Five-year-old Liam Conejo Ramos has safely returned to a suburb of Minneapolis after being held at a detention center in Texas, according to a lawmaker. On Saturday, a federal judge ordered the release of Liam and his father, Adrian Conejo Arias, who had been detained during a raid in Minnesota. Texas Democrat Joaquin Castro picked them up from the detention facility on Saturday night and accompanied them back to Minnesota on Sunday. Castro shared, “Liam is now home, with his hat and backpack. We won’t stop until all children and families are reunited.”
A viral photo last month showed Liam sporting a blue bunny hat outside his house, with federal agents nearby. The boy, one of four students detained by immigration authorities in a Minneapolis suburb, had entered the U.S. legally seeking asylum. He and his father had been held at a detention center in Dilley, Texas.
Judge Fred Biery, an appointee of former President Clinton, criticized the government’s deportation practices, calling them “ill-conceived and incompetently executed,” and highlighted the trauma inflicted on children. He pointed out that an arrest warrant should be based on probable cause determined by a judge, warning against the use of “administrative warrants” issued by immigration officials, which he described as “the fox guarding the henhouse.”
Democratic officials are calling for reforms, especially after recent ICE enforcement operations and two deadly shootings involving agents in Minneapolis. Proposed changes include requiring officers to wear body cameras, ending patrols that roam neighborhoods, and stopping the use of face masks during operations. Meanwhile, budget talks for the Department of Homeland Security are ongoing, with negotiations over funding stalling between Republicans and Democrats. President Trump indicated plans to discuss the matter soon at Mar-a-Lago.
Some city mayors, including Oklahoma City’s, see the need for immigration reform too. Mayor David Holt expressed cautious optimism, noting that the city’s relationship with federal immigration authorities is strained. He explained that recent events in Minneapolis threaten trust built over time with local residents. Holt made his remarks after Trump ordered DHS to avoid engaging with protesters unless federal property is at risk or asked to intervene by local officials.
A suspected grooming gang trial in the UK has been halted after jury members’ involvement with a WhatsApp group raised concerns, according to The Telegraph. The case, which involves allegations of raping and sexually abusing two teenage girls in Rochdale, Greater Manchester, between 2003 and 2006, was being tried at Manchester Minshull Street Crown Court.
The proceedings, involving six defendants, started in October but paused about two months later when one juror disclosed that multiple jurors had discussed a TV show about grooming gangs within a private WhatsApp chat. Judge Matthew Corbett-Jones ordered a review of all messages exchanged in the group during an investigation.
It was revealed that in one chat, a juror warned others not to watch the program. Despite this, another juror responded, “I’m going to watch it anyway,” with a smiley emoji, and a second juror indicated they intended to watch it as well. All jurors were later questioned, and they claimed none had watched the show. Defense attorneys raised doubts about their honesty and requested further questioning, but the judge declined.
The judge expressed regret over halting the trial, citing unresolved issues and doubts that couldn’t be adequately addressed. He emphasized that the complexities and layered problems meant no suitable solution remained, leading to the decision to postpone the trial to August.
Restrictions on reporting the jury’s discharge reasons were lifted after an application by the Manchester Evening News. The accused—Tahir Rashid (54), Mohammed Saleem (46), Iftaq Hussain (45), and Sucklane Shah (46)—denied all rape charges. Arshad Mohammed (55) also denied rape and assault by penetration, while Amjad Mahmood (53) faced multiple allegations, including rape, indecent assault, and assault by penetration. Rashid also denied a separate late-1980s rape charge.
Digital Phablet – Judge Frank Caprio spent his final days courageously battling pancreatic cancer.
Also Read“Ketamine Queen” Jasveen Sangha pleads guilty in Matthew Perry’s death case
Judge Frank Caprio, popularly known worldwide as “America’s nicest judge,” has passed away at the age of 88. He died on August 20, 2025, after a prolonged battle with pancreatic cancer.
Caprio served as the chief judge of Rhode Island’s Providence Municipal Court for many years. He chose to step down from his judicial position in 2023 after serving since 1985. His compassionate approach gained him fame through the popular TV show Caught in Providence, which showcased real courtroom cases from 2018 to 2020. Clips from this show have been viewed over a billion times worldwide.
Judge Caprio was known for his genuine concern for others. He often handled minor traffic violations with kindness and humor. Rather than solely punishing, he listened to people’s stories and showed empathy. He frequently reduced or canceled fines when he recognized hardships. “I don’t wear a badge under my robe; I wear a heart,” he once said. This reflected his belief that justice should be rooted in understanding.
John Caprio was born in Rhode Island in 1936. His parents emigrated from Italy. As a young boy, he picked up odd jobs such as delivering newspapers and shining shoes. Later, he attended Providence College and Suffolk University to become a lawyer. Throughout his journey, he also served as an educator and was part of the Rhode Island Army National Guard.
Judge Frank Caprio’s Instagram profile
In December 2023, he revealed his diagnosis of pancreatic cancer. His final message, made the day before his passing, asked everyone to keep him in their prayers.
