California
Judge bars immigration arrests at U.S. courthouses
A judge on Tuesday barred the federal government from making arrests at immigration courts, ordering an end to a practice that took hold shortly after President Donald Trump took office last year.
The Trump administration’s reversal of long-standing policy against arrests at immigration court resulted “not from merely unreasoned decision-making but a complete lack of decision-making,” wrote U.S. District Judge Casey Pitts of San Francisco.
Authorities failed to address the “chilling effect” of arrests on whether people attend court hearings.
“For 80 years, Congress has commanded federal agencies to think before they act,” wrote Pitts, referring to the Administrative Procedure Act, a 1946 law that requires federal agencies to justify its actions. That law, he wrote, “does not require an agency to make the choice that a reviewing court might deem preferable. But it demands that an agency at least provide sound reasons for following its chosen course.”
The ruling is the second setback for courthouse arrests since May when a federal judge in New York barred them at immigration courts. That order applied only in New York, while the latest decision invalidated the policy nationwide.
James Percival, the U.S. Homeland Security Department’s general counsel, criticized the ruling as an exercise in judicial overreach.
“When a judge sentences a defendant, the defendant is taken into custody. If an alien is ordered removed by an immigration judge, the same should happen. A district judge ordering otherwise is naked judicial activism in service of an anti-American, open borders agenda,” Percival wrote online.
After Trump took office, hearings across the country often ended with cases being dismissed by the government, setting the stage for plainclothes agents to make arrests in hallways in coordination with attorneys from the Department of Homeland Security.
Pitts, who was appointed by President Joe Biden, faulted the administration for carrying out the arrests and for holding people in nearby cells for longer than a prescribed 12-hour limit.
Switzerland
Landmark legal win compensates pregnant soccer player who lost contract
LAUSANNE, Switzerland (AP) — In a landmark legal win for female soccer players, sport’s highest court has awarded Maja Göthberg salary compensation from Lazio Women after the Italian club ended contract talks when it knew she was pregnant.
The Court of Arbitration for Sport ordered Lazio to pay Göthberg more than 70,000 euros ($79,000) in salary compensation and “infringement of her personality rights” including 5% interest for the past two years, in a verdict published Wednesday by the global players’ union FIFPRO.
The former Sweden youth international took her appeal to CAS after losing her initial claim at a FIFA tribunal.
“The significance of this ruling goes beyond Maja Göthberg and confirms clubs cannot simply walk away from an employment relationship, even if this is not fully formalized, once they learn a player is pregnant,” FIFPRO’s Legal Director Alexandra Gomez Bruinewoud said.
Göthberg played for Lazio Women in the 2023-24 season and helped the club win promotion to the top tier.
She discovered she was pregnant and told the club during talks that summer on a new contract for a gross salary of 64,000 euros ($72,500), the CAS ruling stated.
“Immediately afterwards, the relationship broke down,” FIFPRO said. “Lazio Women later argued that no contract existed and that the player no longer wished to continue.”
Key evidence in the appeal win was WhatsApp messages sent during negotiations which showed that Lazio was aware of her pregnancy.
FIFA judges had previously decided Göthberg had “failed to establish that the parties had concluded an employment contract,” the CAS ruling said
“CAS made clear that where the essential terms have been agreed and both parties act as though a contract exists, a player is protected,” the union said. “The CAS ruling also establishes an important precedent around the confidentiality of pregnancy-related medical information.”
Colorado
Former CBI analyst pleads guilty in DNA testing scandal
GOLDEN, Colo. (AP) — A former forensic analyst with the Colorado Bureau of Investigation pleaded guilty Tuesday to four felony counts stemming from accusations that she manipulated and omitted data to speed up the DNA testing process, calling into question the validity of hundreds of criminal cases.
Yvonne “Missy” Woods entered guilty pleas to committing a cybercrime, perjury, attempting to influence a public servant and forgery. Dozens of other counts were dismissed as part of a plea agreement.
Woods was set to stand trial later this year. Instead, she’ll face between 8 and 16 years in prison when she’s sentenced in September.
Woods and her attorneys declined to talk to reporters after Tuesday’s hearing.
Authorities accused Woods, who resigned in 2023 after a decades-long career, of altering data to conceal tampering, deleting data that showed she failed to troubleshoot issues within the testing process and not thoroughly documenting tests performed in case records.
The investigation into Woods’ misconduct began in September 2023 after an intern at the bureau discovered missing information in a case that Woods handled in 2018. According to an arrest affidavit, Woods allegedly told investigators at one point that she had changed data to complete cases more quickly.
Problems with the scientist’s work were found in cases involving homicide, sexual assault, robbery and other crimes, according to a law enforcement affidavit. Prosecutors were forced to review hundreds of cases.
