Minnesota sues Texas governor to compel extradition of ICE agent for trial

(NEW HAVEN, Conn.) — Yale University said it’s negotiating with the Department of Justice over a potential resolution of the Trump administration’s findings of alleged racial discrimination in its medical school’s admissions processes, according to a statement by the university’s president.

President Maurie McInnis also confirmed for the first time that the DOJ’s inquiry extends beyond Yale’s medical school, with two pending investigations into admissions processes at Yale College and Yale Law School.

The statement issued on Monday describes recent university-wide changes to admissions processes to meet federal guidelines, stating that “academic strength” is its main consideration when evaluating Yale College applicants.

“We now state explicitly that academic strength has long been the predominant criterion in our holistic evaluation of applicants,” McInnis said.

ABC News has reached out to Yale University and the Department of Justice for a comment.

In May, following a yearlong investigation, the DOJ released a letter of findings alleging that the Yale School of Medicine discriminated based on race in its admissions practices. Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 — which prohibits discrimination in any program receiving federal funding — requires that the government seek a voluntary resolution with the institution following an investigation.

McInnis characterized Yale’s decision to engage in this process as “standard” and “required” by law, saying in her statement: “These investigations concern university compliance with federal law…As a university committed to the rule of law, we take that obligation seriously.”

Three legal experts on higher education told ABC News that although, historically, it has been customary for universities to undergo the resolution process, they say it is not required. 

“Going back several administrations, there was always the opportunity to say, ‘No, thank you. I don’t want to go through voluntary resolution,'” explained Dr. Peter Lake, law professor and director of Stetson University’s Center for Excellence in Higher Education Law and Policy. “…Most institutions wouldn’t pick that option for various reasons because the consequences could be very severe.”

However, norms surrounding the voluntary resolution process have been called into question since the start of President Donald Trump’s second term, according to legal experts.

“In this instance, and I think that this is why a lot of individuals at Yale and others are raising alarm over a quick settlement is that, we are in uncharted waters with how this administration has used legal mechanisms to try to get higher education to do what it wants,” said Dr. Neal Hutchens, a professor at the University of Kentucky specializing in legal and policy issues in higher education.

“This is pushing an investigation based on a DOJ memorandum that may not have conclusions or interpretations of law that are necessarily sound or that would be backed by courts,” Hutchens continued. “I think there are real questions there, and so, I think there are some real legal questions about why you would necessarily fold too quickly on this.”

Dr. Jonathan Feingold, a professor at the Boston University School of Law, told ABC News that he believes Yale does not “even come close” to violating federal law and criticized the university for engaging with the Trump administration in “good faith.”

“From my perspective, as someone who cares about higher education but has no personal relationship with Yale, even the posture of treating the Trump administration’s investigation as legitimate in entering this sort of process is a betrayal to the entire Yale community,” he said.

Feingold also sees the pursuit of settlements — in lieu of litigation in court — as a common tactic by the Trump administration to place what he sees as undue pressure on universities.

He explained, “I think the institution would benefit, and the community would benefit, actually, from the litigation because you get to put all facts on the table and you don’t get to allow the Trump administration to sort of manufacture the story that it wants to.”

When reports of potential resolution talks first circulated last week, a wide coalition of critics emerged — including the national American Association of University Professors, the Yale undergraduate student government, and Connecticut senator and Yale Law School alum Richard Blumenthal. In various petitions and statements, they have called for the university to resist a settlement and to defend its admissions practices through legal channels.

While Yale’s talks follow a string of settlements between American universities and the Trump administration, other universities have resisted talks with the Trump administration — most notably Harvard University, which is currently fighting DOJ lawsuits over its admissions records and handling of campus protests.

“For instance, Harvard engaged with the new government, but certainly didn’t just accept the demands, and they challenged it in court,” Hutchens told ABC News. “And so, I think Harvard charts a path of just not acquiescence or just not folding, that Yale will have a decision potentially to make.”

In early June, the DOJ announced investigations into the admissions practices of fifteen additional medical schools. These investigations have not yet concluded.

Following McInnis’ statement Monday evening, the Yale chapter of the AAUP — which represents 300 Yale faculty — renewed their call for transparency.

A spokesperson for the Yale AAUP chapter confirmed to ABC News Tuesday that they are currently reviewing legal options, including litigation to “assert our rights as faculty in this matter.” 

“[This case] has implications for Yale, but there are [also] a lot of institutions around the country that are wanting to understand what they can do in terms of race-neutral alternatives to still try to assemble classes,” said Lake. 

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(NEW YORK) — Target is apologizing for selling a children’s Halloween costume that some described as reminiscent of racist minstrel caricatures.

“An apology from us: We pulled an offensive Halloween costume that should never have been part of our assortment,” Target said in a statement posted on its website and social media pages late Monday. “It is no longer for sale.”

“As a company, we got this wrong, and we are deeply sorry,” the statement continued. “We know this is especially hurtful for our Black guests, team members and partners. Removing the costume is an important first step, and the company is looking closely at how this happened and what needs to change to ensure this won’t happen again.”

