Category: Law/Legal

Legal Challenge Emerges Against $100,000 Fee on H-1B Visas

Staff ReporterImmigration, Law/Legal 0

The first legal challenge against President Trump’s $100,000 fee on H-1B visas has been filed, with critics arguing it could devastate key sectors and exceed presidential authority.

A coalition of unions, employers, religious organizations, and healthcare providers has initiated the first federal lawsuit against President Donald Trump’s controversial $100,000 fee on new H-1B visa petitions. The lawsuit, filed in San Francisco, asserts that the Trump administration has overstepped its constitutional authority, as only Congress has the power to impose taxes or fees.

Trump announced the unprecedented policy on September 19, claiming that the H-1B program, which allows tens of thousands of high-skilled foreign workers to enter the United States each year, had been “deliberately exploited” to replace American workers with lower-paid labor. The new fee is set to take effect just 36 hours after the announcement, prompting panic among employers who rushed to secure workers before the rules changed.

The proclamation mandates that employers pay an additional $100,000 for each new H-1B hire, in addition to existing fees that typically range from $2,000 to $5,000. Notably, this fee does not apply to current H-1B holders or to petitions filed before September 21.

The plaintiffs in the lawsuit include the United Auto Workers union, the American Association of University Professors (AAUP), healthcare providers, and various religious groups. They argue that Trump’s actions have effectively disrupted a program established by Congress, creating chaos for employers, workers, and federal agencies alike. They contend that the proclamation must be blocked to prevent widespread harm.

“Without relief, hospitals will lose medical staff, churches will lose pastors, classrooms will lose teachers, and industries across the country risk losing key innovators,” stated the Democracy Forward Foundation and Justice Action Center, which are representing the plaintiffs in a joint press release.

The H-1B visa program, introduced by Congress in 1992, permits U.S. employers to hire temporary foreign workers in specialized fields such as technology, medicine, engineering, and education. Each year, the program issues 65,000 visas, with an additional 20,000 reserved for applicants holding advanced degrees. Due to high demand, visas are typically allocated by lottery.

This lawsuit highlights the extensive impact of the H-1B program beyond the technology sector. According to the plaintiffs, approximately one-third of H-1B visa holders are employed as nurses, physicians, teachers, scholars, and clergy. Hospitals and universities have expressed concerns that the new fee could severely hinder their staffing capabilities, while religious organizations fear it may impede their ability to recruit clergy.

“The $100,000 fee will discourage the best and brightest minds from bringing life-saving research to the U.S.,” remarked Todd Wolfson, president of the AAUP, in comments reported by the Associated Press.

Business leaders have echoed these sentiments. Amazon, which received over 10,000 H-1B visas this year, is among the largest beneficiaries, followed by Tata Consultancy, Microsoft, Apple, and Google. California, home to many of these companies, employs the highest number of H-1B workers in the nation. For these businesses, the new fee could translate into tens of millions of dollars in additional costs, not to mention the potential chilling effect on talent mobility.

The Trump administration defends the fee as a necessary measure to curb abuse of the H-1B program and to protect American jobs. Trump has argued that the influx of lower-wage workers has undermined the program’s integrity and poses a threat to national security by discouraging Americans from pursuing careers in science and technology.

Supporters of the fee assert that some outsourcing firms exploit the H-1B program to import workers at salaries as low as $60,000, which is significantly below the typical six-figure compensation for U.S. tech jobs.

The lawsuit raises a critical constitutional question: Can a president unilaterally impose new fees on a visa program established by Congress? The plaintiffs assert that the answer is no, emphasizing that the Constitution reserves the authority to levy taxes or fees for Congress alone.

The proclamation effectively transforms the H-1B program into one where employers must either “pay to play” or seek a “national interest” exemption, which would be granted at the discretion of the Secretary of Homeland Security. This system raises concerns about selective enforcement and potential corruption, according to the lawsuit.

Skye Perryman, president and CEO of Democracy Forward, described the “exorbitant fee” as illegal and a potential invitation for corruption. “Congress created the program, and Trump cannot rewrite it overnight or impose new taxes by executive order,” she stated, as reported by the Associated Press.

The lawsuit also critiques the administration for failing to adhere to the required rulemaking process, alleging that agencies such as USCIS and the State Department implemented policies without proper notice or consideration of their impact on employers and innovation.

India is the largest beneficiary of the H-1B program, with Indian nationals accounting for 71 percent of approved visas last year, while China received 11.7 percent, according to government data. The steep new fee is expected to disproportionately affect Indian professionals, potentially straining U.S.-India relations at a time when Washington seeks to strengthen ties with New Delhi.

The plaintiffs are seeking an immediate injunction to halt the enforcement of the fee. A federal judge in San Francisco is expected to hear arguments in the coming weeks. Meanwhile, uncertainty looms as employers remain unsure whether to proceed with petitions and workers find themselves in limbo.

If the court rules against the administration, it would represent a significant rebuke of Trump’s expansive claims of executive authority over immigration. Conversely, if the order is upheld, it could permanently alter one of America’s most vital pathways for high-skilled immigration, with far-reaching implications for the economy, education, healthcare, and international diplomacy.

For now, this lawsuit marks the first but likely not the last challenge to a policy that critics argue threatens to close America’s doors to global talent while entangling employers and workers in costly and confusing regulations.

Source: Original article

Legal Groups Seek Emergency Order to Prevent ICE from Detaining Immigrant Teens

Staff ReporterImmigration, Law/Legal 0

Advocacy groups have filed an emergency motion to enforce a court ruling preventing the detention of unaccompanied immigrant teens in adult facilities, citing recent violations by ICE.

Washington, D.C., October 4 — The American Immigration Council and the National Immigrant Justice Center (NIJC) have filed an emergency motion today, aiming to enforce a 2021 court ruling from the Garcia Ramirez v. ICE case. This ruling prohibits U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) from unlawfully detaining unaccompanied immigrant children in adult detention centers once they reach the age of 18.

The motion comes in response to multiple documented instances where ICE has resumed transferring immigrant children who entered the U.S. alone into adult detention facilities upon turning 18, a practice that violates the permanent injunction established in the Garcia Ramirez case.

“The permanent injunction made clear that ICE cannot automatically transfer young people to adult detention centers simply because they have turned 18,” said Michelle Lapointe, legal director at the American Immigration Council. “Locking up these young people in ICE jails rife with overcrowding and hazardous conditions, and far from their support systems, does nothing to make our communities safer; it only inflicts more harm on vulnerable youth.”

When children under 18 enter the United States unaccompanied, they are typically placed in shelters managed by the Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR). These children are generally released to family members or other vetted sponsors in the U.S., rather than being sent to ICE detention centers. This policy is designed to prioritize care and support for children instead of punishment.

