Inmate hands judge 'wad' of counterfeit cash to pay bond — then actually tells judge to 'keep the change': Police



A South Carolina prison inmate handed a judge a "wad" of counterfeit cash to pay his trespassing bond — and then told the judge to "keep the change," the Chesterfield County Sheriff's Office said.

Officials on Monday said an inmate at the Chesterfield County Detention Center was charged with forgery after the incident.

With that, instead of a relatively minor charge of trespassing, Alexander soon was charged with counterfeit money/forgery, the sheriff's office said.

A judge said he had set bond for inmate Patrick Alexander, 33, of Mississippi in the amount of $250 on a trespassing charge, officials said.

After being given his personal property, Alexander reportedly "removed a wad of money, sorted through the bills, and handed the judge" three $100 bills — and then told the judge to “keep the change," officials said.

As you can imagine, the judge wasn't impressed by the suspect's supposed generosity.

Instead, the judge told Alexander he "could not keep the change and, while holding the money, noticed the color of the bills appeared unusual," the sheriff's office said.

Upon further inspection, the judge observed Chinese writing on the back of the bills, officials said.

A detention officer then checked the bills using a counterfeit detection pen, and that revealed the bills were counterfeit, the sheriff's office said.

Alexander then was informed the currency was fake, and the judge instructed the detention officer to hold the money as evidence, officials said.

RELATED: Video shows Texas man shoot up meat market after worker refuses to accept counterfeit $50 bill: 'Watch what's gonna happen'

Image source: Chesterfield County (S.C.) Sheriff's Office

With that, instead of a relatively minor charge of trespassing, Alexander soon was charged with counterfeit money/forgery, the sheriff's office said.

A warrant was obtained and served on Alexander at the Chesterfield County Detention Center, the sheriff's office noted.

"Under South Carolina Code § 16-13-10 (Forgery), it is unlawful for a person to falsely make, forge, or counterfeit, or knowingly assist in the making or counterfeiting of any writing or instrument," officials said.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

'Case about swinging d**ks': Fed-up Trump judge tears apart woke colleagues for forcing Christian female spa to admit men



A federal judge minced no words in his dissenting opinion regarding the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals' refusal on Thursday to rehear the case of a Christian-owned women's spa forced by Washington state into admitting men.

Judge Lawrence VanDyke, an appointee of President Donald Trump, wrote, "This is a case about swinging d**ks."

''Sometimes, it feels like the supposed adults in the room have collectively lost their minds.'

"The Christian owners of Olympus Spa — a traditional Korean, women-only, nude spa — understandably don't want them in their spa," VanDyke continued. "Their female employees and female clients don't want them in their spa either. But Washington State insists on them. And now so does the Ninth Circuit."

The family-owned spa was accused of discrimination in 2020 for refusing access to a trans-identifying male whose penis was intact, and has been fighting an uphill legal battle ever since. In May, a three-judge Ninth Circuit panel ruled against the spa, holding that the First Amendment rights of its owners had not been violated by the state.

The spa subsequently petitioned the Ninth Circuit for a panel rehearing and/or a full-court rehearing of the case. Those were denied, prompting VanDyke to go nuclear:

Sometimes, it feels like the supposed adults in the room have collectively lost their minds. Woke regulators and complicit judges seem entirely willing, even eager, to ignore the consequences that their Frankenstein social experiments impose on real women and young girls. Yet if harmful and unfortunate consequences were all this case was about, we’d have to shrug and say: "That’s what comes with living in a democracy." Unless the Constitution is implicated, we get what we voted for “good and hard."

But some fundamental rights, like the right to the free exercise of religion, are constitutionally protected precisely to avoid majoritarian infringement. Unfortunately, in this case the panel majority has allowed Washington State bureaucrats to trample on such rights long secured by the Constitution.

VanDyke tore apart his colleagues' reasoning, stating that:

  • "[Washington Law Against Discrimination] is not generally applicable because it treats comparable secular activity more favorably than Olympus Spa's religiously motivated activity";
  • "WLAD's application is not neutral because it facially differentiates among religions based on theological choices by granting an exemption to only a small set of favored religious activities"; and
  • "WLAD's woke redefinition of 'sex' undermines the hard-fought legal protections granted to women as a class and undercuts established criminal laws against voyeurism and indecent exposure."

Some of the Trump judge's colleagues couldn't handle his criticism and frank language.

RELATED: WATCH: Talarico self-owns when he warns fascism will 'be wrapped in the flag and carrying the cross'

Annie Wells/Los Angeles Times via Getty Images

Mary Margaret McKeown, an appointee of former President Bill Clinton who previously ruled against the spa, said in a statement that was joined by over 25 other Ninth Circuit judges that the American legal system is "not a place for vulgar barroom talk" or a "place to suggest that fellow judges have 'collectively lost their minds,' or that they are 'woke judges' 'complicit' in a scheme to harm ordinary Americans."

