Top Trump administration officials had decided to oust Justice Department antitrust chief Abigail Slater and had discussions with her shortly before she announced on social media that she was leaving the department, sources told CBS News.
Slater didn’t cite a reason for her departure in her statement on X, where she wrote, “It is with great sadness and abiding hope that I leave my role as AAG for Antitrust today.”
But she had lost the trust of Attorney General Pam Bondi and Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche, according to multiple sources familiar with the matter.
File: Abigail Slater, assistant attorney general for the Justice Department’s Antitrust Division, speaks outside federal court in Washington on April 21, 2025.
Kent Nishimura / Bloomberg via Getty Images
In her post as assistant attorney general for antitrust, she determined whether business merger deals would be approved or get derailed, and her every move was closely watched by the business community.
Trump officials believed Slater had undermined pending cases because of disagreements with leadership and had disobeyed requests, including to not embark on expensive travel to Europe and on other matters, two sources said. On one occasion, Slater angered Bondi when she traveled to a conference in Paris without Bondi’s permission, prompting Bondi to cut off access to Slater’s government credit cards, one source said.
Vice President JD Vance was aware of the fraught dynamics with Slater at the agency, two sources said.
Bondi in a statement to CBS News said: “On behalf of the Department of Justice, we thank Gail Slater for her service to the Antitrust Division which works to protect consumers, promote affordability, and expand economic opportunity.”
Slater had been on the job for less than a year. Her exit marks the end of a short tenure that was fraught with tension between her office and senior department leaders, sources told CBS News.
Justice officials have placed Omeed Assefi in the role as acting antitrust chief, three sources said.
Earlier this month, Semafor reported that Slater had announced on her X account that her chief of staff would be stepping down, only to later delete the post. According to Semafor, Slater had sought to terminate Sara Matar by not renewing her contract, but was overruled by Bondi.
And amid a dispute related to the Justice Department’s settlement greenlighting Hewlett Packard Enterprise’s $14 billion acquisition of Juniper Networks, Justice Department chief of staff and Acting Associate Attorney General Chad Mizelle fired Roger Alford, who had served in the first Trump administration and was Slater’s top deputy, and Bill Rinner, a former counsel at hedge fund Apollo Global Management who was in charge of merger enforcement.
In a scathing speech in August, Alford blasted “MAGA-In-Name-Only lobbyists and DOJ officials” who were pursuing an antitrust agenda that curried favor with special interests.
Editor’s note: An earlier version of this report said Abigail Slater had fired Roger Alford and Bill Rinner, but then-Justice Department chief of staff Chad Mizelle fired Alford and Rinner. The article has been updated.
Newly released Department of Justice documents show that investigators reviewing surveillance footage from the night of Jeffrey Epstein’s death observed an orange-colored shape moving up a staircase toward the isolated, locked tier where his cell was located at approximately 10:39 p.m. on Aug. 9, 2019.
That entry in an observation log of the video from the Metropolitan Correctional Center appears to suggest something previously unreported by authorities: “A flash of orange looks to be going up the L Tier stairs — could possibly be an inmate escorted up to that Tier.”
It also appears, according to an FBI memorandum, that reviews by investigators led to disparate conclusions by the FBI and those examining the same video from the Department of Justice’s Office of Inspector General.
The FBI log describes the fuzzy image as “possibly an inmate.”
FBI analysis of video footage describes a fuzzy orange image on the stairs leading to Epstein’s cell tier as “possibly an inmate.”
Document released by Department of Justice
The inspector general logs it as an officer carrying orange “linen or bedding,” noting it in their final report as “an unidentified [corrections officer].”
The DOJ Office of Inspector General’s analysis of video footage describes a fuzzy orange image on the stairs leading to Epstein’s cell tier as: “it is possible someone is carrying inmate linen or bedding up the stairs.”
Document released by Department of Justice
The final report by the Inspector General stated: “At approximately 10:39 p.m., an unidentified CO appeared to walk up the L Tier stairway, and then reappeared within view of the camera at 10:41 p.m.”
Official reports state that Epstein died by suicide some time before 6:30 a.m., when his body was discovered by a corrections officer delivering his breakfast. No official time of death was ever determined. In recent months, there have been questions about the work of investigators probing the circumstances of his death.
In an in-depth analysis of surveillance video from the jail, CBS News previously reported on the figure on the stairs and consulted independent video analysts who said the movement was more consistent with an inmate — or someone wearing an orange prison uniform — than a corrections officer.
The new records raise more questions about activity near Epstein’s tier late that evening. Official reviews of Epstein’s death make no mention of the figure in orange, and later pronouncements from authorities including the attorney general at the time, Bill Barr, were that no one entered Epstein’s housing tier the night of his death. Last summer in an interview on “Fox & Friends,” then-deputy FBI director Dan Bongino said, “There’s video clear as day, he’s the only person in there and the only person coming out. You can see it.”
Prison employees interviewed by CBS News said escorting an inmate at that hour would have been highly unusual. The identification of the individual could have been crucial to reconstructing the events, given that the sighting occurred within the estimated window of Epstein’s possible time of death.
The staircase leading to his cell tier was captured by the only camera known to have been recording that night, positioned in a way that partially obscured the approach to Epstein’s tier. Government investigators relied heavily on that footage in reconstructing the timeline of events. But because of the camera angle, it was not possible to rule out whether someone could have climbed the stairs and entered the tier without being clearly visible. CBS News’ analysis of that video found additional contradictions between what the video showed and official statements.
This image from the video — zoomed in and highlighted by CBS News – shows a partial view of something orange on the stairs leading to Jeffrey Epstein’s cell tier.
U.S. Bureau of Prisons
Inside the SHU
Thousands of pages released last week as part of a broader Justice Department disclosure of Epstein-related files, totaling more than 3 million documents, provide additional detail about the hours between the evening of Aug. 9, when Epstein was last seen alive on camera, and the discovery of his body the following morning.
Records and interviews describe a largely quiet night inside the Special Housing Unit, or SHU, where Epstein was being held. Several inmates told investigators they were using drugs inside their cells, including marijuana and K2, a synthetic substance that multiple witnesses said was common on the tier.
Among those interviewed were the two corrections officers assigned to the unit that night, Tova Noel and Ghitto Bonhomme, a materials handler who had not previously been publicly identified. Documents show Bonhomme was interviewed twice in September 2019 in sessions conducted in lieu of a grand jury subpoena.
According to Noel’s account, Bonhomme had been working multiple consecutive shifts and slept while on duty for a period between approximately 10 p.m. and midnight.
Investigators also questioned Noel about an unexplained change in the recorded number of inmates in the SHU, which appeared to drop from 73 to 72 sometime between 10 p.m. and 3 a.m. Noel said she was “probably” mistaken about the discrepancy and told investigators she had no memory of a count changing.
Neither officer was specifically asked about the orange-colored figure noted in the video observation log. Bonhomme told investigators he did not remember the period between 10 p.m. and midnight and said he had no recollection of anyone walking up the stairs toward Epstein’s tier at around 10:30 p.m. He added that a jail employee entering a tier alone would have violated policy.
