12163 stories
·
23 followers

Judge Says ICE Violated Court Orders in 74 Cases—See Them All Here

1 Comment
Chief U.S. District Judge Patrick J. Schiltz and ICE agents | Dave Decker/ZUMAPRESS/Newscom/U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota

An infuriated federal judge in Minnesota on Wednesday published a list of nearly 100 court orders that Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) had violated over the last month, and Reason has collected links to the cases. 

Patrick J. Schiltz, Chief Judge of the U.S. District Court for Minnesota, released the list as an appendix to a court order castigating ICE for repeatedly violating court orders regarding immigrant detention.

Although the appendix listed 74 cases with 96 separate violations, Schiltz wrote that the "extent of ICE's noncompliance is almost certainly substantially understated. This list is confined to orders issued since January 1, 2026, and the list was hurriedly compiled by extraordinarily busy judges."

Nevertheless, the extraordinary document offers a glimpse of a national campaign by the federal government to deprive detained immigrants of due process rights that an overwhelming majority of federal judges say they're entitled to.

In one example from Schiltz's list, ICE arrested a Venezuelan man living in Eagan, Minnesota, and transferred him to Texas, despite a judge's order to keep him in-state. 

According to the judge's order granting the man's writ of habeas corpus:

He lives with his partner and his six-year-old daughter, and he is employed by a landscaping company. He is not subject to a final order of removal. After Petitioner attended an appointment regarding his pending asylum application on January 20, 2026, he was arrested and detained by ICE without a warrant and without apparent justification. Petitioner filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus that same day. The next day, January 21, 2026, the Court entered an Order enjoining Respondents from moving Petitioner outside of Minnesota until the Court ruled on the pending habeas petition. Nevertheless, the Court has reason to believe that Petitioner is presently detained in El Paso, Texas.

In another case from the appendix, ICE arrested a Moldovan refugee who had already gone through extensive background checks and vetting. In response to her petition for emergency relief, the government claimed that her detention was based on her "fail[ure] to acquire permanent resident status within one year." 

But as the judge noted in his order granting the woman's petition (citation omitted), "Such a basis for detention is illogical given that refugees are not eligible to apply for adjustment of status until they have 'been physically present in the United States for at least one year.'"

Schiltz's list, however, is just a PDF with case names and numbers. Let's bring it up to Web 1.0 standards.

Your friendly neighborhood Reason reporter found the dockets for 71 out of the 74 cases on CourtListener, a free online repository of federal court records. It appears most of the judges' orders and other docket entries are still only available on PACER, the federal government's clunky, pay-by-the-page database, but this is at least one more step toward making the information widely available.

25-CV-4722: Hakan K. v. Noem (Judges: JMB/DTS) (Order Violated: January 24, 2026)

25-CV-4741: Luis L.P. v. Brott (Judges: NEB/DJF) (Order Violated: January 9, 2026)

25-CV-4776: Ahmed A. v. Pamela Bondi (Judges: JWB/DJF) (Order Violated: January 6, 2026)

26-CV-080: Francisco E.O. v. Olson (Judges: JRT/DJF) (Order Violated: January 15, 2026)

26-CV-013: Suhaib M. v. Kristi Noem (Judges: JWB/DJF) (Order Violated: January 12, 2026)

26-CV-031: Alex V.Y.L. v. Pamela Bondi (Judges: JWB/DJF) (Order Violated: January 9, 2026)

26-CV-106: Marlon M.M. v. Easterwood (Judges: NEB/ECW) (Order Violated: January 15, 2026)

26-CV-0107: Juan T.R. v. Noem (Judges: PJS/DLM) (Order Violated: January 14, 2026)

26-CV-130: Botir B. v. Bondi (Judges: LMP/DJF) (Order Violated: January 15, 2026)

26-CV-138: Lide E.G.Q. v. Executive Office for Immigration Review (Judges: JWB/JFD) (Order Violated: January 9, 2026)

26-CV-00146: Jhony A. v. Bondi (Judges: JMB/LIB) (Order Violated: January 15, 2026)

26-CV-150: Christopher A.F.E. v. Pamela Bondi (Judges: JWB/ECW) (Order Violated: January 14, 2026)

