PODCAST: Trading Earth Day for ‘People Day’ and Is the United States Facing a Constitutional Crisis? thumbnail

PODCAST: Trading Earth Day for ‘People Day’ and Is the United States Facing a Constitutional Crisis?

/in , , , , , /by

By Conservative Commandos Radio Show and AUN-TV

GUESTS AND TOPICS

PAUL DRIESSEN

Paul Driessen is senior policy advisor for the Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow (CFACT) and author of articles and books on energy, environmental and human rights issues.

TOPIC: Trading Earth Day for ‘People Day’

JUDGE PHIL GINN

Judge Phil Ginn was appointed president of Southern Evangelical Seminary in April 2021 after a distinguished career as both a lawyer and a judge. He holds a B.A. from Appalachian State University, a J.D. from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, and a Doctor of Ministry from Southern Evangelical Seminary. Prior to his appointment as SES president, Judge Ginn served as SES Chairman of the Board of Trustees.

TOPIC: Is the United States Facing a Constitutional Crisis?

©2025 . All rights reserved.

Supreme Court Allows Deportation of 500,000+ Criminal Illegals to Continue thumbnail

Supreme Court Allows Deportation of 500,000+ Criminal Illegals to Continue

/in , , , , , /by

By The Geller Report

Jonathon Turley: The Supreme Court delivered a win for the Administration today by lifting the injunction on the move to terminate Temporary Protected Status (TPS) protections for hundreds of thousands of people allowed into the country by Biden from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua, and Venezuela (X).

Trump can deport 500,000 migrants “legalized” by Biden (illegally)

Wall Street Journal: Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem in February announced she was rescinding temporary legal protections that allowed certain Venezuelan migrants to live and work in the U.S. (Wall Street Journal).

That this had to go to the Supreme Court speaks to how ruinous the Democrats are to our country.

SCOTUS Blog: Alejandro Mayorkas, then the DHS secretary, initially designated (and later extended the designation of) Venezuela in 2021 as a country whose nationals in the United States were eligible to stay in the United States and work under a program known as the Temporary Protected Status program. Created in 1990, the program gives the DHS secretary the power to make such designations when a country’s citizens cannot return safely to their home country because of a natural disaster, armed conflict, or other “extraordinary and temporary conditions” there. The dispute before the Supreme Court arose earlier this year, when Noem announced the termination of the TPS designation (along with its extensions) for a group of over 300,000 Venezuelan nationals (SCOTUS Blog).

AUTHOR

Pamela Geller

RELATED ARTICLES:

Here’s Why Shutting Down FBI Washington Headquarters is Momentous

DEBAUCHERY: Department of Defense IG Finds 8,000 HIGH-RISK Transactions on Taxpayer-Funder Government-Issued Credit Cards

CBS News President Resigns

Government Censorship Project Boasted of Suppressing Trump Message, Defunding Newsrooms

POSTS ON X:

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

The post Supreme Court Allows Deportation of 500,000+ Criminal Illegals to Continue appeared first on Dr. Rich Swier.

There’s A New Law Firm In Washington. It Wants To Take All The Cases Liberals Hate thumbnail

There’s A New Law Firm In Washington. It Wants To Take All The Cases Liberals Hate

/in , , , /by

By Royal A. Brown III

Good news — there’s a new D.C. conservative Law Firm willing to take all cases the leftist leanng big law firms won’t touch.

There’s A New Law Firm In Washington. It Wants To Take All The Cases Liberals Hate

A growing conservative law firm led by attorneys who worked with Vivek Ramaswamy and Elon Musk aims to tackle political litigation others won’t touch.

Within the Trump administration, there’s an intentional shift away from reliance on left-leaning “BigLaw” firms, seen through President Donald Trump’s deals securing millions in pro bono work from major firms and the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) decision to distance itself from the American Bar Association. Outside, Lex Politica is positioning itself to fill the void in a changing legal landscape.

“The administration and others are catching on,” Lex Politica CEO Chris Gober told the DCNF in an interview. He argued the “hypocrisy” of major firms who don’t apply equal standards in taking on political cases is creating a need for firms like his that are willing to be “unapologetically conservative.”

“They bend over backwards not to offend the sensitivities of those [liberal] lawyers and those clients, and what they’ll tend to do is just refuse to take on cases that are, you know, synonymous or connected with the conservative or Republican movement,” Gober told the DCNF.

Lex Politica’s current clients include close to 20 senators and over 50 members of the House, along with governors, attorneys general and other Republican politicians, Gober says. They have been involved in key issues, such as legal and political considerations related to establishing the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE).

Attorneys Steve Roberts and Jessica Furst Johnson left Holtzman Vogel to join Gober’s effort, as did Christine Fort and Nicole Kelly.

“We are offering what BigLaw can’t – and won’t,” Lex Politica Partner and Political Law Co-Chair Steve Roberts told the DCNF in a statement. “Having worked at an AmLaw 100 firm, I can tell you first hand that BigLaw’s problem with Trump isn’t legal, it’s cultural. While some firms dance around politics, we’re stepping in with a firm that says what it believes and can act in the best strategic and legal interests of our clients.”

Trump’s executive orders against law firms have stirred up controversy and legal challenges. A judge struck down Trump’s order against Perkins Coie, which sought to cancel the firm’s government contracts and attorney security clearances, as unconstitutional in early May.

“I think a lot of these firms would have no problem at all taking on a pro bono case for an organization like a Planned Parenthood, but they will say that they can’t take on some kind of religious liberty case for a company that is out there,” Gober said.

During the presidential campaign, Gober worked with Musk closely to establish America PAC, which he expects will continue to play a critical role in the midterm elections and beyond.

“I do not see it being a one and done,” he said, noting a lot of people had that question during the campaign. “I think we’ve answered a little bit of that…in our involvement with Wisconsin.”

Musk gave $238 million to America PAC to help elect Trump, according to CNN.

Musk’s America PAC spent close to $12.7 million backing conservative Wisconsin Supreme Court candidate Judge Brad Schimel, who lost his race in April, according to the Brennan Center for Justice.

Working with Musk through the PAC was a “new experience,” Gober says, noting some of the unique initiatives they launched, such as the petition program.

“There was definitely a level of creativity with the PAC that you normally don’t see in politics,” he said.

As far as DOGE goes, Gober says he doesn’t see much “fundamentally changing” as Musk scales back his work.

“The fact of the matter is, it was the creation and structure of DOGE that I think is critically important,” Gober said. “Even without him being there, I think you’re left with a lot of the same kind of foundational elements and people with the same kind of mindset as Elon.”

AUTHOR

Katelynn Richardson

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

The post There’s A New Law Firm In Washington. It Wants To Take All The Cases Liberals Hate appeared first on Dr. Rich Swier.

BREAKING! Pornography Companies SUED for Allowing a Minor Access to the Sites thumbnail

BREAKING! Pornography Companies SUED for Allowing a Minor Access to the Sites

/in , , , , , /by

By National Center on Sexual Exploitation

As a mother, Jane Doe was fully aware of the online dangers that children face. So, she did everything she possibly could to monitor and safeguard her 14-year-old son’s devices. She was vigilant.

But her son found an old laptop in the closet. And through that, he was able to access hardcore pornography. 

Jane Doe’s son spent countless hours on the pornographic websites Chaturbate.com, Jerkmate.com, Superporn.com, and Titan Websites. His viewing became more and more compulsive. Until finally, terrified at how badly he’d spiralled out of control, he confessed everything to his mother.

At first glance, this story may seem commonplace. Sadly, children are exposed to pornographic websites all the time, even when their parents take precautions to prevent it.

But here’s the kicker: This mother and son lived in Kansas. And the state had already passed a law requiring pornography websites block access to children by verifying the age of users. 

The pornography websites that harmed this 14-year-old boy were violating the law.

First U.S. Lawsuits Suing Pornography Websites for Violating Age Verification Laws

The NCOSE Law Center is now representing this boy in lawsuits against the pornography websites that illegally exposed him to harm. These are the first lawsuits in the United States that seek to hold pornography websites accountable for violating age verification laws!

In 2024, Kansas passed a law requiring that websites which contain “content that is harmful to minors” use age verification technology to block access to children. The law was specifically passed with pornography in mind, responding to a prior resolution adopting the Kansas Senate which stated, “pornography is a public health hazard that leads to a broad spectrum of individual and public health impacts and societal harms.”

Yet in spite of all this, the pornography websites that the boy accessed employed no meaningful age verification technology, allowing children to freely access their content.

To add insult to injury, the pornographic sites geolocated the boy and served him ads encouraging him to meet people in his area—a shocking risk for child molestation and sex trafficking! Such “meetup” sites are one of the biggest advertisers on pornography sites.

When will the pornography industry stop willfully endangering and exploiting vulnerable children? Join us in holding them accountable!

As the NCOSE Law Center represents all our clients free of charge, these lawsuits only exist because of the generous support of people like you. Please become a monthly donor to the NCOSE Law Center to hold exploiters accountable and win justice for the vulnerable!

Science Proves Pornography’s Harms to Children

For example, longitudinal research shows that adolescents who intentionally viewed violent pornography were nearly 6x more likely to become sexually aggressive later on in life.

Many studies, including longitudinal research, have linked pornography consumption to the development of sexual dysfunctions.

Adolescent pornography consumption has also been associated with poor mental health outcomes, including poor self-image, increased insecurity, lower life satisfaction, psychosomatic symptoms, depressive symptoms, suicidal ideation, and suicide attempts.

Pornography does not depict safe sex practices and research has found that adolescent pornography consumption is associated with having unprotected sex, among other risky sexual behaviors.

This is only a very small sampling of the research demonstrating pornography’s harms to children. Learn more by downloading our FREE flyer below.

Download this resource about the harms of pornography on children.

The message is clear: it’s time to stop letting pornography websites prey on our children.

EDITORS NOTE: This NCOSE column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Become a Monthly Donor

The post BREAKING! Pornography Companies SUED for Allowing a Minor Access to the Sites appeared first on Dr. Rich Swier.

The False Equivalence of Antisemitism and ‘Islamophobia’ is Meant to Minimize Rampant Jew-Hatred thumbnail

The False Equivalence of Antisemitism and ‘Islamophobia’ is Meant to Minimize Rampant Jew-Hatred

/in , , , , , , /by

By Jihad Watch

Islamophobia is a newly-minted concept designed to intimidate people into being afraid to oppose jihad violence and Sharia oppression.

“Exposing the Islamophobia hoax,” by James Sinkinson, JNS, May 14, 2025:

Jew-hatred is a highly prevalent, historically well-documented and well-defined set of behaviors, while Islamophobia is a relatively new phenomenon, much less frequent and so weaponized that some consider the very concept a hoax.

Case in point: After more than 18 chaotic months of pro-Hamas protesters bullying and blocking Jewish students’ access to campus, Harvard University, on April 29, finally issued a report on the school’s and radicals’ misdeeds, titled: “Presidential task force on combating antisemitism and anti-Israel bias.”

Bizarrely, that same day, Harvard University released another report: “Presidential task force on combating anti-Muslim, anti-Arab and anti-Palestinian bias.”

Why did we need two simultaneous reports on two unrelated problems with two dramatically different measures of magnitude, incidence and character?

Indeed, Muslim and Arab students at Harvard are not bullied, nor are they denied access, nor do their professors demean them for their ethnicity, nor are they victims of screaming invectives in mass protests against their homelands.

Moreover, while only a tiny few classes in Harvard’s curricula address Israel favorably, its catalog teems with pro-Palestinian, openly anti-Israel courses. Finally, ironically, a preponderance of campus activities attacking Harvard’s Jewish students’ rights are themselves led by Muslims and Arabs.