McKeown claimed that VanDyke's language — not her decisions — "undermines public trust in the courts."

VanDyke said in response to his colleagues' pearl-clutching:

My distressed colleagues appear to have the fastidious sensibilities of a Victorian nun when it comes to mere unpleasant words in my opinion, yet exhibit the scruples of our dearly departed colleague Judge Reinhardt when it comes to the government trampling on religious liberties and exposing women and girls to male genitalia. That kind of selective outrage speaks for itself. The public deserves a court that is actually trustworthy. We should be earning that trust, not demanding it like petty tyrants.

"Sometimes 'dignified and civil' words are employed to mask a legal abomination. ... Sometimes coarse and ugly words bear the truth," VanDyke added.

Go deeper

The spa, owned by a theologically conservative Christian family, is modeled on jjimjilbang, sex-segregated bathhouses in Korea, and requires that guests be nude inside the pool area.

Court documents state the spa required that entrants "physically present in the nude as ... female," further noting, "Biological women are welcome." Under the rules, female-identifying males were welcome just so long as they had "gone through post-operative sex confirmation surgery." In other words, penises weren't permitted.

In 2020, Caleb Richmond — a trans-identifying male who was once married to a woman and now goes by Haven Wilvich — attempted to use the Washington Law Against Discrimination to gain access to the spa. The spa reportedly denied the man access, prompting him to file a complaint with the Washington State Human Rights Commission.

When the WSHRC notified the spa that it had received a discrimination complaint, the spa asserted that its "biological women"-only policy was in keeping with state law and "essential for the safety, legal protection, and well-being of our customers and employees," court documents said.

'Washington has perversely distorted a law that was enacted to safeguard women's rights to strip women of protections.'

Although initially defiant, the spa signed a pre-finding settlement agreement requiring compliance with WLAD while reserving the right to mount a constitutional challenge.

Richmond reportedly boasted online that he had successfully found a way to legally invade the women's sanctuary. He wrote, "I did it," adding he got "the main naked lady spa in the area to change their policies and allow all self-identified women access regardless of surgery and genitals."

Richmond further suggested that he was "more woman" than any of his female critics because he is "an intentional woman whereas they are only incidental."

Myoon Woon Lee, the owner of the spa, sued the WSHRC, claiming that the WLAD, as enforced, impinged upon his "traditional, theologically conservative" Christian values and put his female clientele at risk.

A Washington District Court judge dismissed the case with prejudice in 2023, but Lee appealed to the Ninth Circuit.

A three-judge panel ruled in May 2025 that the spa cannot sue the WSHRC on First Amendment grounds. The majority held that the enforcement of WLAD "did not impermissibly burden the Spa's free speech," that the spa is "not an expressive association," and that "eliminating discrimination on the basis of sex and transgender status is a legitimate government purpose."

Judge McKeown stated in her May opinion for the majority, "The HRC's enforcement action against Olympus Spa was a straightforward application of Washington's statutory scheme."

Judge Kenneth Lee, a Trump appointee, said in his dissenting opinion, "Washington has perversely distorted a law that was enacted to safeguard women's rights to strip women of protections. The women and girls of Washington state deserve better."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Judge blasted for drastically cutting sentence of creep who sodomized, kidnapped woman — even as he cursed out judge in court



A judge in Jefferson County, Kentucky, is receiving criticism after she drastically cut the sentence of a man who was was convicted of kidnapping, robbing, and sodomizing a woman.

Rather than following a jury’s recommendation of a 65-year sentence for 24-year-old Christopher Thompson, Judge Tracy Davis instead sentenced him to 30 years behind bars, WDRB-TV reported.

'I don’t have sympathy for nobody. I don’t have sympathy for you, the victim, the victim’s family, I don’t care. Boo hoo.'

Thompson was convicted in December in connection with a 2023 attack in which prosecutors said he abducted a woman, robbed her, and sodomized her twice, the station said.

WDRB, citing court documents, reported that Thompson kidnapped the victim in her own vehicle and forced her to perform oral sex on him in a school parking lot. The station said Thompson then drove her to an ATM, robbed her, drove back to the school lot, and sodomized her at gunpoint again.

What's more, the station said Thompson during his sentencing hearing earlier this month punctuated the proceedings with repeated disruptions, profanity, and direct insults directed toward Judge Davis.

“Before we even get appearances, Mr. Thompson, I’m going to need you to be respectful,” Davis said, according to WDRB.

“I ain’t doing nothing. Eat my d**k,” Thompson responded, according to the station.

WDRB said the intensity only became more extreme moments later.

“It’s fine. OK? It’s fine,” Davis said, according to the station.

“If I could spit on you, I would,” Thompson replied, according to WDRB.

“At the end of the day, I’m the one with the pen,” Davis added, the station said, after which Thompson replied, "I don’t care."