According to the product’s original description on Target’s site, the costume in question was the Kids’ Circus Glow Clown Halloween Costume Bodysuit. It features an orange and black shirt and pants set with black gloves and a hooded mesh mask with an attached miniature hat. The entire design also glows “under blacklight.”

The item is no longer listed for sale on Target’s website.

The controversial costume prompted calls to boycott Target on social media, a year after the retailer faced boycotts over its decision to cut some of its diversity, equity, and inclusion programs.

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

Prosecutors in upstate New York are defending their decision not to bring charges in 2024 after an alleged “gang rape” at a Cornell University fraternity. 

Tompkins County District Attorney Matthew Van Houten described the allegations as “morally disturbing” but argued that the facts he knew at the time did not support a prosecution. 

“If what was said on social media about this case was true, those fraternity members would be in prison right now,” Van Houten told ABC News.

Van Houten argued that Jane Doe’s account of the incident from 2024 suggested that she consented to the sexual activity. He said that she did not withdraw her consent, and that when she raised concerns, the fraternity members “stopped and did not pursue what they were doing.” 

“She clearly consented in the beginning, and there was never any indication that she changed that to the things that she participated in,” he said. “There is a disconnect in the sense of how the community and how social media has understood this to have happened. If at any point Jane Doe had said, ‘I don’t consent to this anymore,’ or in those words, or in any form of communication. If there had been continued sexual activity, contact by these individuals, that would be a crime. But that’s not what was alleged in her statement.” 

Van Houten acknowledged that his office did not examine a photo of the fraternity’s Snapchat group, but he argued that the messages do not change his view of the case. 

He called the messages, “disgusting and vulgar and immoral.”

“But the question that we analyzed was: Did Jane Doe consent to what happened, and was she unable to consent?” he said. “I’m not clear on exactly how that was given to us, or if anyone here looked at it. That was not critical to our analysis, as I mentioned earlier. The issue was her consent, and if you take that Snapchat being vile and crude and vulgar, that did not have any relevance to the issue of whether Jane Doe consented to what was happening,”  Van Houten said.

The DA’s comments come a day after his office announced it would be reopening the 2024 case in light of Jane Doe’s civil lawsuit alleging that she was drugged, assaulted and gang raped by seven former and current members of the Chi Phi fraternity at Cornell.

Cornell’s Chi Phi chapter was barred from campus after the alleged Oct. 19, 2024, incident, though none of the individuals allegedly involved faced criminal charges, according to the DA. 

An attorney for Jane Doe responded to Van Houten’s written statement on Monday, alleging his client’s claims were not investigated thoroughly.

“It is challenging for me to understand how a thorough criminal investigation could have been conducted when she was never spoke with anyone other than the officer who took her original complaint,” Thomas P. Giuffra said.

Giuffra also raised concerns that prosecutors might have lost critical evidence because of the two-year delay in investigating the case. 

“I believe that opportunities to fully investigate these crimes were lost. We will never fully know what occurred or the identities of everyone who was involved that night,” he said. 

Van Houten said his office plans to meet with Jane Doe to “establish a rapport” before having her testify before the grand jury this fall. He added that he requested some of the documents from Cornell’s Title IX investigation (through Jane Doe) and suggested that some of the fraternity members might testify. 

Van Houten argued his office is constrained by New York’s laws on sexual assault and consent, which present a high bar to a potential prosecution. 

“The law in New York State is clear that if you are voluntarily intoxicated or under the influence of drugs – such that your judgment is impaired — that does not legally, under the penal law, constitute your inability to consent,” Van Houten said. “That’s a very difficult concept, but it’s a concept that I am constrained by when I apply the law to the case.”

The university said in a new statement on Monday that it “supports the decision of the Tompkins County District Attorney (DA) to provide an opportunity for the victim’s story, in the 2024 Chi Phi fraternity Sexual Assault case, to be heard by a criminal grand jury.”

“Cornell also conducted a thorough Title IX investigation, which is separate from a criminal proceeding, over the course of several months,” Monday’s statement said. “During that investigation temporary suspensions and other restrictive measures were used. After investigation, and pursuant to federal law, the matter was sent to a hearing where a panel of trained faculty and staff heard evidence over multiple days. The complainant and respondents had the opportunity to testify and present evidence. At its conclusion, the hearing panel issued a range of sanctions, which included expulsions and suspensions from Cornell. None of the individuals charged were offered the opportunity to write essays as a sole consequence of their involvement.”

Jane Doe’s lawyers allege that the fraternity members “were afforded the opportunity to mitigate their conduct by submitting essays to Cornell.”

The fraternity was closed in 2024, the school said.

“Any suggestion that the University did not impose consequential punishments for those involved is false,” Cornell said on Monday. “A continuation of the false narrative that there were minimal consequences in this case is irresponsible, will make survivors feel less safe and supported, and will perpetuate the underreporting of sexual assault.”

ABC News has reached out to Chi Phi for a comment.

An attorney for one of the defendants denied the allegations and said the incident detailed in the complaint “did not happen.”

“We look forward to confronting the plaintiff in a court of law for her selfishly false claims with both the evidence and her own words.” Attorney Jeremy Saland said.

Another defendant also denied engaging in sexual activity or drug use, though he acknowledged that he sent a message that was included in the complaint. 

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.