The same disproportionate attention to “Islamophobia” was paid by the Biden administration in April 2024, when it simultaneously formed the “National Strategy to Counter Antisemitism” and a sister task force to counter “Islamophobia and Anti-Arab Hate.”

Though certainly hatred of Jews, and other religious or ethnic groups, is deplorable, the actions of Harvard and the Biden administration seem to indicate that antisemitism and Islamophobia are problems of equal import and impact. In fact, antisemitic hate crimes make up a majority of all religious-based hate crimes nationally and are nearly eight times more frequent than anti-Muslim hate crimes.

This disparity in frequency is also matched by profound differences in characteristics. Antisemitism is recognized as a dangerous, irrational hatred of the Jewish people, whose values form the foundation of Western civilization. Research shows that Muslim societies harbor some of the world’s most virulent anti-Jewish attitudes, as well as a determination by radical Islamists to destroy the Jewish state.

Islamophobia is a relatively new concept, which critics convincingly argue is generally not a hatred at all, but rather a term used by social, political and media elites to whitewash the avowed intentions of Islamists to wage jihad globally….

AUTHOR

RELATED ARTICLES:

Trump Administration Suggests Relocating One Million Gazans to Libya 

Human rights activist and Islam critic Rasmus Paludan banned from entering Italy

Another Day, Another Horror, Or, One Muslim’s Mayhem in Sweden

UK: Iranian criminal allowed to stay in country because he wouldn’t be able to give son haircuts if deported

Yuval Raphael At Eurovision Does Her Tiny Country Proud

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

The post The False Equivalence of Antisemitism and ‘Islamophobia’ is Meant to Minimize Rampant Jew-Hatred appeared first on Dr. Rich Swier.

5 More Stories in Ongoing Trump-Federal Court Saga thumbnail

5 More Stories in Ongoing Trump-Federal Court Saga

/in , , , , , , , /by

By Family Research Council

Conflict is escalating — not just between President Donald Trump and the federal judiciary but even among the courts themselves. As the U.S. Supreme Court hears arguments Thursday in a case centered on birthright citizenship and the constant use of sweeping universal injunctions by inferior courts, federal judges across the country are continuing to halt the Trump administration’s immigration agenda, although at least one judge is bucking the trend and siding with the president. Here are the latest updates.

Trump Blocked from Deporting Hamas Propagandist

Biden-appointed Judge Patricia Tolliver Giles of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia ordered on Wednesday that U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) release Indian national Badar Khan Suri from custody. Suri was an academic at Georgetown University when he was arrested in March after spreading propaganda supporting the terrorist organization Hamas, of which his father-in-law, Ahmed Yousef, is reportedly a senior officer. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin reported at the time that Suri was involved in “actively spreading Hamas propaganda and promoting antisemitism on social media” and “has close connections to a known or suspected terrorist, who is a senior advisor to Hamas.” Therefore, Secretary of State Marco Rubio revoked Suri’s visa and “rendered him deportable” under the Immigration and Naturalization Act (INA).

Suri has subsequently filed a habeas corpus claim in a bid to stop his deportation. In the order she issued Wednesday, Giles demanded that Suri “be immediately released … during the pendency of his habeas proceedings…” She ordered that Suri is to remain in Virginia, attend court hearings in person, and cooperate with removal proceedings if necessary. The judge also barred law enforcement officers from using GPS tracking to monitor Suri’s whereabouts and ordered that law enforcement give both the court and Suri’s attorneys 48 hours’ notice if they intend to arrest him again.

ICE Barred from Deporting International Students

In another case, Judge Jeffrey White of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California issued a preliminary injunction barring ICE from deporting 18 noncitizens studying in the U.S. DHS canceled the students’ visas and allegedly removed their immigration information from a federal database, citing the fact that each of the students had been identified in the National Crime Information Center database. White determined that terminating the students’ immigration records was “unlawful,” even on the basis of visa revocation, and ordered that the records be restored, even though DHS agents had already pledged to do so.

Although White, appointed to the judiciary by George W. Bush, temporarily halted ICE from deporting the 18 students who had filed lawsuits, he stipulated that his is not a universal injunction but applies only to the 18 students involved in the lawsuits, while still reserving the right to expand the scope of the injunction at a later date to bar action taken against the supposed thousands of foreign students across the U.S. who may be impacted.

Judge Seizes Control of Rikers Island

In a shocking move, another federal judge has taken over the prison on Rikers Island in New York City. Clinton-appointed Judge Laura Taylor Swain of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York issued a sweeping order Tuesday placing the notorious prison complex under the command of an independent officer who will report directly to Swain, rather than to New York City officials. The judge also granted that officer the authority to change or adjust any New York City Department of Corrections policies deemed necessary.

The case originated in 2011, when complaints were lodged of abusive and excessively violent conditions being permitted by Rikers Island guards. In the years since, Swain has issued numerous court orders demanding various changes and reforms. While her latest order does not specifically allude to immigration or deportation policies, it comes shortly after New York City Mayor Eric Adams (D) agreed to cooperate with ICE and allow agents into the prison for the first time in years to arrest and deport illegal immigrants detained there.

Trump Can Use 1798 Law to Deport Illegal Immigrants

One of the most controversial moves of the second Trump administration so far has been the use of the Alien Enemies Act (AEA) of 1798 to carry out the mass arrest and deportation of Venezuelan nationals affiliated with the foreign terrorist organization Tren de Aragua (TdA). While the president’s use of the AEA has been challenged in various ways and to varying degrees by different federal courts, Judge Stephanie Haines of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania published an opinion Tuesday determining that the president does have the authority to arrest and deport TdA members under the auspices of the AEA, since the actions of TdA in the U.S. constitute an “invasion” or “predatory incursion.”

Haines, who was appointed by Trump in his first term, defined a “predatory incursion” as: “a hostile entry into the United States by a cohesive group of individuals, such as a military detachment or a designated Foreign Terrorist Organization, who are united by a common goal of causing significant disruption to the public safety — whether that be the safety of persons, property, or pecuniary interests — of those within the United States.”

She added, “The Court finds that that definition is faithful to the meaning of ‘predatory incursions’ in 1798, but it also accounts for new applications given ‘changes in the world.’”

While Haines ultimately determined that TdA’s actions constitute a “predatory incursion” and thus warrant the president’s use of the AEA, she further claimed that the Trump administration was not providing accused TdA members with enough notice prior to deportation. In order to afford Venezuelan nationals accused of being TdA members enough time to file habeas petitions and present their cases in court, Haines ordered that the Trump administration give detainees slated for deportation 21 days’ notice before actually deporting them.

Judge Claims Trump Administration Retaliated against American Bar Association

On Wednesday, Obama-appointed Judge Christopher Cooper of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia issued a memorandum opinion in which he claimed that the Department of Justice (DOJ) had engaged in “unlawful retaliation” against the American Bar Association (ABA). After the ABA joined a lawsuit against the Trump administration and openly criticized the president’s words and actions against federal judges, the DOJ canceled an estimated $3 million in grants to the ABA and further barred DOJ employees from using taxpayer dollars to travel to ABA events, attend ABA events while on the clock, and obtain DOJ approval before attending ABA events. Cooper argued that the DOJ’s actions regarding the ABA constituted retaliation against constitutionally protected free speech. “The First Amendment injury is concrete and ongoing. The ABA regularly engages in protected expressive activity, and DOJ’s termination of its grants directly punishes that activity,” he wrote.

Interestingly, the Trump administration did not directly contest the claim that it was acting in retaliation against the ABA. Instead, Trump administration attorneys argued that Cooper lacked jurisdiction, contending that the complaint was a contract matter and thus should have been brought in a court of claims, not in a district court.

AUTHOR

S.A. McCarthy

S.A. McCarthy serves as a news writer at The Washington Stand.

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2025 Family Research Council.

The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

The post 5 More Stories in Ongoing Trump-Federal Court Saga appeared first on Dr. Rich Swier.

Legalizing Anti-Semitism in America thumbnail

Legalizing Anti-Semitism in America

/in , , , , /by

By Beverly Newman, Ed. D.

In his revealing article “How Antisemitism Infects the Law” published by the ABA, Law Professor Robert Katz dares to document antisemitism in the legal profession and governmental agencies as “a highly infectious intellectual disease.” Not only is antisemitism in the legal system “highly infectious,” it is epidemic if not pandemic.

In far too many American courts, Jews are denigrated by lawyers before acquiescing judges or even castigated with antisemitic accusations by judges themselves. In South Florida, a judge’s antisemitic litany against a Holocaust Survivor family was profuse with slurs:

  • “deliberate callousness”
  • “inappropriate”
  • “gross indifference”
  • “oppositional behavior continued unabated”
  • “like nothing this Court has ever seen”
  • “bizarre and unjustifiable”
  • “callous disregard”
  • “egregiousness of these purported actions”
  • “vindictive and wholly inappropriate”
  • “hyperbolic”
  • “abject contempt”
  • “gross indifference”
  • “abusive”
  • “callous and inappropriate”
  • “egregious and inappropriate indifference and disrespect ”
  • “contumacious disregard.”

In some jurisdictions, it is common knowledge that all antisemitism goes unpunished and continues with impunity unabated in the world of law, as this nation is witnessing on countless college campuses, American streets, and in corporate America, where Jews are often held in contempt by co-workers or management.

Where are the aggressive prosecutions of antisemitic crimes required by Executive Orders?

How Antisemitism Infects the Law

Robert Katz

Summary

  • Antisemitic stereotypes have infiltrated legal frameworks, as seen in certain EEOC compliance manuals and judicial decisions.
  • Such biases can distort legal reasoning and undermine the impartiality of legal institutions.
  • Lawyers and legal professionals must develop a profound understanding of antisemitism to prevent its influence on the law.

Historian Paul Johnson described antisemitism as a highly infectious “intellectual disease.” This essay examines three instances where antisemitism infected the intellectual work of otherwise intelligent and well-meaning lawyers.

The first instance examines a manual published by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), in which the EEOC impaired its mission by including antisemitic stereotypes. The second instance explores a case heard by the House of Lords in which antisemitism unhinged the Lords’ reasoning. The third instance discusses a case in which concern over antisemitic backlash distorted the legal strategy of lawyers defending the civil rights of Jewish plaintiffs. These instances indicate that lawyers have a personal and professional interest in developing a profound understanding of antisemitism.

EEOC Compliance Manual on Religious Discrimination

The EEOC enforces federal laws prohibiting employment discrimination. In January 2021, it published the Compliance Manual on Religious Discrimination, which contains a passage designed to illustrate religious discrimination. It presents three examples:

An otherwise qualified applicant is not hired because he is a self-described evangelical Christian. A qualified non-Jewish employee is denied promotion because the supervisor wishes to give a preference based on religion to a fellow Jewish employee. An employer terminates an employee based on his disclosure to the employer that he has recently converted to the Baha’i Faith.

Section 12: Religious Discrimination, 12-I.A.1, Example 1 “Employment Decisions Based on ‘Religion’”

The second sentence in this passage, intentionally or not, reflects the antisemitic trope that Jews are clannish. This stereotype is widely held: According to a 2022 Anti-Defamation League (ADL) survey, 53 percent of respondents agreed with the statement that “Jews in business go out of their way to hire other Jews.”

Two parties are responsible for this passage: those who wrote it and those who approved it. The writers presumably started with a simple, non-antisemitic fact pattern that mirrored the Christian and Baha’i examples: “An otherwise qualified applicant is not hired because he is Jewish.” The Christian and Baha’i examples do not provide fact patterns that reinforce stereotypes.

