(NEW YORK) — More than 700 flights nationwide have been canceled Saturday as the Federal Aviation Administration continues limiting flight capacity at 40 major U.S. airports amid the government shutdown.
As of 6 a.m. ET on Saturday, 754 flights have already been canceled nationwide and the total could eclipse Friday’s toll of 1,024 cancellations.
However, despite more than 1,000 flights being canceled on Friday, major delays at airports across the country continue to persist due to staffing issues in air traffic controller towers and centers.
If the government shutdown continues, more air travel reductions could be on the way, Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy said in an interview on ABC News Live on Friday.
“My hope is that this government shutdown will end soon and we can get back in the business of letting Americans travel,” Duffy said in the interview.
It is possible the Department of Transportation may ask airlines to cancel more than 10% of their flights if controllers keep calling out in higher numbers, Duffy told ABC News.
Duffy said the FAA has asked private jets to avoid flying at the 40 airports impacted by the flight reductions, though they are currently not prohibited from flying there. He said private jet companies have been cooperative and are choosing alternate airports to help alleviate the pressure at those airports.
The cancellations are the latest — and perhaps biggest — disruption to air travel since the government shutdown began more than a month ago.
The FAA decided not to cut any international flights as it would be a violation of international agreements with the countries, according to Duffy.
“We have international agreements that we abide by, and because of those international agreements, I’m not going to impact those international flights. And because if I do, what will happen is we have other countries that are waiting to have a breach of those contracts from the US so they can cut down American flights, and then that would have a very long lasting impact on our ability to to to send travelers from the U.S. to those partners that have the agreements,” Duffy said.
(GRAND CANYON, Ariz) — A 65-year-old man died after slipping off the edge of the Grand Canyon and falling more than 100 feet, authorities in Arizona said.
The incident occurred at Guano Point on the canyon’s western rim on the Hualapai Reservation, according to the Mohave County Sheriff’s Office.
The sheriff’s office said it responded to assist the Hualapai Nation in a technical recovery Thursday afternoon.
A search and rescue crew located the man approximately 130 feet down into the canyon on a pile of rock fragments, according to the sheriff’s office.
Technical rope technicians used ropes to recover the body, which was then transported to the Mohave County Medical Examiner’s Office, authorities said.
The Hualapai Nation Police Department, Hualapai Nation Fire and Grand Canyon West security also assisted in the recovery, the sheriff’s office said.
The name of the man was not released.
Guano Point is known for its dramatic viewpoints of the Grand Canyon from the western rim.
ABC News has reached out to Grand Canyon Resort Corporation, which manages the Grand Canyon West area, for comment.
(PORTLAND, Ore.) — A federal judge ruled on Friday that Donald Trump “exceeded the President’s authority” when he sent federalized National Guard troops into Portland.
In a 106-decision, Trump-appointed U.S. District Judge Karin Immergut made permanent an order she issued last month blocking the deployment into the city.
“The evidence demonstrates that these deployments, which were objected to by Oregon’s governor and not requested by the federal officials in charge of protection of the ICE building, exceeded the president’s authority,” the judge wrote.
After a three-day trial, Immergut rejected the Trump administration’s argument that immigration-related protests amounted to rebellion or danger of a rebellion — the standard needed to justify a federal takeover of the National Guard.
“When considering these conditions that persisted for months before the President’s federalization of the National Guard, this Court concludes that even giving great deference to the President’s determination, the President did not have a lawful basis to federalize the National Guard” she wrote.
With Trump threatening to send the National Guard into Democratic-run cities across the country, Immergut acknowledged the magnitude of the issue in her order, writing the legal issue was bound for a higher court.
“The ‘precise standard’ to demarcate the line past which conditions would satisfy the statutory standard to deploy the military in the streets of American cities is ultimately a question for a higher court to decide,” she wrote.
In late September, Trump issued an order federalizing 200 members of the Oregon National Guard to protect federal property amid ongoing protests at a Portland ICE facility, despite objections from local officials.