A separate internal presentation included in the document release described a corrections officer, believed by investigators to be Noel, carrying linen or inmate clothing up to the tier. The 2023 inspector general report did not identify Noel as the figure seen in the footage. In her interview, Noel told investigators distributing linen was not part of her duties. “I never gave out linen. Ever,” she said. “Because that’s done on the shift prior.”
An early morning discovery
Bonhomme ended his shift at midnight and was replaced by another corrections officer named Michael Thomas, who would discover Epstein’s body hours later. Noel continued on for a second consecutive 8-hour shift.
Thomas and Noel failed to complete inmate counts at 3 a.m., and 5 a.m. as well as mandatory 30-minute wellness checks of Epstein. Investigators speculated the officers may have fallen asleep.
Thomas and Noel were later charged with falsifying records certifying the inmate counts had been completed. Federal prosecutors eventually dropped the charges in exchange for cooperation agreements that included interviews. A transcript of Thomas’ interview, conducted two years after Epstein’s death and released in the recent document disclosure, shows significant gaps in his recollection of the morning Epstein was found.
Thomas told investigators he discovered Epstein in his cell shortly after 6:30 a.m. on Aug.10 and that he “ripped” Epstein down from the hanging position.
Investigators asked what happened to the noose.
“I don’t recall taking the noose off. I really don’t,” he replied. “I don’t recall taking the thing from around his neck.”
Noel, who remained standing at the cell entrance, told investigators she saw Thomas lower Epstein to the floor but did not see a noose around his neck.
The noose Epstein allegedly used has never been definitively identified. According to the inspector general’s report, a noose collected at the scene was later determined not to be the ligature used in Epstein’s death.
Thomas also described Epstein as shirtless when he found him. Evidence records indicate a shirt believed to have been cut from Epstein’s body was later returned from the hospital in a bag of personal belongings.
Evidence records indicate a shirt believed to have been cut from Epstein’s body was later returned from the hospital in a bag of personal belongings.
Released by Department of Justice
The new documents also show that New York City’s Office of the Chief Medical Examiner reviewed the jail surveillance footage six days after Epstein’s death as part of its investigation and concluded the video was too blurry to identify any individuals. Hours later, the office publicly ruled Epstein’s death a suicide. The medical examiner did not provide an estimate of how long Epstein may have been dead before his body was discovered. CBS News had previously reported on the office’s unorthodox handling of the crime scene.
Dr. Michael Baden, a forensic pathologist retained by Epstein’s brother, previously told CBS News Epstein had likely been dead for several hours before he was found but because the body had been moved, determining the time of death was impossible.
Bonhomme declined to comment when contacted by CBS News. Noel’s attorney told CBS News, “Ms. Noel will not be making any statements [or] attempts to clarify any aspect of this situation.” Previous attempts to reach Michael Thomas on the phone, through his attorney and at his home, have been unsuccessful.
The four prosecutors who spearheaded a $250 million Minnesota fraud case will not be in court at the next trial because they’ve all left the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Minnesota in recent days, along with more than a dozen others in a growing wave of resignations.
The departures have left the already-diminished office with as few as 17 assistant U.S. attorneys, according to sources inside the office — down from 70 during the Biden administration.
Former prosecutors Joe Thompson, Harry Jacobs, Daniel Bobier and Matthew Ebert — the four attorneys who had been leading the $250 million Feeding Our Futurefraud case, which was the first shoe to drop in the massive Minnesota fraud scandal — have handed off the prosecution to relative newcomers to the office.
Harry Jacobs, who was recently named head of the office’s criminal division, was also involved in the prosecution of Vance Boelter, the man accused of assassinating former Minnesota House Speaker Melissa Hortman and her husband Mark.
Sources close to the attorneys who left have cited a variety of factors for the staff shakeup, including caseload management, structural issues within the office, the Trump administration’s influence on the office, and concerns related to Operation Metro Surge — the ongoing immigration enforcement operation in the Twin Cities that has led to thousands of arrests as well as repeated clashes with protesters, two of whom were killed by federal agents.
“The mass exodus we’re seeing in Minnesota is alarming,” said Stacey Young, founder of Justice Connection, a Washington, D.C.-based organization of former Justice Department employees.
“We should all pay attention to why some of the state’s top federal prosecutors chose to leave — it had nothing to do with political disagreement; rather, this administration asked them to violate their legal and ethical responsibilities, and they believed the exit was their only option,” Young said. “The loss of institutional knowledge and expertise will destabilize the U.S. Attorney’s office, leaving Minnesotans’ safety and rights less protected.”
The office’s ranks were depleted even before Operation Metro Surge. By the time Daniel Rosen was sworn in as U.S. attorney in October 2025, the number of prosecutors had already dropped to less than 40, former and current officials tell CBS News. They cited retirements and changes made by the Trump administration, including cuts related to the Department of Government Efficiency, known as DOGE.
The Justice Department has sought to buttress Minnesota’s prosecutorial ranks with prosecutors from neighboring districts, including from Michigan, as well as the Department of Homeland Security and military attorneys. But that has not always worked out well. A DHS attorney working in Minnesota on Tuesday told a judge “this job sucks” and asked to be held in contempt “so that I can have a full 24 hours of sleep.” She was removed from the Minnesota assignment on Wednesday.
The Minnesota U.S. Attorney’s Office declined to comment. A spokeswoman for the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Detroit declined to comment when asked how many attorneys had been dispatched from the Eastern District of Michigan.
So far, federal prosecutors in Minnesota have convicted 62 people in connection to the scandal, which tops the list of the nation’s most costly COVID-era fraud sprees. Federal prosecutors estimate taxpayer losses exceed $1 billion.
Feeding Our Future was the initial scheme: a nonprofit organization that tricked state and federal officials into paying them to serve food to thousands of hungry children but never provided the meals. That group allegedly raked in $250 million.
The final trial of those charged in the scheme is scheduled for April. Ikram Yusuf Mohamed, Suleman Yusuf Mohamed, Aisha Hassan Hussein, Sahra Sharif Osman, Shakur Abdinur Abdisalam, Fadumo Mohamed Yusuf and Gandi Yusuf Mohamed face charges of conspiracy, wire fraud, money laundering and bribery.
The two prosecutors now leading the case are Rebecca Kline and Matthew Murphy. Both prosecutors joined the office in January 2024, after working in private practice, according to their LinkedIn pages.
Additional fraud cases have since come into focus. In August, state officials shut down a housing program designed to help seniors and people with disabilities, citing “large-scale fraud.” In September, prosecutors charged eight people with defrauding the program by enrolling as providers and submitting millions in “fake and inflated bills.”
Joe Thompson, the former first Assistant U.S. Attorney who became the public face announcing the indictments, made news before his departure when he said in December that federal prosecutors were investigating roughly $18 billion spent on social programs in Minnesota since 2018. CBS News asked how much they believe was fraud, and they said they’ve “seen more red flags than legitimate providers.” Thompson suggested half of the $18 billion or more could be fraudulent.
