24 States Ask Judge to Block Trump’s Election Executive Order

BOSTON – Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea Joy Cambell co-led a group of 23 attorneys general and a governor to file a motion for summary judgement that would permanently block key provisions of President Donald Trump’s executive order which restricts mail-in voting and exerts federal control over elections.

The same coalition of states sued the Trump administration to prevent enforcement of the executive order on April 3. The motion for summary judgement filed this week asks the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts to permanently block enforcement of those provisions. The motion argues that the law is clear and that the case can be decided without a trial.

Executive Order no. 14399, in part, declares that mail-in voting is restricted to lists of voters pre-authorized by the federal government. It also orders the USPS to create rules to deliver mail-in ballots only to those on that list.

The lawsuit filed April 3 argues that argued Trump’s executive order is unconstitutional and beyond the authority of the President and other federal officials.

According to Campbell’s office, the motion for summary judgement filed makes three main arguments:

• The order’s attempt to dictate federal voter eligibility lists for each state, and its attempt to coerce states to deny ballots to voters excluded from those lists, unconstitutionally invades the states’ power to determine eligibility and maintain rolls of registered voters.
• The order’s attempt to charge the states and USPS with compiling mail voter eligibility lists, and its prohibition on USPS transmitting mail ballots from voters not on those lists, are unconstitutional and run headlong into states’ authority to regulate elections and Congress’s power to regulate USPS.
• The order threatens serious injury to the coalition states, including harms to the states’ sovereign powers to administer their elections, fiscal injuries from states being forced to administer elections under the federal government’s new procedures, legal jeopardy to states and their elections officials from the Executive Order’s directives to investigate and prosecute those who issue ballots to individuals who do not appear on the federal government’s lists, and harms to states’ reputations and public trust.

“Today, I’m asking the Court to permanently block the President from implementing his illegal Executive Order that attempts to restrict voting rights,” said AG Campbell. “The Constitution gives states – not the White House – the authority to oversee elections, and I will not back down from ensuring that every eligible voter in Massachusetts can cast their ballot and have their vote counted.”

Campbell co-led the coalition of states with California Attorney General Rob Bonta, Nevada Attorney General Aaron Ford, and Washington Attorney General Nick Brown. Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro is representing his state in the lawsuit.

The other states included in the coalition are Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, and Wisconsin.

Seven Arrested in Car Wash Raid File Lawsuit Against ICE

BOSTON – Seven workers arrested at a car wash in Allston have filed a lawsuit against the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) alleging multiple violations of law in their arrests on Nov. 4, 2025.

According to the complaint, some workers arrested are lawfully present in the United States. Although ICE agents photographed the workers and located them in federal databases, confirming they are legally present, the agents arrested them anyway.

The complaint violations of the Fourth and Fifth Amendments to the constitution, the Immigration and Nationality Act, and agency standards for enforcement activities. The claims in the complaint include false arrest, false imprisonment, battery, intentional infliction of emotional distress, negligent infliction of emotional distress, and negligent supervision.

The lawsuit seeks $1 million in damages for each of the seven claimants.

On Nov. 4, around 20 unmarked vehicles descended on the car wash, according to the complaint. It claims the agents on-site made no meaningful effort to determine the workers’ identities or immigration status before detaining them. Some complainants allege the agents encircled them and asked, “are you legal or illegal.”

The agents informed none of the workers why they were being detained, photographed, or arrested, according to the lawsuit.

After arresting the seven workers, agents took them to a detention center in Burlington. ICE later transferred some to Plymouth and others to Vermont.

All the complainants were released on bond. The last of the seven received their release on Nov. 20.

3 Worcester Orgs Receive Community Investment Tax Credits

BOSTON – The office of Governor Maura Healey and the Executive Office of Housing and Livable Communities announced $12.8 million in Community Investment Tax Credits (CITC) awards to 52 community development corporations (CDCs) and support organizations on Thursday, April 23.

Three prominent Worcester organizations received tax credit awards, including Main South CDC ($100,000), Worcester Community Housing Resources Inc. ($100,000), and Worcester Common Ground ($75,000).

The CITC program provides a 50 percent refundable state tax credit to incentivize contributions to CDCs.

