Crime News

CRIME NEWS

Showing 12 articles

$Second Wave of Family Separations: 11,800+ United States-affected Families Still Await Justice","description":"The Trump administration’s family separation policy continues to impact thousands of families, with a recent investigation revealing renewed separations despite a settlement that guaranteed reunification.","summary":"An AP investigation uncovers that the U.S. government has re-separated a significant number of children from their parents within the last year, violating the Ms. L settlement that promised they remain together. The story follows the case of Ederson Alva and his mother, Elva López, highlighting legal battles, government denial, and the urgent need for renewed protections.","image":"https://dims.apnews.com/dims4/default/3b21a05/2147483647/strip/true/crop/8640x5760+0+0/resize/599x399!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fassets.apnews.com%2Ffe%2F6b%2Fb5695ec27def0182e3698487be98%2Fe89ef3586e4043848e6174551247b59d","text":"<h2>Ederson Alva’s 8‑Year Long Journey</h2><p>When 3‑year‑old Ederson Alva was pulled from his mother’s arms at the U.S.-Mexico border in 2018, he and Elva López were separated for months in a government facility. They reunited only after lawyers pressed the case, but the moment was a temporary reprieve. Six months later, on June 3, 2024, the family was pulled apart again, with Ederson sent to Guatemala the same day his mother was detained. It was only on a federal judge’s order that the two were allowed to return to Florida, after a year in the indigenous highlands of Guatemala.</p><h2>A Settlement That Should Have Ended It All</h2><p>In 2018 the Trump administration, under Stephen Miller’s hard‑line immigration policy, began separating families at the border. The ACLU filed a class‑action lawsuit—<em>Ms. L v. U.S. Customs and Immigration Enforcement</em>—to halt the practice. A judge ordered the policy to stop, noting the lasting harm inflicted on families. In 2023 a settlement promised the affected parents, children and relatives legal protections, pathways to asylum, work permits, and support services, existing until December 2031. The settlement also mandated regular audits of removal orders, a right to counsel and a comprehensive record of every family affected.</p><h2>Investigation Reveals New Violations</h2><p>The latest Associated Press investigation shows that, despite the settlement, the U.S. government has re‑separated dozens of children from their parents this past year—cases that were fully documented by the settlement. Reports indicate that many parents were detained in immigration facilities for months, while others were deported after the system identified them as “legally off‑limits for removal.” Immigration officials thereby undermined the court’s order to keep families together. Their emails reveal that the department used the designation of “statutory authority” to justify removal orders against those entitled to protection.</p><h2>Government’s Defense</h2><p>Assistant Secretary Lauren Bis, spokesperson for the Department of Homeland Security, insisted “the agency complies with all court orders.” She argued that enforcement of immigration law was “not optional” and that every removal “helps restore order.” The Department’s attorneys claim there are no legal restrictions on its authority to execute removal orders, a stance that conflicts sharply with the settlement’s mandates.</p><h2>Practical Impact on Families</h2><p>Elva López reports that after returning to Florida on a judge’s order, the Department again questioned her, tracing fingerprints and taking new documents. She received only two weeks of humanitarian parole, while Ederson and his siblings remain in legal limbo. The settlement’s benefits, including the right to apply for asylum, will expire in December. Beyond the expiration, the Department’s current contract covering legal services also ends in August, leaving families without counsel or support.</p><h2>What’s at Stake?</h2><p>The settlement requires that removal orders be canceled by December and that the government fully documents every class‑member family. Failure to meet these deadlines could strip families of their legal status and future asylum claims. As deportation numbers rise, many parents fear filling out government paperwork and miss out on the settlement’s protections because they are unaware of the lawsuit’s provisions or the impending expiration dates.</p><h2>Looking Ahead</h2><p>With the settlement’s deadline approaching and a court order that the government violated the settlement, legal teams are pushing for immediate statutory action to ensure all families are granted the rights they were promised. Meanwhile, the public remains largely unaware that the Trump administration’s second‑term policy has caused new separations, perpetuating the trauma originally caused by the first‑term policy.</p><h2>Stay Informed</h2><p>For ongoing updates, connect with the investigative team at <a href=\"mailto:investigative@ap.org\">investigative@ap.org</a> or through the secure Signal channel at +1 (202) 281‑8604. The story continues to unfold as courts and advocacy groups press for compliance with the mandated settlement. "</p>$