After another trove of Epstein files was released, some survivors, like Dani Bensky, are blasting the Justice Department for withholding potentially millions of additional pages from the files while also mistakenly releasing images and identities of survivors. Scott MacFarlane has more.
Washington — A federal appeals court judge dismissed a judicial misconduct complaint that the Justice Department filed against U.S. District Judge James Boasberg, whom President Trump has denounced over his handling of a legal battle involving the Alien Enemies Act and the administration’s swift removals of Venezuelan migrants to El Salvador.
In a December decision, Judge Jeffrey Sutton, the chief judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit, faulted the Justice Department for failing to provide “sufficient evidence” about an alleged statement Boasberg made last March during a closed-door meeting of judges, which sparked the judicial misconduct complaint.
FILE – U.S. District Judge James Boasberg, chief judge of the United States District Court for D.C., at E. Barrett Prettyman Federal Courthouse in Washington, March 16, 2023.
Carolyn Van Houten / AP
The complaint was filed last July by Chad Mizelle, then-chief of staff to Attorney General Pam Bondi. He claimed Boasberg made “improper public comments” about Mr. Trump and his administration during the meeting of the Judicial Conference, the policymaking body of the federal courts.
Boasberg allegedly expressed concerns that the Trump administration “would disregard rulings of federal courts, leading to a constitutional crisis.” The Justice Department’s complaint also cited Boasberg’s handling of a case involving Mr. Trump’s use of the Alien Enemies Act to swiftly deport Venezuelan migrants who were allegedly members of the gang Tren de Aragua.
The department identified in its complaint one source of evidence for Boasberg’s statement and where it was allegedly made, but did not include that source, Sutton said. When the federal appeals court in Washington, D.C., reached out to the Justice Department about the missing information, the department didn’t provide it, according to Sutton’s order.
“In the absence of the attachment, the complaint offers no source for what, if anything, the subject judge said during the Conference, when he said it, whether he said it in response to a question, whether he said it during the Conference or at another meeting, and whether he expressed these concerns as his own or as those of other judges,” the judge wrote.
The Justice Department also mentioned in the complaint a Fox News clip discussing the allegations against Boasberg, which Sutton said also did not offer details about his alleged comment.
“A recycling of unadorned allegations with no reference to a source does not corroborate them. And a repetition of uncorroborated statements rarely supplies a basis for a valid misconduct complaint,” he wrote.
Sutton also noted that meetings of the Judicial Conference aim to facilitate “candidate conversations” among judges, and said any claim that Boasberg’s alleged comment was made in public and in reference to a pending case “falls short.”
“In these settings, a judge’s expression of anxiety about executive-branch compliance with judicial orders, whether rightly feared or not, is not so far afield from customary topics at these meetings — judicial independence, judicial security, and inter-branch relations — as to violate the Codes of Judicial Conduct,” he found.
The complaint was initially filed with Judge Sri Srinivasan, the chief judge of the U.S. appeals court in Washington, D.C. But he asked Chief Justice John Roberts to transfer the complaint to another appeals court because of appellate challenges to Boasberg’s rulings. Roberts then transferred the matter to the 6th Circuit’s Judicial Council in December, according to Sutton’s order.
Top administration officials and Mr. Trump himself have attacked Boasberg for his decisions in the fast-moving legal fight over the president’s use of the Alien Enemies Act and the summary removal of Venezuelan migrants to a notorious Salvadoran prison, which played out last year.
Boasberg had ordered the Trump administration to turn around two planes carrying the alleged gang members that was bound for El Salvador and said that the government did not stop the removals. He ruled last April that probable cause existed to find government officials in criminal contempt over their defiance of his decision and said the government demonstrated a “willful disregard” for his order.
Mr. Trump and some Republicans in Congress had called for Boasberg to be impeached, though it’s unlikely that would happen. The Justice Department has also filed a judicial misconduct complaint against U.S. District Judge Ana Reyes, who sits on the same court as Boasberg, for what it says was “hostile and egregious misconduct” during a hearing last February.
Reyes was presiding over a case involving Mr. Trump’s plan to bar transgender people from serving in the military and blocked enforcement of the policy last March. The Supreme Court has allowed the Trump administration to implement the ban while litigation continues.
Federal judge Kate Menendez denied Minnesota’s motion for a temporary restraining order to halt “Operation Metro Surge” on Saturday. The court documents, filed on Saturday, say that Minnesota and its cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul have not met their burden of proof.
The argument to halt operations, in part, stated that the federal operation is “causing harm to the Twin Cities and State themselves, as well as their residents.” Lawyers with the U.S. Department of Justice have called the lawsuit “legally frivolous.”
In the court documents, Menendez cited another recent case where the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals recently vacated the preliminary injunction ruling that restricted the force federal agents can use on peaceful protesters, saying that court case had “much more settled precedent” in that case and that “the Court of Appeals determined that the injunction would cause irreparable harm to the government because it would hamper their efforts to enforce federal law.” Menendez also wrote, “If that injunction went too far, then halting the entire operation certainly would.”
“Because there is evidence supporting both sides’ arguments as to motivation and the relative merits of each side’s competing positions are unclear, the Court is reluctant to find that the likelihood-of-success factor weighs sufficiently in favor of granting a preliminary injunction,” the judge said in the ruling.
Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey released a statement after Menendez’s ruling that stated in part:
“Of course, we’re disappointed. This decision doesn’t change what people here have lived through — fear, disruption, and harm caused by a federal operation that never belonged in Minneapolis in the first place. This operation has not brought public safety. It’s brought the opposite and has detracted from the order we need for a working city. It’s an invasion, and it needs to stop.”
The state of Minnesota and the cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul have sought a temporary restraining order in their lawsuit against Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem and other Trump administration officials.
U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi took to social media Saturday to laud the ruling, calling it “another HUGE” legal win for the Justice Department on X.
Minnesota’s argument
The state filed the lawsuit claiming the Trump administration has “violated the 10th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution,” through infringement of police power and unlawful coercion. Minnesota alleges it “has been singled out and targeted by ICE in a way that no other state has experienced.”
In the court filing, Minnesota argues that the operation is not motivated by “a legitimate law-enforcement purpose” but rather serves as a “pretext for leveraging demands and punishing political leaders within the State and Twin Cities who oppose the Trump administration’s immigration policies.”
Court documents also state that the large-scale presence of federal agents has disrupted the healthcare industry, affected local businesses and stopped residents from going to religious services. The state also claims that “federal officers’ use of force and being detained on their way to and from school had had ‘negative impacts on attendance and student focus’” forcing several school districts to temporarily close.
Trump administration’s argument
The Trump administration argues Operation Metro Surge was launched “to address the dangers arising from the presence of illegal aliens in the Twin Cities.” The administration also argues the dangers are exacerbated by Minnesota, Minneapolis and St. Paul’s sanctuary city policies.
The Trump administration also claims that Operation Metro Surge has “strictly been in furtherance of “the enforcement of federal law,” in line with President Trump’s campaign promises.”
