Explore

Rapid Read Rapid Read
Maine Supreme Judicial Court's IOLTA Program Challenge Dismissed by U.S. District Court

Maine Supreme Judicial Court's IOLTA Program Challenge Dismissed by U.S. District Court

The U.S. District Court for the District of Maine has dismissed an as-applied challenge to Maine's Interest on Lawyers' Trust Accounts (IOLTA) program. The plaintiffs, Russell Johnson Beaupain, a law firm, and E. David Wescott, a client, argued that the program violated their First Amendment rights. The defendants in the case included the Chief Justice of the Maine Supreme Judicial Court, the State Court Administrator for Maine's Judicial Branch, and the Maine Justice Foundation. The court dismissed the claims against the Chief Justice and State Court Administrator on the merits and dismissed the claim against the Maine Justice Foundation for lack of jurisdiction. The plaintiffs appealed the decision, but the court affirmed the dismissal, citing a lack of plausible allegations that the IOLTA program required the deposit of funds into an IOLTA account or that such deposits would accrue interest.
Rapid Read Rapid Read
Supreme Court Reconsiders Birthright Citizenship Amid Trump Administration's Challenge

Supreme Court Reconsiders Birthright Citizenship Amid Trump Administration's Challenge

The U.S. Supreme Court recently heard arguments regarding President Trump's executive order aimed at restricting birthright citizenship. This legal principle, rooted in the 14th Amendment, grants citizenship to nearly anyone born on U.S. soil, regardless of their parents' immigration status. The court's skepticism was evident, with justices questioning the government's stance. Justice Neil Gorsuch, appointed by Trump, challenged the government's position on whether it would affect Native Americans' citizenship. Justice Brett Kavanaugh, another Trump appointee, questioned the argument that birthright citizenship makes the U.S. an outlier globally. Historically, the 14th Amendment was designed to overturn the Dred Scott decision, ensuring citizenship for African Americans. The Trump administration argues that the amendment was intended for descendants of enslaved people, not immigrants' children. This debate echoes the 1898 Wong Kim Ark case, where the Supreme Court upheld birthright citizenship for a man bo...
Rapid Read Rapid Read
Federal Appeals Court Reinstates $656 Million Judgment Against Palestinian Authorities

Federal Appeals Court Reinstates $656 Million Judgment Against Palestinian Authorities

A federal appeals court in New York has reinstated a $656 million judgment against the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) and the Palestinian Authority. This decision follows a U.S. Supreme Court ruling that allows American courts to hear claims against these Palestinian entities. The original judgment was related to a civil terrorism award tied to violence in Israel, which had been previously dismissed by the appeals court on the grounds that U.S. courts could not consider lawsuits against foreign groups for overseas attacks not aimed at the United States. However, the Supreme Court's decision in June 2025 upheld a 2019 law permitting such lawsuits, leading to the reinstatement of the judgment.
Reuters Reuters
US Supreme Court clears way for dismissal of case against Trump ally Steve Bannon

US Supreme Court clears way for dismissal of case against Trump ally Steve Bannon

By John Kruzel WASHINGTON, April 6 (Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court cleared the way on Monday for the Justice Department to move forward with dismissing a criminal case in which Steve Bannon, an influential ally of President Donald Trump, was convicted after defying a congressional subpoena.
Rapid Read Rapid Read
Supreme Court Skeptical of Trump Administration's Challenge to Birthright Citizenship

Supreme Court Skeptical of Trump Administration's Challenge to Birthright Citizenship

The Supreme Court recently heard arguments regarding the Trump administration's challenge to birthright citizenship, a principle established by the 14th Amendment. President Trump was present during the oral arguments, marking a presidential first. The administration argues that the phrase 'subject to the jurisdiction thereof' does not apply to undocumented immigrants, as they owe allegiance to another country. However, the justices appeared skeptical of this interpretation, with Chief Justice John Roberts questioning the basis of the federal government's case. The challenge stems from an executive order issued by Trump aimed at disrupting chain migration.
Trendline Trendline
Ashley Chung Rejoins Winston Strawn as Partner in Appellate Practice

