The Freedom Fuel Network, a chain of gas stations that launched in July with steeply discounted prices touted by President Donald Trump, has expanded with a new location in Detroit as a lawsuit over the chain’s alleged supply heats up in Philadelphia federal court.

The Detroit location, where a gallon of regular unleaded was selling for $3.47, is the cheapest gas in Michigan, where the average price is $4.09 per gallon, according to the price tracking site GasBuddy. The Harper Avenue station is the first Freedom Fuel station outside of New Jersey and Pennsylvania, where the network has 29 locations.

Freedom Fuel stations are no longer the cheapest stations in those states, GasBuddy data shows.

In a court filing this week, a Georgia fuel supplier alleged that businessman Syed Kazmi and his company KRSM — which purportedly sold some of the fuel it bought from the supplier to Freedom Fuel stations — are violating a judge’s Aug. 28 order by failing to maintain a balance of at least $2.75 million in an M&T Bank checking account as a suit over KRSM’s purported failure to pay for the fuel plays out.

And in a new court filing Thursday, the supplier, Mansfield Oil Company of Gainesville, Georgia, told a judge the account is underfunded by about $2.25 million.

That filing also says Mansfield Oil has learned from M&T that, contrary to KRSM’s representations that it owns the account, the account “now belongs to some different Kazmi-related entity named ‘Universal.'”

“The revelation that the account is now owned by ‘Universal’ also raises serious concerns that funds are being dissipated while KRSM fails to maintain the $2.75 million amount Ordered by the Court,” Mansfield said in the filing.

Freedom Fuel is not a defendant in the lawsuit, whose allegations came after questions were raised about how Freedom Fuel could afford to offer steeply discounted prices amid supply constraints and higher fuel prices resulting from the U.S. war with Iran.

Mansfield’s suit, filed Aug. 19, alleges Kazmi and KRSM obtained more than 1.1 million gallons of Mansfield’s fuel from a Pennsylvania supply terminal between May and July.

After Mansfield sent an invoice asking for payment for about $4 million for the fuel in July, the suit alleges, KRSM failed to pay it.

At least some of the fuel was sold to Freedom Fuel stations, which began operating in Pennsylvania and New Jersey in early July, the suit alleges. The civil complaint does not say how much of Mansfield’s fuel ended up in those stations.

“KRSM was able to sell such fuel for such low prices and garner such publicity because it never paid Plaintiff for such fuel,” the suit says.

Politico has reported that Kazmi’s brother, Shamikh Kazmi, owns at least six Freedom Fuel locations in New Jersey.

CNBC has requested comment on the court filings from lawyers for KRSM, Syed Kazmi, Mansfield Oil and the Freedom…

The Supreme Court said Monday that President Donald Trump can continue construction of his controversial White House ballroom as legal challenges to the project play out.

In the unsigned order, a majority of the nine-member court said that the plaintiff challenging the ballroom, the National Trust for Historic Preservation in the United States, is likely to be shown to lack legal standing to sue to block the ballroom project.

Chief Justice John Roberts and the court’s three liberal members dissented from the order.

“The President ordered the demolition of the East Wing of the White House to make way for a new, privately funded state ballroom in its place,” the dissent said. “Construction of the ballroom has proceeded apace for the better part of a year.”

“That construction is likely unlawful.”

This is breaking news. Please refresh for updates.

Hims & Hers CEO Andrew Dudum defended the telehealth company amid a Federal Trade Commission lawsuit over its data sharing practices.

In a wide-ranging exclusive interview aired Tuesday, Dudum contended the allegations stemmed from a misunderstanding of how the company is altering healthcare.

“I can’t say much other than the fact that, you know when you’re changing the fundamental understanding of how a traditional system like healthcare works, and you’re rebuilding it in the digital ecosystem,” he told Andrew Ross Sorkin on CNBC’s “Squawk Box.” “I think it takes time for people to understand how to do that the right way, and we’ve worked for many years with the FTC to walk them through that. And I think ultimately they wanted more of a headline than than a real agreement here.”

In July, the FTC, Los Angeles County and Utah filed a lawsuit against Hims & Hers. It accused the company of sharing user health information with advertisers like Meta and Snap, charging for prescriptions before customers have spoken with a healthcare provider and making it hard to cancel subscriptions.

Dudum defended the telehealth provider’s business model, saying it is built around increasing access to care.

“We are active disruptors. We take that head on, and we’re willing to do it. But it is always when we believe that it’s in the best interest of people and their access,” said Dudum.

The Hims & Hers CEO also weighed in on the company’s transition from compounded to branded GLP-1 drugs. When popular obesity and weight loss drugs were in shortage in recent years, the company could legally sell copycat versions at a discount.

After supply recovered, Novo Nordisk sued Hims & Hers for patent infringement. In March, the Danish drugmaker dropped its suit and the telehealth company agreed to sell Novo’s branded drugs on its platform.

That decision came at a time when Novo and its main rival Eli Lilly were cutting the prices of their GLP-1 drugs for patients paying out of pocket.

