NewzIntel.com

Category: US Department of Justice

  • MIL-OSI Analysis: Immigration courts hiding the names of ICE lawyers goes against centuries of precedent and legal ethics requiring transparency in courts

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Cassandra Burke Robertson, Professor of Law and Director of the Center for Professional Ethics, Case Western Reserve University

    Some immigration courts have allowed ICE attorneys to conceal their names during proceedings. Jacob Wackerhausen/iStock via Getty Images

    Something unusual is happening in U.S. immigration courts. Government lawyers are refusing to give their names during public hearings.

    In June 2025, Immigration Judge ShaSha Xu in New York City reportedly told lawyers in her courtroom: “We’re not really doing names publicly.” Only the government lawyers’ names were hidden – the immigrants’ attorneys had to give their names as usual. Xu cited privacy concerns, saying, “Things lately have changed.”

    When one immigration lawyer objected that the court record would be incomplete without the government attorney’s name, Xu reportedly refused to provide it. In another case, New York immigration Judge James McCarthy in July referred to the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or ICE, attorney as merely “Department” throughout the hearing.

    New York immigration Judge Shirley Lazare-Raphael told The Intercept that some ICE attorneys believe it is “dangerous to state their names publicly.” This follows a broader pattern of ICE agents wearing masks during arrests to hide their identities.

    This secrecy violates a fundamental principle that has protected Americans for centuries: open courts. Here’s how those courts operate and why the principle governing them matters.

    Hiding of ICE attorneys’ names in court fits a broader pattern seen here outside a New York immigration courtroom of ICE agents wearing masks.
    AP Photo/Olga Fedorova

    ‘Presumption of openness’

    The U.S. legal system is built on openness, with multiple layers of legal protection that guarantee public access to court proceedings.

    This tradition of open courts developed as a direct rejection of secret judicial proceedings that had been used to abuse power in England. The notorious Star Chamber operated in secret from the 15th to 17th centuries, initially trying people “too powerful to be brought before ordinary common-law courts.”

    But the Star Chamber eventually became a tool of oppression, using torture to obtain confessions and punishing jurors who ruled against the Crown. Parliament abolished it in 1641 after widespread abuses.

    By the time American colonial courts were established, the reaction against the Star Chamber had already shaped English legal thinking toward openness. American courts adopted this principle of transparency from the beginning, rejecting the secretive proceedings that had enabled abuse.

    Today, the term “star chamber” refers to any secret court proceeding that seems grossly unfair or is used to persecute individuals.

    In the U.S., courts have repeatedly emphasized that “justice faces its gravest threat when courts dispense it secretly.” The First Amendment gives the public a right to observe judicial proceedings. The Supreme Court has ruled that “a presumption of openness inheres in the very nature of a criminal trial under our system of justice.”

    Every federal appeals court has recognized that this constitutional right extends to civil cases too, with some exceptions such as protecting “the parties’ privacy, confidential business information, or trade secrets.” Federal court rules require that trials be “conducted in open court” and that witness testimony be “taken in open court unless otherwise provided.”

    Many state constitutions also guarantee open courts – such as Oregon’s mandate that “no court shall be secret.”

    While there’s no explicit law requiring attorneys to be publicly named, there’s also no policy allowing their names to be kept secret. The presumption is always toward openness.

    In response to these recent developments, law professor Elissa Steglich said that she’d “never heard of someone in open court not being identified,” and that failing to identify an attorney could impair accountability “if there are unethical or professional concerns.”

    Rules for anonymity

    Courts sometimes allow anonymity, but only in specific circumstances.

    Juries can be anonymous when there’s “substantial danger of harm or undue influence,” as legal expert Michael Crowell writes – like in high-profile organized crime cases or when defendants have tried to intimidate witnesses before. Even then, the lawyers still know the jurors’ names.

    Similarly, parties to a lawsuit can sometimes use pseudonyms like “Jane Doe” when the case involves highly sensitive matters such as sexual abuse, or when there’s a real risk of physical retaliation.

    But these rare exceptions require careful court review.

    What’s happening with ICE attorneys is different. There’s no formal court ruling allowing it, no specific safety findings and no established legal process.

    Immigration courts have fewer protections

    Immigration courts operate differently from regular federal courts. They are so-called “administrative courts” that are part of the executive branch, not the judicial branch.

    These courts decide claims involving an individual’s right to stay in the U.S., either when the government seeks to remove someone from the country for violating immigration law or when an individual seeks to stay in the country through the asylum process.

    Immigration judges lack the lifetime job protections that regular federal judges have. As executive branch government employees, they can be hired and fired, just like other Department of Justice employees.

    People in immigration court also have fewer procedural protections than criminal defendants. They have no right to court-appointed counsel and must represent themselves unless they can afford to hire an attorney. The majority of immigrants appear without an attorney. Outcomes are better for those who can afford to hire counsel.

    Immigration court records are also less accessible to the public than other federal court proceedings.

    For years, the Board of Immigration Appeals, the nation’s highest immigration court, made less than 1% of its opinions publicly available. A federal court ruled that public disclosure was required; the Board of Immigration Appeals now posts its decisions online.

    However, lower immigration court decisions are rarely made public.

    Because immigration courts operate with less oversight than regular federal courts, public observation becomes more critical.

    Open courts aren’t just about legal procedure – they’re about democracy itself. When the public can observe how justice is administered, it builds confidence that the system is fair.

    Federal agents patrol the halls of immigration court at the Jacob K. Javitz Federal Building on July 21, 2025, in New York City.
    Michael M. Santiago/Getty Images

    Court watching protects transparency

    Court watching has become an important way for citizens to ensure due process is honored, especially in immigration cases.

    Observers can monitor whether proper legal procedures are being followed. They can watch for signs that attorneys are prepared, treating people respectfully and following court rules – regardless of whether those attorneys identify themselves.

    Observers help track trends such as lack of legal representation, language barriers or procedural unfairness that can inform advocacy for reforms. This kind of public oversight is especially important in immigration court, where people often don’t have lawyers and may not understand their rights.

    When community members bear witness to these proceedings, it helps ensure the system operates fairly and transparently.

    Professional ethics and accountability

    As a law professor who runs a law school’s Center for Professional Ethics, I can say that while there’s no specific law forcing ICE attorneys to identify themselves, they are still bound by rules of professional conduct that require accountability and transparency.

    State bar associations have clear standards about attorney conduct in court proceedings. The American Bar Association’s Model Rules of Professional Conduct emphasize that lawyers are “officers of the legal system” with duties to uphold its integrity.

    Immigration judges, despite being government employees rather than lifetime-tenured federal judges, are also bound by judicial conduct codes that require them to uphold public confidence in the justice system. When judges allow or encourage anonymity without formal procedures or safety findings, they risk violating these ethical obligations.

    Bar associations can investigate professional conduct violations and impose sanctions ranging from reprimands to suspension or disbarment. While enforcement against federal government lawyers has historically been uncommon, sustained documentation by court observers can provide the evidence needed for formal complaints.

    While government attorneys, judges and other court personnel may face real safety concerns, hiding their identities in open court is unprecedented and breaks with centuries of legal tradition that requires accountability and transparency in our justice system.

    As pressure mounts to process immigration cases quickly, courts are ethically and legally bound to ensure that speed doesn’t come at the expense of fundamental fairness and transparency.

    Cassandra Burke Robertson does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    – ref. Immigration courts hiding the names of ICE lawyers goes against centuries of precedent and legal ethics requiring transparency in courts – https://theconversation.com/immigration-courts-hiding-the-names-of-ice-lawyers-goes-against-centuries-of-precedent-and-legal-ethics-requiring-transparency-in-courts-261452

    MIL OSI Analysis –

  • MIL-OSI Analysis: Immigration courts hiding the names of ICE lawyers goes against centuries of precedent and legal ethics requiring transparency in courts

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Cassandra Burke Robertson, Professor of Law and Director of the Center for Professional Ethics, Case Western Reserve University

    Some immigration courts have allowed ICE attorneys to conceal their names during proceedings. Jacob Wackerhausen/iStock via Getty Images

    Something unusual is happening in U.S. immigration courts. Government lawyers are refusing to give their names during public hearings.

    In June 2025, Immigration Judge ShaSha Xu in New York City reportedly told lawyers in her courtroom: “We’re not really doing names publicly.” Only the government lawyers’ names were hidden – the immigrants’ attorneys had to give their names as usual. Xu cited privacy concerns, saying, “Things lately have changed.”

    When one immigration lawyer objected that the court record would be incomplete without the government attorney’s name, Xu reportedly refused to provide it. In another case, New York immigration Judge James McCarthy in July referred to the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or ICE, attorney as merely “Department” throughout the hearing.

    New York immigration Judge Shirley Lazare-Raphael told The Intercept that some ICE attorneys believe it is “dangerous to state their names publicly.” This follows a broader pattern of ICE agents wearing masks during arrests to hide their identities.

    This secrecy violates a fundamental principle that has protected Americans for centuries: open courts. Here’s how those courts operate and why the principle governing them matters.

    Hiding of ICE attorneys’ names in court fits a broader pattern seen here outside a New York immigration courtroom of ICE agents wearing masks.
    AP Photo/Olga Fedorova

    ‘Presumption of openness’

    The U.S. legal system is built on openness, with multiple layers of legal protection that guarantee public access to court proceedings.

    This tradition of open courts developed as a direct rejection of secret judicial proceedings that had been used to abuse power in England. The notorious Star Chamber operated in secret from the 15th to 17th centuries, initially trying people “too powerful to be brought before ordinary common-law courts.”

    But the Star Chamber eventually became a tool of oppression, using torture to obtain confessions and punishing jurors who ruled against the Crown. Parliament abolished it in 1641 after widespread abuses.

    By the time American colonial courts were established, the reaction against the Star Chamber had already shaped English legal thinking toward openness. American courts adopted this principle of transparency from the beginning, rejecting the secretive proceedings that had enabled abuse.

    Today, the term “star chamber” refers to any secret court proceeding that seems grossly unfair or is used to persecute individuals.

    In the U.S., courts have repeatedly emphasized that “justice faces its gravest threat when courts dispense it secretly.” The First Amendment gives the public a right to observe judicial proceedings. The Supreme Court has ruled that “a presumption of openness inheres in the very nature of a criminal trial under our system of justice.”

    Every federal appeals court has recognized that this constitutional right extends to civil cases too, with some exceptions such as protecting “the parties’ privacy, confidential business information, or trade secrets.” Federal court rules require that trials be “conducted in open court” and that witness testimony be “taken in open court unless otherwise provided.”

    Many state constitutions also guarantee open courts – such as Oregon’s mandate that “no court shall be secret.”

    While there’s no explicit law requiring attorneys to be publicly named, there’s also no policy allowing their names to be kept secret. The presumption is always toward openness.

    In response to these recent developments, law professor Elissa Steglich said that she’d “never heard of someone in open court not being identified,” and that failing to identify an attorney could impair accountability “if there are unethical or professional concerns.”

    Rules for anonymity

    Courts sometimes allow anonymity, but only in specific circumstances.

    Juries can be anonymous when there’s “substantial danger of harm or undue influence,” as legal expert Michael Crowell writes – like in high-profile organized crime cases or when defendants have tried to intimidate witnesses before. Even then, the lawyers still know the jurors’ names.

    Similarly, parties to a lawsuit can sometimes use pseudonyms like “Jane Doe” when the case involves highly sensitive matters such as sexual abuse, or when there’s a real risk of physical retaliation.

    But these rare exceptions require careful court review.

    What’s happening with ICE attorneys is different. There’s no formal court ruling allowing it, no specific safety findings and no established legal process.

    Immigration courts have fewer protections

    Immigration courts operate differently from regular federal courts. They are so-called “administrative courts” that are part of the executive branch, not the judicial branch.

    These courts decide claims involving an individual’s right to stay in the U.S., either when the government seeks to remove someone from the country for violating immigration law or when an individual seeks to stay in the country through the asylum process.

    Immigration judges lack the lifetime job protections that regular federal judges have. As executive branch government employees, they can be hired and fired, just like other Department of Justice employees.

    People in immigration court also have fewer procedural protections than criminal defendants. They have no right to court-appointed counsel and must represent themselves unless they can afford to hire an attorney. The majority of immigrants appear without an attorney. Outcomes are better for those who can afford to hire counsel.

    Immigration court records are also less accessible to the public than other federal court proceedings.

    For years, the Board of Immigration Appeals, the nation’s highest immigration court, made less than 1% of its opinions publicly available. A federal court ruled that public disclosure was required; the Board of Immigration Appeals now posts its decisions online.

    However, lower immigration court decisions are rarely made public.

    Because immigration courts operate with less oversight than regular federal courts, public observation becomes more critical.

    Open courts aren’t just about legal procedure – they’re about democracy itself. When the public can observe how justice is administered, it builds confidence that the system is fair.

    Federal agents patrol the halls of immigration court at the Jacob K. Javitz Federal Building on July 21, 2025, in New York City.
    Michael M. Santiago/Getty Images

    Court watching protects transparency

    Court watching has become an important way for citizens to ensure due process is honored, especially in immigration cases.

    Observers can monitor whether proper legal procedures are being followed. They can watch for signs that attorneys are prepared, treating people respectfully and following court rules – regardless of whether those attorneys identify themselves.

    Observers help track trends such as lack of legal representation, language barriers or procedural unfairness that can inform advocacy for reforms. This kind of public oversight is especially important in immigration court, where people often don’t have lawyers and may not understand their rights.

    When community members bear witness to these proceedings, it helps ensure the system operates fairly and transparently.

    Professional ethics and accountability

    As a law professor who runs a law school’s Center for Professional Ethics, I can say that while there’s no specific law forcing ICE attorneys to identify themselves, they are still bound by rules of professional conduct that require accountability and transparency.

    State bar associations have clear standards about attorney conduct in court proceedings. The American Bar Association’s Model Rules of Professional Conduct emphasize that lawyers are “officers of the legal system” with duties to uphold its integrity.

    Immigration judges, despite being government employees rather than lifetime-tenured federal judges, are also bound by judicial conduct codes that require them to uphold public confidence in the justice system. When judges allow or encourage anonymity without formal procedures or safety findings, they risk violating these ethical obligations.

    Bar associations can investigate professional conduct violations and impose sanctions ranging from reprimands to suspension or disbarment. While enforcement against federal government lawyers has historically been uncommon, sustained documentation by court observers can provide the evidence needed for formal complaints.

    While government attorneys, judges and other court personnel may face real safety concerns, hiding their identities in open court is unprecedented and breaks with centuries of legal tradition that requires accountability and transparency in our justice system.

    As pressure mounts to process immigration cases quickly, courts are ethically and legally bound to ensure that speed doesn’t come at the expense of fundamental fairness and transparency.

