They Face $1 Million in Fines—for Someone Else's Code Violations
Humboldt County, California's sketchy code enforcement scheme piles ruinous fines on innocent people and sets them up to lose.
Humboldt County, California's sketchy code enforcement scheme piles ruinous fines on innocent people and sets them up to lose.
The Supreme Court will hear a case next week challenging the legality of President Donald Trump's "emergency" tariffs.
To fill the roles, the Trump administration is turning to agents from Customs and Border Protection, the agency that has led aggressive immigration enforcement operations in Los Angeles and Chicago.
The DOJ tried to claim jurisdiction because he drove on a road.
His administration is urging the Supreme Court to uphold a prosecution for violating a federal law that bars illegal drug users from owning firearms.
The actions would violate a federal order imposed by U.S. District Court Judge Sara L. Ellis to limit the use of nonlethal weapons and other crowd control tactics.
That understanding of a familiar anti-Biden slogan hinges on the political message it communicates.
The decision “erodes core constitutional principles, including sovereign States’ control over their States’ militias and the people’s First Amendment rights,” Judge Susan P. Graber warned in her dissent.
The law applies to millions of Americans who pose no plausible threat to public safety, including cannabis consumers in states that have legalized marijuana.
U.S. District Court Judge Sara L. Ellis is “profoundly concerned” about the continued clashing between protestors and federal agents despite her temporary restraining order issued last week.
Grand juries have declined to indict numerous times when Trump's prosecutors have brought excessive charges.
The former Trump administration official is facing a maximum of 180 years in prison.
The settlement, which followed Sylvia Gonzalez's victory at the Supreme Court, also includes remedial First Amendment training for city officials.
The cases give the justices a chance to address a constitutionally dubious policy that disarms peaceful Americans.
Law enforcement launched 30 tear gas canisters into Amy Hadley's home, smashed windows, ransacked furniture, destroyed security cameras, and more. The government gave her nothing.
If the courts try to enforce legal limits on the president's military deployments, he can resort to an alarmingly broad statute that gives him more discretion.
The case is the second in two weeks, with little legal merit, filed by a neophyte prosecutor against a Trump opponent
Lawyers at America's largest civil liberties group say the agency’s lack of transparency violates federal disclosure requirements.
U.S. District Judge Karin Immergut concluded that the president's description of "War ravaged Portland" was "simply untethered to the facts."
The law is one of several attempts to override the right to bear arms by making it impractical to exercise.
Judge William Young wrote a book-length order attacking “the problem this President has with the First Amendment.”
“I got arrested twice for being a Latino working in construction,” says Leo Garcia Venegas, the lead plaintiff in a new lawsuit filed by the Institute for Justice challenging warrantless ICE raids on construction sites.
By demanding that the Justice Department punish the former FBI director for wronging him, the president provided evidence to support a claim of selective or vindictive prosecution.
There is ample evidence to suspect prosecutors are just doing President Trump's dirty work rather than following the facts of the case.
The decision, which hinges on an exception to the Gun-Free School Zones Act, does not say whether that law is consistent with the Second Amendment.
Lawsuits against Oregon and Maine test how far the federal government can go in demanding access to voter information.
Whether he is waging the drug war, imposing tariffs, deporting alleged gang members, or fighting crime, the president thinks he can do "anything I want to do."
Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis promised that the federal government would reimburse the state for the costs of "Alligator Alcatraz," but doing so would make the detention facility subject to environmental reviews Florida ignored.
Such a gun ban is not authorized by statute or allowed by the Second Amendment.
The same legal theory that tripped up Joe Biden's student loan scheme could also sink Donald Trump's tariffs.
A federal judge cleared the way for Jennifer Heath Box's lawsuit against the cops who misidentified her as a fugitive, despite a "mountain of evidence" that they had the wrong woman.
The Justice Department reportedly is considering a regulation aimed at disarming "mentally ill individuals suffering from gender dysphoria."
The appeals court blocked the removal of alleged Venezuelan gang members under that law "because we find no invasion or predatory incursion."
The federal law relies on a risible reading of the Commerce Clause to restrict a constitutional right.
Donald Trump's claim that the appeals court ruled against him for partisan or ideological reasons is hard to take seriously.
Plus: Rogue sheriffs, Trump life coaching, Trump family cryptocurrency, and more…
Seven judges agreed that the president's assertion of unlimited authority to tax imports is illegal and unconstitutional.
Trump went "beyond the authority delegated to the President," the court ruled, but it vacated an injunction that could have provided immediate tariff relief to American businesses.
The appeals court rejected most of the arguments in favor of that policy, saying "the government must show non-intoxicated marijuana users pose a risk of future danger."
A recent federal appeals court decision underlines the importance of that safeguard.
The appeals court concluded that the government had failed to show that policy is consistent with "this Nation's historical tradition of firearm regulation."
A federal district court judge granted environmentalist groups’ request for a preliminary injunction.
The 2016 brief defended the understanding of the 14th Amendment that the president wants to overturn.
There’s no historical precedent for trying to ration constitutionally protected rights.
A video by the White House corroborates that account, calling into question just how serious the president is about actually addressing crime.
The words national emergency are not a magic spell that presidents can utter to unlock unlimited legislative powers for themselves.
For years, the president has rightly railed against those oppressive regimes. So why is his administration targeting their victims?
The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression is seeking an injunction that would protect noncitizens at The Stanford Daily from arrest and removal because of their published work.