaii Gov. Josh Green signed legislation in May that raises tax revenue to deal with eroding shorelines, wildfires and other climate problems. Officials estimate the tax would generate nearly $100 million annually.

    U.S. District Judge Jill A. Otake last week upheld the law and the plaintiffs appealed to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. The U.S. government intervened in the case and also appealed Otake’s ruling.

    The order by two 9th Circuit judges granted both requests for an injunction pending the appeals.

    “We remain confident that Act 96 is lawful and will be vindicated when the appeal is heard on the merits,” Toni Schwartz, spokesperson for the Hawaii attorney general’s office, said in an email.

    The order temporarily halts enforcement of the law on cruise ships while the appeals process moves forward, her email noted.

    The lawsuit challenged only the law’s cruise ship provisions.

    Cruise Lines International Association spokesperson Jim McCarthy said he wasn’t sure he could get comment from the plaintiffs given the timing of the ruling before a holiday.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • California delays revoking 17,000 commercial driver’s licenses until March after immigrants sue

    [ad_1]

    A week after immigrant groups filed a lawsuit, California said Tuesday it will delay the revocations of 17,000 commercial driver’s licenses until March to allow more time to ensure that truckers and bus drivers who legally qualify for the licenses can keep them.

    But U.S. Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy said the state may lose $160 million if it doesn’t meet a Jan. 5 deadline to revoke the licenses. He already withheld $40 million in federal funding because he said California isn’t enforcing English proficiency requirements for truckers.

    California only sent out notices to invalidate the licenses after Duffy pressured the state to make sure immigrants who are in the country illegally aren’t granted the licenses. An audit found problems like licenses that remained valid long after an immigrant’s authorization to be in the country expired or licenses where the state couldn’t prove it checked a driver’s immigration status.

    “California does NOT have an ‘extension’ to keep breaking the law and putting Americans at risk on the roads,” Duffy posted on the social platform X.

    The Transportation Department has been prioritizing the issue ever since a truck driver who was not authorized to be in the U.S. made an illegal U-turn and caused a crash in Florida that killed three people in August.

    California officials said they are working to make sure the federal Transportation Department is satisfied with the reforms they have put in place. The state had planned to resume issuing commercial driver’s licenses in mid-December, but the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration blocked that.

    “Commercial drivers are an important part of our economy — our supply chains don’t move, and our communities don’t stay connected without them,” said DMV Director Steve Gordon.

    The Sikh Coalition, a national group defending the civil rights of Sikhs, and the San Francisco-based Asian Law Caucus filed a class-action lawsuit on behalf of the California drivers. They said immigrant truck drivers were being unfairly targeted. The driver in the Florida crash and the driver in another fatal crash in California in October are both Sikhs.

    Immigrants account for about 20% of all truck drivers, but these non-domiciled licenses immigrants can receive only represent about 5% of all commercial driver’s licenses or about 200,000 drivers. The Transportation Department also proposed new restrictions that would severely limit which noncitizens could get a license, but a court put the new rules on hold.

    Mumeeth Kaur, the legal director of the Sikh Coalition, said this delay “is an important step towards alleviating the immediate threat that these drivers are facing to their lives and livelihoods.”

    Duffy previously threatened to withhold millions of dollars in federal funding from California, Pennsylvania and Minnesota after audits found significant problems under the existing rules like commercial licenses being valid long after an immigrant truck driver’s work permit expired. He dropped the threat to withhold $160 million from California after the state said it would revoke the licenses because the state was complying.

    Trucking trade groups have praised the effort to get unqualified drivers who shouldn’t have licenses or can’t speak English off the road. They also applauded the Transportation Department’s moves to go after questionable commercial driver’s license schools.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Tyler Perry Accused Of Sexual Assault By Second Actor, ‘Madea’ Mogul’s Attorney Slams $77M Lawsuit As A ‘Money Grab’

    [ad_1]

    Tyler Perry faces new sexual assault accusations from a another actor who filed a $77 million lawsuit, alleging years of unwanted advances and sexual battery.