The hearing continued into the sentencing phase despite Thompson's outbursts, and WDRB said prosecutors urged Davis to impose the jury’s recommended 65-year sentence.

Thompson didn't exactly support his own cause, as the station said he stated, “I don’t have sympathy for nobody. I don’t have sympathy for you, the victim, the victim’s family, I don’t care. Boo hoo."

Davis soon imposed a 30-year sentence, WDRB said, citing Thompson’s age and the possibility of rehabilitation.

But Thompson apparently was unmoved. The station said he interrupted by saying, "I don’t care. I don’t care."

RELATED: Trio jailed for rape of mostly unconscious 14-year-old girl — recorded on video because 'it was funny' — given probation

“Unfortunately, he fell through the cracks and ended up in this court as an 18- or 19-year-old,” Davis said, according to WDRB. “This court does not believe Mr. Thompson, if given the resources that he can get while incarcerated, is beyond being rehabilitated.”

The station said the reduced sentence has elicited criticism from Louisville Metro Council members, including Minority Caucus Chair Anthony Piagentini: “Where is the concern for the victim? Do we think she’s going to get over this in 30 years? Where is the concern for the safety of the public when he does get released from jail?”

WDRB said Piagentini also raised concerns about judicial transparency and pointed out Davis’ use of shock probation in dozens of cases since 2023: “My next step, in addition to condemning her decision, is to request for all of her shock probation cases to have the public learn about who she is releasing from the sentences that are given. That’s the minimum I can do for the electorate of this community, so that they can ... understand the decisions that she’s making.”

According to the U.S. Justice Department, "shock probation" provides a short prison time — between 30 to 180 days — for a convicted felon after which the remainder of the sentence is served on probation "in the community." The justice department notes that corrections and probation personnel view shock probation as having a future deterrent effect on criminal behavior, and lawyers view it as a level in plea bargaining.

Louisville’s Chief Prosecutor — Commonwealth’s Attorney Gerina D. Whethers — said in a statement that her office is "disappointed" by the reduced sentence, WDRB noted.

RELATED: 'Sex offender' to be replaced by 'adults who commit sexual offenses' in Colorado since latter is less stigmatizing for sex offenders receiving treatment

Commonwealth’s Attorney Gerina D. Whethers; image source: Office of the Commonwealth’s Attorney, Jefferson County, Ky.

“Due to the defendant’s actions and inappropriate outbursts in court, the jury recommended a sentence of 65 years in prison. While we recognize that the court has discretion in the final sentence, we are disappointed that the court deviated from the sentence for less than half of what the jury of his peers determined was appropriate for this dangerous defendant," Whethers said, according to the station. "The jury’s recommendation was the most appropriate outcome in this case."

WDRB said Whethers added that "our pursuit of justice is unwavering. As prosecutors, our responsibility is to take to trial and present before the jury cases like these, where dangerous individuals pose a severe threat to the community and, as a result, need to be removed from it for as long as possible."

The station noted that Judge Davis imposed an additional sentence of more than four years for Thompson's statements in court and that he must serve that time before his 30-year sentence commences.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Activist judge who downplayed Don Lemon's church antics, summoned ICE director donated to pro-illegal-alien group



The Minnesota-based federal judge who declined to issue arrest warrants for Don Lemon and several of the radicals accused of storming into Cities Church on Jan. 18 demanded on Tuesday that acting ICE Director Todd Lyons "appear personally before the Court and show cause why he should not be held in contempt of Court."

Despite U.S. District Court Judge Patrick Schiltz's portrayal in the liberal media as a conservative-minded and "mild-mannered George W. Bush appointee," it appears that Department of Homeland Security Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin's characterization of Schiltz as "just another activist judge" is more apt.

'Another activist judge who is clearly more concerned about politics than the safety of the Minnesotans.'

Bill Melugin of Fox News revealed this week that Schiltz is linked to the Immigrant Law Center of Minnesota, a liberal activist outfit that provides free legal representation to illegal aliens, low-income migrants, and so-called refugees in Minnesota and North Dakota.

The ILCM routinely criticizes the men and women of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, accusing them of occupation, racism, "Islamophobi[a]," and engaging in "execution-style murders."

After Schiltz's name was found among the donors and volunteers listed in the ILCM's 2019 annual report, the judge — dubbed the "latest hero to the anti-Trump resistance" by Politico — admitted to Fox News Digital that he has "donated for many years to the Immigrant Law Center of Minnesota."

"I have also donated for many years to Mid-Minnesota Legal Aid. I believe that poor people should be able to get legal representation," added Schiltz, who has served as a delegate at Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party conventions.

The donor to the illegal alien support group noted in a Monday court filing that his "patience is at an end" and ordered Lyons to explain on Friday why he should not be held in contempt for supposedly violating an earlier order.