According to the Garcia Ramirez ruling, which resulted from years of litigation by the NIJC and the Council, ICE is required to consider placement in the least restrictive setting once these youths turn 18. This includes exploring alternatives to detention rather than resorting to immigration detention.

“ICE’s attempt to expand the detention of immigrant youth is a direct violation of the courts, which explicitly requires the agency to consider safe, less restrictive alternatives to detention,” stated Mark Fleming, associate director of litigation at the National Immigrant Justice Center. “We will not allow the government to turn back the clock and return to a practice that the courts have already found unlawful.”

The number of individuals in immigration detention has reached unprecedented levels, leading to overcrowding and abusive conditions. Critics argue that the previous administration weaponized the threat of prolonged confinement in these dangerous facilities to coerce individuals into relinquishing their legal rights and accepting deportation. This pressure is further exacerbated by new policies, including financial incentives for unaccompanied youths who agree to leave the country.

“The law is clear: ICE must use safe, less restrictive alternatives, not default to jailing young people indefinitely,” emphasized Marie Silver, managing attorney for NIJC’s Immigrant Children’s Protection Project. “These kids came here seeking safety and hope. They deserve a chance to be free, reunify with family and community members, attend school, and work with their lawyers to have their day in court. Trapping them in dangerous and degrading conditions in immigration detention is compounding their trauma in a cruel and unnecessary way.”

The emergency motion filed today underscores the urgent need to uphold the rights of immigrant youth and ensure compliance with established legal rulings.

Source: Original article

Federal Judge Sentences Man Who Attempted to Assassinate Justice Kavanaugh

Staff ReporterNation, Law/Legal 0

A federal judge is set to sentence Nicholas Roske for his attempted assassination of Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh, with prosecutors seeking a 30-year prison term.

A federal judge is scheduled to sentence Nicholas Roske on Friday for his attempt to assassinate Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh. This incident occurred in the weeks leading up to the Supreme Court’s landmark Dobbs decision, which significantly impacted abortion rights in the United States.

The Department of Justice is advocating for a 30-year prison sentence for Roske, while his defense attorneys have requested a significantly shorter term of eight years. In a sentencing memorandum, prosecutors detailed how Roske arrived at Kavanaugh’s residence on June 8, 2022, armed with a pistol, ammunition, a knife, a crowbar, and tactical gear, with the intention of killing Kavanaugh and three other justices.

Prosecutors emphasized the potential consequences of Roske’s actions, describing them as “immeasurable and staggering.” They noted that by targeting at least one justice and aiming to kill three, Roske sought to alter an entire branch of the U.S. government through violence.

In contrast, Roske’s attorneys argued that a 30-year sentence, which includes enhancements for terrorism, is disproportionate to the crime. Roske pleaded guilty in April to one count of attempting to murder a Supreme Court justice, a charge that carries a maximum penalty of life in prison.

The defense highlighted that Roske called 911 shortly after arriving at Kavanaugh’s home, effectively self-reporting his intentions and plans rather than proceeding with the attack. They also pointed out that Roske suffers from severe depression, arguing that his online searches related to mass shootings and various justices should not be interpreted as evidence of intent to murder multiple justices.

Roske’s attorneys stated, “As any internet user knows, Googling and doom-scrolling, even in dark corners of the internet, does not equate to criminal intent.” They further argued that a person’s online content is often voluminous, intensely personal, and can easily be misinterpreted.

In a notable development, Roske’s attorneys informed the court that although his name had not formally changed, he wishes to be referred to as “Sophie” and to use female pronouns. A footnote in their memorandum stated that the remainder of the document and the in-court arguments would respect this preference.

Roske’s sentencing comes amid growing concerns among judges regarding threats from ideologically motivated individuals across the political spectrum. The attempted assassination occurred just two weeks before the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade, a ruling that had sparked widespread protests outside the Supreme Court building and the homes of conservative justices.

In a related case, an Alaska man named Panos Anastasiou was indicted last year for sending hundreds of threatening messages to Supreme Court justices, including explicit threats of murder. Anastasiou faces accusations of making specific threats against six justices, including shooting, strangling, “lynching,” and beheading them.

This story is still developing, and updates will be provided as more information becomes available.

Source: Original article

Inside a Scammer’s Day: Targeting Victims in the Digital Age

Staff ReporterLaw/Legal, Security 0

Scammers utilize personal data from public records and data brokers to create convincing narratives, enhancing their chances of successfully targeting potential victims through calls and emails.

Imagine sipping your morning coffee when your phone rings. A number you don’t recognize appears on the screen. On the other end, a voice claims to be from your bank, asking you to “confirm a recent charge.” This scenario is all too familiar for many.

Scammers do not rely on luck. They do not randomly select numbers from a phone book in hopes of finding a target. Instead, their calls, texts, and emails are meticulously planned. They often possess a wealth of information about you before they ever reach out, making their pitches sound credible and tailored.

So, what does a typical day look like for a scammer? Let’s take a closer look.

Scammers begin their day not by hacking into secure databases but by accessing data broker sites—dubious online directories that trade personal information like collectibles. These platforms provide a comprehensive profile of individuals, including details such as addresses, email addresses, voter registrations, and even criminal histories, whether accurate or not.

With this information at their fingertips, scammers can construct narratives that seem custom-made for their targets. They do not fabricate details; rather, they borrow from your life, which is why their communications can feel so believable.

Even without social media, scammers can effectively target individuals. Once they have crafted their story, they deploy auto-dialing software to send out thousands of calls daily. By acquiring personal and contact details from various data brokers, they can repeatedly target the same individuals. If you hang up or ignore the call, scammers log your number as “active,” ensuring you remain on their list for future attempts.

Scammers do not need every target to fall for their tricks; they only require a small percentage to succeed. This is a numbers game, and the abundance of personal data significantly increases their odds. At the end of the day, scammers continue their operations by feeding the information they have gathered back into the data cycle, perpetuating the cycle of victimization.

Now, consider a scenario where scammers cannot find your data online. Without access to personal information, they would lack storylines, details to exploit, and the means to personalize their attacks. Removing your data from people-search sites and data broker databases not only cleans up your online presence but also effectively shuts the door on scammers’ tactics.

However, the process of removing your data can be tedious. You could spend hours navigating various sites, filling out opt-out forms, and sending emails while trying to track compliance. The challenge is that data brokers do not cease their operations; new ones emerge weekly, and old ones often reintroduce your data.

This is where data removal services come into play. While no service can guarantee complete removal of your data from the internet, utilizing a data removal service is a wise choice. Although these services may come at a cost, they provide peace of mind by actively monitoring and systematically erasing your personal information from numerous websites.