Second Wave of Family Separations: 11,800+ United States-affected Families Still Await Justice","description":"The Trump administration’s family separation policy continues to impact thousands of families, with a recent investigation revealing renewed separations despite a settlement that guaranteed reunification.","summary":"An AP investigation uncovers that the U.S. government has re-separated a significant number of children from their parents within the last year, violating the Ms. L settlement that promised they remain together. The story follows the case of Ederson Alva and his mother, Elva López, highlighting legal battles, government denial, and the urgent need for renewed protections.","image":"https://dims.apnews.com/dims4/default/3b21a05/2147483647/strip/true/crop/8640x5760+0+0/resize/599x399!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fassets.apnews.com%2Ffe%2F6b%2Fb5695ec27def0182e3698487be98%2Fe89ef3586e4043848e6174551247b59d","text":"<h2>Ederson Alva’s 8‑Year Long Journey</h2><p>When 3‑year‑old Ederson Alva was pulled from his mother’s arms at the U.S.-Mexico border in 2018, he and Elva López were separated for months in a government facility. They reunited only after lawyers pressed the case, but the moment was a temporary reprieve. Six months later, on June 3, 2024, the family was pulled apart again, with Ederson sent to Guatemala the same day his mother was detained. It was only on a federal judge’s order that the two were allowed to return to Florida, after a year in the indigenous highlands of Guatemala.</p><h2>A Settlement That Should Have Ended It All</h2><p>In 2018 the Trump administration, under Stephen Miller’s hard‑line immigration policy, began separating families at the border. The ACLU filed a class‑action lawsuit—<em>Ms. L v. U.S. Customs and Immigration Enforcement</em>—to halt the practice. A judge ordered the policy to stop, noting the lasting harm inflicted on families. In 2023 a settlement promised the affected parents, children and relatives legal protections, pathways to asylum, work permits, and support services, existing until December 2031. The settlement also mandated regular audits of removal orders, a right to counsel and a comprehensive record of every family affected.</p><h2>Investigation Reveals New Violations</h2><p>The latest Associated Press investigation shows that, despite the settlement, the U.S. government has re‑separated dozens of children from their parents this past year—cases that were fully documented by the settlement. Reports indicate that many parents were detained in immigration facilities for months, while others were deported after the system identified them as “legally off‑limits for removal.” Immigration officials thereby undermined the court’s order to keep families together. Their emails reveal that the department used the designation of “statutory authority” to justify removal orders against those entitled to protection.</p><h2>Government’s Defense</h2><p>Assistant Secretary Lauren Bis, spokesperson for the Department of Homeland Security, insisted “the agency complies with all court orders.” She argued that enforcement of immigration law was “not optional” and that every removal “helps restore order.” The Department’s attorneys claim there are no legal restrictions on its authority to execute removal orders, a stance that conflicts sharply with the settlement’s mandates.</p><h2>Practical Impact on Families</h2><p>Elva López reports that after returning to Florida on a judge’s order, the Department again questioned her, tracing fingerprints and taking new documents. She received only two weeks of humanitarian parole, while Ederson and his siblings remain in legal limbo. The settlement’s benefits, including the right to apply for asylum, will expire in December. Beyond the expiration, the Department’s current contract covering legal services also ends in August, leaving families without counsel or support.</p><h2>What’s at Stake?</h2><p>The settlement requires that removal orders be canceled by December and that the government fully documents every class‑member family. Failure to meet these deadlines could strip families of their legal status and future asylum claims. As deportation numbers rise, many parents fear filling out government paperwork and miss out on the settlement’s protections because they are unaware of the lawsuit’s provisions or the impending expiration dates.</p><h2>Looking Ahead</h2><p>With the settlement’s deadline approaching and a court order that the government violated the settlement, legal teams are pushing for immediate statutory action to ensure all families are granted the rights they were promised. Meanwhile, the public remains largely unaware that the Trump administration’s second‑term policy has caused new separations, perpetuating the trauma originally caused by the first‑term policy.</p><h2>Stay Informed</h2><p>For ongoing updates, connect with the investigative team at <a href=\"mailto:investigative@ap.org\">investigative@ap.org</a> or through the secure Signal channel at +1 (202) 281‑8604. The story continues to unfold as courts and advocacy groups press for compliance with the mandated settlement. "</p>

