files

WASHINGTON — FBI employees fired for their roles in the investigation of President Trump’s retention of classified documents at his Florida estate sued on Thursday to get their jobs back, calling their terminations unlawful acts of “political retribution.”

The complaint adds to the growing list of legal challenges to the mass terminations under FBI Director Kash Patel of agents who participated in investigations of the Republican president or are seen as opposed to Trump administration interests.

The suit was filed in federal court in Washington on behalf of nine agents, intelligence analysts and staff operations specialists who were fired in February after dismissals of agents who had worked on the investigation into Trump’s efforts to overturn his 2020 presidential election loss to Democrat Joe Biden.

Patel has said in congressional testimony that employees he has fired had “weaponized” the FBI. But the agents deny that claim in the lawsuit, noting that between them they had more than a century of distinguished and apolitical FBI service that involved responding to the Boston Marathon bombing, hostage recoveries and the investigation into the 2024 assassination attempt of Trump in Butler, Pa.

Their firings, the lawsuit says, create an “immeasurable loss” to “America’s national security.”

“In return for their service, they were fired because they did their jobs, as they always did to follow the facts and law without bias or favor. To this administration, this is an offense. To the rest of us, it is heroic,” said a statement from their attorneys, Margaret Donovan, Abbe Lowell and Rebecca Tinio.

“This lawsuit will prove their unlawful dismissal and hold the administration accountable for this blatant attack on the rule of law,” the statement added.

The Mar-a-Lago investigation produced criminal charges against Trump

The suit lays out a detailed recitation of the allegations against Trump, describing how he improperly stored dozens of classified documents at his Mar-a-Lago estate in Palm Beach, Fla., that he took with him after leaving the White House, showed them off to people not authorized to see them and obstructed FBI efforts to get them back.

The investigation resulted in a dramatic 2022 FBI search of Mar-a-Lago that recovered classified records and later produced an indictment in federal court in Florida charging Trump with dozens of felony counts.

Trump denied wrongdoing, and the case was dismissed in 2024 by a Trump-appointed judge, Aileen Cannon, who ruled that the special counsel who filed the charges, Jack Smith, had been illegally appointed by the Biden administration Justice Department.

The nine fired FBI employees did not volunteer for the investigation but were rather assigned to it as part of their work on specialized counterintelligence and counterespionage squads, according to the lawsuit, which says they were nonetheless terminated because of baseless perceptions that the performance of their law enforcement duties had run “afoul of the political and personal loyalty to Trump that Defendants demanded.”

“By casting Plaintiffs’ work on the Plasmic Echo investigation as ‘politically weaponized,’ Defendants incorrectly presumed to know the personal political convictions of Plaintiffs and took unlawful action based on that presumption,” the lawsuit says, using the FBI code name for the classified documents investigation. “Worse still, Defendants incorrectly concluded that those personal political convictions affected or drove their work.”

The lawsuit seeks, among other remedies, reinstatement to the FBI, an awarding of back pay and a court order declaring that the firings were unlawful.

The suit says the firings were the culmination of a retribution campaign

Lawyers for the fired employees suggest their clients’ “fate was sealed” well before the February terminations, casting the ousters as the culmination of a long-running retribution campaign that kicked into gear once Trump returned to the White House in 2025.

The lawsuit notes how Patel, in his capacity as a conservative podcaster before becoming Trump’s FBI director, had derided the FBI’s Mar-a-Lago search as “unlawful” and had accused the agents who had participated in it as being “corrupt government gangsters.”

Days after Trump was inaugurated, a top Justice Department official demanded that the FBI turn over a list of bureau employees who had participated in Trump-related investigations, an order that the then-director, Brian Driscoll, resisted and that was seen within the workforce as a potential prelude to mass firings.

Over the following year, the FBI and the Justice Department fired waves of employees involved in investigations of Trump, without hearings or proper notice that the plaintiffs’ lawyers say are required by law.

The lawsuit says that the Mar-a-Lago agents and analysts were fired in February after Patel disclosed to Reuters that the FBI, as part of the investigation, had subpoenaed his toll records, which show the date, time and length of a phone call but not the content of the communications.

“The Plaintiffs were unlawfully terminated not for any cause or any legitimate reason, but only to satisfy the President’s personal vendetta,” the lawsuit states. “The firings did not follow any internal investigation or disciplinary process within the FBI, and Plaintiffs were not given any notice, a hearing, or an opportunity to appeal.”

Tucker writes for the Associated Press.

Horror star Mia Goth is ending her marriage to Shia LaBeouf just days short of their 10th wedding anniversary.

Goth, star of Ti West’s “X” trilogy, on Tuesday filed her petition to divorce “Peanut Butter Falcon” and “Honey Boy” actor LaBeouf in Los Angeles Superior Court. According to the petition, the estranged spouses married Oct. 10, 2016 but separated in July 2025. The petition confirms reports from earlier this year that the actors were on the outs.

