Across the US, judges are fuming. The source of their ire: Donald Trump and his administration.
In frank, unapologetic and sometimes openly angry language, the American judiciary is pushing back at what it says is undemocratic and dangerous behaviour by Trump, his agents and federal prosecutors.
And in the lead-up to next month’s midterm elections, those accusations have escalated dramatically.
How weight-loss jabs boom is putting waste workers at risk
The rising popularity of injectable weight-loss drugs like Mounjaro and Wegovy means more used needles are turning up at recycling centres – and their bosses have warned this is putting workers at risk of infection and serious injury.
What is the issue?
Used needles should always disposed of through a dedicated clinical waste service.
But a large number of weight-loss needles are being dumped in household bins, the BBC reports.
Waste site workers are regularly being pricked by them, putting their health at risk.
What should you do to help?
- Weight-loss drug users have been urged to speak to their GPs or pharmacies about obtaining a sharps bin.
- Whatever you do, never put a sharps container or loose needles in your recycling bin.
4 min read
Recycling boss voices concern
There are safe disposal routes for needles but the worst place to put them is in your recycling. It ends up in facilities like ours where it will be touched by people and that’s inherently unsafe
Richard Dobbs, managing director of Sherborne Recycling
Poundland on brink of administration – what we know
Poundland has filed to appoint administrators, threatening the future of around 12,000 workers.
Court filings show that the retailer filed a notice of intention to appoint administrators on Thursday, which will give the business 10 working days of breathing space from creditors to secure a potential rescue deal.
Despite enormous efforts it has not been possible to identify an acceptable offer for the business as a whole. The process has however attracted several established retail operators who have made formal offers. Collectively these cover a significant part of the business.
Barry willams, Poundland’s managing director
What you need to know
- Advisers are still in talks with parties interested in buying the brand and swathes of stores.
- Poundland stressed that all its stores remain open and trading as normal despite the insolvency process.
- It comes after owner Gordon Brothers rejected a takeover offer from Irish real estate firm Martin Property Group, which management named as their preferred bidder earlier this month.
3 min read
A closer look at the detail
- Gordon Brothers – which only bought Poundland last year for £1 – launched a sale process for the retailer at the start of September.
- Poundland currently runs around 600 stores across the UK.
- Wilko and The Range owner CDS Superstores, Poundstretcher owner Fortress and TG Jones owner Modella are all understood to be interested in buying parts of the Poundland business.
- However, deals are unlikely to include all Poundland stores and some jobs are likely to be affected.
Girl, 8, injured in wolf attack at German wildlife park
An eight-year-old girl has been left seriously injured after being attacked by a wolf at a wildlife park in Germany.
What happened?
- The girl, who has not been named, was attacked at the Johannismühle wildlife park near Berlin.
- The facility had been holding a special event for children at the time of the incident, the Associated Press reported.
3 min read
What do we know?
- The girl was attacked before the park opened on Wednesday, German media reports.
- She was rushed to hospital by helicopter after the incident.
- The park has been temporarily closed and is set to reopen on 2 November.
- Johannismühle’s website states it offers small group tours where there is an opportunity to “feed wolves”.
- There are no reports of anyone else being injured.
The background
The news comes after William Chapman, 24, was fatally mauled by a tiger at the Yorkshire Wildlife Park earlier this month.
Senior coroner Nicola Mundy said Chapman had a history of mental illness, a diagnosis of schizophrenia and had suffered previous bouts of psychosis.
3 min read
On Wednesday Judge David Carter, in California’s district court, accused Trump of acting like “a sovereign”.
The Trump administration, via the Department of Justice (DOJ) has been seeking an emergency court order to segregate about 20,000 potential ballots in the midterm elections, which it claimed were sent to “likely noncitizens”.
In a blistering 26-page ruling rejecting the suit Carter said the case was “about the right of every American citizen to vote in a free and fair election”.
“Never before in American history has the federal government, on the eve of an election,
sought to coerce a state and local government to abandon their own Constitutional elections
procedures and bend to the will of the Executive Branch,” Carter wrote.