$St. Paul Prosecutor Declares No State Charges for ICE Protesters","description":"City Attorney Irene Kao announced that anti‑immigration activists who disrupted a Minnesota church service will not face state criminal charges, a decision that has drawn criticism from church leadership and civil rights groups.","summary":"In St. Paul, Minnesota, a group of protesters who interrupted a church service in January were charged federally but will not face state crime charges, according to City Attorney Irene Kao. The protest was led by former CNN host Don Lemon and targeted a pastor who also served as an ICE official. Despite the city’s statement that no violence or property damage occurred, church leaders argue that the act itself broke the law.","image":"https://example.com/images/ice_protest.jpg","text":"<p>In St. Paul, Minnesota, a group of anti‑immigration protesters, who already face federal criminal charges, interrupted a church service on January 18, but the city attorney has decided they will not also face state criminal charges.</p><p>City Attorney Irene Kao said the evidence available was insufficient to meet the standard required for criminal prosecution under Minnesota state statutes. \"This decision should not be interpreted as an endorsement of unlawful behavior or public disorder,\" Kao added. \"The right to peacefully protest is protected, as is the right to exercise one’s religious beliefs. Balancing these equally important rights is paramount to our decision today.\"</p><p>The federal Department of Justice filed civil‑rights charges against 39 people, including former CNN journalist Don Lemon and another independent reporter, after a livestream showed the protests at Cities Church on Jan. 18. Protesters chanted \"ICE out\" and \"Justice for Renee Good,\" a 37‑year‑old mother of three who was fatally shot by an ICE agent during an intensified federal immigration enforcement operation in Minneapolis.</p><p>Participants discovered that one of the church’s pastors also served as an ICE official overseeing the national enforcement push in Minnesota. \"According to the St. Paul City Attorney's logic, it is perfectly fine for agitators to invade a mosque, cathedral, or temple, intimidate the families and children inside, and shut down their religious gathering,\" pastor Jonathan Parnell said in a written statement. \"Just call it a protest.\"</p><p>While the protesters did not smash windows or spill property, the church’s attorneys argue that the right to disrupt worship is not protected by law. \"Violence, destruction of property and threats to public safety remain serious concerns,\" Kao added, noting that such actions did not occur during the demonstration.<br>Despite the absence of violence, the church says that the legal boundaries were still crossed.</p><p>Four states – Idaho, Louisiana, Oklahoma and Kansas – adopted statutes this year that deem it a crime to disrupt worship services. These laws are now in effect in those states and are being monitored by civil‑rights advocates in Minnesota as well.</p>$

St. Paul Prosecutor Declares No State Charges for ICE Protesters","description":"City Attorney Irene Kao announced that anti‑immigration activists who disrupted a Minnesota church service will not face state criminal charges, a decision that has drawn criticism from church leadership and civil rights groups.","summary":"In St. Paul, Minnesota, a group of protesters who interrupted a church service in January were charged federally but will not face state crime charges, according to City Attorney Irene Kao. The protest was led by former CNN host Don Lemon and targeted a pastor who also served as an ICE official. Despite the city’s statement that no violence or property damage occurred, church leaders argue that the act itself broke the law.","image":"https://example.com/images/ice_protest.jpg","text":"<p>In St. Paul, Minnesota, a group of anti‑immigration protesters, who already face federal criminal charges, interrupted a church service on January 18, but the city attorney has decided they will not also face state criminal charges.</p><p>City Attorney Irene Kao said the evidence available was insufficient to meet the standard required for criminal prosecution under Minnesota state statutes. \"This decision should not be interpreted as an endorsement of unlawful behavior or public disorder,\" Kao added. \"The right to peacefully protest is protected, as is the right to exercise one’s religious beliefs. Balancing these equally important rights is paramount to our decision today.\"</p><p>The federal Department of Justice filed civil‑rights charges against 39 people, including former CNN journalist Don Lemon and another independent reporter, after a livestream showed the protests at Cities Church on Jan. 18. Protesters chanted \"ICE out\" and \"Justice for Renee Good,\" a 37‑year‑old mother of three who was fatally shot by an ICE agent during an intensified federal immigration enforcement operation in Minneapolis.</p><p>Participants discovered that one of the church’s pastors also served as an ICE official overseeing the national enforcement push in Minnesota. \"According to the St. Paul City Attorney's logic, it is perfectly fine for agitators to invade a mosque, cathedral, or temple, intimidate the families and children inside, and shut down their religious gathering,\" pastor Jonathan Parnell said in a written statement. \"Just call it a protest.\"</p><p>While the protesters did not smash windows or spill property, the church’s attorneys argue that the right to disrupt worship is not protected by law. \"Violence, destruction of property and threats to public safety remain serious concerns,\" Kao added, noting that such actions did not occur during the demonstration.<br>Despite the absence of violence, the church says that the legal boundaries were still crossed.</p><p>Four states – Idaho, Louisiana, Oklahoma and Kansas – adopted statutes this year that deem it a crime to disrupt worship services. These laws are now in effect in those states and are being monitored by civil‑rights advocates in Minnesota as well.</p>