The writers might have similarly provided the “Jewish” example. They instead chose to modify the example in certain telling ways. For example, they made the victim a non-Jew and the victimizer a Jew. They depicted the Jew as engaged in illegal activity, playing into a stereotype that Jews are devious and dishonest. They gave the Jew the power to control the fate of the non-Jew. They depicted the Jew as disloyal to the employer, who desired to promote the most qualified person.

While it seems unlikely the EEOC intended to lend credence to antisemitic stereotypes that Jews are dishonest, devious, disloyal, malevolent, controlling, and give unfair advantages to fellow Jews, the example can clearly be interpreted that way. Asserting or implying that Jews possess these odious qualities is a form of group defamation or hate speech. In some countries, this kind of anti-Jewish propaganda would be actionable.

The people who approved the manual’s publication with this passage also should have known better. Even if this language reflects unintentional or unconscious anti-Jewish bias, it demonstrates the ease with which such bias can infect otherwise sound legal minds. The fact that this appears in an EEOC publication magnifies the problem. If there is any agency that should know better it is the EEOC, an agency charged with fighting discrimination.

Continue reading.

©2025 All rights reserved.

The post Legalizing Anti-Semitism in America appeared first on Dr. Rich Swier.

The War On Cops — Cincinnati Is Ground Zero thumbnail

The War On Cops — Cincinnati Is Ground Zero

/in , , , /by

By Center For Security Policy

Ryan Hinton was an 18-year-old black man living in Cincinnati, Ohio. On May 1, 2025, he and three friends were pulled over by the police in a vehicle the police officers believed was stolen. The four youths took off running. The two police officers who had made the stop pursued on foot.

Seconds later, Hinton appeared from between two dumpsters with a semi-automatic pistol in his hand and pointing it at one of the police officers. He was shot dead.

On May 2, 2025, the police showed Hinton’s parents body cam footage taken by one of the officers, clearly showing their son holding a pistol. The weapon was recovered from the scene.

The father, Rodney Hinton, Jr., was upset. So, later that day, he got in his car and ran over a sheriff’s deputy directing traffic outside a University of Cincinnati graduation event. The officer was killed.

Other members of the Hinton family were in another vehicle following Rodney Hinton, Jr., when he ran over the police officer. It is unclear if they knew what Hinton was going to do in advance.

Rodney Hinton, Jr., is now being charged with murder and may face the death penalty. The Black Panthers and the Democratic Socialists of America have shown up. Rodney Hinton has a long criminal record including grand theft, aggravated robbery, and domestic violence. That is irrelevant. Hinton is, you understand, being oppressed. The answer is not that he should be prosecuted. The answer is that more cops should die.



“They might wanna kill Rodney for avenging his son. We say no, sir!” said Mmoja Ajabu, Executive Director of Pan-African Affairs for the Black Panther Movement, at a rally in support of Rodney Hinton. “You do that, and other things are gonna happen!”

“No justice! No peace!” the crowd at the rally chanted.

“Say his name! Rodney Hinton! And we’re not going to just say his name, we’re going to protect his body.”

Ajabu was surrounded by armed members of the Black Panther Party in full military regalia.

Later that day, Mmoja Ajabu spoke again at a town hall. Hinton was lionized as some sort of revolutionary hero, and the act of running over a deputy was glorified as an act of revolutionary courage.

“Most of us think like this, especially in this room, but how many of us have the courage to carry it out?” Ajabu asked.

“When we start seeing each other as brother and sister, then if it’s your child, it’s mine too.”

“Rodney has shown us, and we’re gonna support him. Now they’re talking about killing him,” Ajabu said.

“That ain’t gonna happen without there being a price. But see, we don’t want to riot. We want to have a military strategy that we bring them to their knees.”

“If you ain’t ready for the killing, then you’re in the wrong place.”

A group of representatives from the Democratic Socialists of America at the University of Cincinnati attended the town hall as well. Someone asked about identifying the officer who shot Ryan Hinton. “We take the position that Rodney took,” Ajabu replied. “Any of them will do.”

There is no ambiguity here. Ajabu is not calling for an inquiry or due process. Ajabu is legitimizing the deliberate murder of a police officer and encouraging others to act as Rodney Hinton did. “Any of them will do.” The objective is to kill police officers. In Ajabu’s terms, a “military strategy”.

The Democratic Party set this monster loose. It made common cause with revolutionary Marxists who want to burn the system down. It encouraged mobs to destroy cities and demonized the police. Trump is in the White House, but the revolutionary forces across the nation remain powerful and fully intent on destroying the existing social, economic, and political order.

This is the United States of America. We give a wide berth to free speech as we should. We need to understand, however, that groups like the Black Panthers and others on the far left have no real interest in talking. They are organizing for overt, violent action.

At some point, we are going to have to recognize that and act accordingly. These guys are already talking about a war on cops. All the rest of us are next.

©2025 . All rights reserved.

Please visit the AND Magazine substack.

The post The War On Cops — Cincinnati Is Ground Zero appeared first on Dr. Rich Swier.

VIDEO: Joint Legislative Hearing on Arizona’s Family Court System thumbnail

VIDEO: Joint Legislative Hearing on Arizona’s Family Court System

/in , , , , /by

By Lyle J. Rapacki, Ph.D.

On Monday May 12th, 2025, an all-day Joint Legislative Hearing in the Arizona Senate occurred. Senator Mark Finchem chaired the hearing, and this interview on ARIZONA TODAY addresses major portions of the day-long legislative hearing. Those tuning in across the nation be informed that documented evidence had previously been received and was further presented to the committee revealing that six other states are experiencing very, very similar problems and challenges as Arizona. The conversation on this segment of ARIZONA TODAY with Senator Finchem will provide a very sobering glimpse to the horrendous and damaging effects from a system that has gone astray and turned on the family bringing pain, financial collapse, and other hardships that are quite sobering and damaging.

The woke and DEI political philosophy and antics are meant to subvert the gift of family. You will hear just how this DEI subversion is damaging families. More evidence and revelations are coming. Once again Arizona is taking the lead confronting a most destructive attack determined to alter another dimension of what makes America great.

WATCH: Arizona Today with AZ Senator Mark Finchem

©2025 All rights reserved.

The post VIDEO: Joint Legislative Hearing on Arizona’s Family Court System appeared first on Dr. Rich Swier.

JUDICIAL TYRANNY: Supreme Court to Hear Trump Challenge to Universal Injunctions by Radical, Rogue Judges thumbnail

JUDICIAL TYRANNY: Supreme Court to Hear Trump Challenge to Universal Injunctions by Radical, Rogue Judges

/in , , , , /by

By The Geller Report

Far left judges issue rulings that go far beyond the scope of resolving cases or controversies. It is a grotesque seizure of power that puts the entire nation at risk.

The Supreme Court under a corrupt and compromised Justice Roberts has abandoned it’s judicial responsibility to uphold the Constitution. He is owned.

The case proper is over birthright citizenship. This hearing, however, will be about the numerous injunctions that have sought to limit the administration’s efforts coast to coast. SCOTUS Blog: The dispute is one of the relatively rare proceedings that came to the justices as an emergency appeal – on the so-called “shadow docket” – only to be set for oral arguments…. the primary issue before the court on Thursday is whether lower-court judges can issue what are known as universal injunctions to block an order nationwide. With a universal injunction, a federal judge (or several in this case) can that bar the government from enforcing an executive order – or, in another case, a law or policy – anywhere in the country. The Trump administration, which has been blocked by many such injunctions in recent months, argues that the practice is unconstitutional…. President Donald Trump set the events leading to Thursday’s argument in motion on Jan. 20, when he signed an executive order ending birthright citizenship. Under the order, which was originally slated to go into effect on Feb. 19, children born in the United States would not be automatically entitled to U.S. citizenship if their parents were in this country illegally or temporarily – for example, on a work or student visa…. Seven years ago, in a concurring opinion in Trump v. Hawaii, Justice Clarence Thomas called universal injunctions “legally and historically dubious.” Moreover, he added, they are “beginning to take a toll on the federal court system — preventing legal questions from percolating through the federal courts, encouraging forum shopping, and making every case a national emergency for the courts and for the Executive Branch” (SCOTUSblog).

The very fact that they are holding this hearing may bode well for the president. Margot Cleveland at the Federalist: That the Supreme Court scheduled oral argument on the nationwide injunction issue, while the underlying question of the constitutionality of the president’s EO continues to percolate in the lower courts, suggests several of the justices have grave concerns over nationwide injunctions. Further, as the Trump Administration’s brief highlights, five justices — Justices Alito, Barrett, Thomas, Kavanaugh, and Gorsuch — at different times and in various concurrences or dissents, have criticized the use of nationwide injunctions (Federalist).

AUTHOR

Pamela Geller

RELATED ARTICLES:

Liberals Get A Taste Of Their Own ‘January 6’ Medicine

‘Modern Equivalent Of A Pirate Or Robber’: Federal Judge Says Trump Can Deport Tren De Aragua Gangbangers

Minor Parking Violation Leads To Discovery Of Multiple Illegal Immigrants Accused Of Crimes

‘Dumbest F*cking Thing’: Democrats Are Absolutely Furious At Lawmaker Trying To Impeach Trump

‘Remarkable Reversal’: CNN Stunned As Trump Prediction Proves True

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

The post JUDICIAL TYRANNY: Supreme Court to Hear Trump Challenge to Universal Injunctions by Radical, Rogue Judges appeared first on Dr. Rich Swier.

‘Hang It Around Their Neck’ — Against Long Odds, GOP Operatives Have A Plan To Win In 2026 thumbnail

‘Hang It Around Their Neck’ — Against Long Odds, GOP Operatives Have A Plan To Win In 2026

/in , , , /by

By The Daily Caller

Whether it’s a 12-hour-long protest on the Capitol steps about inflation, assaulting police officers during a protest at an ICE facility, or the threat of ousting the newly elected leadership of the DNC, it’s safe to say that since President Donald Trump retook the White House in November, Democrats have found themselves lost as a party, if not in total disarray.

The Democrats’ apparent lack of direction and constant infighting could help carry the GOP through a midterm cycle that, given historical trends, they appear destined to lose.

Over more than a dozen interviews, party officials and GOP consultants told the Daily Caller that they have a plan to bring Republicans more victory in 2026 — and they’re fully intending on using the divisions in the Democratic Party to achieve this goal.

“There’s an old rule in politics that I tell my clients, which is when your opponent is committing suicide, stay out of the way,” a national GOP operative told the Caller. “And that’s what the Democrats are doing right now.”

DEMS IN DISARRAY

In stark contrast to the Democratic Party, the GOP is fresh off a week-long celebration touting the Trump administration’s success in the first 100 days of his second term. Six months after Trump was elected for the second time, and the party took both the House and the Senate, the GOP is in prime position to enact the MAGA agenda.

Despite the celebration, the thought of the 2026 midterms still looms. The question of how to continue to capitalize on the nation’s massive shift to the right is on the minds of GOP strategists, top party officials and the White House.

“What I am going to tell my clients is let the Democrats be Democrats. If they think that transgender issues and Harry Sisson and those guys are going to deliver them great wins, God bless them. Keep going, kids,” one Midwestern conservative strategist told the Caller.

