|
|
|
A South Korean court sentences former President Yoon to 5 years in prison
Court News |
2026/01/12 08:12
|
A South Korean court sentenced former President Yoon Suk Yeol to five years in prison Friday in the first verdict from eight criminal trials over the martial law debacle that forced him out of office and other allegations.
Yoon was impeached, arrested and dismissed as president after his short-lived imposition of martial law in December 2024 triggered huge public protests calling for his ouster.
The most significant criminal charge against him alleges that his martial law enforcement amounted to a rebellion, An independent counsel has requested the death sentence over that charge, and the Seoul Central District Court will decide on that in a ruling on Feb. 19.
Yoon has maintained he didn’t intend to place the country under military rule for an extended period, saying his decree was only meant to inform the people about the danger of the liberal-controlled parliament obstructing his agenda. But investigators have viewed Yoon’s decree as an attempt to bolster and prolong his rule, charging him with rebellion, abuse of power and other criminal offenses.
In Friday’s case, the Seoul court sentenced Yoon for defying attempts to detain him and fabricating the martial law proclamation. He was also sentenced for sidestepping a legally mandated full Cabinet meeting, which deprived some Cabinet members who were not convened of their rights to deliberate on his decree.
Judge Baek Dae-hyun said in the televised ruling that imposing “a heavy punishment” was necessary because Yoon hasn’t shown remorse and has only repeated “hard-to-comprehend excuses.” The judge also said restoring legal systems damaged by Yoon’s action was necessary.
Yoon’s defense team said they will appeal the ruling, which they believe was “politicized” and reflected “the unilateral arguments by the independent counsel.” Yoon’s defense team argued the ruling “oversimplified the boundary between the exercise of the president’s constitutional powers and criminal liability.”
Park SungBae, a lawyer who specializes in criminal law, said there is little chance the court would decide Yoon should face the death penalty in the rebellion case. He said the court will likely issue a life sentence or a sentence of 30 years or more in prison.
South Korea has maintained a de facto moratorium on executions since 1997 and courts rarely hand down death sentences. Park said the court would take into account that Yoon’s decree didn’t cause casualties and didn’t last long, although Yoon hasn’t shown genuine remorse for his action.
South Korea has a history of pardoning former presidents who were jailed over diverse crimes in the name of promoting national unity. Those pardoned include strongman Chun Doo-hwan, who received the death penalty at a district court over his 1979 coup, the bloody 1980 crackdowns of pro-democracy protests that killed about 200 people, and other crimes.
Even if Yoon is spared the death penalty or life imprisonment at the rebellion trial, he may still face other prison sentences in the multiple smaller trials he faces.
Some observers say Yoon is likely retaining a defiant attitude in the ongoing trials to maintain his support base in the belief that he cannot avoid a lengthy sentence but could be pardoned in the future.
On the night of Dec. 3, 2024, Yoon abruptly declared martial law in a televised speech, saying he would eliminate “anti-state forces” and protect “the constitutional democratic order.” Yoon sent troops and police officers to encircle the National Assembly, but many apparently didn’t aggressively cordon off the area, allowing enough lawmakers to get into an assembly hall to vote down Yoon’s decree.
No major violence occurred, but Yoon’s decree caused the biggest political crisis in South Korea in decades and rattled its diplomacy and financial markets. For many, his decree, the first of its kind in more than 40 years in South Korea, brought back harrowing memories of past dictatorships in the 1970s and 1980s, when military-backed leaders used martial law and emergency measures to deploy soldiers and tanks on the streets to suppress demonstrations.
After Yoon’s ouster, his liberal rival Lee Jae Myung became president via a snap election last June. After taking office, Lee appointed three independent counsels to look into allegations involving Yoon, his wife and associates.
Yoon’s other trials deal with charges like ordering drone flights over North Korea to deliberately inflame animosities to look for a pretext to declare martial law. Other charges accuse Yoon of manipulating the investigation into a marine’s drowning in 2023 and receiving free opinion surveys from an election broker in return for a political favor. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Supreme Court meets to weigh Trump’s birthright citizenship restrictions
Court News |
2025/11/27 06:31
|
The Supreme Court is meeting in private Friday with a key issue on its agenda — President Donald Trump ’s birthright citizenship order declaring that children born to parents who are in the United States illegally or temporarily are not American citizens.
