Todd Blanche, acting US attorney general, during a news conference at the Department of Justice in Washington, DC, US, on Monday, April 27, 2026. (Valerie Plesch/Bloomberg via Getty Images)
(WASHINGTON) — Attorneys for the Southern Poverty Law Center asked a federal judge Tuesday to demand that acting Attorney General Todd Blanche issue a correction to allegedly “false” statements he made in the aftermath of the indictment of the organization last week, according to a legal filing.
In a motion to the judge presiding over their criminal case in the Middle District of Alabama, attorneys for the SPLC accuse Blanche of lying in an interview he gave to Fox News last Tuesday when he claimed the government did not have information showing the organization has shared information it learned from informants with law enforcement.
“Those statements are false,” attorneys for the SPLC wrote. “Weeks before the indictment, undersigned counsel provided information to the government demonstrating unequivocally that the SPLC had shared information from its informants with law enforcement.”
Blanche, who earlier this month replaced Pam Bondi as attorney general, announced last week that a federal grand jury returned an indictment charging the group with wire, bank fraud and money laundering offenses related to its paying of informants to infiltrate hate groups.
The attorneys write that they previously requested Blanche issue a correction to the statements but that counsel for the government refused.
They specifically cite an April 6 meeting that SPLC attorneys had with prosecutors in Alabama in which they explained in detail how some of their past cooperation with the government had resulted in an indictment of a member of a well-known extremist group.
The SPLC then sent a letter to the DOJ, which they requested it share with the grand jury, detailing six categories that they argued showed the organization using informants to dismantle white supremacist organizations, which they said undercut the core of the government’s case that argues SPLC used the informants to boost such groups.
The organization is asking the judge overseeing the case to order the disclosure of grand jury transcripts and issue a separate order restricting the government from making further “prejudicial” statements that could taint a possible jury pool.
Daughter of former FBI Director James Comey, Maurene Comey, leaves the Albert V. Bryan United States Courthouse on November 13, 2025 in Alexandria, Virginia. (Alex Wong/Getty Images)
(NEW YORK) — A federal judge in New York on Tuesday blocked the Justice Department’s attempt to move Maurene Comey’s lawsuit over her firing as a federal prosecutor out of court.
Comey, the daughter of former FBI director James Comey, has joined a private law practice but is suing for unlawful termination after she was fired last year from the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York.
The Justice Department argued that her case belongs before the Merit Systems Protection Board and not in federal district court.
Judge Jesse Furman decided the case belongs with him because Comey was fired pursuant to the president’s executive authority and not the usual procedures for civil servants.
“Maurene Comey was, by all accounts, an exemplary Assistant United States Attorney. In her nearly ten years working at the United States Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York, she was assigned some of the country’s highest profile cases, and she consistently received the highest accolades from supervisors and peers alike,” the judge’s opinion said.
“Comey was notified by email from Department of Justice officials in Washington, D.C., that her employment was terminated, effective immediately,” the judge wrote. “She was given one and only one reason for her removal: Article II of the U.S. Constitution, which ‘vest[s]’ the ‘executive Power’ in the President.”
The DOJ, in court filings, has characterized Comey’s case as routine.
“A federal employee’s claims that removal from federal service was arbitrary and capricious or conducted in a manner that did not provide the process to which they contend they were due is not a novel issue,” government attorneys said.
Comey, who prosecuted high-profile defendants including Sean Combs, Robert Hadden, Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell, alleged she was fired “because her father is former FBI Director James B. Comey, or because of her perceived political affiliation and beliefs, or both.”
Laura Dern attends the U.K. Gala screening of ‘Is This Thing On?’ at the Odeon Luxe West End in London, United Kingdom, on Jan. 19, 2026. (Wiktor Szymanowicz/Anadolu via Getty Images)
Laura Dern is checking into The White Lotus.
The actress has joined the season 4 cast of the Emmy-winning HBO series. The news was shared in a post to the network’s Instagram on Tuesday.
This new casting announcement comes a few days after the news that Helena Bonham Carter had departed the season after production had already started in the French Riviera.
