The filing argues that the timing, Blumenthal’s differential treatment compared with other journalists on the same reporting trip, and the overlap between Loomer’s demands and CBP’s questioning raise serious concerns that he was targeted because of his reporting and political viewpoints.
motion to return seized phones argues that timing, differential treatment, and overlap between Loomer’s demands and CBP’s questioning raise serious concerns that he was targeted because of his reporting and political viewpoints Max Blumenthal
No event time was recorded for this claim — the text gave nothing to anchor it to, and a guessed date would be worse than none.
Standing
lens: Evidence-weighted Structural
No belief has been computed for this claim under Structural yet.
What bears on it
Nothing supports or challenges this claim yet — untested, which is not the same as refuted.
Voices
- thegrayzone.com independent
Voices are counted, never weighed. How many people say a thing is structure worth seeing; it is not, by itself, a reason to believe it.
What the documents actually said
The verbatim text each extraction read before resolving it into this canonical claim. Quoted, never republished.
- The filing argues that the timing, Blumenthal’s differential treatment compared with other journalists on the same reporting trip, and the overlap between…
The filing argues that the timing, Blumenthal’s differential treatment compared with other journalists on the same reporting trip, and the overlap between Loomer’s demands and CBP’s questioning raise serious concerns that he was targeted because of his reporting and political viewpoints.
Sources
Who and what it involves
Origin: extracted from ADC sues DHS Secretary Mullin over illegal CBP seizure of Max Blumenthal’s devices · 2026-07-23 07:04