Appeals court to hear arguments over Trump’s orders that sought to punish 4 elite law firms
U.S. President Donald Trump speaks in front of the American flag to the press as he departs the White House on May 12, 2026 in Washington, DC. (Photo by Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images)
(WASHINGTON) — A District of Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals panel is set to hear arguments Thursday over the Trump administration’s bid to reinstate executive orders that sought punishing sanctions against four elite law firms over their past representation or employment of perceived political foes of President Donald Trump.
Four separate district court judges had previously granted permanent restraining orders sought by the four law firms — Perkins Coie, Susman Godfrey, Wilmer Hale and Jenner & Block — after determining the EOs were unconstitutional.
Some of the judges derided the White House’s efforts to punish the firms in particularly blistering terms, likening the pressure campaign mounted last year by the Trump administration against ‘Big Law’ as akin to McCarthyism and the ‘Red Scare’ era in American history.
Staring down similar prospects of facing executive orders that sought to virtually eliminate their interactions with the government, at least nine other elite firms entered into controversial settlements with the Trump administration in exchange for providing pro bono legal services for causes supported by the White House.
Those settlements, which in sum totaled nearly $1 billion by the White House’s calculation, led to an exodus of high-profile attorneys at several of the firms who said the agreements amounted to capitulation in response to an unlawful intimidation campaign by the Trump administration.
In March, the Justice Department appeared inclined to drop their appeal of the injunctions and even notified attorneys and the circuit court that it was withdrawing the case.
Less than 24 hours later, however, the department abruptly reversed course and said it would continue arguing the appeal after multiple news articles described the move as a major victory for the firms that mounted the legal battle.
It’s unclear whether that back-and-forth will surface in oral arguments Thursday as the law firms seek to convince a three-judge panel to uphold the injunctions — which barred the Trump administration from implementing sanctions that included barring firm attorneys from accessing some federal properties and restricting their security clearances. Several of the firms described in detailed filings how the orders, if implemented, would effectively bankrupt them.
The administration, however, argued the orders were well within President Trump’s power to issue, and described the district courts’ orders as an impermissible intrusion on the executive branch.
“This appeal of those sweeping decisions is not about the sanctity of the American law firm; it is about lower courts encroaching on the constitutional power of the President to discuss and address invidious racial discrimination, national security risks, and other problems with certain law firms,” DOJ attorneys said in a court filing in March.
Kilmar Abrego Garcia (R) and his wife Jennifer Vasquez Sura (L) attend a prayer vigil before he enters a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) field office on August 25, 2025 in Baltimore, Maryland. (Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images)
(NEW YORK) — A federal judge in Tennessee will hear arguments Thursday over whether the government is being vindictive in pursuing a human smuggling case against Kilmar Abrego Garcia.
The hearing comes after the judge, Waverly Crenshaw Jr., canceled the trial in the case in December and wrote in a court order that there was enough evidence to hold a hearing on the question of vindictive prosecution.
The government is currently blocked from deporting Abrego Garcia, who was released from immigration detention in December. In a separate case last week, a federal judge ruled that Immigration and Customs Enforcement cannot re-detain him because his 90-day detention period had expired and the government lacked a viable plan for his deportation.
The Salvadoran native, who had been living in Maryland with his wife and children, was deported in March to El Salvador’s CECOT mega-prison — despite a 2019 court order barring his deportation to that country due to fear of persecution. The Trump administration claimed he was a member of the criminal gang MS-13, which he and his attorneys deny.
He was brought back to the U.S. in June to face human smuggling charges in Tennessee, to which he pleaded not guilty.
After being released into the custody of his brother in Maryland pending trial, he was again detained by immigration authorities before being released in December.
Two teenagers look at their iPhone screens displaying various social media and messaging apps. (Anna Barclay/Getty Images)
(LOS ANGELES) — In a landmark decision, a jury found Meta and YouTube negligent for designing apps that harmed kids and teens and failed to warn them about the dangers.
The jury awarded compensatory damages in the amount of $3 million. The jury also found punitive damages are warranted.
The lawsuit, brought by a 20-year-old woman identified as “Kaley,” alleges major social media companies intentionally designed their platforms to be addictive. The suit claims features like auto-scrolling got the plaintiff addicted to the platforms, ultimately leading to anxiety, depression and body image issues.
In a statement to ABC News, a Meta spokesperson said “We respectfully disagree with the verdict and are evaluating our legal options.”
The plaintiff’s attorney called the verdict “bigger than one case,” in a statement to ABC News.
In a statement to ABC News, a Meta spokesperson said “We respectfully disagree with the verdict and are evaluating our legal options.”
The plaintiff’s attorney called the verdict “bigger than one case,” in a statement to ABC News.
“For years, social media companies have profited from targeting children while concealing their addictive and dangerous design features,” the attorney continued. “Today’s verdict is a referendum — from a jury, to an entire industry — that accountability has arrived. We now move forward to the next phase of this trial focused on punitive damages.”
The damages were found to be 70 percent the responsibility of Meta and 30 percent the responsibility of YouTube.