People worldwide shared their memories and tributes after his death. Rhode Island Governor Dan McKee called him "a Rhode Island treasure." His family described him as a wonderful friend, husband, father, and grandfather.
Beloved Judge Frank Caprio shared this heartfelt video asking his followers to remember him in their prayers before he passed away today. Rest in peace 🙏❤️ pic.twitter.com/SFlguEbhux
— Defender of the Republic 🇺🇸 (@realdefender45) August 20, 2025
Judge Caprio left behind a legacy of kindness, fairness, and compassion. He proved that justice can be achieved through empathy and understanding. His work and life impacted many, inspiring others to treat everyone with dignity and care, and his influence will continue to motivate for generations.
Frank Caprio, who served as the long-time Chief Judge of Providence Municipal Court and gained popularity as the star of the reality TV show Caught in Providence, has passed away at age 88 after a prolonged battle with pancreatic cancer, his family has announced.
He died peacefully on Wednesday, August 20.
“Judge Frank Caprio left us peacefully at 88 after fighting pancreatic cancer with courage,” his family expressed in a Facebook statement. “In his memory, let’s all aim to add a bit more kindness to the world — just as he did every single day.”
Rhode Island Governor Dan McKee ordered flags at state offices and buildings to fly at half-staff until Caprio’s funeral.
“Judge Caprio was a true Rhode Island treasure,” McKee stated. “On a personal note, he was a friend who confronted his illness bravely, and I will deeply miss him. My sympathies are with his family and loved ones during this difficult time.”
“Judge Caprio not only served the public diligently but also connected with people in a heartfelt way. He demonstrated what justice with compassion can look like,” he added.
A Judge Known Worldwide
Caprio gained international recognition through Caught in Providence, a long-running reality TV series that showcased his kindhearted approach to minor traffic violations. His blend of humor and empathy often brought smiles and comfort to those appearing in his courtroom.
The show aired locally for over 20 years before reaching viewers nationwide. Clips of his rulings became popular on YouTube, with new videos still appearing long after he retired from the bench.
“I don’t wear a badge beneath my robe,” Caprio often said. “I wear a heart.”
Earlier this year, he published his memoir titled Compassion in the Court: Life-Changing Stories from America’s Nicest Judge.
His Illness and Final Months
In December 2023, Caprio disclosed his diagnosis of pancreatic cancer. He lauded his medical team in Boston and Providence, though he acknowledged facing “an insidious form of cancer.”
He kept his 1.7 million followers on Instagram updated, sometimes sharing videos during chemotherapy treatments. In one clip, he listened to singer-songwriter Jewel, who later said she was “honored to provide some comfort” during his treatment.
Frank Caprio is remembered both in Rhode Island and beyond as a compassionate man who brought kindness to the courtroom.
Headline: Justin Baldoni’s $400 Million Lawsuit Against Blake Lively Dismissed
A federal judge has formally dismissed Justin Baldoni’s $400 million lawsuit against actress Blake Lively, effectively ending their legal battle tied to the film "It Ends With Us."
In January, Lively and her husband, Ryan Reynolds, were accused by Baldoni and Wayfarer Studios of slander. The actor sought damages claiming a loss of future income exceeding $400 million, with publicist Leslie Sloane also named as a defendant.
Just two weeks after Lively initiated her legal action, Baldoni responded with a lawsuit of his own, alleging harassment and asserting that Lively had been part of a campaign to undermine his reputation following her claims of unacceptable behavior on set. Lively’s revised complaint indicated that Baldoni’s actions had also led to discomfort for other women involved in the production.
Furthermore, Baldoni leveled a libel suit against The New York Times, asserting that the publication collaborated with Lively to defame him. However, U.S. District Judge Lewis J. Liman dismissed this case as well.
According to Liman’s court order, Baldoni’s team has until June 23 to amend their claims related to breach of implied covenant and tortious interference with contract.
"This ruling represents a complete triumph and a validation for Blake Lively and those unjustly entangled in Baldoni’s retaliatory legal actions, which also included Ryan Reynolds, Leslie Sloane, and The New York Times," expressed Lively’s attorneys, Esra Hudson and Mike Gottlieb. They labeled Baldoni’s lawsuit as a "sham," suggesting that the court quickly recognized its unfounded nature.
Hudson and Gottlieb further indicated their intent to pursue attorney fees, punitive damages, and other compensatory claims against Baldoni and his associates involved in what they described as an abusive legal strategy.
A spokesperson for The New York Times commented on the dismissal, noting, "We appreciate that the judge recognized the lawsuit for what it was: an unsubstantiated attempt to suppress legitimate journalism." They affirmed their commitment to safeguarding journalistic integrity.
Bryan Freedman, Baldoni’s attorney, has yet to respond to requests for comments regarding the dismissal.
The tensions between Baldoni and Lively have escalated since their collaboration on "It Ends With Us," based on the novel by Colleen Hoover. Lively’s initial accusations included claims of sexual harassment by Baldoni during filming, and she suggested that he had employed a crisis public relations firm to orchestrate a campaign against her.