The program, launched in 2012, led to flexible funding sources for community organizations supporting affordable housing development and preservation, community planning, economic development, homeownership assistance, financial education, foreclosure prevention, and workforce development. The 2024 Affordable Homes Act expanded the program and created a permanent funding source.

“We are focused on building more housing and lowering costs across Massachusetts. Communities know best what they need to grow and succeed, and the CITC program gives them the resources they need to deliver,” said Governor Maura Healey. “These investments will help build more housing, support small businesses and strengthen neighborhoods across Massachusetts. We’re proud to partner with all 52 communities receiving awards to create opportunity and make our state more affordable.”

The CITC program design enables residents and stakeholders to work through CDCs to partner with nonprofits to improve economic opportunities for low and moderate-income families.

The full list of awardees announced are:

• African Community Economic Development of New England (ACEDONE): $150,000
• Allston Brighton CDC: $200,000
• Amherst Community Land Trust: $375,000
• Asian CDC: $160,000
• Boston Neighborhood Community Land Trust: $180,000
• Chinatown Community Land Trust: $100,000
• Coalition for a Better Acre: $75,000
• Codman Square NDC: $225,000
• Community Development Corporation of South Berkshire: $225,000
• Community Development Partnership: $375,000
• Community Teamwork, Inc.: $375,000
• Community Economic Development Corporation (CEDC): $300,000
• Dorchester Bay Economic Development Corporation: $250,000
• Fenway Forward: $300,000
• Franklin County CDC: $250,000
• Groundwork Lawrence: $225,000
• Harborlight Homes: $375,000
• Hilltown CDC: $300,000
• Homeowner’s Rehab Inc.: $125,000
• Housing Assistance Corporation: $375,000
• Housing Corporation of Arlington: $300,000
• Housing Nantucket: $375,000
• Inquilinos Boricuas en Accion (IBA): $300,000
• Island Housing Trust: $375,000
• Jamaica Plain Neighborhood Development Corporation: $75,000
• Just A Start: $375,000
• Latino Support Network: $100,000
• Lawrence Community Works: $375,000
• Local Initiatives Support Corporation: $300,000
• Madison Park Development Corporation: $200,000
• Main South CDC: $100,000
• Massachusetts Association of Community Development Corporations (MACDC): $120,000
• Nectar Community Investments: $375,000
• Neighborhood of Affordable Housing (NOAH): $150,000
• NeighborWorks Housing Solutions: $375,000
• NewVue Communities: $375,000
• North Shore CDC: $275,000
• Nuestra Comunidad: $150,000
• OneHolyoke CDC: $150,000
• Somerville Community Corporation: $200,000
• South Boston NDC: $50,000
• South Middlesex Opportunity Council: $375,000
• Southeast Asian Coalition of Massachusetts: $150,000
• The Neighborhood Developers: $375,000
• Urban Edge: $375,000
• Valley Community Development: $200,000
• WATCH CDC: $375,000
• Waterfront Historic Area League (WHALE): $100,000
• Way Finders: $250,000
• Wellspring Cooperative: $375,000
• Worcester Common Ground: $75,000
• Worcester Community Housing Resources Inc.: $100,000

Image Credit: Hsin Ju HSU, Massachusetts Statehouse, CC BY-SA 3.0

Worcester Man Charged for Assault of a Federal Confidential Informant

WORCESTER – A local man faces charges for assaulting a federal confidential informant during a planned purchase of a firearm.

Federal prosecutors charged Joshua Guzman, 18, of Worcester, with assault of a person assisting federal officers with a dangerous weapon. Guzman remains in federal custody after his initial court appearance.

Prosecutors say that Guzman and another person used WhatsApp to coordinate the sale of a firearm to the informant and arranged for the transaction to occur in Worcester on Feb. 25.

The U.S. Attorney’s office did not provide the name of the person with Guzman.

Guzman and the other individual entered the informant’s vehicle to conduct the transaction. After conducting the exchange, Guzman allegedly displayed a firearm and pointed it at the informant’s head while demanding “everything.” Guzman also allegedly struck the informant with the firearm before grabbing the cash and the firearm he sold to the informant. Both Guzman and the other individual fled the scene.

Agents in the area for another matter observed Guzman fleeing and apprehended him after a brief pursuit.

A firearm in Guzman’s possession fell to the ground during the pursuit and was recovered by authorities.

Law enforcement located the individual with Guzman during the alleged robbery soon after the incident and arrested him .