    Cassandra Burke Robertson does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    – ref. Immigration courts hiding the names of ICE lawyers goes against centuries of precedent and legal ethics requiring transparency in courts – https://theconversation.com/immigration-courts-hiding-the-names-of-ice-lawyers-goes-against-centuries-of-precedent-and-legal-ethics-requiring-transparency-in-courts-261452

    MIL OSI Analysis –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Hinson Introduces the Save Our Bacon Act to Block California’s Radical Prop 12, Protect Interstate Commerce

    Source: United States House of Representatives – Congresswoman Ashley Hinson (IA-01)

    Bill ensures all Americans can continue to enjoy Iowa Ag Products & blocks blue-state bacon bans

    Washington, D.C. — Today, Congresswoman Ashley Hinson (IA-02) introduced the Save Our Bacon Act to protect access to interstate commerce for Iowa family farmers and lower grocery prices for consumers. California and Massachusetts have proposed arbitrary mandates on production practices for farmers in other states. The Save Our Bacon Act would alleviate this overregulation by prohibiting state and local governments from interfering with the production of livestock in other states. 

    “California’s Proposition 12 and Massachusetts’ Question 3 pose a major threat to family farms and food security—both in Iowa and across the country. The Save Our Bacon Act reaffirms livestock producers’ right to sell their products across state lines, without interference from arbitrary mandates. This legislation will stop out-of-touch activists—who don’t know the first thing about farming—from dictating how Iowa farmers do their job.

    “Since day one in Congress, I’ve fought to keep food affordable and protect local producers. Under the Trump Administration, rural America will continue to be at the forefront of policy conversations that impact producers’ ability to feed and fuel the world—and there will be no bacon ban on my watch.” – Congresswoman Ashley Hinson

    “With Proposition 12, California has set out-of-touch, arbitrary requirements for how producers should operate their farming businesses. California activists now claim to know what’s best for the producers who have raised livestock from generation to generation. The Save Our Bacon Act will allow Iowa’s farmers to continue doing what they do best – feeding our country and the world.” – Iowa Governor Kim Reynolds

    “California needs to keep its hands off our bacon. No other state should dictate how Iowans farm, let alone California’s bureaucrats. The Save Our Bacon Act stops California’s overreach, protects hog farmers, and lets states like Iowa regulate how their own farmers raise livestock. I want to thank Representative Hinson for her work on this important legislation, and I urge Congress to pass it and stand up for livestock producers across the nation.” – Iowa Attorney General Brenna Bird
     
    “I applaud Congresswoman Hinson for introducing legislation to address the overreach of California’s Prop 12 and restore robust interstate commerce. As the nation’s leading pork-producing state, Iowa plays a critical role in maintaining the safest, most abundant, and most affordable food supply in the world. Allowing states like California to dictate farming practices only creates a patchwork of requirements that drive up production costs and food prices for consumers. This important legislation, which previously earned bipartisan support in the House Agriculture Committee’s passage of last year’s Farm Bill, is essential to safeguarding Iowa’s agriculture and preventing any single state from setting a precedent that undermines the foundation of our food supply. This legislation would protect Iowa’s farmers from burdensome out-of-state regulations that threaten our rural economies and communities, and I urge the House and Senate to send this legislation to President Trump for his signature.” – Iowa Secretary of Agriculture Mike Naig
     
    “We sincerely appreciate Representative Hinson for consistently engaging with family farmers and championing legislation that provides the certainty we need to pass along our farms to the next generation. Without legislation to shield America’s 60,000+ pork-producing family farms from heavy-handed, multi-state regulations, many producers otherwise would be faced with business-crushing decisions.” – National Pork Producers Council President Duane Stateler, a pork producer from McComb, Ohio
      
    “We appreciate Rep. Hinson’s leadership in fighting to protect Iowa pig farmers, who work hard every day to care for their animals and produce safe, high-quality pork. The Supreme Court made it clear the best option is for Congress to address California’s Prop 12 to prevent a patchwork of conflicting state regulations. Since Prop 12 took effect, the law has negatively impacted both consumers and producers. We urge Congress to act this year and support Rep. Hinson’s efforts to stop this burdensome mandate.” – Aaron Juergens, a pig farmer from Carroll County who serves as president of the Iowa Pork Producers Association. 
     
    “Iowa Farm Bureau members are thankful for Rep. Hinson’s unwavering support for Iowa agriculture and being a champion for fair interstate commerce through the introduction of the Save Our Bacon Act. When states enact laws that restrict or ban the sale of any type of goods from other states, they hinder market access for both farmers and businesses. This creates a negative ripple effect, as these entities struggle with arbitrary business standards and increased costs. Farm families and consumers are grappling with record-high prices, and without congressional action to strengthen the Interstate Commerce Clause, consumers will face fewer choices and higher costs at the grocery store.” – Iowa Farm Bureau Federation

    Background: 

    • In 2018, California passed Proposition 12, which prohibits the sale of certain meat and poultry products unless they are produced in compliance with the state’s arbitrary animal housing requirements.
    • In May 2023, the US Supreme Court upheld Proposition 12 in a 5 – 4 decision, with the Court noting that Congress has the authority to determine how states may interfere with interstate commerce.
    • California makes up nearly 15% of the national market for pork, leading many Iowa livestock producers to choose between complying with another state’s mandate and losing access to a major market for their products. Similar state-level mandates – such as Massachusetts’ Question 3 – create further uncertainty for livestock producers and risk an unworkable patchwork of state regulations for American farmers.  
    • Research from economists has shown that mandates like Prop 12 come at a significant cost to both producers and consumers. Following the implementation of Prop 12, the cost per pound of pork loin in California increased by 41%. Estimates also show that pork producers face costs of up to $4,000 per sow to comply with California’s arbitrary mandate.
    • Rep. Hinson has been a tireless champion for Iowa pork producers against this overreach.   
      • In December 2023, Rep. Hinson testified before the House Agriculture Committee to share stories from farmers in Iowa about the negative impact that mandates like Prop 12 would have on their operation.
      • In a recent House Appropriations Committee hearing, Hinson asked USDA Secretary Brooke Rollins about the potential consequences of laws like Prop 12. Secretary Rollins called mandates like Prop 12 “unsustainable.”
    • On July 9, the Trump Administration’s Department of Justice filed a lawsuit against the State of California over state laws that have caused grocery prices to skyrocket, including Prop 12.

    This bill was introduced with Representatives Feenstra, Nunn, Miller-Meeks, Sam Graves, Rouzer, Murphy, Messmer, Adrian Smith, Flood, LaMalfa, Alford, Dusty Johnson, Bost, Newhouse, Mark Harris, Finstad, Wied, and Rose.

    The bill text can be found here. Click here to read exclusive reporting by Bloomberg News. 

    ###

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Attorney General Bonta Launches Statewide Survey to Ensure Hospitals Follow Emergency Reproductive Healthcare Laws

    Source: US State of California

    OAKLAND – California Attorney General Rob Bonta today announced the launch of a statewide survey to assess how hospital emergency departments are complying with reproductive healthcare laws, particularly when abortion care is the medically necessary emergency treatment.

    The survey is being conducted by the California Department of Justice’s Healthcare Rights and Access Section as part of an ongoing effort to identify and address gaps in emergency care across the state. The findings will help determine whether hospitals are meeting their legal obligations under California’s Emergency Services Law (ESL) and will ensure patients are receiving the care they are entitled to without delay or denial.

    “Access to emergency abortion care is not optional. It’s the law,” said Attorney General Bonta. “No patient should need to wonder whether they will receive the care they need in a medical emergency. We’re letting the facts and data lead the way to ensure every hospital in California is fulfilling its responsibility to protect patients’ health and dignity.”

    California’s Emergency Services Law (ESL)

    California’s Emergency Services Law requires every general acute care hospital with an emergency department to treat all patients experiencing a medical emergency regardless of insurance, ethnicity, citizenship, age, preexisting medical condition, immigration status, or ability to pay, among other protected characteristics.

    Patients have the right to receive the emergency healthcare needed to determine if they have an emergency medical condition, as well as the emergency healthcare needed to relieve or eliminate that emergency medical condition, provided the hospital has the personnel and facilities to provide such healthcare. Under the law, hospitals must act not only when a person’s life is in danger, but also when a patient is experiencing acute symptoms and, without immediate medical attention, the patient could reasonably be expected to face serious:

    •  Jeopardy to their health 
    •  Impairment to bodily functions
    •  Dysfunction to any organ or body part

    Despite these clear legal protections, the Department has received alarming reports of hospitals refusing to provide emergency abortion care, including delaying treatment and placing patients at risk of infection, hemorrhage, or permanent harm. This practice fails to meet the standard of care required by California law.

    Providence St. Joseph’s Lawsuit Highlights Dangers of Delayed Reproductive Care

    In September 2024, Attorney General Bonta filed a lawsuit against Providence St. Joseph Hospital (Providence) alleging it violated multiple California laws due to its refusal to provide emergency abortion care to people experiencing obstetric emergencies. One particular patient, Anna Nusslock, had her water break when she was 15 weeks pregnant with twins on February 23, 2024. Despite the immediate threat to her life and health, and despite the fact her pregnancy was no longer viable, Providence refused to treat her with the necessary abortion or induction. She had to travel to a small critical access hospital called Mad River, 12 miles away, where she was actively hemorrhaging by the time she was on the operating table.

    Emergency Reproductive Health Laws

    The survey also seeks to ensure that designated hospitals offer Sexual Assault Forensic Exams (SAFE), which are designed to gather evidence of sexual assault and provide healthcare services, including medical and mental health treatment. Victims of sexual assault are entitled to a SAFE exam from a trained medical professional free of charge. Sexual assault victims shall be provided with the option of emergency contraception at no cost. All patients are entitled to obtain a prescription for emergency contraception, where medically appropriate. 

    Statewide Survey Will Evaluate Hospital Compliance

    The survey will reach approximately 333 hospitals across California, gathering detailed information about how emergency departments administer reproductive healthcare and how they respond when abortion care is the required emergency treatment. Results from the survey will inform oversight, guide enforcement efforts, and ensure hospitals are fully complying with the Emergency Services Law.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Attorney General Bonta Asks Court to Place Los Angeles County Juvenile Halls in Receivership

    Source: US State of California Department of Justice

    Seeks compensation fund for youth harmed in the County’s care during its noncompliance with the judgment secured by the Attorney General 

    OAKLAND – California Attorney General Rob Bonta today announced that he is asking the Los Angeles County Superior Court to place Los Angeles County’s juvenile halls into a receivership amid the County’s persistent failure to comply with a stipulated judgment, enforcement order, and two stipulated amendments secured by the Attorney General’s Office since 2021. In the filing, the Attorney General argues that while it is a measure of last resort, receivership — or total control by an appointed officer of the court over the management and operations of the juvenile halls, including the setting of budgets; procurement of goods; hiring and firing of staff; and all other necessary decisions to bring the juvenile halls into compliance — is necessary to address the ongoing and immediate harm to youth at the facilities resulting from chronic illegal and unsafe conditions. In recent years, youth at these facilities have suffered severe harms, including overdoses on narcotics allowed to enter the facility, youth-on-youth violence facilitated by staff, and significant unmet medical needs — and will continue to do so if the juvenile halls remain under the County’s authority. Attorney General Bonta’s proposed receivership, if approved, would give a court-appointed receiver all the powers vested with the County, and additional powers as approved by the court necessary to bring about compliance, providing the receiver with the tools necessary to shepherd the juvenile halls toward long-overdue compliance with the judgment.

    “Today, for the first time in my office’s history, we are asking a court to place the subject of a pattern-and-practice investigation into receivership. This drastic step to divest Los Angeles County of control over its juvenile halls is a last resort — and the only option left to ensure the safety and wellbeing of the youth currently in its care,” said Attorney General Bonta. “For four-and-a-half years, we’ve moved aggressively to bring the County into compliance with our judgment — and we’ve been met with glacial progress that has too often looked like one step forward and two steps back. Enough is enough. These young people deserve better, and my office will not stop until they get it. A receivership is the best and only option to turn Los Angeles County juvenile halls around, and we believe the court will agree.”

    In January 2021, after an extensive investigation by the California Department of Justice into conditions at the County of Los Angeles’s juvenile halls, the Attorney General secured a comprehensive stipulated judgment aimed at remedying the unsafe and illegal conditions revealed by the investigation. Over the following years, the California Department of Justice has aggressively enforced compliance with this judgment, including (1) multiple motions approved by the court to enforce and strengthen the judgment; (2) an expansion of the monitoring team; (3) training from the monitoring team to the County; (4) numerous offers by the monitoring team to provide additional technical assistance to the County; (5) multiples directives from the Monitor that were not followed; and (6) the Attorney General’s extensive engagement with the County regarding areas of noncompliance, including noncompliance observed during site visits to the juvenile halls. 

    Despite continuous enforcement and monitoring, conditions at Los Angeles County juvenile halls have deteriorated and the County remains out of compliance with 75% of the provisions of the judgment. Persistent failures include adequate staffing of the juvenile halls; stemming the flow of drugs; preventing staff from instigating or encouraging youth-on-youth assaults; delivering youth to medical appointments; preventing retaliation against youth who file grievances; and ensuring cameras are installed in all areas and that video footage is reviewed, among other concerns.  

    Several particularly egregious incidents highlight the untenable and unsafe conditions at these facilities: First, in March 2025, Attorney General Bonta secured a grand jury indictment of 30 probation staff for child endangerment and abuse, battery, and conspiracy for permitting, facilitating, and encouraging 69 fights involving 143 different victims between July 1, 2023, to December 31, 2023. Second, a number of overdoses have occurred at Los Padrinos Juvenile Hall in 2025, despite a court order mandating the County improve its contraband-screening protocols. At the same time, the Board of State and Community Corrections has issued findings of unsuitably for both Los Padrinos and Barry J. Nidorf Secure Youth Treatment Facility, and the juvenile division of the Los Angeles County Superior Court has ordered the County to depopulate Los Padrinos. 

    For all of these reasons, and the many more outlined in a filing today with the court, Attorney General Bonta is asking the court to place Los Angeles County juvenile halls in a receivership and in doing so, to transfer all authority and powers currently vested with the County to a court-appointed receiver. The filing explains that less-intensive interventions have repeatedly failed to bear fruit and that nothing about the County’s record to date suggest that giving the County more time to achieve compliance will result in anything but prolonging the unsuitability of conditions endured by youth in their care. 

    The Attorney General also asks that the court order the County to establish a compensation fund for youth to redress and repair the injuries suffered in the County’s custody due to its noncompliance with the judgment, including medical and education expenses.

    A copy of the filing, which is subject to approval by the court, is available here. 

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Operation Grayskull Culminates in Lengthy Sentences for Managers of Dark Web Site Dedicated to Sexual Abuse of Children

    Source: US State of California

    Operation Grayskull Eradicated Four Dark Web Child Abuse Sites and Led to the Convictions of 18 Offenders to Date, Who Have Collectively Received More than 300 Years in Prison

    Today, the Justice Department announced the results of Operation Grayskull, a highly successful joint effort between the Department of Justice and the FBI that resulted in the dismantling of four dark web sites dedicated to images and videos containing child sexual abuse material (CSAM). To date, the operation has led to the convictions of 18 offenders, including a Minnesota man who was sentenced yesterday to 250 months in prison and lifetime supervised release for his involvement with one of these dark web sites. He was also ordered to pay $23,000 in restitution.