    Source: Jerod Harris/Rob Latour/Variety

    Model Mario Rodriuez broke into his first major acting role in Boo! A Madea Halloween. He claimed Perry personally recruited him through a trainer at a Los Angeles Equinox gym who said the super producer wanted an introduction. He said he recieved an offer to playthe small role of “Frat Guy #10.” According to Page Six, the lawsuit alleges this began a series promises for more opportunities that lured in Rodriguez for sexual advances.

    The complaint filed Thursday states that in Novernber 2018, Perry invited Rodriguez to Mastro’s Steakhouse in Beverly Hills to discuss a role in The Oval over dinner. Then Rodriguez said they went to the director’s home, where Perry “tightly hugged” him, attempted to unbuckle his pants, and “reached into Mr. Rodriguez’s underwear.

    “Mr. Perry was making sexual moaning noises and saying, ‘Stay here, stay here,’ while he pressed his body against Mr. Rodriguez and continued to grab his penis,” the complaint states.

    Rodriguez claimed he “repeatedly told Mr. Perry to stop,” but still had to “physically struggle to get away.” He said Perry apologized after the rejection and paid him $5,000.

    In an alleged April 2019 incident, the suit claims Perry grabbed Rodriguez’s hand and placed it on his privates. Perry allegedly told him to “let it happen” and “If you were to just be with me, I would take care of you, and you wouldn’t have to ever worry about anything.”

    According to the documents obtained by PEOPLE, the billionaire gave Rodriguez $5,000 when he delined again “and sent him away.” Following this alleged incident, the filing states:

    “More than ever before, it was clear that Mr. Perry would do whatever he wanted, whenever he wanted, to whomever he wanted no matter how many times he was rejected.”

    Rodriguez continued his acting career outside the Madeaverse on two seasons of The Family Business in 2020 and 2021. Still, he claims Perry continued to “randomly reach out to” him until 2024.

    “When Perry became aware that Rodriguez was going to file this action, Perry once again reached out to Rodriguez by text,” the filing continues, stating Perry said he “was feeling betrayed” after he “did so much to help Rodriguez.”

    As BOSSIP previously reported, The Oval actor Derek Dixon made similar allegations in a $260M lawsuit against Perry. He accused Perry of stringing him along with promises of acting roles and producing a script Dixon wrote. The lawsuit claimed invitations to meet at Perry’s home to discuss work turned into sexual assault and harassment. Attorney Jonathan J. Delshad represents both Dixon and Rodriguez.

    See what Mario Rodriguez speaking out in his own words and Tyler Perry’s response after the flip.

    Mario Rodriguez Spoke Out About Harassment Weeks Before He Filed The Sexual Assault Lawsuit

    Two weeks before the lawsuit went public, Mario Rodroguez took to Instagram to speak out about experiencing harassment. “This is so hard to talk about,” he wrote in the caption. In the Dec. 13 clip, Rodriguez opened up about his struggles with feeling “scared and ashamed,” and how that keeps victims silent.

    The candid clip mentioned his sense of guilt in anticipation of victim-blaming “for even being in the circumstances “for just being there” at the time of sexual assault and harassment.

    “I felt all of that when a very big director, a seriously powerful person that everybody knows, invited me over to his house to talk about roles and upcoming things that he was writing,” which made him think “all of my dreams are coming true.”

    “Then it happens, my boundaries were crossed. This person feels like they got power over you because of the situation and the opportunity,” he continued. Then he said fear kept him quiet, which put others at risk of the same experiences.

    “I stayed quiet for much too long. And I just want to say I’m really sorry, man. Because if I would’ve spoken up sooner I could’ve saved somebody that this probably happened to after me,” he continued. “I just wanna say sorry for that, whoever that may be. It could’ve stopped with me if I would’ve said something. … But I’m speaking up now.”

    On Dec. 26, Perry’s attorney Alex Spiro issued a statement slamming the lawsuit as a “money grab” after the same attorney represented Derek Dixon:

    “Having recently failed in another matter against Mr. Perry, the very same lawyer has now made yet another demand from more than a decade ago which will also be a failed money grab.”