Federal judge Kate Menendez denied Minnesota’s motion for a temporary restraining order to halt “Operation Metro Surge” on Saturday. The court documents, filed on Saturday, say that Minnesota and its cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul have not met their burden of proof.
The argument to halt operations, in part, stated that the federal operation is “causing harm to the Twin Cities and State themselves, as well as their residents.” Lawyers with the U.S. Department of Justice have called the lawsuit “legally frivolous.”
In the court documents, Menendez cited another recent case where the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals recently vacated the preliminary injunction ruling that restricted the force federal agents can use on peaceful protesters, saying that court case had “much more settled precedent” in that case and that “the Court of Appeals determined that the injunction would cause irreparable harm to the government because it would hamper their efforts to enforce federal law.” Menendez also wrote, “If that injunction went too far, then halting the entire operation certainly would.”
“Because there is evidence supporting both sides’ arguments as to motivation and the relative merits of each side’s competing positions are unclear, the Court is reluctant to find that the likelihood-of-success factor weighs sufficiently in favor of granting a preliminary injunction,” the judge said in the ruling.
Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey released a statement after Menendez’s ruling that stated in part:
“Of course, we’re disappointed. This decision doesn’t change what people here have lived through — fear, disruption, and harm caused by a federal operation that never belonged in Minneapolis in the first place. This operation has not brought public safety. It’s brought the opposite and has detracted from the order we need for a working city. It’s an invasion, and it needs to stop.”
The state of Minnesota and the cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul have sought a temporary restraining order in their lawsuit against Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem and other Trump administration officials.
U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi took to social media Saturday to laud the ruling, calling it “another HUGE” legal win for the Justice Department on X.
Minnesota’s argument
The state filed the lawsuit claiming the Trump administration has “violated the 10th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution,” through infringement of police power and unlawful coercion. Minnesota alleges it “has been singled out and targeted by ICE in a way that no other state has experienced.”
In the court filing, Minnesota argues that the operation is not motivated by “a legitimate law-enforcement purpose” but rather serves as a “pretext for leveraging demands and punishing political leaders within the State and Twin Cities who oppose the Trump administration’s immigration policies.”
Court documents also state that the large-scale presence of federal agents has disrupted the healthcare industry, affected local businesses and stopped residents from going to religious services. The state also claims that “federal officers’ use of force and being detained on their way to and from school had had ‘negative impacts on attendance and student focus’” forcing several school districts to temporarily close.
Trump administration’s argument
The Trump administration argues Operation Metro Surge was launched “to address the dangers arising from the presence of illegal aliens in the Twin Cities.” The administration also argues the dangers are exacerbated by Minnesota, Minneapolis and St. Paul’s sanctuary city policies.
The Trump administration also claims that Operation Metro Surge has “strictly been in furtherance of “the enforcement of federal law,” in line with President Trump’s campaign promises.”
In an email exchange between New York Giants co-owner Steve Tisch and Jeffrey Epstein, the two men discussed multiple women, and Epstein sent details about their lives to the film producer-turned-NFL owner.
In one email from 2013, Tisch asked for details about a “Ukrainian Girl” who had lunch with him after meeting at Epstein’s house. He called her a “very sweet girl.”
Epstein replied that the woman had “a 10 ass” and is a “character,” adding he would get “all info” on her.
Tisch responded that he was “curious to know about,” the woman, and asked Epstein if she is a “pro or civilian?” prompting Epstein to reply that he doesn’t “like records of these conversations.”
Regarding a different woman, Tisch asked Epstein, “Is she fun?”
Epstein replied that the woman is “a civilian, but russian, and rarely tells the full truth, but fun.”
In a separate email, after it appears Tisch met with a woman, Epstein told Tisch that a “report” was “just in” from their encounter, and he told the Giants owner that “you did very well… she is a little freaked by the age difference but go slow…”
In another email from the same year, Tisch appeared to be emailing with a woman that Epstein had introduced him to, writing to her, “Jeffrey Epstein is very excited about you and I meeting each other… I like that idea… do you?”
Epstein then appeared to give him tips about the woman’s life, suggesting she was still in college and could not travel during the week to meet Tisch.
“Never heard back from her,” Tisch wrote to Epstein in a reply. “Oh well…”
Other emails show Tisch inviting Epstein to a Giants football game and Epstein inviting Tisch to his private island.
CBS News has reached out to the NFL and the Giants for comment.
What to expect from latest Epstein files release – CBS News
Watch CBS News
The Justice Department on Friday began releasing more than 3 million records related to the investigation into convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. CBS News’ Jake Rosen has more.
The Department of Justice is participating in a civil rights investigation into the death of Alex Pretti, who was shot and killed by two Border Patrol agents in Minneapolis amid a federal immigration crackdown.
Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche stopped short of formally calling it a civil rights investigation, however, and declined to discuss the scope of what the FBI will be examining. He said he did not want to overstate the move, and instead characterized it as a “standard investigation by the FBI when there are circumstances like what we saw last Saturday.”
“And that investigation, to the extent it needs to involve lawyers at the civil rights division, it will involve those,” he said at a press conference.
Blanche said he would not commit to releasing any body camera footage of the shooting.
The announcement comes after the FBI on Friday said it would lead the investigation into Pretti’s shooting.
Previously, Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s Homeland Security Investigations branch had been spearheading the probe, an unusual move according to current and former law enforcement officials. HSI is not typically tasked with investigating law enforcement shootings and does not have the equipment to handle such evidence, the officials said.
In response to news of the investigation, Walz said “Trump’s right hand cannot be responsible for investigating his left hand. We need an independent, impartial investigation now.”
Pretti, a 37-year-old ICU nurse, was the second U.S. citizen killed in Minneapolis by federal agents this month. Renee Good, a mother and poet, was killed by an ICE agent on Jan. 7.
After Good’s shooting and the decision not to open a civil rights investigation into her death, several career prosecutors in the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division, as well as in the U.S. Attorney’s office in Minnesota, resigned.
Federal prosecutors in Minneapolis earlier this week pressed the U.S. attorney over the lack of a civil rights investigation and warned that more resignations could come.
In a statement to WCCO, Pretti’s family attorney said “The family’s focus is on a fair and impartial investigation that examines the facts around his murder.”
A federal appellate court ruled on Friday that the Justice Department has established probable cause to charge five people, including former CNN anchor Don Lemon, in connection with an anti-ICE protest inside a church in St. Paul, Minnesota, but it refused to order a lower court judge to sign the arrest warrants being sought by prosecutors, according to court filings and multiple sources familiar with the matter.
The ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, which was unsealed Saturday, came about after the Justice Department asked the appellate court to compel the U.S. District Court in Minnesota to sign five arrest warrants over civil rights charges alleging the defendants were unlawfully interfering with the churchgoers’ constitutionally-protected freedom to practice religion.
The ruling made public on Saturday did not identify the names of the five defendants for whom the Justice Department is seeking arrest warrants, but multiple sources confirmed to CBS that Lemon is one of them.
A spokesperson for Lemon had no immediate comment on the ruling.
CBS News reported on Thursday that Magistrate Judge Doug Micko had refused to sign an arrest warrant for Lemon, who attended the protest at the church and interviewed the pastor.
