SEC continuing $150 million lawsuit against Elon Musk over Twitter purchase
Win McNamee/Getty Images
(WASHINGTON) — The Securities and Exchange Commission is continuing its $150 million lawsuit against Elon Musk that was brought during the Biden administration.
According to a court filing Monday, the tech billionaire and head of the Department of Government Efficiency has agreed to respond to the suit, which accuses him of misleading investors when he bought millions of dollars in Twitter stock in 2022, prior to his acquisition of the company.
The SEC brought the case against Musk on Jan. 14 in the waning days of the Biden administration, and a representative of the SEC served Musk with the complaint and a summons earlier this month — though Musk contests the validity of the service.
Under the terms of the agreement, Musk’s lawyers will file a response to the complaint by June 6, pending approval from the court.
“The parties respectfully submit that this compromise is reasonable and will conserve judicial resources,” the filing said.
Monday’s filing marks the first time a deadline for Musk to respond to the complaint has been raised by either party.
Musk’s lawyers could not immediately be reached for comment by ABC News.
“They spend their time on s— like this when there are so many actual crimes that go unpunished,” Musk said on X in January in response to the SEC’s suit.
(GREER, Ariz.) — A wildfire in eastern Arizona continues to burn, expanding to over 20,000 acres, with more red flag warnings in effect on Monday.
The Greer Fire, named after the small community in Arizona’s White Mountains where the blaze sparked on May 13, has grown to 20,425 acres and is 38% contained, officials said on Monday.
A red flag warning in northeastern Arizona — including the area of the flames — is in effect on Monday, with officials urging residents to avoid burning or using tools that spark.
“One spark into the dry veg under red flag conditions can start a rapid spreading wildfire,” the Arizona Department of Forestry and Fire Management said Monday in a post on X.
Over 700 personnel have been assigned to battle the blaze, with high winds — reaching around 40 mph — posing “another test for firefighters holding the firelines,” the forestry service said.
On Saturday, Arizona Gov. Katie Hobbs declared a state of emergency in Apache County due to the growing flames.
“My heart is with everybody who has been impacted by this devastating wildfire,” Hobbs said in a statement on Saturday.
Evacuations have been issued for Greer, South Fork, residents west of Highway 261, Eager, south of Highway 260 and west of River Road, officials said. An interactive map has also been established to highlight the current evacuation orders.
The cause of the fire remains under investigation, officials said.
Greer is a small mountain town near the state’s border with New Mexico with a population of less than 60 residents, as of 2020 census data.
More information on the growth of the fire and evacuations will be provided to the public on Monday evening, the forestry service said.
ABC News’ Leah Sarnoff contributed to this report.
(WASHINGTON) — A team from the Department of Government Efficiency can now access a sensitive Treasury Department system that controls trillions of dollars in federal payments, a judge ruled late Tuesday.
U.S. District Judge Jeannette Vargas gave permission for four DOGE employees to access the Bureau of the Fiscal Service, which essentially serves as the checkbook for the federal government. Vargas said she would no longer require the Trump administration to get permission from the court before expanding access to other DOGE representatives.
The ruling marks a win for the Trump administration and DOGE, which caused a legal firestorm in February when it tried to get access to the Treasury Department’s payment systems. A group of Democratic attorneys general sued to block their access, and Vargas temporarily blocked their access in February but permitted DOGE to build a system to access the data with appropriate training and restrictions.
In April, Vargas allowed one DOGE employee to begin accessing the system. In yesterday’s ruling, she said the Trump administration had established a system to train employees to prevent improper disclosures. The attorneys general did not object to allowing DOGE’s access if the employees were properly trained.
“There is little utility in having this Court function as Treasury’s de facto human resources officer each time a new team member is onboarded,” Vargas said.
Demetrius Freeman/The Washington Post via Getty Images
(WASHINGTON) — Nearly three weeks after President Donald Trump invoked the Alien Enemies Act to remove more than 200 alleged migrant gang members to El Salvador with little-to-no due process, a federal judge will consider whether the Trump administration defied his court order by deporting the men.
U.S. District Judge James Boasberg said at a hearing Thursday that he is contemplating initiating “contempt proceedings” against the government in the event he finds probable cause they deliberately defied his March 15 order that barred removals under the Alien Enemies Act and directed two flights carrying alleged Venezuelan gang members be returned to the United States.
Boasberg questioned DOJ attorney Drew Ensign over the best way to proceed in the case in the event he determines the government violated his verbal order that the flights be returned to the U.S.