By limiting the information available about you, you reduce the risk of scammers cross-referencing data from breaches with information they might find on the dark web, making it more challenging for them to target you.

Scammers do not accidentally stumble upon your phone number. They meticulously map out your life, one data point at a time. Therefore, protecting your information online is the most effective step you can take to reduce the likelihood of scam calls, phishing emails, and identity theft.

Remember, every piece of personal data you remove is one less tool in a scammer’s arsenal. What’s the most convincing scam attempt you’ve ever received? Share your experiences with us.

Source: Original article

DOJ Closes Investigation into BAPS Akshardham Temple Labor Allegations

Staff ReporterLaw/Legal, USA 0

The U.S. Department of Justice has closed its investigation into forced labor allegations at the BAPS Swaminarayan Akshardham temple in New Jersey, while a civil lawsuit continues in federal court.

The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) has officially concluded its investigation into allegations of forced labor at the BAPS Swaminarayan Akshardham temple in Robbinsville, New Jersey. This temple is recognized as the largest Hindu temple in the Western Hemisphere. The investigation was launched following a raid in 2021, which was prompted by claims made by Indian workers who were brought to the United States on R-1 religious worker visas.

In May 2021, six workers filed a civil lawsuit, alleging they were coerced into performing strenuous construction tasks under poor working conditions. The lawsuit claimed that their passports were confiscated and that they were inadequately compensated for their labor. An amended complaint later introduced 15 additional plaintiffs; however, 12 of these individuals withdrew their claims, stating they had been misled by their legal counsel.

The leadership of the temple has consistently maintained that the workers were volunteers, referred to as “sevaks,” who regarded their participation as a form of spiritual service. They emphasized that the construction of the temple was a collective effort, involving over 12,500 individuals from diverse backgrounds and countries.

The DOJ’s decision to close the criminal investigation has been welcomed by officials at BAPS. They expressed relief and reaffirmed their commitment to transparency and community service. Lenin Joshi, a volunteer at the temple, described the community as “shaken” by the initial allegations but confident in the integrity of their efforts.

Despite the closure of the criminal investigation, the civil lawsuit remains active in federal court. Leaders at BAPS are optimistic about a favorable outcome, citing the DOJ’s findings as supportive of their position. The civil case is set to resume at an undetermined date, with both sides preparing for further proceedings.

Source: Original article

Expanding Surveillance of Immigrants Raises Concerns Over Privacy Rights

Staff ReporterImmigration, Law/Legal 0

Expanding surveillance measures targeting immigrants in the U.S. raise significant concerns about privacy rights, as government agencies increasingly share sensitive data and employ advanced monitoring techniques.

Since the Trump administration took office, the United States has witnessed a significant crackdown on immigrants. Immigration authorities, including Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), and U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), have intensified efforts to question, detain, and deport undocumented immigrants, student visa holders, and green card holders.

To facilitate this crackdown, the administration has directed non-immigration-related government agencies, such as the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) and Medicaid, to share sensitive information with immigration authorities. During an American Community Media briefing on September 5, data privacy and policy experts expressed concerns that this development sets a dangerous precedent for privacy rights.

Nicole Alvarez, a Senior Policy Analyst for Technology Policy at the Center for American Progress (CAP), described the administration’s use of sensitive records for immigration enforcement as a “digital watchtower.” In a report published last month, Alvarez outlined how the administration is constructing an infrastructure for an expanding surveillance system that poses threats to both immigrants and citizens.

Alvarez noted that the Privacy Act of 1974, enacted in the wake of the Watergate scandal, was designed to ensure that the federal government could only use an individual’s private information for the purpose for which it was collected. However, she argued that the Privacy Act “has simply not kept up with the times.” It was established before the advent of the internet, mass data storage, and the ability to link extensive databases, resulting in limited accountability when data is reused or shared across agencies in unexpected ways.

The administration’s use of sensitive information for purposes other than its original intent—such as IRS or Medicaid data being utilized for immigration raids—can be classified as secondary data abuse. A 2022 report by the Center for Privacy and Technology at Georgetown Law revealed that ICE has access to personal information through various sources, including Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) driver’s license records and utility providers’ client records.

Another initiative underway is the consolidation of data from different agencies into a centralized repository, which simplifies the federal government’s ability to surveil both immigrants and citizens. Over time, Alvarez believes that secondary data abuse and the centralization of information will deter individuals from enrolling in or utilizing services offered by government agencies. Immigrants may become hesitant to pay taxes, enroll in healthcare programs, or seek other benefits to which they are entitled.

“When people disengage from public systems, those systems inherently become weaker; they become more unfair and less democratic,” Alvarez explained. “It becomes harder for agencies to serve communities effectively, and ironically, it undermines long-term goals like fraud prevention and civic participation.”

Emerald Tse, from the Center on Privacy and Technology at Georgetown Law, echoed Alvarez’s findings regarding the government’s digital watchtower and emphasized that the surveillance extends beyond data collected through federal agencies. The Center’s 2024 report, “Raiding The Genome,” provides a detailed analysis of a DHS program that collects DNA samples from thousands of individuals daily. In 2020, a Department of Justice rule granted DHS the authority to collect DNA from any individual they detain. These samples are then used to create profiles added to a federal policing database accessible to all levels of law enforcement.

“We found that the federal government has been collecting DNA on the assumption that people will commit crimes in the future,” Tse stated. “Profiles were added regardless of whether a person committed a crime or had been charged with one, and this included individuals of all ages, even children as young as four years old.” The report indicates that the DHS has added over 2.5 million profiles to the national policing database through this program, marking a staggering 5000% increase in the number of profiles added over the past three years.

The current administration is also leveraging social media to screen and, in some cases, target immigrants. Earlier this year, student visa interviews were paused for three weeks. Upon resuming, consular officers were instructed to vet applicants based on their social media profiles and online presence. This directive included screening candidates who demonstrated support for Hamas or exhibited a history of political activism. The government has also announced the use of an AI-based application called “Catch and Revoke,” which scours social media profiles of thousands of international students and revokes their visas if their sympathies align with Hamas.

Sophia Cope, Senior Staff Attorney at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, views this social media surveillance as a direct challenge to individuals’ First Amendment rights. She highlighted a troubling trend in which the government is increasingly limiting what immigrants can express on social media.

“First it was pro-terrorism and pro-Palestine content, then it became anti-Semitism, and now it has broadened to include a general hostility toward American values and culture,” Cope explained. “This is absurd because all of that speech— even pro-terrorism speech—is protected under the First Amendment, as long as it does not incite imminent violence.”

As the U.S. government continues to expand its surveillance capabilities, the implications for privacy rights and civil liberties remain a pressing concern.