    “Today’s announcement sends a clear warning to those who exploit and abuse children: you will not find safe haven, even on the dark web,” said Acting Assistant Attorney General Matthew R. Galeotti of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division. “These offenders thought that they could act without consequences, but they were wrong.  Thanks to the relentless determination of our prosecutors and law enforcement partners we have exposed these perpetrators for who they are, eliminated their websites and brought justice to countless victims.”

    “This operation represents one of the most significant strikes ever made against online child exploitation networks,” said FBI Director Kash Patel. “We’ve not only dismantled dangerous platforms on the dark web, but we’ve also brought key perpetrators to justice and delivered a powerful message: you cannot hide behind anonymity to harm children.”

    “Yesterday’s sentencing reaffirms our steadfast commitment to protecting our children, the most vulnerable among us, from those who exploit and harm them through the despicable trade in child sexual abuse material,” said U.S. Attorney Hayden P. O’Byrne for the Southern District of Florida. “Thomas Peter Katsampes and his co-conspirators ran some of the darkweb’s most heinous networks, enabling horrific crimes against innocent victims, but Operation Grayskull has shut these sites down and delivered justice. We applaud the FBI and our international partners for their tireless work, and let this be a clear warning: we will relentlessly pursue and prosecute anyone engaged in such atrocities, no matter how they attempt to cover their tracks.”

    Thomas Peter Katsampes, 52, of Eagan, Minnesota, pleaded guilty to conspiracy to advertise and conspiracy to distribute child pornography on Feb. 27. According to court documents, Katsampes joined a dark web site dedicated to CSAM in 2022, advertised and distributed CSAM over the website, including CSAM depicting prepubescent children, and eventually worked his way up to a staff position on the web site, which, among other things, involved moderating the site, enforcing the site’s rules for posting CSAM, and advising the site’s users about how to post CSAM.

    In addition to Katsampes, eight individuals have been convicted and sentenced in the Southern District of Florida for their involvement in running the primary site targeted by Operation Grayskull.

    Defendant Residence Case Status
    Selwyn David Rosenstein Boynton Beach, Florida

    Pleaded guilty to conspiracy to advertise child pornography, five counts of advertisement of child pornography, and possession of child pornography.

    Sentenced on Dec. 12, 2022, to 28 years in prison and ordered to pay $80,500 in restitution to victims of his offense.
    Matthew Branden Garrell Raleigh, North Carolina

    Pleaded guilty to conspiracy to advertise child pornography and conspiracy to distribute child pornography.

    Sentenced on Aug. 1, 2023, to 20 years and 10 months in prison and ordered to pay $158,500 in restitution to victims of his offense.
    Robert Preston Boyles Clarksville, Tennessee

    Pleaded guilty to conspiracy to advertise child pornography and conspiracy to distribute child pornography.

    Sentenced on Aug. 15, 2023, to 23 years and four months in prison and ordered to pay $7,500 in restitution to victims of his offense.
    Gregory Malcolm Good Silver Springs, Nevada

    Pleaded guilty to conspiracy to advertise child pornography and conspiracy to distribute child pornography.

    Sentenced on Aug. 22, 2023, to 25 years and 10 months in prison and ordered to pay $93,500 in restitution to victims of his offense.
    William Michael Spearman Madison, Alabama

    Pleaded guilty to engaging in a child exploitation enterprise.

    Sentenced on Jan. 23, 2024, to life in prison and ordered to pay $123,400 in restitution to victims of his offense.
    Joseph Addison Martin Tahuya, Washington

    Pleaded guilty to engaging in a child exploitation enterprise.

    Sentenced on April 18, 2024, to 42 years in prison and ordered to pay $174,500 in restitution to victims of his offense.
    Joseph Robert Stewart Milton, Washington

    Pleaded guilty to conspiracy to advertise child pornography and conspiracy to distribute child pornography.

    Sentenced on April 18, 2024, to 23 years and 9 months in prison and ordered to pay $19,500 in restitution to victims of his offense.
    Keith David McIntosh Grand Rapids, Michigan

    Pleaded guilty to conspiracy to advertise child pornography and conspiracy to distribute child pornography, both as a person with a prior conviction for possession of child pornography.

    Sentenced on Dec. 19, 2024, to 55 years in prison.

    The website’s leaders advertised and distributed CSAM, promulgated rules for the website, enforced the rules by banning or scolding users who violated them, held staff meetings, recruited members to serve as staff members, recommended users for promotion, edited and deleted user posts, praised individuals for participating in and contributing to the website, kept records of CSAM posts made by individual members, and paid for and maintained the website servers, among other things.

    Operation Grayskull resulted in the dismantling of a total of four sites dedicated to images and videos depicting child sexual abuse. These websites were some of the most egregious on the dark web, and they included sections specifically dedicated to infants and toddlers, as well as depictions of violence, sadism, and torture. The websites also contained detailed advice on how to avoid detection by law enforcement – for example, by using sophisticated technologies.

    In other judicial districts around the country, nine additional individuals have been convicted for their involvement with these websites, including the following:

    • Charles Hand, of Aberdeen, Maryland, was prosecuted in the District of Maryland and was sentenced to 14 years in federal prison;
    • Michael Ibarra, of Wenatchee, Washington, was prosecuted in the Eastern District of Washington and was sentenced to 12 years in prison;
    • Clay Trimble, of Fordyce, Arkansas, was prosecuted in the Eastern District of Arkansas and was sentenced to 18 years in prison;
    • David Craig, of Houston, Texas, was prosecuted in the Southern District of Texas and was sentenced to nine years in prison;
    • Robert Rella of Chesapeake, Virginia, was prosecuted in the Eastern District of Virginia and was sentenced to five years and eight months in prison;
    • Samuel Hicks, of Fort Wayne, Indiana, was prosecuted in the Northern District of Indiana and was sentenced to 16 years in prison;
    • Richard Smith of Dallas, Texas, was prosecuted in the Eastern District of Texas and was sentenced to 14 years in prison;
    • Patrick Harrison, of Grand Rapids, Michigan, was prosecuted in the Western District of Michigan and was sentenced to five years and ten months in prison.
    • Thomas Gailus, of Webbers Falls, Oklahoma, was prosecuted in the Eastern District of Oklahoma, and his sentencing is pending.

    Two other individuals in the United States died before being charged for their involvement with the websites. The operation also resulted in arrests in the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, Italy, Germany, Estonia, Belgium, and South Africa.

    The FBI’s Child Exploitation Operational Unit and Miami Field Office, West Palm Beach Resident Agency investigated the cases.

    Acting Deputy Chief Kyle P. Reynolds and Trial Attorney William G. Clayman of the Justice Department’s Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section (CEOS) and former Assistant U.S. Attorney Gregory Schiller of the Southern District of Florida coordinated the operation and prosecuted the defendants in the Southern District of Florida.

    Substantial assistance for the cases prosected in the Southern District of Florida was provided by FBI Field Offices and Resident Agencies in Huntsville, Alabama; Reno, Nevada; Clarksville, Tennessee; Raleigh, North Carolina; Madison, Wisconsin; Tacoma, Washington; Grand Rapids, Michigan; and Minneapolis, Minnesota; CEOS’s High Technology Investigative Unit; and the U.S. Attorney’s Offices for the Northern District of Alabama, District of Nevada, Middle District of Tennessee, Eastern District of North Carolina, Western District of Wisconsin, Western District of Washington, Western District of Michigan, and District of Minnesota.

    This case was brought as part of Project Safe Childhood, a nationwide initiative launched in May 2006 by the Department of Justice to combat the growing epidemic of child sexual exploitation and abuse. Led by U.S. Attorneys’ Offices and CEOS, Project Safe Childhood marshals federal, state and local resources to better locate, apprehend and prosecute individuals who exploit children via the Internet, as well as to identify and rescue victims. For more information about Project Safe Childhood, please visit www.justice.gov/psc.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI Security: Operation Grayskull Culminates in Lengthy Sentences for Managers of Dark Web Site Dedicated to Sexual Abuse of Children

    Source: United States Department of Justice

    Operation Grayskull Eradicated Four Dark Web Child Abuse Sites and Led to the Convictions of 18 Offenders to Date, Who Have Collectively Received More than 300 Years in Prison

    Today, the Justice Department announced the results of Operation Grayskull, a highly successful joint effort between the Department of Justice and the FBI that resulted in the dismantling of four dark web sites dedicated to images and videos containing child sexual abuse material (CSAM). To date, the operation has led to the convictions of 18 offenders, including a Minnesota man who was sentenced yesterday to 250 months in prison and lifetime supervised release for his involvement with one of these dark web sites. He was also ordered to pay $23,000 in restitution.

    “Today’s announcement sends a clear warning to those who exploit and abuse children: you will not find safe haven, even on the dark web,” said Acting Assistant Attorney General Matthew R. Galeotti of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division. “These offenders thought that they could act without consequences, but they were wrong.  Thanks to the relentless determination of our prosecutors and law enforcement partners we have exposed these perpetrators for who they are, eliminated their websites and brought justice to countless victims.”

    “This operation represents one of the most significant strikes ever made against online child exploitation networks,” said FBI Director Kash Patel. “We’ve not only dismantled dangerous platforms on the dark web, but we’ve also brought key perpetrators to justice and delivered a powerful message: you cannot hide behind anonymity to harm children.”

    “Yesterday’s sentencing reaffirms our steadfast commitment to protecting our children, the most vulnerable among us, from those who exploit and harm them through the despicable trade in child sexual abuse material,” said U.S. Attorney Hayden P. O’Byrne for the Southern District of Florida. “Thomas Peter Katsampes and his co-conspirators ran some of the darkweb’s most heinous networks, enabling horrific crimes against innocent victims, but Operation Grayskull has shut these sites down and delivered justice. We applaud the FBI and our international partners for their tireless work, and let this be a clear warning: we will relentlessly pursue and prosecute anyone engaged in such atrocities, no matter how they attempt to cover their tracks.”

    Thomas Peter Katsampes, 52, of Eagan, Minnesota, pleaded guilty to conspiracy to advertise and conspiracy to distribute child pornography on Feb. 27. According to court documents, Katsampes joined a dark web site dedicated to CSAM in 2022, advertised and distributed CSAM over the website, including CSAM depicting prepubescent children, and eventually worked his way up to a staff position on the web site, which, among other things, involved moderating the site, enforcing the site’s rules for posting CSAM, and advising the site’s users about how to post CSAM.

    In addition to Katsampes, eight individuals have been convicted and sentenced in the Southern District of Florida for their involvement in running the primary site targeted by Operation Grayskull.

    Defendant Residence Case Status
    Selwyn David Rosenstein Boynton Beach, Florida

    Pleaded guilty to conspiracy to advertise child pornography, five counts of advertisement of child pornography, and possession of child pornography.

    Sentenced on Dec. 12, 2022, to 28 years in prison and ordered to pay $80,500 in restitution to victims of his offense.
    Matthew Branden Garrell Raleigh, North Carolina

    Pleaded guilty to conspiracy to advertise child pornography and conspiracy to distribute child pornography.

    Sentenced on Aug. 1, 2023, to 20 years and 10 months in prison and ordered to pay $158,500 in restitution to victims of his offense.
    Robert Preston Boyles Clarksville, Tennessee

    Pleaded guilty to conspiracy to advertise child pornography and conspiracy to distribute child pornography.

    Sentenced on Aug. 15, 2023, to 23 years and four months in prison and ordered to pay $7,500 in restitution to victims of his offense.
    Gregory Malcolm Good Silver Springs, Nevada

    Pleaded guilty to conspiracy to advertise child pornography and conspiracy to distribute child pornography.

    Sentenced on Aug. 22, 2023, to 25 years and 10 months in prison and ordered to pay $93,500 in restitution to victims of his offense.
    William Michael Spearman Madison, Alabama

    Pleaded guilty to engaging in a child exploitation enterprise.

    Sentenced on Jan. 23, 2024, to life in prison and ordered to pay $123,400 in restitution to victims of his offense.
    Joseph Addison Martin Tahuya, Washington

    Pleaded guilty to engaging in a child exploitation enterprise.

    Sentenced on April 18, 2024, to 42 years in prison and ordered to pay $174,500 in restitution to victims of his offense.
    Joseph Robert Stewart Milton, Washington

    Pleaded guilty to conspiracy to advertise child pornography and conspiracy to distribute child pornography.

    Sentenced on April 18, 2024, to 23 years and 9 months in prison and ordered to pay $19,500 in restitution to victims of his offense.
    Keith David McIntosh Grand Rapids, Michigan

    Pleaded guilty to conspiracy to advertise child pornography and conspiracy to distribute child pornography, both as a person with a prior conviction for possession of child pornography.

    Sentenced on Dec. 19, 2024, to 55 years in prison.

    The website’s leaders advertised and distributed CSAM, promulgated rules for the website, enforced the rules by banning or scolding users who violated them, held staff meetings, recruited members to serve as staff members, recommended users for promotion, edited and deleted user posts, praised individuals for participating in and contributing to the website, kept records of CSAM posts made by individual members, and paid for and maintained the website servers, among other things.

    Operation Grayskull resulted in the dismantling of a total of four sites dedicated to images and videos depicting child sexual abuse. These websites were some of the most egregious on the dark web, and they included sections specifically dedicated to infants and toddlers, as well as depictions of violence, sadism, and torture. The websites also contained detailed advice on how to avoid detection by law enforcement – for example, by using sophisticated technologies.

    In other judicial districts around the country, nine additional individuals have been convicted for their involvement with these websites, including the following:

    • Charles Hand, of Aberdeen, Maryland, was prosecuted in the District of Maryland and was sentenced to 14 years in federal prison;
    • Michael Ibarra, of Wenatchee, Washington, was prosecuted in the Eastern District of Washington and was sentenced to 12 years in prison;
    • Clay Trimble, of Fordyce, Arkansas, was prosecuted in the Eastern District of Arkansas and was sentenced to 18 years in prison;
    • David Craig, of Houston, Texas, was prosecuted in the Southern District of Texas and was sentenced to nine years in prison;
    • Robert Rella of Chesapeake, Virginia, was prosecuted in the Eastern District of Virginia and was sentenced to five years and eight months in prison;
    • Samuel Hicks, of Fort Wayne, Indiana, was prosecuted in the Northern District of Indiana and was sentenced to 16 years in prison;
    • Richard Smith of Dallas, Texas, was prosecuted in the Eastern District of Texas and was sentenced to 14 years in prison;
    • Patrick Harrison, of Grand Rapids, Michigan, was prosecuted in the Western District of Michigan and was sentenced to five years and ten months in prison.
    • Thomas Gailus, of Webbers Falls, Oklahoma, was prosecuted in the Eastern District of Oklahoma, and his sentencing is pending.

    Two other individuals in the United States died before being charged for their involvement with the websites. The operation also resulted in arrests in the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, Italy, Germany, Estonia, Belgium, and South Africa.