WOAH! This is the overflow area at Bernie Sanders and AOC’s rally in Salt Lake City, Utah today. Over 5,000 people alone in the overflow area. Trump should be terrified. pic.twitter.com/zShKnhkMAj

— Harry Sisson (@harryjsisson) April 14, 2025

Over 30,000 people showed up to see Bernie Sanders and AOC in LA today! Just absolutely remarkable. pic.twitter.com/G8ByzLuF17

— Harry Sisson (@harryjsisson) April 12, 2025

Since the 2024 election, Harris’s camp signaled that she wouldn’t make a decision about her political future until the summer. Joe Biden retreated to Delaware for a quiet life. Gavin Newsom launched a podcast. Gretchen Whitmer was spotted in the White House. And AOC and Bernie Sanders, two of the party’s furthest left candidates, stepped up to become the new faces of the Democratic Party.

“Democrats may not know who their leader is, but we do – it’s the Jasmine Crocketts, the AOCs, and the Bernie Sanders of the party. We’ll elevate their most extreme voices, like Jasmine Crockett, because they are the ones running the party right now, and they couldn’t be more out-of-touch with what most Americans care about,” Abigail Jackson, the deputy communications director for the Republican National Committee, told the Caller. 

Andrew Clark, founder of Relentless Strategies, told the Caller that the media is primed right now to cover tension within the Democrat ranks and that Republicans can use this opportunity to push Democrats to be on the record talking about the division in their party. Alternatively, they can force them on the record defending unpopular policy positions – like men in women’s sports. Democratic Sen. Jon Ossoff, who is running for re-election in Georgia, and Democratic Rep. Haley Stevens, who is running for an open Senate seat in Michigan, are both cosponsoring legislation that would allow men to compete in women’s sports, for example.

“Get Democrats on the record talking about it, draw attention to it,” Clark told the Caller. “If the Democrats go on the record now, that’s what gets used for ads in the fall — that lays the foundation for what these Republicans can run on and what these Democrats have to defend.”

In November, nearly every area of the country shifted to the right. American voters signaled leading up to Election Day that they were worried, first and foremost, about Democrats’ handling of the border crisis and the effect ‘Bidenomics’ had on the economy. But voters were also heavily persuaded by the candidates’ views on transgender issues. According to an analysis by Future Forward, a Democratic super PAC, Trump’s most effective ad was one telling voters that Harris was for “they/them” but that he was for “you.” That ad shifted viewers 2.7 percentage points in favor of the now president.

One strategist told the Caller that getting Democrats to take the unpopular stance on 70-30 and 80-20 issues – like wanting men in women’s sports – can prove to be lucrative for Republicans.

“It provides really kind of stark differences between our candidates and theirs that manifest themselves on the earned media front,” a GOP strategist told the Caller.

The Democrats’ collapse hasn’t just been on Capitol Hill, as one strategist pointed out. Across the country, Americans have protested the administration, especially Elon Musk’s role, by lighting Tesla chargers on fire, keying the cars and throwing Molotov cocktails at Tesla dealerships.

🚨 Woke Karen SPOTTED at anti-Musk protest in Tysons Corner 🚨 pic.twitter.com/53MuSja9wJ

— Daily Caller (@DailyCaller) March 29, 2025

“What am I doing about this? I’m just collecting footage, some of this unhinged protest footage, like … domestic terrorism and like people keying cars and looking completely out of their minds,” one national strategist focused on full service creative services told the Caller.

The strategist also pointed out that Democrats have rushed to back federal workers: “These overpaid suburban D.C., career bureaucrats… if that’s their rallying cry, I think that they’re in trouble in the swing states.”

“I think any little bit of stuff that we have showing the Democrats spending a lot of time on those folks is going to be beneficial for us to hold, to have in the quiver to use,” the source added.

THE VIEW FROM THE WHITE HOUSE

Echoing what the strategists pointed out, one top White House official told the Caller that the “big, beautiful” reconciliation bill will give them an opportunity to further bury Democrats on policy.

“Like the big tax package and all this that’s come forward [in the reconciliation bill], we think there will be really popular things in there that 100% of Democrats will vote against, and then we will hang it around their neck like an anchor,” the official told the Caller.

While nailing Democrats to unpopular policy positions and highlighting the ongoing disarray in the party is important, the White House believes that the president’s ability to deliver on his campaign promises will be the best advertising the party has going into 2026, the official told the Caller.

“The big picture, the thing we’ve been most focused on so far, is just delivering the agenda that the president ran on, which is critical issue number one. We have to give the voters what they paid for to try to cement the coalition that brought him into office, which is, of course, the coalition that we need — at least some version — to turn up in the midterms in order to be successful where we want to be successful,” the senior White House official told the Caller.

Inside the briefing room there is a packet of 100 ICE arrests made on every briefing room chair. pic.twitter.com/3wLyIZRBcl

— Reagan Reese (@reaganreese_) April 28, 2025

That means delivering for voters on securing the southern border – which the administration has made leaps and bounds on. Illegal crossings were down roughly 95% in March from the monthly average during the Biden administration.

It also means putting more money into Americans’ pockets and addressing their concerns on the economy, something the administration is still trying to navigate as the stock market reacts to Trump’s tariff policies. The economy is something every strategist and consultant that the Caller spoke to agreed could tank the election for Republicans in 2026. And it’s an element the White House knows they have to address.

“The question is, what does [the economy] look like, sort of Q2 of next year? And if we can get the economy really moving in the right direction … by the data it already is … But get people feeling that, then I think we’ll be really successful,” the official told the Caller of the White House’s plans to address the economy.

WHERE TO FOCUS

Fixing the economy isn’t the only thing the party will be looking at the White House to do to help ensure the 2026 midterms are a building year for the GOP. Across the country, strategists, PACs and party officials will follow the White House’s direction on which states and races they should focus their time and resources.

The House of Representatives will be a big target focus, the White House official told the Caller, adding that “all of the swing districts, whether on the offensive or defensive side” will be a priority.

“The Senate is probably in a little bit safer territory, but we think we’ve got a great offensive opportunity in Georgia, good offensive opportunity in Michigan, and potentially good offensive opportunity in New Hampshire,” the official said of the top targets for the party moving into 2026.

The NRCC plans to build on down-ballot gains with different demographic groups, including Hispanic, African-American, and young voters, one party official told the Caller.

“I think for the Senate map, one of the things to lean into is the fact that Democrats don’t even want to be here,” one NRSC official told the Caller, mentioning all of the recent Senate Democrat retirees that have been announced. Sens. Dick Durbin of Illinois, Tina Smith of Minnesota and Gary Peters of Michigan have indicated that they will not be running for reelection in 2026.

The map on the left is George Bush’s 6.68% loss in New Jersey in 2004.

The map on the right is Donald Trump’s 5.91% loss in New Jersey in 2024.

You can see very clearly that a realignment is taking place. The GOP has made huge inroads in South Jersey, The Shore, and Passaic and… pic.twitter.com/3azuN0xlcd

— Christian Heiens 🏛 (@ChristianHeiens) December 18, 2024

And don’t count out New Jersey, a typically blue state that Trump narrowly lost in 2024.

At the time the White House official spoke to the Caller, Trump had yet to endorse in the New Jersey governor’s race. The official noted that they would continue to monitor the race and would get involved if they felt Republicans were in “striking distance.”

That would “bode well for ’26 and in the future,” the official added.

On Monday, Trump announced an endorsement of Republican Jack Ciattarelli, who is the frontrunner in the primary.

🚨BREAKING🚨 Trump endorses Republican Jack Ciattarelli for New Jersey Governor pic.twitter.com/OZGkCgKHNr

— Daily Caller (@DailyCaller) May 12, 2025

Part of the puzzle to defeating the Democrats in 2026 and securing further victory for the GOP is capitalizing on what the party has only recently embraced: early voting and get-out-the-vote (GOTV) efforts.

American Majority Action’s Ned Ryun told the Caller that it comes down to the fundamentals: voter registration, more absentee voting, and embracing early voting where it benefits the party. Ryun also stressed the importance of the GOP – both on a national and local level – pressuring county clerks to clear their voter rolls of ineligible voters. In March, the Republican National Committee (RNC) requested all states provide the party information on how it maintains and cleans up its voter rolls, the Daily Caller previously reported.

After working on the Wisconsin Supreme Court race, Ryun and his group are now shifting their focus to Virginia, where they plan to practice the “fundamentals.”

NEW MEDIA APPROACH

Early voting isn’t the only new tool that the GOP harnessed for the 2024 election. Trump’s media strategy, which included appearing on podcasts and talk shows outside of legacy media programs, was a break from the traditional route politicians usually take on the campaign trail. It was also a strategy Harris and her campaign struggled to embrace, fumbling a potential interview with Joe Rogan that would’ve given the vice president a better chance at reaching independent and undecided voters.

The White House has indicated that the new media strategy is here to stay, shaking up the press briefing room to include new and independent media outlets and adding them into the daily rotation of reporters that cover the president.

🚨PRESIDENT TRUMP AND JOE ROGAN🚨

WATCH NOW 👇https://t.co/UmTD7VWR0X

— Trump War Room (@TrumpWarRoom) October 26, 2024

The NRSC, meanwhile, is encouraging Senate Republicans to embrace this new approach — and create a novel media strategy of their own.

A national Republican working on Senate races told the Caller that the NRSC advised each Senate office in February to have an active presence on social media and to draft up a new media engagement plan as part of a list of benchmarks meant to assist incumbents up for re-election in 2026.

A month later, the NRSC encouraged incumbents to “lead the fight” for President Trump’s efforts to cut waste, fraud, and abuse from government spending through unconventional channels. Candidates were advised to “be a leader on cuts your senator is passionate about through regional and new media,” the source told the Caller.

The NRSC also appointed Senator Marsha Blackburn to be vice chair, with the expectation that she will assist Senate Republicans in breaking into the new media sphere.

One senator who took the new media strategy in stride was Senate Majority Leader John Thune.

A Senate aide explained to the Caller that they first implemented the new media strategy when Congress was voting on the “Keep Men Out Of Women’s Sports Act.”

Sen. Tuberville had already appeared on Megyn Kelly’s independent podcast to promote the bill and the pair started a pressure campaign on X in support of the legislation. That “opened up the door” for Thune to use that outlet to publicly advocate for the bill.

“She had a call with the leader [Thune] and it was him saying, ‘Look, this is a priority,’” the aide recounted to the Caller. “We gave her the exclusive so that she could be the one to announce when that vote would be taking place on her show. We gave that to her because we saw that as being the best place for it, because that’s where the conversation was focused.”

.@johnthune – we need a vote in the Senate on the Protection of Women & Girls in Sports Act to make Trump’s hugely popular EO a LAW. Without that, the next president could undo it. Make the Ds opposed to 79% of the country ⬇️ go on record with a NO vote. Let’s go! https://t.co/2gUTzgQgJH

— Megyn Kelly (@megynkelly) February 6, 2025

Another Senate aide told the Caller that it has been important to put members of Congress on hour-long podcasts in addition to quick TV hits because it helps show in-depth policy knowledge and allows constituents to get to know their senator on a more personal level. Some senators do podcasts that correspond with specific policy focuses, like cryptocurrency or culture war issues.

“What has kind of been the playbook forever has been five minute Fox [News] hits, and you get your message out,” the Senate aide explained. “But people don’t really know you.”

ANGRY VS. HAPPY VOTERS

“Policy is the politics,” is a message the Caller heard from nearly every consultant or party aide over the course of numerous interviews. The best message the party can campaign on, they stressed, is the president and the GOP delivering on promises made to the American people.

The fear, though, is that angry voters are typically more motivated to turn out in a midterm than happy voters.

The GOP has already learned this lesson from the special election in Florida’s 6th Congressional District. Although Republicans managed to hang on to now U.N. Ambassador Mike Waltz’s vacant seat, the March race was much closer than the party anticipated — particularly after Trump’s decisive victory just six months prior.

