The verdict came in a retrial of Palin’s case, after a federal appeals court threw out a 2022 verdict in the Times’ favor.

The jury deliberated for around two hours after a weeklong trial.

In a statement after the verdict, New York Times spokesperson Danielle Rhoades Ha said, “The decision reaffirms an important tenet of American law: publishers are not liable for honest mistakes.”

Palin’s lawyers did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Palin Sued Newspaper, Editor

Palin, 61, who also served as Alaska’s governor, sued the newspaper and former editorial page editor James Bennet over a June 14, 2017, article that wrongly suggested she may have incited a January 2011 mass shooting in an Arizona parking lot.

Six people were killed and Democratic U.S. Representative Gabby Giffords was seriously wounded in the attack.

Bennet said he was under deadline pressure when he added language to “America’s Lethal Politics” that linked the attack to a map from Palin’s political action committee that put Giffords and other Democrats under crosshairs.

The Times quickly acknowledged its mistake and apologized, publishing a correction 14 hours after the editorial appeared online.

Lawyers for Palin said that wasn’t enough because the backtracking didn’t mention her by name.

In her closing argument, Times’ lawyer Felicia Ellsworth alluded to the high burden that Palin, a public figure, had in order to hold the newspaper liable.

“To win this case, Governor Palin needs to prove that the New York Times and James Bennet did not care about the truth,” she said. “There has not been one shred of evidence showing anything other than an honest mistake.”

Palin lawyer Ken Turkel said it was more than that.

“”This is not an honest mistake about a passing reference” to Palin, he said in his closing argument. “For her, it was a life-changer.”

Palin Loses First Trial in February 2022

Palin lost her first trial in February 2022, but the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Manhattan last August said the verdict was tainted by several rulings from the presiding judge.

The case had long been viewed by Palin and other conservatives as a possible vehicle to overturn the 1964 U.S. Supreme Court landmark New York Times v. Sullivan.

In that case, the court said that to win a defamation case, a public figure must demonstrate that an offending statement was made with “actual malice,” meaning with knowledge it was false or with reckless disregard as to whether it was false.

The 2nd Circuit, however, said Palin waived the argument by waiting too long to challenge the “actual malice” standard. President Donald Trump has also questioned the standard.

Palin was Alaska’s governor from 2006 to 2009, and ran with late Republican Senator John McCain of Arizona in his unsuccessful 2008 White House run. Democrat Barack Obama and his vice presidential pick Joe Biden won that race.

—

(Reporting by Luc Cohen in New York; Editing by Mark Porter)

The post Jury Finds NY Times Not Liable in Sarah Palin Defamation Case appeared first on GV Wire.

Conservative justices Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett, along with the court’s three liberals, appeared skeptical of arguments that Obamacare’s process for deciding which services must be fully covered by private insurance is unconstitutional.

The case could have big ramifications for the law’s preventive care coverage requirements for an estimated 150 million Americans. Medications and services that could be affected include statins to prevent heart disease, lung cancer screenings, HIV-prevention drugs and medication to lower the chance of breast cancer for high-risk women.

The plaintiffs argued that requirements to cover those medications and services are unconstitutional because a volunteer board of medical experts that recommended them should have been Senate- approved. The challengers have also raised religious and procedural objections to some requirements.

Trump Administration Defends Mandate in Court

The Trump administration defended the mandate before the court, though President Donald Trump has been a critic of the law. The Justice Department said board members don’t need Senate approval because they can be removed by the health and human services secretary.

A majority of the justices seemed inclined to side with the government. Kavanaugh said he didn’t see indications in the law that the board was designed to have the kind of independent power that would require Senate approval, and Barrett questioned the plaintiff’s apparently “maximalist” interpretation of the board’s role.

“We don’t just go around creating independent agencies. More often, we destroy independent agencies,” said Justice Elena Kagan said about the court’s prior opinions.

Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas seemed likely to side with the plaintiffs. And some suggested they could send the case back to the conservative U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals. That would likely leave unanswered questions about which medications and services remain covered.

Ruling Expected by End of June

A ruling is expected by the end of June.

The case came before the Supreme Court after the appeals court struck down some preventive care coverage requirements. It sided with Christian employers and Texas residents who argued they can’t be forced to provide full insurance coverage for things like medication to prevent HIV and some cancer screenings.