    The FBI’s Child Exploitation Operational Unit and Miami Field Office, West Palm Beach Resident Agency investigated the cases.

    Acting Deputy Chief Kyle P. Reynolds and Trial Attorney William G. Clayman of the Justice Department’s Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section (CEOS) and former Assistant U.S. Attorney Gregory Schiller of the Southern District of Florida coordinated the operation and prosecuted the defendants in the Southern District of Florida.

    Substantial assistance for the cases prosected in the Southern District of Florida was provided by FBI Field Offices and Resident Agencies in Huntsville, Alabama; Reno, Nevada; Clarksville, Tennessee; Raleigh, North Carolina; Madison, Wisconsin; Tacoma, Washington; Grand Rapids, Michigan; and Minneapolis, Minnesota; CEOS’s High Technology Investigative Unit; and the U.S. Attorney’s Offices for the Northern District of Alabama, District of Nevada, Middle District of Tennessee, Eastern District of North Carolina, Western District of Wisconsin, Western District of Washington, Western District of Michigan, and District of Minnesota.

    This case was brought as part of Project Safe Childhood, a nationwide initiative launched in May 2006 by the Department of Justice to combat the growing epidemic of child sexual exploitation and abuse. Led by U.S. Attorneys’ Offices and CEOS, Project Safe Childhood marshals federal, state and local resources to better locate, apprehend and prosecute individuals who exploit children via the Internet, as well as to identify and rescue victims. For more information about Project Safe Childhood, please visit www.justice.gov/psc.

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Security: Mankato Man Sentenced to Federal Prison for Abusive Sexual Contact

    Source: US FBI

    PIERRE – United States Attorney Alison J. Ramsdell announced today that Chief Judge Roberto A. Lange, U.S. District Court, has sentenced a Mankato, Minnesota, man convicted of Abusive Sexual Contact. The sentencing took place on June 30, 2025.

    Ethan Schnitker, 41, was sentenced to two years in federal prison, followed by five years of supervised release, and ordered to pay a $100 special assessment to the Federal Crime Victims Fund.

    Schnitker was indicted by a federal grand jury in May 2023. He pleaded guilty on March 13, 2025.

    The conviction stems from an incident that occurred on October 3, 2021, in Gregory County, South Dakota, on property located within the Rosebud Sioux Indian Reservation. Schnitker had sexual contact with a minor victim without her permission while they were visiting the area. Schnitker was responsible for the minor’s care at the time.

    This case was brought as part of Project Safe Childhood, a nationwide initiative to combat the growing epidemic of child sexual exploitation and abuse, launched in May 2006 by the Department of Justice. Led by the U.S. Attorneys’ Offices and the DOJ’s Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section, Project Safe Childhood marshals federal, state, and local resources to locate, apprehend, and prosecute individuals who exploit children, as well as identify and rescue victims. For more information about Project Safe Childhood, please visit https://www.justice.gov/psc.

    This case was investigated by the FBI and the Rosebud Sioux Tribe Law Enforcement Services. Assistant U.S. Attorney Wayne Venhuizen prosecuted the case.

    Schnitker was immediately remanded to the custody of the U.S. Marshals Service. 

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Security: Mankato Man Sentenced to Federal Prison for Abusive Sexual Contact

    Source: US FBI

    PIERRE – United States Attorney Alison J. Ramsdell announced today that Chief Judge Roberto A. Lange, U.S. District Court, has sentenced a Mankato, Minnesota, man convicted of Abusive Sexual Contact. The sentencing took place on June 30, 2025.

    Ethan Schnitker, 41, was sentenced to two years in federal prison, followed by five years of supervised release, and ordered to pay a $100 special assessment to the Federal Crime Victims Fund.

    Schnitker was indicted by a federal grand jury in May 2023. He pleaded guilty on March 13, 2025.

    The conviction stems from an incident that occurred on October 3, 2021, in Gregory County, South Dakota, on property located within the Rosebud Sioux Indian Reservation. Schnitker had sexual contact with a minor victim without her permission while they were visiting the area. Schnitker was responsible for the minor’s care at the time.

    This case was brought as part of Project Safe Childhood, a nationwide initiative to combat the growing epidemic of child sexual exploitation and abuse, launched in May 2006 by the Department of Justice. Led by the U.S. Attorneys’ Offices and the DOJ’s Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section, Project Safe Childhood marshals federal, state, and local resources to locate, apprehend, and prosecute individuals who exploit children, as well as identify and rescue victims. For more information about Project Safe Childhood, please visit https://www.justice.gov/psc.

    This case was investigated by the FBI and the Rosebud Sioux Tribe Law Enforcement Services. Assistant U.S. Attorney Wayne Venhuizen prosecuted the case.

    Schnitker was immediately remanded to the custody of the U.S. Marshals Service. 

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Importers Agree to Pay $6.8M to Resolve False Claims Act Liability Relating to Voluntary Self-Disclosure of Unpaid Customs Duties

    Source: US State of California

    Manchester, New Hampshire, based Global Plastics LLC (Global Plastics) and Melville, New York, based Marco Polo International LLC (Marco Polo), both subsidiaries of MGI International LLC, have agreed to pay $6.8 million to resolve their civil liability under the False Claims Act for knowingly failing to pay customs duties on certain plastic resin imported from the People’s Republic of China (PRC). In connection with the settlement, the United States acknowledged that MGI International and its subsidiaries took a number of significant steps entitling them to credit for cooperating with the government.

    To enter goods into the United States, an importer must declare, among other things, the country of origin of the goods, the value of the goods, whether the goods are subject to duties, and the amount of duties owed. U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) collects applicable duties.

    In 2024, MGI and its subsidiaries disclosed to CBP and the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of New Hampshire that, beginning in May 2019, Global Plastics and Marco Polo failed to declare the correct country of origin and value on certain entries of plastic resin products manufactured in the PRC and, as a result, failed to pay the proper duties owed to CBP.   

    “The Department will pursue those who gain an unfair trade advantage in U.S. markets, including those who knowingly evade or underpay duties owed on foreign imports,” said Assistant Attorney General Brett A. Shumate of the Justice Department’s Civil Division. “As today’s settlement reflects, when importers fail to pay customs duties owed, they can mitigate the consequences by making timely self-disclosures, cooperating with investigations, and taking appropriate remedial measures.”

    “Companies doing business in the United States must play by the rules, including paying full custom duties owed for imports,” said Acting U.S. Attorney Jay McCormack for the District of New Hampshire. “This resolution demonstrates that when companies self-disclose misconduct, cooperate fully with the government’s investigation, and take meaningful corrective action, they can receive credit for those admissions. We will continue to hold accountable those who attempt to avoid paying what they owe to the federal government, while also recognizing responsible corporate behavior.”

    “When companies use unfair trade practices and fraudulent methodologies to avoid paying customs duties, it robs the American people of revenue and undermines our economy,” said acting Executive Assistant Commissioner Susan S. Thomas of the Office of Trade, U.S. Customs and Border Protection. “I am proud that CBP was able to work with the Department of Justice to help ensure a level playing field for law abiding businesses.”

    MGI cooperated with the United States’ investigation by, among other things: making a timely voluntary self-disclosure of the potential violations; performing a thorough and independent internal investigation;  preserving, collecting, and disclosing facts not known to the government but relevant to its investigation; conducting an analysis of potential damages that was shared with the government; and implementing appropriate remedial actions, including disciplining personnel and making improvements to compliance procedures. As a result, MGI, Global Plastics, and Marco Polo received credit under the Department’s guidelines for taking disclosure, cooperation, and remediation into account in False Claims Act settlements.

    This resolution obtained in this matter was the result of a coordinated effort between the Civil Division’s Commercial Litigation Branch, Fraud Section and the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of New Hampshire, with assistance from the CBP’s Office of Chief Counsel.

    This matter was handled by Assistant United States Attorney Raphael Katz of the District of New Hampshire and Senior Trial Counsel Art J. Coulter of the Civil Division’s Commercial Litigation Branch, Fraud Section.

    The claims resolved by the settlement are allegations only, and there has been no determination of liability.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI Security: Importers Agree to Pay $6.8M to Resolve False Claims Act Liability Relating to Voluntary Self-Disclosure of Unpaid Customs Duties

    Source: United States Attorneys General

    Manchester, New Hampshire, based Global Plastics LLC (Global Plastics) and Melville, New York, based Marco Polo International LLC (Marco Polo), both subsidiaries of MGI International LLC, have agreed to pay $6.8 million to resolve their civil liability under the False Claims Act for knowingly failing to pay customs duties on certain plastic resin imported from the People’s Republic of China (PRC). In connection with the settlement, the United States acknowledged that MGI International and its subsidiaries took a number of significant steps entitling them to credit for cooperating with the government.

    To enter goods into the United States, an importer must declare, among other things, the country of origin of the goods, the value of the goods, whether the goods are subject to duties, and the amount of duties owed. U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) collects applicable duties.

    In 2024, MGI and its subsidiaries disclosed to CBP and the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of New Hampshire that, beginning in May 2019, Global Plastics and Marco Polo failed to declare the correct country of origin and value on certain entries of plastic resin products manufactured in the PRC and, as a result, failed to pay the proper duties owed to CBP.   

    “The Department will pursue those who gain an unfair trade advantage in U.S. markets, including those who knowingly evade or underpay duties owed on foreign imports,” said Assistant Attorney General Brett A. Shumate of the Justice Department’s Civil Division. “As today’s settlement reflects, when importers fail to pay customs duties owed, they can mitigate the consequences by making timely self-disclosures, cooperating with investigations, and taking appropriate remedial measures.”

    “Companies doing business in the United States must play by the rules, including paying full custom duties owed for imports,” said Acting U.S. Attorney Jay McCormack for the District of New Hampshire. “This resolution demonstrates that when companies self-disclose misconduct, cooperate fully with the government’s investigation, and take meaningful corrective action, they can receive credit for those admissions. We will continue to hold accountable those who attempt to avoid paying what they owe to the federal government, while also recognizing responsible corporate behavior.”

    “When companies use unfair trade practices and fraudulent methodologies to avoid paying customs duties, it robs the American people of revenue and undermines our economy,” said acting Executive Assistant Commissioner Susan S. Thomas of the Office of Trade, U.S. Customs and Border Protection. “I am proud that CBP was able to work with the Department of Justice to help ensure a level playing field for law abiding businesses.”

    MGI cooperated with the United States’ investigation by, among other things: making a timely voluntary self-disclosure of the potential violations; performing a thorough and independent internal investigation;  preserving, collecting, and disclosing facts not known to the government but relevant to its investigation; conducting an analysis of potential damages that was shared with the government; and implementing appropriate remedial actions, including disciplining personnel and making improvements to compliance procedures. As a result, MGI, Global Plastics, and Marco Polo received credit under the Department’s guidelines for taking disclosure, cooperation, and remediation into account in False Claims Act settlements.

    This resolution obtained in this matter was the result of a coordinated effort between the Civil Division’s Commercial Litigation Branch, Fraud Section and the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of New Hampshire, with assistance from the CBP’s Office of Chief Counsel.

    This matter was handled by Assistant United States Attorney Raphael Katz of the District of New Hampshire and Senior Trial Counsel Art J. Coulter of the Civil Division’s Commercial Litigation Branch, Fraud Section.

    The claims resolved by the settlement are allegations only, and there has been no determination of liability.

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Security: Laredo man with prior murder conviction sentenced to 30 years for smuggling methamphetamine

    Source: Office of United States Attorneys

    LAREDO, Texas – A 31-year-old resident of Laredo has been sentenced for illegally importing over 836 kilograms of methamphetamine into the country, announced U.S. Attorney Nicholas J. Ganjei.

    Cornelio Aguilar pleaded guilty July 9, 2024.

    U.S. District Judge Keith Ellison ordered him to serve the 30-year sentence to be immediately followed by five years of supervised release. At the hearing, the court heard about Aguilar’s violent criminal history, including prior convictions for murder and aggravated assault with a deadly weapon. In imposing the sentence, Judge Ellison noted that this was a serious offense.

    The investigation revealed Aguilar imported two loads of methamphetamine into the United States using tractor trailers between January and June 2022. Hidden inside the bags of charcoal he was hauling were bundles of methamphetamine. 

    Aguilar has been and will remain in custody pending transfer to a Federal Bureau of Prisons facility in the near future.

    Immigration and Customs Enforcement – Homeland Security Investigations conducted the Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Forces (OCDETF) operation with the assistance of Customs and Border Protection.

    Assistant U.S. Attorney Steven Chamberlin prosecuted the case.

    OCDETF identifies, disrupts and dismantles the highest-level criminal organizations that threaten the United States using a prosecutor-led, intelligence-driven, multi-agency approach. Additional information about the OCDETF Program can be found on the Department of Justice’s OCDETF webpage.

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Security: Illegal alien pleads guilty to leading smuggling organization involving transportation of over 100 persons

    Source: Office of United States Attorneys

    CORPUS CHRISTI, Texas – A 40-year-old Mexican national who illegally resided in Houston has admitted to an alien smuggling conspiracy and illegal reentry into the country, announced U.S. Attorney Nicholas J. Ganjei.

    The investigation revealed Edgar Ruiz-Briones arranged transportation and coordinating trips for illegal aliens coming over the southern border with Mexico. Ruiz-Briones was the leader of the smuggling organization, recruiting drivers from as far away as Kansas to come to the Rio Grande Valley.

    Drivers would communicate directly with Ruiz-Briones to set up the trips, give updates on progress and set meeting spots for drop-offs in Houston after successful smuggling operations. They would pick up illegal aliens from different stash houses and transport them to Houston, where they met with Ruiz-Briones before going further into the United States. 

    Ruiz-Briones handled payments from the aliens to come into the United States and payments to the drivers he recruited. 

    Over the course of the 18-month conspiracy, Ruiz-Briones arranged for over 100 aliens to enter, remain and be transported further into the United States.

    An illegal alien himself, having been removed from the United States on multiple occasions, he also pleaded guilty to illegally reentering the United States from Mexico and remaining here in violation of the law.

    U.S. District Judge Nelva Gonzales Ramos will impose sentencing Oct. 30. At that time. Ruiz-Briones faces up to 10 years in federal prison for the alien smuggling conspiracy and 20 years for illegally re-entering the United States.

    Ruiz-Briones has been and will remain in custody pending sentencing.

    Immigration and Customs Enforcement – Homeland Security Investigations conducted the investigation with the assistance of Border Patrol.

    Assistant U.S. Attorney Joseph Griffith is prosecuting the case.

    This case is part of Operation Take Back America, a nationwide initiative that marshals the full resources of the Department of Justice to repel the invasion of illegal immigration, achieve the total elimination of cartels and transnational criminal organizations and protect our communities from the perpetrators of violent crime. Operation Take Back America streamlines efforts and resources from the Department’s Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Forces and Project Safe Neighborhood.