Lemon’s attorney, Abbe Lowell, said Thursday that the magistrate’s actions “confirm the nature of Don’s First Amendment protected work this weekend in Minnesota as a reporter,” and slammed the Justice Department for what he called “a stunning and troubling effort to silence and punish a journalist for doing his job.”
Three people so far have been charged in connection with the protest on Sunday, when demonstrators entered St. Paul’s Cities Church after discovering that an Immigration and Customs Enforcement official appeared to be one of the pastors at the church.
The criminal compliant shows that several defendants were also charged, but their names are redacted after the magistrate declined to sign the arrest warrants over concerns about a lack of probable cause.
Micko also separately declined to approve some of the charges for the three defendants who were arrested, also citing a lack of probable cause.
In court filings to the Eighth Circuit, Chief Judge Patrick Schiltz for the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota said that Micko only found probable cause on three of the eight arrest warrants presented to him by the department on Jan. 20. When he declined to sign the other five, Minnesota’s U.S. Attorney Daniel Rosen personally called the court and demanded that his decision be reviewed by a district court judge.
The matter was ultimately assigned to Schiltz.
“What the U.S. Attorney requested is unheard of in our district,” he wrote. He told the department he needed more time to confer with other judges because it was such an unusual demand, and it would normally be addressed by the Justice Department either re-submitting an improved affidavit with the criminal complaint, or by seeking a grand jury indictment.
Although he told the department he would render a decision by Tuesday, the department claimed that was too late. Citing national security concerns, he said the Justice Department claimed that getting the five warrants signed was an emergency, and if he did not act urgently, then “copycats will invade churches and synagogues” this weekend. He said the department claimed he must accept their national security concerns as true “because they said it, and they are the government.”
He added that he disagrees with their claims, noting that the worst behavior alleged against the protestors is that they were “yelling horrible things.”
“None committed any acts of violence,” he wrote. “There is absolutely no emergency.”
In its opinion, a three-judge panel from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit said that while they believe the department has established probable cause to justify the arrests, they did not believe the Justice Department’s claim that it “has no other adequate means of obtaining the requested relief.”
It is not immediately clear what the Justice Department will do next. It could draft new affidavits in support of the charges and re-present them to a magistrate judge, or it could also potentially seek grand jury indictments instead.
Honolulu — A former flight attendant for a Canadian airline posed as a commercial pilot and as a current flight attendant to obtain hundreds of free flights from U.S. airlines, authorities said.
Dallas Pokornik, 33, of Toronto, was arrested in Panama after being indicted on wire fraud charges in federal court in Hawaii last October. He pleaded not guilty Tuesday following his extradition.
If convicted, Pokornik faces up to 20 years in prison, a fine of up to $250,000, plus a term of supervised release, the Justice Department said.
According to court documents, Pokornik was a flight attendant for a Toronto-based airline from 2017 to 2019, then used fake employee identification from that carrier to obtain tickets reserved for pilots and flight attendants on three other airlines.
U.S. prosecutors said Tuesday that Pokornik even requested to sit in an extra seat in the cockpit – the “jump seat” – typically reserved for off-duty pilots. It wasn’t clear from court documents whether he ever actually rode in a plane’s cockpit, and the U.S. Attorney’s Office declined to say.
The indictment didn’t identify the airlines except to say they’re based in Honolulu, Chicago and Fort Worth, Texas. Representatives for Hawaiian Airlines, United Airlines and American Airlines – which are respectively based in those cities – didn’t immediately respond to emails from The Associated Press seeking comment.
Air Canada, which is based in Toronto, also didn’t respond to an email seeking comment.
The scheme lasted four years, the U.S. prosecutors in Hawaii said.
A U.S. magistrate judge on Tuesday ordered Pokornik to remain in custody. His federal defender declined to comment.
In 2023, an off-duty airline pilot riding in the cockpit of a Horizon Air flight said “I’m not OK” just before trying to cut the engines midflight. That pilot, Joseph Emerson, later told police he’d been struggling with depression.
The allegations against Pokornik are reminiscent of “Catch Me If You Can,” the movie starring Leonardo DiCaprio that tells the story of Frank Abagnale posing as a pilot to defraud an airline and obtain free flights.
The Justice Department on Tuesday served subpoenas to the offices of multiple Democratic officials in Minnesota, including Gov. Tim Walz, Attorney General Keith Ellison and Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey, in connection with a probe into an alleged conspiracy to impede federal immigration officers, three sources familiar with the matter told CBS News.
The subpoenas represent a significant escalation between the Justice Department and Minnesota officials, who have clashed over the Trump administration’s intense crackdown against immigrants living in the state illegally. They were served on the same day that Attorney General Pam Bondi arrived for a visit in Minnesota, multiple sources told CBS.
The subpoenas were sent in connection with a Justice Department investigation into state and local officials to see if they may have conspired to impede federal officers from discharging their duties, sources said.
The Justice Department did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
A copy of a subpoena seen by CBS does not specify which criminal violations the department is probing. However, multiple sources previously told CBS the primary statute being used as the basis for the probe is 18 USC 372 — the same one that was used against some of the rioters who stormed the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, including members of the far-right Oath Keepers and the Proud Boys.
Mr. Trump granted clemency to the more than 1,500 people who were convicted of crimes in connection with the Capitol riot during his first day in office one year ago.
Earlier this month, the Department of Homeland Security staged a massive deployment of federal immigration agents to the Minneapolis region, saying they would be tasked with arresting people suspected of being in the U.S. illegally and probing allegations of fraud.
In total, roughly 3,000 Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers and Border Patrol agents have been dispatched to the Twin Cities, a force that is nearly five times the size of the Minneapolis police department, which employs about 600 officers.
The high-profile federal deployment has been strongly opposed by state and local leaders, including Walz, Ellison and Frey, and angered many local residents, who have denounced actions and operations by federal agents as heavy-handed and indiscriminate.
Walz’s office confirmed to CBS News that it received a subpoena. In a statement, Walz said Minnesota would “not be drawn into political theater,” and alleged that the Justice Department’s investigation “does not seek justice,” but is a “partisan distraction.”
“Minnesotans are more concerned with safety and peace than baseless legal tactics aimed at intimidating public servants standing shoulder to shoulder with their community,” Walz said.
Frey, in a statement to CBS News, confirmed receiving the subpoena and said the Justice Department is pursuing him for merely disagreeing with the administration.
“When the federal government weaponizes its power to try to intimidate local leaders for doing their jobs, every American should be concerned,” he said. “We shouldn’t have to live in a country where people fear that federal law enforcement will be used to play politics or crack down on local voices they disagree with. In Minneapolis, we won’t be afraid. We know the difference between right and wrong, and, as Mayor, I’ll continue doing the job I was elected to do: keeping our community safe and standing up for our values.”
Ellison, in a statement to CBS, also confirmed that his office has received a grand jury subpoena seeking records, and noted that the subpoena is not directed to him personally.