They were represented by well-known conservative attorney Jonathan Mitchell, who represented Trump before the high court in a dispute about whether he could appear on the 2024 ballot.

Not all preventive care was threatened by the ruling. A 2023 analysis prepared by the nonprofit KFF found that some screenings, including mammography and cervical cancer screening, would still be covered without out-of-pocket costs.

The appeals court found that coverage requirements were unconstitutional because they came from a body — the United States Preventive Services Task Force — whose members were not nominated by the president and confirmed by the Senate.

The post US Supreme Court Appears Likely to Uphold Obamacare’s Preventive Care Coverage Mandate appeared first on GV Wire.

Pilar Rose, 51, was also ordered to forfeit more than $2.5 million in proceeds from the sale of her and her husband’s mansion on Van Ness Extension and a luxury BMW, Acting U.S. Attorney Michele Beckwith said in a statement.

Related Story: Fresno Woman, Tied to Fentanyl ‘M30 King,’ Sentenced to Federal ...

According to court records, between 2012 and 2015, Rose prepared false financial statements for her husband’s orthodontics practice that significantly underreported income, allowing the couple to avoid more than $870,000 in federal taxes.

Prosecutors said Rose also altered hundreds of checks in 2016 — originally written for nondeductible personal expenses such as mortgage payments, utilities, landscaping, and college tuition — to appear as business-related. She submitted the doctored checks, along with false financial statements, to IRS auditors in an effort to conceal the fraud.

Related Story: Fresno Barbershop Shooting Leaves Man Dead, Two Others Injured

Rose further misled financial institutions in two separate attempts to refinance a $1.5 million mortgage on the couple’s mansion, officials said. In one case, she claimed the couple had more than $250,000 in their bank accounts when they had less than $3,000.

In 2017, Rose purchased a new BMW sedan for about $90,000 using a fraudulent loan application that falsely stated she was an attorney earning more than $600,000 a year. She also used a Social Security number belonging to her husband’s former dental school classmate to avoid a credit check under her own name.

Related Story: Fresno Police Arrest 11 for DUI During Weekend Enforcement

Authorities later seized both the mansion and the car.

Rose was convicted of tax evasion and obstruction of an IRS audit as part of a broader fraud scheme stretching over several years.

—

Connect with Anthony W. Haddad on social media. Got a tip? Send an email. 

The post Woman in Fresno Mansion Fraud Case Sentenced to Prison for Tax Evasion appeared first on GV Wire.

Nathaniel Ray Diaz, 21, of Greenfield, was arraigned Monday after a federal grand jury returned a three-count indictment charging him with sexual exploitation of a minor, attempted receipt of child pornography, and obstruction of justice, Acting U.S. Attorney Michele Beckwith announced.

Related Story: Fresno Woman, Tied to Fentanyl ‘M30 King,’ Sentenced to Federal ...

According to court documents, Diaz was serving a three-year sentence at Avenal State Prison in Kings County for committing lewd acts against a 12-year-old and making criminal threats with a gun.

Between July 5 and Nov. 25, 2024, he allegedly used prison phones, a state-issued tablet, and monitored ViaPath messaging equipment to repeatedly contact the same victim.

Related Story: Former Parlier City Manager Sentenced to Prison for Fraud

Although Diaz was under a 10-year no-contact order with the minor, prosecutors said he placed thousands of calls and directed the victim to produce and send sexually explicit images.

When Diaz became aware that law enforcement had been alerted, he allegedly instructed others to delete evidence of the communications.

Related Story: California Woman Arrested in Russia Freed in Prisoner Swap: What We Know

If convicted, Diaz faces a mandatory minimum of 25 years in prison and up to 50 years for the sexual exploitation charge, prosecutors said.

He also faces a minimum of 15 years and up to 40 years for the attempted receipt charge, and up to 20 years for obstruction of justice. Each count carries a potential fine of up to $250,000.

—

Connect with Anthony W. Haddad on social media. Got a tip? Send an email. 

The post California Prisoner Indicted for Exploiting Child Victim While Incarcerated appeared first on GV Wire.

