Category: National

(WASHINGTON) — The Trump administration’s attempt to make federal funding to schools conditional on them eliminating any diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) policies erodes the “foundational principles” that separates the United States from totalitarian regimes, a federal judge said on Thursday.

In an 82-page order, U.S. District Judge Landya McCafferty in New Hampshire partially blocked the Department of Education from enforcing a memo issued earlier this year that directed any institution that receives federal funding to end discrimination on the basis of race or face funding cuts.

“Ours is a nation deeply committed to safeguarding academic freedom, which is of transcendent value to all of us and not merely to the teachers concerned,” Judge McCafferty wrote, adding the “right to speak freely and to promote diversity of ideas and programs is…one of the chief distinctions that sets us apart from totalitarian regimes.”

“In this case, the court reviews action by the executive branch that threatens to erode these foundational principles,” she wrote.

The judge stopped short of issuing a nationwide injunction, instead limiting the relief to any entity that employs or contacts with the groups that filed a lawsuit challenging the DOE’s memo, including the National Education Association and the Center for Black Educator Development.

The education groups sued the Department of Education in February after the agency warned all educational institutions in a letter to end discrimination based on race or face federal funding consequences.

The lawsuit criticized what it said was an unlawful “Dear Colleague” letter which will “irreparably harm” schools, students, educators, and communities across the country.

“This vague and clearly unconstitutional memo is a grave attack on students, our profession and knowledge itself,” American Federation of Teachers President Randi Weingarten said in a statement at the time.

In justifying her preliminary injunction Thursday, Judge McCafferty called out the DOE for taking a position on DEI that flatly contradicts its own policies from a few years ago.

“Prior to the 2025 Letter, the Department had not indicated a belief that programs designed to promote diversity, equity, or inclusion constituted unlawful discrimination. Nor had it taken the position that schools necessarily behave unlawfully when they act with the goal of increasing racial diversity. In fact, the Department had taken the opposite position,” the judge wrote.

In addition to finding the policy is likely unconstitutional and illegal, Judge McCafferty also criticized the Department of Education for making funding conditional on DEI programming, though the judge said the memo “does not even define what a DEI program is,” pointing to “vague and expansive prohibitions” in the DOE’s letter from February.

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(NEW YORK) — Lawyers with the Department of Justice accidentally filed a document overnight that outlined a series of legal flaws with the Trump administration’s plan to kill New York City’s congestion pricing tolls.

In an 11-page letter to the Department of Transportation, lawyers with the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York wrote that Secretary of Transportation Sean Duffy’s attempt to terminate congestion pricing faces “considerable litigation risk” and is “unlikely” to be accepted by the court.

“As discussed below, there is considerable litigation risk in defending the Secretary’s February 19, 2025 decision against plaintiffs’ claims under the Administrative Procedure Act, that the decision was contrary to law, pretextual, procedurally arbitrary and capricious, and violated due process,” the letter said.

According to DOJ lawyers, both of Duffy’s arguments for canceling the program — that the tolls raise revenue rather than prevent congestion and that the program does not offer a toll-free option — are unlikely to convince the court.

DOJ lawyers instead proposed an alternative justification to defend canceling the program, urging the Department of Justice to use regulations set by the Office of Management and Budget to say the program was canceled “as a matter of changed agency priorities.”

“Importantly, DOT can seek termination of the agreement pursuant to the OMB regulations in addition to, and not in place of, defending the rationale laid out in the Secretary’s letter,” the letter said.

In a letter to the judge overseeing the lawsuit challenging congestion pricing, DOJ lawyers on Thursday morning acknowledged the document was “plainly filed in error” and asked to permanently seal the record. They argued the internal legal guidance included in the letter is privileged and should not be considered in the ongoing lawsuit.

A spokesperson for the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York said the filing was an “honest error.”

“Unfortunately, an attorney-client privileged document was erroneously filed on the public docket last night,” the spokesperson said in a statement Thursday. “This was a completely honest error and was not intentional in any way. Upon realizing the error, we immediately took steps to have the document removed. We look forward to continuing to vigorously advocate in the best interest of our clients, the DOT and FHWA, in this matter.”

The Metropolitan Transit Authority’s congestion pricing program, the first of its kind in the nation, went into effect in January. Weeks later, with Donald Trump now in office, the Federal Highway Administration terminated approval of the plan, with Duffy saying at the time that the “scope of this pilot project as approved exceeds the authority authorized by Congress.”

In February, the Metropolitan Transit Authority sued over the Trump administration’s attempt to rescind the agreement between the Federal Highway Administration and MTA that authorized the collection of the congestion toll. Lawyers for the MTA argued the termination was unlawful, contradicts the DOT’s own publicly stated policies and seeks to end a program that benefits the public.