Virginia Bus Crash Highlights Long‑Standing Safety Gaps in Commercial Transport

$Chicago Prosecutor Admits Speaking to Grand Jury for First Time","description":"U.S. Attorney Andrew Boutros publicly acknowledges a personal pitch to grand jurors during a protest indictment, marking an unprecedented level of transparency in the justice system.","summary":"In a rare admission, Chicago’s top federal prosecutor says he offered a pep talk to a grand jury before indicting protestors over immigration enforcement actions. The move highlights growing scrutiny over the DOJ’s handling of grand juries during the Trump era.","image":"https://dims.apnews.com/dims4/default/0a6a942/2147483647/strip/true/crop/4038x2692+0+0/resize/1440x960!/format/webp/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fassets.apnews.com%2F7b%2Faf%2F5e2193159b829937a1e22ebfa897%2F2434212dec644fda8854c2025f5ec4d6","text":"<h1 style=\"font-family:Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-weight:700;margin-bottom:0.5rem\">Chicago Prosecutor Admits Speaking to Grand Jury for First Time</h1><p style=\"font-family:Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:1rem;margin-bottom:1rem\">The top federal prosecutor in Chicago, Andrew Boutros, formally acknowledged that he spoke personally to a grand jury before it indicted protestors who opposed the Trump administration’s immigration sweeps last year. This is the first time a prosecutor has publicly revealed such involvement in a grand jury's deliberations, a move that has prompted calls for greater transparency in a process that has traditionally operated behind closed doors.</p><p style=\"font-family:Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:1rem;margin-bottom:1rem\">Boutros released a five-page statement, complete with transcript excerpts, in response to defense attorneys' claims that he had “unusual personal contact” with jurors in October. In his submission, he says the purpose of his presence was to remind jurors of their duty to remain fair and not to influence the hearing. He specifically urged jurors to raise their hand if they could not set aside personal feelings regarding immigration or any other case.</p><p style=\"font-family:Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:1rem;margin-bottom:1rem\">The case, involving anti‑immigration protests at a Chicago-area detention site, ultimately saw charges against four activists dropped following allegations of misconduct by an assistant U.S. attorney during the grand jury proceedings. A judge later ruled that no one acted with intent to mislead the jury.</p><h2 style=\"font-family:Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:1.5rem;margin-top:1.5rem;margin-bottom:0.5rem\">The Grand Jury Process</h2><p style=\"font-family:Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:1rem;margin-bottom:1rem\">A federal grand jury typically comprises 16 to 23 jurors and operates in complete secrecy. Unlike criminal trials, defense attorneys are not permitted to participate. Prosecutors present evidence, and the jury must receive 12 affirmative votes to issue an indictment. Jurors, as well as prosecutors and investigators, are sworn to silence.</p><p style=\"font-family:Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:1rem;margin-bottom:1rem\">It is highly uncommon for a U.S. attorney—especially one in a major city—to appear in the grand jury room. Boutros explained that he was present to deliver a brief motivational address while his staff handled the details of the case. He expressed concern about jurors who might be reluctant to accept evidence impartially due to personal biases.</p><h2 style=\"font-family:Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:1.5rem;margin-top:1.5rem;margin-bottom:0.5rem\">Reactions and Broader DOJ Issues</h2><p style=\"font-family:Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:1rem;margin-bottom:1rem\">Defense attorney Josh Herman described Boutros’s appearance as “chilling,” noting that the prosecutor asked jurors to disclose when they could not separate personal feelings from the evidence. Herman, along with other attorneys, is seeking a court order requiring the government to reimburse legal fees resulting from the misconduct.</p><p style=\"font-family:Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:1rem;margin-bottom:1rem\">Boutros’s role comes amid a series of DOJ mishaps during the Trump administration, including the dismissal of charges in Wyoming after a prosecutor told jurors that suspects were “bad guys” and "murderers,” and an admonishment of a Trump loyalist who secured the indictment of former FBI Director James Comey. In Minnesota, a federal magistrate judge scolded a pro‑Trump official involved in an indictment of journalist Don Lemon over an immigration protest at a church.</p><p style=\"font-family:Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:1rem;margin-bottom:1rem\">Boutros was appointed U.S. attorney in 2025 for northern Illinois and was recently asked to resign by Illinois Senators Dick Durbin and Tammy Duckworth. They cited “chaos” and “deep internal dysfunction” in his office. The case underscores ongoing challenges with grand jury proceedings as the Department of Justice navigates its legacy of procedural controversies.</p>$

