A University of Chicago fraternity is facing allegations of sexual assault from a local resident in a lawsuit filed this week.

The 19-year-old woman, who is not a student at the school and is identified in the suit only as “Jane Doe,” alleged that she was raped at a party at the Alpha Delta Phi fraternity house in February after a fraternity member offered her “unidentified alcohol” that made her lightheaded and unsteady. According to the complaint, obtained by MS NOW, the assault occurred in a “secluded room” of the house while the woman was “visibly impaired” and both physically and mentally incapable of giving consent.

Filed Monday in Cook County Circuit Court, the lawsuit comes on the heels of a national reckoning around sexual misconduct at universities, which was sparked last month when allegations of a 2024 gang rape at Cornell University resurfaced in a civil suit.

News of the Chicago lawsuit was first reported by NBC News on Tuesday.

The complaint named just two defendants: the Alpha Delta Phi Inc. national organization, which governs individual chapters and memberships, and the fraternity’s Chicago chapter. Jane Doe claimed that both were negligent in ensuring the safety of guests at the Chicago house, especially given multiple allegations of sexual assault at the same residence, which has been maintained by the chapter for almost 100 years.

According to the complaint, two alleged sexual assaults occurred in the same month in 2009 at the same Alpha Delta Phi house where Jane Doe alleges she was raped. Her complaint alleges that those incidents, combined with the documented prevalence of campus sexual assault, should have put both the national fraternity and its Chicago chapter on notice of the serious and specific risks of sexual assault to party guests like Jane Doe at the Alpha Delta Phi house.

In a statement provided to MS NOW, Gerald McSwiggan, a spokesperson for the University of Chicago, called the allegations “very disturbing to the University community” and said the school was “committed to addressing and preventing incidents of sexual assault.” McSwiggan noted that the university was not named as a defendant in the suit and was prepared to work with the Chicago Police Department as it investigates.

Jane Doe’s lead attorney, Mike Grieco, confirmed to MS NOW that the university was not a defendant but said that following discovery, he could amend the complaint to seek damages from the university as well.

A representative from Alpha Delta Phi’s national office confirmed to MS NOW that the fraternity member accused of perpetrating the assault — who is named in the complaint but is not listed a defendant — has been suspended from the organization. Alpha Delta Phi’s statement described the alleged conduct as “deeply troubling and inconsistent with our values” and said the fraternity takes the allegations “extremely seriously,” adding, “We are committed to the safety and well-being of our members and communities and will cooperate with law enforcement as appropriate.”

Jane Doe alleges in the complaint that the fraternity member left her unconscious in a bedroom of the house, and that other members initially blocked a friend who accompanied her to the party from searching for her until another member discovered Jane Doe unconscious and allowed the friend to enter. Jane Doe alleges that she was “struggling to speak and required assistance to walk” when leaving the room where she was assaulted.

The morning after the alleged assault, Jane Doe allegedly “awoke to blood stains in her underwear” and made a report to the Chicago Police Department, the complaint states. (MS NOW has requested a copy of the report from the department.)

Grieco told MS NOW that Jane Doe went to a hospital and underwent rape kit testing the morning after the assault. He said he was unaware of whether CPD or the university police ever interviewed the alleged perpetrator or anyone else other than his client. He said he hopes the suit will prod both departments to prioritize their investigations.

The lawsuit was filed less than a week after the Chicago Sun-Times reported that another woman recently alleged that she was sexually assaulted at the Alpha Epsilon Pi fraternity house at the University of Chicago earlier this month. The woman — who, like Jane Doe, reportedly does not attend the university — was hospitalized immediately after the incident, which was reported to campus police, according to the Sun-Times.

The university says it alerted students on Oct. 11 that a sexual assault had allegedly occurred at a frat house near campus that day. Two days later, a second public alert said that a “person of interest” who was not “affiliated with the university” had been identified and banned from campus.

According to a statement posted to the Instagram page of the school’s Alpha Epsilon Pi chapter, the perpetrator “was chased out of the building” and “captured on cameras when they fled.” Both the school’s chapter and the fraternity’s national organization condemned the incident and said they supported the victim and the police investigation.

