On Monday, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), a left-leaning government watchdog group, announced that as a result of its recent lawsuit, the government will have to turn over logs and records of individuals who visited Mar-a-Lago, President Trump’s Florida residence.

CREW filed the lawsuit alongside the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University and the National Security Archive under the Freedom of Information Act. The group has been working to reveal visitor logs for the White House, Mar-a-Lago, and Trump Tower in New York City.

Currently, the Department of Homeland Security says it has no records of people visiting Trump Tower. The lawsuit regarding the White House records is ongoing.

“The public deserves to know who is coming to meet with the president and his staff,” CREW executive director Noah Bookbinder said in a statement. “We are glad as a result of this case, this information will become public for meetings at his personal residences–but it needs to be public for meetings at the White House as well.”

District Court Judge Katherine Polk Failla wrote in her ruling: “The Secret Service will complete its search for and processing of responsive ‘records of presidential visitors at Mar-a-Lago,’ and produce any non-exempt responsive records, by September 8, 2017.” CREW says it plans to share the information publicly once it’s released.

Amidst promises to “drain the swamp” and allegations of collusion with foreign officials, Trump’s poorly-disclosed private dealings have been at the heart of public debate in recent months.

The public has essentially been prevented from knowing which lobbyists, political donors, and others the president is meeting with behind closed doors, making it difficult to fully comprehend Trump’s allegiances and stances on issues.

The Mar-a-Lago visitor logs may prove to be revelatory because of the unique role the estate has played since Trump took office. In a sense, Mar-a-Lago, which the president affectionately refers to as the “Southern White House,” best represents Trump: a mix of his gold-plated private life, his business ties, and now, his executive power.

The venue has controversially served as the backdrop for high-profile diplomatic visits with foreign leaders as well as numerous costly golf weekends for the president.

This lawsuit is not CREW’s first attempt to compel transparency from the White House. The group also sued the Obama Administration, which agreed to release White House visitor logs as part of a settlement. That effort began during the Bush Administration before it was settled with President Obama. Since 2009, about 6 million visitor records were made public.

In April, the Trump Administration announced it would end this practice, citing “grave national security risks.” Currently, the website where the logs were previously published is blank and reads: “Thank you for your interest in this subject. Stay tuned as we continue to update whitehouse.gov.”

Celia Heudebourg

Celia Heudebourg is an editorial intern for Law Street Media. She is from Paris, France and is entering her senior year at Macalester College in Minnesota where she studies international relations and political science. When she’s not reading or watching the news, she can be found planning a trip abroad or binge-watching a good Netflix show. Contact Celia at Staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Judge Orders Trump to Release Mar-a-Lago Visitor Logs appeared first on Law Street.

To boost recruitment, the Secret Service is altering its drug policy: now, applicants who have used marijuana at some point in their past can still be considered for a position. An initiative by newly appointed director Randolph Alles, who President Donald Trump appointed to the post at the end of April, the policy change is designed to infuse the agency with a couple thousand more officers. The policy went into effect last month.

“We need more people,” Alles said in a press conference last Thursday. “The mission has changed.” Pointing to threats like international terrorism, groups like al Qaeda and Islamic State, and homegrown actors, he added: “It’s more dynamic and way more dangerous than it has been in years past.”

According to its drug policy statement, the Secret Service “does not condone any prior unlawful drug activity by applicants, but it is recognized that some otherwise qualified applicants may have used or otherwise interacted with illegal drugs at some point in their past.” When examining an applicant’s eligibility, “any prior illegal drug activity along with various considerations associated with that activity will be weighed in that adjudication process.” the statement says.

The agency’s prior policy disqualified candidates who had used marijuana more than a certain number of times at some point in their pasts. The new policy, designed to be a “whole-person concept,” Alles said, will instead look at the time between an applicant’s last use of marijuana, and his or her application date.

For instance, if an applicant was 24-years-old or younger when he or she last used or purchased marijuana, they must wait at least a year before applying to the agency. That standard rises as the age of last use or purchase rises.

Alles, who previously led air and marine missions with Customs and and Border Protections, also underlined a non-terrorism related reality that is requiring the agency to bolster its ranks: the round-the-clock protection of Trump and his family, as well as his collection of properties, including Mar-a-Lago in Palm Beach and Trump Tower in Manhattan.

“I think between that and the fact that he has a larger family, that’s just more stress on the organization,” he said.

