Protecting Voter Fraud

The Daily Signal posted an article today about the President’s election commission that is investigating voter fraud.

The article reports:

Many of the states refusing to cooperate with President Donald Trump’s election commission aren’t in compliance with federal law on maintaining voter registration lists, according to government watchdog groups.

So far, 18 states and the District of Columbia have declined or are still considering whether to provide election data to the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity, established in May to examine and prevent voter fraud, among other concerns.

The commission requested voter registration data from every state and the District and 14 states include counties where registered voters outnumbered eligible voters based on Census Bureau data, according to findings from Judicial Watch, a conservative legal group.

The 1993 ‘motor voter law‘ requires states to purge their voter rolls of ineligible voters periodically.

The article explains:

Kentucky, a decisively red state in previous elections, had the most counties where registered voters outnumber eligible voters. California, a strongly blue state, also had significant problems, according to findings from Judicial Watch and the Public Interest Legal Foundation, both conservative watchdog groups.

Other states that outright refuse to cooperate with the commission are Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Mexico, North Dakota, South Carolina, Tennessee, Vermont, Virginia, and Wyoming.

The states of Arizona, Illinois, and Indiana are still undecided.

“Overall, in most of the states not providing information to the commission, there are a significant number of counties with problems,” Robert Popper, senior attorney for Judicial Watch’s Election Integrity Project, told The Daily Signal.

Common sense tells us that if registered voters outnumber eligible voters in a county, there is a problem. Every fraudulent vote cast in an elections voids the vote of a legitimate voter. That is the true definition of voter suppression and needs to be stopped.

Government By The People…Which People???

On Monday, The Conservative Review posted an article about some recent decisions by the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals regarding North Carolina. It seems that the wishes of the voters and the legislature have taken a back seat to the wishes of the Court.

The article reports:

As we’ve noted in a series of articles, the unelected federal courts have destroyed North Carolina’s right to self-determination. They have mandated transgenderism, blocked every voter integrity law, required very specific times and amounts of early voting, criminalized voluntary public prayer, and erased every single districting map — from federal and state districts to even county school board maps in middle of an election season and after candidates already spent enormous sums campaigning. Again, this was all done by federal, not state courts. They are rendering elections moot and are now ensuring that conservatives can never win elections by ruling Democrat racial gerrymander advantages into law and into the Constitution.

Now, the Fourth Circuit has unilaterally hired a liberal proctor to oversee and supervise the state legislature in the new redistricting it previously mandated.

It is not the duty of the Court to legislate–they are not elected officials and do not have that power.

The article continues:

It is first important to recognize that North Carolina received pre-clearance from Obama’s Justice Department, and the maps were upheld twice in state court. That should have ended the matter. Federal courts should have absolutely no jurisdiction over state legislative maps. Yet the federal courts nullified 28 legislative districts and remanded back to the three-judge panel, which includes two Obama-appointed judges.

The North Carolina legislature went back and drew a new, clean map that is better than anything Democrats put out when they had control for 100 years. That should have ended the matter. Yet the Obama judges, who have been accorded God-like power over subject matter the Constitution did not entrust to them, want to make sure the maps maximize the Democrat Party advantage. They gave standing to another lawsuit challenging three Senate and nine House districts. Last Thursday, in a written order, Judge Catherine Eagles wrote on behalf of the three-judge panel that she feels the new map doesn’t redress the “constitutional” violation and is “otherwise legally unacceptable” — in other words, it doesn’t contain enough Democrat advantages. So, in the ultimate act of legislating from the bench, the judge said that due to “the technical nature of determining an appropriate remedy” and “exceptional circumstances,” the court is appointing a “special master” to oversee the maps.

Thus, an unelected federal court with no constitutional jurisdiction over maps cleared by the DOJ and state courts is now requiring that de facto veto power over the new maps be given to an unelected “expert.” While this is not the first time officious federal courts have created a “special master,” the circumstances are particularly indefensible, given that the state has done everything properly until now.

This is not acceptable. The solution is nullification.

The Tenth Amendment Center explains the concept of nullification:

Thomas Jefferson’s Kentucky Resolutions claim that the U. S. Constitution was a compact among the several states-whereby the states delegated certain limited powers to the U.S. government; any undelegated power exercised by the U. S. government is thus void.

Furthermore, the general government is not the final and authoritative judge of its own powers, since that would make the government’s discretion, and not the Constitution, the measure of those powers-but rather the parties to the contract, the states, have each an equal right to judge for themselves whether the Constitution has been violated as well as “the mode and measure of redress”-since there is no common judge of such matters among them.

