Military Sends 20 Lawyers to Assist
D.C.’s Office of the U.S. Attorney
Twenty attorneys from the military’s Judge Advocate General Corps are joining the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia this week.
They are part of the latest effort by the Trump administration to use the military in a takeover of local law enforcement operations in the nation’s capital.
The military attorneys normally represent the armed forces and soldiers in legal disputes. At the U.S. Attorney’s Office, they will be assigned to prosecute misdemeanor cases.
Their first week will be dedicated to training for their new role.
Local opposition is rising against the increasing presence of the military in daily affairs of Washington.
A recent Washington Post/Schar School survey showed that 79 percent of residents oppose sending in the military to buttress the police. Only 17 percent of residents supported it.
Protesters are showing their outrage at public events around the city. They often carry signs saying, “Free D.C.”
Some of them tried to shout down Vice President J.D. Vance this week at Union Station near the Capitol building when he arrived to demonstrate support for the National Guardsmen stationed there.
Part of the reason for posting 20 JAG attorneys to the U.S. Attorney’s Office appears to be mass firings targeted at prosecutors who participated in investigating President Donald Trump on allegations that he incited the Jan. 6, 2021 insurrection at the Capitol. Other U.S. attorneys resigned in protest over what they believed was political coercion from the Trump administration.
U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro, who heads the office, said this month during an interview on Fox News that she was understaffed.
She said she was short by “90 prosecutors, 60 investigators and paralegals.” She added, “If you want a job in the nation’s capital in the premier office, the largest U.S. attorney’s office, contact me.”
The Washington office of the U.S. attorney is unique in the way it combines prosecutions in U.S. District Court with local prosecutions in District of Columbia Superior Court. All other U.S. attorneys’ offices nationwide operate only in federal court.
She explained the appointment of the JAG attorneys this week in a statement saying, “The assignment of 20 JAGs to my office is further proof of President Trump’s commitment to fighting and reducing crime in the District.”
Trump said when he announced on Aug. 11 that he was federalizing Washington’s law enforcement that crime in the city was some of the worst in the nation. Local officials dispute his claim.
For more information, contact The Legal Forum (www.legal-forum.net) at email: tramstack@gmail.com or phone: 202-479-7240.
Justice Dept. Investigates D.C. Police
For Manipulating Crime Statistics
The Justice Department is investigating whether Washington, D.C., police faked their recent statistics to make it appear crime is lower than its actual rate.
The investigation was revealed last week in a social media post by President Donald Trump.
The Trump administration claims crime in the nation's capital is out of control, which is why the president called in the National Guard to assist local and federal police.
Police statistics show all violent crime has fallen 27 percent so far this year to the lowest rate in 30 years. Homicides are reportedly down 11 percent.
The investigation of crime statistics is being overseen by U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro. She has not said what kind of criminal charges she might pursue.
It follows other examples of President Donald Trump's outrage when records and statistics conflicted with his political statements.
This month he fired the head of the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics after her agency reported that job growth in July fell below expectations. He also famously disputed his 2020 presidential election loss by saying the vote count resulted from fraud.
On Monday, Trump posted a message on social media saying, “D.C. gave Fake Crime numbers in order to create a false illusion of safety. This is a very bad and dangerous thing to do, and they are under serious investigation for so doing!”
He credited his decision to call out the National Guard as resolving Washington’s crime problems.
“Until 4 days ago, Washington, D.C., was the most unsafe ‘city’ in the United States, and perhaps the World,” Trump’s post said. “Now, in just a short period of time, it is perhaps the safest, and getting better every single hour!”
Washington Mayor Muriel Bowser said she has found no abnormalities in the way local crime statistics are gathered.
She said at a press conference this week that Trump’s assertions of high crime hide his true motives of a federal takeover of Washington. She also urged the president to be more honest.
“We don’t have any authority over the D.C. guard or any other guards," Bowser said. "But I think it is, kind of makes the point that this is not about D.C. crime."
She described the “surge in federal law enforcement” as “commandeering” local police.
“This doesn’t make sense,” she said about the hundreds of National Guard troops that are posted near national monuments and critical government sites.