26-CV-156: Evelin M.A. v. Bondi (Judges: NEB/DLM) (Order Violated: January 23, 2026)

26-CV-160: Jose A. v. Bondi (Judges: NEB/EMB) (Order Violated: January 15, 2026)

26-CV-00161: Pascual G. v. Bondi (Judges: JMB/LIB) (Order Violated: January 12, 2026)

26-CV-164: Santiago A.C.P. v. Todd Lyons (Judges: JWB/DTS) (Order Violated: January 15, 2026; January 19, 2026; January 20, 2026)

26-CV-166: Andrei C. v. Lyons (Judges: SRN/ECW) (Order Violated: January 12, 2026)

26-CV-167: Oscar O.T. v. Pamela Bondi (Judges: JWB/JFD) (Order Violated: January 15, 2026; January 19, 2026; January 20, 2026)

26-CV-00168: Martin R. v. Bondi (Judges: JMB/LIB) (Order Violated: January 12, 2026; January 20, 2026; January 21, 2026)

26-CV-00208: Abdi W. v. Trump (Judges: KMM/SGE) (Order Violated: January 21, 2026)

26-CV-213: Adriana M.Y.M. v. David Easterwood (Judges: JWB/JFD) (Order Violated: January 24, 2026)

26-CV-216: Estefany J.S. v. Pamela Bondi (Judges: JWB/SGE) (Order Violated: January 13, 2026)

26-CV-231: Martha S.S. v. Kristi Noem (Judges: JWB/DLM) (Order Violated: January 16, 2026; January 20, 2016)

26-CV-233: Joaquin Q. L. v. Bondi (Judges: LMP/DTS) (Order Violated: January 14, 2026; January 21, 2026)

26-CV-244: Jose L.C.C. v. Pamela Bondi (Judges: JWB/DTS) (Order Violated: January 15, 2026; January 19, 2026)

26-CV-252: Juan R. v. Bondi (Judges: SRN/DTS) (Order Violated: January 16, 2026)

26-CV-261: Jesus A.P. v. Bondi (Judges: PJS/EMB) (Order Violated: January 15, 2026)

26-CV-272: Abdiqadir A. v. Bondi (Judges: JMB/DTS) (Order Violated: January 16, 2026)

26-CV-276: Bashir Ali K. v. Noem (Judges: LMP/DTS) (Order Violated: January 22, 2026)

26-CV-282: Roman N. v. Donald Trump (Judges: JWB/DLM) (Order Violated: January 3, 2026; January 17, 2026)

26-CV-00283: Sandra C. v. Bondi (Judges: JMB/JFD) (Order Violated: January 16, 2026; January 21, 2026)

26-CV-296: Yeylin C.R. v. Bondi (Judges: NEB/LIB) (Order Violated: January 20, 2026)

26-CV-301: Liban G. v. Noem (Judges: SRN/ECW) (Order Violated: January 15, 2026; January 16, 2026; January 20, 2026; January 22, 2026)

26-CV-0309: Joseph T.M. v. Bondi (Judges: PJS/EMB) (Order Violated: January 22, 2026)

26-CV-312: Obildzhon E. v. Pamela Bondi (Judges: JWB/DTS) (Order Violated: January 17, 2026)

26-CV-313: Corina E. v. Pamela Bondi (Judges: JWB/DTS) (Order Violated: January 17, 2026)

26-CV-314: E.E. v. Pamela Bondi (Judges: JWB/DTS) (Order Violated: January 17, 2026)

26-CV-316: Manolo Z. L. v. Trump (Judges: LMP/DTS) (Order Violated: January 15, 2026)

26-CV-317: C. v. Bondi (Judges: NEB/JFD) (Order Violated: January 18, 2026)

26-CV-319: C. v. Bondi (Judges: NEB/JFD) (Order Violated: January 18, 2026)

26-CV-328: Felix J.C.A. v. Pamela Bondi (Judges: JWB/DLM) (Order Violated: January 24, 2026)

26-CV-00351: Ihor D. v. Noem (Judges: JMB/DTS) (Order Violated: January 20, 2026; January 22, 2026)

26-CV-369: Francisco M. v. Bondi (Judges: JMB/EMB) (Order Violated: January 16, 2026; January 23, 2026)