“Less than two weeks ago, federal agents shot and killed a Minnesotan in broad daylight. Now, instead of seriously investigating the killing of Renee Good, Trump is weaponizing the justice system against any leader who dares stand up to him,” he said. “Everything about this is highly irregular, especially the fact that this comes shortly after my office sued the Trump Administration to challenge their illegal actions within Minnesota.”
Casper Hill, a spokesperson for Ramsey County — which includes St. Paul, Minnesota’s capital city — told CBS News in a statement that Ramsey County was also served with a subpoena.
Hennepin County spokesperson Daniel Borgertpoepping told CBS News that “[n]either Hennepin County Attorney Mary Moriarty nor the Hennepin County Attorney’s Office was served with a subpoena,” but that Hennepin County, whose county seat is in Minneapolis, was served with a subpoena. “The Civil Division of the Hennepin County Attorney’s Office represents Hennepin County in legal matters and will be advising the County on the subpoena,” Borgertpoepping said.
The subpoena sent to Frey’s office orders the office’s custodian of records to appear for testimony on Feb. 3.
It also asks for eight categories of documents, including all records and communications issued by the office since Jan. 1, related to federal immigration enforcement in Minnesota, any communications related to the lack of cooperation with federal immigration enforcement and any directives issued to Minnesota residents concerning their interactions with immigration officers.
Legal experts remain skeptical that the Justice Department has enough evidence to secure any indictments in the case.
“A grand jury subpoena should not be issued to an individual who is merely exercising their First Amendment rights,” said Gene Rossi, a former federal prosecutor who is now an attorney with Carlton Fields.
“Impeding an investigation is not done by words. It is done by actions. And all they are doing is criminalizing the policy of a president. If that is the basis for a grand jury investigation, the entire country could be subject to a grand jury investigation.”
At first glance, some of the language looks familiar.
A letter sent to state officials in Rhode Island by the Justice Department in June included a reminder that federal civil rights law “prohibits an employer from discriminating against an individual on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin.”
But that letter is part of a Trump administration initiative that upends 60 years of efforts by the federal government to prevent discrimination against minority groups in the U.S.
Several former Justice Department employees who spoke with CBS News said the department’s focus is shifting: it will seek to protect White people against alleged “reverse discrimination.”
The dramatic shift was crystallized by President Trump’s statement earlier this month in an interview with the New York Times. Trump said civil rights protections and programs have hurt White people.
“I think that a lot of people were very badly treated,” he told the Times. “White people were very badly treated, where they did extremely well and they were not invited to go into a university or a college.”
The Justice Department’s inquiry letter to Rhode Island says it is investigating whether the state is engaging in discrimination in its state government hiring in implementing an affirmative action plan that’s been used nationwide to ensure diverse workforces and student groups.
The Rhode Island inquiry is the latest in a series of probes by the Trump administration’s Justice Department into organizations or governments that use diversity, equity and inclusion programs.
Last week, the agency also filed a lawsuit against Minnesota, in an effort to bring down the state’s affirmative action hiring policies for its agencies. The suit asserts Minnesota law, which mandates affirmative action programs for state civil service, is a violation of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
“We’re seeing a Civil Rights Division that’s really acting on the president’s notion that civil rights laws have harmed White people,” said Jen Swedish, a former attorney in the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division.
“I think the president’s recent statement about reverse discrimination has demonstrated that this administration is focused much more narrowly on White people,” she said.
Swedish said federal laws have long prohibited discrimination against any groups, including White people and people of color. She and other former agency employees who spoke with CBS News said the Trump administration’s focus on targeting and reversing diversity programs appears to be a political decision.
“We are right now operating under a backdrop of a Department of Justice that’s no longer independent from the White House,” said Swedish, who began working in 2025 for the Washington, D.C.-based Justice Connection organization, which helps support thousands of former Justice Department employees with legal representation, employment guidance and mental health assistance, among other services.
A spokesperson for the Justice Department defended the new probes in a statement to CBS News.
“The DEI insanity that took hold of our country over the past decade or so has led to blatant, widespread race and sex discrimination in violation of federal law,” the spokesperson said. “The Civil Rights Division has dozens of active investigations into potentially unlawful discrimination adopted under the guise of diversity, equity, and inclusion. Some of these investigations are public, some aren’t. When we identify violations of federal law, we will not shy away from taking action.”
The Trump administration’s view of reverse discrimination and the prioritizing of these cases by the department is jarring to civil rights advocates who have long championed protections for people of color.
“The president has taken on the effort to mislead the American public and distort the truth and history. His statement is patently false,” said Derrick Johnson, the president of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People.
“This is beyond dog-whistle politics when they are playing to the lowest common denominator, denomination of our history, building to white supremacy, when in fact, the problem with what has happened is this false narrative of white supremacy,” Johnson said.
File: Harmeet K. Dhillon speaks at the IAC National Summit on Jan. 17, 2026 in Hollywood, Florida.
Noam Galai / Getty Images
In December, Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights Harmeet Dhillon announced a new rule for handling civil rights cases, eliminating disparate-impact liability from the Civil Rights Act Title VI regulations.
Title VI bans discrimination based on race, color, or national origin in programs that receive federal financial assistance. It’s intended to ensure equal access to benefits and services. Discrimination that’s the result of disparate-impact discrimination occurs “when a seemingly neutral policy or action causes a disproportionate and unjustified negative harm to a group, regardless of intent,” according to the Congressional Research Service. The issue has been the basis of lawsuits involving housing restrictions, lending or age discrimination in hiring and public accommodations for the disabled, among other cases.
In a statement in December, Dhillon accused the Justice Department of a history of “enforcing race- or sex-based quotas or assumptions.” And she said that disparate-impact regulations had “encouraged people to file lawsuits challenging racially neutral policies, without evidence of intentional discrimination.” Rescinding that regulation “will restore true equality under the law by requiring proof of actual discrimination, rather than enforcing race- or sex-based quotas or assumptions,” Dhillon said.
John Wesley, a community activist in Baltimore, told CBS News the changes to the Justice Department’s approach to racial discrimination risks hurting both White people and people of color. Wesley, who previously worked in local Maryland government agencies investigating allegations regarding housing discrimination, said the changes by the Trump administration risk triggering resignations or retirements inside the Justice Department.
He said the departures will hamper the agency’s ability to root out and stop discrimination and unfair practices against all people. Wesley said, “Economically impaired people come in all colors. If we change the protections or reduce them, we will hurt all people.”
A mass departure is already unfolding inside the Justice Department, including its Civil Rights Division.
Swedish and her colleagues at Justice Connection estimate more than 5,000 employees of the Justice Department have departed in the first year of the second Trump administration. She said many of those employees departed because of controversial policy changes and decisions by new agency leaders.
Earlier this month, prosecutors in the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division were told they would not play a role in the ongoing investigation into a fatal shooting of Renee Good in Minneapolis by a federal immigration officer, CBS News previously reported. Swedish told CBS News recent departures inside the Civil Rights Division have been especially consequential.
