California
San Diego sues federal agencies over razor wire fencing on city land
The city of San Diego is suing the federal government for building razor wire fencing on city land near the Mexican border, arguing that the fence damages sensitive habitat and trespasses on city property.
The lawsuit, filed with the federal Southern District Court on Jan. 5, names the Department of Homeland Security and Department of Defense, along with Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and other federal officials. It argues that U.S. Marines illegally entered city land in December and built fences in Marron Valley, east of Otay Mountain.
The fences caused “irreparable harm to protected plant and wildlife habitats, riparian areas, and vernal pools” the city argued, saying the fence blocks city access to the site and jeopardizes conservation programs designed to protect that habitat. The city is asking the court to halt any more fence construction and declare the city’s right to ownership and use of the land.
“The City of San Diego will not allow federal agencies to disregard the law and damage city property,” City Attorney Heather Ferbert said in a statement. “We are taking decisive action to protect sensitive habitats, uphold environmental commitments, and ensure that the rights and resources of our community are respected.”
The Department of Defense declined to comment, citing pending litigation. The Department of Homeland Security didn’t respond to questions from CalMatters, and neither agency has filed responses to the lawsuit yet.
The case represents a new front in California’s battle with the Trump administration over immigration enforcement and the role of federal power versus state and local authority.
The most high-profile conflicts have concerned the use of National Guard and active duty military in California cities. In December a federal judge ordered the National Guard to leave Los Angeles and return to Gov. Gavin Newsom’s control. Shortly afterward the Supreme Court blocked deployment of the National Guard in Chicago, effectively shutting down the administration’s appeals against California.
In this case the fight is over wildlands instead of urban neighborhoods.
California
Stanford settles wrongful death suit with Katie Meyer’s family, announces mental health initiative
(AP) — Stanford and the family of Katie Meyer have settled a wrongful death lawsuit filed against the university following the star soccer player’s suicide in 2022.
When she died, the 22-year-old Meyer was distraught over the prospect of disciplinary action from the university for “defending a teammate on campus over an incident,” her father, Steve Meyer, told NBC’s “Today” soon after her death.
The lawsuit, which was filed in Santa Clara County (California) Superior Court in November 2022, said that on the night of her death, Stanford “negligently and recklessly” sent her the formal disciplinary notice that “contained threatening language regarding sanctions and potential removal from the university.”
The university and the family announced the resolution this week in a joint statement, which did not address a monetary settlement. It said Stanford and Meyer’s family will work together to launch an initiative focused on the mental health and well-being of student-athletes at the Wu Tsai Human Performance Alliance.
Stanford also will establish the Katie Meyer Leadership Award to recognize an exceptional student-athlete each year. The statement said more information on the award and the mental health initiative will be released later.
The school also will adopt the principles of Katie Meyer’s Law to support students facing Stanford’s disciplinary process. Katie Meyer’s Law, which was signed into law in 2024 by California Gov. Gavin Newsom, allows students in disciplinary proceedings at public colleges and universities in the state to choose an adviser to help them navigate the process.
In addition, the No. 19 jersey that Meyer wore at Stanford will be retired to honor her accomplishments with the soccer team. Meyer, who was a goalie and team captain, made two critical saves to lead the Cardinals to a win over North Carolina in the 2019 national championship game.
Washington
Families of 2 men killed in boat strike sue Trump administration over attack they call ‘unlawful’
WASHINGTON (AP) — Families of two Trinidadian nationals killed in a Trump administration boat strike last October sued the federal government on Tuesday, calling the attack a war crime and part of an “unprecedented and manifestly unlawful U.S. military campaign.”
The lawsuit is thought to be the first wrongful death case arising from the three dozen strikes that the administration has launched since September on boats in the Caribbean Sea and eastern Pacific Ocean. The complaint will test the legal justification of the Trump administration attacks; government officials have defended them as necessary to stem the flow of drugs into the United States, but many legal experts say they amount to a brazen violation of the laws of armed conflict.
The complaint echoes many of the frequently articulated concerns about the boat strikes, noting for instance that they have been carried out without congressional authorization and at a time when there is no military conflict between the United States and drug cartels that under the laws of war could justify the lethal attacks.
“These premeditated and intentional killings lack any plausible legal justification. Thus, they were simply murders, ordered by individuals at the highest levels of government and obeyed by military officers in the chain of command,” the lawsuit says.
White House deputy press secretary Anna Kelly said in a statement that the strike “was conducted against designated narcoterrorists bringing deadly poison to our shores.”
“President Trump used his lawful authority to take decisive action against the scourge of illicit narcotics that has resulted in the needless deaths of innocent Americans,” Kelly stated.