The city of Portland and state of Oregon sued.
Around the same time, Trump sought to deploy Guard troops to Chicago — a move that was similarly opposed by local officials and blocked by the courts.
(NEW YORK) — A federal judge has barred the Trump administration from removing Diana Patricia Santillana Galeano from the United States and transferring her to any federal jurisdiction outside of Illinois, Indiana and Wisconsin, court documents show.
Santillana, 38, was detained at a day care center in Chicago earlier this week. Judge Jeremy C. Daniel has scheduled a hearing in her case on Nov. 13.
Santillana is currently detained at an ICE facility in Clark County, Indiana, her attorney, Charlie Wysong, said in a statement.
(NEW YORK) — Cornell University reached an agreement with the Trump administration to “immediately restore” its frozen federal funding after months-long negotiations over alleged civil rights violations, the school announced on Friday.
The multimillion-dollar agreement will be paid out over three years. Cornell agreed to invest $30 million into U.S. agriculture research and another $30 million will go directly to the federal government “as a condition for ending pending claims that have been brought against the university,” the school said.
This is the administration’s latest settlement with Ivy League institutions over alleged violations, following massive deals with the University of Pennsylvania, Columbia and Brown in recent months.
Similar to the other university leaders, Cornell University President Michael Kotlikoff maintained that it had not done any wrongdoing or broken federal civil rights laws.
The administration halted federal funding to Cornell in April along with Northwestern University and many other Ivy League schools in its quest to root out so-called unlawful DEI practices. Cornell said it has been subject to more than $250 million in federal funding interruptions, which have disrupted the research of faculty and students across all campuses.
President Kotlikoff explained that the agreement is taking place after “good faith” discussions with the administration, which enabled the school to return to its education and research practices in partnership with the federal government.
In a statement to the Cornell community, Kotlikoff noted “the agreement explicitly recognizes Cornell’s right to independently establish our policies and procedures, choose whom to hire and admit, and determine what we teach, without intrusive government monitoring or approvals.”
“In short, it recognizes our rights, as a private university, to define the conditions on our campuses that advance learning and produce new knowledge,” the statement added.
Kotlikoff will also certify compliance with the agreement on a regular basis and provide anonymized admissions data while continuing to conduct campus climate surveys and carry out foreign gift and contract reporting, according to the statement.
In a post on X, Secretary of Education Linda McMahon applauded the latest deal as a “transformative commitment” to restore merit and end DEI policies on college campuses.
“These reforms are a huge win in the fight to restore excellence to American higher education and make our schools the greatest in the world,” McMahon wrote.
(WASHINGTON) Officials decided to gradually increase air travel reductions to 10% after the safety team determined it would be the safest approach, Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy told reporters at Reagan National Airport.
Major airlines say they are planning to cancel hundreds of flights on Friday — out of thousands of daily flights — as the Federal Aviation Administration is set to begin limiting flight capacity at 40 major U.S. airports amid the government shutdown.
If the government shutdown continues, more air travel reductions could be on the way, Duffy said.
“I want it to be fixed, but also I have to continue to look at data and if this continues, and I have more [air traffic] controllers who decide they can’t come to work and control the airspace, but instead have to take a second job, with that you might see 10% would have been a good number, because we might go to 15% or 20%,” Duffy said.
This could likely cost airlines tens of millions of dollars, Duffy said.
The initial plan called for a 10% reduction starting Friday, but officials chose to gradually increase the reductions for safety, Duffy said.
Loss of separation — the minimum distance kept between aircrafts to keep them safe — in the airspace and complaints from pilots about stress from air traffic controllers are among the data points that led to the decision to reduce air travel, Duffy said.
“We’ve seen more breaches in regard to that loss of separation, we see more incursions on tarmac throughout the country, and we have more complaints from pilots about stress from air traffic controllers, and more complaints about the lack of responsiveness from controllers,” Duffy said.
“That data is going in the wrong direction, not in the right direction, which made us make the decision we have to actually take additional measures to reduce the pressure in our system,” Duffy said.