Thus, every state can of its own authority nullify within its territory “all assumptions of power by others”-i.e., all perceived violations of the Constitution by the federal government.

The Kentucky Resolution uses the Tenth Amendment to justify a strict construction of the general government’s powers; any powers not expressly delegated to the U. S. government remain the province of the states or the people, and any exercise of those powers by the general government is void and can be struck down by the states on that basis.

Furthermore, Jefferson warns against construing the “necessary and proper” clause so broadly as to justify the assumption of undelegated powers by the general government; the intent of the clause was to only enable the execution of limited powers, not to indefinitely extend the general government’s scope. Otherwise, this part of the Constitution would be used “to destroy the whole residue of that instrument.”

We have wandered far afield from the republic our Founding Fathers envisioned. It is time to change direction and get back to where we belong. Nullification is one weapon in our arsenal that will allow us to do that.

 

Cutting The Cost Of Government By Improving The Economy

Yesterday Breitbart reported that in the last year food stamp [Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP)] enrollment has gone down in 46 out of the 50 states. The biggest drops were in Connecticut, North Carolina, and Washington, D.C.

The article reports:

Connecticut saw the largest drop, with SNAP enrollment dropping 25.4 percent from May 2016 to May 2017.

The state also saw a pretty hefty drop in enrollment over one month — Connecticut’s enrollment in the food stamp program dropped 14.2 percent from April 2017 to May 2017.

North Carolina saw the second-largest decrease in SNAP enrollment with a 14.2 drop in the number of state residents participating in the food stamp program.

Part of the decrease has to do with a provision in the 2009 economic stimulus bill. The bill included a waiver of the work requirement in areas that were economically depressed.

The article explains:

The economic boom in these towns no longer made them eligible as of April 1, 2016, for a waiver from SNAP regulations. These regulations were put in place nationwide before the recession and require able-bodied adults without children to work at least 20 hours week, enroll in school, or take part in state-approved job training if they receive benefits for more than three months.

…The only four states that did not see declines in food stamp enrollment are Alaska, Kentucky, Montana, and Illinois. Each of those states reported slight gains in SNAP enrollment. Alaska saw the biggest increase in food stamp enrollment, with SNAP participation increasing by 4.1 percent. Illinois saw the second-largest increase in SNAP enrollment at 3.4 percent, and Montana reported an increase of 3 percent.

All of those states participate in the waiver program either statewide or in certain towns because of chronic unemployment in those areas.

Nationwide, food stamp enrollment has been on the downswing. Food stamp use in the U.S. fell to its lowest level in seven years, and 1.1 million Americans dropped off the food stamp rolls since President Trump took office.

There is a basic lesson here. When there is a work requirement to collect food stamps, enrollment goes down.

As I reported in July:

For example, in July 2014, Maine announced that it would no longer grant waivers from the work requirements for able-bodied adults without dependent children.

In order to receive benefits, they would thus have to work, participate in a work program for 20 hours per week, or do community service for about six hours per week.

It is important to note that this policy did not arbitrarily cut food stamp recipients from the program rolls. Able-bodied adults without dependent children in Maine were removed from the rolls only if they refused to participate in modest activities.

In fact, most of these individuals in Maine chose to leave the program rather than participate in training or community service, despite the strong outreach efforts of government caseworkers. This indicates that these individuals had other means of supporting themselves.

As a result of the new policy, the Maine caseload for able-bodied adults without dependent children dropped 80 percent in just a few months, falling from 13,332 in December 2014 to 2,678 recipients in March 2015.

I wonder what Congress had in mind when the waivers were put in place in 2009. We now have the examples of Alaska, Kentucky, Montana, and Illinois. All of those states still have the waivers, and they are the only four states whose economies have not improved sufficiently to remove the waivers. Food stamps without a work or training requirement does not help anyone–it simply creates dependency. How many times do we have to see this principle in action before we learn that lesson?

The Battle For Local Seafood In North Carolina

There is a song from the musical “Oklahoma” entitled, “The Farmer and the Cowman Should Be Friends.” The song refers to the struggle between those who wanted to use the newly opened lands in the western United States for cattle and those who wanted to use the land for crops. There were some struggles before that issue was resolved. North Carolina faces a similar issue–a struggle between the commercial fishermen and the sports fishermen. At issue is the availability of fresh local seafood and the ability of small family commercial fishermen to earn a living.