The lawsuit was filed by the mother of Chad Joseph and the sister of Rishi Samaroo, two Trinidadian nationals who were among six people killed in the Oct. 14 missile strike on a boat traveling from Venezuela to Trinidad. The men were not members of any drug cartel, the lawsuit says, but had instead been fishing in the waters off the Venezuelan coast and were returning to their homes in Trinidad and Tobago.
The two had caught a ride home to Las Cuevas, a fishing community where they were from, on a small boat targeted in a strike announced on Truth Social by President Donald Trump.
“These killings were wrongful because they took place outside of armed conflict and in circumstances in which Mr. Joseph and Mr. Samaroo were not engaged in activities that presented a concrete, specific, and imminent threat of death or serious physical injury, and where there were means other than lethal force that could have reasonably been employed to neutralize any such threat,” the lawsuit says.
The lawsuit is the first to challenge the legality of the boat strikes in court, according to Jen Nessel, a spokesperson for the Center for Constitutional Rights, whose lawyers are part of a team of attorneys that filed the case. Nessel said in an email that the center also has a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit seeking the release of the legal justification for the strikes.
Jeffrey Stein, a lawyer for the American Civil Liberties Union, which also filed the lawsuit, told reporters Tuesday that the lawsuit seeks compensatory and punitive damages that can be determined after a trial.
“We don’t think that it’s something that we could put a precise dollar amount on,” Stein said. “But we’re seeking damages that can go some way towards bringing justice for these really heinous abuses of power.”
The lawsuit also aims to prevent more boat strikes, Stein said, with the hope that a U.S. court rejects the Trump administration’s “frankly absurd claims about its authority to engage in these illegal strikes.”
The lawsuit was filed in federal court in Massachusetts. It cites the Death on the High Seas Act, which the lawyers say permits wrongful death cases in situations like this, as well as the Alien Tort Statute, which permits foreign nationals to sue in federal court for alleged human rights violations.
The death toll from the boat strikes is now up to at least 126 people, with the inclusion of those presumed dead after being lost at sea, the U.S. military confirmed Monday. The figure includes 116 people who were killed immediately in at least 36 attacks carried out since early September, with 10 others believed dead because searchers did not locate them following a strike.
New York
Top aide to former NYC mayor took a bribe of diamond earrings, prosecutors say
NEW YORK (AP) — Prosecutors have accused a top aide to former New York City Mayor Eric Adams of accepting diamond earrings from two real estate developers, then pressuring city regulators to expedite their construction projects, despite safety concerns.
In court papers filed Tuesday, prosecutors in Manhattan offered new details about one of several bribery schemes they say was carried out by Ingrid Lewis-Martin, a close confidant of Adams who once served as the second-most powerful person in city government.
She resigned in late 2024 shortly before she and her son were charged with raking in over $100,000 in bribes from the two developers, Raizada Vaid and Mayank Dwivedi. All four have pleaded not guilty.
Lewis-Martin was then hit with a separate set of bribery charges in August, alleging she traded political favors — including nixing a planned bike lane and steering shelter contracts toward a favored developer — for cash, home renovations and even a speaking role on the TV show “Godfather of Harlem.” She has also pleaded not guilty to those allegations.
An attorney for Lewis-Martin has maintained that she was only helping her constituents cut through red tape.
The latest filing expands on the initial charges brought against Lewis-Martin and her son, Glenn D. Martin II, who performs under the stage name DJ Suave Luciano.
Shortly after meeting with Vaid and Dwivedi in 2022, Lewis-Martin received a set of 2-carat diamond earrings worth around $3,000 from the developers, according to the new court filing.
Lewis-Martin then pressured city regulators to speed up approvals for the developers’ projects, prosecutors allege. In one case, she urged the acting commissioner of the Department of Buildings to approve the proposed renovation of a Manhattan hotel owned by Vaid, despite “legitimate safety concerns” raised by building inspectors, prosecutors said.
After city regulators agreed to expedite the application, Lewis-Martin texted her son indicating that Vaid would have him “completely covered. You(r) fashion line is 100 percent,” according to the court filing. Vaid also promised to help Martin II open a Chick-fil-A franchise, prosecutors said.
In an email, an attorney for Lewis-Martin, Arthur Aidala, criticized the length of the filing, without addressing its substance.
“We look forward to submitting our robust reply to the prosecutor’s desperate 170 page answer to our motion to dismiss,” Aidala said. “It is the longest answer to a motion we have ever seen and that speaks volumes about their insecurity in their case.”
The case against Lewis-Martin, brought by Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, first emerged amid a period of overlapping scandals for the Adams’ administration. It is unrelated to Adams’ own indictment on federal corruption charges, which was dismissed last year by the Justice Department. Adams is not accused of any wrongdoing in Lewis-Martin’s case.
