News

(SANTA DE, NM) — Signs of rodent activity were found at Gene Hackman’s New Mexico property after the actor’s wife, Betsy Arakawa, died from a rare disease transmitted through rodents, according to a report.

Arakawa, 65, died at their Santa Fe home in February from hantavirus pulmonary syndrome — a disease spread through rodent urine, droppings or saliva, officials said.

Signs of dead rodents and rodent feces were discovered in their attached garage, detached garage, two casitas and a storage shed, according to a New Mexico Department of Health homesite environmental report. A rodent nest was found in a detached garage, the report said.

In a vehicle, officials found a live rodent, rodent feces and a nest, according to the report.

Live traps had been set out around the home, the report said.

The main house was clean with no signs of rodent activity, the report noted.

The inspection was completed one week after the bodies of Hackman, 95, and Arakawa were found inside their house during a Feb. 26 welfare check.

At first, authorities didn’t know what caused their deaths.

Officials later announced that Hackman died of cardiovascular disease and Alzheimer’s disease. He likely died around Feb. 18, about one week after Arakawa died from HPS on about Feb. 12, officials said.

Hantavirus pulmonary syndrome at first causes flu-like symptoms and can later cause trouble breathing, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Those who contract HPS after being exposed to rodent excrement often feel ill for roughly three to six days, Dr. Heather Jarrell, chief medical investigator for New Mexico’s Office of the Medical Investigator, told reporters.

“Then they can transition to that pulmonary phase, where they have fluid in their lungs and around their lungs,” she said. “And at that point, a person can die very quickly, within 24 to 48 hours, roughly speaking, without medical treatment.”

Hackman was likely home with his deceased wife for one week before he died, Santa Fe County Sheriff Adan Mendoza said at a press briefing in March.

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(HOUSTON) — A Texas man was arrested after his dogs fatally attacked his neighbor, with a history of disturbing others, according to the Houston Police Department.

Marshall Garrett, 38, was arrested on Tuesday and charged with three counts of criminal negligent failure to secure his dogs after his three Staffordshire mixes fatally mauled 65-year-old Harriette Phillips, according to court documents filed on April 9.

The attack occurred on March 23 in Houston, when Phillips was walking toward the left side of her backyard, and it “appeared that the defendant’s dogs had broken through her fence,” the court records said.

Phillips’ home security cameras reviewed by police show her “scanning her backyard looking for something” and hitting her fence with a hammer. Then, the dogs “returned through the broken fence and attacked her.” She began screaming for help and attempted to use her hammer as a form of defense, the court records said.

She fell to the ground, and the dogs began “mauling her head, neck area, arms/elbows and other parts of her body until the complainant was unable to move anymore or screamed for help,” the court records said.

Garrett did not witness the attacks but “realized what occurred afterward and called 911,” court documents said.

On the same day as this attack, another neighbor texted Garrett that he saw the dogs in Phillips’ yard, to which he replied: “Oh lord, I’m about to get it resolved,” the court records said.

In that same month, the dogs also nipped the finger of another neighbor when she was trying to fix a hole in her fence, the court records said.

All three dogs were euthanized after the attack, the court records said.

Garrett already has an established criminal record prior to this incident, as he and a female suspect, Latrecia Washington, were charged with murder last year when they fatally assaulted a man outside a Family Dollar store, according to court records.

On Oct. 29, Garrett approached 69-year-old Alton Martin from behind and punched him in the back of the head, according to court records.

The altercation appears to have stemmed from a dispute over whether jewelry Martin had sold to Washington was authentic or fake. Martin died from his injuries, court records said.

Garrett was arrested for this crime and was previously released on bond, according to court records. As of Tuesday, Garrett is back in police custody.

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — A federal judge in Washington, D.C., temporarily blocked President Donald Trump’s recent executive order aimed at Susman Godfrey, the law firm that has for years represented Dominion Voting Systems — the leading supplier of election technology across the U.S.

The decision from Judge Loren AliKhan on Tuesday is the latest win for one of the few law firms that have fought back against Trump’s orders instead of striking a deal.

Trump’s executive order seeks to block the firm’s access to government buildings and cancel government contracts, among others, over their “previous activities.”

Susman Godfrey has represented the voting machine company Dominion, famously securing a $787.5 million settlement from Fox News to settle allegations the network aired false claims about the company rigging the 2020 election.

Notably, the firm still represents Dominion in its active cases against a number of Trump’s allies — including Rudy Giuliani, Mike Lindell and others.

In her ruling, Judge AliKhan delivered a strong repudiation of the order, noting it “chills the firm’s speech and advocacy” as well as “threatens reputational harm.”

“The executive order is based on a personal vendetta… and frankly I think the Framers of the Constitution would see this as a shocking abuse of power,” she said.

During the hearing on Tuesday afternoon, attorneys representing Susman Godfrey said that Trump’s order was “one of the most brazenly unconstitutional exercises of executive power in the history of this nation.”

“The executive is wielding an axe, and we don’t know exactly when that axe is going to fall but they’re ready to bring it down,” said Donald Verrilli, an attorney representing Susman from the firm Munger, Tolles, and Olson.

Deputy Associate Attorney General Richard Lawson, a political appointee who previously worked for Attorney General Pam Bondi, argued repeatedly that the order fit squarely in the administration’s free speech rights.

“I would urge great caution from the court on the judiciary policing the executive branch’s speech, that is just a very tricky area that is extremely difficult to try and implement,” Lawson said.

He argued the judge should wait until the administration issued formal guidance to agencies on their interactions with the firm before issuing a temporary restraining order barring any kind of enforcement.

Despite this, Judge AliKhan said the TRO would remain in effect for 14 days and ordered the government to rescind any memos or guidance that had already gone out on the order.

