Category: Uncategorized

Atlanta sports reporter Tabitha Turner alleges she was pepper-sprayed in the face and physically attacked by an Uber driver over the weekend following a dispute over the car temperature.

The Uber driver, identified by police as Mericole Smith, is facing charges of misdemeanor battery and simple battery after Hapeville police said a video of the Saturday incident showed that she was the aggressor and physically attacked Turner. Police said an arrest warrant would be issued for Smith.

Turner’s attorney, Miguel Dominguez, said in a Wednesday press conference that the altercation occurred as Turner was being driven to her home from the Hartsfield–Jackson Atlanta International Airport.

Smith, who accused Turner of escalating the situation in a viral TikTok video, did not return a request for comment on Thursday.

According to Dominguez, Turner had requested an Uber Comfort, which allows passengers to customize the ride. Uber’s website says that passengers who use this service can let the driver know if they want to talk during the ride and set a temperature preference.

Because of the scorching hot temperatures in Atlanta, Turner wanted “a cool Uber,” Dominguez said. But when Smith arrived, she had the windows rolled down and the air conditioner wasn’t turned on, he said.

Dominguez said that when Turner asked for the windows to be rolled up, Smith escalated the situation.

“The driver did not respond verbally, but she did put the air conditioner on, but she did not roll the windows up. And so as the ride went on, the vehicle obviously did not cool off,” he told reporters. “My client was really hot, she was sweaty, she addressed the driver again, asking that the windows be rolled up. The response she got from the driver was not kind and was not friendly. The driver was clearly irritated by, I guess, the demands of a passenger.”

Dominguez said the driver suddenly pulled over in the emergency lane on the expressway and ordered Turner out of the vehicle. He said Turner did not get out and told the driver to either take her back to the airport, where it was safe, or call the police and refund her the money for the fare.

According to the attorney, Turner was “completely calm.” He alleged that Smith exited the car, removed Turner’s bags and then attempted to “physically remove my client from the vehicle by grabbing the bookbag that she was carrying and getting into a struggle.”

In her TikTok video, Smith said she turned the air conditioner up after Turner commented on how hot the car was. However, she explained that she does not roll up the windows because she sometimes has passengers who are sick. Smith said the windows were only slightly cracked.

According to Smith, Turner started yelling at her, so she told Turner that she would take her back to the airport and end the trip.

“That was not good enough for her,” Smith said in her video. “She is going off. She is irate in the back seat, tripping, so I pull over. I’m like, actually, yeah, I’m going to need you to get out right here. So I pull over in Hapeville, we’re off the highway.”

In the video, Smith said she told Turner that Uber would refund her, but Turner refused to leave. Because the situation was escalating, Smith flagged down a passerby and asked that they call 911.

Smith said she then opened the car door and again asked Turner to get out. She alleged that Turner went “in her bag to get a weapon.” According to Smith, she got back in her car and pepper-sprayed Turner “in self-defense.”

But Dominguez said Smith pepper-sprayed his client in an unprovoked attack. In a 30-second video clip released by his office, Smith is seen telling Turner to get out of the car.

She then leans into the backseat as she curses and screams at Turner, the video shows.

The incident continued to escalate as both women exited the vehicle.

According to Dominguez, Smith physically assaulted Turner and pulled out some of her hair. Smith alleged in her video that Turner ran toward her and tried “to gouge” her eye out. Smith said in her video, which has more than two million views, that she had to get stitches on her eye.

According to a police report, Smith initiated the physical assault, and Turner scratched her while trying to defend herself.

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court is set to conclude its nine-month term Friday with a flurry of rulings, including a closely watched case concerning President Donald Trump’s attempt to end automatic birthright citizenship.

The court, which has a 6-3 conservative majority, has six cases left to decide of those in which it heard oral arguments in the current term, which began in October.

Other cases are on such issues as voting rights, religious rights and health care.