Ashley Chung Rejoins Winston Strawn as Partner in Appellate Practice

Ashley Chung Rejoins Winston Strawn as Partner in Appellate Practice
Trendline Trendline
Norton Rose Fulbright Expands Appellate Team with Notable Legal Experts

Norton Rose Fulbright Expands Appellate Team with Notable Legal Experts

Norton Rose Fulbright Expands Appellate Team with Notable Legal Experts
Rapid Read Rapid Read
Trump DOJ Anti-Fraud Office to Intensify Oversight on Federal Funds

Trump DOJ Anti-Fraud Office to Intensify Oversight on Federal Funds

The Department of Justice's Division for National Fraud Enforcement, under the Trump administration, is set to reshape the landscape of fraud enforcement in the United States. This new division, led by federal prosecutor Colin McDonald, aims to coordinate and litigate fraud cases with a focus on politically sensitive programs. The division, which reports to the deputy attorney general, is expected to pursue cases that align with policy themes and financial recoveries. Recent enforcement actions in Minnesota, involving multi-agency responses and large-scale immigration enforcement operations, illustrate the division's approach. The division's creation signals a more centralized and aggressive oversight of federally funded programs, with potential expansions into other states like California and Ohio.
Rapid Read Rapid Read
Jury Acquits Man Accused of Assaulting ICE Agent in Los Angeles

Jury Acquits Man Accused of Assaulting ICE Agent in Los Angeles

A jury has acquitted a man accused of assaulting an Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agent during an immigration sweep in downtown Los Angeles. The incident, which occurred in 2025, involved allegations that the man punched the ICE agent during the operation. The acquittal comes after a trial where the defense likely argued against the prosecution's claims, leading to the jury's decision in favor of the accused. This case highlights the tensions and complexities surrounding immigration enforcement actions in urban areas, where interactions between law enforcement and community members can lead to legal disputes.
Rapid Read Rapid Read
Federal Judge Rules President Trump's Executive Order Defunding NPR and PBS Violates First Amendment

Federal Judge Rules President Trump's Executive Order Defunding NPR and PBS Violates First Amendment

On March 31, 2026, a federal judge ruled that President Trump's executive order to terminate all federal funding for NPR and PBS was unconstitutional, violating the First Amendment rights of these broadcasters. The decision, delivered by Judge Randolph Moss of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, emphasized that the executive branch cannot withdraw funding from news organizations based on their coverage. This ruling follows Congress's earlier decision in July 2025 to rescind $1.1 billion in federal funding for public media. Despite the ruling, the lost federal funding is not automatically restored, but the decision paves the way for potential future federal grants to public media.
Reuters Reuters
US judge upholds block on subpoenas to Fed's Powell, teeing up likely appeal

US judge upholds block on subpoenas to Fed's Powell, teeing up likely appeal

By Andrew Goudsward WASHINGTON, April 3 (Reuters) - A U.S. judge on Friday stood by his prior decision to block subpoenas issued in a criminal investigation into Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell, setting up a likely appeal that could further delay President Donald Trump’s move to install a more
Rapid Read Rapid Read
Justice Department Declares Presidential Records Act Unconstitutional

Justice Department Declares Presidential Records Act Unconstitutional

The Justice Department has declared the Presidential Records Act, which mandates that presidential documents be turned over to the National Archives, unconstitutional. Assistant Attorney General T. Elliot Gaiser stated that the Act exceeds Congress' power and infringes on the executive branch's independence. This opinion suggests that President Trump is not required to comply with the Act. The Presidential Records Act, enacted in 1978 post-Watergate, was designed to ensure presidential records belong to the U.S. government. The Act lacks an enforcement mechanism, but President Trump has invoked it in defense against allegations of mishandling sensitive records.