Susman Godfrey said of the judge’s decision in a statement to ABC News,”This fight is bigger and more important than any one firm. Susman Godfrey is fighting this unconstitutional executive order because it infringes on the rights of all Americans and the rule of law.”

“This fight is right, it is just, and we are duty-bound to pursue it. We are grateful the court directly addressed the unconstitutionality of the executive order by recognizing it as a ‘shocking abuse of power,'” the firm said.

The hearing comes as the Trump administration has ramped up pressure against several law firms and universities.

Since Trump began targeting law firms, nine of the country’s largest law firms — including Paul Weiss, Kirkland & Ellis, Willkie Farr and Latham & Watkins — have agreed to provide a combined $940 million in legal services to promote causes supported by the president.

The firms also agreed to remove Diversity, Equity and Inclusion from hiring practices and vow not to deny representing clients based on politics.

Alternatively, three other major U.S. firms — Perkins Coie, WilmerHale, and Jenner & Block — are fighting the president’s action against law firms in federal courts, which have temporarily paused the orders from taking effect.

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — Fifteen minutes before a scheduled hearing in wrongful deportation case of Kilmar Abrego Garcia, the Trump administration said in their daily status report to the court that it is “prepared to facilitate Abrego Garcia’s presence in the United States in accordance with those processes if he presents at a port of entry.”

“I have been authorized to represent that DHS is prepared to facilitate Abrego Garcia’s presence in the United states in accordance with those processes if he presents at a port of entry,” said Joseph Mazarra, the Acting General Counsel for DHS.

However, Mazarra said, since Abrego Garcia is “being held in the sovereign, domestic custody” of El Salvador, DHS does not have the authority to forcibly extract him “from the domestic custody of a foreign sovereign nation.”

If Abrego Garcia does present at a port of entry, he would become subject to detention by DHS, due to his alleged membership in the criminal gang MS-13, said Mazarra.

The development came a day after a highly anticipated Oval Office meeting in which the president of El Salvador said he would not return Abrego Garcia to the United States.

The federal judge who ordered his return is scheduled to hear from Trump administration attorneys at a court hearing Tuesday afternoon.

Kilmar Abrego Garcia is entering his second month in an El Salvador mega-prison after he was deported there on March 15 despite being issued a 2019 court order barring his deportation to that country.

Trump administration officials say Abrego Garcia, who escaped political violence in El Salvador 2011, is a member of the criminal gang MS-13, but to date they have provided little evidence of that assertion in court.

He is being held in El Salvador’s notorious CECOT prison, along with hundreds of other alleged migrant gang members, under an arrangement in which the Trump administration is paying El Salvador $6 million to house migrants deported from the United States as part of President Donald Trump’s immigration crackdown.

Attorney General Pam Bondi, in an Oval Office meeting Monday with President Trump and the visiting El Salvador president, said that Abrego Garcia’s return is “up to El Salvador.”

“If El Salvador … wanted to return him, we would facilitate it,” she said.

Asked by reporters about Abrego Garcia, President Bukele responded, “I don’t have the power to return him to the United States.”

In a motion filed Tuesday in advance of the hearing, lawyers for Abrego Garcia argued that the Trump administration has not taken any steps to comply with the orders to facilitate his release.

“There is no evidence that anyone has requested the release of Abrego Garcia,” they wrote in the filing.

The attorneys also took issue with the government’s interpretation of the word “facilitate,” which the administration has argued in court filings is limited to removing any domestic obstacles that would impede the return of Abrego Garcia to the United States.

Interpreting the term in that manner, Abrego Garcia’s attorneys argued, would render “null” the Supreme Court’s order that the government facilitate his release.

“To give any meaning to the Supreme Court’s order, the Government should at least be required to request the release of Abrego Garcia. To date, the Government has not done so,” they wrote in their motion.

After U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis ordered the government to “facilitate and effectuate” Abrego Garcia’s return, the Supreme Court last week unanimously ruled that Judge Xinis “properly requires the Government to ‘facilitate’ Abrego Garcia’s release from custody in El Salvador and to ensure that his case is handled as it would have been had he not been improperly sent to El Salvador.”

“The intended scope of the term ‘effectuate’ in the District Court’s order is, however, unclear, and may exceed the District Court’s authority. The District Court should clarify its directive, with due regard for the deference owed to the Executive Branch in the conduct of foreign affairs,” the Supreme Court wrote, which the Trump administration has interpreted as prohibiting the district court from ordering the executive branch to take any action that would violate the separation of powers.

Judge Xinis subsequently amended her ruling to remove the word “effectuate,” leaving the order to “facilitate.”

In an interview Monday evening with ABC News’ Linsey Davis, an attorney for Abrego Garcia said he hopes Tuesday’s hearing “lights a fire under the government to comply with the Supreme Court’s order” to facilitate Abrego Garcia’s release.

“What we’re asking [of Trump] is exactly what the Supreme Court told him,” attorney Benjamin Osorio said. “I personally have worked with DHS before to facilitate the return of several other clients who were deported and then won their cases at circuit court levels or at the Supreme Court, and ICE facilitated their return.”

“So we’re not asking anybody to do anything illegal,” Osorio said. “We’re asking them to follow the law.”

“It feels a little bit like the Spider-Man meme where everybody’s pointing at everybody else,” Osorio said of Bukele’s claim that he doesn’t have the power to return Garcia. “But at the same time, I mean, we are renting space from the Salvadorans. We are paying them to house these individuals, so we could stop payment and allow them to be returned to us.”

Asked if he is confident that Abrego Garcia will be returned, Osorio said he was concerned but hopeful.

“I’m worried about the rule of law, I’m worried about our Constitution, I’m worrying about due process,” he said. “So at this point, I am optimistic to see what happens in the federal court hearing.”

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.