RELATED: DOJ tries to put the squeeze on Don Lemon over church invasion — but judge says no, enraging Bondi: Report

Todd Lyons, acting director of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Photographer: Kent Nishimura/Bloomberg via Getty Images

Schiltz indicated that Juan Hugo Tobay Robles, an Ecuadorian national who illegally entered the U.S. in 1999 and was detained by immigration agents on Jan. 6, should have been provided with a bond hearing or released earlier this month.

The Bush judge indicated in his Tuesday order that if Robles was released before the hearing, Lyons would not be required to appear. A lawyer for the Ecuadorian told the Associated Press that his client was released Tuesday afternoon.

"Judge Patrick J. Schiltz is just another activist judge who is clearly more concerned about politics than the safety of the Minnesotans," stated DHS Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin. "Does this judge really think Director Lyons should take time out of his day leading ICE to target the worst of the worst criminal illegals including murderers, rapists, pedophiles, and terrorists into our country to testify at a hearing for one illegal alien’s removal proceedings?"

While Schiltz evidently figured that swift and decisive action was required in the case of Robles, he took an entirely different approach in the case of the radicals who assembled on Jan. 18 for a so-called "ICE Out Action," then stormed a Christian church in Saint Paul, Minnesota.

After the church invasion, the Trump Justice Department promptly filed a criminal complaint in the District of Minnesota charging eight of the suspected invaders with violations of the Freedom of Access to Clinics Entrances Act.

The DOJ's pursuit of accountability was frustrated at the outset when Magistrate Judge Douglas Micko — whose wife reportedly works for Minnesota's anti-ICE attorney general, Keith Ellison — declined to support all but three of the requested arrest affidavits.

After Micko threw up additional roadblocks, the DOJ turned to Schiltz for a review of the magistrate's no-probable-cause finding in hopes that he might issue the warrants.

In an angry and sarcastic Jan. 23 letter to the Eighth Circuit's chief judge, Steven Colloton, Schiltz downplayed the church invasion, glossed over the invaders' intimidation tactics, cast doubt on whether arresting them would deter copycats, emphasized that "there is no emergency," and noted that if the petition filed by the government seeks an immediate decision, "the petition is frivolous."

In a separate letter, he suggested there was "no evidence that [Don Lemon and his producer] engaged in any criminal behavior or conspired to do so."

Sure enough, Schiltz indicated that he would not issue arrest warrants until conferring with his colleagues — a meeting that was supposed to happen last week but was delayed.

Over the weekend, a three-judge Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals panel denied the government's petition to review the magistrate's refusal to sign the warrants.

While U.S. Circuit Court Judge Steven Grasz, an appointee of President Donald Trump, recognized that the complaint and affidavit "clearly establish probably cause for all five arrest warrants" and that "there is no discretion to refuse to issue an arrest warrant once probable cause for its issuance has been shown," the government had "failed to establish that it has no other adequate means of obtaining the requested relief."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

12-year-old accused of striking woman in face with screwdriver amid robbery appears in court; lawyer calls him a 'good kid'



A 12-year-old boy accused of striking a woman in the face with a screwdriver and beating her amid a weekend robbery in Seattle went before a juvenile court judge Tuesday, KOMO-TV reported.

Despite the boy's attorney referring to him as a "good kid" who should be released to his parents — and his father making what a KOMO video report said was an emotional plea to the court — the judge didn't see it that way.

'He turned 12 about three months ago.'

The first-appearance judge determined there was probable cause to believe the boy committed first-degree robbery, which under state law involves the display of a deadly weapon or the infliction of bodily injury, the station said.

The judge ordered the boy held in secure juvenile detention, KOMO reported, adding that bail is not considered in juvenile court and a respondent is either released or held.

The defense argued that the boy's parents would watch him and monitor his behavior, while the state said the boy has chronic issues, the station report. The defense still asked for the boy's release to his parents and wasn't opposed to electronic home monitoring, KOMO added.

In the station's video report, the boy's attorney is heard arguing that her client is "quite young; he turned 12 about three months ago. He has no criminal adjudication history." The boy — whose face isn't shown in the video — is seen apparently wiping his eyes with tissue during the proceedings.

But Judge Tanya Thorp said he'll remain in detention, noting that his "multiple contacts" with police deemed "chronic is of great concern to me."

RELATED: 3 males — ages 8, 11, 12 — steal car, crash into house; driver, 11, says he learned how to steal cars from YouTube: Cops

More from KOMO:

The case remains under investigation by Seattle police and has not yet been formally referred to the King County Prosecuting Attorney’s Office. Prosecutors said that timeline is typical, noting that charging decisions require a higher burden of proof than the probable cause standard used at a first-appearance hearing.

King County prosecutors said they expect to receive the case referral from Seattle police on Thursday and anticipate making a charging decision later this week. Prosecutors said first-degree robbery cases are not eligible for diversion and are instead handled in juvenile court with input from juvenile probation counselors.