Goth, 32, and LaBeouf, 40, share a 4-year-old daughter born March 2022, according to the petition. Neither representatives for the actors immediately responded on Wednesday to a request for comment.

The “Odyssey” actor filed her petition a day after LaBeouf’s ex-girlfriend FKA twigs brought her latest lawsuit against the former Disney Channel star to a close.

LaBeouf, who had an off-and-on relationship with Goth since their marriage, began dating FKA twigs, legal name Tahliah Barnett, in 2018. Barnett first sued LaBeouf in 2020, claiming she was subjected to frequent episodes of verbal and emotional abuse that escalated into physical assaults by the “Transformers” actor. She also accused LaBeouf of “knowingly infect[ing]” her with a sexually transmitted disease. The exes settled that case with prejudice last year but it returned to a legal spotlight in March.

The Grammy-winning “Eusexua” musician sued LaBeouf, alleging he “sought to silence her” from speaking out about his alleged abuse via an NDA which she claimed violated California law. Barnett on Monday notified the court that she and LaBeouf settled their case, noting that her ex “has agreed that the non-disclosure provisions (NDAs) contained” in the 2025 settlement “are terminated and void.”

LaBeouf faced additional legal turmoil for his arrests in February after his involvement in a Mardi Gras brawl. He pleaded guilty to three counts of simple battery in June.

Goth also faces legal issues. The British star was sued for battery in a 2024 lawsuit that accused her of “intentionally and willfully” assaulting and kicking an actor in the head while filming “Maxxxine” in 2023. Goth was sued alongside director West and movie studio A24. That case is ongoing and a jury trial is scheduled to begin April 17, 2028, according to a court order filed Monday.

WASHINGTON — The Department of Justice filed a complaint Wednesday against federal judges in Minnesota over their remarks to the media related to the Trump administration’s immigration enforcement surge.

The complaint escalates the department’s battle with the federal judiciary, which has halted administration priorities, dismissed high-profile prosecutions and accused government lawyers in some cases of failing to comply with court orders.

The department is demanding that the judges recuse themselves from all criminal or civil cases involving the Department of Homeland Security, Atty. Gen. Todd Blanche told reporters, because of what he described as “obvious bias they have shown” in recent remarks to the New York Times.

At issue is a September article in which seven federal judges in Minnesota — nominated by Democrats and Republican presidents — spoke on the record about their experience dealing with a flood of cases during last winter’s immigration crackdown that led to thousands of arrests.

The judge at the center of the story, Patrick Schiltz, accused the government in January of failing to comply with nearly 100 court orders. He said in a ruling that U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, a part of Homeland Security, “is not a law unto itself.”

Schiltz, who was nominated by Republican President George W. Bush and served as a law clerk for Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, told the newspaper that what happened in Minnesota’s federal court last winter “created a grave threat to the rule of law.”

In a statement Wednesday, Schiltz said he was “acting well within the ethical rules that apply to federal judges in speaking to The New York Times.”

“Indeed, in February of this year, the Committee on Codes of Conduct issued an advisory opinion to emphasize that federal judges” may speak or write “on core judiciary matters such as advocacy for the rule of law and judicial independence,’” Schiltz said. “That is exactly what I did.”

The complaint was filed with the chief judge of the U.S. 8th Circuit Court of Appeals, which oversees federal judges in Minnesota.

The Republican administration has railed against what it describes as “activist judges” who officials say are intent on thwarting Trump’s agenda. Yet some of the most critical and unfavorable court rulings have come from judges nominated by Trump and other Republican presidents.

Richer writes for the Associated Press.

Sept. 30, 2026 2:13 PM PT

SIOUX FALLS, S.D. — Former Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem has filed for divorce from her husband of 34 years.

Noem, who was tasked with leading President Trump’s immigration crackdown from January 2025 to March 2026 and previously served as South Dakota’s governor, is seeking a divorce from Bryon Noem in their home state. The two married in May 1992 and have three children.

The filing, made in April but posted online Monday, comes after questions arose earlier this year about the nature of Kristi Noem’s relationship with a top advisor. The complaint, filed in Hamlin County, notes “irreconcilable differences” as grounds for the divorce.

In a statement, Kristi Noem’s attorney confirmed she has filed for divorce and said she will reserve further comments for the legal process. Lawyers for Bryon Noem did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

A day before Noem was ousted from her post in Trump’s Cabinet, members of Congress questioned her about an alleged extramarital affair with Corey Lewandowski, a special government employee and one of the secretary’s lead advisors. He was Trump’s first campaign manager in 2016 and appeared to play an outsize role in Noem’s department, even though his position was supposed to have a limit on days worked.

Noem denied the allegations that they were having an affair, dismissing them as “tabloid garbage.”

Once a close ally to Trump, Noem became a liability for the Republican president as questions arose over her conduct following the shooting deaths of two protesters in Minneapolis at the hands of immigration officers. Noem characterized Renee Good and Alex Pretti, both U.S. citizens, as aggressors, contradicting videos from the scene and descriptions of their deaths from bystanders. She also faced criticism from fellow Republicans for her spending at her department.