Today I went to Raleigh to the legislative buildings (along with about three hundred other people) to talk to our state representatives about House Bill 867, which would have a serious negative impact on the commercial fishing industry in North Carolina. What is being proposed here actually happened in Massachusetts while I was living there. Over- regulation crippled commercial fishing businesses that had been owned by families for generations. The towns of New Bedford and Gloucester were particularly hard hit. I don’t want to see that happen in North Carolina. The Craven County Board of Commissioners has taken a stand on this issue. Hopefully the legislature will listen to their resolution.

This is the resolution:

Resolution To Oppose North Carolina House Bill 867

Coastal Fisheries Conservation / Economic Development

WHEREAS, the State of North Carolina and particularly Eastern Carolina counties, have a long history and lineage of commercial fishing from the Algonquian Indians trading fish to the modern day commercial fishing industry; and

WHEREAS, North Carolina commercial fishermen have made extraordinary gains with science in protecting the environment which they rely on for their wellbeing and way of life, and want to protect the waters and fisheries for the next generation along with generations to come; and

WHEREAS, commercial fishing in North Carolina is in a state of change. There are a number of economic pressures bearing down on industry participants such as competition from imported seafood, closing working waterfronts, and ever increasing government regulations ; and

WHEREAS, imported seafood is normally of lower quality, with little regulation and inspection of the product. Imported seafood has been known to have been raised in waters containing human or animal feces, and also injected with carboxymethyl cellulose, gelatin, and glucose; and

WHEREAS, due to recent appointments to the North Carolina Marine Fisheries Commission, the Commission has refused to listen and adhere to the advice of their own advisory committees including Finfish, Habitat and Water Quality, Shellfish / Crustacean, Northern Region, and Southern Region advisory committees; and

WHEREAS, the North Carolina Marine Fisheries Commission has gone against the advice of their advisory committees, and are currently trying to establish severe restrictions on the commercial fishing industry without scientific data or an economic impact study on which to base their restrictions. These restrictions go against the current Management Plan which requires future regulations be based on science and the data gathered; and

WHEREAS, House Bill 867 seeks to rewrite the North Carolina Fisheries Reform Act of 1997, which was passed after months of public scrutiny. House Bill 867 would reform the North Carolina Fisheries Reform Act of 1997 without such vetting from the public; and

WHEREAS, House Bill 867 would eliminate the advisory committees which have a set amount of commercial fishermen, recreational fishermen, and scientists to advise the Commission and replace them with one, 20 member advisory committee appointed by the North Carolina Marine Fisheries Commission without any designation as to member’s qualification or status in the industry; and

WHEREAS, House Bill 867 also offers a commercial fishing license buyback plan which also gives insight to the implied destruction of a way of life for so many North Carolina residents that would cause a harmful impact to the state’s economy.

NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Craven County Board of Commissioners hereby opposes North Carolina House Bill 867 in its entirety and respectfully requests that North Carolina Legislators reject this legislation and support the State of North Carolina’s working watermen in order to sustain a way of life for many future generations and preserve a vital economic engine for North Carolina.

Adopted this the 15th day of May, 2017.

Some of the warriors from yesterday:

 

Let’s Keep Voting Until We Get It Right

There have been some strange lower court decisions regarding North Carolina in recent years. A voter ID law, passed by the state legislature and signed by the governor was overturned, while similar laws in other states were allowed to stand. Then the states voting districts were challenged, after they had been redrawn at the request of the courts. It makes your head spin. Today the Supreme Court of the United States weighed in on the redistricting matter.

The Carolina Journal reports today:

The U.S. Supreme Court has upheld a lower court’s ruling striking down 28 North Carolina legislative districts as cases of unconstitutional racial gerrymandering. But the high court has rejected the idea of holding special legislative elections this year.

The Supreme Court had issued a stay on Jan. 10 blocking a three-judge panel’s order of a special election. Today’s unsigned Supreme Court order chides the trial-court panel for ordering a special 2017 legislative election without making a convincing argument why that remedy is needed.

Justices say their trial-court colleagues should have used an “equitable weighing process” to determine the proper remedy for dealing with the racially gerrymandered election maps. “Rather than undertaking such an analysis in this case, the District Court addressed the balance of equities in only the most cursory fashion,” the Supreme Court order states. “As noted above, the court simply announced that ‘[w]hile special elections have costs,’ those unspecified costs ‘pale in comparison’ to the prospect that citizens will be ‘represented by legislators elected pursuant to a racial gerrymander.’

“That minimal reasoning would appear to justify a special election in every racial-gerrymandering case — a result clearly at odds with our demand for careful case-specific analysis,” the order continues. “For that reason, we cannot have confidence that the court adequately grappled with the interests on both sides of the remedial question before us.”