San Diego sues federal agencies over razor wire fencing on city land
The city of San Diego is suing the federal government for building razor wire fencing on city land near the Mexican border, arguing that the fence damages sensitive habitat and trespasses on city property.
The lawsuit, filed with the federal Southern District Court on Jan. 5, names the Department of Homeland Security and Department of Defense, along with Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and other federal officials. It argues that U.S. Marines illegally entered city land in December and built fences in Marron Valley, east of Otay Mountain.
The fences caused “irreparable harm to protected plant and wildlife habitats, riparian areas, and vernal pools” the city argued, saying the fence blocks city access to the site and jeopardizes conservation programs designed to protect that habitat. The city is asking the court to halt any more fence construction and declare the city’s right to ownership and use of the land.
“The City of San Diego will not allow federal agencies to disregard the law and damage city property,” City Attorney Heather Ferbert said in a statement. “We are taking decisive action to protect sensitive habitats, uphold environmental commitments, and ensure that the rights and resources of our community are respected.”
The Department of Defense declined to comment, citing pending litigation. The Department of Homeland Security didn’t respond to questions from CalMatters, and neither agency has filed responses to the lawsuit yet.
The case represents a new front in California’s battle with the Trump administration over immigration enforcement and the role of federal power versus state and local authority.
The most high-profile conflicts have concerned the use of National Guard and active duty military in California cities. In December a federal judge ordered the National Guard to leave Los Angeles and return to Gov. Gavin Newsom’s control. Shortly afterward the Supreme Court blocked deployment of the National Guard in Chicago, effectively shutting down the administration’s appeals against California.
In this case the fight is over wildlands instead of urban neighborhoods.
California
Stanford settles wrongful death suit with Katie Meyer’s family, announces mental health initiative
(AP) — Stanford and the family of Katie Meyer have settled a wrongful death lawsuit filed against the university following the star soccer player’s suicide in 2022.
When she died, the 22-year-old Meyer was distraught over the prospect of disciplinary action from the university for “defending a teammate on campus over an incident,” her father, Steve Meyer, told NBC’s “Today” soon after her death.
The lawsuit, which was filed in Santa Clara County (California) Superior Court in November 2022, said that on the night of her death, Stanford “negligently and recklessly” sent her the formal disciplinary notice that “contained threatening language regarding sanctions and potential removal from the university.”
The university and the family announced the resolution this week in a joint statement, which did not address a monetary settlement. It said Stanford and Meyer’s family will work together to launch an initiative focused on the mental health and well-being of student-athletes at the Wu Tsai Human Performance Alliance.
Stanford also will establish the Katie Meyer Leadership Award to recognize an exceptional student-athlete each year. The statement said more information on the award and the mental health initiative will be released later.
The school also will adopt the principles of Katie Meyer’s Law to support students facing Stanford’s disciplinary process. Katie Meyer’s Law, which was signed into law in 2024 by California Gov. Gavin Newsom, allows students in disciplinary proceedings at public colleges and universities in the state to choose an adviser to help them navigate the process.
In addition, the No. 19 jersey that Meyer wore at Stanford will be retired to honor her accomplishments with the soccer team. Meyer, who was a goalie and team captain, made two critical saves to lead the Cardinals to a win over North Carolina in the 2019 national championship game.
Washington
Families of 2 men killed in boat strike sue Trump administration over attack they call ‘unlawful’
WASHINGTON (AP) — Families of two Trinidadian nationals killed in a Trump administration boat strike last October sued the federal government on Tuesday, calling the attack a war crime and part of an “unprecedented and manifestly unlawful U.S. military campaign.”
The lawsuit is thought to be the first wrongful death case arising from the three dozen strikes that the administration has launched since September on boats in the Caribbean Sea and eastern Pacific Ocean. The complaint will test the legal justification of the Trump administration attacks; government officials have defended them as necessary to stem the flow of drugs into the United States, but many legal experts say they amount to a brazen violation of the laws of armed conflict.
The complaint echoes many of the frequently articulated concerns about the boat strikes, noting for instance that they have been carried out without congressional authorization and at a time when there is no military conflict between the United States and drug cartels that under the laws of war could justify the lethal attacks.
“These premeditated and intentional killings lack any plausible legal justification. Thus, they were simply murders, ordered by individuals at the highest levels of government and obeyed by military officers in the chain of command,” the lawsuit says.
White House deputy press secretary Anna Kelly said in a statement that the strike “was conducted against designated narcoterrorists bringing deadly poison to our shores.”
“President Trump used his lawful authority to take decisive action against the scourge of illicit narcotics that has resulted in the needless deaths of innocent Americans,” Kelly stated.