    Delshad refuted this claim to PEOPLE, noting that Dixon’s claims “are alive and well, and none of them have failed; they were just moved to a different court,” due to the case relocating from California to Georgia.

    [ad_2]

    lexdirects

    Source link

  • Lawyer in Diego Pavia’s Eligibility Lawsuit Against NCAA Cites NBA Draft Pick’s Return to College

    [ad_1]

    NASHVILLE, Tenn. (AP) — A lawyer for Heisman Trophy runner-up Diego Pavia and 26 other football players has cited the NCAA’s decision to allow an NBA draft pick to return to college basketball as a reason that a federal judge should let his clients play in 2026 and 2027.

    Although Pavia plans to enter the NFL draft, he is continuing the lawsuit — which challenges an NCAA rule that counts seasons spent at junior colleges against players’ eligibility for Division I football — to help other former junior college players.

    On Wednesday, Baylor announced that 7-foot center James Nnaji had joined the Bears after four seasons playing professionally in Europe, a span that included Nnaji being drafted No. 31 overall by the Detroit Pistons. His rights were traded to Charlotte and later the New York Knicks.

    Attorney Ryan Downton seized on that news in a memorandum he filed Friday in a Tennessee federal court to support his antitrust lawsuit against the NCAA. He’s asking U.S. District Judge William L. Campbell to block the NCAA from enforcing its eligibility rules.

    With Nnaji’s arrival at Baylor having been announced on Christmas Eve, Downton began his memo with a reference to Clement Clarke Moore’s poem “A Visit from St. Nicholas.”

    “When what to my wandering eyes should appear, but … the hypocrisy of the NCAA granting four years of eligibility to a 21-year-old European professional basketball player with four years of professional experience who was drafted by an NBA team two years ago,” the attorney wrote.

    The memo noted that Nnaji, who also played in the NBA Summer League, will be 25 before he runs out of eligibility.

    “Meanwhile, the NCAA argues to this court that high school seniors are harmed if a 22- or 23-year-old former junior college player plays one more year of college football,” according to the filing.

    Pavia initially sued the NCAA in November 2024 and won a preliminary injunction weeks later that allowed him to play this season. He led Vanderbilt to a No. 13 ranking in the AP poll and the best season in program history. The Commodores will play Iowa in the ReliaQuest Bowl on Dec. 31.

    The lawsuit has since added 26 other plaintiffs, including Tennessee quarterback Joey Aguilar.

    NCAA rules give athletes five years to play four seasons under an eligibility clock that starts at any “collegiate institution” regardless of whether that school is an NCAA member.

    Pavia started playing at New Mexico Military Institute in 2020; the NCAA did not count that season toward eligibility because of the COVID-19 pandemic. He led the junior college to the 2021 national championship, then played at New Mexico State in 2022 and 2023 before transferring to Vanderbilt for 2024, making this season his sixth in college football but only his fourth at the Division I level.

    The NCAA is facing several eligibility lawsuits, and Downton is representing players in another lawsuit over the NCAA’s redshirt rule, with Vanderbilt linebacker Langston Patterson a lead plaintiff.

    Copyright 2025 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

    Photos You Should See – December 2025

    [ad_2]

    Associated Press

    Source link

  • Virginia offshore wind developer sues over Trump administration order halting projects

    [ad_1]

    The developers of a Virginia offshore wind project are asking a federal judge to block a Trump administration order that halted construction of their project, along with four others, over national security concerns

    NORFOLK, Va. — The developers of a Virginia offshore wind project are asking a federal judge to block a Trump administration order that halted construction of their project, along with four others, over national security concerns.

    Dominion Energy Virginia said in its lawsuit filed late Tuesday that the government’s order is “arbitrary and capricious” and unconstitutional. The Richmond-based company is developing Coastal Virginia Offshore Wind, a project it says is essential to meet dramatically growing energy needs driven by dozens of new data centers.