She said, “Those losses translate in hundreds or thousands of years of experience. These are people who have dedicated their entire lives to enforcing civil rights laws and these constitutional protections. I can’t overstate the value of those employees and the serious consequences of that institutional loss.”
Dhillon has said the agency has been hiring new employees and attorneys to serve in the division. It is unclear if the department’s new mission of combating alleged reverse discrimination will help lure new recruits, or dissuade more from applying.
The Justice Department is investigating Minnesota officials, including Gov. Tim Walz and Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey, over an alleged conspiracy to impede federal immigration agents, an extraordinary escalation in the Trump administration’s clash with Democratic leaders there, multiple sources familiar with the matter told CBS News.
One of the sources, a U.S. official, said the investigation stems from statements that Walz and Frey have made about the thousands of Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers and Border Patrol agents deployed to the Minneapolis region in recent weeks.
Subpoenas are likely to be issued in the probe, sources familiar with the matter told CBS News.
A Justice Department spokesperson declined to comment.
“This is an obvious attempt to intimidate me for standing up for Minneapolis, our local law enforcement, and our residents against the chaos and danger this Administration has brought to our streets,” Frey said in a statement to CBS News. “I will not be intimidated. My focus will remain where it’s always been: keeping our city safe.”
Walz said in a statement: “Two days ago it was Elissa Slotkin. Last week it was Jerome Powell. Before that, Mark Kelly. Weaponizing the justice system and threatening political opponents is a dangerous, authoritarian tactic. The only person not being investigated for the shooting of Renee Good is the federal agent who shot her.”
Nearly 3,000 federal immigration agents have been dispatched to Minneapolis, with a stated objective of arresting people suspected of being in the U.S. illegally and probing allegations of fraud in Minnesota. The Department of Homeland Security has called the massive deployment the largest operation in its history.
The large-scale presence of federal agents has triggered widespread local backlash, sparking protests and clashes, especially after the killing of Minnesota resident Renee Good by an ICE officer last week.
Walz and Frey, both Democrats, have vocally denounced the federal deployment to the Twin Cities, accusing federal agents of creating chaos and undermining public safety through aggressive tactics.
Earlier this week, Frey said the federal deployment had created a situation that was “not sustainable.”
“We’re in a position right now where we have residents that are asking the very limited number of police officers that we have to fight ICE agents on the street,” Frey said. “We cannot be at a place right now in America where we have two governmental entities that are literally fighting one another.”
Walz and Frey have called for protests to remain peaceful. The governor urged Minnesotans not to “fan the flames of chaos” in a message on X Thursday.
Attorney General Pam Bondi wrote on X Friday, “A reminder to all those in Minnesota: No one is above the law.”
Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche, who visited Minneapolis with FBI Director Kash Patel on Friday, appeared to make a vague reference to the investigation earlier this week.
“Walz and Frey- I’m focused on stopping YOU from your terrorism by whatever means necessary. This is not a threat. It’s a promise,” Blanche wrote on X earlier this week.
Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem on Thursday said: “Mayor Frey and Governor Walz have to get their city under control. They are encouraging impeding and assault against our law enforcement which is a federal crime, a felony.”
Noem has said rhetoric from Walz and Frey “perpetuated” violence directed at federal officers, arguing their comments undermined public trust in law enforcement and emboldened protesters on the ground.
The federal inquiry is focused on a federal statute, 18 U.S.C. § 372, one U.S. official told CBS News, which makes it a crime for two or more people to conspire to prevent federal officers from carrying out their official duties through “force, intimidation or threats.”
The statute has historically been used in cases involving coordinated efforts to obstruct federal officials, including actions involving violence or threats. Public criticism of federal policy has historically been treated as protected speech unless involving direct coordination or incitement to obstruct law enforcement.
The frontrunner to oversee a new national counter-fraud push at the Justice Department in the wake of revelations of massive public benefits fraud in Minnesota is a top official in Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche’s office, sources familiar with the decision told CBS News.
Colin McDonald is being considered for the newly created position of assistant attorney general, the sources said. McDonald is a longtime federal prosecutor who is currently an associate deputy attorney general.
Mr. Trump said Wednesday he had someone in mind for the post, but he was not ready to announce a name. His nominee will require U.S. Senate confirmation.
“We have chosen a person who’s very tough, very smart, very fair,” the president told reporters in the Oval Office.
Mr. Trump earlier this month announced that the Justice Department would be establishing a new division tasked with investigating and prosecuting fraud against the federal government, as well as private citizens.
The White House is leaning into new anti-fraud efforts and more oversight is likely to be announced in coming weeks.
The new assistant attorney general post will be structured the same way as existing roles, according one of the sources with direct knowledge of the matter. The Justice Department’s current criminal and civil divisions, as well as U.S. Attorney’s offices around the country, already handle a wide variety of fraud cases, from healthcare fraud to violations of the False Claims Act.
McDonald is considered a close ally to Blanche, one of the people familiar with the matter told CBS News. The fact that Mr. Trump is considering him for the role suggests that the White House is listening to Blanche’s advice, the person added.
Of all of the associate deputy attorneys general in Blanche’s office, McDonald is among those with the most experience in the field as a prosecutor.
He is also among a handful of close advisers in Blanche’s office who has been involved in efforts to root out what Trump allies have described as the weaponization of the U.S. justice system against him during President Biden’s tenure, according to government records reviewed by CBS News.
The creation of a new fraud-focused division at the Justice Department comes as Minnesota and its officials have come under nationwide scrutiny over a growing fraud scandal in the state, which prosecutors estimate could top $9 billion.
More than 90 people have faced federal charges as a result of fraud schemes in the state that have come to light since 2021.
Prosecutors have uncovered widespread fraud in various social services programs, including a housing program for seniors, one that provides services to children with autism and the Federal Child Nutrition Program.
Two cities in the San Francisco Bay Area are facing a lawsuit brought on by the Trump administration seeking to end their bans on natural gas in new buildings.
On Jan. 5, the Department of Justice filed a suit in the Northern District of California against the cities of Morgan Hill and Petaluma.
According to the text of the lawsuit, federal prosecutors argue such bans lead to “crushing” costs for residents and are preempted by federal law.
“These natural gas bans hurt American families and are outright illegal,” Attorney General Pamela Bondi said in a statement. “Alongside the Department of Energy, the Department of Justice is working around the clock to end radical environmentalist policies, restore common sense, and unleash American energy.”
Adam Gustafson, the Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General of the DOJ’s Environment and Natural Resources Division, said, “When states and cities pick winners and losers, consumers pay the price. Our complaint seeks to restore consumer choice so that people and businesses can build in a way that fits their needs best.”
According to prosecutors, Morgan Hill approved a ban on new natural gas infrastructure in 2019, while Petaluma followed two years later.
Another Bay Area city, Berkeley, was the first in the country to implement a ban on natural gas on new homes and buildings, citing concerns about climate change. The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals tossed out Berkeley’s ordinance in 2024, following a challenge brought on by the California Restaurant Association.
“Under that controlling precedent, Morgan Hill’s and Petaluma’s natural gas bans are invalid-as numerous other California cities have recognized when recently repealing or suspending their equivalent bans,” the lawsuit said.