The party faced the hard truth that yes, voters upset with the current administration are more motivated to show up to the polls, one national GOP strategist told the Caller. However, the source noted that the tight race shouldn’t have been a total shock given how much money Democrats poured into the race.

“Our people – they got the message on time, but it took them a little bit longer. And so they basically needed to be rustled up to say, ‘Hey, this is important.’ But once the message was delivered that, ‘hey, the President’s agenda is on the line,’ it was lights out,” the source told the Caller.

The White House feels similarly, one official told the Caller, acknowledging that, at a certain point, they can’t help but make Democrats angry if they deliver on Trump’s campaign promises.

But the official added that the fight in 2026 is really about inspiring the Republican coalition to keep fighting each and every election cycle. Voters need to understand that Trump’s long-term success is in many ways predicated on having a friendly Congress to codify his agenda through legislation, the official explained.

“What it really comes down to is the Republican coalition … can we connect the need for a Republican Congress to Trump’s success in the minds of those voters that have really only turned out when Trump is on the ticket,” the official said.

AUTHOR

Reagan Reese

White House Correspondent. Follow Reagan on Twitter.

RELATED ARTICLE: Joe Rogan Responds To Kamala Campaign’s Alleged Lies About Their Interview That Wasn’t

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

NO ONE IS ABOVE THE LAW thumbnail

NO ONE IS ABOVE THE LAW

/in , , , , /by

By The Daily Caller

NO ONE IS ABOVE THE LAW

The Democratic Party is so bereft of coherent ideas to oppose President Donald Trump that their most high-profile stunts consist of defending criminal illegal aliens and impeding law enforcement in the process.

On Friday, a Democratic mayor and his colleagues attempted to storm an ICE detention facility housing illegal aliens awaiting immigration hearings (you know, the due process the Democrats keep crying about).

Three members of Congress from New Jersey, Reps. LaMonica McIver, Bonnie Watson Coleman, and Rob Menendez, visited the facility to conduct “federal oversight” — which is allowed under the law — but things quickly spiraled out of control.

According to video and various news reports, it appears the congressmembers refused to wait for officers to permit them entry and Newark Mayor Ras Baraka — who does not have oversight authority as a local official — tried to join them for their tour. Protesters also contributed to the ensuing chaos, seemingly trying to get past law enforcement and enter the facility.

The Department of Homeland Security said Baraka ignored several orders to leave the area and was eventually arrested for trespassing, which is when the situation really escalated.

Video shows McIver, in a bright red blazer, repeatedly pushing her body into and shoving an officer.

“You better get your fucking officers,” McIver later yells at a female officer while wagging her finger in the officer’s face. “I touch whoever I want, motherfucker … I’m filing a complaint. You can’t talk to a congresswoman like that. And you put your hands on me? You will pay!”

McIver claims that she did not “body slam” anyone and blamed police for escalating the situation, insisting that she was the one who was assaulted.

The Democratic congressmembers reportedly received their tour of the detention facility and were even offered a soda after the ruckus. Baraka, however, was detained and is facing charges for his behavior. DHS spokeswoman Tricia McLaughlin said that there are “likely more arrests coming.”

In a separate incident in Worcester, Massachusetts, on Friday, District 5 City Councilor Etel Haxhiaj was accused of inciting aggression toward the police and assaulting local and federal officers as they attempted to arrest a criminal illegal alien. ICE officers were trying to arrest Ferreira de Oliveira, a woman who entered the country illegally in 2022 and has since been charged with assault and battery with a dangerous weapon and assault on a pregnant woman.

Aside from the horrendous optics of Democrats effectively rioting on behalf of criminal illegals, party members are incredulous that their colleagues might be held accountable for their lawless behavior. Democratic Florida Rep. Jared Moskowitz responded to the New Jersey incident, stating, “If this continues to happen, where members of Congress are going to be attacked, physically attacked by the administration, this is going to have reverberations on whether the House can function.”

This is the same political party, of course, that celebrated dubious fraud and insurrection-related charges against the president, declaring sanctimoniously that “no one is above the law.”

Declare that your opulent oceanfront resort in Palm Beach is obviously worth way more than $18 million? Straight to jail. Assault an officer carrying out an arrest order or trying to prevent criminal trespassing? We’re the real victims, actually.

Nevermind the woman who pursued that fraud case is now being investigated for her own alleged mortgage fraud. Attorney General Letitia James is accused of falsely claiming a Virginia home as her primary residence to secure better mortgage terms and allegedly listed a Brooklyn property as having four apartment units instead of five for insurance purposes.

Sorry, Democrats, but a new sheriff is in town. Your attempts to cosplay the tough-on-crime party (only when it comes to orange man, of course) are about to be blown out by a true law-and-order administration.

AUTHOR

Amber Duke

Senior Editor.

WHAT ELSE IS ON MY RADAR

The Democratic Party’s post-mortem is going really well…Dem Senate Candidates Running In ‘Toss-Up’ States Co-Sponsor Bill To Eliminate Women’s Sports

Americans will finally reap the benefits of billions of taxpayer dollars going to pharmaceutical companies for the research and development of new drugs…‘Our Country Will Finally Be Treated Fairly’: Trump Signs ‘Aggressive’ Executive Order Slashing Drug Prices

Republican North Carolina Sen. Thom Tillis tanked the acting U.S. attorney for Washington, D.C.’s, confirmation, and the reason why is still incredibly confusing…Ed Martin Baffled By Reasons Thom Tillis Gave For Opposing His Nomination

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller Unfit to Print column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

The post NO ONE IS ABOVE THE LAW appeared first on Dr. Rich Swier.

ARIZONA: 15 Counties in Arizona Ordered to Remove Illegal Aliens from Voter Rolls thumbnail

ARIZONA: 15 Counties in Arizona Ordered to Remove Illegal Aliens from Voter Rolls

/in , , , , , , /by

By The Geller Report

America First Legal has won its lawsuit in Arizona, requiring all 15 counties in Arizona to remove illegal aliens from voter rolls. The idea that we have to litigate rule of law. Our taxpayer dollars have to fund litigation in every corrupt blue state, county, locality that  doesn’t follow the Constitution and rule of law.

That said, this is a huge win for election integrity and ensuring only U.S. citizens vote in our elections.

Following AFL’s Lawsuit, All 15 Counties in Arizona Now Taking Action to Remove Illegal Aliens from Voter Rolls in Major Win for Election Integrity

By:  America First, April 14, 2025:

WASHINGTON, D.C. — America First Legal (AFL) has secured a major victory for election integrity, with all 15 counties in Arizona now working to remove non-citizens from the state’s voter rolls. Following a settlement in a lawsuit AFL filed last year, all 15 Arizona County Recorders are now seeking assistance from the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to verify the citizenship status of registered voters who have not provided proof of citizenship.

AFL filed the lawsuit against the 15 counties in Arizona on September 4, 2024, on behalf of its clients, Strong Communities Foundation of Arizona, known as EZAZ.org, and Yvonne Cahill, a registered voter and naturalized citizen. The lawsuit stemmed from Arizona’s unique voter registration system, which, unlike almost every other state, requires documentary proof of citizenship to vote in state and local elections. The state’s groundbreaking law imposing this requirement is an important way to ensure that only eligible citizens can vote.

The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that in federal elections, states cannot impose additional voter registration requirements beyond what the federal voter registration form requires, which only requires registrants to check a box affirming they are citizens. Therefore, if someone registering to vote in Arizona refuses to provide proof of citizenship, the state is required to allow that person to vote in Arizona’s federal elections, unless the state discovers that the individual is an ineligible voter. However, Arizona law still requires proof of citizenship to vote in state and local elections.

Nearly 50,000 individuals have registered to vote in Arizona without providing proof of citizenship. These so-called “federal-only voters” can only vote in Arizona’s federal elections, but not in state or local elections.

Arizona law requires county recorders to perform monthly list maintenance to confirm the citizenship of federal-only registered voters. Voter registrations of people found to be non-citizens are required to be canceled, while those who are confirmed to be citizens are moved onto the regular voter list and allowed to vote in state and local elections. However, county recorders had not been utilizing all available resources to verify the citizenship status of registered voters until AFL took action last year, notifying all 15 Arizona County Recorders of the resources available to them and their legal obligations to use them.

Two federal statutes, 8 U.S.C. § 1373(c) and 8 U.S.C. § 1644, authorize state and local officials to obtain information about the citizenship or immigration status of any individual for any lawful purpose. Until now, county recorders haven’t invoked this law to get DHS’s assistance to verify the citizenship of federal-only voters. However, on January 20, 2025, the day that he took office, President Trump issued an Executive Order requiring the Secretary of Homeland Security “to ensure maximum compliance by Department of Homeland Security personnel with the provisions of 8 U.S.C. 1373 and 8 U.S.C. 1644 and ensure that State and local governments are provided with the information necessary to fulfill … citizenship, or immigration status verification requirements authorized by law.” And again, on March 25, he issued an Executive Order on election integrity that cited 8 U.S.C. 1373(c) and affirmed that “the Department of Homeland Security is required to share database information with States upon request so they can fulfill this duty” of making sure that aliens are not registered to vote.

AFL sued all 15 of Arizona’s County Recorders to compel them to enlist DHS’s aid to verify the citizenship of voters. Late last year, the County Recorders of Yavapai and Mohave Counties settled the case and asked DHS to assist the counties in verifying the citizenship of federal-only voters. Last week, Maricopa County and the remaining 12 counties joined in sending requests to DHS to verify the citizenship of federal-only voters.

AFL is proud to have partnered with EZAZ.org and Yvonne Cahill to protect Arizona election integrity, and we will continue fighting relentlessly to ensure that only American citizens vote in U.S. elections.

Statement from James Rogers, America First Legal Senior Counsel:

“This settlement is a great result for all Arizonans. This will help County Recorders find and remove any aliens on their voter rolls. It will also potentially enfranchise federal-only voters whose citizenship is confirmed, which would allow them to vote in State and local elections. AFL congratulates each of Arizona’s 15 County Recorders for taking this bold and important step for election integrity in the State,” said James Rogers.

Continue reading.

AUTHOR

Pamela Geller

RELATED ARTICLES:

President Trump Says ‘Total Reset Negotiated’ with China During Intense 10-hour Tariff Talks

“Impeccable and Epic Operation”: Venezuela’s Opposition Leaders Rescued In U.S.-Coordinated Operation After 412 Days in Hiding

Khamenei Endorses ‘Death to America’ Chants Ahead of Nuclear Talks

TRUMP PEACE: President Trump Announces ‘Full and Immediate Ceasefire’ Between India and Pakistan

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

The post ARIZONA: 15 Counties in Arizona Ordered to Remove Illegal Aliens from Voter Rolls appeared first on Dr. Rich Swier.

TEXAS: Department of Justice Announces Investigation of Muslim EPIC City thumbnail

TEXAS: Department of Justice Announces Investigation of Muslim EPIC City

/in , , , , , /by

By Jihad Watch

There are serious concerns about the application of Sharia in this place, and so the investigation is entirely warranted, although it is not at all clear that the investigators will know what danger signs to look for. In any case, the fact that any investigation is being conducted at all is a tribute to the heroic efforts of the great Amy Mek.

“Department of Justice announces investigation of Muslim EPIC City,” by Caroline Love and Penelope Rivera, KERA, May 9, 2025 (thanks to The Religion of Peace):

The U.S. Department of Justice is opening an investigation into a proposed Muslim development of a North Texas mosque.