Washington state law says a 12-year-old charged with first-degree robbery must remain in juvenile court, the station noted, adding that officials said prosecutors and judges lack the authority to transfer such a case to adult court, regardless of the circumstances.

Authorities told KOMO the next update is expected Thursday evening.

In regard to Saturday evening's incident, police said a juvenile suspect wearing a “hot pink ski mask” robbed a 43-year-old woman at an Amazon Fresh store. Police said the suspect “attacked the victim, hitting her multiple times in the face with his hands," after which he struck the woman in the face with a screwdriver.

The suspect rifled through the victim's handbag in a parking garage — and then returned to the victim and assaulted her again before running off, police said.

While police located the suspect, they said he fled from them on foot. However, police recognized the suspect based on previous interactions — as well as his age and unique clothing description — and went to his family’s house and got a search warrant for his arrest, police said.

Officers took the suspect into custody without incident and recovered the screwdriver, police said.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Activist Obama judge throws lifeline to deported Venezuelan gangsters



President Donald Trump issued a proclamation on March 15 invoking the Alien Enemies Act and declaring that Tren de Aragua is "a designated Foreign Terrorist Organization" aligned with the Venezuelan Maduro regime that "is perpetrating, attempting, and threatening an invasion or predatory incursion against the territory of the United States."

Within hours of invoking the AEA, the Trump administration deported over 130 suspected Venezuelan gangsters — many of whom were credibly accused of murder, robbery, rape, and other crimes — to El Salvador, where they were placed in a Salvadoran prison for terrorists.

In July, the administration had Venezuelan deportees who were imprisoned at the Terrorism Confinement Center repatriated to Venezuela, where they were welcomed home by Venezuelan dictator Nicolas Maduro.

'Chief Judge Boasberg has compromised the impartiality of the judiciary.'

U.S. District Court Judge James Boasberg, the Obama appointee who tried unsuccessfully to stop the illegal aliens' March 15 removal from the U.S., certified the Venezuelan deportees as a class on Monday and ordered the administration to offer them legal relief abroad, though stopping short of ordering their return to the United States.

"The Court finds that the only remedy that would give effect to its granting of Plaintiffs’ Motion would be to order the Government to undo the effects of their unlawful removal by facilitating a meaningful opportunity to contest their designation and the Proclamation’s validity," wrote Boasberg.

"Otherwise, a finding of unlawful removal would be meaningless for Plaintiffs, who have already been sent back to Venezuela against their wishes and without due process."

RELATED: Judges break the law to stop Trump from enforcing it

Accused gangster at the Counter Terrorism Confinement Center in El Salvador. Photo by John Moore/Getty Images.

"Expedited removal cannot be allowed to render this relief toothless," continued the activist judge. "If secretly spiriting individuals to another country were enough to neuter the Great Writ, then 'the Government could snatch anyone off the street, turn him over to a foreign country, and then effectively foreclose any corrective course of action.'"

Boasberg — the activist judge who helped the Biden FBI spy on Republican lawmakers' phone records, ordered in August the release of a woman accused of repeatedly threatening Trump's life, and mandated a right to Medicaid for able-bodied adults without work requirements — gave the government a deadline of Jan. 5 to "submit its proposal either to facilitate the return of Plaintiffs to the United States or to otherwise provide them with hearings that satisfy the requirements of due process."

The Obama judge indicated that the Venezuelans needn't demonstrate that the president's AEA invocation was unlawful but rather that their designation as alien enemies was incorrect.

"The merits of Plaintiffs' due-process claim are easily resolved," he wrote. "Even if the AEA was properly invoked as a general matter, it is beyond cavil that designated 'alien enemies' under that act must be afforded some process to contest their designation. ... Here, Plaintiffs received none."

The American Civil Liberties Union, which is representing the suspected foreign gangsters, said in a statement, "This administration cannot escape judicial scrutiny of its policies, which has been its goal all along."

The ACLU noted further that "this is an important ruling for these men who were tortured, and for the rule of law."

Blaze News has reached out to the White House for comment.

Rob Luther, a professor at the Antonin Scalia Law School at George Mason University, said in response to the ruling, "I predict that in 2026, Judge Boasberg will make history as the 16th judge impeached by the U.S. House of Representatives."

Rep. Brandon Gill (R-Texas) introduced articles of impeachment against Boasberg on Nov. 4, stating, "Chief Judge Boasberg has compromised the impartiality of the judiciary and created a constitutional crisis."

A simple majority is needed to pass articles of impeachment for a judge in the House, where Republicans hold a slim majority.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Lebanese Democrat sues over her ouster as US immigration judge as Trump admin fires 8 more



Immigration courts are not part of the judicial branch but rather part of the executive branch, where they are housed under the Department of Justice — meaning the Trump administration doesn't have to take any guff or tolerate suboptimal performances from those warming their benches.

