Donald Trump

New York officials sued prediction market platform Kalshi for potentially billions of dollars on Friday, calling it an “illegal, unlicensed gambling operation” that includes sports wagering as the state seeks to halt its operations and force the company to forfeit its profits.

New York joins a growing number of states filing lawsuits against Kalshi and other companies in a dispute with President Donald Trump’s administration over who regulates the fast-growing prediction market. Kalshi and other platforms argue they are federally licensed and regulated, and states have no authority to govern them.

The European Union on Thursday hit Google with a fine of 890 million euros ($1 billion) after it said the technology behemoth broke digital antitrust regulations by setting up Google Play and its ubiquitous search engine to corral consumers towards its own services and apps to the detriment of competitors.

It was the latest major crackdown on Big Tech by Brussels, which has led the world in reining in some of the world’s largest companies from Silicon Valley to Beijing.

In a 2-1 decision on the ballroom, the appeals court sided with historic preservationists who sued to stop construction of the massive structure, which has begun to rise above ground on the east side of the White House, according to the most recent aerial photos of the site. The court said it would stay its ruling for two weeks to give the administration time to appeal to the Supreme Court.

Sullivan’s decision follows a ruling by US district judge Indira Talwani last week, in which the NAACP had also challenged the executive order. Talwani blocked the administration’s plan for mail-in voting across 23 states and the District of Columbia, which sued the administration to stop the proposed rule. The latest order appears to extend this injunction nationwide, as it is meant to enforce an agreement that bound the postal service as an agency until 2028.

The Trump administration agreed on Monday to keep flying a rainbow Pride flag at the Stonewall national monument, reversing course after removing the banner in February.

The government revealed the decision as it seeks to settle a lawsuit filed by LGBTQ+ and historic preservation groups who had sought to block the removal. A judge must still approve the agreement.

“The one thing we can do is make sure the American people know what they’re doing in our name and with our tax dollars,” the congressman said. “We should do that because what they have pulled off here is a potential template for other betrayals of public trust that they and maybe future generations will attempt if we don’t challenge them.”

In June, the Trump administration abandoned an effort to try to halt all wind projects and leases across the US, giving up a challenge in court to a judge tossing Trump’s executive order to freeze all permitting and leasing for wind projects.

“We are proud of our efforts to push back against these improper demands that only serve to undermine confidence in our elections,” Fulton County Attorney Soo Jo said in a statement.

Federal judges in Maine and Wisconsin on Thursday dismissed lawsuits filed by the U.S. Department of Justice seeking to compel the states to hand over detailed voter registration information.

U.S. District Judge James Pederson in Wisconsin said the state’s voter registration list is not a record that can be requested under the Civil Rights Act of 1960, as President Donald Trump’s administration argued. In Maine, Chief U.S. District Judge Lance Walker described the government’s claim as “half-hearted” and granted a state motion to dismiss it.

The rulings were the latest in a string of defeats for the Trump administration in its attempts to force states to turn over voter rolls. In addition to Maine and Wisconsin, judges have rejected similar attempts in Arizona, California, Massachusetts, Michigan, Oregon and Rhode Island, In Georgia, a judge dismissed a DOJ lawsuit because it had been filed in the wrong city, prompting the government to refile elsewhere.

Legal challenges to the fund and its addendum have been growing. A bipartisan group of 35 ex-federal judges on 27 May filed a motion appealing to a federal judge in Miami who oversaw Trump’s lawsuit against the IRS to reopen the case, and launch an inquiry to determine if Trump and DoJ’s unorthodox deal to settle the lawsuit involved fraud. The jurists’ charge that the settlement fund’s creation was a “fraud on the court”.

In an extraordinary turnaround on 29 May, the Miami judge reopened Trump’s lawsuit against the IRS to explore whether the court had been deceived by the parties involved including DoJ, and the deal was “premised on deception”.

Separately, responding to a lawsuit filed by a former January 6 prosecutor who the DoJ fired, plus other individuals and entities who say they have faced Trump administration attacks, a Virginia federal judge ruled on 29 May temporarily blocking further moves to set up the fund and fund dispersals until at least a hearing on 12 June.