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Security: Three Syracuse Men Plead Guilty to Possessing and Selling Firearms

    Source: Office of United States Attorneys

    UTICA, NEW YORK –Erik Burch, age 30, Khalid Richardson, age 30, and Lamar Stanford, age 33, each of Syracuse, have each pled guilty for their respective roles in a firearms trafficking operation. Burch pled guilty last week to the unlawful sale of a firearm to a prohibited person; Richardson pled guilty to possession of a firearm by a prohibited person on June 4, 2025; and Stanford pled guilty to possession of a firearm by a prohibited person on April 30, 2025. Acting United States Attorney John A. Sarcone III and Bryan Miller, Special Agent in Charge of the New York Field Division of the United States Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF), made the announcement.

    Richardson admitted that he sold firearms to an individual whom he knew to be a felon on four separate occasions in 2022. He further admitted that he obtained firearms on two of those occasions from his co-defendants, Stanford and Burch. Stanford and Burch each admitted to possessing firearms on the dates of the firearm sales that they engaged in with Richardson. Stanford and Burch were each prohibited from possessing firearms based on prior felony convictions.

    Acting United States Attorney John Sarcone stated, “If you sell firearms to felons, be ready to spend a long time in federal prison. We will not tolerate felons buying, selling, or possessing firearms in the Northern District of New York. We will use all of the tools at our disposal to make sure these people are prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.”

    ATF Special Agent in Charge Bryan Miller stated: “This case underscores the serious threat that illegal firearms trafficking pose to our communities. These defendants — including two convicted felons — were involved in trafficking firearms, a crime that puts lives at risk and undermines the safety of our communities. Thanks to the diligent work of ATF NY Syracuse, in coordination with the Syracuse Police Department and the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Northern District of New York, we were able to disrupt this operation and hold these individuals accountable. We remain committed to working alongside our law enforcement partners to stem schemes that fuel violent crime.”

    The charges filed against Burch, Richardson, and Stanford carry a maximum term of 15 years in prison, a maximum fine of $250,000, and a term of supervised release of up to 3 years. A defendant’s sentence is imposed by a judge based on the particular statutes the defendant is convicted of violating, the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines, and other factors. Burch is scheduled to be sentenced on November 12, 2025; Richardson is scheduled to be sentenced on October 15, 2025; and Stanford is scheduled to be sentenced on August 27, 2025.  The defendants will appear for sentencing before Senior United States District Judge David N. Hurd.

    ATF investigated the case with assistance from the Syracuse Police Department’s Intelligence Unit. Assistant U.S. Attorney Jessica N. Carbone is prosecuting the case as part of Project Safe Neighborhoods.

    Project Safe Neighborhoods (PSN) is the centerpiece of the Department of Justice’s violent crime reduction efforts.  PSN is an evidence-based program proven to be effective at reducing violent crime.  Through PSN, a broad spectrum of stakeholders work together to identify the most pressing violent crime problems in the community and develop comprehensive solutions to address them.  As part of this strategy, PSN focuses enforcement efforts on the most violent offenders and partners with locally based prevention and reentry programs for lasting reductions in crime. For more information about Project Safe Neighborhoods, please visit https://www.justice.gov/psn.

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Security: Utah Man Pleads Guilty in Making Threats Against Palestinian Rights Organization

    Source: US FBI

                WASHINGTON – Kevin Brent Buchanan, 63, of Tooele, Utah, pleaded guilty yesterday in the District of Columbia in connection with threatening violence against the employees of a D.C.-based Palestinian rights organization, announced U.S. Attorney Jeanine Ferris Pirro.

                Buchanan pleaded guilty to a one-count information charging him with transmitting in interstate commerce a communication containing a threat to injure the person of another. U.S. District Court Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly scheduled a sentencing hearing for November 18, 2025. Buchanan faces a maximum of five years in prison and a fine of up to $250,000.

                Joining in the announcement were Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon of the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division and FBI Assistant Director in Charge Steven J. Jensen of the Washington Field Office.

                According to court documents, between Oct. 31, 2023, and Nov. 2, 2023, Buchanan used his cell phone to call and leave five voice mail messages for members of the organization. In his November 2 message, Buchanan stated in part: “Your families are going to be followed and watched;” “You don’t even belong in America;” “I hope every Muslim in the United States [expletive] croaks;” and “You are all going to [expletive] die, you pieces of [expletive] traitors.”

                Buchanan admitted that he intentionally targeted the organization because its staff and members are Palestinian, and because the organization advocates on behalf of Palestinians.

                The FBI Washington Field Office investigated the case. Valuable assistance was provided by FBI Salt Lake City and the United States Attorney’s Office for the District of Utah. Prosecuting the case are Assistant U.S. Attorneys Timothy Visser and Joshua Gold for the District of Columbia and Trial Attorney Sanjay Patel of the Department of Justice Civil Rights Division’s Criminal Section.

    24cr256

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Booker, Kim Statement on Trump Administration Firing First Assistant Desiree Grace

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for New Jersey Cory Booker

    WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, U.S. Senators Cory Booker (D-NJ) and Andy Kim (D-NJ) issued the following statement:

    “Trump’s Department of Justice is once again criticizing a court that acted within its authority, continuing a pattern of publicly undermining judicial decisions and showing disregard for the rule of law and the separation of powers.

    “The firing of a career public servant, lawfully appointed by the court, is another blatant attempt to intimidate anyone that doesn’t agree with them and undermine judicial independence.

    “This Administration may not like the law, but they are not above it.

    “The people of New Jersey deserve a U.S. Attorney who will enforce the law and pursue justice for the people of our state without partisanship or politics.”

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI Asia-Pac: LCQ19: Combating traffic offences

    Source: Hong Kong Government special administrative region

    ​Following is a question by the Hon Yung Hoi-yan and a written reply by the Secretary for Transport and Logistics, Ms Mable Chan, in the Legislative Council today (July 23):

    Question:

    It has been reported that after the occurrence of traffic accidents recently, many drivers who caused the accidents chose to hit and run or refused to provide the drivers’ personal particulars. There are views that the reason for the drivers who caused the accidents taking such actions is the lighter penalty for the relevant traffic offences, thereby enabling them to circumvent more serious offences such as causing casualties by dangerous driving, which reflected the existence of legal loopholes in the authorities’ efforts to combat traffic offences. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:

    (1) of the respective numbers of persons who were (i) arrested, (ii) prosecuted, (iii) convicted after trial and on own plea for being involved in traffic accidents in each of the past five years, together with a breakdown by the offenses involving the drivers concerned (including but not limited to (a) careless driving, (b) causing grievous bodily harm by dangerous driving, (c) causing death by dangerous driving, (d) failing to stop after a traffic accident, (e) failing to report after a traffic accident, and (f) refusing to provide the driver’s information after a traffic accident);

    (2) given that under the Road Traffic Ordinance (Cap. 374) (the Ordinance), the maximum penalty for refusal to give information on the driver of a vehicle suspected of having committed an offence under the Ordinance is liable to a fine of $10,000 and an imprisonment for six months, whereas the maximum penalty for dangerous driving causing death is a fine of $50,000 and an imprisonment for 10 years; disqualification from driving for not less than five years on first conviction and not less than 10 years or life on subsequent conviction, there are views that the disparity in the penalties between the two offences is significant, which may indirectly encourage drivers who caused accidents to circumvent serious offences by refusing to give personal particulars, whether the Government has plans to increase the penalties and maximum penalty for refusal to give a driver’s personal particulars, so as to enhance the deterrent effect; if so, of the details; if not, the reasons for that;

    (3) it is learnt that if the registered owner of the vehicle concerned is a limited company and the relevant person refused to give the driver’s personal particulars after the traffic accident, the penalty is only limited to a fine and no one has to be imprisoned, whether the Government has plans to review the responsibility of the registrant of the vehicle concerned after a traffic accident, e.g. whether it will hold the responsible individuals of companies of the vehicle involved (including director, general manager or company secretary) responsible for the traffic accident, and whether it will study empowering the Commissioner for Transport to refuse to issue licences to owners of company vehicles who have repeatedly committed offences under section 63(1) of the Ordinance; if so, of the details; if not, the reasons for that;

    (4) given that Schedule 8 to the Criminal Procedure Ordinance (Cap. 221) sets out the level of fines for offences, but there are views that the Schedule was last revised in 1994 and has failed to adequately reflect the severity of some of the offences (including behaviour in contravention of traffic legislation) taking into account the current social environment and economic changes, whether the Government has plans to review the Schedule and increase the corresponding amounts of fines; if so, of the details; if not, the reasons for that; and

    (5) given that under the Magistrates Ordinance (Cap. 227), the maximum sentence Magistrates’ Courts can impose is generally two years’ imprisonment and a fine of $100,000; and maximum three years’ imprisonment where there are two or more indictable offences being dealt with by the courts at the same time, whether the Government will review the Ordinance and study expanding the Magistrates’ power to impose imprisonment and fine in parallel, so as to ensure that they can impose deterrent penalties when more serious offences (including contravention of traffic legislation) are being adjudicated; if so, of the details; if not, the reasons for that?

    Reply:

    President,

    After consulting the Hong Kong Police Force (HKPF), the Department of Justice, and the Judiciary Administration, my consolidated reponse to the questions raised by the Hon Yung Hoi-yan on combating traffic offences is as follows:

    (1) The numbers of arrests related to the offences mentioned in the question from 2020 to 2024 are listed in the table below. Apart from the initial figures, which may have been influenced by the COVID-19 pandemic, the numbers have remained generally stable in recent years.
     

    Offences 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
    Careless Driving 26 48 25 36 34
    Causing grievous bodily harm by dangerous driving 84 93 102 103 102
    Causing death by dangerous driving 51 55 54 56 34
    Failing to stop after a traffic accident 7 20 24 23 33
    Failing to report a traffic accident 7 18 24 20 31
    Failing to give particulars after a traffic accident 0 1 0 1 0

    The HKPF does not maintain a breakdown of statistical data for “prosecutions”, “convictions through trial”, or “guilty pleas”. 

    (2) and (3) In accordnance with sections 63(1), (2) and (3) and 63B(2) and (3) of the Road Traffic Ordinance (Cap. 374) (the Ordinance), if the driver of a vehicle is suspected of having committed an offence under the Ordinance, or an accident occurs owing to the presence of a vehicle on a road, a police officer may, within six months after the date of the alleged offence or accident, demand any person to provide the personal particulars of the driver involved and the relationship (if any) of the person to the driver concerned. Sections 63B(5) and (7) of the Ordinance provide that any person who contravenes section 63B(2) or (3) commits an offence and is liable on conviction to a fine at level 3 (i.e. $10,000) and to imprisonment for six months, unless the person proves that he did not know, and could not with reasonable diligence have ascertained, the personal particulars of the driver involved.

    The Government agrees that a registered vehicle owner should have a certain degree of responsibility with regard to who drives the vehicle registered under his name. However, the registered owner may not actually have full control of all operational information of his vehicle. Therefore, the current section 63B of the Ordinance provides a defence provision to exempt registered vehicle owners from the responsibility of providing driver information in respect of the vehicle concerned under certain circumstances to strike a proper balance.

    The HKPF has consistently enforced the law strictly and effectively, striving to bring offenders to justice. When investigating traffic accidents, apart from requiring the registered vehicle owner to provide information on the driver who may have been involved in the accident under section 63 of the Ordinance, the HKPF will, depending on the nature of the case, use various methods to gather evidence. These methods include analysing footage from nearby security cameras, dash cameras, or even fingerprints to identify the driver involved. In other words, even if the HKPF cannot obtain information of the driver who may have been involved in the accident from the registered owner, there are still ways for the HKPF to find out the cause of the accident through other means and to prosecute the suspected offender.

    The Government will continue to pay heed to stakeholders’ views and review the legislation when appropriate.

    (4) Schedule 8 to the Criminal Procedure Ordinance (Cap. 221) sets out different levels of fines applicable to penalty provisions under various ordinances. Bureaux and departments will from time to time review and propose adjustments to penalties under relevant legislation based on their policy considerations to ensure that the penalties reflect the severity of the offences. The Government will review the fine levels table as appropriate.

    (5) The scope of charges heard in the Magistrates’ Courts includes summary offences and indictable offences, with the maximum penalty for indictable offences generally being imprisonment for two years and a fine of $100,000. The Government may, in accordance with relevant policies, empower magistrates to impose maximum penalties under specific legislation when enacting or amending such laws to enhance deterrent effect, instead of amending the Magistrates Ordinance (Cap. 227). Currently, certain ordinances already authorise magistrates to impose a maximum penalty of up to three years’ imprisonment and a fine of $5 million for a single offence. In addition, while all criminal proceedings commence in the Magistrates’ Courts, more serious indictable offences may be transferred to the District Court or the Court of First Instance of the High Court for trial. The District Court has a sentencing limit of up to seven years’ imprisonment, while the Court of First Instance may impose the maximum penalty prescribed by the relevant legislative provisions. This mechanism has been operating effectively.

    Currently, different levels of courts (including the Magistrates’ Courts) have distinct judicial jurisdictions, allowing cases to be reasonably allocated based on their nature, severity, and complexity to ensure the efficiency of judicial operations. Any proposals to adjust the judicial jurisdiction of individual court levels (including the Magistrates’ Courts) should go through a comprehensive and prudent review and an extensive consultation with stakeholders, before any decisions are made. Key considerations include the demarcation of judicial jurisdiction among different court levels, ensuring that each level of courts has adequate judicial manpower and legal support to handle relevant cases, as well as the overall resources, facilities, and supporting arrangements of the courts.

    MIL OSI Asia Pacific News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: July 22nd, 2025 Heinrich Announces Committee Passage of $6.5 Million to Combat Crime, Save Lives, & Keep New Mexicans Safe

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for New Mexico Martin Heinrich

    WASHINGTON — U.S. Senator Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.) announced the bipartisan Senate Appropriations Committee passage of the Fiscal Year 2026 (FY26) Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies Appropriations Bill. With Committee approval of this bill, Heinrich secured support for over $6.5 million for nine local projects in New Mexico.

    “While this Appropriations bill isn’t perfect, it includes resources and investments I negotiated for New Mexico that will help our law enforcement officers solve and reduce violent crime, keep our communities safe, and save lives,” said Heinrich, a member of the Senate Appropriations Committee. “This legislation will allocate additional resources to investigate, respond to, and prevent crimes in Tribal communities, including funding to address the crisis of Missing and Murdered Indigenous Persons. Additionally, the bill creates a fentanyl tracking system, builds on my work to prevent firearm straw purchases and illegal gun trafficking, and makes opioid use disorder medications more accessible to New Mexicans. As a member of the Senate Appropriations Committee, I will always fight for investments that put New Mexico communities first.”

    Next, the bill will be considered by the full United States Senate.