“And because the District Court’s discretion ‘was barely exercised here,’ its order provides no meaningful basis for even deferential review,” according to the Supreme Court.

North Carolina will be forced to redraw the districts until everyone is happy with them, but I am thankful that we don’t have to have another election this year. That would have been very expensive for the state and totally unnecessary.

We need national voter ID. I realize that individual states are in charge of their elections, as it should be, but there needs to be a requirement that voters identify themselves as eligible voters before they vote. Almost all free countries have some form of voter identification, and America needs to join them.

 

Bad Laws Have Consequences

There has been much made of North Carolina’s recent law that asked people to use the public restrooms and public locker rooms corresponding to their sex at birth. The law has since been replaced by a similar law. However, those in favor or making every bathroom or locker room open to anyone according to what sex they identify with at that particular moment have overlooked a few possible negative consequences.

On April 6th, WBTV posted an article about a recent incident at Central Piedmont Community College. The incident itself is disturbing, but the school’s response to the incident is even more disturbing.

The article reports:

A Central Piedmont Community College student was shocked to find a man in the women’s bathroom allegedly trying to take her picture under a stall door. She was equally shocked, she said, when she reported the incident to police and they told her what happened was not a crime.

Catherine Barker said she was in a stall in the first-floor women’s bathroom in the Belk Building on CPCC’s Central Campus when she suddenly noticed something that didn’t feel right.

“I noticed a person come through the vertical crack in the bathroom stall and then bend down, so I jumped up and went out the door and they were headed out the bathroom and I said ‘you look for somebody?’ and the guy started fumbling and mumbling with his phone and trying to get his phone away so I blocked him from the door so he wouldn’t get out,” Barker recalled days later in an interview with WBTV.

Barker said she grabbed the man’s phone and, eventually, led him to a campus security officer to report the incident.

But she said campus security officers told her there was nothing they could do.

“They said that there’s no proof that he has any pictures so they can’t do anything to him,” she said she was told by campus security officers.

The article goes on to describe the lack of action by the college:

Federal law requires colleges and universities to keep a daily log of all crimes—or incidents that could potentially be crimes—that are reported on campus. The requirement is part of a federal law known as the Clery Act, which is aimed at alerting those on colleges campuses about crimes that occur nearby.

Documents provided by CPCC security show Barker reported Monday’s incident in the bathroom to authorities as soon as it happened.  But a review of the school’s crime log the next day found campus security had failed to list the incident in its daily crime log. 

WBTV obtained access to the crime log after multiple security officials first refused to provide the log and, later, demanded to know why a reporter wanted to see it. The Clery Act requires a crime log be made available upon request to anyone who asks to review it.

Instead, the page for Monday’s crime log was blank with a message that said “no data for daily crime log.”

The article concludes:

Catherine Barker, the student who reported the man she thought was trying to take a picture of her while she was in a bathroom stall, said she no longer feels safe on campus.

“It’s just a really uncomfortable feeling to have somebody take that away – one of the most private parts of the day. And he’s not welcome there,” she said.

Barker said she tried to report this incident to Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police Department but was told CPCC’s contracted police agency, Allied Universal, has primary jurisdiction over the incident.

She said she has one message for college administrators.

“The administrators, first and foremost, made me feel unsafe,” she said.

We have heard a lot of ruckus from various sports groups about not being willing to come to North Carolina because North Carolina wants men in the men’s room and women in the women’s room (and locker rooms). What about the parents who don’t want to send their daughters to college in North Carolina because their daughters may not be protected on campus? The way the college handled this incident is a disgrace. There should have been a warrant to search the man’s phone, and he should have been arrested if the phone had incriminating pictures on it. Does anyone actually believe that this was the first or last time that the person attempting to take pictures in the ladies’ room had done that? Who will protect the students if he decides to go further than pictures? Would you send your daughter to college there?

 

 

Somehow A Lot Of The Media Missed This

On March 20, The Washington Times posted an article about the impact of HB2 (also known as the bathroom bill) on the North Carolina economy. Despite much of the media in North Carolina telling you that the bill has hurt the state economically, the actual numbers tell a different story.

Here are some basic facts taken from the article:

Tourism has thrived: Hotel occupancy, room rates and demand for rooms set records in 2016, according to the year-end hotel lodging report issued last week by VisitNC, part of the Economic Development Partnership of North Carolina.

Meanwhile, North Carolina ranked fourth in the nation for attracting and expanding businesses with the arrival of 289 major projects, and seventh in projects per capita — the same as in 2015, according to Site Selection magazine, which released its 2016 rankings in the March edition.