Along with the firearm dropped by Guzman, authorities recovered clothing, a cell phone, and around $1,600 in cash.

The charge of assault of a person assisting federal officers with a dangerous weapon provides for a sentence of up to 20 years in prison, three years of supervised release, and a fine of $250,000.

Editor’s note: The information provided in this report is based on events as described by the U.S. Department of Justice. The claims within are allegations which may be challenged by the accused in court.

Southbridge Woman Arraigned in Death of 10-Year-Old Girl

WEBSTER – A local woman faced arraignment on Tuesday, April 21, on charges related to a motor vehicle crash which led to the death of a 10-year-old pedestrian.

A Dudle District Court judge held the arraignment of Sherry Plitouke, 35, of Southbridge, on charges of motor vehicle homicide by negligent operation, negligent operation of a motor vehicle, and speeding in a special regulation zone.

The judge ordered the woman held on $25,000 bail.

Webster Police responded to School Street on Saturday, April 11, in response to a report of a crash involving a pedestrian. Upon arriving at the scene, police discovered 10-year-old Marleigh Guevara as the pedestrian. Police provided emergency medical aid until EMS transported Guevara to UMass Memorial Hospital.

Medical personnel pronounced Guevara dead the following day.

Woman Charged for Stealing $100,000 from Social Security

WORCESTER – A local woman faces charges for stealing over $100,000 of Social Security benefits in Federal Court in Worcester.

Federal prosecutors filed charges against Jennifer Valley, 51, of Barre, for one count of theft of government money.

According to federal prosecutors, Valley stole $100,218 in Social Security retirement benefits from the government between October 2022 and August 2025.

The announcement by the office of the U.S. Attorney for Massachusetts, Leah Foley, did not include other information about the circumstances of the theft.

The charge of theft of public funds provides for a sentence of up to 10 years in prison, three years of supervised release, and a fine of $250,000 or twice the gross gain or loss, whichever is greater.

Editor’s note: The information provided in this report is based on events as described by the U.S. Department of Justice. The claims within are allegations which may be challenged by the accused in court.

State Plans Playground, Spray Deck, and More at Lake Park

WORCESTER – The beach at Quinsigamond State Park, or Lake Park, on Lake Avenue in Worcester is being permanently closed and replaced with a lakefront overlook, according to plans presented by the Massachusetts Department of Conservation and Recreation (DCR).

Lake Park beach is being removed due to the lack of accessibility, including uneven staircases, a narrow beach area and a steep ramp descending to the shoreline along Lake Quinsigamond.

The DCR presented the 25 percent design development progress for the Lake Park Site Improvements project on Thursday, April 16.

The park developments will be broken into two phases:

• Phase 1 will include a 5,000 sq. foot spray deck and playground; and
• Phase 2 will be the reimagining of the beach area with an overlook and lawn area, fishing areas and a picnic area, and an improved plaza area in front of the park’s bath house.

The spray deck and playground will be installed where the southern parking lot currently ends, near the bathhouse. The space will include a cooling station, new bike racks, benches, and a shade awning structure. Phase 1 will also include a metal fence around the playground, a new pathway connecting the playground area to the park’s walking loop and a drop-off area in the parking lot outside of the playground.

The playground will include a large seesaw, three bays of swings, slides, and other apparatus.

The Phase 1 construction documents are expected to be ready by this summer, followed by an announcement of accepting bids for the project. Designs for Phase 2 are still in progress and will be presented to the public in the future.

A recording of DCR’s Thursday’s presentation is below. The public can share additional feedback, with a deadline for receipt of comments by DCR of April 30. Comments may be submitted via the DCR public comment portal.

Jury Finds Live Nation/ Ticketmaster Violated Antitrust Laws

BOSTON  – A jury in a New York City federal court delivered a verdict that Live Nation and its subsidiary Ticketmaster illegally maintained monopoly power in the event ticketing market.

After a five-week trial, the jury found Ticketmaster overcharged concertgoers by $1.72 per ticket at major concert venues, resulting from its anticompetitive behavior. A federal judge will decide the penalty for the company at a later date.

The U.S. Justice Department and several state attorneys general filed the complaint in 2024. The complaint alleged Live Nation engages in anticompetitive conduct which resulted in higher fees and fewer options for venues being coerced by Ticketmaster.