    The Interior Department did not detail the security concerns in blocking the five projects on Monday. In a letter to project developers, Interior’s Bureau of Ocean Energy Management set a 90-day period — and possibly longer — “to determine whether the national security threats posed by this project can be adequately mitigated.”

    The other projects are the Vineyard Wind project under construction in Massachusetts, Revolution Wind in Rhode Island and Connecticut and two projects in New York: Sunrise Wind and Empire Wind. Democratic governors in those states have vowed to fight the order, the latest action by the Trump administration to hobble offshore wind in its push against renewable energy sources.

    Dominion’s project has been under construction since early 2024 and was scheduled to come online early next year, providing enough energy to power about 660,000 homes. The company said the delay was costing it more than $5 million a day in losses solely for the ships used in round-the-clock construction, and that customers or the company would eventually bear the cost.

    Dominion called this week’s order “the latest in a series of irrational agency actions attacking offshore wind and then doubling down when those actions are found unlawful.”

    The Bureau of Ocean Energy Management didn’t immediately respond to an email seeking comment.

    U.S. District Judge Jamar Walker set a hearing for 2 p.m. Monday on Dominion’s request for a temporary restraining order.

    ___

    The Associated Press’ climate and environmental coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP’s standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at AP.org.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Immigrant truckers file suit over California’s plans to revoke commercial licenses

    [ad_1]

    A group of immigrant truckers sued California’s Department of Motor Vehicles on Tuesday, alleging the state violated thousands of workers’ rights when officials took action to revoke their commercial driver’s licenses.

    California officials said last month that the state notified about 17,000 truckers that their commercial driver’s licenses would be revoked because the expiration dates went past when the drivers were legally allowed to be in the U.S. That number has since grown to 21,000.

    The move came after the Trump administration started cracking down on states’ issuance of the licenses to immigrants. The federal government has threatened to withhold money from California, Pennsylvania, Minnesota and New York over the issue.

    The Sikh Coalition, a national group defending the civil rights of Sikhs, and the San Francisco-based Asian Law Caucus filed a class-action lawsuit on behalf of the California drivers.

    “These drivers have spent years anchoring their lives to these careers, only to now face potential economic ruin through no fault of their own — they deserve better, and California must do better,” said Munmeeth Kaur, the Sikh Coalition’s legal director, in a statement.

    The state’s plan to revoke the truckers’ licenses violates their due process rights and threatens their livelihoods, the groups allege. They’re asking the Alameda County Superior Court to pause the license cancellations.

    The California DMV said it doesn’t comment on pending litigation.

    Concerns about immigrant truck drivers gained attention after a tractor-trailer driver who was not authorized to be in the U.S. made an illegal U-turn and caused an August crash in Florida that killed three people. A fiery California crash that also killed three people in October and involved a truck driver in the country illegally added to the worries.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Judge green lights New York’s driver’s license law, rejecting a Trump administration challenge

    [ad_1]

    NEW YORK — A federal judge gave a green light Tuesday to New York’s so-called Green Light Law, rejecting the Trump administration’s bid to stop the state from giving people driver’s licenses without having them prove they are in the country legally.

    U.S. District Judge Anne M. Nardacci in Albany ruled that the Republican administration — which challenged the law under President Donald Trump’s crackdown on illegal immigration — had failed to support its claims that the state law usurps federal law or that it unlawfully regulates or unlawfully discriminates against the federal government.

    The Justice Department sued the state over the law in February, naming Gov. Kathy Hochul and the state’s attorney general, Letitia James, as defendants. At a news conference announcing the lawsuit, U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi accused the officials, both Democrats, of prioritizing “illegal aliens over American citizens.”

    “As I said from the start, our laws protect the rights of all New Yorkers and keep our communities safe,” James said in a statement Friday. “I will always stand up for New Yorkers and the rule of law.”

    A message seeking comment was left for the Justice Department.

    Nardacci, appointed to the bench by President Joe Biden, a Democrat, wrote that her job was not to evaluate the desirability of the Green Light Law as a policy matter. Rather, she said in a 23-page opinion, it was to assess whether the Trump administration’s arguments established that the law violates the U.S. Constitution’s Supremacy Clause, which gives federal laws precedence over state laws.