A spokesperson for the Chicago Police Department said that nobody was in custody in connection with either alleged incident — the one on Oct. 11 or the one described in the lawsuit — and that both investigations were ongoing. (MS NOW has also requested the police report for the alleged Oct. 11 incident.)

The university held a safety meeting on Wednesday night, according to Grieco and NBC Chicago. But McSwiggan, the university spokesperson, said the meeting had been planned prior to Jane Doe’s lawsuit.

Grieco told MS NOW the meeting highlighted the chasm between the university’s stated policy on fraternities — the institution says it does not recognize them —and officials’ responsibilities to prevent and address sexual assault. That’s why, he said, Jane Doe’s lawsuit focuses on achieving institutional accountability, not criminal prosecution.

Meanwhile, Jane Doe, who was a college student residing in Cook County at the time of the assault, is no longer enrolled in school, according to Grieco.

“She is in therapy,” he said, “and focused on her recovery.”

The post Woman alleges rape at University of Chicago fraternity house in new lawsuit appeared first on MS NOW.

For six years, Marina Lacerda was known publicly only as “Minor Victim 1,” the name federal prosecutors gave her in their 2019 sex-trafficking indictment of Jeffrey Epstein. Last year, she stepped out from behind it on Capitol Hill, joining fellow survivors in demanding that the government release the Epstein files.

Now, just over a year later, Lacerda is the central figure in a new political ad against Sen. Roger Marshall, R-Kan., who once voted against forcing the files into public view. It launches online Monday and hits Kansas TV on Tuesday.

Hers is one of three new ads featuring Epstein survivors. In another, Jena-Lisa Jones takes aim at Sen. Cindy Hyde-Smith, R-Miss. Lacerda also appears in the third, which targets Sen. Ashley Moody, R-Fla., which is expected to air Wednesday.

The ads mark the first time Epstein survivors themselves have campaigned in a congressional race. The family of one survivor got there first: Sky and Amanda Roberts, the brother and sister-in-law of the late Virginia Giuffre, recently appeared in an ad opposing their own congressman, Colorado Republican Rep. Jeff Crank, who they say refused to meet with them.

The new ads are sponsored by New Deal for All, a political action committee registered just this month and launched by Steve Pajcic, a Florida lawyer and former Democratic state legislator. Pajcic and his children “are spending at least $7 million for a blitz of ads in Florida, Kansas, Mississippi and South Carolina,” The New York Times reported last week in a profile of him.

To date, the PAC has spent roughly $4.55 million on ads and ad reservations through Election Day, according to AdImpact data reviewed by MS NOW. A Democratic strategist close to the project who was granted anonymity to discuss internal plans told MS NOW that the group had put roughly $2 million behind the Epstein-related ads targeting Marshall, Hyde-Smith and Moody, at least to start.

In the Kansas ad, Lacerda says she was 13 when she first met Epstein and was abused by him. “I expected our leaders to listen to our stories and hold our abusers accountable,” she says as a photo of Marshall appears alongside text faulting him for voting to block the release of the Epstein files.

The ad also features audio of Marshall saying, “It’s just not of much interest to me right now.” MS NOW was not able to independently verify the origin of the audio or whether he was referring to the Epstein files, but it appeared to come from footage by KSN, a Kansas NBC affiliate.

In the Mississippi spot, Jones, who says she was also in her early teens when Epstein first abused her, accuses Hyde-Smith of “voting to protect the sex trafficker who abused me.”

Looking directly into the camera, she says, “I want true change. I want our children to be safe.” Then, as a photo of Hyde-Smith appears: “If you vote for pedophiles, it’s time for Mississippi to pick a new senator.”

Both ads center on the same vote. In September 2025, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer tried to attach the Epstein Files Transparency Act, legislation requiring the Justice Department to release its files on Epstein, to the annual defense policy bill. Marshall and Hyde-Smith were among 51 Republicans who voted to table the amendment, effectively killing it. Two months later, after the bill passed the House nearly unanimously, the Senate approved it by unanimous consent. That means no senator objected, but also that there was no recorded vote.

In response to a request for comment, a representative for Hyde-Smith pushed back on the ad’s depiction of the senator.