The star-studded season 4 cast also includes Vincent Cassel, Steve Coogan, Caleb Jonte Edwards, Dylan Ennis, Corentin Fila, Ari Graynor, Marissa Long, Alexander Ludwig, Chris Messina, AJ Michalka, Kumail Nanjiani and Nadia Tereszkiewicz. Additional cast includes Chloe Bennet, Sandra Bernhard, Heather Graham, Max Greenfield, Frida Gustavsson, Charlie Hall, Jarrad Paul, Rosie Perez, Ben Schnetzer and Laura Smet.
This new season’s plot will take place during the Cannes Film Festival, where it will follow a new group of White Lotus hotel guests and its employees over the course of a week. It is set to film in Cannes, St. Tropez and Monaco. Additionally, some filming will take place in Paris, although the main story remains along the Côte d’Azur.
The hotels that will be featured in this season of the show are the Airelles Château de la Messardière, which will be the White Lotus du Cap, and the Hôtel Martinez, which will be the White Lotus Cannes.
The White Lotus is created, written and directed by Mike White. White also executive produces alongside David Bernad and Mark Kamine.
Elon Musk arrives to court for his lawsuit against OpenAI at the Ronald V. Dellums Federal Building on April 28, 2026 in Oakland, California. (Benjamin Fanjoy/Getty Images)
(OAKLAND, Calif.) — Billionaire entrepreneur Elon Musk and prominent AI executive Sam Altman are facing off in court with major implications for OpenAI, the San Francisco-based tech giant led by Altman.
The federal case, which concerns OpenAI’s evolution from nonprofit to profit-seeking, kicked off on Monday in Oakland, California. Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers is managing proceedings alongside nine jurors and no alternates, according to a court filing last month.
The star-studded list of potential witnesses includes Altman, Musk and Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella, among other tech luminaries, a court filing showed.
Musk sued OpenAI and Altman, its CEO, in 2024, alleging that the company abandoned its mission of benefiting humanity in a sprint toward profits.
Musk, a co-founder of OpenAI, said he reached an agreement with the company’s leaders on the nonprofit course of the firm when it launched in 2015. The company later breached that “Founding Agreement,” Musk said in a 2024 court filing, when it made ChatGPT-4 available for use by Microsoft — the tech giant got access to the then-most powerful version of its popular chatbot under an exclusive licensing agreement.
Microsoft and OpenAI have renegotiated the exclusive licensing agreement, allowing OpenAI to strike deals with other tech firms.
OpenAI has rebuked the charges, calling them “baseless.” Microsoft has also denied any wrongdoing. Musk, the world’s richest person, counts $839 billion in wealth, according to Forbes. He is seeking $150 billion in damages from the tech companies.
OpenAI, which is not publicly traded, valued itself at $852 billion after a round of funding in March. Microsoft’s value — as measured by market capitalization — stands at about $3.1 trillion.
After jury selection, the case will take place in two sections, Gonzalez Rogers said in a court filing. An initial phase will focus on liability to determine whether any of the defendants committed illegal acts. A subsequent remedies portion will assess potential damages.
Musk and the OpenAI defendants will each be afforded 22 hours to present their case during the liability phase, Gonzalez Rogers said in a court filing earlier this month. Microsoft, also a defendant, will be given five hours for its case.
Musk will plead two claims against OpenAI: unjust enrichment and breach of charitable trust, according to a legal filing last week.
“OpenAI, Inc. has been transformed into a closed-source de facto subsidiary of the largest technology company in the world: Microsoft,” Musk said in the lawsuit.
Typically, deals established between a top investor and company leadership are set out in writing with concrete terms, some experts previously told ABC News, leaving Musk in a difficult position as he attempts to invoke what they say appear to be spoken commitments made years ago without a formal contract.
For his part, Musk says in the lawsuit that the agreement was memorialized in a legal filing when OpenAI was incorporated.
In the lawsuit, Musk alleges that Altman and OpenAI President Greg Brockman reaffirmed the founding agreement in written messages over the ensuing years.