26-CV-0380: Alberto C.M. v. Noem (Judges: DWF/SGE) (Order Violated: January 23, 2026)

26-CV-396: Josue David P. A. v. Bondi (Judges: LMP/JFD) (Order Violated: January 17, 2026)

26-CV-00404: Nadejda P. v. Lyons (Judges: KMM/DLM) (Order Violated: January 22, 2026)

26-CV-410: Paula G. v. Bondi (Judges: JMB/DLM) (Order Violated: January 17, 2026; January 20, 2026)

26-CV-423: Ronnie C. v. Pamela Bondi (Judges: JWB/JFD) (Order Violated: January 18, 2026; January 21, 2026)

26-CV-0424: J.B.C.O. et al., v. Bondi (Judges: JRT/DJF) (Order Violated: January 19, 2026; January 25, 2026)

26-CV-437: Darvin M. v. Bondi (Judges: SRN/EMB) (Order Violated: January 19, 2026)

26-CV-439: Maria U.C.G. v. Pamela Bondi (Judges: JWB/LIB) (Order Violated: January 24, 2026)

26-CV-00440: Abdirahman S. v. Bondi (Judges: JMB/DJF) (Order Violated: January 22, 2026)

26-CV-00444: Enrique L. v. Bondi (Judges: JMB/SGE) (Order Violated: January 22, 2026)

26-CV-0445: Fernando T. v. Noem (Judges: ECT/EMB) (Order Violated: January 20, 2026)

26-CV-447: Alexis D.A.M. v. Bondi (Judges: JRT/ECW) (Order Violated: January 20, 2026)

26-CV-449: Hector T.G. v. Bondi (Judges: NEB/LIB) (Order Violated: January 23, 2026)

26-CV-454: Luis S. v. Bondi (Judges: ECT/LIB) (Order Violated: January 22, 2026)

26-CV-457: Sonia M.M.C. v. Pamela Bondi (Judges: JWB/LIB) (Order Violated: January 24, 2026)

26-CV-00480: Jose A. v. Noem (Judges: JMB/ECW) (Order Violated: January 26, 2026)

26-CV-485: Ivan R. v. Pamela Bondi (Judges: JWB/EMB) (Order Violated: January 21, 2026; January 24, 2026)

26-CV-489: Yosber I.M.C. v. Bondi (Judges: JRT/DLM) (Order Violated: January 21, 2026)

26-CV-493: Fabian L.C. v. Bondi (Judges: NEB/DLM) (Order Violated: January 24, 2026)

26-CV-00504: Maria P. v. Brott (Judges: JMB/JFD) (Order Violated: January 23, 2026)

26-CV-517: Brayan M.O. v. Bondi (Judges: NEB/JFD) (Order Violated: January 24, 2026)

26-CV-00537: Isidro L. v. Lyons (Judges: JMB/DLM) (Order Violated: January 22, 2026)

26-CV-546: Maria V.H., et al., v. Bondi (Judges: JMG/DLM) (Order Violated: January 24, 2026)

26-CV-00561: Elvis T. E., et al. v. Bondi (Judges: KMM/JFD) (Order Violated: January 22, 2026)

26-CV-0575: Guled O. v. Noem (Judges: ADM/DJF) (Order Violated: January 23, 2026)

26-CV-00580: Carlos A. G. v. Bondi (Judges: SRB-DJF) (Order Violated: January 23, 2026)

26-CV-597: Jose V. v. Easterwood (Judges: DSD/LIB) (Order Violated: January 25, 2026)

26-CV-00663: Marco Q. v. Noem (Judges: SRB-DLM) (Order Violated: January 26, 2026)

The post Judge Says ICE Violated Court Orders in 74 Cases—See Them All Here appeared first on Reason.com.

Read the whole story
freeAgent
54 seconds ago
reply
And what are the consequences?
Los Angeles, CA
Share this story
Delete

Key Inflation Metric Hits 3 Percent, Despite Trump's Claim That Rising Prices Are 'Solved'

1 Share
US Dollars tinted red | Photo: PedaltotheStock/Envato

Inflation is stubbornly refusing to be vanquished by presidential edict.