“Sen. Hyde-Smith has consistently stood with victims of human trafficking. As the lead co-sponsor of the bipartisan Trafficking Survivors Relief Act, signed into law in January 2026, she helped ensure survivors can clear nonviolent federal offenses they were forced to commit by their traffickers and have a real opportunity to rebuild their lives,” said Jake Monssen, Hyde-Smith’s campaign manager. “This ad is nothing more than partisan propaganda paid for by people aligned with George Soros and national Democrats.”

Representatives for Marshall and Moody did not immediately respond to requests for comment. A representative for Crank previously told The New York Times that “it is deeply unfortunate that Washington lobbyist Jessica Killin is preying on a grieving family with the help of the Washington Democrats.” (Killin is Crank’s opponent in the Colorado race.)

Lacerda, who became a U.S. citizen in her 20s, and Jones both told MS NOW that they are registered to vote in Florida. Both also said that until the past year, neither was particularly invested in, or knowledgeable about, national politics or Congress. Jones said she is a registered Republican.

Asked earlier this month whether they too would be getting involved in upcoming congressional races, several other Epstein survivors demurred.

One, Shauntae Smith, said that for her, “It’s not a political issue; it’s a human rights issue. It doesn’t matter if you’re a Democrat or a Republican. It matters whether or not you agree with child rape and child trafficking, that’s the problem.”

Yet when pressed on why they decided their voices were needed in Kansas and Mississippi, Lacerda and Jones gave reasons for entering the fray that echoed Smith’s rationale for staying out of it.

“If you can’t stand with us, then you are not willing to protect us or our future kids,” Lacerda said.

Jones agreed, stating that no matter which side of the aisle a member sits on, “Anyone who isn’t behind protecting our children or future generations I want no part of.”

CORRECTION (OCt. 19, 2026 at 2:33 p.m.): An earlier version of this newsletter misidentified the state Rep. Crank is from. He represents Colorado, not Texas.

The post Two Epstein survivors enter the battle for Congress with ads against GOP senators appeared first on MS NOW.

💾

In a letter to Justice Department prosecutors Friday evening, lawyers for Rep. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., demanded the immediate return of all property taken from her Washington home on Monday, when Homeland Security investigators executed a search warrant as part of an investigation into alleged immigration fraud and conspiracy.

That search deviated from the specific procedures mandated by the judge who approved the warrant, and may have violated Omar’s constitutional rights as a result, according to Omar’s lawyers Amy Jeffress and Joshua Matz of Hecker Fink LLP.

Their seven-page letter also demands that the Department of Justice preserve and provide to Omar’s counsel within five days any video or audio recordings taken during the search, as well as any records reflecting Homeland Security Investigations’ reported review of Omar’s immigration status in 2019.

As a member of Congress, Omar is entitled to protections under the Constitution’s Speech or Debate Clause, which provides immunity for her legislative conduct and protects certain congressional materials and communications from disclosure or use in legal proceedings.

The letter also challenges the perceived focus of the DOJ and Homeland Security’s investigation.

“There is no legitimate basis for any suggestion that she has violated any law concerning her citizenship status,” the lawyers write. “Still, recent experience teaches that the absence of a proper predicate has not stopped this Administration from pursuing politically motivated criminal investigations into President Trump’s opponents.”

The lawyers note that Omar, a frequent public critic of Trump, has been the target of criticism from Trump and members of his administration, with apparent efforts to harass and intimidate her. In particular, they cite several statements that Trump and Vice President JD Vance have made about Omar on social media over the past year. The lawyers allege those statements have contributed to serious threats of harm against Omar.

Omar’s lawyers also allege that the White House appears to be directly involved in the investigation, citing a Washington Post report that Anthony Salisbury, a White House official, is a member of the investigative team.

“This vindictive, retributive, and politically motivated criminal investigation into one of the President’s chief congressional critics violates Representative Omar’s constitutional rights and threatens the separation of powers,” they write.

The lawyers also argue that the timing of the search at Omar’s home violates DOJ policy prohibiting prosecutors from taking or refraining from investigative or prosecutorial actions to influence an election.

Omar, who was first elected to Congress in 2018, is running for re-election to the House this year.

“Historically, the Department has refrained from this type of investigative activity so close to an election, so as to avoid even the appearance of politically motivated law enforcement actions. But the political motivations behind this pre-election investigation and search are clear as day. For the reasons given above, this search was neither justified nor lawful,” the letter states.