“[I] remain enthusiastic about the non-profit structure!” Altman wrote to Musk in 2017, according to the lawsuit.
Musk, who helped bankroll OpenAI, launched a rival AI company in 2023 called xAI, which built a chatbot that competes with ChatGPT.
Acknowledging his previous criticism of the pace and ambitions of AI development, Musk said in a conference call on X in July 2023 that he entered the industry reluctantly.
In the lawsuit, Musk alleges breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty and unfair business practices.
Musk is seeking a legal order that requires OpenAI to abide by its alleged founding mission of aiding humanity and retaining its nonprofit form, as well as compensation for the funds received by OpenAI while it carried out allegedly unfair business practices.
A man named Cole Allen, who appears to be the same person as the suspect in the shooting incident at the annual White House Correspondents’ Association dinner in Washington, D.C., April 25, 2026, is interviewed by KABC in Los Angeles in March 2017. (KABC)
(WASHINGTON) — Cole Allen, the suspect in the White House Correspondents’ Association Dinner shooting, appears to have been a highly intelligent person, albeit shy, and was at one point a devoted Christian, according to conversations with individuals from his past.
The California native was tackled by law enforcement after the gunfire Saturday night inside the Washington, D.C., Hilton hotel, where thousands of journalists as well as President Donald Trump and members of his Cabinet were gathered for the annual dinner. Allen did not reach the ballroom, where the dinner was underway. A Secret Service member was shot during the incident, but the bullet hit the agent’s protective vest, officials said.
Allen, 31, faces three felony counts of attempted assassination of the President of the United States, transportation of a firearm and ammunition over state lines with the intent to commit a felony and discharge of a firearm during a crime of violence.
Allen’s former pastor, Rev. Movses Janbazian, struggled to square the man described by federal officials as an aspiring killer with the hard-working student who attended sermons each week at Pasadena United Reformed Church in South Pasadena.
“Nice, gentle, smart young man,” Janbazian told ABC News. “It’s obviously very surprising to hear his name appear in the news in this way.”
Janbazian said Allen joined the United Reformed Church congregation during his time at Caltech, where he studied mechanical engineering. Allen would frequently bring coursework to church — evidence, he said, of what a “competitive program” he was enrolled in. Allen graduated from Caltech in 2017 and he received a master’s degree from California State University, Dominguez Hills in 2025.
Paul Thompson, a neighbor of the Allen family, described Allen as “not very sociable,” but maintained that he “had no idea that he was capable of that kind of violence.”
“I’ve seen him a hundred times coming and going … but I’ve never had a conversation with him,” Thompson said.
Allen’s father, on the other hand, was “kind of like the neighborhood mayor — knows everybody by first name,” Thompson said.
“Everybody likes him. He’s a very sociable guy,” Thompson said of Allen’s father.
“This is going to be very, very difficult … on his family,” Thompson added.
Allen was most recently working as a tutor and students said he demonstrated a knack for competently teaching a wide range of subjects. A group of high school students who were tutored by Allen shared a statement describing him as “generally very intelligent” and “normal and friendly.”
Joel Devereux, the father-in-law of Allen’s brother, described Allen to ABC News as “very quiet, polite, smart” in their limited interactions, but said he seemed “distant from his family” and “doesn’t normally hang around them.”
Allen — who officials say traveled by train from California to D.C. — allegedly left a note which said that administration officials were his targets, “not including [FBI Director Kash] Mr. Patel,” and were “prioritized from highest-ranking to lowest,” according to the criminal complaint against him.
Allen allegedly wrote that Secret Service agents were targets “only if necessary, and to be incapacitated non-lethally if possible,” the complaint said.
The note said hotel security, Capitol police and the National Guard were “not targets if at all possible (aka unless they shoot at me),” and hotel employees and guests were “not targets at all,” the complaint said.
The note said he would “go through most everyone here to get to the targets if it were absolutely necessary,” adding, ‘I really hope it doesn’t come to that,” according to the complaint.
Allen appeared in court on Monday and did not enter a plea. He’s set to return to court for a detention hearing on Thursday.