North Carolina finished first for drawing corporate facilities in the eight-state South Atlantic region, said Site Selection, which uses figures tracked by the Conway Projects Database.

And in November, both Forbes and Site Selection magazine ranked North Carolina the No. 2 state for business climate.

Also unscathed was the state’s seasonally adjusted unemployment rate, which registered at 5.3 percent in January 2016 and 5.3 percent in January 2017, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.

The figures released almost exactly a year after the bill’s passage appear to fly in the face of predictions of economic doom made by opponents of HB2. The Center for American Progress estimated in April that the state would lose more than $567 million in private-sector economic activity through 2018.

Obviously the predictions of gloom and doom if HB2 passed were not true. I have stated before that I truly believe if you asked parents of high school children whether or not they wanted members of the opposite sex in their children’s high school locker rooms, the answer would be a resounding NO. I understand that there are a small number of people impacted by this law, but the answer is simply to allow them private changing and restroom facilities. The same people who support ‘safe spaces’ for college students because their candidate lost the last election should at least support private spaces for students and others struggling with their sexuality.

How An Open Border Effects You If You Live In North Carolina

Border security under former President Obama was something of a joke. Border patrol agents were simply not allowed to do their job. Certain areas of America were marked with signs indicating it was dangerous to go there because drug cartels were using those areas to conduct business (inside America). Well, there is a new sheriff in town, but he sure has a lot to clean up.

On February 7th, Judicial Watch posted an article about the reach of Mexican drug cartels into America. It’s not good news.

The article reports:

Illustrating that the Mexican drug crisis is having a far-reaching impact on the U.S., a heroin ring operated by a Mexican cartel was recently busted in an American suburb more than 1,500 miles from the southern border. In the last few years Judicial Watch has reported extensively on the massive amounts of drugs—especially heroin—that get smuggled into the U.S. by Mexican traffickers who later use street, prison and outlaw motorcycle gangs to distribute them throughout the country. Undoubtedly, these enterprises benefitted tremendously from the Obama administration’s open border policies.

Now we have confirmation that these illicit drug operations have penetrated areas far from the border. This case comes out of Rowan County, North Carolina where a local news report reveals that authorities began targeting large-scale heroin distribution in 2013. Last week three people with ties to a Mexican drug cartel were arrested in the county. Large quantities of heroin, handguns, a rifle, ammunition, numerous telephones, cash and drug paraphernalia was confiscated by police. Authorities say the Mexican heroin trafficking ring was based in the Charlotte-Matthews area and has been supplying heroin to Rowan County for more than a decade. “Over the past two months, investigators purchased large amounts of heroin from two people working for this Mexican National Drug Trafficking Organization,” the news report states.

Rowan County is near Charlotte, North Carolina.

The article further reports:

A big part of the problem is that the drug trafficking is being leveraged by corrupt public officials in the U.S., a years-long Judicial Watch investigation has found. Undoubtedly, cartel violence is real but truckloads of drugs are getting across the country because U.S. officials at the municipal, state and federal level are turning a blind eye or actively participating and cooperating with cartels. As part of an ongoing probe, Judicial Watch has provided the Department of Justice (DOJ) Inspector General and Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley with evidence, including the sworn testimony of law enforcement officers, of this corruption and criminality in all levels of government. Learn more about Judicial Watch’s probe here.

Hopefully the new sheriff in town can put an end to this activity. However, when you realize how pervasive the corruption is, you begin to understand some of the opposition to President Trump. There is a lot of money tied up in the drug trade that does not want the new sheriff to interfere with that money. Our future as a nation is at stake–it is time to get control of our borders.

Support Your Local Fisherman

Above is a picture of shrimp boats Tuesday morning at Union Point, New Bern, North Carolina. There were there so that their owners and crew could attend the meeting described below. We need to make sure we protect their livelihood.

Yesterday I attended the Joint Meeting of the Northern, Southern, Finfish, Habitat and Water Quality, and Shellfish/Crustacean Advisory Committee at the Riverfront Convention Center in New Bern, North Carolina. I am not a fisherman (I haven’t even done a lot of swimming in the ocean since I saw “Jaws.”), and I really don’t know a lot about fishing. I have learned over the years, however, that often the best conservationists are the people who hunt and fish because they respect the environment and observe changes in the population of the animals they are hunting or fishing. The meeting was called as a public meeting to discuss a petition from the North Carolina Wildlife Federation (NCWF) to change the rules on catching shrimp in the waters of North Carolina. One of my sources tells me that the impetus behind the petition is the Coastal Conservation Association (CCA), which has in the past advocated for regulations that would severely limit commercial fishing.