The lawsuit was filed by the mother of Chad Joseph and the sister of Rishi Samaroo, two Trinidadian nationals who were among six people killed in the Oct. 14 missile strike on a boat traveling from Venezuela to Trinidad. The men were not members of any drug cartel, the lawsuit says, but had instead been fishing in the waters off the Venezuelan coast and were returning to their homes in Trinidad and Tobago.
The two had caught a ride home to Las Cuevas, a fishing community where they were from, on a small boat targeted in a strike announced on Truth Social by President Donald Trump.
“These killings were wrongful because they took place outside of armed conflict and in circumstances in which Mr. Joseph and Mr. Samaroo were not engaged in activities that presented a concrete, specific, and imminent threat of death or serious physical injury, and where there were means other than lethal force that could have reasonably been employed to neutralize any such threat,” the lawsuit says.
The lawsuit is the first to challenge the legality of the boat strikes in court, according to Jen Nessel, a spokesperson for the Center for Constitutional Rights, whose lawyers are part of a team of attorneys that filed the case. Nessel said in an email that the center also has a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit seeking the release of the legal justification for the strikes.
Jeffrey Stein, a lawyer for the American Civil Liberties Union, which also filed the lawsuit, told reporters Tuesday that the lawsuit seeks compensatory and punitive damages that can be determined after a trial.
“We don’t think that it’s something that we could put a precise dollar amount on,” Stein said. “But we’re seeking damages that can go some way towards bringing justice for these really heinous abuses of power.”
The lawsuit also aims to prevent more boat strikes, Stein said, with the hope that a U.S. court rejects the Trump administration’s “frankly absurd claims about its authority to engage in these illegal strikes.”
The lawsuit was filed in federal court in Massachusetts. It cites the Death on the High Seas Act, which the lawyers say permits wrongful death cases in situations like this, as well as the Alien Tort Statute, which permits foreign nationals to sue in federal court for alleged human rights violations.
The death toll from the boat strikes is now up to at least 126 people, with the inclusion of those presumed dead after being lost at sea, the U.S. military confirmed Monday. The figure includes 116 people who were killed immediately in at least 36 attacks carried out since early September, with 10 others believed dead because searchers did not locate them following a strike.
New York
Top aide to former NYC mayor took a bribe of diamond earrings, prosecutors say
NEW YORK (AP) — Prosecutors have accused a top aide to former New York City Mayor Eric Adams of accepting diamond earrings from two real estate developers, then pressuring city regulators to expedite their construction projects, despite safety concerns.
In court papers filed Tuesday, prosecutors in Manhattan offered new details about one of several bribery schemes they say was carried out by Ingrid Lewis-Martin, a close confidant of Adams who once served as the second-most powerful person in city government.
She resigned in late 2024 shortly before she and her son were charged with raking in over $100,000 in bribes from the two developers, Raizada Vaid and Mayank Dwivedi. All four have pleaded not guilty.
Lewis-Martin was then hit with a separate set of bribery charges in August, alleging she traded political favors — including nixing a planned bike lane and steering shelter contracts toward a favored developer — for cash, home renovations and even a speaking role on the TV show “Godfather of Harlem.” She has also pleaded not guilty to those allegations.
An attorney for Lewis-Martin has maintained that she was only helping her constituents cut through red tape.
The latest filing expands on the initial charges brought against Lewis-Martin and her son, Glenn D. Martin II, who performs under the stage name DJ Suave Luciano.
Shortly after meeting with Vaid and Dwivedi in 2022, Lewis-Martin received a set of 2-carat diamond earrings worth around $3,000 from the developers, according to the new court filing.
Lewis-Martin then pressured city regulators to speed up approvals for the developers’ projects, prosecutors allege. In one case, she urged the acting commissioner of the Department of Buildings to approve the proposed renovation of a Manhattan hotel owned by Vaid, despite “legitimate safety concerns” raised by building inspectors, prosecutors said.
After city regulators agreed to expedite the application, Lewis-Martin texted her son indicating that Vaid would have him “completely covered. You(r) fashion line is 100 percent,” according to the court filing. Vaid also promised to help Martin II open a Chick-fil-A franchise, prosecutors said.
In an email, an attorney for Lewis-Martin, Arthur Aidala, criticized the length of the filing, without addressing its substance.
“We look forward to submitting our robust reply to the prosecutor’s desperate 170 page answer to our motion to dismiss,” Aidala said. “It is the longest answer to a motion we have ever seen and that speaks volumes about their insecurity in their case.”
The case against Lewis-Martin, brought by Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, first emerged amid a period of overlapping scandals for the Adams’ administration. It is unrelated to Adams’ own indictment on federal corruption charges, which was dismissed last year by the Justice Department. Adams is not accused of any wrongdoing in Lewis-Martin’s case.