Chicago Prosecutor Admits Speaking to Grand Jury for First Time","description":"U.S. Attorney Andrew Boutros publicly acknowledges a personal pitch to grand jurors during a protest indictment, marking an unprecedented level of transparency in the justice system.","summary":"In a rare admission, Chicago’s top federal prosecutor says he offered a pep talk to a grand jury before indicting protestors over immigration enforcement actions. The move highlights growing scrutiny over the DOJ’s handling of grand juries during the Trump era.","image":"https://dims.apnews.com/dims4/default/0a6a942/2147483647/strip/true/crop/4038x2692+0+0/resize/1440x960!/format/webp/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fassets.apnews.com%2F7b%2Faf%2F5e2193159b829937a1e22ebfa897%2F2434212dec644fda8854c2025f5ec4d6","text":"<h1 style=\"font-family:Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-weight:700;margin-bottom:0.5rem\">Chicago Prosecutor Admits Speaking to Grand Jury for First Time</h1><p style=\"font-family:Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:1rem;margin-bottom:1rem\">The top federal prosecutor in Chicago, Andrew Boutros, formally acknowledged that he spoke personally to a grand jury before it indicted protestors who opposed the Trump administration’s immigration sweeps last year. This is the first time a prosecutor has publicly revealed such involvement in a grand jury's deliberations, a move that has prompted calls for greater transparency in a process that has traditionally operated behind closed doors.</p><p style=\"font-family:Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:1rem;margin-bottom:1rem\">Boutros released a five-page statement, complete with transcript excerpts, in response to defense attorneys' claims that he had “unusual personal contact” with jurors in October. In his submission, he says the purpose of his presence was to remind jurors of their duty to remain fair and not to influence the hearing. He specifically urged jurors to raise their hand if they could not set aside personal feelings regarding immigration or any other case.</p><p style=\"font-family:Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:1rem;margin-bottom:1rem\">The case, involving anti‑immigration protests at a Chicago-area detention site, ultimately saw charges against four activists dropped following allegations of misconduct by an assistant U.S. attorney during the grand jury proceedings. A judge later ruled that no one acted with intent to mislead the jury.</p><h2 style=\"font-family:Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:1.5rem;margin-top:1.5rem;margin-bottom:0.5rem\">The Grand Jury Process</h2><p style=\"font-family:Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:1rem;margin-bottom:1rem\">A federal grand jury typically comprises 16 to 23 jurors and operates in complete secrecy. Unlike criminal trials, defense attorneys are not permitted to participate. Prosecutors present evidence, and the jury must receive 12 affirmative votes to issue an indictment. Jurors, as well as prosecutors and investigators, are sworn to silence.</p><p style=\"font-family:Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:1rem;margin-bottom:1rem\">It is highly uncommon for a U.S. attorney—especially one in a major city—to appear in the grand jury room. Boutros explained that he was present to deliver a brief motivational address while his staff handled the details of the case. He expressed concern about jurors who might be reluctant to accept evidence impartially due to personal biases.</p><h2 style=\"font-family:Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:1.5rem;margin-top:1.5rem;margin-bottom:0.5rem\">Reactions and Broader DOJ Issues</h2><p style=\"font-family:Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:1rem;margin-bottom:1rem\">Defense attorney Josh Herman described Boutros’s appearance as “chilling,” noting that the prosecutor asked jurors to disclose when they could not separate personal feelings from the evidence. Herman, along with other attorneys, is seeking a court order requiring the government to reimburse legal fees resulting from the misconduct.</p><p style=\"font-family:Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:1rem;margin-bottom:1rem\">Boutros’s role comes amid a series of DOJ mishaps during the Trump administration, including the dismissal of charges in Wyoming after a prosecutor told jurors that suspects were “bad guys” and "murderers,” and an admonishment of a Trump loyalist who secured the indictment of former FBI Director James Comey. In Minnesota, a federal magistrate judge scolded a pro‑Trump official involved in an indictment of journalist Don Lemon over an immigration protest at a church.</p><p style=\"font-family:Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:1rem;margin-bottom:1rem\">Boutros was appointed U.S. attorney in 2025 for northern Illinois and was recently asked to resign by Illinois Senators Dick Durbin and Tammy Duckworth. They cited “chaos” and “deep internal dysfunction” in his office. The case underscores ongoing challenges with grand jury proceedings as the Department of Justice navigates its legacy of procedural controversies.</p>