The jury returned an answer of “Yes” to every question posed relating to negligence and failure to warn of dangers. Ten jurors were in favor of the plaintiff for every question, with two in favor of the defense in every question.
This is a developing story. Please check back for updates.
Fraudsters are posing as ICE officers, immigration lawyers and federal judges. (Evelin Flores)
(NEW YORK) — Twenty-year-old Edith from Guatemala has remained in her home with her 1-year-old baby Justin for weeks after selling her only means of transportation.
“Being stuck at home, locked up inside, is very, very difficult for us,” she told ABC News.
Edith, a U.S. citizen who was raised in Guatemala and requested she only be referred to by her first name out of concern over her privacy, sold her car and spent her life savings to pay someone who she thought was an attorney to help her husband Dimas, who was arrested and placed in immigration custody in March.
After Dimas, the undocumented breadwinner of the family, was quickly sent to a detention center in Georgia, Edith sought an immigration lawyer on social media, where a stranger recommended a supposed Florida-based attorney.
“I was scheduled for a video call, and the woman who said she was a lawyer said that to get someone out of immigration detention, a habeas corpus needed to be filed,” Edith told ABC News.
Edith retained the woman and began communicating with her frequently. She completed documents the woman sent her, and began sending the woman payments. She even received documents that appeared to be from U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), the federal agency that oversees immigration services.
“She began asking for money, $500, $600, $1,750, $4,000 for the bond, petition, copies [of forms],” Edith said.
But last month, when the woman was scheduled to participate in a video call for Dimas’ initial hearing before an immigration judge, she never appeared on the call. Edith’s husband later told her that the judge said that the attorney wasn’t registered in the court system.
“He said, ‘They’re scamming you,'” Edith said. “I said, ‘But why? Why me?’ I started to feel really bad and I didn’t know what to do.”
After confronting the woman she had hired, Edith realized she had been scammed out of more than $10,000 — her life savings. And with all her money gone, she was unable to pay for a legitimate lawyer to represent her husband, who last month was ordered deported by an immigration judge.
‘A billion-dollar industry’ Edith is one of many victims across the country that law enforcement and immigration lawyers say are being targeted by bad actors seizing on the Trump administration’s mass deportation agenda.
Some scammers, according to officials, are using artificial intelligence to hold fake immigration court proceedings with scammers wearing judicial robes and law enforcement uniforms, using fake documents that appear to be from federal agencies.
“In my experience, this is a billion-dollar industry,” said Jorge Rivera, an immigration lawyer in Florida.
Rivera told ABC News that scammers, including the woman who Edith hired, have used his credentials and his law firm’s information to target immigrants.
“[Victims] have shown up to our office and they say, ‘What happened to my case?'” he said.
ABC News found cases of sophisticated immigration scams across the country, including in New York, where five defendants pleaded not guilty to charges accusing them of holding “sham immigration proceedings” including asylum interviews and court appearances.
According to the complaint, one victim ended up missing their real immigration hearing and was deported.
“In doing so, the defendants demonstrated a complete and utter disregard for the potentially life-altering consequences that their actions inflicted on their victims — vulnerable individuals who not only lost significant funds, but also missed their actual immigration court appearances,” prosecutors said.
And last month, four people in Orlando, Florida, were charged with setting up a fake immigration law firm and extorting millions from victims. They have not yet entered formal pleas.
‘It’s heartbreaking’ Rivera said immigration scams have gotten “exponentially worse” during the second Trump administration, because more pathways for immigration relief “have closed.”
“There’s been pauses, there’s more denials, undoubtedly, it’s more difficult to be able to resolve your immigration status,” he said. “So this is a perfect storm for the criminals.”
Rivera said that if those seeking help are “talking to a legitimate attorney and they’re talking to a fraudster, and the fraudster is giving them hope and giving them possibilities, they’re going to go with the person that’s giving them the hope.”
Rivera said he has been working with law enforcement across the country to send them information on alleged scammers, and has been reaching out to social media companies to take down fake profiles.
In a statement to ABC News, the Department of Homeland Security said scammers are also “pretending to be ICE and USCIS to trick people into giving them money or personal information.”
The DHS said that officials will never call out of the blue, demand money, or accept payments using gift cards or crypto currency.
Scammers are also targeting immigrant advocacy groups like Catholic Charities, Kevin Brennan, Catholic Charities’ vice president, told ABC News.
“It’s really been over the past year or so that we started hearing reports of people claiming to be Catholic Charities and other organizations that provide legal services to immigrants and refugees and using social media to fraudulently offer services, express urgency, ask for money,” Brennan told ABC News.
“It’s heartbreaking to see people who are in need and looking for help and being taken advantage of in such a terrible way by these fraudsters and criminals,” he said.
In Edith’s case, the possibility of getting legitimate legal help to try to get her husband released before he’s deported is slipping away. After an immigration judge ordered her husband deported on April 28, he is currently in ICE custody awaiting removal to Guatemala.
Edith said she will likely go to Guatemala to remain with her husband.
“It’s very ugly, and I don’t wish it on anyone else — to a person who is alone and without support,” she said. “This is not easy.”