Related Story: Fresno Barbershop Shooting Leaves Man Dead, Two Others Injured

Alma Garza, 24, was convicted by a federal jury in September following a four-day trial. Prosecutors said she worked as a trusted assistant to Horacio Torrecillas Urias Jr., the self-proclaimed “M30 King of Fresno,” helping to smuggle drugs into California from Mexico and distribute them across state lines.

Between Nov. 2, 2021, and March 31, 2022, Garza conspired with Torrecillas Urias and others to traffic tens of thousands of counterfeit M30 fentanyl pills and large quantities of cocaine and methamphetamine, according to evidence presented at trial.

On Jan. 27, 2022, Garza mailed a package containing cocaine and methamphetamine to a co-defendant in New Mexico. Authorities intercepted the package before it reached its destination.

Less than two weeks later, Garza traveled with Torrecillas Urias to Sanger to deliver thousands of fentanyl-laced pills, which were seized two days later during a search of a home.

Prosecutors also said Garza transferred thousands of dollars in cash to Mexican drug suppliers to further the trafficking operation.

Garza was one of 19 people charged in the case. With Monday’s sentencing by U.S. District Judge Jennifer L. Thurston, all defendants have been sentenced.

—

Connect with Anthony W. Haddad on social media. Got a tip? Send an email. 

The post Fresno Woman, Tied to Fentanyl ‘M30 King,’ Sentenced to Federal Prison appeared first on GV Wire.

The post Tesla Settles Wrongful Death Lawsuit Claiming Sudden Acceleration in Ohio Crash appeared first on GV Wire.

At the hearing on Monday, El Paso’s District Attorney James Montoya read the names of each of the 23 people killed in the attack, as well as the 22 wounded, local media reported.

Montoya told reporters last month that he would no longer seek the death penalty if Patrick Crusius, 26, pleaded guilty.

“I know many wanted us to continue pursuing the death penalty against the shooter,” Montoya said in a statement on Monday, adding that many of the families wanted the case to end as soon as possible.

“After nearly six years, many families just wanted it to be over. And now it is,” he said.

Judge Sam Medrano sentenced Crusius to life in prison without the possibility of parole for capital murder of multiple persons, and life in prison for each of 22 counts of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon, the prosecutor said in a statement.

Some of the more than 40 victims and relatives of victims who had asked to give impact statements began addressing the court after the sentencing. The statements to the court will likely continue through Wednesday, the prosecutor said.

Crusius had previously pleaded guilty to a 90-count federal indictment for hate crimes and weapon offenses in the August 3, 2019, attack in the border city of El Paso and was sentenced to 90 consecutive life terms.

Crusius admitted he targeted people because of their Hispanic origin and that he intended to kill everyone he shot, federal prosecutors said.

—

(Reporting by Rich McKay in Atlanta; editing by Donna Bryson and Bill Berkrot)

The post Texas Walmart Shooter Who Killed 23 Avoids Death Penalty by Pleading Guilty appeared first on GV Wire.

In a brief order, the court directed the Trump administration not to remove Venezuelans held in the Bluebonnet Detention Center “until further order of this court.”

Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito dissented.

The high court acted in an emergency appeal from the American Civil Liberties Union contending that immigration authorities appeared to be moving to restart removals under the Alien Enemies Act of 1798. The Supreme Court had said earlier in April that deportations could proceed only if those about to be removed had a chance to argue their case in court and were given “a reasonable time” to contest their pending removals.

Related Story: Senator Slams ‘Margaritagate’ Stunt During Deportee Visit

ACLU Files Emergency Appeal

“We are deeply relieved that the Court has temporarily blocked the removals. These individuals were in imminent danger of spending the rest of their lives in a brutal Salvadoran prison without ever having had any due process,” ACLU lawyer Lee Gelernt said in an email.

On Friday, two federal judges refused to step in as lawyers for the men launched a desperate legal campaign to prevent their deportation, even as one judge said the case raised legitimate concerns. Early Saturday, the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals also refused to issue an order protecting the detainees from being deported.

The administration is expected to return to the Supreme Court quickly in an effort to persuade the justices to lift their temporary order.