    The administration, she wrote, has “failed to state such a claim.”

    The Green Light Law was enacted partly to improve public safety on the roads, as people without licenses sometimes drove without one, or without having passed a road test. The state also makes it easier for holders of such licenses to get auto insurance, thus cutting down on crashes involving uninsured drivers.

    Under the law, people who don’t have a valid Social Security number can submit alternative forms of ID that include valid passports and driver’s licenses issued in other countries. Applicants must still get a permit and pass a road test to qualify for a “standard driver’s license.” It does not apply to commercial driver’s licenses.

    The Justice Department’s lawsuit sought to strike down the law as “a frontal assault on the federal immigration laws, and the federal authorities that administer them.” It highlighted a provision that requires the state’s Department of Motor Vehicles commissioner to inform people who are in the country illegally when a federal immigration agency has requested their information.

    In 2020, during Trump’s first term, his administration sought to pressure New York into changing the law by barring anyone from the state from enrolling in trusted traveler programs, meaning they would spend longer amounts of time going through security lines at airports.

    The governor at the time, Andrew Cuomo, offered to restore federal access to driving records on a limited basis, but said he wouldn’t let immigration agents see lists of people who had applied for the special licenses available to immigrants who couldn’t prove legal residency in the U.S. The administration ultimately restored New Yorkers’ access to the trusted traveler program after a brief legal fight.

    In the lawsuit rejected Tuesday, the administration argued that it could be easier to enforce federal immigration priorities if federal authorities had unfettered access to New York’s driver information. Nardacci, echoing a 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruling in a county clerk’s earlier challenge to the law, wrote that such information “remains available to federal immigration authorities” through a lawful court order or judicial warrant.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Democratic lawmaker brings lawsuit challenging move to add Trump’s name to Kennedy Center

    [ad_1]

    (CNN) — A new lawsuit filed in Washington, DC’s federal court Monday challenges the Kennedy Center board of trustees’ move to add President Donald Trump’s name to the cultural institution.

    Rep. Joyce Beatty, an Ohio Democrat and an ex-officio trustee of the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts, is bringing the lawsuit. She alleges a recent vote by the Center’s board of trustees to add Trump’s name went beyond the authority given to the board by Congress.

    “This is a flagrant violation of the rule of law, and it flies in the face of our constitutional order,” she wrote in the filing.

    Her complaint repeated an account she gave on social media of being muted via Zoom during the board meeting last week when she tried to speak up in objection to the vote. She said in the lawsuit that the vote and the addition of Trump’s name to the physical building the day after were “scenes more reminiscent of authoritarian regimes than the American republic.”

    Beatty is being represented by Democracy Defenders Action and the Washington Litigation Group. There had not been any request for emergency intervention filed to the case’s docket as of Monday evening.

    CNN has reached out to the White House and Kennedy Center for comment.

    “Only Congress has the authority to rename the Kennedy Center. President Trump and his cronies must not be allowed to trample federal law and bypass Congress to feed his ego,” Beatty said in a statement. “This entire process has been a complete disgrace to this cherished institution and the people it serves. These unlawful actions must be blocked before any further damage is done.”

    Congress renamed the arts center after former President John F. Kennedy in legislation passed after his 1963 assassination, and federal law requires that the board “assure that after December 2, 1983, no additional memorials or plaques in the nature of memorials shall be designated or installed in the public areas of the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts.”

    Experts told CNN last week that while the board’s decision was likely unlawful, it’s unclear whether someone looking to challenge the move would have the legal right – known as “standing” – to even pursue such a case. “There is absolutely no way they can do this legally,” said David Super, a professor at Georgetown Law who specializes in legislation. But, he added, “the administration is not concerning itself with laws unless it has a realistic prospect of getting sued.”

    New signage featuring the president’s name was installed the day after the vote.

    Trump has touted his influence on the performing arts center, and he claimed last week that the institution is experiencing “record-setting numbers” in donors.