There were three people who spoke in favor of the rule change—Blakely Hilderbrand, an attorney for the Southern Environmental Law Center, David Knight, a policy advisor for the North Carolina Wildlife Federation, and Jack Travelstead.

The three NCWF representatives painted a bleak picture of fishing in North Carolina if the new regulations were not passed. They mentioned that all the other states on the east coast of America have passed these regulations. Then the people in the other groups got to ask questions. It came out in the questioning that the population of one particular fish that the NCWF claimed was threatened was not threatened according to the North Carolina Division of Marine Fisheries. It was also noted that the states that had already enacted the laws that the NCWF was requesting had also seen drops in certain fish populations. It appeared that the penalties imposed on the shrimp fishermen didn’t help anyone except foreign countries importing shrimp. It was also noted that there are numerous variables that impact fish population—upstream pollution, chemicals entering the water from activities on the shore or upstream, storms, weather conditions, etc. I should also note here that one of the characteristics of the North Carolina coast is that a severe storm can change inlets and water current patterns. This would also impact the fish population.

At the end of the meeting all of the groups (other than the NCWF) voted to deny the petition to change the laws. This is not, however, the end of the story.

According to the North Carolina Marine Fisheries Commission website, the next public meeting will be in Wilmington, North Carolina, on February 15th and 16th. This issue will be discussed at that meeting. The decision will rest with the North Carolina Marine Fisheries Commission. I sincerely hope that they understand that the rules proposed in this petition could end the shrimp industry in North Carolina and eventually put the commercial fishermen out of business. There is no positive side to these regulations—they will not increase the fish population, they will only hurt the fishermen.

 

People Vote With Their Feet

The Albany Times Union posted a story today about states that are losing population and states that are gaining population.

The article reports:

United Van Lines reported Tuesday that nearly two-thirds of the moves involving New York households were outbound, a higher proportion than any other state except New Jersey and Illinois.

The 2016 National Movers Study by Fenton, Mo.- based United also found that almost 59 percent of the moves within the eastern United States were outbound.

Where were people moving? Mostly to western states and the Carolinas, with one exception. That exception was Vermont, which ranked second on the list of states with the highest proportion  — 67 percent — of inbound moves.

 South Dakota had the highest share of inbound moves, at 68 percent. 

New Jersey and Illinois, like New York, saw outbound moves making up 63 percent of all moves. 

The article also posted another interesting statistic:

In New York, inbound millennials were 27 percent of inbound moves and 19 percent of those moving out. But of those over 65, 26 percent were outbound and 20 percent were inbound.

So what is going on here? Millennials in many cases have limited life experience–they don’t realize how high taxes and high real estate prices will impact their standard of living. Also, many of them are in fields where they could potentially earn a large income, and they are not thinking about how much it costs to live in places like New York. The Carolinas have worked hard in recent years to lower taxes and attract businesses in order to keep the cost of living lower. South Dakota has a booming economy because of the oil industry there. As taxes increase in many northeastern states (as they tend to do under Democratic control), it will be interesting to track the migration of Americans. In recent years we have seen many companies move from California to Texas because of tax issues. It will be interesting to see if that trend continues.

Looking Past The Obvious

HB2 is a controversial piece of legislation passed in accordance with the North Carolina Constitution. Efforts to repeal it recently failed. Actually, the Democrats in the North Carolina legislature (yes, I said Democrats) have blocked repealing it four times.

American Lens has the story and reports:

May 2016
The Charlotte Observer reported that a bipartisan group of Charlotte City Council (CLTCC) members went to Raleigh to meet with House Speaker Tim Moore to try to facilitate a deal where the council would repeal their ordinance in exchange for the state making significant changes to HB2.

In response, the Democrat-controlled council, led by Mayor Jennifer Roberts – and after heavy-duty lobbying by liberal LGBT groups – refused to put on the table the possibility of repealing the city’s controversial non-discrimination ordinance, which passed in February. The ordinance included a ban on sex-segregated facilities like showers, locker rooms, fitting rooms, and bathrooms in both public and private businesses.

June/July 2016
Charlotte’s WBTV News reported that a bipartisan deal to broadly amend HB2 was axed after political strong-arming from then-candidate-for-governor Roy Cooper (emphasis added):

September 2016
The NC Restaurant and Lodging Association said in a press release they had “received assurances this week from legislative leadership” that they were ready to move on a repeal of House Bill 2 provided that the Mayor Jennifer Roberts and the CLTCC agreed to repeal their ordinance

…December 2016
In a surprise flip-flop from their September stance, the CLTCC voted on Monday the 19th – over a month after the election- to repeal their February ordinance as part of an alleged deal “brokered” by Gov.-Elect Cooper in an effort to motivate the NCGA for a HB2 repeal.