At least one murder conviction was overturned as a result of Woods’ misconduct. Michael Clark was released from prison in 2025 after his lawyers argued that DNA evidence in the case was mishandled by Woods, but prosecutors are seeking to retry him.
In at least two cases, both homicides, the defendants received lesser sentences under plea deals than they could have faced if they went to trial because prosecutors were afraid Woods’ involvement could lead to acquittals.
Convictions in other cases also are being challenged in courts across Colorado.
State officials have said that the response to Woods’ actions could end up costing more than $11 million.
The state investigation bureau in a statement issued Tuesday described Woods’ actions as intentional criminal fraud and said it didn’t reflect the bureau’s practices.
“This moment is not about moving on, for CBI it’s about moving forward,” said Armando Saldate, bureau director. “Today’s guilty plea is an important moment of accountability.”
The bureau said it has been making changes and is committed to following best practices used nationwide in forensic science.
New York
High school senior gets over 5 years in prison for setting homeless man on fire on NYC subway
NEW YORK (AP) — A high school senior who admitted to setting a fire that severely burned a homeless man on the subway was sentenced Tuesday in Manhattan federal court to 5 1/2 years in prison.
Judge Lewis J. Liman gave Hiram Carrero, 19, a sentence that was longer than the mandatory minimum required for arson, after the teen plead guilty in March to the charge.
The early morning fire on Dec. 1, 2025, came among a series of attacks with people set on fire on public transit across the U.S.
In a presentence submission, prosecutors requested he serve up to eight years in prison, saying Carrero’s “heinous actions” left the man, who was sleeping at the time, critically injured and with permanent extensive scarring and disfigurement.
During his guilty plea, Carrero admitted that he intentionally ignited a piece of paper that harmed the man.
In court papers, prosecutors said Carrero tried to kill “a sleeping, homeless man by burning him alive and leaving him trapped on a moving subway car.”
They said the man’s life was saved only because emergency personnel reached him quickly after a “mercifully short trip” from Penn Station at 34th Street to Times Square.
The crime, prosecutors said, was “separated from murder by mere chance,” and they were critical of his explanation that he had been drinking and smoked marijuana that day.
In seeking leniency for her client, defense lawyer Jennifer Brown noted in court papers that he’d had a troubled past, starting when he was born prematurely with drugs in his system and was abandoned by his biological parents at the hospital after his birth.
Intellectually challenged, “things fell apart for him” when the pandemic struck in 2020, eliminating his ability to attend school, the lawyer wrote.
“Words are inadequate to express the profound shame and remorse that Hiram feels,” Brown said.
Oklahoma
Former death row inmate has a new trial set for a 1997 killing of motel owner
OKLAHOMA CITY (AP) — A new murder trial has been set for a former Oklahoma death row inmate who was on the brink of being executed multiple times during the three decades he spent in prison for the 1997 killing of his former boss.
The Supreme Court overturned Richard Glossip’s conviction in 2025, and a state judge released the man on bond last month.
His attorneys had asked the same judge to consider whether there is enough evidence to retry him, but after a hearing Tuesday, the judge ruled that a new trial would start Sept. 28.
Oklahoma Attorney General Gentner Drummond had pledged to retry Glossip for first-degree murder, but is not pursuing the death penalty again.
“We are pleased with the ruling,” a spokesperson, Leslie Berger, said in an email.
Glossip’s attorney, Don Knight, declined to comment.
Glossip had been sentenced to death for the January 1997 killing in Oklahoma City of motel owner Barry Van Treese, his former boss. Van Treese was beaten with a baseball bat in what prosecutors have alleged was a murder-for-hire scheme.
Prosecutors accused Glossip of setting up Van Treese’s murder, and a co-defendant, Justin Sneed, agreed to testify against Glossip to avoid the death penalty himself. Sneed was the only witness linking Glossip directly to the crime.
But the Supreme Court ruled that prosecutors allowed Sneed to give testimony about his mental health history that they knew was false, and said it violated Glossip’s constitutional right to a fair trial. Drummond agreed that Glossip should get a new trial.
Glossip has maintained his innocence and has drawn support from Kim Kardashian and other prominent figures. Van Treese’s family had asked the Supreme Court to leave Glossip’s conviction and sentence intact.
During Glossip’s time on death row, Oklahoma courts set nine different execution dates for him. He came so close to being put to death that he ate three separate last meals.
Each time, he was spared because of questions about Oklahoma’s planned procedures for lethal injection. In 2015, he was even held in a cell next to Oklahoma’s execution chamber, waiting to be strapped to a gurney and die by lethal injection, when the state’s governor put executions on hold to review its execution protocols.