Alec Siegel

Alec Siegel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. When he’s not working at Law Street he’s either cooking a mediocre tofu dish or enjoying a run in the woods. His passions include: gooey chocolate chips, black coffee, mountains, the Animal Kingdom in general, and John Lennon. Baklava is his achilles heel. Contact Alec at ASiegel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post New Secret Service Director Loosens Agency’s Drug Policy appeared first on Law Street.

Rep. Devin Nunes (R-CA) said, in a press conference on Capitol Hill and later at the White House on Wednesday, that President Donald Trump and his associates were compromised during the campaign as the result of surveillance in Trump Tower. Trump’s associates, Nunes said, were “unmasked” by the surveillance, and some of Trump’s communications were swept up in “incidental collection” as a result. He cited a classified report as the source of his claims, but did not divulge who provided him with the information.

“I don’t want to get too much into the details, but these were intelligence reports, and it brings up a lot of concern about whether things were properly minimized or not,” Nunes said. “What I have read bothers me, and I think it should bother the president himself and his team, because I think some of it seems to be inappropriate.”

This behavior by Nunes, head of the House investigation into Trump and his associates’ communications with Russia, brings up a host of questions: Can Nunes continue to lead an impartial investigation? Did he reveal any new information? What is “unmasking” and “incidental collection”? And was the surveillance that Nunes described lawful?

Rep. Jackie Speier (D-CA) said that Nunes apologized Thursday morning for going straight to the White House with his concerns, and circumventing the House Intelligence Committee. But many House Democrats, including Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA), the ranking Democrat on the intelligence committee, said Nunes could no longer be expected to be an impartial voice in the Trump-Russia investigation.

The White House, in contrast, warmly embraced Nunes’s direct approach. “I very much appreciated the fact that they found what they found,” Trump said, adding that he feels “somewhat” vindicated for his accusations that Obama wiretapped Trump Tower during the campaign. Sean Spicer, the White House spokesman, said Nunes provided “startling information.” But what exactly did Nunes reveal that was previously unknown?

The FBI and the Senate Intelligence Committee, which are leading separate investigations into Russia’s communications with Trump and his associates, both concluded there is no evidence Trump Tower was wiretapped–by Obama or any other intelligence agency. And Nunes on Wednesday admitted as much. It is the “unmasking” of Trump’s associates that has Nunes concerned. Americans are often surveilled for communicating with foreign actors that might concern the U.S. But their identities are commonly masked, hidden from U.S. authorities who are tracking them.

Not so in the case of Trump’s associates, Nunes claims. He said the identity of those who were surveilled–Nunes said it was multiple associates, Schiff said it was one–was revealed to U.S. officials. Given the unusual nature of the investigation into people close to Trump who had ties to Russia (a common target of U.S. surveillance), it is hardly surprising that U.S. officials might not have conducted business as usual.

And according to Schiff, “unmasking” in and of itself “does not indicate that there was any flaw in the procedures followed by the intelligence agencies,” and “is fully appropriate when it is necessary to understand the context of collected foreign intelligence information.”

The “incidental collection” Nunes mentioned refers to Trump’s communications that might have been collected due to the surveillance of his associates. Again, there is nothing illegal about that. As to who might have been the subject of the surveillance, Nunes provided no specifics. Here’s a good bet though: Paul Manafort, Trump’s former campaign chairman who resigned last August after his name was included on a ledger of cash payments made by Ukraine’s former pro-Russia President Viktor Yanukovych.

Alec Siegel

Alec Siegel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. When he’s not working at Law Street he’s either cooking a mediocre tofu dish or enjoying a run in the woods. His passions include: gooey chocolate chips, black coffee, mountains, the Animal Kingdom in general, and John Lennon. Baklava is his achilles heel. Contact Alec at ASiegel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Did Devin Nunes Reveal Any New Information About Trump’s Wiretap Claim? appeared first on Law Street.

The House Intelligence Committee convened its first public hearing with FBI Director James Comey on Monday. Fielding questions from Rep. Devin Nunes (R-CA), the committee’s chairman, and Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA), the ranking Democrat on the committee, Comey was reluctant to reveal anything too explosive. He did, however, reaffirm the Senate Intelligence Committee’s conclusions that, contrary to President Donald Trump’s tweets, there is no evidence that Trump Tower was bugged at any time during the campaign. Comey also said the bureau is actively investigating Russia’s election meddling, including any communications it had with Trump’s campaign associates.