$Judge Seals State Murder Hearing on Luigi Mangione, Raising Transparency Concerns","description":"A New York judge closed a hearing in the case of Luigi Mangione for the killing of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson, sparking questions about access to justice.","summary":"In a secret virtual hearing held on Wednesday, Judge Gregory Carro sealed proceedings related to Luigi Mangione’s state murder case for the death of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson. The decision came at the request of Mangione’s defense team, but no rationale was given, raising concerns about the lack of transparency in a high‑profile case that has attracted significant public interest. The judge’s statement that the hearing was \"sealed at the moment\" prompted further scrutiny, as the same judge had previously shut out reporters from related pre‑trial sessions. Mangione, who is scheduled to go to trial on September 8, has pleaded not guilty and faces life imprisonment on both state and federal charges. The sealed hearing, conducted entirely via video conference, included discussions of scheduling and jury selection and allowed the defense and prosecution to present evidence such as a 3‑D‑printed gun and a notebook allegedly linking Mangione to the murder.","image":"https://dims.apnews.com/dims4/default/460263f/2147483647/strip/true/crop/2200x1467+0+0/resize/599x399!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fassets.apnews.com%2F56%2F3b%2Fac9ef0b0c587e2e19beee88fddcc%2F6c4ffa0ba3e44b4aadca0c028b8bfa5e","text":"<p><strong>New York Judge Seals State Murder Hearing in Luigi Mangione Case</strong></p>\n<p>In a private virtual session held on Wednesday, Judge Gregory Carro of the Manhattan state court sealed proceedings related to Luigi Mangione’s case of the murder of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson. The decision was made at the request of Mangione’s defense team, but the judge offered no explanation for the action.</p>\n<p>Normally, court hearings in the United States are open to the public. Judges may close them only under special circumstances, such as to protect confidential information. The secrecy of this hearing has raised questions about transparency, especially given the high public interest in the case.</p>\n<p>The judge conducted the hearing in his chambers at the Manhattan courthouse, with Mangione, his attorneys, and the prosecution participating via video conference. A lawyer representing news organizations tried to obtain reasons for sealing the hearing, but his letter was ignored and the judge’s staff rebuffed his outreach.</p>\n<p>Earlier this year, Judge Carro banned a reporter from a pre‑trial hearing and held an off‑record conference that was planned to be public. Reporters had also been blocked from relaying their comments to the judge during a previous session.</p>\n<p>At the end of the May 18 hearing, Judge Carro announced that the session was “sealed at the moment.” He scheduled an in‑person hearing for June 16 that he said would be open to the public.</p>\n<p>Follow‑up inquiries by journalists to clarify the sealing decision were unanswered, and only a forwarding of the email was sent to the court’s press office rather than a full response.</p>\n<p>Luigi Mangione, 28, has pleaded not guilty to both state and federal charges stemming from the December 4 shooting that killed Thompson. His federal trial for stalking charges is set for October 13. He faces a life sentence on either trial.</p>\n<p>Mangione is a former Ivy League graduate who was arrested five days after the shooting at a McDonald’s in Altoona, Pennsylvania. Prosecutors have identified a 3‑D‑printed pistol and a notebook as evidence linking him to the murder, describing motives that target a “health‑insurance cartel.”</p>\n<p>Defendants’ attorneys and the Manhattan district attorney’s office have declined to comment on the sealed hearing. A news reporter present in the courtroom observed that for the third time in six months, the judge and court staff have silenced or ignored inquiries from reporters about the case.</p>$