ABC News’ Susan Zalkind contributed to this report.
Construction cranes are seen, from the Washington Monument, on the site of the former East Wing of the White House on April 17, 2026 in Washington, D.C. (Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images)
(WASHINGTON) — Senate Republicans unveiled a bill on Monday that would provide $400 million for President Trump’s White House ballroom project, arguing that such a space is needed following the shooting at the White House Correspondents’ Dinner, revealing their plans hours before the Department of Justice filed a scathing response to a judge’s injunction on the project.
Senior leadership of the Justice Department overnight filed a motion demanding U.S. District Judge Richard Leon dissolve the injunction he put in place in March, a ruling that said Trump couldn’t build the planned ballroom without authorization from Congress.
In an extraordinary filing, parts of which echo President Donald Trump’s social media post style, the DOJ officials repeatedly accuse the plaintiffs who brought the lawsuit of suffering from “TRUMP DERANGEMENT SYNDROME” and describes Leon’s injunction as “intolerable,” “unsustainable” and “indefensible.” It also makes a side reference to former President “Barack Hussein Obama,” using his full name in the way Trump often does.
That filing was submitted to the court hours after Republicans proposed a bill that would provide $400 million in funding for the facility, which they officials have said would feature a newly built ballroom along with military and secret service security infrastructure beneath it.
Trump has said repeatedly that the ballroom would be privately funded.
Both the court filing and the proposed legislation used Saturday’s incident, during which a suspect allegedly rushed through security at the Washington Hilton during an event where Trump was present, as part of their rationale. The suspect, Cole Allen, was charged on Monday with the attempted assassination of the president. Allen did not enter a plea during a court appearance.
“I am convinced if there had been a presidential ballroom adjacent to the White House the guy never would have gotten in,” Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., who is sponsoring the legislation, said in reference to the alleged perpetrator.
Graham said it would be “insane” to hold the dinner in the Hilton in the future.
“Anybody who suggests that we have an event like this in the times in which we live in a facility like Hilton, that’s crazy,” he said. “We are going to have to accommodate the times in which we live.”
The motion was filed following a warning from the leader of DOJ’s Civil Division, Brett Shumate, to plaintiffs in a letter that was posted on Sunday on social media by acting Attorney General Todd Blanche.
ABC News asked Blanche on Sunday during a news conference about some of DOJ’s statements in the letter — specifically their determination that the Washington Hilton was a “demonstrably unsafe” site for the president and his Cabinet and whether that was evaluated prior to Saturday’s dinner.
“When he says demonstrably, it’s demonstrated by what happened on Saturday night,” Blanche responded. “So it doesn’t mean that the Secret Service were –would ever let the president go into to an unsafe environment. I know that the director of the Secret Service will be focused on making sure that we always keep him safe. And by the way, as we said before, and as anybody that was in that room knows we were safe. We were safe.”
Blanche on Sunday said that “law enforcement did not fail,” with hundreds of armed agents between the alleged would-be assassin and the president, but the overnight filing included an assertion on its fourth page that the suspect “came horrifically close.”
In their motion to the court, however, the DOJ’s top officials argued that a secure space for the president to attend large gatherings in Washington “currently does not exist” and — even though the proposed ballroom plan schedule has said it would not be completed until at least 2028 — current national security issues require it to continue construction “immediately.”
The ballroom, according to the senators who are proposing additional funding, could be a secure facility where events like Saturday’s gala could take place in the future. Graham said it would ultimately be up to the White House Correspondents’ Association whether they’d want to use the ballroom for the event, but their bill aims to give them the choice about whether to do so.
“We are going to build this facility, and I would suggest to the next president don’t go to the Hilton don’t do an event at the Hilton or any other facility outside the White House given the times in which we live,” Graham said. “The problem is you don’t have a choice. We are going to give people that choice.”
The senators are proposing to offset the cost of the ballroom by using customs fees. Their proposal follows months of assertions by Trump that the ballroom — a proposed 89,000-square-foot expansion of the White House — would be funded “at no charge to the taxpayer.” The initial proposal for the ballroom placed construction costs at an estimated $200 million, according to the White House.