The justices could say as soon as Monday whether they will hear Trump’s appeal of lower court rulings that have uniformly struck down the citizenship restrictions. They have not taken effect anywhere in the United States.
If the court steps in now, the case would be argued in the spring, with a definitive ruling expected by early summer.
The birthright citizenship order, which Trump signed on the first day of his second term in the White House, is part of his administration’s broad immigration crackdown. Other actions include immigration enforcement surges in several cities and the first peacetime invocation of the 18th century Alien Enemies Act.
The administration is facing multiple court challenges, and the high court has sent mixed signals in emergency orders it has issued. The justices effectively stopped the use of the Alien Enemies Act to rapidly deport alleged Venezuelan gang members without court hearings, while they allowed the resumption of sweeping immigration stops in the Los Angeles area after a lower court blocked the practice of stopping people solely based on their race, language, job or location.
The justices also are weighing the administration’s emergency appeal to be allowed to deploy National Guard troops in the Chicago area for immigration enforcement actions. A lower court has indefinitely prevented the deployment.
Birthright citizenship is the first Trump immigration-related policy to reach the court for a final ruling. Trump’s order would upend more than 125 years of understanding that the Constitution’s 14th Amendment confers citizenship on everyone born on American soil, with narrow exceptions for the children of foreign diplomats and those born to a foreign occupying force.
In a series of decisions, lower courts have struck down the executive order as unconstitutional, or likely so, even after a Supreme Court ruling in late June that limited judges’ use of nationwide injunctions.
While the Supreme Court curbed the use of nationwide injunctions, it did not rule out other court orders that could have nationwide effects, including in class-action lawsuits and those brought by states. The justices did not decide at that time whether the underlying citizenship order is constitutional.
But every lower court that has looked at the issue has concluded that Trump’s order violates or most likely violates the 14th Amendment, which was intended to ensure that Black people, including former slaves, had citizenship.
The administration is appealing two cases.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit in San Francisco ruled in July that a group of states that sued over the order needed a nationwide injunction to prevent the problems that would be caused by birthright citizenship being in effect in some states and not others.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Judge orders Trump administration to end National Guard deployment in DC
Court News |
2025/11/23 06:35
|
A federal judge on Thursday ordered the Trump administration to end its monthslong deployment of National Guard troops to help police the nation’s capital.
U.S. District Judge Jia Cobb concluded that President Donald Trump’s military takeover in Washington, D.C., illegally intrudes on local officials’ authority to direct law enforcement in the district. She put her order on hold for 21 days to allow for an appeal, however.
District of Columbia Attorney General Brian Schwalb sued to challenge the Guard deployments. He asked the judge to bar the White House from deploying Guard troops without the mayor’s consent while the lawsuit plays out.
Dozens of states took sides in Schwalb’s lawsuit, with their support falling along party lines.
Cobb found that while the president does have authority to protect federal functioning and property, he can’t unilaterally deploy the D.C. National Guard to help with crime control as he sees fit or call in troops from other states.
After her ruling, Schwalb called for troops to be sent home. “Normalizing the use of military troops for domestic law enforcement sets a dangerous precedent, where the President can disregard states’ independence and deploy troops wherever and whenever he wants — with no check on his military power,” Schwalb said.
The White House, though, stood by the deployment.
“President Trump is well within his lawful authority to deploy the National Guard in Washington, D.C., to protect federal assets and assist law enforcement with specific tasks,” said spokeswoman Abigail Jackson. “This lawsuit is nothing more than another attempt — at the detriment of DC residents — to undermine the President’s highly successful operations to stop violent crime in DC.”
In August, President Donald Trump issued an executive order declaring a crime emergency in Washington. Within a month, more than 2,300 National Guard troops from eight states and the district were patrolling the city under the command of the Secretary of the Army. Trump also deployed hundreds of federal agents to assist in patrols.
The administration has also deployed Guard troops to Los Angeles and tried to send troops into Chicago and Portland, Oregon, prompting other court challenges. A federal appeals court allowed the Los Angeles deployment, and the administration is appealing a judge’s decision in Portland that found the president did not have the authority to call up or deploy National Guard troops there.