Related Story: Trump Officials’ Defiance Over Abrego Garcia’s Deportation Is ‘Shocking,’ Appeals Court Says

Historical Context of the Alien Enemies Act

The ACLU had already sued to block deportations of two Venezuelans held in the Bluebonnet facility and sought an order barring removals of any immigrants in the region under the Alien Enemies Act.

In an emergency filing early Friday, the ACLU warned that immigration authorities were accusing other Venezuelan men held there of being members of the Tren de Aragua gang, which would make them subject to President Donald Trump’s use of the act.

The act has only been invoked three previous times in U.S. history, most recently during World War II to hold Japanese-American civilians in internment camps. The Trump administration contended it gave them power to swiftly remove immigrants they identified as members of the gang, regardless of their immigration status.

Following the unanimous high court order on April 9, federal judges in Colorado, New York and southern Texas promptly issued orders barring removal of detainees under the AEA until the administration provides a process for them to make claims in court.

But there had been no such order issued in the area of Texas that covers Bluebonnet, which is located 24 miles north of Abilene in the far northern end of the state.

Related Story: Judge Finds Probable Cause to Hold Trump Admin in Contempt for Violating Deportation Order

Legal Battles Continue Across Jurisdictions

U.S. District Judge James Wesley Hendrix, a Trump appointee, this week declined to bar the administration from removing the two men identified in the ACLU lawsuit because Immigration and Customs Enforcement filed sworn declarations that they would not be immediately deported. He also balked at issuing a broader order prohibiting removal of all Venezuelans in the area under the act because he said removals hadn’t started yet.

But the ACLU’s Friday filing included sworn declarations from three separate immigration lawyers who said their clients in Bluebonnet were given paperwork indicating they were members of Tren de Aragua and could be deported by Saturday. In one case, immigration lawyer Karene Brown said her client, identified by initials, was told to sign papers in English even though the client only spoke Spanish.

“ICE informed F.G.M. that these papers were coming from the President, and that he will be deported even if he did not sign it,” Brown wrote.

Gelernt said in a Friday evening hearing before District Judge James E. Boasberg in Washington, D.C., that the administration initially moved Venezuelans to its south Texas immigration facility for deportation. But since a judge banned deportations in that area, it has funneled them to the Bluebonnet facility, where no such order exists. He said witnesses reported the men were being loaded on buses Friday evening to be taken to the airport.

With Hendrix not agreeing to the ACLU’s request for an emergency order, the group turned to Boasberg, who initially halted deportations in March. The Supreme Court ruled the orders against deportation could only come from judges in jurisdictions where immigrants were held, which Boasberg said made him powerless Friday.

“I’m sympathetic to everything you’re saying,” Boasberg told Gelernt. “I just don’t think I have the power to do anything about it.”

Boasberg this week found there’s probable cause that the Trump administration committed criminal contempt by disobeying his initial deportation ban. He was concerned that the paper that ICE was giving those held did not make clear they had a right to challenge their removal in court, which he believed the Supreme Court mandated.

Drew Ensign, an attorney for the Justice Department, disagreed, saying that people slated for deportation would have a “minimum” of 24 hours to challenge their removal in court. He said no flights were scheduled for Friday night and he was unaware of any Saturday, but the Department of Homeland Security said it reserved the right to remove people then.

ICE said it would not comment on the litigation.

Also Friday, a Massachusetts judge made permanent his temporary ban on the administration deporting immigrants who have exhausted their appeals to countries other than their home countries unless they are informed of their destination and given a chance to object if they’d face torture or death there.

Some Venezuelans subject to Trump’s Alien Enemies Act have been sent to El Salvador and housed in its notorious main prison.

The post Supreme Court Blocks, for Now, New Deportations Under 18th Century Wartime Law appeared first on GV Wire.

A 3-0 ruling from the Fifth Appellate District found in favor of the state and ordered the county to pay undetermined court costs.

Fresno County sued the state in 2023 over AB 2022, which banned the use of “squaw” for geographic place names. The law went into effect Jan. 1, 2025. “Squaw” is considered a derogatory term for Native American women.

Approximately 3,000 residents live in the unincorporated mountain community that until recently was known as Squaw Valley, about 30 miles east of Fresno on Highway 180. The federal government — during the Biden Administration — recognized the community as Yokuts Valley.