As of 2:30 a.m. ET on Friday morning, at least 814 flights within, into or out of the United States have been cancelled so far, per FlightAware
American Airlines said Thursday it will cancel about 220 of its roughly 6,000 departures starting Friday and lasting through this weekend.
United Airlines said in a statement it plans to cancel less than 200 of its more than 5,000 flights each day through the weekend. The airline has listed the flight cancellations on a special website along with other information for travelers.
A company spokesperson told ABC News that about half of customers who had their flights canceled were able to be rebooked within 4 hours of their original departure time.
Delta Airlines said it planned to cancel about 170 daily flights.
American, United and Delta — the three largest airlines in the U.S. — all have said they believe they will be able to accommodate most of the impacted passengers on other flights.
The cancellations are the latest — and perhaps biggest — disruption to air travel since the government shutdown began more than a month ago.
The FAA decided not to cut any international flights as it would be a violation of international agreements with the countries, according to Duffy.
“We have international agreements that we abide by, and because of those international agreements, I’m not going to impact those international flights. And because if I do, what will happen is we have other countries that are waiting to have a breach of those contracts from the US so they can cut down American flights, and then that would have a very long lasting impact on our ability to to to send travelers from the U.S. to those partners that have the agreements,” Duffy said.
Duffy said he has spoken to President Donald Trump about the flight reduction decision and that the White House is “fully read in” on it.
“The White House also looks to the safety team to help us make the right decisions to do the best we can to keep people safe. But there’s an easy answer. There’s an easy answer, open up the government, stop this,” Duffy said.
What travelers are saying Travelers began to be notified of the canceled flights on Thursday.
Caitlin Ladner, in Wisconsin, said she had planned to fly to Raleigh, North Carolina, on a Friday for a trip to surprise her parents with her sister but got a notice about her canceled flight on the United app.
“We’ve been planning it for a while …. It’s pretty upsetting,” she told ABC News.
Despite an offer to reschedule her flight, she said she decided to cancel it altogether.
“I don’t know when all this is going to end,” she said.
Meanwhile, other travelers across the country on Thursday were bracing for delays — and trying to make it home before the cancellations started.
At Reagan National Airport, just outside Washington, D.C., Frederick Ross, from Fort Myers, Florida, told ABC News the current travel headaches have him rethinking his upcoming holiday travel plans.
“It’s a big factor to have to possibly deal with delays and cancellations, and talking about traveling with the whole family, it’s easier to just take a road trip,” he said.
FAA order limits flights The FAA said earlier this week it was reducing flight capacity at 40 major airports across the country to alleviate staffing pressures. The reductions this weekend are starting out at 4% but will eventually climb to 10%, federal officials said.
Under an emergency order issued by the FAA on Thursday, airlines are required to reduce operations at the 40 “high-impact airports” by 6% by Nov. 11 and by 10% by Nov. 14. Any airline that does not comply will be fined $75,000 per flight over the limit, according to the FAA order.
That announcement came after Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy said earlier that the FAA would be forced to shut down the airspace in some areas if the shutdown continues into next week, warning of “mass chaos.”
Staffing shortages among air traffic controllers has been an ongoing concern and there have been scattered flight delays and cancellations over the past several weeks, as the shutdown has stretched on.
Last weekend, a surge in callouts among air traffic controllers led to strained staffing at multiple airports across the U.S. — including in the New York City area where 80% of controllers were absent at one point, the FAA reported.
Air traffic controllers, who are required to work without pay for the duration of the shutdown, are credited with helping end the most recent shutdown in 2019, when a series of absences delayed flights and heightened pressure on members of Congress.
The precise impact the flight cancellations will have on overall air travel is unclear.
“We’re not in the peak of summer, we’re not over a holiday period. So we feel confident that we have enough seats in these markets to accommodate all travelers,” United’s chief customer officer, David Kinzelman, told ABC News.
“There will not be chaos over the weekend,” he said, likening the impact of the reductions to a “medium-sized storm.”