Trump nominated Markwayne Mullin, then a U.S. senator from Oklahoma, in Noem’s place and made her a special envoy for the Shield of the Americas, a new security initiative focused on the Western Hemisphere.

Schoenbaum and Raza write for the Associated Press. Schoenbaum reported from Salt Lake City, Utah.

Seven Minnesota judges face ethics complaint after speaking publicly about the US president’s immigration crackdown.

The United States Justice Department has filed a misconduct complaint against seven federal judges in Minnesota who spoke publicly about the pressure their courts came under during President Donald Trump’s immigration crackdown.

The judges spoke to The New York Times this month about dealing with a flood of cases during Operation Metro Surge, an immigration crackdown that led to thousands of arrests in the Minneapolis-St Paul area from December to February.

The Justice Department says it crossed an ethical line by talking publicly about the cases.

Attorney General Todd Blanche accused the judges of showing “obvious bias” against the Trump administration and called on them to step aside from any cases involving the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).

“When we have a situation like we have now, where you have a judge, a couple of judges, just not only violating the canons in our view but also showing bias in what they’re saying, we have no choice but to act,” Blanche told reporters.

The judges say they did nothing wrong. A spokesperson for Minnesota’s federal court system said legal experts had found that the judges were “well within the ethical rules” when they spoke to the newspaper.

The complaint is the latest in a series of clashes between the Trump administration and the judiciary, which has blocked some of the president’s policies and, in several cases, accused government lawyers of failing to follow court orders.

One of the judges named in the complaint, Patrick Schiltz, alleged that the government did not comply with nearly 100 court orders related to immigration enforcement in January alone.

In one ruling, he wrote that US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) “is not a law unto itself”.

Schiltz was nominated by Republican President George W Bush and previously clerked for conservative Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia.

He later told The New York Times that what happened in Minnesota’s federal courts during the crackdown “created a grave threat to the rule of law”.

Schiltz also pointed to guidance issued by a federal judicial ethics panel in February, saying that judges can speak publicly about issues such as the rule of law and judicial independence.

“That is exactly what I did,” he said.

Deputy assistant commissioner Kevin Southworth said a team of 220 investigators had worked hard on the case but he appreciates “it has taken nine years to get to this point”.

“As we have said before, this is one of the most complex investigations ever undertaken by any UK law enforcement agency – the scale is truly enormous.

“While we know this has had a significant impact on those waiting for answers, it has necessarily taken this long to ensure our investigation is meticulous and presents the very best possible evidence to the CPS for charging decisions,” he added.

The CPS will decide whether there is a realistic prospect of conviction, as well as considering whether bringing charges is in the public interest.

In anticipation of possible criminal proceedings, the Met has said it is building a £2m replica of a section of the tower, which is being dismantled, to help future jurors understand its layout.

Frank Ferguson, head of the CPS special crime and counter terrorism division, said it marked “an important step”.

“We recognise that the journey to this point has been long and difficult.

“Charging decisions will be made independently by CPS prosecutors following a thorough and careful review of all the evidence gathered by the Metropolitan Police Service,” he added.

Listen to the best of BBC Radio London on Sounds and follow BBC London on Facebook, external, X, external and Instagram, external. Send your story ideas to hello.bbclondon@bbc.co.uk, external

A EUROPEAN airline that carries thousands of British passengers every week has filed for bankruptcy.

The travel company organises flights to the Baltic region from both London Gatwick and Aberdeen airport.

The national airline of Latvia, airBaltic, has had its bankruptcy protection approved in a move that hopes to cut mounting costs.

Around 4,000 British passengers fly on AirBaltic flights weekly, with the airline operating direct flights between London Gatwick and Riga, along with seasonal twice-weekly routes from Aberdeen to the capital.

The voluntary decision saw the carrier file for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in the United States, later securing $405million in financial commitments from various financial groups.

Despite the filing, experts have warned passengers not to interpret bankruptcy as cancellation and to wait before considering changing bookings.

CHEF’S BLISS

12 UK restaurants among best in world – from viral hotspot to date night fave

KEY SCENE

Hidden gallery reopens at top UK attraction today after being sealed for 80 YEARS

Anton Radchenko, CEO of AirAdvisor, said: “Cancelling voluntarily could leave the passenger subject to the ticket’s normal restrictions, whereas waiting for the airline’s decision preserves their statutory rights if the service is later changed or cancelled.”

AirBaltic has confirmed that operations would continue as usual during the bankruptcy process, which is expected to finish by June 2027.

This includes scheduled flights, ticket sales, reservations and customer service, with all existing tickets, vouchers and credits remaining valid.

AirBaltic flies to over 70 destinations around the Baltics, including Europe, North Africa and the Middle East out of its main hub in Riga, Latvia.

The carrier is majority-owned by the Latvian government and has agreements with major international airlines such as Air France, KLM and Delta Airlines.

It currently operates a fleet of 54 aircraft, but announced a business plan in August to reduce its fleet to 36 planes to improve its financial stability.