    Congressionally Directed Spending

    Heinrich successfully included $6,521,000 in investments for the following 9 local projects in the bill:

    • $1,668,000 for the New Mexico Statewide Sexual Assault Program to increase capacity at the Helpline and Work Force Trauma Institute.
    • $1,050,000 for the Bernalillo County Sheriff’s Office for forensic analysis and crime scene reconstruction equipment.
    • $1,000,000 for the Las Cruces Police Department to establish an Evidence Processing Lab for local law enforcement agencies.
    • $908,000 for the Albuquerque Police Department to purchase crime scene processing equipment at the Metropolitan Forensic Science Center.
    • $629,000 for the City of Farmington to acquire forensic DNA and narcotics identification equipment, training, and personnel.
    • $533,000 for Eastern New Mexico University Campus to enhance lighting and safety on campus.
    • $350,000 for New Mexicans to Prevent Gun Violence to expand its youth gun violence prevention programs.
    • $268,000 for the Doña Ana County Sheriff’s Office to purchase mobile security trailers.
    • $115,000 for Gallup Police Department to purchase crime scene reconstruction equipment.

    Additionally, Heinrich and U.S. Senator Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.) successfully included $1,000,000 for the New Mexico Medical Investigator to enhance the DNA Processing Laboratory.

    Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies Key Points and Highlights

    Combatting Crimes on Tribal Lands: Heinrich successfully included language directing the Department of Justice (DOJ) to continue to allocate additional resources to address the crisis of Missing and Murdered Indigenous Persons, including providing sufficient funding to investigate, respond to, and prevent crimes in Tribal communities. Heinrich helped secure $95,000,000 within the Crime Victims Fund specifically for law enforcement efforts on Tribal lands and in order for federal, state, and tribal governments to coordinate on these critical public safety initiatives.

    Fentanyl Tracking System: Heinrich successfully included language directing the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) to develop a comprehensive fentanyl tracking system. That tracking system would include documentation of seizure location, chemical composition, probable or known manufacturing location, and probable or known point of entry into the United States. Currently, fentanyl interdiction is compiled at land ports of entry by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), but the DEA does not have readily accessible tracking data on the movement of illicit drugs within the U.S. or their point of origin. Requiring the compilation and organization of that data will complement DHS’ work and improve our country’s work to effectively combat the fentanyl crisis.

    Firearm Straw Purchases Prevention: Heinrich successfully included language calling on the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) to continue its public awareness campaign to reduce firearm straw purchases at the retail level and to educate would-be straw purchasers of the penalties associated with knowingly participating in an illegal firearm purchase. This language builds on Heinrich’s work to negotiate and author the provision in the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act that increased criminal penalties for straw purchases and made it illegal to traffic firearms out of the United States. To date, more than 1,000 defendants have been charged by the Department of Justice because of those provisions, removing hundreds of firearms from the streets.

    Removing Barriers to Lifesaving Medication: Heinrich successfully included language directing the DEA to take further action to remove barriers to access for opioid use disorder medications such as buprenorphine. The data clearly shows that prescriptions of medications for opioid use disorder significantly reduce the risk of overdose death, but despite their demonstrated effectiveness, approximately 87% of those suffering from opioid use disorder do not have a prescription for these lifesaving medications. The inclusion of this language will assist local medical and mental health providers and make medications, including buprenorphine, more accessible to New Mexicans.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: July 22nd, 2025 Heinrich Announces Committee Passage of $6.5 Million to Combat Crime, Save Lives, & Keep New Mexicans Safe

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for New Mexico Martin Heinrich

    WASHINGTON — U.S. Senator Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.) announced the bipartisan Senate Appropriations Committee passage of the Fiscal Year 2026 (FY26) Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies Appropriations Bill. With Committee approval of this bill, Heinrich secured support for over $6.5 million for nine local projects in New Mexico.

    “While this Appropriations bill isn’t perfect, it includes resources and investments I negotiated for New Mexico that will help our law enforcement officers solve and reduce violent crime, keep our communities safe, and save lives,” said Heinrich, a member of the Senate Appropriations Committee. “This legislation will allocate additional resources to investigate, respond to, and prevent crimes in Tribal communities, including funding to address the crisis of Missing and Murdered Indigenous Persons. Additionally, the bill creates a fentanyl tracking system, builds on my work to prevent firearm straw purchases and illegal gun trafficking, and makes opioid use disorder medications more accessible to New Mexicans. As a member of the Senate Appropriations Committee, I will always fight for investments that put New Mexico communities first.”

    Next, the bill will be considered by the full United States Senate.

    Congressionally Directed Spending

    Heinrich successfully included $6,521,000 in investments for the following 9 local projects in the bill:

    • $1,668,000 for the New Mexico Statewide Sexual Assault Program to increase capacity at the Helpline and Work Force Trauma Institute.
    • $1,050,000 for the Bernalillo County Sheriff’s Office for forensic analysis and crime scene reconstruction equipment.
    • $1,000,000 for the Las Cruces Police Department to establish an Evidence Processing Lab for local law enforcement agencies.
    • $908,000 for the Albuquerque Police Department to purchase crime scene processing equipment at the Metropolitan Forensic Science Center.
    • $629,000 for the City of Farmington to acquire forensic DNA and narcotics identification equipment, training, and personnel.
    • $533,000 for Eastern New Mexico University Campus to enhance lighting and safety on campus.
    • $350,000 for New Mexicans to Prevent Gun Violence to expand its youth gun violence prevention programs.
    • $268,000 for the Doña Ana County Sheriff’s Office to purchase mobile security trailers.
    • $115,000 for Gallup Police Department to purchase crime scene reconstruction equipment.

    Additionally, Heinrich and U.S. Senator Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.) successfully included $1,000,000 for the New Mexico Medical Investigator to enhance the DNA Processing Laboratory.

    Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies Key Points and Highlights

    Combatting Crimes on Tribal Lands: Heinrich successfully included language directing the Department of Justice (DOJ) to continue to allocate additional resources to address the crisis of Missing and Murdered Indigenous Persons, including providing sufficient funding to investigate, respond to, and prevent crimes in Tribal communities. Heinrich helped secure $95,000,000 within the Crime Victims Fund specifically for law enforcement efforts on Tribal lands and in order for federal, state, and tribal governments to coordinate on these critical public safety initiatives.

    Fentanyl Tracking System: Heinrich successfully included language directing the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) to develop a comprehensive fentanyl tracking system. That tracking system would include documentation of seizure location, chemical composition, probable or known manufacturing location, and probable or known point of entry into the United States. Currently, fentanyl interdiction is compiled at land ports of entry by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), but the DEA does not have readily accessible tracking data on the movement of illicit drugs within the U.S. or their point of origin. Requiring the compilation and organization of that data will complement DHS’ work and improve our country’s work to effectively combat the fentanyl crisis.

    Firearm Straw Purchases Prevention: Heinrich successfully included language calling on the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) to continue its public awareness campaign to reduce firearm straw purchases at the retail level and to educate would-be straw purchasers of the penalties associated with knowingly participating in an illegal firearm purchase. This language builds on Heinrich’s work to negotiate and author the provision in the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act that increased criminal penalties for straw purchases and made it illegal to traffic firearms out of the United States. To date, more than 1,000 defendants have been charged by the Department of Justice because of those provisions, removing hundreds of firearms from the streets.

    Removing Barriers to Lifesaving Medication: Heinrich successfully included language directing the DEA to take further action to remove barriers to access for opioid use disorder medications such as buprenorphine. The data clearly shows that prescriptions of medications for opioid use disorder significantly reduce the risk of overdose death, but despite their demonstrated effectiveness, approximately 87% of those suffering from opioid use disorder do not have a prescription for these lifesaving medications. The inclusion of this language will assist local medical and mental health providers and make medications, including buprenorphine, more accessible to New Mexicans.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: 07.22.2025 Sen. Cruz Introduces Bill Targeting NGOs and Adversaries Funding Violent Riots

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Texas Ted Cruz
    WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) and colleagues introduced the Stop Financial Underwriting of Nefarious Demonstrations and Extremist Riots (Stop FUNDERs) Act. This bill adds rioting, as defined by the federal anti-riot statute, to the list of RICO predicate offenses, allowing the Department of Justice to use the full suite of RICO tools against entities who fund or coordinate violent interstate riots.
    Sen. Cruz said, “Every American has the right to freedom of speech and peaceful protest, but not to commit violence. Domestic NGOs and foreign adversaries fund and use riots in the United States to undermine the security and prosperity of Americans. My legislation will give the Department of Justice the tools it needs to hold them accountable, and I urge colleagues to pass it expeditiously.”
    The bill is cosponsored by Sens. John Cornyn (R-Texas), Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.), Bill Hagerty (R-Tenn.), Thom Tillis (R-N.C.), Mike Lee (R-Utah), and Josh Hawley (R- Mo.).
    Sen. Cornyn said, “Radical, left-wing groups who fund acts of violence, coordinate attacks against law enforcement, and spearhead the destruction of property must be stopped. This legislation would add rioting to the list of racketeering offenses to crack down on this lawless behavior while ensuring the First Amendment rights of free speech and peaceful protest are protected.”
    Sen. Tuberville said, “77 million Americans voted for President Trump and his America First policy agenda – and that includes arresting and deporting illegal aliens. Democrats don’t like that – so they are rioting in the streets and violently attacking law enforcement officers. This cannot stand. My colleagues and I are introducing a bill to make sure the Department of Justice has the tools it needs to go after anti-American terrorist groups and their funders who are protecting illegal rapists, murderers, and criminals. We have to cut these violent riots off at the source. The adults are back in charge, and law and order will prevail.”
    Sen. Hagerty said, “From anti-Semitic riots to violent anti-ICE attacks, those who fund and coordinate violent riots across our country must be held accountable. The Stop FUNDERs Act will give the Department of Justice the tools it needs to bring those facilitating and financing violence on our campuses and in our streets to account.”
    Sen. Tillis said, “Organized riots like those in Los Angeles pose a serious threat to public safety, endanger law enforcement, and undermine the rule of law. The Stop FUNDERs Act gives the Department of Justice the tools to go after the individuals and organizations that fund and orchestrate violent riots across our country. I’m proud to support this legislation to hold these bad actors accountable and restore law and order in our communities.”
    Companion legislation was introduced in the House by Rep. Beth Van Duyne (R-Texas-24).
    Rep. Van Duyne said, “The standard of treating violent, extremist activists as individual criminals must end. It is time we empower our law enforcement with a commonsense tool to treat these violent mobs, their funding sources, and their organizers as the criminal enterprises they are by passing the Stop FUNDERS Act. Since the days of the George Floyd riots, to the violence we see across American cities and college campuses today, it is obvious there are well funded, well outfitted, and highly coordinated efforts to plan and execute violent and potentially deadly missions of chaos and mayhem. This is organized crime, and we need to attack it as such.”
    This bill is supported by Heritage Action and National Right to Work Committee.
    Read the full text of the bill here.
    BACKGROUND
    The Stop FUNDERs Act will:
    Amend 18 U.S.C. § 1961(1) to add “rioting,” as defined in the Anti-Riot Act, to the list of racketeering predicate offenses.
    Enable the Department of Justice to use RICO tools—including joint liability and group prosecution, conspiracy charges, asset forfeiture, and enhanced criminal penalties—against organizations and individuals who repeatedly fund or coordinate violent interstate riots.
    Deter abuse of nonprofit status and expose hidden financial pipelines behind politically motivated violence.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Ministers Burke and Dillon Initiate Public Consultation on Review of Employment Permit Occupations lists

    Source: Government of Ireland – Department of Jobs Enterprise and Innovation

    23rd July 2025

    Peter Burke, Minister for Enterprise, Tourism and Employment, and Alan Dillon, Minister of State for Small Business, Retail and Employment, have today announced the opening of the consultation period inviting submissions from stakeholders on the status of occupations on the employment permits Occupations Lists. The Lists are used to administer Ireland’s employment permits policy. They consist of the Ineligible Occupations List – occupations for which there is an adequate supply of labour and skills with Ireland and the EEA, and for which an employment permit will not be issued, and the Critical Skills Occupations List – occupations in short supply in Ireland and across the EEA.

    The last review of the occupations lists took place in 2023, and resulted in 11 additional roles being placed on the Critical Skills Occupations List, and 32 roles being made eligible for a General Employment Permit. 

    Minister Burke said:

    “I am delighted to launch this next review of the eligible occupations for employment permits. At a time of full employment, with over 2.81 million people at work, and with 90,000 new jobs created in the last year, it is vital that we continue to have a strong and flexible employment permits system to allow non-EEA nationals to fill the skill and labour gaps we cannot access in Ireland or Europe and to ensure our economy remains competitive. 

    “As demonstrated by the changes made to the employment permit system over the last year, the system is responsive to the needs of the sectors and industries it serves. This full review will allow us to ensure the system remains up-to-date in a way that serves both workers and employers.”

    Minister Dillon added:

    “Our economic migration policy accommodates the arrival of non-EEA nationals to fill skills and labour gaps in the domestic economy in the short to medium term. These workers are a vital part of the Irish economy. My Department’s reviews of the system promote an integrated approach to address these labour market deficiencies in the longer term and ensure we can continue to meet our labour needs.

    “Where employers or stakeholders are facing challenges in recruiting a specific occupation and believe it should be eligible for an employment permit, or believe a certain occupation should move onto the critical skills list, now is their opportunity to share this feedback.

    “With the consultation running over the summer period, there is plenty of time for interested employers and sectors who use the employment permits system to provide their feedback. Employer’s observations are vital in helping inform the department on how the list system is operating and where it can be improved.”

    The submission process is an opportunity for stakeholders to provide additional information and potentially different perspectives on the nature and extent of skill shortages.  

    Submissions will be accepted through the online consultation form made available on the Department’s website and will be open from 23 July to 19 September.

    Notes for Editor

    Background

    The Employment Permits System

    The Irish State’s general policy is to promote the sourcing of labour and skills needs from within the workforce of Ireland, the European Union and other EEA states. Policy in relation to applications for employment permits remains focused on facilitating the recruitment from outside the EEA of highly skilled personnel, where the requisite skills cannot be met by normal recruitment or by training.  Employment permit policy is part of the response to addressing skills deficits which exist and are likely to continue into the medium term, but it is not intended over the longer term to act as a substitute for meeting the challenge of up-skilling the State’s resident workforce, with an emphasis on the process of lifelong learning, and on maximising the potential of EEA nationals to fill our skills deficits.

    The Occupations Lists

    The Employment Permits system is designed to attract highly skilled workers from outside the EEA to Ireland, to meet skills demand in the economy where those skills can’t be accessed through the resident labour force.  For the purposes of the employment permits system, occupations fall into three categories:

    • Occupations listed on the Critical Skills Occupations List are highly skilled professional roles that are in high demand and are not always available in the resident labour force.  Occupations on this list are eligible for a Critical Skills Employment Permit (CSEP) and include roles such as medicine, ICT, sciences, finance and business.  Special “fast-track” conditions attach to this permit type including the eligibility to apply to the Department of Justice for family members to accompany the permit holder immediately; and after two years may apply to the Department of Justice for permission to work without the requirement for an employment permit. 
    • Ineligible occupations are those with evidence suggesting there are sufficient Irish/EEA workers to fill such vacancies. Employment permits are not granted for these occupations.
    • Every other job in the labour market, where an employer cannot find a worker, is eligible for an employment permit.  For General Employment Permits, Seasonal Employment Permits and Contract for Services Employment Permits the employer is required to undertake a Labour Market Needs Test. If no-one suitable applies for the job, the employer is free to apply for an employment permit. Occupations such as these may be skills of a more general nature and are typically eligible for a General Employment Permit (GEP).  This permit type is renewable and after five years the applicant may apply to the Department of Justice for long term residency permission.  