Sen. John Cornyn sent a letter to Attorney General Pam Bondi and Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon last month asking them to to investigate potential “religious discrimination” at the East Plano Islamic Center’s EPIC City, a proposed housing development that would be located in unincorporated Collin and Hunt counties.

Cornyn said in a press release on Friday the U.S. Department of Justice has opened an investigation in response to his concerns.

“I am grateful to Attorney General Bondi and the Department of Justice for hearing my concerns and opening an investigation into the proposed EPIC City development in North Texas,” Cornyn said. “Religious discrimination and Sharia Law have no place in the Lone Star State. Any violations of federal law must be swiftly prosecuted, and I know under the Trump administration, they will be.”

Dan Cogdell, the attorney for EPIC, said the North Texas mosque will cooperate with the investigation.

“EPIC will cooperate fully with any and all investigations — regardless of how misguided and unnecessary they are,” Cogdell said.

EPIC City is a proposed 402-acre development associated with the East Plano Islamic Center mosque. It would be roughly 40 miles northeast of Dallas near the city of Josephine. The mixed-use development would include a new mosque, more than 1,000 single- and multi-family homes, a K-12 faith-based school, senior housing, an outreach center, commercial developments, sports facilities, and a community college.

Yasir Qadhi, a resident scholar at the East Plano Islamic Center and one of the people involved in the project planning, told KERA in an interview last year EPIC City is not exclusive to Muslim residents.

“It’s an open community,” Qadhi said. “Anybody can come in. We’re welcoming people of all backgrounds and diversity and we’re offering them facilities that we think would be very, very useful.”…

Mustafaa Carroll, the executive director of the Dallas-Fort Worth office of the Council of American Islamic relations, said at a press conference in April that Abbott and Paxton have abused their power by launching groundless investigations into the East Plano Islamic Center and its project and violating their rights to religious expression….

AUTHOR

RELATED ARTICLES:

Khamenei Endorses ‘Death to America’ Chants Ahead of Nuclear Talks

Terrorism Gets Rebranded as ‘Armed Resistance Against Civilians’

Hamas offers ‘congratulations and blessings’ to Pope Leo XIV, decries ‘brutal Zionist aggression’

“Impeccable and Epic Operation”: Venezuela’s Opposition Leaders Rescued In U.S.-Coordinated Operation After 412 Days in Hiding

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

The post TEXAS: Department of Justice Announces Investigation of Muslim EPIC City appeared first on Dr. Rich Swier.

DERELICTION OF DUTY: Chief Justice John Roberts Admits It’s His Job to Rein in the Judicial Insurrection—and He’s Not Doing It thumbnail

DERELICTION OF DUTY: Chief Justice John Roberts Admits It’s His Job to Rein in the Judicial Insurrection—and He’s Not Doing It

/in , , , , , , /by

By The Daily Signal

The deep state and its allies have launched a judicial insurrection against President Donald Trump, and Chief Justice John Roberts effectively just admitted he’s not doing his job to stop it.

Roberts made a rare public statement back in March, criticizing Trump and other Republicans who have suggested impeaching judges to prevent them from taking it upon themselves to make national policy through injunctions. Yet Roberts refused to address the underlying issue, and he dodged again in public remarks Wednesday.

“What do you think of these calls for impeachment of judges based on the decisions that they’ve made?” Judge Lawrence Vilardo asked Roberts in an interview in Buffalo, New York.

“Impeachment is not how you register disagreement with decisions,” the chief justice said, repeating the substance of his comments in March.

“That’s what you’re there for,” Vilardo responded.

“That’s what we’re there for,” Roberts agreed.

Again, Roberts overlooked the underlying issue. Republicans aren’t calling for the impeachment of justices because they disagree with one particular decision—they’re exasperated because judge after judge after judge is effectively usurping the president’s authority by issuing so many nationwide injunctions.



The Judicial Insurrection

When woke bureaucrats stared down the barrel of a second Trump term, they strategized about how best to tie the new president’s hands. Public-sector unions made new collective bargaining agreements to protect work-from-home perks. Employees changed their titles to hide “diversity, equity, and inclusion.” Perhaps most importantly, bureaucrats and their allies outside the administration geared up to sue the Trump administration, targeting friendly judges.

Sure enough, the ink was barely dry on the president’s executive orders rooting woke ideology out of the government before public-sector unions (which represent federal bureaucrats) and leftist groups had taken the new administration to court. Many of these groups also hand-picked jurisdictions with judges more likely to give them the injunctions they seek.

According to the Congressional Research Service, judges issued 86 nationwide injunctions against President Trump in his first administration, with 36 of them involving immigration and 10 involving federal funding related to immigration. By contrast, judges issued only 28 nationwide injunctions against Biden. Between Jan. 20 and March 27 of this year, judges issued 17 injunctions—more than half of the number in Biden’s entire term.

Many of the unions and leftist groups filing these lawsuits also staffed and advised the Biden administration, as I expose in my book, “The Woketopus: The Dark Money Cabal Manipulating the Federal Government.” The ACLU, for instance, pushed the Biden administration to open the border, and now the ACLU is filing lawsuits to block Trump’s border policies.

The judges—many of them appointed by Democrats, surprise surprise!—have taken the opportunity to issue “nationwide injunctions.” While temporary injunctions allow a judge to protect one of the parties in a case from harm while the court considers the case, judges have weaponized this power, claiming to protect people across the country who aren’t parties to the suit.

This practice of “judge shopping” enables activist groups to succeed in early stages of litigation before ultimately failing when the case reaches the Supreme Court. This gives judges a chance to carry out a judicial insurrection. It also gives the case the appearance of success, motivating the leftist groups and their supporters, while tying up the government in the meantime—all in pursuit of a vain claim.



The Supreme Court Acts

For instance, judges blocked Trump’s order removing gender ideology from the military and ordered the government to re-hire probationary employees after they had been fired.

The Supreme Court rightly struck down these injunctions, but the judges only handled them on a case-by-case basis.

Judges have blocked the State Department’s move to restructure the U.S. Agency for International Development, ordered the administration to halt its freeze on federal spending, demanded the government restore deleted websites, and more.

This deluge of injunctions calls for a robust response from the nation’s highest court—or, at the very least, direction from the man who heads the entire U.S. judicial system, Chief Justice Roberts.

Trump, Congress Consider Other Solutions

Roberts only got involved after Trump expressed exasperation over the injunctions.

Trump has pledged to comply with the judges’ orders, though he has rightly contested them in court.

He responded angrily to a judge’s order directing him to turn around planes carrying alleged members of the Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua, however. The president noted that he won the 2024 presidential election in part by promising to oppose illegal immigration.

“I’m just doing what the VOTERS wanted me to do,” Trump wrote. “This judge, like many of the Crooked Judges’ I am forced to appear before, should be IMPEACHED!!!”

Rep. Brandon Gill, R-Texas, introduced articles of impeachment against the judge in question, but Trump and other Republicans have taken efforts to address the systemic issue, as well.

The House Judiciary Committee held a hearing on the injunctions last month.

Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, introduced the Restraining Judicial Insurrectionists Act of 2025, establishing a three-judge panel to swiftly review injunctions or other forms of declaratory relief against the president and the executive branch, with a quick appeal process to the Supreme Court.

Lee said the judges “have presumed to run the military, the civil service, foreign aid, and HR departments across the Executive Branch—blatantly unconstitutional overreach.”

Meanwhile, Trump issued a memo in March directing the heads of executive agencies to request that judges follow the Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65(c), which requires the party requesting an injunction to put up “security in an amount that the court considers proper to pay the costs and damages sustained by any party found to have been wrongfully enjoined or restrained.” Rule 65(c) may not apply to every legal case, however.

John Roberts’ Job

Each of these efforts addresses one aspect of the problem, and Lee’s bill would likely address the issue most effectively. However, there is one person who has authority over the U.S. judiciary and could direct judges to be more circumspect before they issue nationwide injunctions that effectively make policy.

His name is… drumroll please… John Roberts.

When Roberts says reversing lower court mistakes is “what we’re there for,” he’s exactly right. In fact, as head of the judiciary, addressing major nationwide issues like the judicial insurrection is what he’s there for, specifically.

Perhaps, instead of complaining about Trump’s call to impeach judges, Roberts could solve the underlying problem himself by outlining how judges should act when considering temporary injunctions.

If he wants Trump and others to stop talking about impeaching judges, maybe he should step up and address the root problem.



AUTHOR

RELATED ARTICLES:

BETRAYAL: Chief Justice John Roberts Takes the Side of Deep State Swamp Creatures Against Trump

Trump Order Would Force the ACLU to Put Its Money Where Its Mouth Is on Lawfare

What Is Democrat Legality?

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Signal column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

The Daily Signal depends on the support of readers like you. Donate now

The post DERELICTION OF DUTY: Chief Justice John Roberts Admits It’s His Job to Rein in the Judicial Insurrection—and He’s Not Doing It appeared first on Dr. Rich Swier.

EXCLUSIVE: Male ‘Transgender’ Inmate Who Allegedly Terrorized Female Cellmate Has Long History Of Prison Violence thumbnail

EXCLUSIVE: Male ‘Transgender’ Inmate Who Allegedly Terrorized Female Cellmate Has Long History Of Prison Violence

/in , , , , /by

By The Daily Caller

A male “transgender” inmate who allegedly sexually assaulted his female cellmate had a long history of violent behavior and serious infractions before Washington state correction officials transferred him to a women’s prison, according to documents obtained by the Daily Caller News Foundation.

In December 2024, Mozzy Clark filed a lawsuit against the Washington State Department of Corrections (DOC) alleging she was forced to share a cell with Christopher Scott Williams, whom the lawsuit describes as a “6 foot, 4 inch biological male who was known to be a violent, convicted sexual predator,” at Washington Corrections Center for Women (WCCW).

Williams, who still uses a male name, was transferred from a male prison to a women’s prison in 2021, after he began identifying as female. The Washington DOC has a policy that allows inmates to be transferred to a prison that matches their gender identity — how they feel about their sex — rather than their biology.

Williams was convicted of first degree assault and has an earned release date of 2038, according to the Washington DOC.

The DCNF submitted a public records request asking for documentation of reports that Williams had violated correctional facility rules while in prison. The Washington DOC provided the DCNF with Williams’ 98-page prison infraction summary. The summary lists Williams’ infraction reports, the seriousness of the allegation, the outcome of the hearing addressing the allegations and any sanctions imposed for violating prison rules.

The document, which refers to Williams as “female,” spans more than a decade and reveals Williams had a long history of violence and serious violations in male prisons before being transferred to WCCW. The list of serious infractions includes fighting with another inmate, sexual harassment, possessing explicit materials, damaging property and providing false information during an investigation of sexual misconduct. The infractions lead to punishments such as being confined to his cell for days, according to public records.

The DCNF was unable to reach Williams for comment and it appears that he is currently without legal representation.

In July 2011, Williams was sanctioned for sexual harassment and possession of sexually explicit material. He incurred the same infractions in February 2022, the timeframe of Mozzy Clark’s allegations, after his transfer to a women’s prison, according to the infraction summary.

Williams’ final violation in male prison occurred in May 2021, when he was given a sanction of being confined to his cell for 20 days for tampering with a security device. By December 2021, Williams had been transferred to the women’s prison and earned his first infraction there, an unauthorized absence from a required appointment, according to the summary document.

The lawsuit describes how in January and February of 2022, Clark was terrorized by her “fully intact” male cellmate, alleging Williams repeatedly sexually harassed her in the prison cell they shared, said depraved things to her while she showered and sexually assaulted her multiple times, according to the lawsuit.