The Supreme Court is weighing the administration’s emergency appeal to be allowed to deploy National Guard troops in the Chicago area in support of an immigration crackdown. A lower court has indefinitely prevented the deployment.
In Washington, It’s unclear how long the deployments will last, but attorneys from Schwalb’s office said Guard troops are likely to remain in the city through at least next summer.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Man pleads not guilty to sparking deadly Palisades Fire in Los Angeles
Court News |
2025/10/25 16:12
|
A 29-year-old man accused of sparking the deadly Palisades Fire, one of the most destructive wildfires in California history, pleaded not guilty Thursday to federal charges.
Jonathan Rinderknecht appeared in federal court Thursday afternoon after arriving in Los Angeles from Florida earlier in the day, his attorney Steve Haney said. A judge ordered that he remain in custody ahead of his trial.
Federal officials said Rinderknecht, who lived in the area, started a small fire on New Year’s Day that smoldered underground before reigniting nearly a week later and roaring through Pacific Palisades, home to many of Los Angeles’ rich and famous.
The fire, which left 12 dead in the hillside neighborhoods across Pacific Palisades and Malibu, was one of two blazes that broke out on Jan. 7, killing more than 30 people in all and destroying over 17,000 homes and buildings while burning for days in Los Angeles County.
Haney told the judge he took issue with the fact that Rinderknecht was facing charges for the Palisades Fire when he allegedly started the smaller fire beforehand known as the Lachman Fire.
“My client is being charged with a fire that started seven days after,” he said.
Rinderknecht was staying at his sister’s house in Orlando when he was arrested by federal officials on Oct. 7. He made his first court appearance the next day in Florida on a charge of malicious destruction by means of a fire.
A week later, a grand jury indicted him on additional charges including one count of arson affecting property used in interstate commerce, and one count of timber set afire. If convicted, he would face up to 20 years in federal prison.
Rinderknecht’s trial is set for December 16.
On Thursday, he appeared before U.S. Magistrate Judge Rozella Oliver wearing a white jumpsuit. His attorney argued that he should be released on bail, based on the evaluation of court officials in Florida.
Rinderknecht has no documented history of mental health issues, drug use, or prior criminal activity, Haney said.
However, the judge in Florida who ordered Rinderknecht to be detained said he had concerns about the Rinderknecht’s mental health and his ability to get to California for future court hearings.
He appeared agitated when the judge in Los Anglees again ordered that he remain in jail, interjecting into the microphone, “Can I actually say something about detainment?”
Haney said they planned to return to the judge with additional evidence for why Rinderknecht should be released on bail.
“He’s a frustrated young man,” Haney said after the hearing. “He doesn’t know why he’s in jail right now.”
Haney said they plan to argue that even if Rinderknecht was the cause of the initial smaller fire on New Year’s Day, there were several “intervening factors” in the week between that day and when the Palisades Fire ignited, mainly the Los Angeles Fire Department.
Rinderknecht made several 911 calls to report the fire, according to a criminal complaint. Federal officials called the Palisades blaze a “holdover fire” from the Jan. 1 fire, which was not fully extinguished by firefighters, the complaint said.
The city’s interim fire chief said such fires linger in root systems and can reach depths of 15 to 20 feet (4.6 to over 6 meters), making them undetectable by thermal imaging cameras.
“They had a duty to put the fire out,” Haney said. “I do think he’s a scapegoat.”
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trump threatens to pull support for Argentina if its politics move leftward
Court News |
2025/10/15 07:45
|
President Donald Trump on Tuesday threatened to pull assistance for Argentina — led by a political kindred spirit whose philosophy is similar to that of the Republican administration — if the nation’s internal politics don’t align with his interests in upcoming elections.
The comments came during a meeting with Argentine President Javier Milei, whose country is set to hold midterm elections for its legislative body later this month. U.S. presidents typically do not weigh in on the candidates in other countries’ democratic elections.
Referring to an opponent who was “extremely far-left” and encompassed a “philosophy that got Argentina into this problem in the first place,” Trump warned that the United States wouldn’t “waste our time” with largesse toward Buenos Aires if Milei does not prevail. In addition to the midterms that will be a referendum on his policies, Milei himself is up for reelection in 2027.