    The Critical Skills and Ineligible Occupations Lists Review

    It is vital that the employment permits scheme is responsive to changes in economic circumstances and labour market conditions. Therefore, it is necessary to review the Critical Skills and Ineligible Occupations Lists periodically, in accordance with the changing needs of the labour market. 

    The review process utilises research undertaken by the Expert Group on Future Skills Needs (EGFSN) and other experts in the labour market, including the Skills and Labour Market Research Unit (SLMRU) at SOLAS. The Department also invites submissions from industry representatives, other Government Departments and any other stakeholders who might have a case to make, via a periodic open consultation on the Department’s website. The Department also seeks the observations of the Inter-Departmental Group which oversees the review process.

    An occupation may be considered for inclusion on the critical skills occupation list or removal from the ineligible lists provided that:

    • shortage exists across the occupation, despite attempts by industry to train and there are no suitable Irish/EEA nationals available to undertake the work;
    • development opportunities for Irish/EEA nationals are not undermined;
    • genuine skills shortage exists and that it is not a recruitment or retention problem; and
    • the Government education, training, employment and economic development policies are supported.

    Submission process

    As part of this review process, submissions are sought from employers, representative bodies, Government Departments, Agencies, and other interested parties relating to occupations currently included on or absent from the lists.

    The submission process is an opportunity for stakeholders to provide additional information and potentially different perspectives on the nature and extent of skill shortages.  Stakeholder submissions are a vital source of information, helping inform the Department’s final assessment of the status of occupations. 

    ENDS

    Back to Department News

    Back to Top

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Tuberville, Cruz Introduce Bill Targeting Funders of Violent Interstate Protests

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator Tommy Tuberville (Alabama)

    WASHINGTON – Today, U.S. Senator Tommy Tuberville (R-AL) joined U.S. Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) in introducing the Stop Financial Underwriting of Nefarious Demonstrations and Extremist Riots (Stop FUNDERs) Act. The legislation would add rioting to the list of Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) predicate offenses, giving the U.S. Department of Justice authority to use the full suite of RICO tools against entities who fund or coordinate violent interstate riots, such as the ones recently seen in Los Angeles, California.

    “77 million Americans voted for President Trump and his America First policy agenda – and that includes arresting and deporting illegal aliens,” said Senator Tuberville.“Democrats don’t like that – so they are rioting in the streets and violently attacking law enforcement officers. This cannot stand. My colleagues and I are introducing a bill to make sure the Department of Justice has the tools it needs to go after anti-American terrorist groups and their funders who are protecting illegal rapists, murderers, and criminals. We have to cut these violent riots off at the source. The adults are back in charge, and law and order will prevail.”

    “Every American has the right to freedom of speech and peaceful protest, but not to commit violence,” said Senator Cruz.“Domestic NGOs and foreign adversaries fund and use riots in the United States to undermine the security and prosperity of Americans. My legislation will give the Department of Justice the tools it needs to hold them accountable, and I urge colleagues to pass it expeditiously.”

    U.S. Senators Bill Hagerty (R-TN), Mike Lee (R-UT), Thom Tillis (R-NC), John Cornyn (R-TX), and Josh Hawley (R-MO) also joined the legislation. U.S. Representative Beth Van Duyne (R-TX-24) introduced companion legislation in the U.S. House of Representatives.

    This bill is supported by Heritage Action and National Right to Work Committee.

    Senator Tommy Tuberville represents Alabama in the United States Senate and is a member of the Senate Armed Services, Agriculture, Veterans’ Affairs, HELP and Aging Committees.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI Security: Joplin Man Indicted for Felon in Possession of Firearm

    Source: Office of United States Attorneys

    SPRINGFIELD, Mo. – A Joplin, Mo., man has been indicted by a federal grand jury in connection with his possession of a firearm recovered following a shooting in Joplin, Mo.

    Andrew M. Reed, 22, was charged in a single count indictment with being a felon possession of a firearm. Today’s indictment replaces a federal criminal complaint filed on July 2, 2025.

    According to an affidavit filed in support of the original complaint, police officers responded to the area of 5th and Joplin Avenue in Joplin, Mo., on Feb. 15, 2025, in reference to gunshots, and recovered several spent cartridge casings in the area. Officers recovered a firearm with a thirty-round extended magazine loaded with ammunition consistent with the spent shell casings. Surveillance footage from a nearby business showed a male, later identified as Reed, hiding the firearm.

    Reed has prior felony convictions and is prohibited from possessing firearms. Under federal law, it is illegal for anyone who has been convicted of a felony to be in possession of any firearm or ammunition.

    The charges contained in this indictment are simply accusations, and not evidence of guilt. Evidence supporting the charges must be presented to a federal trial jury, whose duty is to determine guilt or innocence.

    This case is being prosecuted by Assistant U.S. Attorney Anthony M. Brown It was investigated by the United States Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives, and the Joplin, Mo., Police Department.

    Operation Take Back America

    This case is part of Operation Take Back America, a nationwide initiative that marshals the full resources of the Department of Justice to repel the invasion of illegal immigration, achieve the total elimination of cartels and transnational criminal organizations (TCOs), and protect our communities from the perpetrators of violent crime. Operation Take Back America streamlines efforts and resources from the Department’s Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Forces (OCDETFs) and Project Safe Neighborhood (PSN).

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Security: Local man gets over 10 years after picking up and delivering “aparatos”

    Source: Office of United States Attorneys

    LAREDO, Texas – A 25-year-old Laredo resident has been sentenced for conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute five kilograms or more of cocaine, announced U.S. Attorney Nicholas J. Ganjei.

    Fernando Tadeo Cerda, 25, pleaded guilty July 19, 2023.

    U.S. District Judge Keith P. Ellison has now ordered Cerda to serve 120 months in federal prison to be immediately followed by five years of supervised release for the drug trafficking conviction. At the hearing, the court considered Cerda was subject to a mandatory 10 years in prison due to being previously convicted of smuggling aliens. 

    Cerda had also admitted he violated his term of supervised release and received another nine months to be served consecutively for a total 129-month-term of imprisonment.  

    The investigation revealed Cerda had conspired with his uncle, Jesus Garza, to coordinate delivery of large amounts of cocaine. 

    On Nov. 27, 2020, Cerda met with Garza and provided him a duffle bag containing the drugs. As Garza departed the location in Laredo, law enforcement conducted a traffic stop and discovered the bag with five bricks which contained over 5,000 grams of cocaine.

    Cerda later admitted Garza had instructed him to pick up and deliver “aparatos” (kilograms of cocaine). He further stated he made a total of four deliveries and was paid $1,000.

    He will remain in custody pending transfer to a Federal Bureau of Prisons facility to be determined in the near future.

    Garza, 63, Laredo, had also pleaded guilty and later sentenced to 48 months in prison. 

    Drug Enforcement Administration and Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives conducted the Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Forces (OCDETF) operation. OCDETF identifies, disrupts and dismantles the highest-level criminal organizations that threaten the United States using a prosecutor-led, intelligence-driven, multi-agency approach. Additional information about the OCDETF Program can be found on the Department of Justice’s OCDETF webpage. 

    Assistant U.S. Attorney Brandon Scott Bowling prosecuted the case.

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Security: 11 Venezuelan Nationals and One Columbian National Indicted for Financial Fraud in the District of Utah

    Source: Office of United States Attorneys

    SALT LAKE CITY, Utah – An indictment was unsealed today charging a dozen foreign nationals of bank fraud and engaging in transactions involving criminally derived property. The defendants were indicted by a federal grand jury in April 2025 at the U.S. District Court in Salt Lake City. Eleven Venezuelan nationals and one Colombian national are accused of committing financial fraud crimes after they allegedly participated in a scheme to defraud banks in Utah and elsewhere.

    According to court documents, between January 2023 and June 2023, the defendants were involved in a scheme to defraud financial institutions by opening accounts and presenting fraudulent cashier’s checks to be deposited to those accounts. In some instances, defendants deposited multiple counterfeit checks at different branches on the same day. Defendants then laundered the funds by check, cashier’s check, and cash withdrawal.

    Defendants are residents of Salt Lake County:

    1.    Gilberto Emiro Andrade-Romero, 36, of Venezuela
    2.    Felipe Enrique Linares-Lobo aka Carlos M. Hidalgo Noguera, 32, of Venezuela
    3.    Alexis Jose Calixto-Bracho, 25, of Venezuela
    4.    Daniel Jose Fuenmayor-leal, aka Enais Inciarte-Urdaneta, 34, of Venezuela
    5.    Yeritza Astrid Cuello-Plata, 40, of Venezuela
    6.    Federico Javier Gutierrez-Pirela, 36, of Venezuela
    7.    Hendry Ricardo Martinez-Concho, 42, of Venezuela
    8.    Cristina Paola Nava-Yoris, 24, of Venezuela
    9.    Patricia Del Carmen Orozco-Cuello, 37, of Colombia
    10.    Ismael Norberto Rodriguez-Moreno, 47, of Venezuela
    11.    Jorge Luis Urribarri-Vento, 32, of Venezuela
    12.    Rayner Jose Delgado-Quiroz, 24, of Venezuela

    Acting United States Attorney Felice John Viti for the District of Utah made the announcement.

    The case is being investigated by Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) and a HSI Task Force Officer with the Salt Lake City Police Department.

    Assistant United States Attorneys Brent L. Andrus and Carl D. Lesueur of the District of Utah are prosecuting the case.

    This is part of Operation Take Back America, a nationwide initiative that marshals the full resources of the Department of Justice to repel the invasion of illegal immigration, achieve the total elimination of cartels and transnational criminal organizations (TCOs), and protect our communities from the perpetrators of violent crime. Operation Take Back America streamlines efforts and resources from the Department’s Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Forces (OCDETF) and Project Safe Neighborhoods (PSN).

    An indictment is merely an allegation and all defendants are presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law. 
     

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Statement by Rep. Dan Goldman on DOJ’s Announcement That It Would Meet With Ghislaine Maxwell

    Source: US Congressman Dan Goldman (NY-10)

    “In a further effort to conceal the Epstein Files to protect President Trump, the Department of Justice is yet again using the criminal justice system for political purposes by belatedly and improperly seeking cooperation from Ghislaine Maxwell, who is serving a 20-year sentence on convictions for conspiring with Jeffrey Epstein to sexually abuse minors. 

    “As Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche well knows from his lengthy tenure as a prosecutor and supervisor in the Southern District of New York, this is almost certainly not the first time the DOJ has inquired about cooperation from Ghislaine Maxwell, who, as a matter of course, would have been offered the opportunity to reduce her sentence in return for truthful and forthright information about Epstein and all others involved in the scheme.  

    “DAG Blanche is now doing an end-run around the SDNY and its institutional policies by acting as a political agent of President Trump to forestall the release of the full Epstein files by tacitly floating a pardon for Maxwell in return for information that politically benefits President Trump. 

    “Maxwell’s information is only as credible as any corroboration found in the Epstein files, including recordings, witness interviews, electronic communications, and photographs and videos. Neither the grand jury testimony nor Maxwell’s compromised information will expose the full extent of the conspiracy, including all those who may be included in the files.   

    “Do not be fooled: this latest delay tactic is yet another effort to conceal the Epstein files. Full transparency will only occur when DOJ releases the full and complete Epstein files, as they promised.”     

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI Security: Raleigh County Woman Pleads Guilty to Federal Drug Crime

    Source: Office of United States Attorneys

    BECKLEY, W.Va. – Carey Ann Trotter, also known as “Carey Ann Metz-Wood,” 41, of Crab Orchard, pleaded guilty today to aiding and abetting possession with intent to distribute 5 grams or more of methamphetamine.

    According to court documents and statements made in court, on July 1, 2024, Trotter possessed approximately 10.51 grams of methamphetamine and a total of 25.95 grams of para-fluorofentanyl, a synthetic opioid, in several packages. As part of her guilty plea, Trotter admitted that she intended to use some of the controlled substances and aid and abet another individual in the possession and distribution of controlled substances.

    Trotter further admitted to possessing a Glock model 21 .45-caliber pistol, a CBC model 817 .17-caliber rifle, and a 26-round high-capacity magazine for .45-caliber ammunition. Federal law prohibits a person with a prior felony conviction from possessing a firearm or ammunition. Trotter knew she was prohibited from possessing a firearm because of her prior felony conviction for delivery of oxycodone in Raleigh County Circuit Court on January 3, 2017.

    Trotter is scheduled to be sentenced on November 7, 2025, and faces a mandatory minimum of five years and up to 40 years in prison, at least four years of supervised release, and a $5 million fine.

    Trotter’s co-defendant, Joshua Mason Trotter, 44, of Crab Orchard, pleaded guilty on May 27, 2025, to being a felon in possession of a firearm. Joshua Mason Trotter admitted to possessing the Glock model 21 .45-caliber pistol and CBC model 817 .17-caliber rifle on July 1, 2024. He is scheduled to be sentenced on September 26, 2025.

    Acting United States Attorney Lisa G. Johnston made the announcement and commended the investigative work of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) and the Raleigh County Sheriff’s Office.

    United States Magistrate Judge Omar J. Aboulhosn presided over the hearing. Assistant United States Attorney JC MacCallum is prosecuting the case.

    This case is part of Operation Take Back America, a nationwide initiative that marshals the full resources of the Department of Justice to repel the invasion of illegal immigration, achieve the total elimination of cartels and transnational criminal organizations (TCOs), and protect our communities from the perpetrators of violent crime. Operation Take Back America streamlines efforts and resources from the Department’s Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Forces (OCDETF) and Project Safe Neighborhoods (PSN).

    A copy of this press release is located on the website of the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of West Virginia. Related court documents and information can be found on PACER by searching for Case No. 5:25-cr-22.

    ###

     

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI USA: S. 237, Honoring Our Fallen Heroes Act of 2025

    Source: US Congressional Budget Office

    Bill Summary

    S. 237 would expand eligibility for death, disability, and education benefits provided by the Public Safety Officer’s Benefit (PSOB) program to public safety officers and their beneficiaries if an officer dies or becomes permanently and totally disabled as a direct result of a cancer covered under the bill. S. 237 would apply retroactively to officers who die or become disabled on or after January 1, 2020. The bill would require the Department of Justice (DOJ) to review the list of cancers covered by the bill at least once every three years.

    S. 237 also would extend the deadline to file a claim for benefits under the PSOB program for officers and their beneficiaries for officers who die or become permanently and totally disabled from COVID-19. Under current law, the deadline to file such a claim was May 11, 2023, when the public health emergency declared during the coronavirus pandemic ended.