Prices paid to domestic producers for their goods jumped by 0.5 percent during December, according to Department of Labor data released Friday morning. That surge in higher wholesale prices brought the annualized producer price index (PPI) to 3 percent for the year. December's sharp increase in the PPI defied expectations and followed tamer increases of 0.1 percent in October and 0.2 percent in November.

More alarming is the so-called "core PPI," which does not include more volatile categories like food and fuel prices. In December, core PPI increased by 0.7 percent, and climbed by 3.3 percent over the course of last year.

The PPI is often seen as an early warning signal about inflation at the consumer level—that's what is measured by the more well-known consumer price index, which rang in at 0.3 percent in December and 2.7 percent for 2025. That's because higher prices at the wholesale level will likely be passed along to the retail level in the coming months.

The new inflation report comes at an awkward time for President Donald Trump, who declared earlier this week that inflation had been "solved."

"It's over," Trump told an Iowa crowd at a Fox News town hall event. "We have it good where prices are coming way down."

The data also figures to complicate the ongoing fight between Trump and the Federal Reserve. Trump wants the central bank to cut interest rates more quickly to help juice the economy, but the Federal Reserve voted earlier this week to hold interest rates steady, in part because "inflation remains somewhat elevated."

High interest rates are generally seen as a check against inflation, since they encourage households and businesses to save rather than borrow or spend. Lower interest rates would ease budgetary pressure from the national debt and could make it easier for Americans to borrow, but they also might trigger another bout of higher inflation at a time when prices are already rising faster than the Fed's stated goal of 2 percent annually.

Hours before the new inflation report was published on Friday, Trump named Kevin Warsh, a former member of the Federal Reserve's board, to be the next chairman of the central bank. Warsh must be confirmed by the Senate. Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell's term ends in May, but Trump has been trying to force Powell to step down earlier.

Trump may not be able to reduce inflation by changing the leader of America's central bank or by declaring prices to be falling, but he's also not totally powerless. It is undeniable that Trump's tariffs are putting upwards pressure on prices, while also not providing the economic boost the administration promised.

Until that policy changes, it's hard to take Trump seriously when he talks about making life more affordable.

The post Key Inflation Metric Hits 3 Percent, Despite Trump's Claim That Rising Prices Are 'Solved' appeared first on Reason.com.

Read the whole story
freeAgent
2 minutes ago
reply
Los Angeles, CA
Share this story
Delete

Ode to the AA Battery

1 Share

Recently this post from @Merocle caught my eye:

I'm fixing my iFixit soldering station. I haven't used it for a long time and the battery has gone overdischarge. I hope it will come back to life. Unfortunately, there are no replacements available for sale at the moment.

iFixit soldering hub torn down - used with permission

Devices with built-in rechargeable batteries have been bugging me a lot lately. It's convenient to have a device you can take with you and use anywhere. And with modern Li-ion cells, battery life is remarkable.

Read the whole story
freeAgent
7 minutes ago
reply
Los Angeles, CA
Share this story
Delete

No Phone, No Social Safety Net: Welcome to the ‘Offline Club’

1 Comment
Across Europe’s largest cities, people are gathering for semi-silent, offline hangouts, in search of an experience that isn’t mediated through their smartphones.
Photo-Illustration: WIRED Staff; Getty Images

On cue, the room fell silent. A man seated to my left at a long wooden table began to scratch at a piece of paper with a coloring pencil. To my right, another guy picked up a book. Across the way, someone buried themselves in a puzzle. We had gathered to take part in an unfamiliar ritual: being extremely offline.

I arrived at 6:45 pm that Monday evening at a nondescript office block in Dalston, a recently gentrified area of East London. I was greeted at the door by the event host, who was wearing a T-shirt that read, “The Offline Club.” I handed them my phone, which they stowed in a specially built cabinet—a sort of shrunken-down capsule hotel.

The entryway opened into a narrow room with high concrete walls painted white, with space enough for about 40 people to sit. The wooden table ran down the center of the room, bordering both a couch area and a kitchenette stocked with herbal teas and other drinks. Two plywood staircases led up to mezzanines dressed with patterned fabric cushions and strung with soft lighting. On the opposite wall, floor-to-ceiling windows were lined with ficus and other broad leafy plants.