Baldoni’s legal representative had even sought to bring Taylor Swift into the dispute as a potential witness, a move swiftly rejected by Swift’s team as a ploy to generate media attention.
Recently, a federal judge declined Lively’s request to dismiss allegations of emotional distress. Instead, Lively had proposed to withdraw these claims in lieu of providing her medical and mental health records to Baldoni’s legal team.
The upcoming trial between Lively and Baldoni is scheduled for March.
Salvadoran police officers escort suspected members of the Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua, recently deported by the U.S. government, to be housed at the Terrorism Confinement Center (CECOT) prison in Tecoluca, El Salvador, as per an agreement with the Salvadoran government. This image was captured on March 16, 2025. — Reuters
On Monday, the U.S. Department of Justice aimed to displace a judge who ordered the Trump administration to clarify whether it went against a court ruling by deporting hundreds of Venezuelans, whom the White House classifies as violent offenders, according to a report by Reuters.
Over the weekend, more than 200 Venezuelans, identified by the Trump administration as part of the Tren de Aragua gang—which has been associated with kidnapping, extortion, and contract killings—were deported to El Salvador. This occurred despite a judge temporarily blocking the use of a wartime law to facilitate these deportations.
Several legal experts consulted by Reuters stated that the flights represented a significant challenge to the separation of powers, a claim that the White House refuted.
Since assuming office in January, President Donald Trump has consistently sought to expand the reach of executive power, including cutting expenditures approved by Congress, dismantling governmental agencies, and terminating thousands of federal employees.
On Monday, his Justice Department filed a motion to remove Judge James Boasberg from the case.
This request to remove Judge Boasberg was made just before a hearing in his Washington, D.C., courtroom, scheduled for 5 PM that day. Judge Boasberg had previously instructed the government to clarify the schedule of the flights that transported the Venezuelans, specifying whether they took off after his order was issued.
During an emergency session on Saturday, requested by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), Judge Boasberg issued a two-week temporary suspension of Trump’s invocation of the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 to facilitate the deportations.
The White House argued on Sunday that federal courts “have no jurisdiction” regarding Trump’s authority to expel foreign adversaries under this 18th-century law, typically employed during wartime. However, they also indicated compliance with the judge’s order.
In a court filing just before Monday’s hearing, the Trump administration claimed that the judge’s verbal directive to ground any planes carrying the deportees was “not enforceable” because it lacked formal written documentation.
The administration maintained that it did not breach Boasberg’s subsequent written ruling barring immigration officials from deporting individuals since the planes had already taken off before it was issued.
“It’s a critical question: how can a judge in Washington, D.C. assert authority over three planes full of criminals flying over the Gulf of America?” Secretary of State Marco Rubio questioned during an appearance on Fox News, using the term preferred by Trump for the Gulf of Mexico.
However, some legal experts argued that the planes’ location did not change the legal framework.
Michael J. Gerhardt, a constitutional law professor at the University of North Carolina School of Law, characterized the administration’s reasoning as “bordering on the ridiculous” and “contrary to well-established constitutional law,” emphasizing that federal officials remain accountable to the Constitution regardless of their location.
“A government plane conducting government business does not operate in a legal vacuum,” said Gerhardt, adding: “If that were the case, the government could act freely as long as it wasn’t on American soil.”
With a Republican Congress largely supporting his agenda, federal judges have frequently served as the only checks on Trump’s executive actions, putting many on hold while reviewing their legality. Advocacy groups have accused the administration of failing to comply with certain judicial orders.
Trump has been actively challenging the traditional checks and balances between the branches of U.S. government.
Rubio also raised concerns about a routine practice within the federal judiciary when he stated on Fox News, “We’ve lost control. All someone has to do is find a judge anywhere in the country to issue orders that apply nationally.”
This principle—where a district judge can issue a ruling with national implications—is not new and has been employed by Trump at the start of litigation to obstruct other measures he opposes.
The Alien Enemies Act
Trump rarely invoked the Alien Enemies Act, which grants the president wartime authority to deport non-citizens whose primary loyalty lies with a foreign nation, to carry out many of the deportations.
This law has only been implemented three times: during the War of 1812, World War I, and World War II, when it was used to justify the mass internment of individuals of Japanese, German, and Italian descent.
According to Leavitt, a total of 261 people were deported, including 137 under the Alien Enemies Act and over 100 through standard immigration procedures. Additionally, there were 23 Salvadoran members of the MS-13 gang among those removed.
The Trump administration has variously labeled the deported Venezuelans as gang members, “monsters,” or “alien terrorists,” yet has not provided evidence to support these claims. The ACLU has criticized authorities for misapplying these labels.
On Monday, four Democratic senators called Trump’s application of the Alien Enemies Act in immigration enforcement an “unlawful and audacious seizure of power.”
“It is essential for all of us, including the judiciary, to hold this administration accountable and to prevent the Trump administration from leading us down a dark and perilous path,” asserted Senators Dick Durbin, Alex Padilla, Cory Booker, and Peter Welch in a statement.
“Ketamine Queen” Jasveen Sangha pleads guilty in Matthew Perry’s death case