Judge Seals State Murder Hearing on Luigi Mangione, Raising Transparency Concerns","description":"A New York judge closed a hearing in the case of Luigi Mangione for the killing of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson, sparking questions about access to justice.","summary":"In a secret virtual hearing held on Wednesday, Judge Gregory Carro sealed proceedings related to Luigi Mangione’s state murder case for the death of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson. The decision came at the request of Mangione’s defense team, but no rationale was given, raising concerns about the lack of transparency in a high‑profile case that has attracted significant public interest. The judge’s statement that the hearing was \"sealed at the moment\" prompted further scrutiny, as the same judge had previously shut out reporters from related pre‑trial sessions. Mangione, who is scheduled to go to trial on September 8, has pleaded not guilty and faces life imprisonment on both state and federal charges. The sealed hearing, conducted entirely via video conference, included discussions of scheduling and jury selection and allowed the defense and prosecution to present evidence such as a 3‑D‑printed gun and a notebook allegedly linking Mangione to the murder.","image":"https://dims.apnews.com/dims4/default/460263f/2147483647/strip/true/crop/2200x1467+0+0/resize/599x399!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fassets.apnews.com%2F56%2F3b%2Fac9ef0b0c587e2e19beee88fddcc%2F6c4ffa0ba3e44b4aadca0c028b8bfa5e","text":"<p><strong>New York Judge Seals State Murder Hearing in Luigi Mangione Case</strong></p>\n<p>In a private virtual session held on Wednesday, Judge Gregory Carro of the Manhattan state court sealed proceedings related to Luigi Mangione’s case of the murder of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson. The decision was made at the request of Mangione’s defense team, but the judge offered no explanation for the action.</p>\n<p>Normally, court hearings in the United States are open to the public. Judges may close them only under special circumstances, such as to protect confidential information. The secrecy of this hearing has raised questions about transparency, especially given the high public interest in the case.</p>\n<p>The judge conducted the hearing in his chambers at the Manhattan courthouse, with Mangione, his attorneys, and the prosecution participating via video conference. A lawyer representing news organizations tried to obtain reasons for sealing the hearing, but his letter was ignored and the judge’s staff rebuffed his outreach.</p>\n<p>Earlier this year, Judge Carro banned a reporter from a pre‑trial hearing and held an off‑record conference that was planned to be public. Reporters had also been blocked from relaying their comments to the judge during a previous session.</p>\n<p>At the end of the May 18 hearing, Judge Carro announced that the session was “sealed at the moment.” He scheduled an in‑person hearing for June 16 that he said would be open to the public.</p>\n<p>Follow‑up inquiries by journalists to clarify the sealing decision were unanswered, and only a forwarding of the email was sent to the court’s press office rather than a full response.</p>\n<p>Luigi Mangione, 28, has pleaded not guilty to both state and federal charges stemming from the December 4 shooting that killed Thompson. His federal trial for stalking charges is set for October 13. He faces a life sentence on either trial.</p>\n<p>Mangione is a former Ivy League graduate who was arrested five days after the shooting at a McDonald’s in Altoona, Pennsylvania. Prosecutors have identified a 3‑D‑printed pistol and a notebook as evidence linking him to the murder, describing motives that target a “health‑insurance cartel.”</p>\n<p>Defendants’ attorneys and the Manhattan district attorney’s office have declined to comment on the sealed hearing. A news reporter present in the courtroom observed that for the third time in six months, the judge and court staff have silenced or ignored inquiries from reporters about the case.</p>

$Subterranean Mystery: Brooklyn and Queens Groups Pop Out of Sewer Tunnels","description":"Three nighttime videos show people emerging from sewer maintenance holes in Brooklyn and Queens, sparking police investigations into the underground activity.","summary":"Security cameras captured at least three incidents of groups of seven or more people entering and emerging from maintenance holes in Brooklyn and Queens at night. The group members appeared to be wearing headlamps, protective gear and carrying tools. Police and the New York Department of Environmental Protection say the tunnel infrastructure was not damaged and are investigating any potential threats to public safety. No injuries or arrests have yet been reported.","image":"https://images.pexels.com/photos/1413617/pexels-photo-1413617.jpeg","text":"<p style=\"margin-bottom:1.5em;\">The city has spurred a perplexed investigation after three nighttime videos, captured by security cameras, showing groups of people emerging from…</p>$

Subterranean Mystery: Brooklyn and Queens Groups Pop Out of Sewer Tunnels","description":"Three nighttime videos show people emerging from sewer maintenance holes in Brooklyn and Queens, sparking police investigations into the underground activity.","summary":"Security cameras captured at least three incidents of groups of seven or more people entering and emerging from maintenance holes in Brooklyn and Queens at night. The group members appeared to be wearing headlamps, protective gear and carrying tools. Police and the New York Department of Environmental Protection say the tunnel infrastructure was not damaged and are investigating any potential threats to public safety. No injuries or arrests have yet been reported.","image":"https://images.pexels.com/photos/1413617/pexels-photo-1413617.jpeg","text":"<p style=\"margin-bottom:1.5em;\">The city has spurred a perplexed investigation after three nighttime videos, captured by security cameras, showing groups of people emerging from…</p>