Follow live politics coverage here

The one that has attracted the most attention is the birthright citizenship dispute, which focuses not on the lawfulness of the proposal itself but whether federal judges had the power to block it nationwide while litigation continues.

What the court says about so-called nationwide injunctions could have wide-ranging impacts, with judges frequently ruling against Trump on his broad use of executive power. The court also has the option of side-stepping a decision on that issue and instead taking up the merits of the plan.

Birthright citizenship is conferred under the Constitution’s 14th Amendment, which states: “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States.”

The longstanding interpretation of the provision as understood by generations of Americans, including legal scholars on the left and right, is that anyone born on U.S. soil is an American citizen with a few minor exceptions, including people who are the children of diplomats.

Along with birthright citizenship, the other five cases the court has to decide concern:

• Whether conservative religious parents can opt their elementary school-age children out of LGBTQ-themed books in class.
• Long-running litigation over whether congressional districts in Louisiana are lawful.
• A law enacted in Texas that imposes age-restrictions for using adult websites.
• A challenge to the Affordable Care Act’s preventive care task force.
• A Federal Communications Commission program that subsidizes phone and internet services in underserved areas.

The justices typically break for the summer and return for a new term in October, although they will still likely have to continue acting on cases that reach them on an emergency basis. Such cases have been reaching the court with increasing frequency since Trump took office.

The federal agency charged with protecting workers’ civil rights has terminated a New York administrative judge who opposed White House directives, including President Donald Trump’s executive order decreeing male and female as two “immutable” sexes.

In February, Administrative Judge Karen Ortiz, who worked in the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s New York office, called Trump’s order “unethical” and criticized Acting Chair Andrea Lucas — Trump’s pick to lead the agency — for complying with it by pausing work on legal cases involving discrimination claims from transgender workers. In an email copied to more than 1,000 colleagues, Ortiz pressed Lucas to resign.

Ortiz was fired on Tuesday after being placed on administrative leave last month. The EEOC declined Wednesday to comment on the termination, saying it does not comment on personnel matters.

In response to the president’s order declaring two unchangeable sexes, the EEOC moved to drop at least seven of its pending legal cases on behalf of transgender workers who filed discrimination complaints. The agency, which enforces U.S. workplace anti-discrimination laws, also is classifying all new gender identity-related cases as its lowest priority.

The actions signaled a major departure from the EEOC’s prior interpretation of civil rights law.

In her mass February email criticizing the agency’s efforts to comply with Trump’s order, Ortiz told Lucas, “You are not fit to be our chair much less hold a license to practice law.” The letter was leaked on Reddit, where it gained more than 10,000 “upvotes.” Many users cheered its author.

The EEOC subsequently revoked her email privileges for about a week and issued her a written reprimand for “discourteous conduct.”

Ortiz said she continued to “raise the alarm” about the agency’s treatment of transgender and gender-nonconforming complainants, and convey her opposition to the agency’s actions. She sent an April 24 email to Lucas and several other internal email groups with the subject line, “If You’re Seeking Power, Here’s Power” and a link to Tears for Fears’ 1985 hit “Everybody Wants to Rule the World.”

She contested her proposed termination earlier this month, arguing in a document submitted by a union representative that she was adhering to her oath of office by calling out behavior she believes is illegal.

Ortiz “views the Agency’s actions regarding LGBTQIA+ complainants to have made the EEOC a hostile environment for LGBTQIA+ workers,” and believes that leadership has “abandoned the EEOC’s core mission,” the document says.

The judge was hired to work at the EEOC during the first Trump administration, and while she disagreed with some policies then, “she did not take any action because there was no ostensible illegality which compelled her to do so,” the document stated. “What is happening under the current administration is unprecedented.”

The letter requested the withdrawal of Ortiz’s proposed termination, the removal of all disciplinary documents from her personnel file, and that Ortiz be allowed “to continue doing her job.”