“If I don’t agree, I don’t find your legal arguments convincing, and I believe there is probable cause to find contempt, what I’m asking is how — how should I determine who [is at fault]?” Boasberg asked.
Boasberg repeatedly pressed Ensign for more information on which parties might have been involved in potentially defying his order. Ensign cited various privileges that might apply to the specific information, but when pressed by Boasberg he said he was not prepared to give specific answers.
Judge Boasberg said he would look to issue a ruling sometime next week.
The judge began the hearing by dressing down Ensign after the DOJ lawyer insisted that the Trump administration complied with Boasberg’s court order.
“It seems to me, there is a fair likelihood that that is not correct,” Judge Boasberg said in response to the argument that the Trump administration complied with the order. “In fact, the government acted in bad faith throughout that day. You really believed everything you did that day was legal and could survive a court challenge. I can’t believe you ever would have operated in the way you did.”
When the judge pressed the government about whether his oral directive to turn around the planes was communicated to the officials managing the deportation flights, DOJ attorney Drew Ensign declined to answer, citing attorney-client privilege. Regardless, Judge Boasberg suggested the Trump administration acted irresponsibly and rushed the deportation flights while the lawsuit played out.
“Why wouldn’t the prudent thing be to say, ‘Let’s slow down here. Let’s see what the judge says. He’s already enjoined the removal of five people, certainly in the realm of possibility that he would enjoin further removal. Let’s see what he says, and if he doesn’t enjoy it, we can go ahead. But surely better to be safe and risk violating the order,'” Judge Boasberg said.
Boasberg used his opening line of questioning to ensure Ensign corrected the record amid public attacks by President Trump and other senior members of the administration who have accused him of supporting terrorist gang members or singlehandedly obstructing the administration’s immigration agenda.
Ensign said it was correct to say that Boasberg’s initial temporary restraining order on March 15 never barred the administration from conducting deportations in the normal course of legal proceedings, and also said it would be incorrect to say that Boasberg ever ordered any TdA members in the administration’s custody to be released.
Thursday’s hearing could present the most consequential face-off yet between the executive and judicial branches of government since Trump took office in January, as Trump attempts to unilaterally implement parts of his agenda amid a flood of litigation.
“I’m just doing what the VOTERS wanted me to do,” Trump said in a social media post last month after Judge Boasberg issued his order blocking the deportations.
Trump last month invoked the Alien Enemies Act — a wartime authority used to deport noncitizens with little-to-no due process — by arguing that the Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua is a “hybrid criminal state” that is invading the United States.
An official with the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement has acknowledged that “many” of the men lack criminal records in the United States — but said that “the lack of specific information about each individual actually highlights the risk they pose” and “demonstrates that they are terrorists with regard to whom we lack a complete profile.”
Lawyers representing the class of migrants covered by the president’s Alien Enemies Act proclamation have argued that the Trump administration violated the court’s “unequivocal oral order” to return to the U.S. two flights carrying alleged Tren de Aragua gang members to El Salvador.
According to flight data reviewed by ABC News, both flights carrying the migrants had not yet landed when Judge Boasberg directed the flights be turned around, and Justice Department lawyers, when questioned by Judge Boasberg, confirmed that the directive was promptly communicated to federal officials overseeing the flights.
“Defendants admit they never attempted to return the individuals on the planes to the United States, despite having both notice and the ability to do so,” the attorneys argued.
Lawyers with the Department of Justice have insisted that the Trump administration “complied with the law” while questioning the legitimacy of Judge Boasberg’s order. According to the DOJ, Judge Boasberg’s oral instructions directing the flight to be returned were defective, and his subsequent written order lacked the necessary explanation to be enforced.
Lawyers with the ACLU and Democracy Forward Foundation responded that “The government’s arguments are also unsupportable on their own terms — as a matter of basic textual analysis, of common sense, and in view of foundational separation-of-powers principles.”
The Justice Department has also argued that the president acted within his authority when he removed the noncitizens — which the Trump administration has alleged are dangerous gang members — and that the government should not have to explain itself to the court because the matter concerns national security.
“Even without the challenged Proclamation, the President doubtlessly acts within his constitutional prerogative by declining to transport foreign terrorists into the country,” the Justice Department argued.
The Justice Department recently invoked the rarely-used state secrets privilege to avoid disclosing further details about the flights on the grounds that it could harm national security, so it’s unclear how DOJ attorneys will respond to Boasberg’s lines of inquiry.
