This Day in Legal History: Eight Executed for Witchcraft in Massachusetts
On September 22, 1692, eight individuals—six women and two men—were executed for witchcraft in Salem, Massachusetts, marking the final hangings of the infamous Salem Witch Trials. Among the condemned were Martha Corey, Mary Easty, Alice Parker, Mary Parker, Ann Pudeator, Wilmot Redd, Margaret Scott, and Samuel Wardwell. This date is significant as it represents the culmination of a months-long hysteria that began in early 1692, spurred by accusations from young girls and sanctioned by a special court convened to root out witchcraft. The trials relied heavily on "spectral evidence"—testimony that the accused's spirit had appeared to the accusers—which would later be discredited. The executions were carried out at Proctor’s Ledge, near Gallows Hill.
The public mood began to shift by the fall of 1692. Prominent ministers and members of the community, including Increase Mather, began speaking out against the trials, criticizing the reliance on uncorroborated testimony and the erosion of due process. Following the September 22 executions, no further hangings took place, and the special court was dissolved in October. In early 1693, Governor William Phips pardoned many of the remaining accused.
The Salem Witch Trials are now viewed as a stark example of mass hysteria and judicial failure. Legal safeguards we take for granted today, such as the right to confront one’s accuser and standards for admissible evidence, were notably absent. Over time, the Massachusetts government issued apologies, and the trials have become a lasting symbol of injustice.
President Trump announced the appointment of his former attorney, Lindsey Halligan, as the new U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia. The move comes amid growing pressure from Trump on Attorney General Pam Bondi to prosecute his political opponents more aggressively. In social media posts, Trump demanded action against figures such as former FBI Director James Comey, Senator Adam Schiff, and New York Attorney General Letitia James, citing frustration over delays and lack of indictments. Halligan, who previously represented Trump in legal battles following the Mar-a-Lago classified documents search, replaces Erik Siebert, who resigned following Trump’s public criticism.
Trump praised Bondi’s overall performance but hinted at dissatisfaction with the pace of investigations. While he continues to support her publicly, his remarks suggest growing impatience. Bondi has also faced internal criticism over her handling of high-profile issues, including the Jeffrey Epstein files. Halligan's appointment surprised some in the Justice Department, as another official, Mary "Maggie" Cleary, reportedly believed she had been selected for the post.
Trump administration sources say Siebert had resisted pushing charges against James and Comey due to weak evidence, which may have led to his ouster. The Eastern District office is currently involved in politically sensitive investigations tied to Trump’s previous legal conflicts and campaign inquiries.
Trump Picks New Virgina Prosecutor After Scolding Bondi Inaction
Google is facing a major antitrust trial in Virginia, where the U.S. Department of Justice and several states are pushing to force the company to sell its ad exchange platform, AdX. The government argues that Google has unlawfully monopolized the web advertising market, particularly by tying AdX to its publisher ad server, which publishers use to manage digital ad inventory. Judge Leonie Brinkema previously ruled that Google holds monopoly power in this area and will now decide what remedies to impose following the trial.
The DOJ wants Google to not only divest AdX but also open-source the auction system that determines which ads get placed when users load a webpage. Google has countered that such proposals are impractical and could destabilize the digital advertising ecosystem. The company had earlier considered selling AdX in EU negotiations but is now proposing policy changes to allow more competition on its platforms.
The trial has significant implications for the broader tech industry, as part of a larger bipartisan effort to regulate major tech firms including Meta, Amazon, and Apple. Testimony is expected from media industry executives, including former officials from News Corp and DailyMail.com, who have accused Google of prioritizing its own interests in ad placements. If current remedies fail to improve competition within four years, the DOJ wants Google to also sell its publisher ad server.
Google seeks to avoid ad tech breakup as antitrust trial begins | Reuters
Lawyers for Luigi Mangione, the man accused of murdering UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson, are asking a federal judge to block the death penalty in his case. In a court filing, they argued that Mangione’s due process rights were violated, pointing to a highly publicized and "dehumanizing" perp walk in which he was shown in shackles being escorted from a helicopter. They claim this media spectacle, along with public comments from officials—including U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi—created a prejudicial environment from the outset of the case.
Mangione has pleaded not guilty to charges including murder and interstate stalking. Thompson was fatally shot on December 4, 2024, outside a Manhattan hotel during an investment conference. While the killing was widely condemned, public sentiment has been mixed, with some sympathizing with Mangione's frustration over rising healthcare costs. The case has also fueled broader concerns about politically motivated violence following other recent high-profile incidents.
Prosecutors have until October 31 to argue in favor of pursuing the death penalty, which would be decided by a jury if Mangione is convicted. His next federal court appearance is December 5. In parallel, Mangione is facing nine state charges, though two terrorism-related counts were recently dismissed. While New York abolished the death penalty in 2004 for state crimes, it remains a legal option in federal prosecutions.
Luigi Mangione's lawyers urge judge to block death penalty over insurance CEO's murder | Reuters
A U.S. federal court will soon decide whether Danish energy firm Ørsted and its partner Skyborn Renewables can resume construction on the Revolution Wind offshore project, which was halted by the Trump administration in August. Located 15 miles off Rhode Island’s coast, the project is designed to power 350,000 homes across Rhode Island and Connecticut. Ørsted, claiming losses of $2 million per day during the stoppage, argues the administration did not follow proper procedures in issuing the stop-work order and is seeking a preliminary injunction from Judge Royce Lamberth.
The Interior Department initially cited vague national security concerns through the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management but later claimed Ørsted failed to comply with permit conditions. These included coordination with the U.S. Navy and NOAA to address military and scientific survey impacts. Ørsted disputes these claims, stating it has met the requirements and that the government's objections were raised only after litigation began.
The Biden administration approved the project in 2023, but President Trump has moved to roll back offshore wind developments, calling them costly and unsightly. The outcome of the court's decision could impact both the future of the Revolution Wind project and the broader U.S. offshore wind sector.
US court weighs Trump halt on Rhode Island offshore wind project | Reuters