“The region’s subways, buses, and commuter railroads — vital lifelines for so many New Yorkers who live in the New York City metropolitan area and beyond — are already benefiting from substantial investments that have been made as a result of the Program,” they argued. “New Yorkers support the Program because it is working.”

New York officials have said they will not turn off the tolls without a court order.

The congestion pricing plan charges passenger vehicles $9 to access Manhattan below 60th Street during peak hours as part of an effort to ease congestion and raise funds for the city’s public transit system. During peak hours, small trucks and charter buses are charged $14.40 and large trucks and tour buses pay $21.60.

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(OCEAN COUNTY, N.J.) — A 19-year-old man has been arrested on suspicion of starting a massive New Jersey wildfire that has consumed at least 15,000 acres and continued to burn Thursday, authorities said.

In a statement released Thursday morning, New Jersey officials, including Ocean County Prosecutor Bradley D. Billhimer, announced the arrest of Joseph Kling of Waretown, New Jersey, on charges of aggravated arson and arson in connection with the wildfire that ignited early Tuesday.

Kling was arrested after investigators determined the fire to be “incendiary by an improperly extinguished bonfire,” according to the statement.

In a criminal complaint filed in the case, authorities alleged that Kling “did purposely start the fire with the purpose of destroying or damaging any forest, specifically by lighting a bonfire off Jones Road in Waretown … and leaving it unattended causing a wildfire.”

The complaint goes on to accuse Kling of “recklessly placing a building or structure” in danger of damage or destruction.

The Jones Road Wildfire was first spotted about 9:45 a.m. on Tuesday in the Greenwood Wildlife Management area in Waretown, officials said.

The origin of the fire, according to investigators, is near the Waretown address that Kling listed as his home.

Fueled by drought-ravaged vegetation, blustery winds and low relative humidity, the fire quickly spread through the Pine Barrens of the wildlife area, jumped the busy Garden State Parkway and threatened around 1,300 structures at one point, fire officials said.

At least 5,000 people heeded mandatory evacuation orders or voluntarily evacuated, according to officials.

“Further investigation has revealed that Kling was the individual responsible for setting wooden pallets on fire — and then leaving the area without the fire being fully extinguished,” they said in the statement.

Kling was taken into custody at Ocean Township Police Headquarters in Waretown, officials said.

According to the criminal complaint, the charges against Kling were based on observations and statements from an eyewitness as well as “statements/admissions” Kling gave during a recorded interview at the Ocean Police Department stationhouse.

It was not immediately clear what led authorities to suspect Kling was involved in the fire.

Kling was booked at the Ocean County Jail, where he is presently lodged pending a detention hearing.

During a news conference on Wednesday, Shawn LaTourette, New Jersey’s commissioner of Environmental Protection, praised firefighters for “truly averting a major disaster.”

Although one commercial building was destroyed and several cabins were damaged, officials said no homes have been lost and no injuries were reported.

The Jones Road Wildfire continued to burn on Thursday. The fire has burned at least 15,000 acres and was 50% contained Thursday morning, according to the Fire Service.

According to the New Jersey Forest Fire Service, the fire is expected to grow as dry conditions, winds and low humidity aid its activity.

With the fire ongoing and winds shifting north, authorities expect some of the wildfire smoke to make it to New York City and Long Island. The New York State Department of Environmental Conservation issued an air quality advisory on Thursday morning that will remain in effect through midnight.

“Air quality levels in outdoor air are predicted to be greater than an Air Quality Index value of 100 for the pollutant of Fine Particulates,” the agency said in a statement.

According to the air quality index, anything over 100 for pollutants and fine particulates in the air is considered unhealthy, especially for people who are sensitive to the effects of elevated levels of pollutants, including children and adults with pre-existing respiratory problems.

Winds are expected to shift overnight away from New York City and Long Island, but could shift back again on Friday, bringing wildfire smoke to the region.

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(BOSTON) — As Karen Read stands trial for a second time in Massachusetts for the alleged murder of her police officer boyfriend, the victim’s mother spoke about her son’s death publicly for the first time on Wednesday.

Prosecutors allege that, following a night of drinking in Canton, Read struck her boyfriend — Boston police officer John O’Keefe — with her Lexus SUV outside of a get-together at another officer’s home and left him to die in a blizzard in January 2022.

After a jury was unable to reach a verdict in the initial murder trial last year, she is being retried on charges including second-degree murder, vehicular manslaughter while operating a vehicle under the influence of alcohol and leaving the scene of a collision causing death. She has pleaded not guilty and maintains her innocence.