He added, “We are going to cancel flights that we think have the least amount of disruption for customers. If you’re in a market with only two small regional flights and you cancel one or both of them, that’s a huge impact to that market. We want to avoid that. And so what we’re doing is really spreading it around the system.”
ABC News’ Ayesha Ali, Sam Sweeney and Rachel Scott contributed to this report.
(WASHINGTON) — The Trump administration has asked the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to issue an emergency stay of a judge’s ruling Thursday ordering the administration to fully fund the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program by today.
Lawyers for the Department of Justice argue that the district court ruling makes a “mockery of the separation of powers.”
“This unprecedented injunction makes a mockery of the separation of powers. Courts hold neither the power to appropriate nor the power to spend. Courts are charged with enforcing the law, but the law is explicit that SNAP benefits are subject to available appropriations,” the DOJ said in its filing.
U.S. District Judge John McConnell, in his ruling Thursday, ordered the Trump administration to fully fund SNAP for the month of November by Friday.
Last week McConnell ordered the government to use emergency funds to pay for SNAP in time for the Nov. 1 payments to be made — but the administration committed to only partially funding the program, saying they had to save the additional funds for child nutrition programs.
McConnell, in his Thursday ruling ordering SNAP to be fully funded, said the government’s argument that it did not want to tap into emergency funds in order to protect child nutrition programs was implausible, and accused the Trump administration of “erroneously and intentionally” conflating the funding.
“People have gone without for too long, not making payments to them for even another day is simply unacceptable,” the judge said.
The government has asked the circuit court to allow U.S. Department of Agriculture, which operates SNAP, to continue with the partial payment of SNAP and to “not compel the agency to transfer billions of dollars from another safety net program with no certainty of their replenishment.”
McConnell hemself denied a request from the government to stay his own decision, saying, “The request for a stay of this decision, either a stay or an administration stay, is denied. People have gone without for too long. Not making payments to them for even another day is simply unacceptable.”
The judge, in his order Thursday, directly rebuked President Donald Trump for stating “his intent to defy” a court order when Trump said earlier this week that SNAP will not be funded until the government reopens from the ongoing government shutdown.
U.S. Border Patrol Chief Greg Bovino leads his troop as they confront demonstrators outside of an immigrant processing center on September 27, 2025 in Broadview, Illinois. Scott Olson/Getty Images
(CHICAGO) — The Border Patrol official tasked with leading the Trump administration’s immigration enforcement crackdown in Chicago admitted to lying about a rock-throwing incident used to justify deploying tear gas against protesters, U.S. District Judge Sara Ellis said Thursday before issuing a preliminary injunction limiting the use of force during immigration arrests and protests.
The Oct. 23 incident involving Border Patrol Commander Greg Bovino, has been a key part of the court proceedings challenging the tactics of immigration agents during the Trump administration’s “Operation Midway Blitz,” which began in September.
Video of the incident showed Bovino throwing a gas canister at demonstrators in Chicago’s Little Village neighborhood without giving a verbal warning — a violation of the judge’s earlier temporary restraining order limiting the use of force, the judge said.
“Mr. Bovino and the Department of Homeland Security claimed that he had been hit by a rock in the head before throwing the tear gas, but video evidence disproves this. And he ultimately admitted he was not hit until after he threw the tear gas,” Ellis said Thursday.
At the time of the incident, DHS defended Bovino’s actions saying that a Border Patrol transport van transporting undocumented immigrants was attacked by demonstrators.
“The mob of rioters grew more hostile and violent, advancing toward agents and began throwing rocks and other objects at agents, including one that struck Chief Greg Bovino in the head,” Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin said in a statement after the incident.
She said in the statement that Border Patrol agents repeated multiple warnings.
“Agents properly used their training. The use of chemical munitions was conducted in full accordance with CBP policy and was necessary to ensure the safety of both law enforcement and the public,” McLaughlin said in the statement.