Washington has about 3,100 police officers. Bowser said about 500 more are needed but that the shortage does not justify calling in the National Guard.
FBI and Washington Metropolitan Police Department statistics show the city’s crime rate follows trends similar to other cities. Violent crime rose in most places during the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 through 2022. It has fallen since then.
Violent crime, such as aggravated assault, rape and robbery, decreased by an average of 13 percent nationwide from 2023 to 2024, according to FBI data. Some of the biggest decreases were reported in Chicago, Los Angeles and Philadelphia.
The Trump administration is citing an incident with a police commander in May to help prove Washington police are covering up the city’s true crime rate.
Metropolitan Police commander Michael Pulliam was placed on administrative leave after allegedly altering crime statistics.
Reports of the personnel action against Pulliam prompted the local chapter of the Fraternal Order of Police to say manipulating statistics to downplay crime was a common problem. The police union said supervisors would frequently tell officers to downgrade serious felony reports to lesser offenses.
For more information, contact The Legal Forum (www.legal-forum.net) at email: tramstack@gmail.com or phone: 202-479-7240.
Dominion Voting Machines Wins $67 Million
In Defamation Lawsuit Against Newsmax
Voting machine company Dominion Voting Systems will be paid $67 million by conservative media outlet Newsmax to settle a defamation lawsuit over the 2020 election, according to a new Securities and Exchange Commission filing.
Newsmax reported that Dominion's voting machines were rigged to favor Joe Biden in his presidential victory over Donald Trump.
Dominion's lawsuit said the cable channel "manufactured" lies to support Trump's Stop the Steal rhetoric about the election.
Newsmax defended itself by saying it reported a newsworthy event that consisted primarily of quoting public figures.
Dominion's original claim was for $1.6 billion. The lawsuit was scheduled to go to trial in a Delaware court in the fall.
Newsmax admitted no wrongdoing in the settlement. It blamed Superior Court Judge Eric M. Davis for leaving it no better alternative than to settle.
Newsmax said the judge’s pretrial rulings that “strongly favored” Dominion showed the media company would not receive a fair trial.
Among the rulings, the judge determined that Newsmax defamed Dominion in each of the 19 alleged statements that would have been presented at trial.
Newsmax said in a statement the ruling deprived the company “of any ability to present a full defense to the serious claims made before a jury…”
"Newsmax believed it was critically important for the American people to hear both sides of the election disputes that arose in 2020," the Newsmax statement said. "We stand by our coverage as fair, balanced, and conducted within professional standards of journalism."
The judge’s actions “represent a direct attack on free speech and a free press," Newsmax said.
The company said in its Aug. 15 Securities and Exchange Commission filing that it plans to make the $67 million payment in three installments by Jan. 15, 2027.
A Dominion statement said, “We are pleased to have settled this matter.”
Dominion said in its lawsuit filed in 2021 that Newsmax knowingly broadcast conspiracy theories that falsely accused the voting machine company of election fraud and vote rigging.
The evidence it planned to present at trial consisted mostly of 18 statements on television and another in a social media post. The statements falsely claimed Dominion’s software changed vote counts in Biden’s favor.
Newsmax also broadcast claims that originated with the Trump campaign that Dominion had ties to a Venezuelan company and paid kickbacks to government officials.
The judge in the case decided in April to let the case go to trial after ruling that Dominion presented “clear and convincing evidence” that Newmax’s statements were false and defamatory.
A jury was supposed to decide whether Newsmax knew the statements were false and that they were likely to hurt Dominion’s business.
The 2020 presidential campaign ended five years ago but some of the litigation that arose from Trump’s Stop the Steal rhetoric continues.
Voting machine company Smartmatic claims $2.7 billion in damages from Fox News in a lawsuit headed toward a civil trial in New York. So far, Fox News says it will defend itself at trial against damages claims it says are “intended to chill First Amendment freedoms.”
Fox News agreed to pay Dominion $787.5 million in a separate defamation case settled in April 2023. Newsmax settled a Smartmatic lawsuit last September for $40 million.