“Ultimately, we will always apply pressure to the system if we believe it’s best for the consumer. And when we were compounding the GLP-1s, there was no affordable access to these therapeutics,” said Dudum. “Now, what that did in the ecosystem is it showed consumers and the drug companies these medications can be brought to consumers at a price that everyone can afford.” 

Dudum said he ultimately sees prices for cash-paying patients dropping to $40 to $50 per month, from roughly $150 to $200 now, depending on the form of the medication.

Dudum also said he believes artificial intelligence will dramatically transform healthcare, and the company is increasing its investments to ultimately go “AI native.” Dudum said Hims & Hers is moving away from third-party AI agents to build everything in house.

“The core foundational models, independent of a closed loop data set, are not that valuable….

Disney’s ABC has filed a First Amendment lawsuit against the Federal Communications Commission, calling the government agency’s recent investigation into the company a “retaliatory campaign” due to the nature of its programming, which has been critical of President Donald Trump.

The broadcast network filed the lawsuit on Tuesday in a district court in Washington, D.C.

It comes months after the FCC launched an early renewal of a set of ABC’s broadcast station licenses, citing concerns around the company’s diversity, equity and inclusion efforts.

However, that early review process came shortly after renewed political backlash against ABC following comments made by TV host Jimmy Kimmel on his late night show, which airs on the broadcast network. ABC has also faced criticism from the government around its daytime talk show, “The View.”

ABC’s lawsuit calls for the FCC to halt its early broadcast renewal proceedings.

An FCC spokesperson said in a statement Tuesday the government entity was working in the public interest.

“Disney is obviously very concerned about the FCC’s proceeding, as evidenced by their ongoing campaign of disinformation as well as their decision to ask a court to stop the FCC from further pursuing matters. The FCC will continue to follow the facts and law wherever they lead,” the statement said.

The agency launched its review of ABC licenses in April, years ahead of their scheduled expiration. ABC shot back in May, saying in filings that it was submitting the applications “under protest in response to an unlawful, arbitrary, and unconstitutional order” from the FCC.

FCC Chairman Brendan Carr told CNBC at the time the agency’s focus was on Disney’s DEI practices and that the early license renewal was not tied to First Amendment matters.

Carr was appointed by Trump to lead the federal entity meant to regulate the media and telecommunications industry. It began its investigation into Disney’s stations last year for possible violations of the Communications Act of 1934 and the FCC’s rules regarding its prohibition on unlawful discrimination.

On Tuesday, ABC said it “continues to face irreparable harm” from the administration, which “has been acting” through the FCC.

Last week, Disney CEO Josh D’Amaro doubled down on the company’s position in a CNBC interview.

“I think you saw in our FCC filings our position on this is clear,” D’Amaro told CNBC’s Julia Boorstin at the time. “We’re very principled on this. We’re going to stand up to what we believe is journalistic and integrity, and we’re not going to be told how to run that side of our business.”

D’Amaro took over as CEO in March from longtime Disney chief Bob Iger.

Last week, Iger agreed to purchase a majority stake in the NBA’s Los Angeles Lakers alongside Joshua Kushner, the founder of…

A legal battle is brewing over new federal rules related to accounts that hold money to pay homeowners’ property taxes and insurance payments.

Ten state attorneys general filed a lawsuit on Tuesday seeking to invalidate a pair of Office of the Comptroller of the Currency rules that allow certain banking institutions under its supervision to sidestep state laws requiring them to pay interest on mortgage escrow balances. The federal lawsuit, filed in U.S. District Court in Oregon, names the OCC and Comptroller Jonathan Gould as defendants.

One new OCC rule codified the power of national banks and federal savings associations to determine the terms of escrow accounts, including whether to pay interest or charge fees. The other rule says federal law preempts state laws when it comes to OCC-regulated banks’ flexibility in determining those aspects of escrow accounts. Banks are either chartered by a state or the federal government. 

The OCC issued the new rules in May, and they became effective June 18.

“The rules basically allow OCC-regulated banks not to pay interest on mortgage escrow accounts,” said Solomon Maman, an attorney in Chicago with expertise in financial services law.

The OCC did not respond to a request for comment.

For many homeowners, in addition to principal and interest payments each month, their mortgage payment includes amounts that go into an escrow account. That account then pays out homeowners insurance premiums and property taxes, as well as mortgage insurance if the borrower is required to carry it.

About 80% of mortgage holders have an escrow account, according to Lereta, which provides real estate tax and flood data to mortgage servicers. Those without an escrow account pay insurance and taxes directly.

The federal lawsuit notes that homeowners make monthly escrow payments, but property taxes and insurance premiums are generally paid annually or semiannually. This means escrow accounts can “carry significant balances throughout the year,” the lawsuit reads.

For perspective, the average annual property tax bill for the 87 million owner-occupied homes in the U.S. was $4,271 in 2024, according to an analysis by the National Association of Homebuilders. The average annual cost of homeowners insurance is projected to reach $3,057 by the end of 2026, according to Insurify.com, an insurance-comparison site.