ABC News has reached out to DHS; about the discrepancy between its account of what happened and the judge’s ruling. A spokesperson responded with a statement criticizing the judge’s decision to grant a preliminary injunction.
“This injunction is an extreme act by an activist judge that risks the lives and livelihoods of law enforcement officers,” the spokesperson said in a statement Thursday. “Rioters, gangbangers, and terrorists have opened fire on our federal law enforcement officers, thrown rocks, bottles, and fireworks at them, slashed the tires of their vehicles, rammed them, ambushed them, and they have destroyed multiple law enforcement vehicles. Despite these real dangers, our law enforcement shows incredible restraint in exhausting all options before force is escalated.”
The spokesperson said DHS would appeal the judge’s order.
During Thursday’s hearing, the judge listed several other instances that she said proved federal agents disregarded the First Amendment rights of journalists, demonstrators and religious practitioners.
She referenced a Sept. 19 video of an incident involving protesters at the Broadview immigration facility.
“The protesters were standing far away. Agents immediately began lobbying … flash-bang grenades and tear gas with no warning whatsoever,” Ellis said.
The judge said she saw little reason for the use of force that federal agents used.
“Overall, this calls into question everything that defendants say they are doing in their characterization of what is happening either at the Broadview facility or out in the streets of the Chicagoland area during law enforcement activities,” she said.
In a deposition, played in court earlier this week, Bovino defended his own conduct and that of other immigration agents, saying he believed “all uses of force have been more than exemplary” during the operation in the Chicago region.
FBI and Border Patrol officers speak with Sean Charles Dunn, after he allegedly assaulted law enforcement with a sandwich, along the U Street corridor during a federal law enforcement deployment to the nation’s capital on Aug. 10, 2025, in Washington, D.C. (Andrew Leyden/Getty Images)
(WASHINGTON) — A jury found Sean Charles Dunn, the man accused of throwing a sandwich at a Customs and Border Protection agent in Washington, D.C., not guilty after three days of testimony and dozens of exhibits.
Dunn, a former Department of Justice staffer, had been hit with a misdemeanor assault charge after a grand jury failed to indict him on a felony assault charge for allegedly throwing a sandwich at the agent during the federal law enforcement surge in August. Video of the encounter went viral after Dunn’s arrest.
According to the earlier felony criminal complaint, Dunn allegedly approached the officer while shouting “f— you! You f—— fascists! Why are you here? I don’t want you in my city!”
After several minutes of confrontation, Dunn allegedly threw the sandwich, striking the officer in the chest, the complaint says.
Defense attorney Sabrina Shroff signaled her strategy immediately in her closing arguments on Wednesday, saying, “This case, ladies and gentlemen, is about a sandwich,” she said. “A sandwich that landed intact, still in its Subway wrapping.”
Assistant U.S. Attorney Michael DiLorenzo opened the government’s closing argument by urging jurors to find Dunn, better known online as “Sandwich Guy,” guilty of misdemeanor assault.
“This case is not about strong opinions,” DiLorenzo said. “It’s not about immigration.” Instead, he argued, Dunn crossed a line the night he threw the sandwich at a CBP agent.
The government said Dunn caused a “seven-minute disturbance” designed to pull attention away from CBP and the Metropolitan Police Department during a “high-visibility” operation. “Distract the officers, move them from their post,” DiLorenzo told jurors.
Prosecutors then played a video of Dunn admitting to officers, “I did it. I threw a sandwich. I did it to draw them away from where they were. I succeeded.”
The government argued that intent, not the menu item, is what matters. “Even with a sandwich, you don’t have the right to touch another person,” DiLorenzo said.
At several points, U.S. District Judge Carl J. Nichols reminded jurors that their verdict must rest on the evidence presented.
When Shroff continued her argument, she turned the government’s framing on its head, not by disputing the sandwich, but by arguing its legal meaning.
She showed photos of the sandwich on the ground after it hit the CBP agent and then pointed to something the government had not, the agent’s own mementos from the incident. The agent, she said, later received a fake Subway sandwich and a “felony footlong” badge from co-workers, both of which he displayed at work.