“I am disappointed with the appellate court ruling regarding the lawsuit that the county had against the state, but I also respect that ruling,” said supervisor Nathan Magsig, who represents the community.

Magsig said the county would follow the law.

“The county has lost at the Superior Court, and now the appellate court level. There are no plans to appeal further,” Magsig said.

Public agencies were to submit alternate names to the California Advisory Committee on Geographic Names by Aug. 6, 2024. The official list of Fresno County names needing to be replaced include the CalFire station, the Squaw Valley Cemetery, Squaw Valley Road, and Squaw Leap Lane.

The state challenged the nature of a lawsuit in Fresno County Superior Court through an action called a demurrer, and Judge D. Tyler Tharpe sustained the action. He agreed with the state’s argument that the county did not have standing.

Tharpe did allow the county to file an amended suit, but dismissed the case when the county did not follow through. The county then appealed the dismissal, challenging the state’s authority to rename the area.

The Fresno County Board of Supervisors in 2022 voted to reject the federal name change, and said if there was a renaming, it should be Bear Valley. Also, voters in 2024 rejected a charter amendment that would specifically give the supervisors name-change authority.

Representatives  from the state were immediately available for comment.

The Court’s Opinion

The court, citing several prior court cases, rejected the county’s arguments in a 38-page opinion issued Tuesday.

“The mere assertion that a name change for the Community is opposed by certain Community residents, and that the County is aligned with their opposition, does not persuade us that County’s challenge to a general law of the state is a valid exercise of its police powers,” Associate Justice Kathleen Meehan — a Jerry Brown appointee — wrote.

Acting Presiding Judge Bert Levy (appointed by Pete Wilson), and Associate Justice Thomas DeSantos, another Brown appointee, concurred.

One of the key arguments is the county has standing to bring the lawsuit. The appeal court disagreed.

“Because County has not alleged any facts to demonstrate Community residents and business owners would face any substantial obstacles in asserting their own rights in this matter, we conclude County does not have standing to assert the free speech and association rights of its constituents,” Meehan wrote.

Meehan also wrote that the law contains “suitable safeguards … to protect against misuse,” when it comes to a state advisory committee on names making decisions.

Even if the argument that the law requires the county to accept certain state views — that “squaw” is a racist term — it is an argument to be made by the residents, and not the county, Meehan wrote.

The court, in a footnote, said “We mean no disrespect to Native Americans and those who are offended by the term” for using the actual “squaw” name in its ruling.

The post Fresno County Ending ‘Squaw Valley’ Fight After Latest Court Ruling appeared first on GV Wire.

Combs, 55, has pleaded not guilty to five criminal counts including racketeering and sex trafficking. Prosecutors with the Manhattan U.S. Attorney’s office say Combs used his business empire to sexually abuse women between 2004 and 2024.

Combs’ Lawyer Describes Encounter as Consensual

Combs’ lawyers say the sexual activity described by prosecutors was consensual.

Jury selection for his trial is currently scheduled to start on May 5, with opening statements on May 12.

In a court filing on Wednesday, Combs’ lawyer Marc Agnifilo asked U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian to delay the trial because he needed more time to prepare his defense to new charges brought on April 4. Agnifilo also said the defense needed more time to review emails it wants an alleged victim to turn over.

Federal prosecutors are opposed to any delay, writing in a Thursday court filing that the additional charges brought earlier this month did not amount to substantially new conduct. They said Combs was not entitled to the alleged victim’s communications.

Subramanian is also weighing other evidentiary issues, such as whether to allow alleged victims to testify under pseudonyms.

Also known during his career as Puff Daddy and P. Diddy, Combs founded Bad Boy Records and is credited with helping turn rappers and R&B singers such as Mary J. Blige, Faith Evans, Notorious B.I.G. and Usher into stars in the 1990s and 2000s.

But prosecutors have said his success concealed a dark side. They say his alleged abuse included having women take part in recorded sexual performances called “freak offs” with male sex workers, who were sometimes transported across state lines.

Combs has been jailed in Brooklyn since September.

—

(Reporting by Luc Cohen in New York; Editing by Lisa Shumaker)

The post Sean ‘Diddy’ Combs Arrives in Court as He Seeks Delay to Sex Trafficking Trial appeared first on GV Wire.