In the interest of maximizing efficiency and fulfilling the president's promises to the American people, the Trump DOJ has made a series of changes to the courts under its purview. The bulk of these changes concern personnel, namely judges.

'All of the judges are now sitting speculating about whether they’re next.'

The administration has sacked or accepted the resignations of at least 100 immigration judges across the country while simultaneously onboarding what the DOJ refers to as "deportation" judges — those keen to earn over $159,000 making "decisions with generational consequences" and ensuring "that only aliens with legally meritorious claims are allowed to remain."

The Justice Department added eight more names to its triple-digit tally of ousted immigration judges on Monday, this time in New York City.

The latest firings — which were confirmed to the New York Times by an official at the National Association of Immigration Judges and a DOJ official — reportedly included Amiena Khan, assistant chief immigration judge at 26 Federal Plaza.

Khan, a former NAIJ president who donated on multiple occasions to Democratic campaigns, previously criticized the first Trump administration's efforts to speed up the deportation process as well as immigration courts' embrace of a "law enforcement ideology."

Olivia Cassin, an appointee of former Obama Attorney General Loretta Lynch, told the Times, "The court has been basically eviscerated."

RELATED: Federal judge limits warrantless detentions by ICE in Colorado — White House fires off defiant response

Photo by Bryan Cox/U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement via Getty Images

Cassin, who got fired at another New York City courthouse last month, added, "It feels like a Monday afternoon massacre."

Carmen Maria Rey Caldas, a Spanish-born immigrant who became an immigration judge in 2022 after criticizing U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement during Trump's first term, complained to the Times that "all of the judges are now sitting speculating about whether they’re next and the impact that that may have in their ability to remain impartial and do their jobs fairly."

Rey Caldas was fired from her job as immigration judge in August.

The DOJ's Executive Office for Immigration Review declined to comment to the Times about the dismissals.

Amid the latest slew of terminations, one disgruntled former immigration judge, a U.S.-Lebanese dual citizen named Tania Nemer, sued the DOJ, claiming she was the "victim of unlawful discrimination in violation of Title VII and the First Amendment."

Nemer, who ran unsuccessfully for a judicial office in Ohio as a Democrat before becoming an immigration judge under the Biden administration, accused the DOJ of firing her because of her sex, national origin, and partisan activities, despite acknowledging that no reason was given for her termination.

"The lightning-fast, precipitous timing indicates that the incoming administration's decision was made — not as part of a careful evaluation of Ms. Nemer's qualifications or fitness for office — but instead as part of a rushed attempt by the new administration to target disfavored civil servants," the Democrat said in a complaint.

According to her lawsuit, Nemer filed the complaint with the Equal Employment Opportunity Office, which dismissed it, saying the termination was a "lawful exercise" of the removal power possessed by President Donald Trump and Attorney General Pam Bondi under Article II of the U.S. Constitution.

"What happened to Tania Nemer is a disgrace," Nemer's attorneys said in a statement. "For more than 50 years, Title VII has prohibited discrimination in the federal workforce. The Department of Justice had a legal obligation to investigation [sic] Tania’s termination. But now the government is asserting a constitutional right to override the law and engage in discrimination. That is wrong. Title VII is unquestionably constitutional."

Blaze News has reached out to the Justice Department for comment.

The Trump administration appears keen to have a different caliber of immigration judge sit on cases across the country.

In September, War Secretary Pete Hegseth approved sending as many as 600 military lawyers to the DOJ to serve as immigration judges.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

DHS blasts 'ACTIVIST' Biden judge's order to cut loose hundreds of illegal aliens in Chicago, pause deportations



Despite the ongoing obstructionism by Chicago's deeply unpopular mayor, Brandon Johnson (D), and other open-borders activists, federal immigration agents continue to risk life and limb with the aim of unburdening the crime-ridden sanctuary city of some of the roughly 150,000 illegal aliens who have sapped its resources, strained its systems, and endangered its people.

'An ACTIVIST JUDGE is putting the lives of Americans directly at risk.'

A Biden judge decided on Wednesday to undo some of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement's hard work, ordering the Trump administration to free hundreds of the illegal aliens recently apprehended in the Chicago area, including some of those captured during the Department of Homeland Security's Operation Midway Blitz.

DHS Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin told Blaze News in a statement. "At every turn, activist judges, sanctuary politicians, and violent rioters have actively tried to prevent our law enforcement officers from arresting and removing the worst of the worst."

"Now an ACTIVIST JUDGE is putting the lives of Americans directly at risk by ordering 615 illegal aliens be released into the community," added McLaughlin.

U.S. District Judge Jeffrey Cummings, a Biden appointee, ruled last month that ICE had violated a 2022 consent decree settlement that barred federal immigration agents from conducting warrantless arrests unless they have cause to suspect an individual is both an illegal alien and a flight risk.