In a statement to CBS News Bay Area on Tuesday, Morgan Hill City Attorney Donald Larkin said the city follows federal law and will continue to do so.
“The City has not denied any permits for gas infrastructure based on the 2019 ordinance since the courts struck down Berkeley’s similar ordinance. In fact, the City has approved projects with gas infrastructure. While we are still reviewing the complaint, this lawsuit appears to be an unnecessary effort to require the City to follow laws with which the City is already in compliance,” Larkin said.
Petaluma City Attorney Eric Danly said in a separate statement to CBS News Bay Area that they are also complying with federal law and that they are not enforcing their ordinance following the 9th Circuit ruling.
“In fact, the City has not denied any project or permit applications based on its electrification regulations, and has approved and is processing development projects that include gas infrastructure. In any event, the City has observed that developers have generally opted voluntarily to install electric utilities,” Danly said.
The lawsuit calls for the court to declare the bans are preempted by federal law and to enter a permanent injunction to prevent the ordinances from taking effect.
London — The heads of 10 major central banks and global financial institutions threw their collective support behind U.S. Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell, saying in a joint statement published Tuesday that it was “critical to preserve” the banks’ independence.
U.S. prosecutors have opened an inquiry into Powell, prompting his rare rebuke against escalating pressure from President Trump’s administration to lower interest rates.
“We stand in full solidarity with the Federal Reserve System and its Chair Jerome H. Powell,” said the statement signed by heads of the European Central Bank, the Bank of England and others, including the central banks of Australia, Brazil, Canada and South Korea.
“The independence of central banks is a cornerstone of price, financial and economic stability in the interest of the citizens that we serve. It is therefore critical to preserve that independence, with full respect for the rule of law and democratic accountability. Chair Powell has served with integrity, focused on his mandate and an unwavering commitment to the public interest. To us, he is a respected colleague who is held in the highest regard by all who have worked with him,” the statement said.
From left, Jerome Powell, chairman of the U.S. Federal Reserve; Tiff Macklem, governor of the Bank of Canada; and Andrew Bailey, governor of the Bank of England, speaking during the Kansas City Federal Reserve’s Jackson Hole Economic Policy Symposium in Moran, Wyoming, on Aug. 23, 2024.
Natalie Behring/Bloomberg/Getty
The Federal Reserve received grand jury subpoenas from the Justice Department on Friday stemming from an investigation into its chair over the cost of building renovations, Powell said in a video statement shared on Sunday.
The subpoenas threatened a criminal indictment related to Powell’s testimony before the Senate Banking Committee in June 2025, during which he spoke about a multi-year project to renovate historic Federal Reserve office buildings, according to Powell.
He said in his video statement that the move by the Department of Justice should, however, be “seen in the broader context of the administration’s threats and ongoing pressure.”
“This new threat is not about my testimony last June or about the renovation of the Federal Reserve buildings. It is not about Congress’ oversight role; the Fed, through testimony and other public disclosures, made every effort to keep Congress informed about the renovation project. Those are pretexts,” said Powell. “The threat of criminal charges is a consequence of the Federal Reserve setting interest rates based on our best assessment of what will serve the public, rather than following the preferences of the president.”
U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi said on Saturday that Nicolás Maduro and his wife “will soon face the full wrath of American justice on American soil in American courts.” Scott MacFarlane has details on the legal case against the former Venezuelan strongman.
Washington — The Virginia man accused of planting two pipe bombs outside the Republican and Democratic Party headquarters on the eve of the Jan. 6, 2021, U.S. Capitol riot will be in court Tuesday as his lawyers and federal prosecutors argue over whether he should remain detained in the lead-up to a criminal trial.
Justice Department lawyers have argued in court papers that Brian Cole, 30, poses an “intolerable risk” to the community and should continue to be detained. He faces two criminal charges stemming from the alleged planting of two improvised explosive devices in the vicinity of the RNC and DNC headquarters in Washington, D.C., nearly five years ago. He has not yet entered a plea to the charges.
Prosecutors urged the court to keep Cole in custody “considering the extreme and profoundly serious nature of his crimes, the overwhelming evidence of his guilt, the years he has spent deceiving those around him to avoid accountability, and the intolerable risk that he will again resort to violence to express his frustration with the world around him.”
The Justice Department said in court filings Sunday that Cole has confessed to constructing the bombs, filling them with explosive power and setting their timers to detonate. Prosecutors argued that he evaded law enforcement and avoided accountability “for actions that endangered lives and created a widespread sense of fear and terror.”
The devices were planted on the night of Jan. 5, 2021, and were not discovered until the afternoon of Jan. 6, 2021, as law enforcement in Washington, D.C., were overwhelmed when a mob of President Trump’s supporters breached the U.S. Capitol in an effort to stop Congress from certifying the results of the 2020 presidential election.
The bombs did not detonate, but the FBI said they were viable. The perpetrator who planted the devices eluded federal investigators for years, even as the FBI continued to release new video and information in hopes of a break in the case. Then, earlier this month, authorities arrested Cole after investigators looked at cellphone provider records, purchasing history and vehicle movements.
Brian Cole Jr.
Department of Justice
Cole told investigators during an interview after his arrest that he had driven to Washington, D.C., on Jan. 5 to attend a protest over the outcome of the 2020 election and did not tell his family he was going to a protest in support of Mr. Trump, prosecutors said. He said that after the 2020 election, he began following the issue on YouTube and Reddit “when it first seemed like something was wrong” and “stuff started happening,” according to Justice Department filings. He said that “if people feel that their votes are like just being thrown away, then . . . at the very least someone should address it,” prosecutors said.
Prosecutors wrote that when asked about his motive, Cole said “something just snapped” and he wanted to target “the parties” because “they were in charge.” He denied that his actions were directed toward Congress or related to certification of the 2020 election results, which took place on Jan. 6, according to the Justice Department.
Cole’s lawyers have argued in court papers that he should not be kept in custody while awaiting a trial, as he has lived “without incident” for the past four years. They said that Cole has been diagnosed with Autism Spectrum Disorder, Level 1, and obsessive compulsive disorder. Level 1 is the mildest form of Autism Spectrum Disorder, according to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition.
Cole’s legal team also argued that he has no criminal history and said there is “zero evidence” to suggest he would flee ahead of a trial. He agreed to home detention with GPS monitoring, and would be supervised by his grandmother, according to court filings.
“There is no pattern of alarming conduct either prior to or after the alleged conduct at issue in this case. Mr. Cole does not pose a danger to the community,” they wrote.
Cole’s lawyers have also asked the magistrate judge overseeing Tuesday’s hearing to order any and all confessions or admissions Cole made to investigators to be turned over to his legal team.
Cole, a Virginia resident, was arrested earlier this month after the yearslong search for the perpetrator of the alleged plot. In court documents, the FBI said Cole lives with his mother and other family members in Woodbridge, Virginia, and works in a bail bondsman’s office.
His lawyers said that Cole “can continue being a productive member of society upon release” because he can return to his job, “which will provide immediate structure and accountability.”
