An anonymous plaintiff. A rushed seal. A judge reassigned overnight. What this case reveals about how power protects itself.
Why Is This Case Sealed?
A gender-based violence lawsuit against George Soros and 27 others is sealed. The public isn’t allowed to know what’s inside. But we should be asking: who ordered the silence — and why?
On February 28, 2025, an anonymous civil case was filed in New York Supreme Court.
Within days, it was sealed in full — the docket locked, the plaintiff anonymized, the public blocked from access. No press coverage. No legal reasoning. No visibility.
But what little is known points to something much bigger:
This case accuses billionaire George Soros of gender-based violence. It also names 27 other high-profile defendants, including elite law firms, major media companies, and institutions like Columbia University.
So again:
Why is this case sealed?
And who had the influence to make that happen — quickly, quietly, and behind closed doors?
What We Know — and Where It Comes From
None of the details in this article are pulled from the sealed case file. They come directly from a public emergency motion filed by the plaintiff on May 6, 2025, in the Appellate Division, First Department of New York State.
The plaintiff, a woman representing herself pro se, filed under CPLR § 5704(a) — a legal mechanism that allows individuals to challenge judicial misconduct or inaction in a lower court.
Because this motion was filed in the appellate court — not in the sealed trial docket — it was initially accessible to the public. For a short time, anyone could read the evidence.
That link has now been taken offline. This was the original document address, but it now returns a server error.
Whether this is a technical issue or a deliberate removal is unclear.
But it’s telling — and disturbing — that the only public window into this sealed case has just been shut.
Fortunately, the filing was preserved. And its contents will not disappear.
The Defendants: A Web of Power
According to the appellate motion, the case names:
- George Soros
- Schulte Roth & Zabel LLP, a major corporate law firm
- Lavely & Singer, legal counsel for Hollywood elites
- Columbia University and its board of trustees
- Major media companies including the New York Post, Daily News, and The Forward.
The complaint itself is sealed, but the plaintiff’s motion outlines a disturbing pattern: institutional retaliation, attorney collusion, and prior judicial bribery abroad. These aren’t speculative claims — they are made under oath, supported by exhibits, and tied to public records.
A Sealing Timeline That Shouldn’t Happen
The speed and secrecy of the case’s sealing is one of the most alarming elements.
Here’s the timeline, drawn from court records and the plaintiff’s sworn affirmation:
- March 19, 2025 (Morning): Judge Leslie A. Stroth is assigned to the case.
- Later that day: Stroth recuses herself (NYSCEF Doc. 40).
- That evening, 6:38 PM: Judge Alexander M. Tisch signs a sealing order — despite not yet being officially reassigned.
- March 20, 2025: The Transfer Order is filed, formally assigning the case to Tisch (NYSCEF Doc. 45).
“The sealing of the case — conducted late at night, with no hearing or motion — and coinciding exactly with Tisch’s entry, suggests backchannel coordination designed to suppress the record and protect high-profile defendants.”
— Plaintiff, Emergency Affirmation, May 8, 2025
The sealing was filed after hours by a court user named “Wolf, Shannon Blank,” with no motion, no hearing, and no notice to the plaintiff.
This isn’t just procedural sloppiness.
It’s systemic shielding — executed in silence.
The Tisch Factor
The plaintiff argues that Judge Tisch’s assignment was not random, but influenced — likely by defense counsel at Schulte Roth & Zabel LLP.
She submitted as evidence a 2019 legal gala program (Exhibit D) listing SRZ as a Gold Sponsor and Judge Tisch as an honored guest.
If true, this means a judge with social and financial ties to defense counsel took over the case within hours of filing — and sealed it before even being formally assigned.
That alone should trigger scrutiny.
It doesn’t help that Tisch’s professional reputation, as documented by attorneys on The Robing Room, is deeply concerning:
“Terrible. Avoid unless you are a rich and famous lawyer.” — Comment #NY12783
“By far the worst judge I have ever experienced.” — Comment #NY13778
This is the judge who sealed the case.
Fast. Quietly. Without oversight.
The Bigger Pattern: Protection by Process
This is not how justice is supposed to work.
In civil court, sealing a case requires clear, extraordinary justification — usually a motion, a hearing, and a public explanation.
Here, there was none.
What the plaintiff describes is a coordinated effort to suppress the case before the public ever saw it:
- Strategic judge reassignment
- After-hours sealing
- Alleged influence from powerful law firms
- Total institutional silence
This isn’t about privacy. It’s about protection.
And when courts protect the powerful — not the survivor — that silence becomes complicity.
What the Plaintiff Is Demanding Now
Through her emergency motion, the plaintiff is asking for:
- The recusal of Judge Tisch
- The immediate unsealing of the docket and all related filings
- Vacatur of Tisch’s April 15 order, which ignored her concerns
- And a judicial investigation into how this sealing and reassignment were handled
She also reserves the right to escalate this case to federal court under civil rights law if the state system fails her.
This isn’t about technical errors or courtroom scheduling.
It’s about whether due process can be suspended to protect billionaires and institutions from public accountability.
So Why Is This Case Sealed?
That’s the question.
And based on everything we now know, the answer isn’t legal necessity — it’s power preservation.
From the judge’s backdoor entry, to the timing of the seal, to the influence of elite law firms and media companies — this case looks less like justice and more like a cover-up designed to disappear a threat.
And the only reason the public even knows it exists is because the plaintiff — a single woman, with no attorney — used an obscure appellate rule to force the truth into daylight.
This isn’t just about her.
It’s not even just about Soros.
It’s about how the legal system closes ranks when the right names show up on the docket.
It’s about what gets hidden — and who gets shielded — when the system serves itself instead of the people.
And it’s a reminder that in America, the deepest corruption doesn’t always happen in back alleys.
It happens in sealed courtrooms.