A special session was called by Gov. McCrory in response and Republican members of the House and Senate began informally caucusing on Tuesday in advance of the Wednesday special session.

One small problem blew everything up, though. As it turns out, Mayor Roberts and the CLTCC did not repeal the February NDO in full as they’d previously announced.

So why did the Democrats vote against repeal? Because that keeps the issue on the table to be used to sway voters who do not truly understand the implications of the Charlotte ordinance.. Do North Carolina parents of high school girls want high school boys in their daughters’ locker rooms? Do North Carolina women using locker rooms at fitness facilities want men in their locker rooms? Keep in mind that the non-exclusive locker room part of the Charlotte ordinance that HB2 eliminated did not distinguish as to what private parts a person actually had. A fully equipped male (if he claimed to be transgender) was allowed to use the women’s locker room and women’s showers. I am not sure that every women in North Carolina would be happy to find a man in her gym locker room.

The purpose of leaving HB2 in place was to continue to bring outside money into the coffers of Democratic candidates in North Carolina. It’s not about rights–it’s about politics.

Why North Carolina Should Not Repeal HB2

HB2 was known as the ‘bathroom bill.’ What wasn’t mentioned was that it also applied to high school locker rooms, health club locker rooms, and other public locker rooms, generally assumed to be segregated according to sex. As long as HB2 was in place, your high school daughter in the high school locker room was not in danger of being walked in on by the high school football team or any member thereof. Now the Governor of North Carolina has decided that since Charlotte says it will repeal the law that made HB2 necessary (the Charlotte bathroom bill was unconstitutional according to the North Carolina Constitution), he wants the legislature to repeal HB2. Well, not so fast. Let’s look at some of the events surrounding the original dust-up.

Yesterday, The Daily Haymaker posted an article about the repeal of HB2.The article reminds us:

Let’s go back to the point about Charlotte’s initial move being unconstitutional. Now, WHO is responsible for dealing with actions that violate the state constitution?  Why, the elected attorney general.  If he refuses to do his job, as he has soooooo often,  the state has to shell out money to go to court itself.

So, Roy Cooper neglects one of the primary responsibilities of his job.  Gets caught lobbying businesses to avoid North Carolina because of HB2.  He spends nearly a whole year lying about HB2 to voters.  Now, the drive by media is ready to coronate him as a HERO.

So, what happens now — after HB2 is repealed — and, say, Carrboro tries something similar?  We have ANOTHER useless bastard in the attorney general’s office who likely ignores it.  And we’re right back into it.

The idea to repeal HB2 is a trap. It is the carrot over the door to the trap that the Republicans are supposed to walk into.

I need to state here that I do not think transgender people pose a threat to anyone. The threat exists in unstable people claiming to be transgender who are no such thing. The threat exists in a dare on the part of high school boys to go into the girls’ locker room. The threat exists in someone claiming to be transgender taking pictures in the dressing room at Target (that has already happened). The transgender population represents less than 1 percent of the American population. Why are endangering women and children for less than 1 percent of the population? Do you really believe that most family men want men or boys in the locker rooms used by their wives and daughters? Do you really believe that high school girls want boys walking into their locker rooms?

Leave the law in place–it represents common sense–men’s bathrooms and locker rooms for men and women’s bathrooms and locker rooms for women. It’s really not that hard.

The Governor’s Race In North Carolina Continues

NC Civitas released the following on its website today:

RALEIGH – The Civitas Center for Law and Freedom (CLF) has filed a federal lawsuit requesting a restraining order against including ballots cast via same-day registration in the 2016 election, pending further investigation.

You can read the lawsuit that was filed in Eastern District federal court here.

You can read the complaint sent to the NC State Board of Elections here.

A press conference will be held later today to relay more details. Civitas President Francis De Luca will be available to the press for questions at that time. To arrange an interview, please contact Demi Dowdy at demi.dowdy@nccivitas.org or 919-747-8064.

Civitas President Francis De Luca said, “To count ballots without verification of same-day registration information discriminates by treating one class of voters differently from another. Furthermore, this calls into question the outcome of close elections such as the one we are still in the middle of in North Carolina. Legitimate voters should never have their votes cancelled by illegitimate voters. The State Board of Elections should examine every ballot cast via same-day registration to verify that every vote cast is genuine and legitimate.”