    “We’re saving the building. We saved the building. The building was in such bad shape, both physically, financially and every other way. And now it’s very solid, very strong,” he said.

    CNN’s Piper Hudspeth Blackburn contributed to this report.

    [ad_2]

    Tierney Sneed and CNN

    Source link

  • Attorneys Urge Judge to Visit ‘Alligator Alcatraz’ to Assess Detainees’ Access to Lawyers

    [ad_1]

    ORLANDO, Fla. (AP) — Attorneys for detainees at an immigration detention center in the Florida Everglades known as “Alligator Alcatraz” want a federal judge to make an unscheduled, in-person visit to the facility to see firsthand if they are getting sufficient access to their lawyers.

    Attorneys asked U.S. District Judge Sheri Polster Chappell on Friday to make the visit within the next two months to help assess whether detainees are allowed to meet with their attorneys in a confidential and regular manner. The facility was built this summer at a remote airstrip in the Florida Everglades by Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis’ administration.

    The detainees’ federal lawsuit claims that their attorneys have to make an appointment to visit three days in advance, unlike at other immigration detention facilities where lawyers can just show up during visiting hours; that detainees often are transferred to other facilities after their attorneys had made an appointment to see them; and that scheduling delays have been so lengthy that detainees were unable to meet with attorneys before key deadlines.

    “Federal courts routinely conduct site visits as a valid fact-finding tool, especially in cases involving conditions of confinement,” the detainees’ attorneys wrote in their request.

    But attorneys for the state of Florida “strenuously” objected to a visit, saying a federal judge doesn’t have authority to inspect a state facility and a visit would pose significant security risks.

    “It would also impose a large burden on facility staff and significantly interrupt the facility’s operations,” attorneys for the state of Florida said.

    As of Monday, the judge hadn’t ruled on the request.

    The judge, who is based in Fort Myers, Florida, ordered the detainees’ lawyers and attorneys for the state and federal government to meet last week in an effort to resolve the case. But they were unable to reach a resolution despite nine hours of talks.

    The case over access to the legal system is one of three federal lawsuits challenging practices at the immigration detention center. Another lawsuit brought by detainees in federal court in Fort Myers argues that immigration is a federal issue, and Florida agencies and private contractors hired by the state have no authority to operate the facility under federal law. A judge last week denied a request by the detainees for a preliminary injunction to close the facility.

    In the third lawsuit, a federal judge in Miami last summer ordered the facility to wind down operations over two months because officials had failed to do a review of the detention center’s environmental impact. But an appellate court panel put that decision on hold for the time being, allowing the facility to stay open.

    Detainees at the facility have complained about toilets that don’t flush, flooding floors with fecal waste, and mosquitoes and other insects that are everywhere. President Donald Trump toured the detention center last summer, suggesting it could be a model for future lockups nationwide as his administration races to expand the infrastructure necessary for increasing deportations.

    Copyright 2025 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

    Photos You Should See – December 2025

    [ad_2]

    Associated Press

    Source link

  • South Dakota Hotel Owner Found Liable for Discrimination Against Native Americans

    [ad_1]

    SIOUX FALLS, S.D. (AP) — The owner of a South Dakota hotel who said Native Americans were banned from the establishment was found liable for discrimination against Native Americans on Friday.

    A federal jury decided the owner of the Grand Gateway Hotel in Rapid City will pay tens of thousands of dollars in damages to various plaintiffs who were denied service at the hotel. The jury awarded $1 to the NDN Collective, the Indigenous advocacy group that filed the lawsuit.

    The group brought the class-action civil rights lawsuit against Retsel Corporation, the company that owns the hotel, in 2022. The case was delayed when the company filed for bankruptcy in September 2024. The head of the company, Connie Uhre, passed away this September.

    “This was never about money. We sued for one dollar,” said Wizipan Garriott, president of NDN Collective and an enrolled member of the Rosebud Sioux Tribe. “It was about being on record for the discrimination that happened, and using this as an opportunity to be able to really call out racism.”