Live Nation says the jury verdict will not be the last word on the matter and that it intends to pursue further legal action.

Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea Joy Campbell led a coalition of 39 states in bringing the lawsuit. The federal government reached a settlement agreement with the company just after the trial began. 27 states did not join that settlement, including Massachusetts.

“For too long, Live Nation has abused its power to drive up prices and harm fans, artists and venues,” said AG Campbell. “This verdict forces real accountability – lowering costs and sending a clear message that no company, no matter how powerful, is allowed to rig the market against consumers. This result also underscores something critical about this moment: when the federal government steps back, bad actors will not escape accountability from state attorneys general. This case is a clear example of states using their authority to take on powerful corporations and put people first.”

According to Campbell’s office, Live Nations owns or controls over 265 concert venues in North America, including House of Blues Boston, MGM Music Hall in Fenway, Leader Bank Pavilion in Boston, and Xfinity Center in Mansfield. Its subsidiary, Ticketmaster, controls roughly 80 percent of major concert venues’ primary ticketing for concerts.

The other states involved in the lawsuit include Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, District of Columbia, Florida, Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Louisiana, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia, Wisconsin, and Wyoming.

13 Charged for Drug Distribution Conspiracy from Puerto Rico to Worcester

BOSTON – Federal prosecutors announced charges against 13 individuals for their alleged roles in a drug trafficking organization on Wednesday, April 15.

According to the office of U.S. Attorney Leah Foley, the government alleges the defendants operated a drug trafficking organization in both Central Massachusetts and Puerto Rico that distributed cocaine, methamphetamine, fentanyl, and marijuana.

The defendants, each charged with a single count of conspiracy to distribute controlled substances, are:

• Jack Saez Jr., 34, of Dayville, Conn.;
• Christopher Rivera Rodriguez, 32, of Puerto Rico;
• Jan Carlos Martinez Mendez, 23, of Puerto Rico;
• Dayanara Mendez, of Dayville, Conn.;
• Shaquille De Jesus Torres, 32, of Puerto Rico;
• Gerardo Villegas Rodriguez, 28, of the Dominican Republic;
• Sheldon Herring, 48, of Worcester, Mass.;
• Duamel Ocasio, 55, of Worcester, Mass.;
• Anthony Hines, 57, of Worcester, Mass.;
• Stephen Bandilla III, 55, of East Brookfield, Mass.;
• Justin Gilchrest, 34, of Webster, Mass.;
• Alondra Daleishka Cruz Mendoza, 23, of Puerto Rico; and
• Ushuuaniliz Hernandez Rios; 21, of Puerto Rico.

According to prosecutors, Saez led the organization that received packages by mail from Puerto Rico. During the investigation, investigators seized over 10 kilograms of cocaine shipped to Worcester County addresses.

Prosecutors say the organization also distributed methamphetamine and fentanyl.

Raids conducted in both Massachusetts and Puerto Rico led to the seizure of five firearms and what prosecutors described as “distribution quantities of other narcotics.”

The charge of conspiracy to distribute controlled substances provides for a sentence of up to 20 years in prison, three years of supervised release, and a fine of $250,000.

The Worcester City Council Circles the Drain; Pt. 1

This piece is the first in a series that will look at actions taken by some councilors over recent years that, when viewed collectively, display a disturbing downward spiral towards a council that serves the interests of its members, not of city residents.

Since 2024, the Worcester City Council has largely eliminated the role of residents in their own local legislature. The public participation portion of the meeting persists, although not without some discussion of further limiting it. However, the majority faction within the council insists on being in total control of what is and isn’t the business of the people of Worcester.

Soon after the Worcester Regional Research Bureau released its October 2025 report, which recommended that the City of Worcester create a civilian review board, City Manager Eric Batista told Talk of the Commonwealth with Hank Stolz that the report had little he wasn’t already familiar with. He said he studied the subject extensively while Assistant City Manager.

Yet here we are, nearly six months later, and no report has made it to the city council. That’s not the manager’s fault. The Mayor, currently Joe Petty, controls the council’s agenda. If he wanted it on the agenda, it’d be there.