“If someone assaulted you, if someone offended you, would you keep a memento of that assault?” Shroff asked. “Would you stick it on your lunchbox and carry it every day? Of course not.”
Shroff argued the sandwich caused no injury, was not a foreseeable weapon, and that Dunn was engaged in protected political speech. She compared the incident to “a kid throwing a stuffed toy in the middle of a bedtime temper tantrum.”
Earlier, Dunn waived his right to testify in court ahead of closing arguments.
After nearly two hours of deliberation, the jury did not reach a verdict. Proceedings will resume at 9 a.m. Thursday.
-ABC News’ Alex Mallin contributed to this report.
(CHICAGO) — Supervisory Border Patrol Agent Charles Exum testified Wednesday that he had no role in the decision to release his government-issued vehicle after it was involved in a collision that led to him shooting a woman on Chicago’s southwest side last month.
“I was told to pick it up, [so] I picked it up,” Exum said, adding that he believed the vehicle had no remaining evidentiary value after it was processed and released by the FBI.
An attorney for the woman disputed Exum’s account, arguing that releasing the vehicle before defense lawyers could inspect it may have led to the destruction of potentially favorable evidence. The lawyer also confronted the agent with text messages Exum sent to friends and family in the days after the incident in which he appeared to boast about his shooting skills.
“I fired 5 rounds and she had 7 holes. Put that in your book, boys,” one of those messages said.
U.S. District Judge Georgia Alexakis ordered the testimony Wednesday in the criminal case against Marimar Martinez, who was shot by the Border Patrol agent — identified for the first time as Exum — on Oct. 4 in the Brighton Park neighborhood. The incident led to chaotic street protests and the deployment of tear gas by federal agents.
Martinez and another man, Anthony Ian Santos Ruiz, are charged with assault with a deadly weapon, accused of following the agents’ vehicles and initiating the collision with Exum’s SUV that led to the shooting. Federal prosecutors contend Exum fired five rounds defensively after Martinez allegedly drove toward him when he exited his vehicle after the crash, according to court filings.
“Moments after exiting the CBP Vehicle, the Martinez Vehicle drove northbound ” at the agent and he “proceeded to fire approximately five shots from his service weapon at the driver of the Martinez Vehicle,” prosecutors wrote in a criminal complaint last month.
Both Martinez and Ruiz have entered not guilty pleas. Martinez’s attorneys contend in court filings that it was the agents’ vehicle that initiated the collision. The government disputes that.
Wednesday’s hearing focused on a defense motion alleging that the federal government may have spoiled or altered evidence when it allowed the damaged vehicle Exum was driving to be released to him and driven back to his home base in Maine, where a Customs and Border Protection mechanic later wiped off black scuff marks after the FBI had processed the SUV in Chicago.
Exum said that after the collision, his government-issued Chevrolet Tahoe had scratches and dents on the driver’s side and black marks on the driver’s door and above the fuel tank. He said the FBI took photographs of his vehicle before it was taken from the scene to an FBI office for further evidence processing.
Prosecutors said in court filings that the FBI took additional photographs of the vehicle at an FBI facility in Chicago. The FBI also took paint chip samples from the Tahoe and downloaded data from the vehicle’s on-board computer before releasing the vehicle to Exum, according to court records.
Exum said he was contacted several hours after the shooting and told that his vehicle was ready to be picked up from an FBI office in downtown Chicago. He testified that a supervisor told him the vehicle had been processed for evidence and cleared for release. When he retrieved it, he said, the SUV appeared to be in the same condition as when it was removed from the scene.
A 23-year Border Patrol veteran stationed in Maine, Exum was on a temporary duty assignment for “Operation Midway Blitz” in Chicago. His assignment began in early September and was scheduled to end in October. He said he stayed an extra day after the incident to be interviewed by the FBI and a prosecutor.