The attendees began to filter in, leaving their phones at the door. They ranged in age from roughly 25 to 40, fairly evenly split between the genders. The collective wardrobe bore the hallmarks of British winter—knitted woolens, corduroys, Chelsea boots, and so on—but with a modish flair typical of this part of town: a tattoo here, a turtleneck there. Many people had come alone and fell easily into conversation; I met a video producer, an insurance claim adjustor and, ironically, a software engineer for a major social media company. Others were more reserved, perhaps better attuned to the strangeness of the social occasion.

The group was drawn together by a shared ambition: to be unglued from their devices, even for just a little while. The Offline Club puts on similar phone-free events across Europe, charging around $17 for entry. Beginning last year, London hangouts began to sell out regularly.

“We talk about it as a gentle rebellion,” says Laura Wilson, cohost of the Offline Club’s London branch. “Any time you’re not on your phone, you’re claiming back for yourself.”

Soon, there was barely an empty chair, stool, or cushion in the room. The host signaled that it was time to stop talking. Following other people’s example, I picked up a coloring pencil and with an indelicate and unpracticed hand began to scrawl.

“I Feel I Am Addicted to My Phone”

The Offline Club began in 2021 with an impromptu off-grid weekend in the Dutch countryside organized by Ilya Kneppelhout, Jordy van Bennekon, and Valentijn Klol. Finding the experiment instructive, the trio started to host infrequent offline getaways in the Netherlands with the purpose of kindling the kind of informal interaction between strangers that they felt is now a rarity in a device-governed world.

The three Dutchmen formally founded the Offline Club in February 2024 and began to host hangouts in an Amsterdam café. Since then, they have exported the concept to 19 other cities, predominantly in Europe, with each branch run like a franchise by part-time organizers. The events typically follow a set format: an hour of silence, during which people are free to do whatever—reading, puzzling, coloring, crafts, and so on—followed by an hour of phone-free conversation with the other attendees.

The format took off in London last summer, after the local branch attempted to set an unofficial world record by gathering 2,000 people at the summit of Primrose Hill, central London. The aim was to watch the sunset without a bobbing sea of phones to block the view. After that, people started to snap up tickets to the hangouts.

The events are meant as a remedy to the noisy, frenetic, and impersonal qualities of city life, says Wilson, where every nano-unit of time is measured and held to schedule by alerts and reminders served up by our smartphones. “It’s like a free pocket of time where you kind of have no responsibilities for a while,” she says. “It’s reigniting that magic of when you’ve hung out with people for no reason and you had no sense of time passing.”

On the evening I attended, people had come for a variety of reasons. For some, it was firmly about escaping the perceived tyranny of their phone; for others, it was about achieving a state of deep concentration; and for some, it was more like an excuse to absorb themselves in a creative pursuit or to meet new people.

The first person to arrive, a regular at the Offline Club who introduced himself as Max, appeared to be the most ardent about the practice of being offline out of all the attendees I met. An analog man, he said he uses a smartphone only begrudgingly for work, and has never had a social media account despite going through school at the dawn of Facebook. When the room fell silent, he reached for a copy of Jonathan Haidt’s The Anxious Generation, a popular treatise on the perils of social media.

Another attendee said they grew up in Cornwall, the southernmost county in England, in the Quaker church. Now living in London, she was searching for an approximation of her experience at Quaker meetings, large portions of which are spent in collective, silent contemplation.

One person, Sangeet Narayan, introduced himself jokingly to the group as an imposter: Narayan emigrated to London last year from Bangalore, India, to work for Meta. By day, Narayan codes up the notification system for Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp, but he had come along that evening hoping to shake his dependency on some of those same apps.

“I feel I am addicted to my phone,” he told me after the event. “I feel the urge to see my phone—to open it, just for no reason.”

No Conversational Safety Net

On that Monday evening, it took a while for me to acclimatize to the combination of hush and collective concentration, which had the quality of the opening minutes of an exam minus the simmering anxiety. People seemed to be thoroughly engrossed in whatever they were doing.