Clark alleges Williams harassed her with sex toys, stating in that lawsuit that “[a]t night, Mr. Williams would take out various sex toys kept in his cell, and talk at length about how he wanted to use them on Ms. Clark.” The lawsuits notes Williams had a “large bag of sex toys” which was confiscated by prison officials in February 2022.

In February 2022, Williams incurred three serious infractions which included possession of sexuality explicit materials, for which Williams was confined to his cell for 10 days. Williams was also accused of sexual harassment but was cleared of that accusation, according to the summary document.

According to the lawsuit, prison officials regularly ignored or minimized Clark’s reports of the harassment. It wasn’t until Clark filed a Prison Rape Elimination Act (PREA) complaint against Williams that he was finally removed from her cell, states the lawsuit.  

“Even from an outside perspective, the only logical conclusion here is that Mozzy’s complaints were trivialized because the state was more concerned with perpetuating its woke policies than protecting the rights and safety of the women in its custody,” David Pivtorak, Clark’s lawyer, told the DCNF. “It appears that they cared more about prioritizing the feelings of male predators claiming to be the opposite sex than the foreseeable risk of violence to the women who were forced into a confined space with them against their will.”

The Washington DOC told the DCNF that allegations of sexual harassment are a “paramount concern” which are taken very seriously. It also made it clear that its prison housing policies and cellmate assignments are made according to state and federal law.

“State and federal law prescribe where offenders are to be housed. Inside, most have a cellmate, unless placed in temporary administrative segregation or assigned to higher security levels based on a Custody Review Score,” a representative for the Washington DOC told the DCNF.

“We do not improvise our standards of treatment and care. We are an arm of the justice system. We carry out the law, and we also follow it,” said the Washington DOC representative.

Stephen Miller, deputy chief of staff for policy and homeland security advisor, recently stated the Trump administration is committed to protecting female inmates by keeping males out of female prisons.

“We are also making clear in our prison system, male prisoners will not be allowed into women’s prisons. The Biden administration promoted prison rape by putting men into female prisons. That is obviously insane, cruel and unacceptable,” stated Miller. “This administration will not allow that.”

Williams still resides in the women’s prison, according to the Washington DOC.

“Eradication Of ‘Female’ As A Legal Category”

Clark’s lawsuit claims the “cruel and unusual punishment of sexual violence” allegedly inflicted upon her in prison was a result of Washington DOC policies.

The Washington DOC published its first transgender policy in February 2020, which allows inmates to be housed according to feelings about their sex, which activists call “gender identity,” rather than their biology.

Policies allowing men to transfer into women’s prison based on their feelings about their sex paves the way for the eradication of “female” as a legal category, Pivtorak explained to the DCNF.

“Taking this to its logical conclusion really means the complete erasure not only of women’s private spaces but the annihilation of ‘female’ as a discernible legal and biological category entirely,” said Pivtorak.

Washington DOC significantly expanded its gender ideology policies in October 2023 when Disability Rights Washington (DRW), a federally-funded nonprofit, announced it had successfully negotiated a settlement with the Washington DOC.

The activist group claimed Washington DOC had violated the rights of disabled transgender inmates by failing to provide them access to medical sex-change procedures and “gender affirming” mental healthcare, according to a press release.

The groundbreaking settlement required Washington DOC to provide inmates with cross-sex surgery, hire additional staff to provide sex-change medical interventions and provide additional gender ideology training for staff. In 2024, the Washington DOC published a toolkit to help gender confused inmates obtain cross-sex hormones, genital surgery and housing.

The DCNF obtained a public records document showing the Washington State DOC spent over $600,000 on transgender medical procedures from 2022 to 2024, with a sharp year-to-year increase. Washington state taxpayers footed the bill for $92,225 of transgender medical interventions in 2022, $203,651 in 2023 and $310,785 in 2024.

The transgender inmate medical claims paid for by the state included anesthesia for genital surgery, anesthesia for the amputation of a penis and silicone breast implants.

Costs of “gender affirming” medical services provided to inmates in the Washington State Department of Corrections.

The settlement requires Washington DOC to designate a “gender-affirming mental health specialist” at each of the state’s eleven major prisons. It also requires DOC to contract with a “gender-affirming mental health community consultant,” described as “a community expert in gender-affirming mental health care,” and hire a “gender-affirming medical specialist” to provide transgender medical interventions to patients at any “Department facility in person or via telehealth services.”

The Washington DOC has a job post for a “gender affirming medical specialist”, stating they will be expected to coordinate “medical care provided to transgender and gender diverse incarcerated individuals statewide, both in person and through telehealth.” The job comes with an annual salary range of $198,648 to $267,228, 25 paid vacation days a year and a requirement to become certified by the World Professional Association of Transgender Health (WPATH). 

The Washington DOC told the DCNF its agreement with DRW “prescribed new standards for gender-affirming care” for the many sex-change interventions that meet the “standards of medical necessity” for inmates who are insured through the state’s version of Medicaid, Apple Health.

“[Department of Corrections] is a medical provider. We intend to be a high-caliber one,” a representative for the Washington DOC told the DCNF.

“State and federal law govern the services we offer, and our professional staff offer them to the highest standard. It improves the lives of incarcerated individuals to receive comprehensive care, and it serves them to be treated in accordance with the law.”

DRW, which had been in negotiations over the settlement with Washington DOC since 2019, was given $1,500,000 to cover legal fees and costs incurred during the settlement negotiations. It was also given $300,000 annually to ensure the Washington DOC complied with the settlement terms, while the agreement is in effect.

DRW, which has received more than $37 million in federal funds since 1996, according to the Department of Health and Human Services, states on its website that federal funding makes up “a significant portion” of its overall funding.

DRW did not provide the DCNF with a comment regarding the settlement, but did tell the DCNF it did not use federal dollars to fund its work on the Washington DOC settlement.

It’s received multiple grants from the U.S. Department of Education, including a $370,000 grant under the Biden administration which was used to publish a guide instructing transgender Washington DOC inmates on how to legally change their name as part of their “Trans in Prison Justice Project.”

Public records obtained by the DCNF show Washington DOC has been holding monthly “GA” meetings with staff from jails throughout the state, where they discussed how to better provide inmates with “gender affirming services.”

AUTHOR

Megan Brock

Contributor.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Washington Pledges To Increase Correctional Officers’ ‘Transgender Focused Training’ In Legal Settlement

THE WPATH TAPES: Behind-The-Scenes Recordings Reveal What Top Gender Doctors Really Think About Sex Change Procedures

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

The post EXCLUSIVE: Male ‘Transgender’ Inmate Who Allegedly Terrorized Female Cellmate Has Long History Of Prison Violence appeared first on Dr. Rich Swier.

Columbia University Lays off 180 in Wake of Federal Funding Cuts Over Anti-Semitism thumbnail

Columbia University Lays off 180 in Wake of Federal Funding Cuts Over Anti-Semitism

/in , , , , /by

By Family Research Council

Columbia University, once a symbol of academic excellence, now finds itself at the heart of a national debate over campus anti-Semitism.

In March, President Donald Trump launched the Joint Task Force to Combat Anti-Semitism, focusing on Ivy League schools, including Columbia. Education Secretary Linda McMahon stated, “Since October 7, Jewish students have faced relentless violence, intimidation, and anti-Semitic harassment on their campuses — only to be ignored by those who are supposed to protect them.” The Trump administration acted decisively, stripping Columbia of $400 million in federal funding for its “continued inaction in the face of persistent harassment of Jewish students.”

This financial penalty led to the layoffs of 180 employees, or “about 20% of the individuals who are funded in some manner by the terminated grants.” A Columbia spokesperson initially claimed the university was working with federal officials to restore funding, stating, “We take Columbia’s legal obligations seriously and understand how serious this announcement is,” and emphasizing a commitment to “combatting antisemitism and ensuring the safety and wellbeing of our students, faculty, and staff.”

After meeting with Columbia’s president, McMahon posted on X, expressing hope for collaboration to “protect all students on their campus.” However, she reiterated that “the Trump Administration will not allow the continued harassment and threats of violence against students.” No funding has been restored, and as The Daily Wire noted, “The Columbia decision represents one of the most significant financial penalties imposed on a university over the handling of campus protests, potentially setting a precedent for how the federal government addresses similar situations at other institutions.”

Columbia’s leadership responded to the circumstances, saying, “Columbia’s leadership continues discussions with the federal government in support of resuming activity on these research awards and additional other awards that have remained active, but unpaid.” They acknowledged, “We are working on and planning for every eventuality, but the strain in the meantime, financially and on our research mission, is intense.”

The university had briefly covered salaries for some affected researchers, but the layoffs signal the end of this approach. Columbia now faces significant financial and operational challenges. Meanwhile, experts point to the university’s long-standing issues with anti-Semitism.

Chris Gacek, senior fellow for Regulatory Affairs at Family Research Council, offered a sharp critique of Columbia’s history and the broader crisis in higher education. Dismissing the university’s claims of progress, he stated, “Columbia is claiming that they’ve gotten rid of anti-Semitism.” But in reality, “They have a serious problem.”

Gacek cited the Amcha Initiative, a nonprofit dedicated to combating anti-Semitism in higher education. Its “Student Voices” resource documents experiences of Jewish students from 2014 to the present. In September 2024, a Columbia student reported: “Walking through campus, I notice fliers being handed out to visibly Jewish students — basically, fliers telling them that they’re complicit in genocide. And I just feel like there’s a target on my back simply for being Jewish.”

Gacek noted that in 2016, Columbia was ranked the worst school for Jewish students regarding anti-Semitism. He argued that student testimonies from 2016 to today show Columbia “didn’t shed being the worst school [for Jews] in America overnight.” He urged the university’s leadership to confront this history to grasp the true campus environment.

Gacek also emphasized that Columbia’s problems reflect a broader issue, stating, “University of Michigan is horrible. A bunch of the [California] schools are horrible,” and “a bunch of the Ivy Leagues” as well. He praised databases like Student Voices for providing a “snapshot in time for every school,” countering claims that “Trump is making this up” or that “some MAGA supporter is putting this stuff in there.”

Regarding the funding cuts, Gacek showed little sympathy, saying, “I’m not shedding any tears for these 180 people.” He argued that Columbia is now facing the consequences of deep-rooted anti-Semitism, a problem predating the Trump administration’s intervention. Gacek recommended that those investigating anti-Semitism, including Trump’s team, use resources like the Amcha Initiative, “because there is a lot of anti-Semitism now.”

AUTHOR

Sarah Holliday

Sarah Holliday is a reporter at The Washington Stand.

RELATED ARTICLE: Explainer: How Trump ’s Proposed 2026 Budget Impacts Transgenderism, Abortion, Education, Immigration, and More

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2025 Family Research Council.

The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

Federal Judge Decides Democrat Wins NC High Court Race Despite Thousands Of Ineligible Ballots thumbnail

Federal Judge Decides Democrat Wins NC High Court Race Despite Thousands Of Ineligible Ballots

/in , , , /by

By The Geller Report

The North Carolina Supreme Court election will result in the Democrat’s victory after the courts denied requiring some voters to prove they were eligible, which could have changed the results.

State Court Report: On May 7, Judge Jefferson Griffin conceded the 2024 election for a seat on the North Carolina Supreme Court to incumbent Justice Allison Riggs, the results of which he had contested since the race. Griffin’s concession came two days after a federal district court ordered the state board of elections to certify the results that existed prior to Griffin’s challenges, which had Riggs ahead by 734 votes.