Judge bars immigration arrests at U.S. courthouses
A judge on Tuesday barred the federal government from making arrests at immigration courts, ordering an end to a practice that took hold shortly after President Donald Trump took office last year.
The Trump administration’s reversal of long-standing policy against arrests at immigration court resulted “not from merely unreasoned decision-making but a complete lack of decision-making,” wrote U.S. District Judge Casey Pitts of San Francisco.
Authorities failed to address the “chilling effect” of arrests on whether people attend court hearings.
“For 80 years, Congress has commanded federal agencies to think before they act,” wrote Pitts, referring to the Administrative Procedure Act, a 1946 law that requires federal agencies to justify its actions. That law, he wrote, “does not require an agency to make the choice that a reviewing court might deem preferable. But it demands that an agency at least provide sound reasons for following its chosen course.”
The ruling is the second setback for courthouse arrests since May when a federal judge in New York barred them at immigration courts. That order applied only in New York, while the latest decision invalidated the policy nationwide.
James Percival, the U.S. Homeland Security Department’s general counsel, criticized the ruling as an exercise in judicial overreach.
“When a judge sentences a defendant, the defendant is taken into custody. If an alien is ordered removed by an immigration judge, the same should happen. A district judge ordering otherwise is naked judicial activism in service of an anti-American, open borders agenda,” Percival wrote online.
After Trump took office, hearings across the country often ended with cases being dismissed by the government, setting the stage for plainclothes agents to make arrests in hallways in coordination with attorneys from the Department of Homeland Security.
Pitts, who was appointed by President Joe Biden, faulted the administration for carrying out the arrests and for holding people in nearby cells for longer than a prescribed 12-hour limit.
Switzerland
Landmark legal win compensates pregnant soccer player who lost contract
LAUSANNE, Switzerland (AP) — In a landmark legal win for female soccer players, sport’s highest court has awarded Maja Göthberg salary compensation from Lazio Women after the Italian club ended contract talks when it knew she was pregnant.
The Court of Arbitration for Sport ordered Lazio to pay Göthberg more than 70,000 euros ($79,000) in salary compensation and “infringement of her personality rights” including 5% interest for the past two years, in a verdict published Wednesday by the global players’ union FIFPRO.
The former Sweden youth international took her appeal to CAS after losing her initial claim at a FIFA tribunal.
“The significance of this ruling goes beyond Maja Göthberg and confirms clubs cannot simply walk away from an employment relationship, even if this is not fully formalized, once they learn a player is pregnant,” FIFPRO’s Legal Director Alexandra Gomez Bruinewoud said.
Göthberg played for Lazio Women in the 2023-24 season and helped the club win promotion to the top tier.
She discovered she was pregnant and told the club during talks that summer on a new contract for a gross salary of 64,000 euros ($72,500), the CAS ruling stated.
“Immediately afterwards, the relationship broke down,” FIFPRO said. “Lazio Women later argued that no contract existed and that the player no longer wished to continue.”
Key evidence in the appeal win was WhatsApp messages sent during negotiations which showed that Lazio was aware of her pregnancy.
FIFA judges had previously decided Göthberg had “failed to establish that the parties had concluded an employment contract,” the CAS ruling said
“CAS made clear that where the essential terms have been agreed and both parties act as though a contract exists, a player is protected,” the union said. “The CAS ruling also establishes an important precedent around the confidentiality of pregnancy-related medical information.”
Colorado
Former CBI analyst pleads guilty in DNA testing scandal
GOLDEN, Colo. (AP) — A former forensic analyst with the Colorado Bureau of Investigation pleaded guilty Tuesday to four felony counts stemming from accusations that she manipulated and omitted data to speed up the DNA testing process, calling into question the validity of hundreds of criminal cases.
Yvonne “Missy” Woods entered guilty pleas to committing a cybercrime, perjury, attempting to influence a public servant and forgery. Dozens of other counts were dismissed as part of a plea agreement.
Woods was set to stand trial later this year. Instead, she’ll face between 8 and 16 years in prison when she’s sentenced in September.
Woods and her attorneys declined to talk to reporters after Tuesday’s hearing.
Authorities accused Woods, who resigned in 2023 after a decades-long career, of altering data to conceal tampering, deleting data that showed she failed to troubleshoot issues within the testing process and not thoroughly documenting tests performed in case records.
The investigation into Woods’ misconduct began in September 2023 after an intern at the bureau discovered missing information in a case that Woods handled in 2018. According to an arrest affidavit, Woods allegedly told investigators at one point that she had changed data to complete cases more quickly.
Problems with the scientist’s work were found in cases involving homicide, sexual assault, robbery and other crimes, according to a law enforcement affidavit. Prosecutors were forced to review hundreds of cases.