The settlement, which was the result of a lawsuit filed by the open-borders advocacy organization National Immigrant Justice Center and the ACLU of Illinois, was set to expire on May 12, 2025. However, the NIJC filed a motion to continue enforcing the settlement earlier this year after ICE made a series of warrantless illegal alien arrests.

RELATED: Federal judge wildly oversteps her bounds with Border Patrol commander in Chicago

Photo by Scott Olson/Getty Images

Cummings, who previously claimed that NIJC's pending motion kept the settlement alive, decided on Oct. 7 to extend the consent decree until Feb. 2, 2026, and ordered ICE to apply it to all agents nationwide.

On Wednesday, Cummings went even farther to appease the open-borders activists, ordering ICE to free 13 illegal aliens by Friday and to release another 615 illegal aliens on bond into a monitoring program by Nov. 21, unless the Trump administration appeals and/or demonstrates that the arrests were in keeping with the consent decree.

Lawyers for the government are considering an appeal, indicating that at least 12 of the 615 illegal aliens arrested in Chicago between June and early October are considered high flight risks, reported Axios.

The activist judge also ordered the Trump administration to pause deportation and voluntary departure procedures for all those illegal aliens who are pending release and to provide additional information concerning all arrests that have taken place since his October ruling.

Michelle Garcia, deputy legal director at the ACLU of Illinois, suggested that by committing to enforcing the consent decree, Cummings has set the stage for "even more of the hundreds of people illegally arrested and detained during Operation Midway Blitz to be released."

Mark Fleming, associate director of litigation at NIJC, also celebrated Cummings' apparent judicial activism, stating, "We are grateful that Judge Cummings sees the urgency of this moment and has ordered the Trump administration to allow hundreds to leave the inhumane detention centers where they are being unlawfully held and to have a chance at the due process our laws require."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Biden judge poised to order the release of a horde of illegal aliens captured by ICE in Chicago



A Biden-appointed federal judge who recently imposed nationwide restrictions on how U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents can make arrests is poised to potentially release hundreds of illegal aliens arrested by federal agents in the Chicago area.

Background

In May 2018, ICE arrested over 100 illegal aliens including numerous convicted criminal noncitizens in the Chicago area as part of Operation Keep Safe.

The National Immigrant Justice Center, an open-borders advocacy organization, swooped in to defend a handful of the illegal aliens who were captured, accusing the first Trump administration of Administrative Procedure Act and 4th Amendment violations.

The legal campaign to challenge the alleged warrantless arrest of the illegal aliens snowballed into a class-action lawsuit involving two additional activist groups and the American Civil Liberties Union of Illinois, which worked in a supporting role.

The plaintiffs managed to surmount the government's attempt to have the case dismissed and in 2022 secured a settlement requiring ICE to follow specific procedures for apprehending illegal aliens without warrants in Illinois and five neighboring states.

The settlement, which ICE policy was augmented to reflect, was set to expire on May 12, 2025.

Biden judge obliges open-borders activists

In March, the NIJC challenged the second Trump administration's warrantless arrests of dozens of illegal aliens in Illinois, requesting that ICE be held accountable for alleged violations of the 2022 settlement.

RELATED: A historian’s warning: The Democrats have gone full totalitarian

Photo by Anadolu/Getty Images

Despite the NIJC's pending motion to enforce the settlement, ICE's principal legal adviser Charles Wall circulated an email in June to all ICE employees indicating that the settlement was terminated and the corresponding policy was rescinded. The agency continued with its campaign to target illegal aliens in a manner unpalatable to the open-borders group, most recently as part of Operation Midway Blitz, which was launched in September.

'They've been uniformly violating the consent decree.'

Amid ICE's efforts to catch violent criminal noncitizens including rapists and members of the terrorist gang Tren de Aragua, the NIJC went running back to the court on Sept. 26, complaining of additional alleged violations of the consent decree and asking that the agreement be extended for another three years.

On Oct. 7, U.S. District Judge Jeffrey Cummings, a Biden appointee, ruled that ICE violated the settlement — which was supposedly kept alive past its expiration date by the NIJC's pending motion to enforce — citing practices such as ICE agents allegedly carrying blank administrative arrest warrants and filling them in after detaining suspects.

Cummings not only granted an extension of the consent decree settlement until Feb. 2, 2026, but ordered ICE to apply the corresponding policy to all agents nationwide.

While attorneys for the Department of Homeland Security have argued that Congress has denied federal courts the ability to grant parole to large groups of illegal aliens in ICE custody, WLS-TV reported that Cummings is contemplating doing just that.

The Biden judge is expected to provide some insight during a hearing on Wednesday into whether he will order ICE to release illegal aliens on interim "alternatives to detention" such as ankle monitor programs or check-in appointments with immigration agents via mobile apps.

Mark Fleming, associate director of litigation at the NIJC, told WLS that the number of illegal aliens arrested in violation of the consent decree is over 3,000 people.