No Evidence of a Wiretap

To hardly anyone’s surprise (except the president’s), Comey said there is “no information” to support Trump’s accusations that President Barack Obama had his de facto campaign headquarters, Trump Tower, wiretapped. “With respect to the president’s tweets about alleged wiretapping directed at him by the prior administration, I have no information that supports those tweets,” Comey said.

He added: “And we have looked carefully inside the FBI. The Department of Justice has asked me to share with you that the answer is the same for the Department of Justice and all its components: the department has no information that supports those tweets.”

Last week, the Senate Intelligence Committee came to the same conclusion, even as Trump and his aides refused to lay the issue to rest. Sean Spicer, the White House press secretary, quoted a report from a Fox News reporter that suggested Obama colluded with GCHQ, the British spy agency, in bugging Trump Tower. GCHQ strongly rejected that claim, and Spicer reportedly met with the British ambassador to promise the unfounded claim would not be made again.

Russia Probe

Confirming what many privately suspected, Comey said the FBI is actively investigating Russia’s role in hacking the emails of Democratic operatives during the campaign; a cohort of Trump’s current and former campaign aides are also being investigated for their Russian ties. What was a surprise to many observers of the hearing, however, was that the FBI has been probing the Trump campaign’s ties to Russia since July of last year, well before the Obama Administration announced the possible role Russia played in hacking the Democrats’ emails.

“Because it is an open, ongoing investigation and is classified, I cannot say more about what we are doing and whose conduct we are examining,” Comey said.

Trump, early Monday morning before the hearing, tried to deflect blame to his favorite target: Hillary Clinton. He tweeted:

The real story that Congress, the FBI and all others should be looking into is the leaking of Classified information. Must find leaker now!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) March 20, 2017

The hearing showcased what Democrats and some Republicans perceive as the real issues at hand. For Democrats, it is the fact that an adversary intentionally hacked the U.S. political process, and what role the current administration might have played in that plot. Republicans at the hearing largely questioned the leaks that ultimately led to former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn’s resignation. The leaker, they seemed to imply, should be identified and punished.

“Unauthorized dissemination is punishable by felony up to 10 years in federal prison?” Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC) asked Comey, who responded: “Yes, as it should be.” But to Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY), the Senate minority leader, the most pressing issue facing the country is not the leaker, but the content of the leaks.

“The possibility of coordination between the Trump campaign and Russian officials is a serious, serious matter,” Schumer said after the hearing. “The investigation must be fair, independent, and impartial in every way, and the F.B.I. must be allowed to follow the facts wherever they may lead.”

Alec Siegel

Alec Siegel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. When he’s not working at Law Street he’s either cooking a mediocre tofu dish or enjoying a run in the woods. His passions include: gooey chocolate chips, black coffee, mountains, the Animal Kingdom in general, and John Lennon. Baklava is his achilles heel. Contact Alec at ASiegel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post What You Need to Know About the House Intelligence Committee Hearing with James Comey appeared first on Law Street.

White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer claimed on Thursday that British spy agency GCHQ colluded with the Obama Administration to wiretap Trump Tower. The GCHQ said those claims are “ridiculous.” The statement came after Spicer defended President Donald Trump’s claims that President Barack Obama wiretapped his Manhattan base during the 2016 campaign. Spicer, quoting a report from Fox News reporter Andrew Napolitano, said the wiretap was a collaborative effort between Obama and GCHQ.

“Three intelligence sources have informed Fox News that President Obama went outside the chain of command,” Spicer said, quoting Napolitano. “He didn’t use the N.S.A., he didn’t use the C.I.A., he didn’t use the F.B.I., and he didn’t use the Department of Justice. He used GCHQ.”

But GCHQ, or Government Communications Headquarters, one of Britain’s three spy agencies, vehemently denied the accusations. “Recent allegations made by media commentator judge Andrew Napolitano about GCHQ being asked to conduct ‘wiretapping’ against the then president-elect are nonsense,” the agency said in a rare statement. “They are utterly ridiculous and should be ignored.”

The wiretap saga began on March 4, when Trump tweeted, “Terrible! Just found out that Obama had my ‘wires tapped’ in Trump Tower just before the victory. Nothing found. This is McCarthyism!” Former Obama officials immediately denied the accusations. James Clapper, the director of national intelligence at the time, also shot down Trump’s claim.