    Estimated Federal Cost

    The estimated budgetary effect of S. 237 is shown in Table 1. The costs of the legislation fall within budget function 750 (administration of justice).

    Table 1.

    Estimated Budgetary Effects of S. 237
     

    By Fiscal Year, Millions of Dollars

    		    
     

    2025

    2026

    2027

    2028

    2029

    2030

    2031

    2032

    2033

    2034

    2035

    2025-2030

    2025-2035
     

    Increases in Direct Spending

    		    

    Estimated Budget Authority

    0

    22

    50

    43

    30

    26

    23

    18

    17

    18

    18

    171

    265

    Estimated Outlays

    0

    15

    40

    45

    34

    27

    23

    19

    17

    17

    18

    161

    255
     

    Increases in Spending Subject to Appropriation

    		    

    Estimated Authorization

    *

    6

    15

    16

    13

    11

    n.e.

    n.e.

    n.e.

    n.e.

    n.e.

    61

    n.e.

    Estimated Outlays

    *

    5

    14

    16

    13

    11

    n.e.

    n.e.

    n.e.

    n.e.

    n.e.

    59

    n.e.

    Basis of Estimate

    CBO assumes that the bill will be enacted near the end of fiscal year 2025. The estimate is based on CBO’s analysis of cancer incidence and mortality among the general population of the United States and a review of the medical literature related to cancer incidence and mortality among public safety officers, including firefighters. The estimate is also based on CBO’s projections of the number of deaths among public safety officers that are likely to be related to cancer and the number of officers or their beneficiaries who apply for and receive benefits under the PSOB program.

    Background

    The PSOB program is administered by DOJ to provide cash benefits to federal, state, and local public safety officers and their beneficiaries in the event of death or permanent and total disability resulting from physical injuries and certain mental health conditions, such as post-traumatic stress disorder. Education benefits are also available to eligible spouses and children of officers who die or become disabled in the line of duty. Public safety officers include those working in law enforcement, firefighters, emergency management, and emergency medical services.

    The program already provides benefits to World Trade Center responders and their beneficiaries who die or become disabled from cancer from exposure to a carcinogen after the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001. CBO is unaware of the program approving any death or disability claim related to cancer that does not stem from attacks on September 11, 2001.

    Eligibility Under the Bill

    Under S. 237, an exposure to a carcinogen would qualify as an injury in the line of duty if an officer later dies or becomes permanently and totally disabled as a direct result of cancer. The bill would direct DOJ to presume that a qualifying injury caused the death or disability if the officer:

    • Was exposed to a carcinogen while in the line of duty;
    • Served for at least five years before being diagnosed with cancer; and
    • Received a diagnosis of cancer within 15 years of leaving service.

    The presumption would not apply if DOJ determines, based on competent medical evidence, that the exposure to a carcinogen was not a substantial factor in an officer’s death or disability.

    Direct Spending

    The PSOB program pays a one-time death benefit to spouses and children or other designated beneficiaries of officers who die in the line of duty. The cost of those benefits is classified in the budget as direct spending. In 2025, the one-time benefit is $448,575; under current law, that amount increases each year to account for inflation.

    Cancer Claims. CBO expects that most relatives of potentially eligible officers would apply for benefits. Based on information from DOJ and other similar programs, such as the September 11th Victim Compensation Fund, CBO estimates that about 75 percent of claims for cancer-related deaths among public safety officers would ultimately result in benefits being paid to family members or designated beneficiaries. CBO expects that firefighters would account for most claims under the bill.

    Using data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) on cancer mortality among the general population and a review of medical literature regarding cancer incidence and mortality among firefighters, CBO estimates that, on average, about 40 claims would be filed annually over the 2025-2035 period.

    S. 237 also would require benefits to be awarded for cancer deaths occurring between January 1, 2020, and the date of enactment. CBO estimates that about 200 claims would be submitted for officers who died from cancer during that period and that those claims would be filed within three years of enactment.

    COVID-19 Claims. Additionally, the bill would extend by three years the deadline to file a claim for death benefits for spouses, children, or other beneficiaries of officers who die from COVID-19. Under current law, an officer is presumed to be eligible by DOJ if the officer was diagnosed with COVID-19 within 45 days of the last day of duty and medical evidence indicates that the officer had the virus or complications from the virus at the time of death. Under current law, the deadline to file such a claim was May 11, 2023, when the public health emergency related to the coronavirus pandemic was lifted. Using information from DOJ about the number of those claims it received between 2020 and 2023 and data from the CDC on COVID-19 mortality, CBO estimates that about 150 claims would be submitted for officers who die from COVID-19.

    In total, CBO estimates that under the bill, about 765 claims would be filed over the 2025-2035 period. Based on the amount of time CBO estimates that it would take DOJ to process each eligible claim, CBO estimates that about 530 claims would be approved for benefits over the next decade under S. 237. (About 30 claims filed during that period would be approved after 2035.) Accounting for expected increases in inflation, CBO estimates that enacting S. 237 would increase direct spending by $255 million over the 2025-2035 period.

    Spending Subject to Appropriation

    By expanding the scope of qualifying deaths and injuries, S. 237 also would increase the number of claimants eligible for disability and education benefits under the PSOB program. Spending for those benefits is subject to the availability of appropriated funds. DOJ also would incur administrative costs to implement the bill. In total, CBO estimates that implanting S. 237 would cost $59 million over the 2025-2030 period (see Table 2). That spending would be subject to the availability of appropriated funds.

    Disability Benefits. Under current law, the PSOB program pays benefits for permanent and total disability resulting from injuries suffered in the line of duty. Under current law, claimants receive a one-time benefit that is the same amount as the death benefit ($448,575 in 2025), which increases each year to account for inflation. In total, CBO estimates that the cost of disability benefits under S. 237 would be $24 million over the 2025-2030 period.

    Table 2.

    Estimated Increases in Spending Subject to Appropriation Under S. 237
     

    By Fiscal Year, Millions of Dollars

    		  
     

    2025

    2026

    2027

    2028

    2029

    2030

    2025-2030

    Disability Benefits

    		              

    Estimated Authorization

    0

    1

    5

    7

    6

    5

    24

    Estimated Outlays

    0

    1

    5

    7

    6

    5

    24

    Education Benefits

    		              

    Estimated Authorization

    0

    4

    9

    8

    6

    5

    32

    Estimated Outlays

    0

    3

    8

    8

    6

    5

    30

    Administrative Costs

    		              

    Estimated Authorization

    *

    1

    1

    1

    1

    1

    5

    Estimated Outlays

    *

    1

    1

    1

    1

    1

    5

    Total Changes

    		              

    Estimated Authorization

    *

    6

    15

    16

    13

    11

    61

    Estimated Outlays

    *

    5

    14

    16

    13

    11

    59

    Cancer Claims. S. 237 would designate an exposure to a carcinogen as an injury in the line of duty if an officer later becomes permanently disabled as a direct result of cancer. Using information from DOJ about the historical number of claims, CBO expects that fewer claims for disability benefits would be filed under the bill than claims for death benefits. On that basis, CBO estimates that one claim for disability benefits would be filed for every three claims for death benefits. Additionally, based on conversations with DOJ and subject matter experts, CBO expects that most officers affected by cancer would not meet the permanently and totally disabled threshold. Based on historical approval rates for disability-related claims, CBO estimates that about 50 percent of claims for disability claims would ultimately be approved.

    Under the bill, CBO estimates that about 120 claims for disability benefits related to cancer would be filed over the 2025-2030 period. Using information from DOJ about the time it takes to process each claim, CBO estimates that about 50 claims would be approved over the same period. (About 10 additional claims filed during the period would be approved after 2030.)

    COVID-19 Claims. S. 237 also would extend by three years the deadline to file a claim for benefits under the PSOB program for officers who become permanently and totally disabled from COVID-19. Using data from DOJ about the number of those claims filed and approved over the 2020-2023 period, CBO estimates that under S. 237 fewer than five claims would be approved for officers who become disabled from COVID-19.

    Education Benefits. Under current law, the spouse or children of a public safety officer who dies or becomes permanently disabled from physical injuries and certain mental health conditions may also be eligible for education benefits to cover tuition, fees, books, supplies and room and board. The monthly benefit for a full-time student in 2025 is $1,536; that amount is adjusted each year for inflation. Under current law, the maximum duration of benefits is 45 months of full-time education or a proportionate duration of part-time education.

    Historical data from the PSOB program indicate that about three claims for education benefits have been approved for every two claims that have been approved for death and disability benefits. On that basis, CBO estimates that about 360 claims stemming from death benefits and about 50 claims stemming from disability benefits will be approved over the 2025-2030 period under S. 237. Using information about the time it takes to process claims for education benefits, CBO estimates that about 650 people will receive benefits over the 2025-2030 period under the bill. In total, CBO estimates that those benefits would cost $30 million over the 2025-2030 period. Those outlays reflect the historical spending patterns for such claims.

    Administrative Costs. As discussed above, implementing S. 237 would require DOJ to review more than 150 additional claims annually under the bill. Using information from the agency about the number of staff required to process claims under current law, CBO estimates that implementing the bill would require an additional five people each year to process claims and review the list of eligible cancers at a cost of $1 million annually. In total, CBO estimates that DOJ would incur $5 million in administrative costs over the 2025-2030 period.

    Uncertainty

    CBO’s cost estimate for S. 237 is subject to significant uncertainty in several areas:

    • Identifying public safety officers’ rate of incidence and deaths from cancer and COVID-19;
    • Estimating the number of people who would be eligible to file claims for benefits under the bill;
    • Calculating the proportion of claims that DOJ would determine to be eligible, which is affected by the latency periods for different cancers and other circumstances specific to each officer’s medical history and lifestyle; and
    • Anticipating the timing of submissions and the amount of time required to review applications and process claims.

    CBO strives for estimates that are in the middle of possible outcomes and each factor in the estimate could be higher or lower than CBO estimates. As a result, enacting the bill could result in higher or lower costs than CBO estimates.

    Pay-As-You-Go Considerations

    The Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act of 2010 establishes budget-reporting and enforcement procedures for legislation affecting direct spending or revenues. The net changes in outlays that are subject to those pay-as-you-go procedures are shown in Table 3.

    Table 3.

    CBO’s Estimate of the Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Effects of S. 237, the Honoring Our Fallen Heroes Act of 2025, as Reported by the Senate Committee on the Judiciary on May 20, 2025
     

    By Fiscal Year, Millions of Dollars

    		    
     

    2025

    2026

    2027

    2028

    2029

    2030

    2031

    2032

    2033

    2034

    2035

    2025-2030

    2025-2035
     

    Net Increase in the Deficit 

    		    

    Pay-As-You-Go Effect

    0

    15

    40

    45

    34

    27

    23

    19

    17

    17

    18

    161

    255

    Increase in Long-Term Net Direct Spending and Deficits

    CBO estimates that enacting S. 237 would not increase net direct spending by more than $2.5 billion in any of the four consecutive 10-year periods beginning in 2036.

    CBO estimates that enacting S. 237 would not increase on‑budget deficits by more than $5 billion in any of the four consecutive 10-year periods beginning in 2036.

    Mandates

    The bill contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act.

    Federal Costs: Jeremy Crimm

    Mandates: Erich Dvorak

    Estimate Reviewed By

    Justin Humphrey
    Chief, Finance, Housing, and Education Cost Estimates Unit

    Kathleen FitzGerald 
    Chief, Public and Private Mandates Unit

    H. Samuel Papenfuss 
    Deputy Director of Budget Analysis

    Phillip L. Swagel

    Director, Congressional Budget Office

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI Security: Former Taney County Volunteer Firefighter Sentenced to 180 Months for Child Pornography

    Source: US FBI

    SPRINGFIELD, Mo. – A Hollister, Mo., man was sentenced in federal court today for sharing child pornography over the internet.

    Cameron Allen Ryan, 36, was sentenced by U.S. District Judge M. Douglas Harpool to 15 years in federal prison without parole. The court also sentenced Ryan to 10 years of supervised release following incarceration. The court ordered Ryan to pay $51,000 in restitution to his victims and a $5,000 special assessment under the Justice for Victims of Trafficking Act.

    Ryan will be required to register as a sex offender upon his release from prison and will be subject to federal and state sex offender registration requirements, which may apply throughout his life.

    Ryan pleaded guilty on Dec. 17, 2024, to one count of receipt and distribution of child pornography. According to court documents, Ryan, who was a volunteer with the Taney County Volunteer Fire Department, admitted to receiving and trading files of child pornography with the undercover FBI agent and other individuals on the internet.

    Law enforcement was alerted by a CyberTip made to the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children. On Nov. 28, 2023, an undercover FBI agent downloaded numerous images of minor children which had been posted to an image hosting website by the suspect user profile and began communicating with suspect via email. The undercover officer made contact with the suspect, and the suspect sent a video to the agent that depicted a minor engaged in sexually explicit conduct.

    The FBI identified Ryan as the suspect user. When officers searched Ryan’s cell phones, one of the phones was logged in to the email account that had been messaging the undercover FBI agent. A forensic analysis of the two phones found over 1800 files containing child pornography.

    This case was prosecuted by Assistant U.S. Attorney Stephanie L. Wan. It was investigated by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Southwest Missouri Cyber Crimes Task Force, the Springfield, Mo., Police Department, and the Taney County, Mo., Sheriff’s Office.

    Project Safe Childhood

    This case was brought as part of Project Safe Childhood, a nationwide initiative launched in May 2006 by the Department of Justice to combat the growing epidemic of child sexual exploitation and abuse. Led by the United States Attorneys’ Offices and the Criminal Division’s Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section, Project Safe Childhood marshals federal, state, and local resources to locate, apprehend, and prosecute individuals who sexually exploit children, and to identify and rescue victims. For more information about Project Safe Childhood, please visit www.usdoj.gov/psc . For more information about Internet safety education, please visit www.usdoj.gov/psc and click on the tab “resources.”

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI USA: MEDIA ADVISORY: Welch to Gaggle with Reporters After GOP’s Sham Hearing on Civil Rights and DEI

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator Peter Welch (D-Vermont)

    Welch to gaggle at 4:30 PM, or immediately after the hearing
    Assistant Attorney General Dhillon to Testify
    WASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Senator Peter Welch (D-Vt.), Ranking Member of the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution, will gaggle with press immediately following the conclusion of tomorrow’s hearing, entitled “Ending Illegal DEI Discrimination & Preferences: Enforcing Our Civil Rights Laws.”
    Witnesses will include Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon; Gene Hamilton, President, America First Legal; and Alabama State Senator Robert Stewart.
    Former career staff attorneys at the Department of Justice’s Civil Rights Division plan to attend the hearing.
    Hearing: “Ending Illegal DEI Discrimination & Preferences: Enforcing Our Civil Rights Laws.”
    Hearing Time: 2:30 PM
    Hearing Location: Dirksen 226
    Gaggle with Senator Welch: 4:30 PM or immediately after the hearing concludes; outside of the hearing room
    Questions/RSVP: Aaron White; 202-960-0677

    MIL OSI USA News –