The six-page termination notice came anyway. In it, Chief Administrative Judge Regina Stephens called Ortiz’ actions “distasteful and unprofessional,” and concluded that Ortiz’s “work performance is affected” by her disagreements with the current executive orders and direction of EEOC leadership.

The notice also alleged that media circulation of Ortiz’s emails had “affected the reputation and credibility of the Agency.” It cited an Associated Press article that quoted Ortiz saying she stood by her email statements as evidence that her behavior would not change with “rehabilitation.”

In a Wednesday phone interview with The Associated Press, Ortiz said the news of her termination is “very sad,” although not surprising. “I think the agency has now become something that, I don’t know if I’d even really want to work there anymore. They’ve lost their way,” she said.

Lucas defended her decision to drop lawsuits on behalf of transgender workers during her confirmation hearing before a Senate committee last week. She acknowledged that transgender workers are protected under civil rights laws but said her agency is not independent and must comply with presidential orders.

Ortiz said she traveled from New York to Washington “on my own dime, on my own time” to attend the hearing. “I needed to be there,” she said, adding that she left thank-you notes for Senators who “put Andrea Lucas’ feet to the fire.”

Ortiz said she isn’t sure what comes next for her, only that it will involve fighting for civil rights. And in the short-term, picking up more volunteer dog walking shifts. “I will keep fighting for the LGBTQ community in whatever way I can,” she told AP.

She added: “It takes courage to take a stand, and be willing to be fired, and lose a six-figure job, and health insurance, and the prestige of the title of ‘judge,’ but I think it’ll also serve an example to future lawyers and young lawyers out there that a job title isn’t everything, and it’s more important to stay true to your values.”

The man who used a “makeshift flamethrower” on demonstrators marching in Boulder in support of Israeli hostages held by Hamas was charged with 12 federal hate crimes.

Mohamed Sabry Soliman, 45, of El Paso County, was previously charged with attempted first-degree murder and one hate crime count in federal court for attacking the protesters on June 1. The added hate crimes filed on Tuesday were expected.

The new indictment lays out evidence officials gathered to argue that Soliman targeted the group of demonstrators, “Run for Their Lives,” because of their national origin or perceived national origin.

Video of the incident appears to show Soliman shout “Free Palestine!” when he attacked demonstrators, the indictment states.

While being interviewed by detectives upon his arrest, Soliman also said that he viewed “anyone supporting the exist of Israel on our land” to be “Zionist,” according to the indictment.

Soliman added that “he “decide[d] to take [his] revenge from these people” and “search[ed] the internet looking for any Zionist event,” the indictment says.

He also told detectives he hoped he “burned them all. I killed them all. This was my dream,” according to the indictment.

Officials additionally found a handwritten note was recovered from Soliman’s car, which described Israel as a “cancer entity,” the indictment says.

“Zionism is our enemies untill [sic] Jerusalem is liberated and they are expelled from our land,” the note reads, according to the indictment.

Soliman did not kill any of the demonstrators, but injured eight people. He faces a maximum sentence of life in prison for the federal hate crime charges.

He is expected to appear in court on Friday to enter a plea to the charges.

Soliman is being represented by public defenders who do not issue statements or comment on pending cases to the media.

A few days after Soliman’s arrest, immigration authorities apprehended Soliman’s wife and five children — who are Egyptian nationals — for what the White House called “expedited removal.”

According to the Department of Homeland Security, the family came to the United States in 2022 and applied for asylum shortly afterwards. Their visas expired in February 2023.

A federal judge ordered this month that Soliman’s wife and children not be deported. They have not been charged with crimes in connection with the Boulder attack.

In court on Tuesday, attorneys for Soliman’s wife argued that the Trump administration “initiated a public media campaign promoting vitriol and falsehoods about the traumatized family” and “lacks authority to detain non-citizens for unlawful purposes.”

In its filing on Tuesday, the government said Soliman’s wife’s court challenge was “without merit.”

Here’s what the prosecution and defense are arguing

IE 11 is not supported. For an optimal experience visit our site on another browser.