Source: Original article

ED Discovers Major Gold Smuggling Operation in Ladakh, Over 1,000 Kg Seized

Staff ReporterConflict, Law/Legal 0

The Enforcement Directorate has uncovered a significant gold smuggling operation that allegedly funneled over 1,000 kilograms of gold into India, valued at nearly ₹800 crore.

LEH: The Enforcement Directorate (ED) has revealed a large-scale cross-border gold smuggling operation that is believed to have brought more than 1,000 kilograms of foreign-origin gold into India during 2023 and 2024, with an estimated value of nearly ₹800 crore.

This discovery is linked to the seizure of 108 gold bars, each weighing one kilogram, near the Line of Actual Control (LAC) in eastern Ladakh. The bars were intercepted on July 9 by an Indo-Tibetan Border Police (ITBP) patrol at Sirigaple in the Changthang sub-sector, resulting in the arrest of two individuals, Tsering Chamba and Stanzin Dorgyal.

According to the ED, the operation was orchestrated by Tendu Tashi in India, who collaborated closely with a Chinese national identified as Bhu-Chum-Chum. The gold, which originated from Tibet, was transported across the border using porters. Investigators have identified Tenzin Khandap of Tibet as the designated receiver and transporter of the gold, while his uncle, Tenzin Samphel, was responsible for arranging the porters to carry the shipments.

Once the gold entered India, it was moved from Ladakh to Delhi, where it was distributed to various jewellers and dealers. Payments to the Chinese supplier were reportedly made through cryptocurrency, specifically using USDT (Tether), to evade detection by authorities.

The ED has indicated that between 2023 and 2024, the smuggling network successfully brought in 1,064 kilograms of gold into the country. As part of its investigation into money laundering, the agency has conducted searches at five locations in the National Capital Region, including Delhi, as well as one site in Ladakh.

Officials noted that the syndicate had established a sophisticated logistics and payment system to facilitate the cross-border movement and sale of the smuggled gold while evading law enforcement agencies.

The ED has stated that further investigations are ongoing to trace the proceeds of crime and to identify all individuals and entities involved in this extensive smuggling operation.

Source: Original article

Columbia University Data Breach Affects 870,000 Individuals

Staff ReporterLaw/Legal, Technology 0

Columbia University has confirmed a significant data breach affecting nearly 869,000 individuals, exposing sensitive personal information, including Social Security numbers and academic records.

Columbia University has recently disclosed a major cyberattack that has compromised the personal, financial, and health-related information of approximately 869,000 individuals, including current and former students, employees, and applicants. Notifications to those affected began on August 7 and are ongoing.

The breach was discovered following a network outage in June, which Columbia attributed to unauthorized access by an external party. Investigators are currently assessing the full extent of the data theft, which reportedly includes about 460 gigabytes of sensitive information.

According to a breach notification filed with the Maine Attorney General’s office, the compromised data encompasses admissions, enrollment, and financial aid records, as well as certain employee information. However, Columbia has confirmed that patient records from the Columbia University Irving Medical Center were not affected by this breach.

The university has taken steps to report the incident to law enforcement and is collaborating with cybersecurity experts to address the situation. In response to the breach, Columbia has implemented new safeguards and enhanced protocols to prevent similar incidents in the future.

As part of its response, Columbia began mailing letters to affected individuals, offering two years of complimentary credit monitoring, fraud consultation, and identity theft restoration services. While the university has stated that there is currently no evidence of misuse of the stolen data, the risk of identity theft and fraud remains a significant concern, as criminals often exploit stolen information months after a breach.

Individuals affected by the breach are encouraged to take proactive measures to safeguard their personal information. Regularly checking credit reports through AnnualCreditReport.com can help identify unauthorized accounts or changes. Additionally, using personal data removal services can assist in scrubbing information from data brokers and people search sites, making it more difficult for criminals to exploit exposed details.

While no service can guarantee complete removal of personal data from the internet, utilizing a data removal service can be a prudent choice. These services actively monitor and systematically erase personal information from various websites, reducing the risk of identity theft.

In addition to these measures, placing a fraud alert on credit reports can make it more challenging for identity thieves to open accounts in an individual’s name. A credit freeze offers even stronger protection by blocking new credit applications altogether.

Creating long, complex passwords for each account is another essential step in protecting personal information. A password manager can assist in generating and securely storing these passwords. Furthermore, individuals should check if their email addresses have been exposed in past breaches, as many password managers include breach scanners to alert users of potential vulnerabilities.

Turning on two-factor authentication (2FA) wherever possible adds an extra layer of security to accounts, helping to protect them even if a password is compromised. It is also crucial to be vigilant against potential scams that may arise in the wake of the breach, as criminals often exploit fear to target victims with fraudulent emails or texts.

To protect against malicious links that could install malware, individuals should ensure they have strong antivirus software installed on all devices. This software can help detect phishing emails and ransomware scams, safeguarding personal information and digital assets.

Beyond the free credit monitoring services offered by Columbia, additional paid services can help track personal data across the dark web and provide extra safeguards. Identity theft protection companies can monitor sensitive information, such as Social Security numbers and email addresses, alerting users if their information is being sold or used fraudulently.

The breach at Columbia University underscores the vulnerability of even trusted institutions to cyberattacks. As the investigation continues and notifications are expected to roll out through the fall, individuals are advised to remain vigilant and proactive in protecting their personal information.

As discussions around data security continue, questions arise regarding what further measures universities and large institutions should implement to safeguard the personal data of those who place their trust in them.

Source: Original article

Notorious People Search Site Resurfaces Following Major Data Breach

Staff ReporterLaw/Legal, Technology 0

The notorious people search site National Public Data has relaunched under new ownership after a massive data breach that exposed the personal information of 3 billion individuals, raising significant privacy concerns.

National Public Data (NPD), a controversial people search site, has made its return to the internet despite a previous breach that affected the personal information of 3 billion individuals. The site’s relaunch has reignited concerns about privacy and data security.

More than a year ago, NPD gained notoriety for one of the largest data breaches in history, which led to the exposure of sensitive information belonging to billions. Following its disappearance from the web, the site has resurfaced under new ownership, specifically Perfect Privacy LLC. It is important to note that this company is not affiliated with the VPN service of the same name.

Despite the change in ownership, the business model of NPD remains unchanged. The site continues to allow users to search for personal data about friends, relatives, or even strangers using just a name. This functionality raises ongoing concerns about how such data can be misused, particularly in contexts like employment, housing, or credit decisions.

NPD claims that the information it provides comes from various sources, including public records, property ownership databases, social media, and government agencies. The company asserts that it verifies and filters this data to ensure accuracy and currency. However, users may still encounter inaccuracies, as a quick test search revealed a mix of outdated and correct information. The site appeared to struggle with hyphenated names but successfully retrieved accurate details in other instances.