A Harmless Resolution in Isolation

On the Worcester City Council agenda for Tuesday, April 14, the council will consider the following resolution:

“That the City Council of the City of Worcester does hereby recognize the Worcester Police Department’s (WPD) excellent work in several recent situations, where potentially serious dangers to the general public’s safety and wellbeing were averted. (Bergman)”

In isolation, there is nothing wrong with this. Based on the Worcester Police Department’s press releases, it worked with departments in surrounding municipalities to arrest 12 and avert planned street takeovers, arrested juveniles on gun and attempted robbery charges, and arrested one and charged two others related to the murder of Tafar Lewis, then-18 years old, in 2019.

Good. We like that.

It’s not the police department, in this case, that is enraging. Coming from this city council, the resolution is infuriating.

Keep in mind that on Feb. 24, just five meetings ago, the council spent over an hour praising the police department based on only crime stats, with Councilor Kate Toomey saying the department has performed “miracles.”

After the 2025 municipal election, the council majority led by Mayor Joe Petty includes Councilors Kate Toomey, Satya Mitra, Tony Economou, Moe Bergman, and Jose Rivera. Councilor Gary Rosen will show independence on some issues. Thus far, both Councilor John Fresolo and Rosen appear quite aligned with the majority on police issues.

Seven of the eight received the endorsement of the New England Police Benevolent Association Local 911, the union that represents patrol officers at the Worcester Police Department. That union endorsed Fresolo’s opponent in the election last year.

Councilors’ Positions on Police Reform

The positions of councilors on police reform roughly break down into three factions.

The Pro-Civilian Review Board Faction

• Councilor Khrystian King
• Councilor Luis Ojeda
• Councilor Rob Bilotta

These councilors support a civilian review board as a check and balance on police misconduct investigations. It’s not a position I share. They rarely work, in my view, and have perceived power that never actually materializes. The position is, at least, better than doing nothing and continuing a half-century trend of being willfully in denial of the problems in policing in Worcester.

The No Changes at All Faction

• Councilor Kate Toomey
• Councilor Moe Bergman
• Councilor Jose Rivera

This group falsely claims that the Massachusetts Peace Officer Standards and Training (POST) Commission is “enough.” Meanwhile, as This Week in Worcester previously reported, the POST Commission’s position directly disputes this faction’s position. While Toomey is chairperson of the council’s Standing Committee on Public Safety, with Bergman and Economou as its members, the POST Commission has never appeared before that committee. To date, none of the committee members have introduced an order to the full council, which would be required to invite the POST Commission to a committee meeting.

Representatives of the POST Commission have appeared before the Human Rights Commission on two occasions. The Executive Director of the POST Commission, Enrique Zuniga, appeared before the Human Rights Commission on March 23.

He told the commission members that POST receives roughly 1,600 complaints per year and directly investigates around 100. That’s good enough for these councilors.

They also pretend that police officers investigating other police officers in the same department is a credible investigation. The WPD Bureau of Professional Standards has been a professional police misconduct and, sometimes, crime cover-up department as long as its existed.

A report by the Worcester Telegram and Gazette, “the city, in 2021, told POST that, of the 795 unnecessary force investigations it had ever conducted into its roughly 460 active officers at the time, it had upheld the allegations just two times.”

Bergman was first elected councilor in 2013. Toomey was first elected in 2005 and is in her 11th year as chair of the public safety committee. Neither has ever expressed concern that 99.75 percent of unnecessary force investigations led to no finding of responsibility.

The Too Cowardly to Take a Position Faction

Here are the positions of councilors who know only what they are against:

• Mayor Joe Petty: Against civilian review board, completely bereft of any other ideas he could support;
• Councilor Satya Mitra: Said during the 2025 campaign he would consider civilian review, no clarification since; unlikely to support;
• Councilor Gary Rosen: Against civilian review board, completely bereft of any other ideas but wants oversight of state road projects;
• Councilor Tony Economou: The DOJ report is “just words on paper,” against civilian review, completely bereft of any other ideas but wants to know the mix of the pothole filler;
• Councilor John Fresolo: Against civilian review board, completely bereft of any other ideas he could support.

Let’s be honest. There isn’t much difference between the No Changes and No Position factions.

For those from these factions reelected last year, Petty, Toomey, and Bergman, they took a week of press when immigration protestors interrupted the city council last year after Worcester Police officers supported the ICE operation on Eureka Street (city officials deny this, more on these lies later in the series), focusing on the curse words used in their protest.

