The Justice Department has opened new investigations into Letitia James, the New York attorney general who brought a civil fraud case against President Donald Trump, US media reported Friday.The New York Times said a subpoena had been issued to James, an outspoken Trump critic, in the civil fraud case and another that her office brought against the National Rifle Association (NRA).A New York judge ordered Trump in February of last year to pay $355 million plus interest for unlawfully inflating his wealth and manipulating the value of properties to obtain favorable bank loans or insurance terms.The Times said the Justice Department was examining whether James’s office had violated Trump’s civil rights in the civil fraud suit brought against the real estate tycoon.James’s office also filed a financial mismanagement case against Trump ally Wayne LaPierre, which saw the senior NRA executive banned from serving in any role at the gun rights advocacy group for 10 years.A Justice Department spokeswoman declined to comment on the reports.James is also reportedly the target of a Justice Department criminal probe for allegedly falsifying records related to properties in Virginia and New York to obtain better loan terms.In a statement in April when reports emerged of the investigation, James denied any wrongdoing and said that she “will not be intimidated by bullies.”Since taking office in January, Trump has taken a number of punitive measures against his perceived enemies, stripping former officials of their security clearances and protective details, targeting law firms involved in past cases against him and pulling federal funding from universities.The FBI recently opened criminal investigations into two other prominent Trump critics, former FBI director James Comey and ex-CIA chief John Brennan, for making alleged false statements to Congress.Abbe Lowell, James’s personal lawyer, told the Times that any investigation into James over Trump’s civil fraud case is “the most blatant and desperate example of this administration carrying out the president’s political retribution campaign.””Weaponizing the Department of Justice to try to punish an elected official for doing her job is an attack on the rule of law and a dangerous escalation by this administration,” Lowell said.A spokesperson for James said “any weaponization of the justice system should disturb every American.”We stand strongly behind our successful litigation against the Trump Organization and the National Rifle Association,” the spokesperson said, “and we will continue to stand up for New Yorkers’ rights.”

For US President Donald Trump, it’s up to Israel to decide what to do next in Gaza — meaning Washington is offering quiet support for its ally’s plans to expand the offensive in the war-wracked Palestinian territory.While numerous European and Arab capitals urged Benjamin Netanyahu on Friday to reconsider his decision to “take control” of Gaza City, Trump this week has effectively given the Israeli prime minister free rein — even if it means pushback from the international community. After nearly two years of devastating conflict, Israel’s security cabinet approved Netanyahu’s plan to “defeat” Hamas, which triggered the war with its October 7, 2023 attack on southern Israel.Before Israel’s announcement, when asked if he could support such a plan, Trump told reporters at the White House on Tuesday that he was focused on securing an increase in the flow of humanitarian aid into Gaza to help starving Palestinians.”As far as the rest of it, I really, I really can’t say — that’s going to be pretty much up to Israel,” Trump said.Then on Thursday, Secretary of State Marco Rubio echoed that position, telling Catholic TV network EWTN, “Ultimately, what Israel needs to do for Israel’s security will be determined by Israel.”Trump and Rubio’s comments speak volumes about the US strategy: since Israel-Hamas talks on a ceasefire in Gaza fell apart, Washington has broadly embraced Israel’s views following US envoy Steve Witkoff’s visit last week.Details of Witkoff’s meeting with Netanyahu have not been made public, but it is hard to imagine that Trump’s emissary was not briefed on Israel’s plans.While Washington has amped up the pressure on Israel to allow more aid into the Gaza Strip, it has also insisted that all Israeli hostages — dead or alive — be freed from Hamas captivity and the complete annihilation of the militant group.”Our goals are very clear,” US Vice President JD Vance said Friday during talks with British Foreign Secretary David Lammy.”We want to make it so that Hamas cannot attack innocent Israeli civilians ever again, and we think that has to come through the eradication of Hamas.”Since returning to the White House in January, Trump has offered Israel ironclad support, even while pushing for better humanitarian support.He seemed to throw in the towel on securing a ceasefire following repeated failed efforts at mediation, especially after talks crumbled late last month in Doha when Hamas refused a deal to free the hostages.Hamas still has 49 Israeli hostages abducted during the October 2023 attack, 27 of whom are presumed dead.- Capitulation -The US ambassador to Israel, Mike Huckabee — who is prone to making eyebrow-raising statements — slammed all criticism of Israel’s plans for Gaza.”So Israel is expected to surrender to Hamas & feed them even though Israeli hostages are being starved?” Huckabee wrote on social media.”Did UK surrender to Nazis and drop food to them?” he said in response to British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, who called Netanyahu’s approach “wrong.”In his interview with EWTN, Rubio said “as long as Hamas exists, particularly exists as an armed organization, there will never be peace in Gaza.”Rubio said he understood why the famine facing Palestinians in the territory was getting “almost all the media coverage” but lamented what he called a lack of attention to the plight of the remaining Israeli hostages.In recent weeks, Washington has sharply criticized international initiatives to formally recognize a Palestinian state, led notably by French President Emmanuel Macron, warning that it emboldens Hamas not to give up.

A US federal appeals court on Friday dismissed a contempt finding against President Donald Trump’s administration over its summary deportation of alleged Venezuelan gang members to El Salvador.The 2-1 decision by the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit overturns a ruling by a federal district judge that there was probable cause to find officials in contempt of court over the deportation flights.The case stems from Trump’s use in March of the obscure 1798 Alien Enemies Act (AEA) to deport more than 200 alleged Tren de Aragua gang members to a notorious prison in El Salvador.District Judge James Boasberg verbally ordered a halt to the deportation flights and for the planes to be turned around but it did not happen, leading to his criminal contempt inquiry.The two Trump appointees on the appeals court panel ruled that Boasberg had overstepped his authority while the third judge, an appointee of former Democratic president Barack Obama, dissented.Judge Neomi Rao, one of the Trump appointees, said Boasberg’s finding was an “abuse of the contempt power” and an “intrusion on the President’s foreign affairs authority.””The order forces a coequal branch to choose between capitulating to an unlawful judicial order and subjecting its officials to a dubious prosecution,” Rao wrote.In her dissent, Judge Nina Pillard, the Obama appointee, said “the rule of law depends on obedience to judicial orders.””Our system of courts cannot long endure if disappointed litigants defy court orders with impunity rather than legally challenge them,” Pillard said. “That is why willful disobedience of a court order is punishable as criminal contempt.”Attorney General Pam Bondi welcomed the decision as a “major victory” for the Trump administration and its use of the AEA “to deport illegal alien terrorists.””The DC Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed what we’ve argued for months: Judge Boasberg’s attempt to sanction the government for deporting criminal-alien terrorists was a ‘clear abuse of discretion’ — failed judicial overreach at its worst,” Bondi said.The White House has been sharply critical of district courts that have blocked some of the president’s executive actions, and Trump called in March for Boasberg to be impeached.That earned the Republican president a rare public rebuke from Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts.”For more than two centuries, it has been established that impeachment is not an appropriate response to disagreement concerning a judicial decision,” Roberts said in a statement. “The normal appellate review process exists for that purpose.”