That decision followed an April 11 order from the North Carolina high court, reversing in part and affirming in part the state appeals court ruling. Overruling the appellate court, the state supreme court concluded that voters with allegedly incomplete registrations should have their votes counted. The supreme court agreed with the appeals court that overseas voters who did not submit photo ID with their ballots must submit that ID to have their ballots counted, but the justices extended to 30 days the window to provide that information. The order affirmed the appeals court ruling that would discard the votes of children and dependents of military servicemembers and other overseas families who inherited residence from their families.

The margin was only 734 votes.

Every time. Another critical election hijacked by Democrats.

Federal Judge Decides Democrat Wins NC High Court Race Despite Thousands Of Questionable Ballots

By: Breccan F. Thies

A federal district judge in North Carolina has ordered that the State Board of Elections (NCSBE) certify the election of Democrat incumbent state Supreme Court Justice Allison Riggs, despite tens of thousands of questionable ballots being counted.

The race is the last one in the country left undecided after the November 2024 election.

U.S. Chief District Judge Richard Myers, an appointee of President Donald Trump, decided in a late Monday night decision that the Democrat-run NCSBE needed to allow Riggs the win, and threw out a state Supreme Court decision that would have thrown out between 1,675 and 5,700 ballots, according to the Carolina Journal, and put in place a “cure” process due in large part to insufficient identity documents provided upon voter registration. Overseas ballots sent without identification would also be allowed to be “cured.”

Roughly 267 ballots from voters who have never resided would have also been thrown out, but Myers preserved those, too.

Myers’ decision maintains Riggs’ current 734-vote lead that was achieved in the nine days after Election Day, as about 10,000 votes trickled in from overseas or were approved provisional ballots.

“IT IS ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that the 1. Retroactive invalidation of absentee ballots cast by overseas military and civilian voters violates those voters’ substantive due process rights; 2. The cure process violates the equal protection rights of overseas military and civilian voters; and 3. The lack of any notice or opportunity for eligible voters to contest their mistaken designation as Never Residents violates procedural due process and represents an unconstitutional burden on the right to vote,” Myers decided.

Myers allowed the Republican candidate, state Appeals Judge Jefferson Griffin, one week to appeal the decision before it goes into effect.

Myers also addressed concerns about a federal court being brought in to resolve state issues, and said the issue rests on the idea that a state cannot change the rules of an election afterward and retroactively invalidate ballots. But that does not address concerns from election integrity advocates who say there is no way of knowing if the thousands of voters are actually eligible to vote.

“[T]he court wishes to make clear that this case is not about the prerogative of North Carolina courts to interpret North Carolina law. Without question, those courts ‘are the principal expositors of state law,’” he said. “This case is also not about North Carolina’s primacy to establish rules for future state elections; it may do so. Rather, this case concerns whether the federal Constitution permits a state to alter the rules of an election after the fact and apply those changes retroactively to only a select group of voters, and in so doing treat those voters differently than other similarly situated individuals.”

Griffin challenged over 65,000 ballots for lacking identification documents upon registration, as required by state law, but the lion’s share of those ballots would have been counted under the state high court’s process.

Despite admitting that the NCSBE’s “inattention and failure to dutifully conform its conduct to the law’s requirements is deeply troubling,” the state Supreme Court also said, “Because the responsibility for the technical defects in the voters’ registration rests with the Board and not the voters, the wholesale voiding of ballots cast by individuals who subsequently proved their identity to the Board by complying with the voter identification law would undermine the principle that ‘this is a government of the people, in which the will of the people — the majority — legally expressed, must govern.’”

However, the decision appears to side-step the fact that North Carolina’s voter ID law upon casting a ballot is notoriously weak.

Continue reading.

AUTHOR

Pamela Geller

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

The post Federal Judge Decides Democrat Wins NC High Court Race Despite Thousands Of Ineligible Ballots appeared first on Dr. Rich Swier.

Trump Reveals Fate Of Ed Martin After Key GOP Senator Drops Support thumbnail

Trump Reveals Fate Of Ed Martin After Key GOP Senator Drops Support

/in , , , , /by

By The Daily Caller

President Donald Trump revealed Thursday that he plans to pull Ed Martin’s nomination for US Attorney for Washington D.C. after Republican North Carolina Senator Thom Tillis refused to vote for him.

Trump also told Daily Caller White House Correspondent Reagan Reese that he has a new nominee and that he may move Martin to a different position in the Department of Justice (DOJ).

“We have somebody else that will be great. I just want to say Ed is unbelievable and hopefully we can bring him into, whether it’s DOJ or whatever, in some capacity because he’s really outstanding,” Trump said.

Trump told Reese he was “very disappointed” and alluded to Tillis’s dissent.

“He’s a terrific person but he wasn’t getting the support from people that I thought,” he said.

Tillis told reporters Tuesday that he would not be supporting Martin’s nomination, primarily due to differences in opinion on the January 6, 2021 Capitol riots.

“If Mr. Martin were being put forth as a US Attorney for any district except the district where January 6 happened, the protest happened, I’d probably support him. But not in this district,” Tillis told reporters.

Tillis expressed that he believed anybody who breached the perimeter of the Capitol should have went to prison and said that he believed 200-300 people who Trump pardoned for their actions on Jan 6. did not deserve it.

“We have to be very clear that what happened on January the 6th was wrong. It was not prompted or created by other people to put those people in trouble. They made a stupid decision and they disgraced the United States by absolutely destroying the Capitol and I can’t have any patience for it,” Tillis said.

Trump lauded Martin’s tenure as acting U.S. attorney for DC. “He’s done a very good job, crime is down 25 percent in D.C. during his period of time.”

“I’m very disappointed in that but I have so many different things that I’m doing now with the trade, you know I’m one person I can only make, boom, I can only lift that little phone so many times in a day.”

Trump repeatedly expressed that he was let down.

“To me it was disappointing I’ll be honest. I have to be straight, I was disappointed, a lot of people were disappointed, but that’s the way it works some times.”

The White House will be announcing the new nominee some time in the next two days, Trump told Reese.

AUTHOR

Robert McGreevy

Reporter.

RELATED ARTICLE: Trump Nom’s Confirmation Prospects On Life Support After Key Sen Comes Out Against Him

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

The post Trump Reveals Fate Of Ed Martin After Key GOP Senator Drops Support appeared first on Dr. Rich Swier.

Trump’s First Federal Judicial Nominees Fought Against Sex Changes For Kids, Limitless Abortion thumbnail

Trump’s First Federal Judicial Nominees Fought Against Sex Changes For Kids, Limitless Abortion

/in , , , , , /by

By The Daily Caller

President Donald Trump began making his first few federal judicial appointments in recent days, naming several individuals who have been prosecuting violent crime, arguing in front of the Supreme Court and defending various culture-war issues.

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told the Daily Caller in March she did not have an update on when the nominations or vetting would begin, but said she would provide a list of names to the outlet.

Nearly two months later, Trump began those appointments, naming a handful of Missourians to district courts as well as one individual to sit on the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit.

Joshua M. Divine of Missouri was appointed Tuesday by Trump to serve as judge on both the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri and Western District of Missouri. Divine is the solicitor general of Missouri and director of special litigation in the Missouri Attorney General’s Office. He was previously chief counsel to Republican Missouri Sen. Josh Hawley and deputy solicitor general in the Missouri Attorney General’s (AG) Office.

Divine was also a law clerk to both Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas and Judge William H. Pryor of the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit. He attended Yale Law School, where he was a member of the Yale Law Journal and the Yale Law & Policy Review, according a White House press release.

During his time with the Missouri Attorney General’s office, Divine represented the state against a lawsuit attempting to overturn Missouri’s restrictions on puberty blockers and hormone treatment for minors. Wright County Circuit Court Judge Craig Carter ultimately sided with Divine and the state.

Divine also argued in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri in favor of a block of President Joe Biden’s proposed income-driven repayment plan for borrowers. The court later granted the state its motion to block the student loan forgiveness plan.

While working under Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey, Divine argued on behalf of the state for a $24 billion judgment against the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) for its role in the COVID-19 pandemic. A federal judge later granted the judgement after finding the CCP liable for damages concerning the hoarding of personal protective equipment during the 2020 pandemic.

Whitney Hermandorfer, Trump’s pick for the Appeals Court for the Sixth Circuit, is the director of the Strategic Litigation Unit in the Office of the Tennessee Attorney General. Hermandorfer was previously a law clerk to Supreme Court Justices Samuel A. Alito and Amy Coney Barrett, as well as Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, and Judge Richard J. Leon of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia.

Hermandorfer played Division I basketball at Princeton University, attended George Washington University Law School and was editor-in-chief of the George Washington University Law Review.

Recently, Hermandorfer argued on behalf of the state of Tennessee in front of the Supreme Court for the case United States v. Skrmetti. During Biden’s term, his administration challenged the state of Tennessee’s law banning child sex-change procedures.

Hermandorfer has also argued against broadening sex discrimination laws to protect individuals from being discriminated based on their gender identity, which often extends to bathroom and locker room use. Additionally, she challenged a government rule that required states to help employees who elected to obtain an abortion.

Maria A. Lanahan, Trump’s pick to serve as a judge on the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri, is the principal deputy solicitor general in the Missouri AG’s Office. She clerked for Judge Raymond Gruender of the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit and Michigan Supreme Court Justice Brian K. Zahra. Lanahan played Division I basketball at Gonzaga University and attended the University of Chicago Law School, where she served as an Articles Editor of the University of Chicago Law Review.

While working under Bailey, Lanahan has focused on statutory interpretation, tax litigation, writs, and constitutional issues, according to the AG’s press release. Lanahan argued in 2023 on behalf of the state in defense of Missouri’s decision to outlaw abortion.

Trump also nominated Zachary M. Bluestone, of Missouri, to serve as judge on the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri. Bluestone is the appellate chief and violent crimes prosecutor in the United States Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of Missouri. He previously served in the Missouri AG’s Office as deputy solicitor general and was a law clerk to Judge Raymond Gruender of the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit.

Bluestone attended Harvard Law School, where he served as managing editor of the Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy. As an assistant U.S. attorney in the Eastern District of Missouri, he focused on the prosecution of violent crimes and criminal appeals.

In one case Bluestone was a prosecutor for, a judge sentenced a former St. Louis middle school principal to two consecutive life terms in prison after he was found guilty of hiring a friend to kill his pregnant schoolteacher girlfriend.

Edward Aloysius O’Connell was nominated Tuesday by Trump to serve as associate judge on the Superior Court of the District of Columbia. He was previously chief of staff and deputy general counsel of the Office of the Inspector General of the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission and Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board. O’Connell was also a prosecutor in the Office of the United States Attorney for the District of Columbia for nearly two decades where he prosecuted homicides, felony major crimes, domestic violence, organized crime, and narcotics offenses, according to the White House press release.

O’Connell clerked for Judge Rufus King III of the Superior Court of the District of Columbia after he graduated from Quinnipiac University School of Law.

“Our Court System is not letting me do the job I was Elected to do. Activist judges must let the Trump Administration deport murderers, and other criminals who have come into our Country illegally, WITHOUT DELAY!!!” Trump said in a Truth Social post following his appointments.

AUTHOR

Reagan Reese

White House Correspondent. Follow Reagan on Twitter.

RELATED ARTICLE: Deadly Sabotage Could Destroy Trump’s Legacy, And America Too

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

The post Trump’s First Federal Judicial Nominees Fought Against Sex Changes For Kids, Limitless Abortion appeared first on Dr. Rich Swier.

STAY INFORMED

Receive regular news, commentary, and analysis straight to your inbox.

POWERED BY

DrRichSwier.com | ThePricklyPear.org

As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.