Sen. Katie Britt, R-Al., said on Sunday that the ballroom was about protecting future presidents, not just Trump, since it isn’t expected to be completed until near the end of his term.
“This isn’t even about him. This will not be done until the end of his term. This is about future presidents,” Britt said. “This isa bout our nation having a place to gather where the president of the united states of America can be a part of it. This is about presidents both now and in the future.”
The funding bill would require 60 votes to pass a bill to fund the ballroom in the Senate. It seems unlikely Democrats would furnish those votes, but Graham said he’d like to put the bill up for a vote to put everyone on the record.
-ABC News’ Steven Portnoy and Katherine Faulders contributed to this report.
Exterior of the Kennedy Center on the Potomac River, Washington, D.C., undated. (Photo by Hulton Archive/Getty Images)
(WASHINGTON) — President Donald Trump’s attempt to remake the Kennedy Center faces a critical legal test on Tuesday morning.
A federal Judge in Washington, D.C., is set to hear arguments about an attempt by Rep. Joyce Beatty, D-Ohio, to block the renaming, planned closure and renovation of the performing arts center.
Beatty, an ex officio trustee of the Kennedy Center, initially brought her lawsuit last year to challenge its renaming to the Trump-Kennedy Center, an action she described as “more reminiscent of authoritarian regimes than the American republic.”
“This is a flagrant violation of the rule of law, and it flies in the face of our constitutional order. Congress intended the Center to be a living memorial to President Kennedy—and a crown jewel of the arts for all Americans, irrespective of party,” her lawsuit said.
In the months since her lawsuit was filed, the board of the Kennedy Center – handpicked by Trump, who serves as the chairman of the board – voted to shutter the famed institution for a two-year renovation project.
Beatty’s lawsuit has grown to cover both the renaming and the closure of the center, arguing the moves were unlawful and violated the duties of the organization’s board.
“Turning the Kennedy Center into a lifeless husk for two years would also constitute a fundamental breach of Defendants’ most basic fiduciary obligations as trustees,” lawyers for Beatty argued in a court filing.
Lawyers for the Trump administration pushed back on the lawsuit and argued that the renovation is in the best interest of the Kennedy Center.
“Renewal will affirmatively fulfill the Board’s responsibilities to repair and improve the Center in a manner consistent with ‘high quality operations’ while minimizing costs to taxpayers and reducing safety risks that result from conducting renovations during public operations,” lawyers with the Department of Justice argued.
Judge Christopher Cooper handed Beatty a win last month when he ruled that she is entitled to a “meaningful opportunity to provide input” and should not be “categorically barred” from speaking during board meetings. However, Judge Cooper stopped short of ruling on the weightier questions of Beatty’s ability to vote during board meetings or the legality of the changes to the Kennedy Center.
A wooden judge’s gavel and sounding block on a desk with a blurred courtroom in the background. (imaginima/Getty)
(NEW YORK) — The U.S. Army special forces soldier who was indicted last week on charges of using classified information about the capture of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro to make more than $400,000 on Polymarket is set to appear in a Manhattan courtroom Tuesday.
Master Sgt. Gannon Ken Van Dyke is scheduled to be arraigned following his release last week on a $250,000 bond.
In what is believed to be the first case of insider trading on a prediction market, prosecutors alleged that Van Dyke used classified information from his work in the planning and execution of the Maduro capture to place 13 bets on the outcome of the operation.
Prosecutors allege that Van Dyke placed bets on Dec. 27 through the evening of Jan. 2 — hours before soldiers entered Venezuelan airspace for the pre-dawn operation. After President Donald Trump made the operation public later that day, Van Dyke allegedly profited $409,881 from his $33,034 in bets.
“The defendant allegedly violated the trust placed in him by the United States Government by using classified information about a sensitive military operation to place bets on the timing and outcome of that very operation, all to turn a profit,” U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York Jay Clayton said in a statement last week. “That is clear insider trading and is illegal under federal law.”