“In bringing this lawsuit, the Executive would have this Court believe that it reigns as a sole sovereign.
“If [the government’s] last-minute request for relief were granted, either party could create chaos for their own political purposes to disrupt the election process. Over 20,000 registered Californians would potentially lose the right that generations of Americans have fought to preserve.”
Carter said it wasn’t an isolated case: the DOJ has filed at least 31 lawsuits in federal district courts across the country seeking to decide who can or cannot vote according to its own lists of eligible voters.
“The DOJ’s actions are indicative of a broad, ongoing pattern of attempted election interference by federal officials,” the judge said.
He also ordered the DOJ to stop threatening officials who do not comply with its wishes.
“Constitutional rights and our democracy are at stake,” he wrote. “If the Executive can discount votes and threaten an ongoing election due to unproven allegations, then our democracy is in danger.”
The DOJ, in a statement, said it was “following the facts and the law, not anyone’s political timetable.”
‘A sideshow on top of a sideshow’
On Tuesday a federal judge scolded the DOJ for mishandling a criminal case against two former FBI officials, regarding their investigation of a laptop linked to Hunter Biden, the son of former president Joe Biden.
An agent confessed in court that FBI director Kash Patel ordered the case to be launched after a July speech from Trump rehashing old complaints about election interference.
“I had concerns that this would be political,” the agent testified.
Magistrate Zia Faruqui rejected an amended criminal complaint filed by the DOJ, which had not been signed off by a judge to confirm there was “probable cause” to believe a crime had been committed.
“Everything is a little sideshow on top of a sideshow,” Faruqui complained.
The DOJ is also accused of political motivations for making a fresh attempt to prosecute former FBI director James Comey, as well as a former White House staffer who testified against Trump at an investigation into the Capitol Hill riot in January 2021, both this week.
Trump’s plan to bulldoze a public golf course in Washington DC and replace it with a carbon copy of one of his resorts has met stiff resistance from conservationists.
Ana Reyes, a district court judge in DC, has been overseeing the case, and rounded on the government when it started cutting down trees on the course while it was still being litigated.
She was especially bemused by government lawyers insisting there was no official plan or decision to remodel the course, despite the president’s repeated social media posts on the subject that conclusively confirmed it was happening.
In a quixotic ruling on Monday, Reyes’ frustration boiled over.
“Rarely, if ever, has the United States Department of Justice urged a federal court not to
believe the sitting President,” her written decision began. “And yet, here we are.
This started as a case about golf. That good walk spoiled. But it has become much more.”
Much of her 70-page ruling concerned the separation of powers between the courts and the government, in which she asserted her power to check Trump’s overreach – accusing the administration of trying to “shield itself from accountability”.
“As the Founders intended and as early Supreme Court precedent confirms, the executive branch may not act free from any judicial oversight,” she said. “The separation of powers is not a talismanic incantation that permits the Executive to run amok, unchecked.”
She concluded: “The Court earlier stated, ‘I am not the Lorax. I do not speak for the trees.’ The Court
still does not speak for the trees. It speaks only for the rule of law.”
The judgement drew the attention of Trump, who responded on social media that the government will hold Reyes herself “fully responsible for anybody who is hurt, or killed, on this very dangerous, dilapidated, and unsightly Golf Course. GOD BLESS AMERICA!”.
Under pressure from the administration, prosecutors are starting to cut corners or even lie, judges claim. In July published a review of hundreds of cases in which judges have criticised the actions of federal prosecutors since Trump’s re-election.
They found that, increasingly, judges could not rely on a legal principle called “the presumption of regularity”: the assumption that the government has done its job properly and in good faith.
“Judges simply don’t believe the representations that are being made by United States attorneys, assistant United States attorneys and the like,” former federal judge John E. Jones told ProPublica. “We’ve never seen anything close to this.”
Examples found by ProPublica include:
A similar review, by CNN, found 77 rulings by dozens of federal judges who described the government’s actions using language such as: “squalid,” “irrational,” and “shocking not only to judges, but to the intuitive sense of liberty that Americans far removed from courthouses still hold dear.”
The most common criticism was abuse of power by the government.