"If they did not have a prior order of removal, in almost all circumstances, they've been uniformly violating the consent decree," said Fleming.

Fleming added, "The bargain was if you violate this, the individual [is] eligible for release."

While Fleming is clearly hopeful that Cummings will cut the whole lot loose, WLS legal analyst Gil Soffer suggested that "there's a statute that makes it very difficult for the district court, federal district court, to require the government to take or not take any action in the immigration space."

Blaze News has reached out to the DHS for comment.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Trump DOJ charges another pair of Big Balls' suspected attackers, blasts judges who kept thug on streets



Edward Coristine, the young engineer known as "Big Balls" who previously worked for the Department of Government Efficiency, was beaten to a pulp by a group of 10 young suspects during an attempted carjacking on Aug. 3 in the national capital.

One week after a Biden-nominated judge cut two of the attackers loose and spared them from jail time, the Trump Justice Department announced charges against another pair of suspects.

Background

After the attack, during which Coristine stood his ground and defended his girlfriend, police apprehended two suspects at the scene — a 15-year-old male and a 15-year-old female of Hyattsville, Maryland — and charged both with unarmed carjacking.

'We're not going to be happy until we get every person who was involved.'

While the attack was so savage as to prompt President Donald Trump to federalize the Metropolitan Police Department and deploy the National Guard, Kendra Briggs, a Biden-nominated associate judge of the Superior Court of the District of Columbia, treated two of the attackers with kid gloves.

First, Briggs decided it wasn't worth keeping the thugs in custody, telling one of Coristine's attackers, "I don't want to put hardship on your family."

After instructing both thugs to refrain from possessing weapons or entering into other people's vehicles unless they have permission from the owners, Briggs directed the male attacker to hang out at his mother's home and the female attacker to move from the secure Youth Services Center to a youth shelter house.

RELATED: The city that chose crime and chaos over courage

Photo by Win McNamee/Getty Images

Obliging the request by prosecutors last week, Briggs decided ultimately not to incarcerate the two attackers.

The male attacker, who pleaded guilty to four counts related to a robbery and the separate beating of Coristine, received one year of probation. The female attacker, who pleaded guilty to a count of simple assault for pepper-spraying someone during the robbery, was sentenced to nine months of probation.

Briggs emphasized that the goal of juvenile court was "rehabilitation, not punishment."

"To this day, they’ve only caught two out of the ten. Eight of them remain on the street. That night could’ve gone far differently. Think of your daughters and mothers. The same group attacked people before and after us, breaking ribs and stomping heads," Coristine noted last week. "This senseless crime must be stopped."

Another two

The Trump DOJ revealed on Monday that it was charging two more teens in connection with the attack on Coristine and the corresponding attempted carjacking.

Jeanine Pirro, U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia, indicated that Laurence Cotton-Powell, 19, and Anthony Taylor, 18, face charges including assault with intent to commit robbery and robbery — not only in connection with the attack on Coristine but in connection with a separate attack on another individual just minutes earlier at a nearby gas station.

Whereas Taylor, a teen from Maryland, has no known criminal history, Cotton-Powell is apparently a seasoned thug who has benefited from bleeding hearts in the judiciary.

Pirro claimed that despite committing crimes while on probation for a previous felony conviction, Cotton-Powell was nevertheless free to attack Coristine and Ethan Levine, the second victim who was stomped ruthlessly by a mob of thugs, because of the leniency of the D.C. Superior Court.

"On April 3 of this year, Laurence Cotton-Powell was sentenced for a felony attempted robbery. My office asked for jail time. Judge [Carmen] McLean, a judge sitting in the criminal part in Superior Court with no criminal background, made a decision to give Cotton-Powell probation in spite of his conviction on a felony attempted robbery," said Pirro. "Within 31 days, by May 4, Powell reoffends. He's re-arrested while he's on probation from the felony, and he's charged with simple assault and possession of a prohibited weapon B."

Pirro indicated that the court subsequently refused her office's request to revoke the thug's bail and released Cotton-Powell. Although Cotton-Powell was later sentenced, "on July 25, another judge suspends his sentence and decides that he should be on probation," said the attorney.

"So after a felony of attempted robbery conviction, after a violation of probation, after a second crime, after a second conviction, after no compliance with [the Court Services and Offender Supervision Agency], the judges say, 'Do better,' and they let him go," said Pirro. "And guess what? Within 10 days, he's at it again with Ethan Levine and Edward Coristine."

Pirro credited the Metropolitan Police Department with going above and and beyond to track down suspects Taylor and Cotton-Powell.

MPD Chief Pamela Smith said, "These arrests send a very strong message to our community: If you commit violent acts in our community, you will be found, you will be held accountable, and you will face justice."

"We're not going to be happy until we get every person who was involved in the assault on these two individuals," said Pirro.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!