Attempts to reach NPD for comment went unanswered before the deadline for this article.

For individuals who prefer not to have their information accessible on NPD’s platform, there is an option to request removal. However, each profile requires a separate request and confirmation email. After submitting a request, users should follow up in a few days to ensure their data has been removed. A helpful tip is to use an alias or disposable email address for these requests, making it easier to track confirmations and keep the main inbox uncluttered.

Removing personal information from NPD is just the beginning of the privacy battle. Numerous other people search sites may still display personal details, as many of these platforms draw from the same public databases. Consequently, addresses, phone numbers, and relatives’ names can continue to resurface online.

The return of NPD serves as a stark reminder of how quickly data can reappear on the internet. While a breach may fade from public attention, the exposed information often remains accessible. To safeguard privacy, individuals need a comprehensive strategy. Regularly searching for one’s name on various people search engines is advisable, as it helps identify new profiles before they proliferate.

In addition to NPD, other sites such as Whitepages, Spokeo, and Radaris often host similar data. Conducting periodic checks can help users stay informed about their online presence.

For those seeking a more efficient approach, data removal services can scan multiple databases simultaneously. These services request opt-outs on behalf of users and monitor for new listings. While no service can guarantee complete removal of personal data from the internet, employing a data removal service can be a prudent choice. Such services actively work to erase personal information from numerous websites, providing peace of mind and reducing the risk of scammers accessing data from breaches.

In addition to removing profiles, individuals should remain vigilant about monitoring their bank statements, credit reports, and online accounts. Exposed data can be exploited for phishing attempts, fraudulent loan applications, or identity theft. Staying alert to suspicious activity can provide early warnings of potential issues.

To further protect against malicious links that could install malware and compromise personal information, it is essential to have robust antivirus software installed on all devices. This software can also alert users to phishing emails and ransomware scams, safeguarding personal information and digital assets.

Setting up alerts for identity theft is another proactive measure. Many banks and credit monitoring services allow users to create alerts for suspicious activity. Additionally, individuals can establish free fraud alerts with credit bureaus, prompting lenders to take extra steps to verify identity before issuing new credit.

People search sites frequently pull records from government databases. Therefore, reviewing local county property, court, or voter registration records can be beneficial. Some jurisdictions permit requests for redactions or limitations on what is displayed online. Furthermore, tightening privacy settings on social media platforms can help limit what strangers can see, reducing the amount of public information available for collection.

The resurgence of National Public Data highlights the ongoing challenge of protecting personal information in an increasingly digital world. Even if individuals successfully remove their data from one site, numerous others may still retain their details. Consequently, safeguarding privacy requires more than a simple opt-out; it necessitates regular monitoring, credit freezes, and enhanced account vigilance to stay ahead of potential threats.

As the conversation around data privacy continues, individuals are left to ponder whether stronger laws should be enacted to prevent companies from collecting and selling personal data or if the responsibility lies solely with individuals to protect themselves.

Source: Original article

Jury Duty Phone Scams Surge as Fraudsters Impersonate Officials

Staff ReporterLaw/Legal, Politics 0

Fraudsters are increasingly impersonating local officials in jury duty scams, threatening victims with arrest to extract payments, prompting warnings from law enforcement agencies.

Fraudsters are finding new ways to deceive individuals, with one of the latest schemes involving impersonation of local officials. This tactic exploits the fear of arrest by claiming that victims have missed jury duty and now face legal consequences.

Scammers often initiate these fraud attempts with calls from blocked or unknown numbers. During these calls, they assert that the recipient has failed to appear for jury duty and is now subject to an arrest warrant. The scammers typically demand payment, which is often requested through wire transfers or gift cards.

A key warning sign of this scam is any demand for money to avoid arrest or legal trouble. It is crucial never to provide personal information or make payments to unknown callers.

While these scams frequently target older or more vulnerable individuals, younger people have also reported close encounters. For instance, one individual received repeated calls from an unidentified number before finally answering. The caller, claiming to be from a local sheriff’s department, had the person’s full name and address and insisted that they had failed to appear for jury duty, threatening multiple citations.

Legitimate jury summonses are always delivered by mail, not through threatening phone calls. If you receive a suspicious call regarding missed jury duty, it is essential to remain calm and take steps to protect your personal information.

First and foremost, do not trust any unknown caller, especially if they demand immediate payment. Legitimate authorities will never request payment over the phone, particularly not through gift cards, wire transfers, or cryptocurrency. If someone threatens you with arrest or legal action unless you pay immediately, it is almost certainly a scam. Hang up and contact your local court or police department using an official number.

It is also advisable to fact-check any suspicious calls. Court summonses are always sent via mail, not over the phone. Even if the caller possesses personal information such as your name or address, that does not lend them credibility. Scammers often utilize leaked or publicly available data to appear convincing.

Exercise caution even if the scam is delivered through text messages or emails. Avoid clicking on any suspicious links, as they can install malware on your device and compromise your personal data. The best way to protect yourself from malicious links is to have robust antivirus software installed on all your devices. This software can alert you to phishing emails and ransomware scams, safeguarding your personal information and digital assets.

It is important to recognize that your data is already accessible online, often due to old social media profiles or past data breaches. This is how scammers gather enough personal details to sound legitimate. Investing in a data removal service can help minimize your digital footprint by removing your information from people-search sites and data brokers.

While no service can guarantee complete removal of your data from the internet, a data removal service is a wise investment. These services actively monitor and systematically erase your personal information from numerous websites, providing peace of mind and reducing the risk of scammers cross-referencing data from breaches with information they might find on the dark web.

If you receive a scam call, it is crucial to report it to local law enforcement or your country’s fraud reporting agency. After hanging up, block the number on your phone and report it. Many carriers allow you to forward scam texts to 7726 (SPAM). Additionally, apps like Truecaller and Hiya, as well as built-in features like Google Call Screen or Silence Unknown Callers on iPhones, can help detect and block fraudulent calls automatically.

Older adults are frequent targets of these scams, so it is essential to sit down with parents, grandparents, or neighbors to explain how these scams work and what to watch for. A simple conversation could prevent a costly mistake.

As scammers become bolder and more convincing, staying informed about the signs of a jury duty phone scam is crucial. Utilizing smart tools like antivirus software and call blockers, along with limiting your digital footprint, can significantly reduce your risk. Empowering yourself and your loved ones with this knowledge is vital in combating these fraudulent schemes.

Scammers are increasingly using hyper-personalized and emotionally charged phone calls instead of relying solely on faceless phishing emails. By impersonating local authorities and referencing civic duties like jury duty, they exploit both fear and a sense of responsibility. This tactic is particularly dangerous because it sounds plausible, drawing on real processes that many individuals may not fully understand.