And on Thursday, before Spicer’s remarks, high-ranking Republicans on the Senate Intelligence Committee said “we see no indications that Trump Tower was the subject of surveillance by any element of the United States government either before or after Election Day 2016.”

Even so, Trump and his advisers stood by his wiretap claims. But after Spicer’s comments rankled British officials and Prime Minister Theresa May, he met with Britain’s ambassador to the U.S. Kim Darroch Thursday evening. Spicer and H.R. McMaster, the U.S. National Security Adviser, formally apologized for the comments, according the British intelligence officials.

A spokesman for May said they told the Trump Administration “these claims are ridiculous and they should be ignored” and that they “received assurances that these allegations will not be repeated.”

Alec Siegel

Alec Siegel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. When he’s not working at Law Street he’s either cooking a mediocre tofu dish or enjoying a run in the woods. His passions include: gooey chocolate chips, black coffee, mountains, the Animal Kingdom in general, and John Lennon. Baklava is his achilles heel. Contact Alec at ASiegel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post GCHQ: Claims of Collusion with Obama to Wiretap Trump Tower are “Ridiculous” appeared first on Law Street.

High-ranking members of the Senate Intelligence Committee, a Democrat and a Republican, said on Thursday that there is no evidence that President Barack Obama wiretapped Trump Tower. The rebuke comes two weeks after President Donald Trump tweeted that his predecessor tapped his phones during the campaign.

Despite producing no evidence to back up this claim, and as lawmakers from both parties piled on the condemnation, Trump remained steadfast. Now, high ranking members of his own party have delivered the strongest statement yet in contradiction to Trump’s claims.

“Based on the information available to us, we see no indications that Trump Tower was the subject of surveillance by any element of the United States government either before or after Election Day 2016,” Intelligence Chairman Sen. Richard Burr (R-NC) and Vice Chairman Sen. Mark Warner (D-VA) said in a joint statement.

House Speaker Paul Ryan delivered a less forceful denial of Trump’s wiretap claims on Thursday, when he told reporters that Congress has “seen no evidence of that.” Trump made the explosive accusation on March 4, when he tweeted:

Terrible! Just found out that Obama had my “wires tapped” in Trump Tower just before the victory. Nothing found. This is McCarthyism!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) March 4, 2017

Trump continued his baseless Twitter tirade, adding: “How low has President Obama gone to tapp my phones during the very sacred election process. This is Nixon/Watergate. Bad (or sick) guy!” In the days since, Trump has failed to produce any evidence that Obama, or any agency or individual in his administration, bugged Trump Tower, his de facto campaign headquarters in Manhattan.

Some suspect Trump was referring to the recently-released intelligence information about some of his aides who had communications with Russian government officials or business representatives. Those conversations were relevant to U.S. authorities because there was evidence that Russia had meddled in the election by hacking the emails of Democratic operatives in a veiled attempt to boost Trump’s standing.

And while there is a legitimate concern that those taps might have inadvertently captured some of Trump’s campaign communications, there is no evidence to suggest that is what happened, intentionally or otherwise. FBI Director James Comey is scheduled to make a public address on Monday regarding the wiretap claims. Despite all of this, on Wednesday Trump ominously stood by his comments. “You’re going to find some very interesting items coming to the forefront over the next two weeks,” he said in an interview on Fox News.

Alec Siegel

Alec Siegel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. When he’s not working at Law Street he’s either cooking a mediocre tofu dish or enjoying a run in the woods. His passions include: gooey chocolate chips, black coffee, mountains, the Animal Kingdom in general, and John Lennon. Baklava is his achilles heel. Contact Alec at ASiegel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Senate Intelligence Committee Leaders: Trump Tower Was Not Wiretapped appeared first on Law Street.

Between Election Day and Inauguration Day, the New York Police Department spent $25.7 million “to protect Trump Tower and the First Family,” according to a letter from the department’s commissioner. That figure is down from the $35 million that was initially estimated in December. The costs associated with protecting President Donald Trump and his family for 75 days during the transition period differed greatly depending on whether Trump himself was in town.

Why was the initial estimate of $35 million nearly one-third higher than the actual cost? “The initial estimate to provide security for Trump Tower was calculated using anticipated costs,” an NYPD spokesperson told POLITICO. “Subsequently, modifications were made to the security plan, and the amount was recalculated using actual costs.”