Narayan told me he found himself resisting the urge to look around to see what other people were up to. Doing so felt like a betrayal in a way that, say, glancing around a train carriage does not. “It felt like I was looking into their private lives,” says Narayan. But soon he became absorbed in his own thing.

“It was quite an unusual feeling,” says Eleanor, a management consultant and first-time attendee who asked to be identified by her first name only. “But there was a lovely sense that everyone in the room was really leaning into it.”

Twice, I found myself reaching to my pocket where my phone should be, to check how much time had elapsed. A flash of panic—I must have lost it somewhere!—gave way to embarrassment at this unwelcome evidence of my own pre-programming. As I took notes or messed with the coloring pencils, though, I was able to forget the 40 strangers in the room.

The silent hour concluded abruptly when the host yanked the plug from the speakers that had been piping faint piano music and acoustic guitar into the room. Though nobody said so explicitly, I detected a reluctance to emerge from the cocoon of silence. But it was time to socialize—without a phone to act as a safety net during conversational lulls.

I struck up with the people nearest. We chatted about the silent activities they had chosen and the books they were reading, the prospect of raising children in the smartphone era, and the recent social media ban in Australia. A couple of times, things ground to a halt. One person remarked that coming to offline events had put them at ease with awkward pauses.

The conversation turned often to a hypocrisy shared widely among the group: a belief that doomscrolling impinges upon leisure time, notifications disturb peace, and algorithms pollute discourse, paired with a simultaneous unwillingness to forfeit any of those things. Most people said they first heard about the Offline Club on Instagram. But that didn’t appear to shake people’s conviction in the worth of a brief offline experience.

“I left the event weirdly feeling more energized. That really surprised me,” says Eleanor.

When it came time to leave, I queued up to retrieve my phone. Before I made it to the street, I picked up a call from my partner, wondering where I was. I popped in my ear buds and selected some music, then tapped open Google Maps to look up the way home.

Read the whole story
freeAgent
2 days ago
reply
I wonder how much people pay for this.
Los Angeles, CA
Share this story
Delete

LinkedIn will let you show off your vibe coding chops with a certificate

1 Comment

Finally, a way to prove to your LinkedIn followers that you’re proficient in vibe-coding.

LinkedIn announced a new partnership on Wednesday allowing users to official certifications in AI skills, drawing on usage data from prominent AI apps. The integration includes the video and podcast editor Descript, coding apps Lovable and Replit, and AI agent building platform Relay.app.

These platforms will use AI to assess your skills as you use them, and generate a certificate based on your usage patterns, product outcomes, and proficiency within the tools. The Microsoft-owned social network didn’t provide exact details on what users would need to do to qualify as proficient on the platform.

Image Credits: LinkedIn

Once granted, certifications will appear on your LinkedIn profile alongside other professional skills.

LinkedIn plans to add more partners to the program in the coming months, including Gamma, GitHub, and Zapier. The platform is also inviting companies to register interest in being a partner in the new verified skills program.

Image Credits: LinkedIn

“Jobs require fluency in the technology your employer depends on and AI proficiency; the ability to use these tools to deliver today is now the most in-demand skill. Today, trust matters more than ever. More than 100 million professionals have verified their identity on LinkedIn. Now, with the addition of verified skills, you can add an additional way to prove what you can actually do,” Hari Sirinivasan, VP of Product at LinkedIn, said in a statement.

According to a report by the learning platform eDX published last August, the number of job postings that required AI as a skill doubled in the trailing 12 months. A separate report from Indeed’s Hiring Lab echoed the same trend and noted that the number of U.S. job postings mentioning AI-related keywords rose to 4.2% by the end of 2025. The report mentioned that tech is still the most common sector where companies use AI-related words in postings, but other sectors like banking and marketing are also rising.

Read the whole story
freeAgent
2 days ago
reply
I’m a certified vibe coder!
Los Angeles, CA
Share this story
Delete

He Leaked the Secrets of a Southeast Asian Scam Compound. Then He Had to Get Out Alive

1 Share
A source trapped inside an industrial-scale scamming operation contacted me, determined to expose his captors’ crimes—and then escape. This is his story.
Read the whole story
freeAgent
3 days ago
reply
Los Angeles, CA
Share this story
Delete
Next Page of Stories