Do you believe that law enforcement and government agencies are doing enough to educate the public about these scams? Share your thoughts by reaching out to us.

Source: Original article

Landslide in Central Darfur Claims Over 1,000 Lives, Destroys Village

Staff ReporterEnvironment, Law/Legal, World 0

A devastating landslide in Tarasin Village, Central Darfur, has resulted in over 1,000 fatalities, with only one survivor reported, according to local rebel sources.

A catastrophic landslide struck Tarasin Village in Sudan’s Central Darfur on Sunday, August 31, resulting in the deaths of at least 1,000 individuals, as reported by a local rebel group. The Sudan Liberation Movement/Army (SLM-A) indicated that the disaster was triggered by several days of torrential rainfall that occurred in late August, leading to the complete destruction of the village.

The SLM-A stated, “Initial information indicates the death of all village residents, estimated to be more than one thousand people. Only one person survived.” This tragic event highlights the severe impact of natural disasters in a region already grappling with conflict and instability.

While the figures reported by the SLM-A cannot be independently verified due to restricted access to the affected area, if confirmed, this incident would rank among the deadliest natural disasters in Sudan’s recent history.

In response to the tragedy, Darfur’s governor, Minni Minnawi, described the landslide as a “humanitarian tragedy.” The SLM-A has called for urgent assistance from the United Nations and international aid organizations to aid in body recovery and provide necessary support to those affected by the disaster.

Earlier reports from the BBC indicated that many residents from North Darfur had sought refuge in Tarasin Village after being displaced by the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces, further complicating the humanitarian situation in the region.

This developing story underscores the ongoing challenges faced by communities in Sudan, where natural disasters intersect with ongoing conflict and displacement issues.

Source: Original article

Texas Businessman Charged with Federal Tax Evasion in Texas

Staff ReporterBusiness, Law/Legal, Politics 0

A Texas businessman has been indicted for federal tax evasion, accused of diverting company funds for personal use and failing to report significant income.

TYLER, TX – A federal grand jury in the Eastern District of Texas has indicted Anil Surabhi, a 43-year-old Indian citizen residing in McKinney, on charges of attempting to evade taxes.

The indictment alleges that Surabhi, who managed an IT services company based in Georgia, misappropriated substantial company funds for his personal gain.

According to the legal document, Surabhi’s misuse of funds included financing private investments, covering personal expenses, and making real estate purchases. Notably, he is accused of failing to report these significant disbursements as income on his individual income tax returns.

If convicted of the federal charge, Surabhi could face a maximum sentence of five years in federal prison.

Source: Original article

Inside Training Facility for Recruits Addressing Trump’s Deportation Policies

Staff ReporterImmigration, Law/Legal 0

The Federal Law Enforcement Training Center in Brunswick, Georgia, serves as the primary training hub for federal law enforcement officers, including those in Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

The Federal Law Enforcement Training Center (FLETC) in Brunswick, Georgia, stands as a pivotal institution for the training of nearly all federal law enforcement officers in the United States. This facility plays a crucial role in preparing officers from various agencies, including Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), which has been at the forefront of immigration enforcement and mass deportation initiatives during the Trump administration.

Established to enhance the quality of law enforcement training, FLETC provides a comprehensive curriculum that covers a wide array of topics essential for effective law enforcement. The center’s programs are designed to equip recruits with the skills necessary to navigate the complexities of federal law enforcement, particularly in areas such as immigration enforcement.

As the demand for immigration enforcement has increased, particularly under the policies implemented during the Trump era, the training provided at FLETC has become even more significant. Recruits undergo rigorous training that prepares them to handle the challenges associated with immigration enforcement, including the legal and ethical implications of their actions.

FLETC’s training programs emphasize not only the technical skills required for law enforcement but also the importance of understanding the communities they serve. This dual focus aims to foster a sense of responsibility and accountability among officers, particularly in sensitive areas such as immigration enforcement.

The facility’s role in shaping the future of federal law enforcement cannot be overstated. As ICE continues to play a central role in the enforcement of immigration laws, the training provided at FLETC will likely have lasting implications for both the officers and the communities they interact with.

In conclusion, the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center in Brunswick, Georgia, remains a critical institution in the training of federal law enforcement officers, particularly those involved in immigration enforcement. Its programs are essential in preparing recruits to meet the demands of their roles in an increasingly complex legal and social landscape, especially in the context of the Trump administration’s immigration policies.

Source: Original article

North Korea Constructs Secret Long-Range Missile Base Near China

Staff ReporterConflict, Law/Legal, World 0

North Korea has constructed a secret long-range missile base near the Chinese border, showcasing its commitment to enhancing its nuclear strike capabilities.

North Korea has reportedly established and is operating a significant long-range missile base close to its border with China. This facility is believed to house some of Kim Jong Un’s most advanced strategic weapons.

The existence of this missile base underscores the regime’s continued focus on advancing its nuclear capabilities. As tensions in the region persist, North Korea’s military developments remain a point of concern for neighboring countries and the international community.

Analysts suggest that the construction of this base reflects North Korea’s strategic priorities and its desire to bolster its deterrent capabilities in the face of perceived threats. The facility’s location near the Chinese border may also indicate a calculated move to leverage its relationship with China while enhancing its military posture.

The ongoing development of missile technology and infrastructure by North Korea has raised alarms among global powers, prompting discussions about security and stability in the region. As the country continues to refine its missile systems, the implications for regional security dynamics are significant.

In light of these developments, the international community remains vigilant, monitoring North Korea’s actions closely. The establishment of this missile base serves as a reminder of the challenges that lie ahead in addressing the complexities of North Korea’s military ambitions.

According to NDTV, the regime’s efforts to enhance its nuclear strike capabilities are evident in the construction and operation of this facility.

Source: Original article

Trump Sues WSJ for Libel Over Epstein Birthday Letters Report

Staff ReporterCover, Law/Legal, Politics 0

President Donald Trump has initiated a $20 billion libel lawsuit against the Wall Street Journal over reports he allegedly gifted Jeffrey Epstein a note bearing his name and an image of a naked woman.

President Donald Trump has launched legal action against the Wall Street Journal and its reporters, seeking at least $20 billion in damages. The lawsuit, filed in a Miami federal court, accuses the publication of failing to adhere to journalistic standards in a story about a collection of letters allegedly gifted to Jeffrey Epstein, which included a note purportedly from Trump featuring an outline of a naked woman. Trump firmly denies authorship of the letter.

The 18-page lawsuit describes the Wall Street Journal’s alleged lapses, highlighting that the publication did not produce the drawing or the letter in their report, claiming their absence because “no authentic letter or drawing exists,” according to Trump’s attorney.