The intent of the commissioner’s letter, which was sent on Tuesday, was to extract resources from the federal government to reimburse the city for protecting Trump and his family during the transition. Though New York City’s mayor, Bill de Blasio, initially asked for $35 million (based on the NYPD’s initial estimate) to cover the costs, the federal government has paid the city $7 million so far.

Trump has yet to visit Trump Tower, or New York City, since Inauguration Day. When he does–he has suggested he would like to spend weekends in Manhattan–the same costs would likely apply, if not more. Regardless, the presence of his wife Melania and his son Barron at Trump Tower incurs heavy costs. It would cost $50 million over a year-long period to protect the two of them for a year (Melania and Barron are expected to stay through the school year). If Trump joins them on weekends, as he has indicated he will do, that will jump to $60 million per year.

In his letter, O’Neill also acknowledged the collateral effects of siphoning the city’s budget to protect the president and his family: “Trump Tower itself now presents a target to those who wish to commit acts of terror against our country, further straining our limited counterterrorism resources.”

Alec Siegel

Alec Siegel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. When he’s not working at Law Street he’s either cooking a mediocre tofu dish or enjoying a run in the woods. His passions include: gooey chocolate chips, black coffee, mountains, the Animal Kingdom in general, and John Lennon. Baklava is his achilles heel. Contact Alec at ASiegel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post How Much Does it Cost to Protect Trump Tower? appeared first on Law Street.

President Donald Trump made his first visit to the National Museum of African American History and Culture in Washington, D.C. on Tuesday. After a morning tour of the museum, which opened last September, Trump spoke about the need to “fight bigotry and hatred and intolerance.” He decried the divisions that exist in America and, after weeks of prodding from lawmakers and Jewish leaders, denounced the spate of bomb threats against Jewish Community Centers across the country since the election.

After his tour, which he said was “a meaningful reminder of why we have to fight bigotry and hatred and intolerance,” Trump gave a brief speech. “Today and every day of my presidency I pledge to do everything I can to continue that promise of freedom for African-Americans and for every American,” he said, flanked by his Secretary of Housing and Urban Development nominee Ben Carson–whose life is captured in an exhibit at the museum–and Carson’s wife.

“We’re going to bring this country together. We have a divided country that’s been divided for many, many years, but we’re going to bring it together,” Trump added. Trump’s daughter, Ivanka, and his aide (and former “Apprentice” contestant) Omarosa Manigault also accompanied Trump to the museum. Rep. Tim Scott (R-South Carolina) was also there. Trump, it seemed, sought to add legitimacy to his remarks by surrounding himself with black aides and lawmakers.

But what Trump has said, and did not say, during the campaign and his presidency regarding the black community has drawn criticism. At speeches and rallies, in stadiums packed primarily with white supporters, Trump was fond of painting inner cities as dens of violence and decay that only afflict black people. Most recently, at a lengthy press conference last week, Trump asked April Ryan, a White House reporter who is black, if she is “friends” with the Congressional Black Caucus. After Ryan asked if Trump would meet with the CBC, he replied: “Do you want to set up the meeting?”

During Trump’s visit to the museum, a line of dump trucks was deployed on Constitution Avenue, as an extra layer of security:

Dump trucks stand guard outside the museum on Tuesday. Image courtesy of Anja Poradzisz.

Law enforcement agencies have employed similar tactics in the past, both for Trump and previous presidents. On Election Day, for instance, the New York Police Department placed 10 Sanitation Department trucks in front of Trump Tower in Manhattan, where Trump was staying. This barrier is a response to the increased threat of truck attacks, which have been used by Islamic State sympathizers in Nice, France, and Berlin.

In 1970, in response to anti-Vietnam War protests, President Richard Nixon’s staff deployed a similar security tactic. Nixon’s advisers decided to surround the White House with school buses. “To me, it’s different looking at a bus than it is looking at a cordon of SWAT-clad policemen, which to me invites a confrontation,” said Egil Krogh, a Nixon adviser who helped devise the bus buffer. “You have to provide the protection, but you do it in a way that is the least provocative, and likely to [provoke] an attack.”

In his remarks, Trump responded to the rise in reported anti-Semitic incidents since the election–just last week, 100 headstones were vandalized at a Jewish cemetery in St. Louis. Leaders of Jewish groups and many lawmakers have been calling for Trump to forcefully respond in recent weeks. On Tuesday, he called the incidents “horrible and painful and a very sad reminder of the work that must still be done to root out hate and prejudice.”