When protestors shut down the Worcester City Council meeting after Mayor Petty “reinterpreted the rules” in under 48 hours to prevent a resolution on a ceasefire in the War in Gaza, despite the city council taking up 11 similar matters on international issues in the past, Toomey called the meeting “a riot.”

How brave of the trio to create that situation entirely of their own actions, then try to spin it as anything but self-inflicted.

Yet when a rally staged by police unions descended on city council, when some department employees insisted on screaming “prostitutes” at women in the room and demanding that their own experiences were a lie, all three sat there in silence wallowing in their fealty to police union special interest political power. They wholly and deliberately ignored what the DOJ said were contributing causes of abuse and misconduct it cited: a failure to hold officers accountable and supervisory structures so inadequate that the department has little visibility into what officers are doing on the street.

After the “not a riot” meeting, Toomey and Bergman played host to Chief of Police Paul Saucier promoting ridiculous conspiracy theories at a public safety committee meeting about interns at the Department of Justice and imposters cosplaying as cops as the origin of the sexual assault claims against some officers. If he had only called them crisis actors, the Alex Jones-like absurdity of it could have come full circle.

While this was, in my view, the worst day for Saucier on the job, I think he’s mostly done well in the role. The future of the chief of police position is not so rosy. We’ll get to that in a future piece in this series.

Based on their positions that everything is just wonderful at the police department, here is what we know the two anti-reform factions support:

• When a police officer physically attacks a pastor for saying things the officer didn’t like, in his own church in front of screaming, horrified parishioners, including children, promoting that officer is appropriate.
• When a group of multiple officers conspire to create a false story that an individual, who just happens to be black by the sheer luck of it, accelerated a car at multiple officers that the man wasn’t in (because they had yanked him out), the appropriate response is not to arrest them for lying on a police report (a crime) and conspiracy, but to promote one of them.
• When there is indisputable evidence that a Worcester Police detective told a very different story during a criminal trial than he told at the civil trial after the man spent 16 years in prison, that’s just fine. Put him back on the street to do it all over again.
• Teens bullied into confessions for crimes they didn’t commit, an autistic 10-year-old child with a broken arm, a man held for five months for a murder he couldn’t have committed, and on and on and on.

We know they have no objection to these horrific occurrences because they refuse to do anything about them. This is the police department they want. This is what they believe the people of this city deserve.

What they certainly do not support is the Constitution of the United States, which each councilor pledges to uphold at inauguration.

Across 276 city council meetings from 2018 through 2025, the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution comes up twice, according to meeting minutes. Once, related to the WPD drone program, and the second related to property inspections as part of the city’s rental registry program.

The amendment, which prohibits unreasonable searches or seizures by government officials, never comes up relative to individual rights and law enforcement in the city.

Let’s suspend reality for a moment and ignore the years of egregious conduct by some within the department. Look at the first 36 seconds of this traffic stop in January:

While I am not a lawyer, I can read. It appears, in my view, that evidence of two violations of law occurred during this stop.

1. Massachusetts has a higher standard for ordering drivers out of a car. Unlike the federal standard, which allows exit orders to be given “as a matter of course,” under Article 14 of the Massachusetts Declaration of Rights, legal exit orders require an officer has a reasonable suspicion of danger to themselves or the public, or the officer has reasonable suspicion of criminal activity.

2. A traffic stop in Massachusetts requires reasonable suspicion of a crime or probable cause of a traffic violation.

The officer declared the stop results from “driving patterns that indicate illegal activity.” That is not reasonable, articulable, or particularized suspicion. That’s what some might call a fishing expedition.

I repeat, the city council has discussed protecting the Fourth Amendment rights of residents of this city in their interactions with police exactly zero times over seven years. Zero.

So yes, considering how comfortable the council majority is with doing absolutely nothing in the face of terrible violations of the rights of people in this city, this election-pandering resolution is infuriating virtue signaling.

Although the council heard this resolution after 11 PM during the council meeting on April 14, just five meetings after heaping effusive praise on the department, several councilors didn’t miss the chance to kiss the ring again. It’s not clout-chasing when they do it. Only residents who speak during public participation do that, of course.

Yet they just have no time to hear petitions from the plebs.

Remember, just last year, how important it was to “show up to work.” The record says otherwise.

That will be the subject of the next piece in this series.