O’Keefe’s mother, Margaret “Peggy” O’Keefe, was not called to testify in Read’s first trial.

While testifying for the Commonwealth on Wednesday, Peggy O’Keefe described her son as an “enthusiastic” fan of sports who was “wonderful” with his niece and nephew, for whom he provided primary guardianship following their parents’ untimely deaths.

“He was their No. 1,” she said, shakily, “They called him JJ.”

She sobbed when special prosecutor Hank Brennan showed a photo of her son smiling.

When asked to recount the morning her son’s body was discovered, Peggy O’Keefe recalled the moment she arrived at the Good Samaritan Hospital in Brockton in search of her son. As she walked down the hallway towards the emergency room, she recalled seeing Read standing on the side of the corridor, screaming out to her, repeatedly asking if John O’Keefe was “dead.”

After John O’Keefe was pronounced dead later that morning, his mother recalled leaving the hospital and gathering in his home with her husband and her grandchildren to mourn together.

She said Read showed up with members of her own family, and that she didn’t recall talking to the defendant. She said they left after about 10 to 15 minutes, removing Read’s Lexus SUV parked in the driveway from the premises.

The defense did not ask Peggy O’Keefe any questions.

“I am very, very sorry for your loss,” defense attorney Alan Jackson told her.

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(HIGHLAND PARK, Ill.) — Robert Crimo III, the gunman who killed seven people and injured dozens in a mass shooting in Highland Park, Illinois, on July 4, 2022, was sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole on Thursday.

Crimo was sentenced to seven consecutive life sentences, Judge Victoria A. Rossetti announced on Thursday.

“This court hopes this sentence hopes brings a sense of justice and an end to the continued horror,” Rossetti said.

The sentencing hearing, which began Wednesday, finished Thursday morning after the court heard from multiple survivors and relatives of those killed in the shooting at the Independence Day parade.

Crimo decided to not appear in court on Wednesday or Thursday. The shooter’s parents, who have attended most court proceedings, were also not present.

The victims, who expected to address Crimo at the sentencing hearing, still shared the impact Crimo’s attack had on their lives.

Leah Sundheim, daughter of victim Jacqueline Sundheim, said Crimo “threw the balance of this world off” by killing her mother.

“I hope you wake in the middle of the night, gasping air you don’t deserve,” Sundheim said in court on Wednesday.

Sundheim also read a statement on behalf of her father, Bruce Sundheim, who said their family’s lives have been destroyed by Crimo’s “violent tantrum.”

Marcia Moran, whose husband was shot by Crimo, said she has been in therapy for over two years due to the emotional trauma. Her family has since moved out of Highland Park and is now living in Tennessee.

“The shooter doesn’t get to take anything more from me,” Moran said in court via Zoom.

In March, Crimo pleaded guilty to 21 counts of first-degree murder, three counts for each person killed, and dozens of attempted murder charges.

Survivor Ashbey Beasley, who fled the parade with her son when the gunfire broke out, said in March the plea brought an “immense amount of relief.”

“Every single time I see [Crimo], it’s stressful,” she told reporters back in March. “I think it’s upsetting for everyone…Just knowing that his plea has been entered and we will not have to see him again is what we all need.”

Crimo appeared ready to accept a guilty plea last June during a hearing, only to reject the deal in front of devastated members of the victims’ families. He was expected to plead guilty to seven counts of murder and 48 counts of aggravated battery with a firearm at the hearing at the time, according to the AP.

“We have Fourth of July coming up and it will be two years,” Sundheim said at a news conference at the time. “All I wanted was to be able to fully grieve my mom without the looming trial, knowing that he was going to spend the rest of his life in jail. And instead, we were yet again shown [Crimo’s] complete and blatant disregard for humans.”

Crimo told police he wore women’s clothing during the shooting and used makeup to hide his facial tattoos and blend in with the crowd during the chaos, prosecutors said. Crimo was apprehended hours later and prosecutors said he confessed to the shooting.

Crimo’s father, Robert Crimo Jr., pleaded guilty last year to reckless conduct, admitting to signing the Firearm Owner’s Identification card for his son to apply for gun ownership.

The younger Crimo was 19 at the time and too young to get a FOID card on his own. Illinois at the time required people ages 18, 19 or 20 to have parent or guardian authorization.

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(COLCHESTER, Vt.) — A federal judge issued a temporary restraining order to keep Mohsen Mahdawi, the Columbia student who was arrested during his citizenship interview last week, in Vermont while his case proceeds.