At least one murder conviction was overturned as a result of Woods’ misconduct. Michael Clark was released from prison in 2025 after his lawyers argued that DNA evidence in the case was mishandled by Woods, but prosecutors are seeking to retry him.
In at least two cases, both homicides, the defendants received lesser sentences under plea deals than they could have faced if they went to trial because prosecutors were afraid Woods’ involvement could lead to acquittals.
Convictions in other cases also are being challenged in courts across Colorado.
State officials have said that the response to Woods’ actions could end up costing more than $11 million.
The state investigation bureau in a statement issued Tuesday described Woods’ actions as intentional criminal fraud and said it didn’t reflect the bureau’s practices.
“This moment is not about moving on, for CBI it’s about moving forward,” said Armando Saldate, bureau director. “Today’s guilty plea is an important moment of accountability.”
The bureau said it has been making changes and is committed to following best practices used nationwide in forensic science.
New York
High school senior gets over 5 years in prison for setting homeless man on fire on NYC subway
NEW YORK (AP) — A high school senior who admitted to setting a fire that severely burned a homeless man on the subway was sentenced Tuesday in Manhattan federal court to 5 1/2 years in prison.
Judge Lewis J. Liman gave Hiram Carrero, 19, a sentence that was longer than the mandatory minimum required for arson, after the teen plead guilty in March to the charge.
The early morning fire on Dec. 1, 2025, came among a series of attacks with people set on fire on public transit across the U.S.
In a presentence submission, prosecutors requested he serve up to eight years in prison, saying Carrero’s “heinous actions” left the man, who was sleeping at the time, critically injured and with permanent extensive scarring and disfigurement.
During his guilty plea, Carrero admitted that he intentionally ignited a piece of paper that harmed the man.
In court papers, prosecutors said Carrero tried to kill “a sleeping, homeless man by burning him alive and leaving him trapped on a moving subway car.”
They said the man’s life was saved only because emergency personnel reached him quickly after a “mercifully short trip” from Penn Station at 34th Street to Times Square.
The crime, prosecutors said, was “separated from murder by mere chance,” and they were critical of his explanation that he had been drinking and smoked marijuana that day.
In seeking leniency for her client, defense lawyer Jennifer Brown noted in court papers that he’d had a troubled past, starting when he was born prematurely with drugs in his system and was abandoned by his biological parents at the hospital after his birth.
Intellectually challenged, “things fell apart for him” when the pandemic struck in 2020, eliminating his ability to attend school, the lawyer wrote.
“Words are inadequate to express the profound shame and remorse that Hiram feels,” Brown said.
Oklahoma
Former death row inmate has a new trial set for a 1997 killing of motel owner
OKLAHOMA CITY (AP) — A new murder trial has been set for a former Oklahoma death row inmate who was on the brink of being executed multiple times during the three decades he spent in prison for the 1997 killing of his former boss.
The Supreme Court overturned Richard Glossip’s conviction in 2025, and a state judge released the man on bond last month.
His attorneys had asked the same judge to consider whether there is enough evidence to retry him, but after a hearing Tuesday, the judge ruled that a new trial would start Sept. 28.
Oklahoma Attorney General Gentner Drummond had pledged to retry Glossip for first-degree murder, but is not pursuing the death penalty again.
“We are pleased with the ruling,” a spokesperson, Leslie Berger, said in an email.
Glossip’s attorney, Don Knight, declined to comment.
Glossip had been sentenced to death for the January 1997 killing in Oklahoma City of motel owner Barry Van Treese, his former boss. Van Treese was beaten with a baseball bat in what prosecutors have alleged was a murder-for-hire scheme.
Prosecutors accused Glossip of setting up Van Treese’s murder, and a co-defendant, Justin Sneed, agreed to testify against Glossip to avoid the death penalty himself. Sneed was the only witness linking Glossip directly to the crime.
But the Supreme Court ruled that prosecutors allowed Sneed to give testimony about his mental health history that they knew was false, and said it violated Glossip’s constitutional right to a fair trial. Drummond agreed that Glossip should get a new trial.
Glossip has maintained his innocence and has drawn support from Kim Kardashian and other prominent figures. Van Treese’s family had asked the Supreme Court to leave Glossip’s conviction and sentence intact.
During Glossip’s time on death row, Oklahoma courts set nine different execution dates for him. He came so close to being put to death that he ate three separate last meals.
Each time, he was spared because of questions about Oklahoma’s planned procedures for lethal injection. In 2015, he was even held in a cell next to Oklahoma’s execution chamber, waiting to be strapped to a gurney and die by lethal injection, when the state’s governor put executions on hold to review its execution protocols.