Trump expressed his intention to initiate legal proceedings promptly after the Journal’s article surfaced on Thursday, naming reporters Khadeeja Safdar and Joe Palazzolo as defendants. Trump also singled out Rupert Murdoch, owner of News Corp, during a Truth Social post, suggesting Murdoch had assured Trump he would manage the situation.

In response, Dow Jones, the Journal’s parent company, released a statement expressing confidence in the report’s accuracy and pledging to defend against the lawsuit vigorously.

Scrutiny has intensified lately concerning Trump’s past association with Epstein, the deceased convicted sex offender who died in a Manhattan jail in 2019 awaiting trial for federal sex trafficking charges. Amid his 2024 campaign, Trump spoke about potentially releasing more files on Epstein, responding to right-wing voices demanding further transparency around Epstein’s controversial case.

A Justice Department memo published earlier this month dismissed the existence of any “client list” maintained by Epstein implicating influential men in illegal activities. However, the absence of such a list has disappointed many of Trump’s supporters, creating a rift within his MAGA base.

The president’s relationship with media mogul Rupert Murdoch, who also owns Fox News, has been characterized by fluctuating dynamics over the years. Trump has repeatedly been a focal point in Murdoch’s media outlets, including Fox News, which prominently features Trump’s daughter-in-law, Lara Trump.

Facing ongoing legal battles with media entities, Trump seems undeterred, continuing to challenge stories he deems defamatory. Legal scholars note his presidency is one of the rare administrations seeing direct lawsuits from the president against media organizations.

First Amendment attorney Ted Boutrous mentioned that it is notably uncommon for a sitting president to sue a reporter or publication for defamation, emphasizing that the presidential “bully pulpit” often suffices in addressing grievances over alleged misrepresentations.

In 2024, Trump initiated legal actions against multiple media outlets during his reelection campaign. A notable instance involved ABC and claims from George Stephanopoulos regarding a jury’s findings in E. Jean Carroll’s case. ABC’s parent company, Disney, settled with Trump, setting a precedent for future settlements linked to Trump’s presidential library funding.

Trump recently withdrew a lawsuit against CBS News related to a “60 Minutes” segment, with Paramount agreeing to a payment as part of the settlement. Further settlements with Meta and X highlight Trump’s sustained focus on countering adversarial coverage.

Carl Tobias, a University of Richmond law professor, points to Trump’s approach as a tactical maneuver designed to instill caution among media outlets in their coverage of Trump and government matters, citing ongoing litigation as efforts that challenge First Amendment freedoms.

Following the lawsuit’s filing, Trump noted on Truth Social his anticipation of Murdoch and his associates undergoing extensive depositions and testimonies as part of the proceedings.

Source: Original article

Human Rights Group Petitions Against Minority Harassment in Bangladesh

Staff ReporterConflict, Law/Legal 0

The Human Rights Congress for Bangladesh Minorities has filed a Public Interest Litigation with the High Court, claiming pervasive misuse of legal processes to target and disenfranchise religious minorities in Bangladesh.

The Human Rights Congress for Bangladesh Minorities (HRCBM) has initiated a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) in the High Court of Bangladesh, asserting that the legal system is being exploited to harass and dispossess Hindus and other religious minorities in the country.

In a statement issued on Monday, HRCBM described the PIL filed at the High Court Division of the Bangladesh Supreme Court as not merely a legal maneuver but a profound appeal for justice. The group highlighted a backdrop where over 3.9 million criminal cases languish unresolved, with frequent misuse of prosecutorial powers.

A pointed example cited by HRCBM is the case of Chinmoy Krishna Brahmachari, a respected monk and social reformer. He remains detained on charges of sedition unlawfully initiated by a private individual—an action permissible only by the state under Section 196 of the Bangladeshi Code of Criminal Procedure.

Despite widespread agreement on the baselessness of these charges and rising public outcry, Brahmachari, also known as Chinmoy Prabhu, remains incarcerated. His bail application has been pending in the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court for several months while he has been implicated in additional alleged cases, including false murder accusations.

The organization questioned whether his sole offense was speaking truth to power and advocating for the marginalized communities in Bangladesh. According to HRCBM, his ongoing legal troubles exemplify the broader state inaction and adoption of a legal system that fails in its mission to deliver justice.

The HRCBM’s thorough investigation covered 15 criminal cases filed between October 31 and December 19, 2024. These cases reportedly implicated 5,701 individuals, many charged without specific allegations, listed under vague First Information Reports (FIRs). The organization stated that such broad accusations, especially against unnamed suspects, are often used by police and local actors to unjustly target minority community members, with this tendency notably prevalent in Chittagong and other urban centers.

The group argued that these actions not only contravene constitutional rights but further isolate already marginalized populations. The HRCBM stressed that religious minorities in Bangladesh have historically endured cycles of violence, displacement, and legal persecution. The current misuse of criminal charges, they contend, represents a novel form of systemic oppression—silent yet extensive in its impact.

Through its PIL, the HRCBM is urging the judiciary to cease arbitrary applications of FIRs, enforce initial inquiries in susceptible cases, take disciplinary measures against officers engaged in malicious prosecutions, and establish a judicial inquiry or commission to scrutinize and document the misuse of criminal charges against minorities, according to IANS.

Source: Original article

Ex-White House Doctor Refuses to Testify in Biden Investigation

Staff ReporterLaw/Legal, Politics 0

Dr. Kevin O’Connor, former President Joe Biden’s longtime physician, has declined to testify in a Republican-led investigation into Biden’s health, citing physician-patient confidentiality and his Fifth Amendment rights.

Dr. Kevin O’Connor, who was former President Joe Biden’s physician throughout his presidency, has refused to testify in a Republican-led congressional inquiry regarding Biden’s health while in office. The deposition was scheduled before the House Committee on Oversight and Government to investigate what some Republicans label as “the cover-up of President Joe Biden’s cognitive decline.”

O’Connor declined to take the stand at the deposition scheduled for Wednesday, invoking physician-patient privilege and his Fifth Amendment rights. His legal team asserted that the decision was essential given “the unique circumstances of this deposition.”

Speculation about Biden’s health, particularly his cognitive state, persisted during his presidency. New reports following his departure from office claim that his staff may have concealed his health issues, a situation further complicated by Biden’s recent announcement of a cancer diagnosis. These developments have intensified calls for clarity from GOP lawmakers.

In a statement to the committee, O’Connor emphasized that participating in the investigation would contravene his professional duty to maintain confidentiality and could lead to the revocation of his medical license. “Dr. O’Connor will not violate his oath of confidentiality to any of his patients, including President Biden,” the statement read.