The lawsuit settled this month is U.S. Dominion Inc. et al. v. Newsmax Media Inc. in the Superior Court of the State of Delaware.
For more information, contact The Legal Forum (www.legal-forum.net) at email: tramstack@gmail.com or phone: 202-479-7240.
U.S. Attorney Pirro Halts Prosecutions
For Carrying Rifles and Shotguns
The U.S. Attorney’s Office for Washington, D.C., acknowledged this month that it has stopped prosecuting lawful gun owners who carry rifles or shotguns in public.
U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro directed her staff to halt the prosecutions in an email. She said they would violate recent U.S Supreme Court rulings on Second Amendment rights.
Pirro’s policy appears to conflict with a District of Columbia gun control law.
The law makes it a felony to carry rifles or shotguns outside the owners’ homes or places of business without permits. D.C. officials rarely grant the permits.
Pirro said enforcing the D.C. ban on rifles and shotguns would violate Supreme Court decisions in two cases. They are District of Columbia v. Heller in 2008 and New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen in 2022.
In the Heller case, the Supreme Court said private citizens have the right under the Second Amendment to possess ordinary guns and use them for self-defense in their homes.
In the New York State Rifle & Pistol Association case, the Supreme Court ruled that a state gun control law was unconstitutional because it required applicants for licenses to carry concealed pistols to prove a "proper cause" or a special need different from the general public before their licenses would be granted. In other words, lawful gun owners could carry concealed pistols without special licenses, the court said.
Pirro said her office would continue to prosecute felons who possess firearms, including rifles, shotguns or guns with large capacity magazines.
The D.C. law partially overridden by Pirro’s policy has been used to prosecute high profile cases.
Among them was the 2016 Pizzagate shooting when a North Carolina man said he was outraged by reports that a child sex trafficking ring was operating out of the downtown Comet Ping Pong restaurant. The man fired several rounds from an AR-15 rifle inside the restaurant. No one was injured and the sex trafficking allegations were false.
For more information, contact The Legal Forum (www.legal-forum.net) at email: tramstack@gmail.com or phone: 202-479-7240.
D.C. Court of Appeals Dismisses Lawsuit
Seeking to Block Cannabis Dispensary
The District of Columbia Court of Appeals is allowing a cannabis dispensary to operate near public schools despite a legal challenge from parents and school administrators.
The court’s decision this month to dismiss a lawsuit filed by parents and school officials said they lacked standing to sue.
The case creates another precedent in Washington’s ongoing struggle to make medical cannabis available legally while also addressing community concerns.
D.C. law authorizes only Advisory Neighborhood Commissions to sue to block the dispensaries, the court said. The local ANC declined to join the lawsuit that would have prevented Green Theory LLC from operating its dispensary at 4828 MacArthur Boulevard NW.
Green Theory has a permit that was granted by D.C.’s Alcoholic Beverage and Cannabis Board. The ABCA also could remove the permit but refused to do so when requested by the parents and school administrators who called themselves the Wolverton Group.
The Wolverton group argued in their lawsuit that they were exercising their right to protect their children from harmful influences by asking the court to intervene. They sought a court order saying no cannabis dispensary should be located within 1,000 feet of a school.
The appellate court’s ruling said it could override an agency’s decision only when a statute, regulation or constitutional right requires a trial-type hearing.
“Absent a timely protest from an ANC, no regulation, statute, or constitutional mandate required the Board to hold a trial-type hearing before issuing Green Theory’s medical cannabis retailer license,” the court’s ruling said.
The Wolverton group also said the Alcoholic Beverage and Cannabis Board decision to grant Green Theory a permit violated the Constitution’s due process and equal protection guarantees.
The appeals court disagreed, writing that “[w]hile parents have a ‘constitutionally recognized ‘fundamental right . . . to make decisions concerning the care, custody and control of their children,’ that right is not implicated by the Board’s discrete licensing decisions for businesses near their children’s schools.”
The court said D.C. Superior Court might be a better forum for the Wolverton group’s private lawsuit rather than a review of an agency action by the appellate court.
For more information, contact The Legal Forum (www.legal-forum.net) at email: tramstack@gmail.com or phone: 202-479-7240.