Exum testified that he drove the vehicle back to Maine over three days, arriving at his home duty station on Oct. 10 and parking it in the facility’s garage. He said he did not see the vehicle again until about six days later, when he noticed it had been moved and that the black scuff marks from the collision had been cleaned off. He said he had no prior knowledge of the work and later learned that a supervisor had authorized a mechanic to perform it.
Prosecutors submitted to the court an email from that supervisor to Exum explaining that he had authorized the work on the vehicle to begin “because I though all the necessary pictures and evidence was [sic] taken in Chicago during the initial investigation.”
Exum said all work on the vehicle was stopped after the FBI informed him it would need to be returned to Chicago under a court order. The vehicle was transported to Chicago on a flatbed truck on Oct 23 and inspected by attorneys for Martinez a week later.
Defense attorney Chris Parente suggested during cross-examination that it was Exum, not his supervisor, who initiated the request for repairs. Parente cited an FBI interview report from Oct. 20 in which the agent wrote that Exum said he had sought approval for the work.
Exum denied that account.
“I did not say that, and I did not get approval for anything,” he testified. “He must have written it down incorrectly or misunderstood.”
Parente also confronted Exum with a series of text messages he sent in the days after the shooting — to his wife, his brother, and a group of fellow agents in a Signal chat. Prosecutors turned over screenshots of the messages to the defense earlier this week.
In one screenshot displayed in court — which included a link to a news article about the shooting — Exum wrote in a group chat: “Read it. Five shots, seven holes.” The message appeared to refer to the number of times Exum shot Martinez.
“So the ‘five shots, seven holes’ is a reference to my argument at the detention hearing that you shot Ms. Martinez five times and there were seven holes. Is that true?” Parente asked.
“I believe that is true,” Exum replied, adding: “I am a firearms instructor, and I take pride in my shooting skills.”
“So you’re bragging that you shot her five times and got seven holes? Are you literally bragging about this?” Parente asked.
“I’m just saying five shots, seven holes,” Exum answered.
In another partially redacted message to the same group, Exum wrote: “I have a MOF amendment to add to my story. I fired 5 rounds and she had 7 holes. Put that in your book, boys.” Exum said “MOF” referred to a nickname used by the group — “Miserable Old F—s.”
Exum testified that the texts to the group were sent as a way of “relieving stress.”
A separate redacted message from Oct. 5, the day after the shooting, read: “Cool. I’m up for another round of ‘f— around and find out.’”
“That means illegal actions have legal consequences,” Exum replied.
Parente pressed Exum on whether such messages were appropriate for a federal officer.
“You’re supposed to protect the lives of U.S. citizens, right?” Parente asked.
“Protect anyone’s life,” Exum replied.
“You know Ms. Martinez is a U.S. citizen, right?”
“I do know,” Exum said.
“And yet this seems like you’re in a support group bragging about the shooting,” Parente said.
“I did what I had to do to save my life,” Exum replied.
Following Exum’s testimony — which did not delve into the specific circumstances of the shooting — Judge Alexakis approved a defense request to hear from the FBI agent in Maine who took Exum’s statement, as well as the FBI agent and federal prosecutor who approved the release of his vehicle just hours after the incident.
“I want to know why an [assistant U.S. attorney] would authorize the release of a vehicle at the center of a media storm in an agent-involved shooting,” Parente said. “It doesn’t comport with my experience, so I think they both have relevant testimony.”
A date for that hearing has not yet been set.
Martinez has been indicted on charges of assaulting a federal officer with a deadly weapon. Prosecutors allege she and Ruiz followed the agents’ SUV for miles and rammed it while Exum and two others were inside.
A DHS statement on the incident emphasized that Martinez “was armed with a semi-automatic weapon and had a history of doxxing federal agents.” The government alleged that the law enforcement officers were “ambushed by domestic terrorists.” The charges against Martinez, however, made no mention of a weapon, and prosecutors have acknowledged in court that the gun was not displayed or possessed by Martinez during the confrontation. It was discovered in her purse when agents searched her vehicle later. Martinez has a license for the gun and a concealed carry permit, according to court records.