The indictment also alleges that Van Dyke attempted to hide the evidence of the illegal trades by attempting to delete his Polymarket account and changing the email address associated with his cryptocurrency exchange account.
Following his arrest on Thursday, Van Dyke briefly appeared in a North Carolina courtroom on Friday. After acknowledging that he understood the charges and potential penalties, he signed a bond and agreed to surrender his passport, limit travel to parts of New York and North Carolina, and no longer possess a firearm unless it is part of his active military service.
His case is being overseen in New York by U.S. District Judge Margaret Garnett, who is also presiding over the high-profile federal case against alleged UnitedHealthcare CEO assassin Luigi Mangione.
Amid mounting criticism of prediction markets for allegedly enabling insider trading, Polymarket CEO Shayne Coplan said his company is “constantly” monitoring for suspicious activity and referring cases to authorities. Coplan argued that the public nature of prediction markets makes it easier to crack down on insider trading.
“The transparency afforded by onchain markets makes global compliance more effective than ever. Every trade is public, permanent, and auditable. Bad actors leave a trail,” he said.
A 64-year-old man has been arrested in connection to a 1991 cold case murder that rocked Northern California 35 years ago, according to authorities. (Placer County Sheriff’s Department)
(BULLHEAD CITY, Ariz) — A 64-year-old man has been arrested in connection to a 1991 cold case murder that rocked Northern California 35 years ago.
The Placer County Sheriff’s Office announced a breakthrough on Monday in the 1991 kidnapping and murder case of Cindy Wanner, confirming that 64-year-old James Lawhead Jr. was arrested by authorities in Bullhead City, Arizona, on Friday.
Wanner was 35 when she vanished from her Granite Bay, California, home on Nov. 25, 1991. Her 11-month-old baby was found abandoned at the home in a highchair. Wanner’s car and coat were still at the home.
Wanner’s body was found three weeks later, strangled to death, in a remote area outside Foresthill, about 40 miles away from her home.
Lawhead Jr. was identified as the suspect by investigators thanks to advanced DNA analysis and testing, authorities said. He was 30 at the time of the crime and had been released from prison in early 1991 after serving 11 years of a 19-year sentence for prior sex crimes involving a child.
He appeared to have vanished completely, with no official documentation of his whereabouts since 2005. It turned out that Lawhead Jr. had been living in Arizona under a new identity as Vincent Reynolds.
In connection with the breakthrough, Lawhead Jr.’s 71-year-old sister, Terry Lawhead Steele, was arrested in South Carolina on Saturday on an accessory charge.
“Although Steele had spoken with law enforcement several times over the years, including with our detectives just weeks ago, and claimed she had not heard from her brother in more than 20 years, investigators discovered James Lawhead had been living in a home she owned,” Placer County Sheriff’s Office said in a statement. “Evidence also showed the two had remained in communication.”
Detectives served a search warrant at her San Clemente, California, home on Sunday as part of the investigation.
“This is one of the most notorious and heinous cold cases we have here in Placer County. We’ve never given up pursuing justice for Cindy and her family, we hope this is a small step in the healing process,” Placer County Sheriff Wayne Woo said. “This breakthrough and arrest reflect the commitment of our office to solve cases; it’s why we pin on the badge and take the oath to serve. Our work is not done. James Lawhead will be brought back to Placer County where he will answer to the charges for this crime.”
Lawhead Jr. is currently booked in Arizona, where he will be extradited to Placer County to face charges. Detectives are also exploring the possibility that Lawhead Jr. could be responsible for additional crimes. It is unclear if Lawhead Jr. has obtained a lawyer.
“This arrest is a powerful reminder that time does not erase responsibility, and it does not diminish our commitment,” said Placer County District Attorney Morgan Gire. “Cold cases are not forgotten cases—they remain urgent, they remain personal, and they remain a promise we intend to keep.”
“Even when the path is long and difficult, there is hope. We will continue this work — steadfast and unwavering — because you deserve answers, you deserve justice, and you deserve to know that you are never forgotten,” said Gire.