In the written order filed on Thursday morning, U.S. District Judge Geoffrey Crawford said the order was necessary to “prevent disputes” about jurisdiction “or any other issues that may arise in the case of involuntary movement of a petitioner between states.”

On Wednesday, Judge Crawford said he was going to issue the temporary restraining order and ordered a hearing for next week to decide whether Mahdawi should be released while the case continues.

Mahdawi, who co-founded a university organization called the Palestinian Student Union with detained Columbia student Mahmoud Khalil, is a permanent resident of the U.S. and was taking his last step in the process for him to become a U.S. citizen before his arrest, his attorneys said.

During the hearing Wednesday, attorneys for Mahdawi argued that the federal judge in Vermont should preserve the court’s jurisdiction in the case and said that an immigration court “does not have the authority to address the egregious violation of his First Amendment.”

The judge seemed to agree with Mahdawi’s attorneys and pointed out that Mahdawi is a Vermont resident and that he was arrested in the state.

Judge Crawford said that he will give the government until Monday to reply to Mahdawi’s attorneys’ motion for release.

Michael Drescher, the acting U.S. attorney for the District of Vermont, said Wednesday he was not authorized to “justify” the extension of the TRO to keep Mahdawi in Vermont. Drescher also requested an opportunity to respond to Mahdawi’s attorney’s motion from Tuesday requesting his release.

“It is a privilege to be granted a visa or green card to live and study in the United States of America,” Tricia McLaughlin, assistant secretary for public affairs at the Department of Homeland Security, told ABC News in a statement. “When you advocate for violence, glorify and support terrorists that relish the killing of Americans, and harass Jews, that privilege should be revoked, and you should not be in this country.”

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(TOPSFIELD, Mass.) — A 49-year-old mother of four died on Wednesday after she fell about 50 to 75 feet from a cliff while hiking at Purgatory Chasm in Massachusetts.

The woman, who was from Topsfield, Massachusetts, was hiking at the Purgatory Chasm State Reservation in Sutton just before 2 p.m. when the incident took place, according to local police. She was hiking with three of her children and other family members when she fell, authorities said.

“There were multiple medical professionals in the area hiking the chasm at the same time, and were able to provide medical attention right away,” Sutton police said. “However, she had succumbed to the injuries sustained during the fall, and was pronounced deceased a short time later.”

The chasm, a popular hiking destination about 20 minutes south of Worcester, is closed in the winter due to slippery conditions. However, the weather was warm and dry on Wednesday.

The fall remains under investigation, but appears to be accidental, police said.

The Sutton Fire Department, Massachusetts State Police, Northbridge Police Department, LifeStar and others were involved in the rescue efforts, according to Sutton police.

“There are trails above the chasm you can go along, [and] dangerous overhangs if you’re going to the edge to look down,” hiker Andy Spears told Boston ABC affiliate WCVB. “It’s really sad that it had to happen at a place like this.”

The woman was not identified, out of respect to the family, according to Sutton police.

“Lastly, the Sutton Police Department would like to extend our condolences to the family during this very difficult time,” the department said.

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — The Trump administration is acknowledging it deported four noncitizens to El Salvador despite a court order barring the removal of people to countries other than their place of origin without an opportunity to raise concerns about their safety.

In a series of court filings overnight, Justice Department lawyers argued that the court order was not violated because the removal of four alleged members of the Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua was carried out by the Department of Defense — not the Department of Homeland Security, which is a defendant in the lawsuit.

U.S. District Judge Brian Murphy issued a court order on March 28 requiring that anyone with a final order of removal must have an opportunity to raise concerns about their safety before they are deported to a so-called “third country” that is not on their order of removal or their country of origin.

Three days after Judge Murphy’s order, the four men — who are originally from Venezuela — were flown from U.S. Naval Station Guantanamo Bay to El Salvador, according to a sworn declaration from Tracey Huettl, a unit chief for field operations with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

Huettl said that each of the four men were identified as members of Tren de Aragua by federal law enforcement, and had extensive criminal records.

According to her declaration, one man admitted he was a member of the gang and that he recruited prostitutes for the organization, and another was charged with multiple crimes including discharge of a firearm and theft.

Another man is allegedly a sex offender who was charged with human smuggling and convicted for domestic assault, and the last was arrested for possession and use of drug-related objects.

None of the men had orders of removal to El Salvador before they were deported to that country on March 31, according to the filings.

Judge Murphy set an April 28 conference earlier this month to learn more about what he described as the “potential violations of the temporary restraining order.”

Last Friday, the judge issued a preliminary injunction requiring the Trump administration to give noncitizens the chance to raise concerns about their safety before they are removed to third countries.