    Uhre posted on social media in March 2022 that she would ban Native Americans from the property after a fatal shooting at the hotel involving two teenagers whom police identified as Native American. She wrote in a Facebook post that she cannot “allow a Native American to enter our business including Cheers,” the hotel’s bar and casino.

    When Native American members of the NDN Collective tried to book a room at the hotel after her social media posts, they were turned away. The incident drew protests in Rapid City and condemnation from the mayor as well as tribes in the state.

    In Friday’s decision, the jury also ruled in Retsel’s countersuit against NDN Collective that the group had acted as a nuisance in its protests against the hotel, awarding $812 to the company.

    The Associated Press reached out to the defense attorneys for comment.

    Rapid City, a gateway to Mount Rushmore, has long seen racial tensions. At least 8% of the city’s population of about 80,000 identifies as American Indian or Alaska Native, according to census data.

    Copyright 2025 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

    Photos You Should See – December 2025

    [ad_2]

    Associated Press

    Source link

  • Northern California city to reform police after racist texts scandal

    [ad_1]

    SAN FRANCISCO — A Northern California city whose police department came under national scrutiny after it was revealed that some officers shared racist and sexist texts, used excessive force and falsified records has reached a settlement agreement to implement a series of reforms, officials announced Friday.

    The City of Antioch, in the San Francisco Bay Area, will enhance police training programs, establish an independent review board to handle complaints and implement a warning system to identify problem officers, according to an agreement that settles a civil rights lawsuit filed in 2023.

    “This agreement allows the Antioch Police Department to start with a clean slate and oversee officers’ conduct and make sure they are compliant with new standards,” said John Burris, who filed the complaint in federal court on behalf of residents who said they were targeted by Antioch police officers.

    Earlier this year, 23 people who were part of the lawsuit reached a $4.6 million settlement with Antioch for monetary damages, Burris said. The city in January announced it would hire a consultant to update its policies, procedures and training on various topics as part of an agreement with the U.S. Department of Justice.

    “A lot of the bad apples are gone, in jail, retired or left on their own, and there is a new command staff that seems committed to bring about change,” Burris said.

    Antioch City Manager Bessie Marie Scott said in a statement that the settlement agreement reinforces work already underway and “ensures sustainable transparency measures and updates core policies to modernize how APD continues to provide constitutional policing services to the residents of Antioch.”

    The Federal Bureau of Investigation and county prosecutors in March 2022 launched an investigation into police officers in Antioch and Pittsburg, a neighboring city, over a broad range of offenses. As part of the investigation, officials released racist and obscenity-laden text messages shared by 45 Antioch police officers that shocked the community.

    Officers referred to some suspects as “gorillas.” They also laughed and joked about harming people who apparently had surrendered or appeared to be asleep by setting a police dog on them or shooting them with a 40 mm “less-lethal” projectile launcher, according to a federal indictment against three former Antioch police officers.

    Federal prosecutors charged Morteza Amiri, Eric Rombough and Devon Christopher Wenger, saying the three former Antioch police officers conspired between February 2019 and March 2022 “to injure, oppress, threaten and intimidate residents of Antioch, California” and later falsified reports about the encounters.

    Wenger was sentenced earlier this month to seven years and six months in federal prison for conspiring to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate residents of Antioch using unreasonable force, conspiring to distribute anabolic steroids, and obstructing justice, federal prosecutors said.

    Amiri, a former Antioch K9 officer, was sentenced in June to seven years in prison for maiming someone with his police dog, falsifying reports on that case and being part of a scheme to obtain pay raises from the Antioch Police Department for a university degree he paid someone else to obtain.

    Rombough, accused of illegally shooting people with his launcher, pleaded guilty and became a government’s witness. He testified against both Amiri and Wenger in their separate trials, the East Bay Times reported. He is scheduled to be sentenced on Jan. 13.

    Antioch, a city of 115,000 residents about 45 miles (72 kilometers) east of San Francisco, was once predominantly white but has diversified in the last 30 years.

    [ad_2]

    Source link