“We’re not going to let somebody get into office and squander the taxpayer money from this country. I’m not gonna let it happen,” Trump said from the Cabinet Room as he prepared to eat lunch with Milei. “If he loses, we are not going to be generous with Argentina.”
Even so, Trump insisted that the $20 billion assistance to Argentina, which administration officials strenuously deny is a bailout, was about helping “our neighbors” rather than any ties to the upcoming midterms.
“It’s just helping a great philosophy take over a great country,” the U.S. president said. “Argentina is one of the most beautiful countries that I’ve ever seen, and we want to see it succeed. It’s very simple.”
U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent added that the administration believed Milei’s coalition in the upcoming midterms would “do quite well and continue his reform agenda.”
As he opened his lunch with Milei, Trump noted that the Argentine president, who is an economist by trade, is “MAGA all the way.” That traditionally refers to his campaign slogan, “Make America Great Again,” but this time, it also meant “Make Argentina Great Again.”
Trump’s meeting with Milei was already making waves back in Argentina, with Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner, leader of the left-leaning Peronist opposition and a two-term former president, writing on social media: “Trump to Milei: ´Our agreements are subject to whoever wins election´. Argentines ... you know what to do!”
The former president is serving a six-year sentence under house arrest since June for corruption, but she remains the most influential leader of Peronism, an ideologically flexible, labor rights-focused populist movement, which emerged in the 1940s and dominated politics for decades.
Ahead of his White House meeting and during it Milei lavished praise on Trump, deploying a tactic that has helped transform Milei’s cash-strapped country into one of the Trump administration’s closest allies.
In the days that followed, Argentine Economy Minister Luis Caputo spent hours in meetings in Washington trying to seal the deal.
Reassurance came last Thursday, when Bessent announced that the U.S. would allow Argentina to exchange up to $20 billion worth of pesos for an equal sum in dollars. Saying that the success of Milei’s program was “of systemic importance,” Bessent added that the U.S. Treasury directly purchased an unspecified amount of pesos.
For the Trump administration, the timing was awkward as it struggles to manage the optics of bailing out a nine-time serial defaulter in the middle of a U.S. government shutdown that has led to mass layoffs. Democratic lawmakers and other critics have slammed it as an example of Trump rewarding loyalists at the expense of American taxpayers.
Later Thursday, Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts — who was singled out during the White House meeting by both Bessent and Trump — tried to advance a bill that would block the $20 billion in U.S. assistance, but the gambit failed in the Republican-controlled Senate.
Another topic that had been on the agenda was the Stargate project, which would expand a network of massive artificial intelligence centers to Latin America, according to a person with knowledge of the plans who was granted anonymity to speak about private discussions.
Argentina could be home to Latin America’s first Stargate, which is a joint initiative from OpenAI, Oracle and SoftBank that will build a network of big data centers that would power OpenAI’s artificial intelligence technology. It’s an initiative that’s been championed by Trump himself.
Milei also joined a ceremony at the White House honoring Charlie Kirk, the prominent right-wing political activist who was fatally shot last month. Milei often crossed paths with Kirk on the speaking circuit of the ascendant global right.
There has been no word on how Argentina, the IMF’s largest debtor, will end up paying the U.S. back for this $20 billion, which comes on top of IMF’s own loan for the same amount in April. And that one came on top of an earlier IMF loan for $40 billion.
Despite all the help, Milei’s government already missed the IMF’s early targets for rebuilding currency reserves.
“The U.S. should be concerned that Argentina has had to return for $20 billion so quickly after getting $14 billion upfront from the IMF,” said Brad Setser, a former Treasury official now at the Council on Foreign Relations.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Law Firm Web Design Information |
| Law Promo has worked with attorneys, lawyers and law firms all over the world in designing beautiful law firm websites that look great on all devices, from desktop computers to mobile phones. Law Promo can construct your law firm a brand new responsive law firm website, or help you redesign your existing site to secure your place in the mobile world. Solo Practice Law Firm Website Design |
|
|
Legal News RSS Feed