The letter was sent to two DOJ lawyers, Michael Wheat and Alessandra “Ali” Serano, both special assistant U.S. attorneys.

A veteran prosecutor from California, Serano was appointed in June by Attorney General Todd Blanche as the national coordinator for child exploitation and human trafficking. The DOJ announced that, as part of that role, Serano would “submit a report to the Deputy Attorney General updating the Department’s strategy for combatting child exploitation and human trafficking” within 120 days. That deadline is approaching within days.

Wheat, on the other hand, has recently been involved with a DOJ effort to obtain California voter registration records from county election officials, according to public reporting. The DOJ sued the state of California for access to those records earlier this week.

In addition to pushing back on the impetus for and timing of the search, the letter also details recent reporting from The Washington Post, which, citing multiple sources, revealed that the Trump administration investigated potential issues surrounding Omar’s naturalization during Trump’s first term and closed the investigation for lack of evidence of criminal conduct.

The letter also alleges that Monday’s search may not have comported with the specific instructions by the magistrate judge who approved the warrant. Among other alleged deficiencies, the lawyers say that although the judge ordered the HSI agents executing the warrant to notify both Omar and the Office of General Counsel for the House of Representatives, the General Counsel was not notified of the search until it was already a matter of public record. The lawyers argue that the delay deprived Omar of the opportunity to seek guidance about her rights as a member of Congress.

Additionally, the lawyers allege that Omar did not receive a copy of the warrant prior to the execution of the search and that she was prevented from contacting her counsel for more than an hour after the search began. They argue that those and other alleged failures prevented her from identifying and separating materials protected by the Speech or Debate Clause.

People or entities from whom property is taken pursuant to a federal search warrant may seek the return of some or all of that property pursuant to rules governing federal criminal cases. Omar, her lawyers note, will file such a motion if the seized property — which, as MS NOW reported, includes her laptop, phone and passport — are not returned promptly.

The post Ilhan Omar demands DOJ immediately return property seized in search of her home appeared first on MS NOW.

Federal agents seized Rep. Ilhan Omar’s laptop, cellphone and passport during a search of her Washington, D.C., home earlier this week, a source familiar with the investigation told MS NOW, as new details emerge about the scope of a federal investigation into potential immigration fraud targeting the Minnesota Democrat.

Agents also took multiple notebooks during Monday’s search, which involved roughly 20 Homeland Security Investigations agents who remained at the home for a “long time,” according to the source. Omar was present for at least part of the search and did not provide investigators with passwords to her devices.

The search warrant authorized agents to seize Omar’s electronic devices and passports, as well as immigration records involving Omar and her relatives, the source said. It listed potential violations involving immigration fraud, false statements in immigration proceedings and conspiracy, but did not identify any alleged crimes that would seem to relate to Omar’s financial disclosures or those of her husband, Tim Mynett.

U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro said this week that her office is investigating potential improprieties related to Omar’s financial disclosures.

CNN reported Wednesday that U.S. Magistrate Judge Matthew Sharbaugh restricted prosecutors’ access to Omar’s records before approving the search warrant, citing constitutional protections for members of Congress, according to multiple sources familiar with the investigation.

Those restrictions are expected to limit investigators’ access to material on Omar’s devices that may be protected under the Constitution’s Speech or Debate Clause, which shields lawmakers’ legislative activities from certain government scrutiny.

The source told MS NOW that Justice Department prosecutors have not been in contact with Omar or her legal team since Monday’s search.

The search came just three weeks before the midterm elections, when Omar is seeking re-election. The DOJ generally seeks to avoid overt investigative actions close to an Election Day that could affect an election.

Omar has not been charged with a crime. She has denied wrongdoing and accused the Trump administration of political intimidation.

“This is an attempt to target political enemies and weaponize federal law enforcement,” Omar wrote Monday. “For ten years, Trump has targeted me with baseless lies and smear campaigns. I will not be silenced.”

CNN also reported that investigators are examining whether Omar or her late father made false statements about her age when she obtained U.S. citizenship in 2000. At least a dozen subpoenas have been issued to witnesses, many of whom are Omar’s relatives, according to multiple outlets.

The post Federal agents seized Ilhan Omar’s phone, laptop in D.C. home search appeared first on MS NOW.