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(BALTIMORE) — A federal judge in Maryland has ordered the Trump administration to facilitate the return of a 20-year-old Venezuelan man deported to El Salvador, whose removal violated a previous court settlement, according to an order issued on Wednesday.

U.S. District Judge Stephanie Gallagher, a Trump appointee, also ordered the government not to remove other individuals covered by the settlement.

The class action case from 2019 was filed on behalf of individuals who entered the U.S. as unaccompanied minors and later sought asylum.

The group sued the government to be able to have their asylum applications adjudicated while they remained in the United States. The parties settled in 2024.

Attorneys for the plaintiffs say the Trump administration, in breach of the settlement agreement, removed one of the class members — referred to using the pseudonym “Cristian” in court records — to El Salvador on March 15 when it deported three planeloads of alleged migrant gang members to the CECOT mega-prison there.

In an opinion filed Wednesday, Judge Gallagher referenced the case of wrongly deported Kilmar Abrego Garcia, and said that “like Judge [Paula] Xinis in the Abrego Garcia matter, this court will order Defendants to facilitate Cristian’s return to the United States so that he can receive the process he was entitled to under the parties’ binding Settlement Agreement.”

The judge’s order was first reported by ABC News.
Judge Gallagher said that facilitating Cristian’s return requires the defendants “making a good faith request to the government of El Salvador and to release Cristian to U.S. custody for transport back to the United States to await the adjudication of his asylum application on the merits by USCIS.”

Gallagher called the deportation a “breach of contract.”

“At bottom, this case, unlike other cases involving the government’s removal of individuals under the Alien Enemies Act, is a contractual dispute because of the Settlement Agreement,” attorneys for the plaintiff said, referring to the 18th century wartime authority used to remove noncitizens with little-to-no due process.

The Trump administration, according to the order, contends that the removal of Cristian did not violate the settlement because “his designation as an alien enemy pursuant to the AEA results in him ceasing to be a member.”

In a sworn declaration, an official for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement said that Cristian was arrested in January for possession of cocaine.

“On January 6, 2025, [“Cristian”] was convicted in the 482nd District Court at Harris County, Texas for the offense of possession of cocaine, a Texas state jail felony,” said Robert Cerna, the Acting Field Office Director for Enforcement and Removal Operations.

Cerna said that following the invocation of the AEA, ICE determined that Cristian was subject to removal.

“On March 15, 2025, [“Cristian”] was removed under the Alien Enemies Act, 50 U.S.C. Ch. 3, pursuant to Presidential Proclamation 10,903, as a Venezuelan citizen 14 years of age or older who is a member of TdA,” Cerna said, referring to the Venezuelan criminal gang Tren de Aragua.

“Allegations that Class Members, like Cristian, are subject to the AEA do not exclude those individuals from the Class under the plain terms of the Settlement Agreement,” attorneys for the plaintiff argued.

Counsel for the class of migrants also alleged in court filings that another Venezuelan man, identified as an 18-year-old named Javier in the court records, was in imminent danger of being deported earlier this month.

Judge Gallagher determined that Javier was covered by the settlement agreement and entered a temporary restraining order prohibiting the government from removing him from the United States.

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(NEW YORK) — The world’s coral reefs are in the midst of the fourth and largest global bleaching event in recorded history, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration announced this week.

The grim milestone was recorded between January 2023 and April 2025, with the agency documenting that bleaching-level heat stress has impacted 83.7% of the world’s coral reef area.

The impacted reefs span at least 83 countries and territories, the agency said.

Since early 2023, mass bleaching of coral reefs has been confirmed in the Atlantic, Pacific and Indian ocean basins, including parts of Florida and the coastline of the United States, the Caribbean, Central America, South America, Australia, the South Pacific, the Persian Gulf, coasts of East Africa and Indonesia, according to NOAA.

The agency deemed this ongoing bleaching event “the biggest to date,” noting that the previous record was set with 68.2% of reefs affected during the third-largest bleaching period, between 2014 and 2017.

The first and second global coral bleaching events occurred in 1998 and 2010, respectively, according to the agency.

Bleaching occurs when warmer ocean temperatures cause the expulsion of algae that live in the coral tissue. This leaves the coral completely white, known as coral bleaching. Coral bleaching does not necessarily mean corals will die, according to NOAA, which noted that corals can recuperate if the strain on their ecosystems is reduced.

At a local level, storms, disease, sediments and changes in salinity can cause corals to bleach; however, mass bleaching, when several varieties of coral reefs are bleached, is largely caused by increased sea temperatures, according to the Australian Institute of Marine Science.

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.