There are 14 states and U.S. territories that have laws requiring interest be paid on escrow balances, according to the lawsuit. Exactly how much banks must pay in interest depends on the state.

For instance, in Rhode Island, escrow accounts must earn the same interest as a regular savings account, according to the suit. In Maryland, lenders are required to pay annual interest at a rate based on the yield of one-year U.S. Treasuries.

The average rate on traditional savings accounts is 0.63%, according to Bankrate. In…

President Donald Trump won an 11th-hour court reprieve Thursday that temporarily blocks the BBC from obtaining detailed records on the finances and ownership of his business empire as part of his $10 billion defamation lawsuit against the British broadcaster.

The emergency stay, granted in Miami federal court, pauses a looming Thursday deadline that would have forced the Donald J. Trump Revocable Trust to turn over tax returns, financial statements, and ownership records for roughly 400 corporate entities.

Trump’s lawyers filed the emergency motion Wednesday, calling the BBC’s demand “shockingly broad” and argued disclosure would cause irreparable harm because the broadcaster could not “un-see” the confidential information if the order were later overturned.

The stay gives Trump a temporary procedural victory but does not permanently shield the records. The court must still decide whether the BBC is entitled to them as it tests Trump’s claims of sweeping financial harm.

The document dispute is the latest fallout from a 2024 BBC documentary about the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol insurrection.

The program spliced together portions of Trump’s speech from that day in a way that appeared to show him directly urging supporters to attack the Capitol. While the BBC has apologized for the edit, the network maintains the error was unintentional and does not meet the legal standard for defamation.

Trump put his finances at issue by alleging the documentary damaged his “brand, properties and businesses.” The BBC says it needs the records to determine whether his companies suffered the losses he claims and whether any damage can be tied to a documentary that aired primarily in Britain.

Prior to the ruling Thursday, U.S. Magistrate Judge Enjoliqué Lett had sided with the BBC in July, ruling that Trump’s allegations placed both his reputation and business finances at issue. 

“All of President Trump’s brand, properties and businesses are impugned or said to have been impugned,” Lett said. “Reputational, economic damages, all of that is now at issue in this case.”

If the BBC ultimately obtains the records, it could provide an unusually detailed look inside Trump’s private business empire. However, a protective order could prevent the documents from becoming public.

Trump’s lawyers are also seeking to amend the complaint to focus on alleged harm to his personal reputation rather than his businesses, a shift that could sharply narrow the scope of financial discovery while preserving his $10 billion demand.

The BBC did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

The BBC case is part of a broader legal offensive by Trump against news organizations over coverage he disputes. He has pursued multibillion-dollar claims and legal action against The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal and ABC News.

CBS parent Paramount…

President Donald Trump on Friday appealed a federal judge’s blistering order finding he filed a bad-faith $10 billion lawsuit in order to reach an advantageous settlement.

The notice of appeal in U.S. District Court in Miami was made public hours after Trump vented frustration that the $1.776 billion “lawfare” fund created as part of that settlement has been scrapped.

“They’ve agreed to not have a fund. But there are a lot of people that are very upset about it,” Trump said at a Cabinet meeting at Camp David Friday afternoon.

The president also lamented that his nominee for U.S. attorney general, Todd Blanche, is in limbo in the Senate as a handful of Republican holdouts seek written confirmation that the controversial fund is indeed defunct. The senators say they have yet to receive that assurance, raising concern that the fund could be resurrected if Blanche is confirmed.

“The fund is dead, but, you know, I wish it weren’t,” Trump said at the Cabinet meeting before launching into complaints about supporters he said have been mistreated by federal law enforcement.

Trump, two of his adult sons and the Trump Organization, along with two of their attorneys, said in a joint filing Friday afternoon that they are appealing Judge Kathleen Williams’ scathing order to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit.

Williams had ruled July 13 that the lawsuit, ostensibly stemming from the leak of Trump’s tax returns by an ex-IRS employee years earlier, was in fact brought to provide “judicial legitimacy for a ‘settlement’ that had no viable basis in law or fact.”

After Friday’s appeal notice was filed, a spokesman for Trump’s legal team repeated a prior statement slamming the IRS leak and declaring, “President Trump continues to hold those who wrong America and Americans accountable.”

That settlement involved Trump and his co-plaintiffs dropping the suit in exchange for the Department of Justice creating a $1.776 billion fund that would be used to pay people who claimed to be victims of government lawfare.

Blanche, in prior Senate testimony, would not rule out that some of those funds could be given to people who were charged with assaulting police officers during the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol riot. Trump has pardoned virtually all Capitol rioters and frequently expresses sympathy for them.

In a Truth Social post Friday morning, he gave a full-throated defense of the fund, saying, “I will always feel that these victims of government abuse should be paid back for what they were forced to endure, their lives have been ruined!”

Some — including Sen. Thom Tillis of North Carolina, one of the Republicans standing in the way of Blanche’s nomination — interpreted Trump‘s post as referring to Jan. 6 participants and suggesting the fund was still alive.

The settlement also included a provision in which the DOJ agreed…