DOJ lawyers refuse to put communications in writing in journalist prosecution case

DOJ Lawyers Reportedly Refusing to Put Certain Information in Writing

Lawyers at the Department of Justice are reportedly declining to document certain information in writing, fearing it could be used against them in court.

The DOJ is currently prosecuting two journalists for their coverage of an anti-ICE protest at Cities Church in Minnesota in January. One of the journalists, Georgia Ellyse Fort, faces three felony charges, including a hate crime. Fort's defense counsel has accused the government of spying on her, and a judge has barred the government from using toll records and cell phone simulators that include Fort's phone activity.

According to court filings, Homeland Security Investigations agent Timothy Gerber allegedly began using customs summonses to obtain information about Fort. Her lawyers stated that prosecutors would not confirm whether the government continues to use those summonses. While the prosecution is required to turn over evidence to the defense, they reportedly only described cell phone data from Fort's phone without providing the data itself.

In a letter to DOJ prosecutors—first flagged by independent journalist Mary Wheeler—Fort's lawyers referenced a phone call with DOJ lawyer Ned Hedley, during which they received the indication that "the government does not intend to respond to our correspondence in writing, out of the concern expressed on the call that what it represents to us could be put before the Court and/or otherwise used against it."

Legal experts note that documenting conversations is a basic requirement in the legal profession, making Hedley's reported comments particularly striking. The remarks suggest the Trump administration may be attempting to conceal information or is aware that its activities might not be lawful.

Fort was arrested alongside journalists Don Lemon and Michael Beute. The three are accused of rioting and protesting, while they maintain they were merely covering the event. Critics argue that refusing to put certain information in writing undermines the government's case.

Judge Allows BBC to Subpoena Trump's Inner Circle in Defamation Case

President Donald Trump's $10 billion defamation lawsuit against the British Broadcasting Company is facing a significant setback, as a judge has approved the subpoenaing of his closest advisers.

Trump filed the lawsuit last year over a 2024 episode of Panorama titled "Trump, a Second Chance." He claims the episode was defamatory because it edited together two sections of his January 6, 2021 speech, highlighting his call for supporters to "fight like hell" while omitting a section in which he told them to protest peacefully. The BBC apologized after Trump threatened legal action but refused to pay damages.

On Tuesday, U.S. Magistrate Judge Enjoliqué Lett ruled that the BBC can proceed with subpoenas for Trump's closest advisers and confidants—including family members, Stephen Miller, and Steve Bannon—to determine Trump's actual goals on January 6.

Judge Lett also ruled that Trump must hand over hundreds of financial records, as his lawsuit argued that the episode damaged his business interests.

"All of President Trump's brand, properties and businesses are impugned or said to have been impugned. Reputational, economic damages, all of that is now at issue in this case," Lett said, allowing the BBC to investigate the more than 400 companies owned by Trump's family trust.

Observers note that Trump's litigious approach, which has yielded payoffs in cases against CBS and ABC, may now lead to unprecedented exposure of his financial dealings.

U.S. Trade Representative Declines to Commit to Tariff Reimbursement

American families are unlikely to be reimbursed for money lost to President Donald Trump's tariff plan, according to testimony from U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer.

During a Senate Finance Committee hearing Wednesday, Greer thwarted attempts by lawmakers to pin down when the Trump administration would return revenue collected from American consumers since the "Liberation Day" tariffs were implemented.