Alec Siegel

Alec Siegel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. When he’s not working at Law Street he’s either cooking a mediocre tofu dish or enjoying a run in the woods. His passions include: gooey chocolate chips, black coffee, mountains, the Animal Kingdom in general, and John Lennon. Baklava is his achilles heel. Contact Alec at ASiegel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Trump Pledges to Fight Bigotry During African American History Museum Visit appeared first on Law Street.

It’s one of those weird days in between Christmas and New Year’s when you don’t really know what you’re supposed to be doing. Work or chill? Whatever your choice is, take a few minutes and enjoy our rants of the day! Welcome to RantCrush Top 5, where we take you through today’s top five controversial stories in the world of law and policy. Who’s ranting and raving right now? Check it out below:

Turkey’s President Claims to Have Evidence That the U.S. Backed ISIS

Turkey’s President Recep Tayyip Erdogan claimed yesterday to have evidence that U.S. coalition forces have helped terrorists in Syria—including ISIS. “They were accusing us of supporting Daesh [Islamic State]. Now they give support to terrorist groups including Daesh, YPG, PYD. It’s very clear. We have confirmed evidence, with pictures, photos and videos,” Erdogan said at a news conference. He also urged Saudi Arabia and Qatar to join Turkey’s meeting with Russia and Iran to talk about peace efforts in Syria.

For years, anyone saying US UK had backed IS terror was branded a ‘conspiracy theorist’. Now, Erdogan says it’s truehttps://t.co/qE9SFBkPoQ

— Charles Shoebridge (@ShoebridgeC) December 27, 2016

American troops have fought alongside Syrian rebels against President Bashar al-Assad’s forces but have tried to avoid indirectly helping radical Islamist groups. No hard proof of Erdogan’s claims has been made public yet and the U.S. State Department denied everything Erdogan said, calling it “ludicrous.” Spokesman Mark Toner said there was no basis for the accusation.

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post RantCrush Top 5: December 28, 2016 appeared first on Law Street.

It has now become virtually physically impossible to get through the day without hearing a news story about Donald Trump making someone mad. But the latest story to come out of The Donald’s terrifyingly successful attempt at a 2016 run might be a bit more threatening than just angry onlookers–it’s a lawsuit. A group of protesters are suing Trump, after they claim they were attacked by his security team.

The five protesters who are plaintiffs in the recently-filed case are, in their own words, “human rights activists of Mexican origin.” The protesters were there to speak out against Trump’s much-maligned rhetoric about immigrants. They were holding up signs outside of an event last Thursday in New York at Trump Tower in which they riffed off Trump’s slogan “Make America Great Again.” Instead, they held signs that read “Make America Racist Again.” Trump’s director of security and long-time guard, Keith Schiller, grabbed the sign from a protester. That protester, named Efrain Galicia, ran after Schiller to try and grab the sign back, and started pulling at it. It was at that point that Schiller turned around and hit Galicia. Here’s a video of the altercation:

It’s in this light that Galicia and his fellow protesters are suing, alleging violence, theft of property, and interference with political speech. They’re also seeking an injunction that would keep members of Trump’s security team from interfering with protesters at various events. Overall, they’re framing their case at least in part from a public free speech angle.

Galicia’s lawyer Benjamin Dictor told New York Daily News:

The video in a sense speaks for itself. The actions were just exceedingly aggressive especially given the fact that demonstrators were on a public sidewalk speaking out about issues of public concern.

Dictor also stated:

There’s obviously a larger issue at play here, which is individuals from the community speaking out in public about issues of public concern in a public space. In the most public of spaces on the most public of issues.

Named in the lawsuit are Schiller, the rest of Trump’s organization, and Trump himself. They aren’t going down without a fight though–in the immediate aftermath of the incident, a spokesman from Trump’s campaign claimed that the protesters were causing disturbances on the sidewalk and had committed violence against Trump’s security team themselves. There has been talk that Trump’s team might actually sue the protesters as well.

This scuffle and resulting lawsuit really don’t come as a surprise after many of Trump’s recent comments have sparked calls for protests. As this election cycle continues to heat up, this may not be the only altercation we see between Trump’s security and protesters that we see.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Donald Trump Sued by Protesters Who Scuffled With His Security Team appeared first on Law Street.