Judge Dugan’s Sentencing Deferred as Court Considers Appeals Decision","description":"A former Milwaukee judge convicted of obstructing ICE agents has her sentencing postponed while a federal judge reviews arguments to reverse the conviction, underscoring tensions over the Trump administration’s immigration enforcement.","summary":"Federal Judge Lynn Adelman postponed the sentencing of former Wisconsin judge Hannah Dugan to hear arguments about overturning her conviction for obstructing ICE agents. Dugan’s attorneys argue that the case lacks a pending proceeding, while prosecutors maintain the opposite. The case reflects the broader legal battles spawned by the Trump-era immigration crackdown.","image":"","text":"<p>Milwaukee County circuit judge Hannah Dugan, who was convicted of felony obstruction for helping an immigrant evade federal officers, has had her sentencing postponed to allow a federal judge to hear arguments seeking to overturn the conviction.</p><p>On Wednesday, U.S. District Judge Lynn Adelman delayed Dugan’s sentencing, which had been scheduled to take place a few days earlier. Adelman did not issue a ruling on the conviction but said he would consider new arguments brought by Dugan’s lawyers.</p><p>Dugan’s conviction came as part of the Trump administration’s broad immigration crackdown that targeted state judges who were perceived as too lenient on ICE. She was the first state judge in Wisconsin to be tried and convicted for obstructing immigration officers, after a 2025 incident in which she guided ICE agents to an area outside her courtroom and was later arrested herself.</p><h2>Legal Arguments Over the “Pending Proceeding” Requirement</h2><p>Dugan’s attorney Steven Biskupic argues that the conviction was invalid because ICE had only filed a warrant for the immigrant’s arrest, which does not meet the definition of a “pending proceeding” required under the federal obstruction statute.</p><p>The argument hinges on a 4th Circuit ruling that a warrant filing alone does not constitute a proceeding for the purposes of obstruction law. Biskupic says the judge was “improperly convicted” under the faulting law because the case did not meet that procedural threshold.</p><h2>Prosecution’s Counterpoint</h2><p>Prosecutors insist that the Virginia case cited by the defense is distinguishable because ICE had actively pursued the immigrant after the warrant was filed. They also cite additional cases to support Dugan’s conviction.</p><p>Richard Frohling, the acting U.S. attorney for the eastern district of Wisconsin, told the judge that the appellate court’s decision to overturn the Virginia case was wrong, and that a proceeding can last from minutes to years, depending on context.</p><h2>Sentencing Considerations</h2><p>Dugan faces up to five years in federal prison, but it is highly unlikely she will receive a prison term. Federal sentencing guidelines of the nature of the crime generally recommend probation for defendants without a criminal history for nonviolent offenses.</p><p>She resigned from her position as a Milwaukee County circuit judge two weeks after her conviction amid threats of impeachment from Republican state lawmakers. She had served as a judge for nine years.</p><h2>Background of the 2025 Incident</h2><p>On April 18, 2025, ICE agents entered the Milwaukee County courthouse after learning that Eduardo Flores‑Ruiz had reentered the United States illegally and was scheduled to appear before Dugan in a state battery case. Dugan confronted the agents outside her courtroom and redirected them to the chief judge’s office, arguing that an administrative warrant was insufficient grounds for arrest.</p><p>Soon after the agents left, Dugan guided Flores‑Ruiz and his attorney out a private jury door. The agents found Flores‑Ruiz in a corridor and later arrested him after a foot chase. A week later, FBI agents arrested Dugan in the courthouse, leading to her removal in handcuffs.</p><p>Flores‑Ruiz was deported in November 2025. Dugan remains accused of obstructing immigration officers, a charge that reflects the current legal clashes over immigration enforcement policies instituted by the Trump administration.</p>

Bakersfield Hostage Standoff Resolved as FBI Kills Suspect After 12 Hours

bbc.co.uk

Ukrainian drones hit St Petersburg as Putin’s flagship economic forum opens

Bakersfield Police Negotiate Hostage Situation at Chase Bank Building

$Inside the Bet: Kalshi Flags George Santos’ Trading Play Ahead of Trump\u2019s Speech$

Virginia Bus Crash Highlights Long‑Standing Safety Gaps in Commercial Transport

Bakersfield Hostage Standoff Resolved as FBI Kills Suspect After 12 Hours

Ukrainian drones hit St Petersburg as Putin’s flagship economic forum opens

Bakersfield Police Negotiate Hostage Situation at Chase Bank Building

Inside the Bet: Kalshi Flags George Santos’ Trading Play Ahead of Trump\u2019s Speech

Iowa Shooting Claims Six Lives, Suspected Relative Found Dead

Ukrainian drones hit St Petersburg as Putin’s flagship economic forum opens