BREAKING: Judicial Watch Victory in California!
Top Headlines of the Week
Press Releases
Judicial Watch announced recently that a California court ruled unconstitutional the state’s racial, ethnic, and LGBT quota for corporate boards of directors. The court granted Judicial Watch’s motion for summary judgment in its taxpayer lawsuit asking the court to declare the quota scheme unconstitutional under California’s constitution.
Judicial Watch announced recently that it filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) for records concerning a new task force set up to address threats to election officials.
Judicial Watch Sues HHS for Records about Gov Agency Research into COVID-19 Boosters
“The American people deserve to know the data about COVID-19 vaccines and boosters, especially data hidden by little known but powerful government agencies such as BARDA,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.
More Debilitating Side Effects after Teens Get Government-Backed HPV Vaccine
Despite life-threatening side effects exposed by Judicial Watch more than a decade ago the government keeps pushing a dangerous cervical and genital cancer vaccine for children and two recent legal cases help illustrate the ongoing risks. The vaccine is called Gardasil and in the last ten years Judicial Watch has uncovered troves of government records documenting its harmful side effects, though adverse event reports don’t necessarily mean a causal connection to the vaccines. The vaccine was scandalously fast-tracked by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and was ardently promoted by the Obama administration as a miracle shot that can prevent certain strains of cervical and genital cancer caused by the sexually transmitted Human Papillomavirus (HPV).
In The News
California’s Diversity Quota Defeat
The conservative legal outfit Judicial Watch sued, arguing the law violated the state Constitution’s equal protection clause by establishing explicit set-asides based on racial, ethnic or sexual preference.
Exclusive: Maryland Court Rules Against Democrats In Gerrymandering Case
The lawsuit was filed by Judicial Watch, a nonprofit judicial and government watchdog group, on behalf of 12 registered Maryland voters who “object to Maryland’s 2021 congressional redistricting plan on the grounds that it is a partisan gerrymander that diminishes their rights to participate in free, fair elections for the U.S. Congress on an equal basis with other Maryland voters, in violation of the Maryland Constitution. The trial also included plaintiffs from a separate lawsuit,” the group wrote in a press release.
The brief ruling granted summary judgment to Judicial Watch, a conservative legal group that sought a permanent injunction against the measure that was signed into law last year. The ruling didn’t explain the judge’s reasoning.
The measure requires corporate boards of publicly traded companies with a main executive office in California to have a member from an “underrepresented community,” including LGBT, Black, Latino, Asian, Native American or Pacific Islander.
The Fitton Report
TOP NEWS