Chair of the committee, Rep. James Comer, R-Ky., criticized O’Connor for resorting to the Fifth Amendment, insisting that “the American people demand transparency.” He expressed intentions to gather further testimony from former Biden officials, such as ex-White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre, and former senior advisers Anita Dunn and Michael Donilon. Interviews with Ronald Klain and Jeff Zients, who both served as Biden’s chief of staff at different times, have also been requested.

Despite criticism, O’Connor’s attorneys highlighted that President Trump had previously invoked his Fifth Amendment right in a 2022 deposition during a New York State Attorney General investigation. Trump had noted, “anyone in my position not taking the Fifth Amendment would be a fool, an absolute fool.”

Biden publicly addressed and refuted the claims of cognitive decline in the last year of his presidency during a May appearance on ABC’s The View.

Original article

Trump Faces Prospect of Rikers Island Imprisonment Amid Trial: Experts Weigh In

Staff ReporterPolitics, Law/Legal 0

In the event that Donald Trump continues to test the patience of the judge overseeing his hush money trial, there’s a possibility he might find himself back in his native New York City borough of Queens – more precisely, within the confines of the prison on Rikers Island, as indicated by experts on Monday.

Judge Juan Merchan, in response to Trump’s repeated breaches of a gag order prohibiting him from disparaging witnesses or the jury, cautioned the former president about the potential for imprisonment “if necessary” for further infractions.

While Merchan did not specify the exact facility, inquiries regarding Trump’s possible detention at Rikers prompted Frank Dwyer, the jail’s chief spokesperson, to assert that suitable accommodations would be arranged by the department.

Trump has persistently argued that he is a victim of a skewed justice system, claiming unfair treatment compared to others. Conversely, critics argue the opposite, suggesting that Trump’s public statements would have led any other defendant to incarceration by now.

The notion of Trump facing imprisonment while under trial is bound to evoke intense reactions from both his supporters and detractors. Trump’s repeated attempts to leverage the specter of imprisonment for fundraising underscore the potent emotional response it elicits from his base.

Mike Lawlor, an expert in criminal justice at the University of New Haven, outlined Rikers as the probable destination should Merchan pursue this course of action. Lawlor, a Democrat and former Connecticut House member, emphasized Merchan’s aim to curb contempt and prevent Trump from intimidating witnesses and jurors.

Lawlor elaborated on the objective of isolating Trump from his social media platform through incarceration, suggesting that imprisonment would achieve this end. He mentioned that Trump would be placed in protective custody, precluding interaction with other inmates, and limiting contact to corrections officers and his Secret Service detail.

Although Trump’s potential detention would mark an unprecedented occurrence at Rikers, Lawlor noted that the facility has experience housing high-profile individuals, including the elderly like Trump.

The former president’s former chief financial officer, Allen Weisselberg, currently serves time at Rikers, having been sentenced last month for perjury during Trump’s civil fraud trial.

Moreover, Trump would undergo standard intake procedures, including physical measurements publicly recorded, Lawlor explained.

Regarding the Secret Service’s role, Lawlor emphasized their primary duty of protecting Trump from harm, suggesting that a prison setting might streamline their responsibilities.

Martin F. Horn, a professor emeritus at John Jay College of Criminal Justice, echoed Lawlor’s sentiments, envisioning Trump’s confinement in a facility separate from other inmates to accommodate his security detail.

Nonetheless, ensuring a former president’s safety behind bars presents an unprecedented challenge for the Secret Service, according to a spokesperson for the agency.

Merchan may hesitate to incarcerate Trump for another reason, suggested Dave Aronberg, a state attorney for Palm Beach County. Aronberg implied that imprisonment might align with Trump’s narrative of victimhood, potentially bolstering his support base.

An alternative to imprisonment, proposed by former federal prosecutor Michael Zeldin, involves confining Trump to a cell near the New York City courtroom where his trial unfolds, serving as a symbolic reminder of the consequences of breaching court orders.

House arrest remains a feasible option, though Merchan retains considerable discretion in determining Trump’s confinement location, Horn remarked.

Lawlor dismissed the possibility of Trump being confined to his opulent Manhattan residence, citing concerns about continued access to electronics and aides, thus facilitating defiance of court orders.

Ultimately, Merchan faces a weighty decision regarding Trump’s punishment for his repeated violations, with potential implications for both the trial’s proceedings and the broader political landscape.

Supreme Court Emphasizes Life and Liberty in Kejriwal Arrest Case Amidst Election Timing Concerns

Staff ReporterLaw/Legal, Nation, News 0

The Supreme Court emphasized the paramount importance of life and liberty during a hearing regarding Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal’s challenge against his arrest by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) in a money laundering case related to the alleged Delhi excise policy scam. Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta directed the central agency to delve into the timing of Kejriwal’s arrest, particularly concerning the ongoing Lok Sabha elections. The bench adjourned the matter till May 3.

Senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi argued during the proceedings that the ED had not recovered any “proceeds of crime” and emphasized the high threshold for arrest under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA). He asserted that mere non-cooperation should not warrant Kejriwal’s incarceration.

In response, the ED contended in its affidavit before the Supreme Court that arresting politicians who are involved in criminal activities does not impede free and fair elections.

Meanwhile, the Delhi High Court stated on Monday that Kejriwal’s decision to continue as Chief Minister despite his arrest was his personal choice. However, the court emphasized that this should not obstruct the provision of free textbooks, writing material, and uniforms to underprivileged school children.

The Delhi High Court had previously ruled on April 9 that there was no illegality in Kejriwal’s arrest by the ED, citing sufficient evidence including statements from approvers, involvement of middlemen, and indications of cash exchanges for the 2022 Goa elections.

Currently, Kejriwal is in judicial custody at Tihar jail in New Delhi, with his detention extended until May 7 by a Delhi court on April 23.

During the hearing, the Supreme Court delved into various aspects of the case. Justice Khanna raised concerns about the timing of Kejriwal’s arrest, particularly in the context of ongoing elections, highlighting the significance of life and liberty. Singhvi, representing Kejriwal, referred to safeguards outlined in the PMLA against vexatious arrests and the lack of proceeds of crime recovered by the ED.

Singhvi also highlighted discrepancies in the statements of approvers and witnesses, arguing that they were hearsay and lacked direct evidence against Kejriwal. He pointed out instances where bail was granted to co-accused after they made incriminating statements against Kejriwal, suggesting coercion.

Additionally, Singhvi emphasized the subjective evaluation criteria for arrest under Section 19 of the PMLA, asserting that it requires the probe officer to have a reason to believe in the accused’s guilt, not just suspicion.

The Supreme Court will resume hearing the matter on May 3, as the legal battle surrounding Kejriwal’s arrest continues amidst political and legal intricacies.

-+=