There are some serious questions about the validity of the election for governor in North Carolina. There are also questions about some of the ballots in other statewide offices. Same-day registration needs to end. There is sufficient time before an election to register. There are also various ways to register that make registration very easy.

I previously posted an article about specific instances of fraud in North Carolina during this election. Although the incidents I cited would not change the outcome, it is quite possible that those incidents are only the tip of the iceberg. We need to find a way to make our elections more secure. Voter ID might be a good start.

Voter Fraud In North Carolina

A website called American Lens posted an article today about voter fraud in North Carolina.

The article cites a few glaring examples:

According to North Carolina law, The Board of Election is required to verify the validity of the applicant’s residence (§163-82.7). In most cases, there is an assumption that the residence is valid, however, a cursory check of the data in Durham County should have raised a flag of concern.

As seen in the snapshot below of our data analysis, it is clear that hundreds of people are listed at the exact same address at Duke University’s campus in Durham.

Our examination of same-day student registrations revealed that 240 students  at Duke University were living at ‘1 Duke University Road, Durham.’

We then looked at online mapping sites, such as Google Maps and Bing Maps to understand why so many people were listed at the exact same address.

The address was a gravel parking lot with a shed.

Further research results were detailed in the article:

Believing the Duke results may just be an anomaly, we looked at the data for other college campuses in both Durham and Wake counties. We found more than 700 voters were registered at a centralized campus locations and not where they sleep.

At North Carolina Central University (NCCU), 340 students were registered to the college’s generic address of 1801 Fayetteville Road, Durham, NC.

Taking into consideration the definition of residence, it would appear that all of these voters mentioned in this article did not meet the voter residency requirements and subsequently voted without a valid registration.

I think we have a problem.

One Of The Best Arguments For Voter Identification

Yesterday’s election did not go as many pundits expected. In North Carolina, there were some mixed results. There are also some questions about some of the results.

The Daily Haymaker posted an article today about some voter irregularities in Durham County, North Carolina. Yesterday I posted an article about the money poured into North Carolina by George Soros in order to prevent the voter ID law from being in place during the 2016 general election. We are probably seeing the results of that effort reflected in what happened in Durham County.

The Daily Haymaker reports:

Yesterday, Durham county had some “technical” glitches and got a court order extending voting hours.  They also –*Surprise!* — discovered 90,000 votes that had not been counted from early voting.

Holy Al Franken! (Yes, we’re citing the comedian turned US senator who won his seat mainly due to trunkloads of uncounted ballots mysteriously showing up after the polls closed.)

After all of that got added to the mix, a roughly 40,000 vote lead for Pat McCrory in the governor’s race turned into a 5000 vote lead for Roy Cooper.  Chuck Stuber’s lead in the auditor’s race turned into a 3000 vote deficit.  And Buck Newton’s 40,000 vote lead in the attorney general’s race turned into a 19,000 vote deficit.

You want all legitimately-cast votes counted.  But last-minute stuff like this tars the integrity of an election a lot like a last-second foul or penalty call spoils the integrity of a sporting event’s final score.

This sounds like Chicago in 1960.

Voter Fraud Illustrated

This article has two sources–Breitbart and Nevo News. Both websites are reporting that North Carolina has 2,214 voters over the age of 110.

Nevo News is reporting the following:

Two voters — and, yes, they’ve already voted in early voting — are over 150! One in Gaston County is 154 and another in Granville County is an astonishing 160!

Breitbart reports the following:

Many are even older than 110. In fact, it seems that NC has an awful lot of voters that are 112, too. The Carolina Transparency project did a review of the voter rolls this year and found that there are 631 Democrats who are 112 or older. By contrast, the Republicans can only find 229 over 112 voters in the state (and “unaffiliated” found 39).

…This isn’t necessarily evidence of vote theft. It could be a massively failed voter registration system, although it is notable that the largest number of these voters just happen to be Democrats. But what ever is the case, it is highly unlikely to have this many centenarian voters still able to get out of their wheelchairs or retirement homes and have a run down to the polling place. Something certainly seems amiss in North Carolina.

Either these people hold the world record for longevity or we have a problem with our voter rolls. This is another example of why we need voter ID. Do you really want your vote cancelled out by someone impersonating an 160-year-old voter?

Letting The 3.4 Percent Rule

There is an attempt being made by 3.4 percent of Americans to control the actions of the other 96.6 percent Americans. No–I am not talking about the wealthy–I am talking about the LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender) community. I have no objection to members of that community being whoever or whatever they choose to be, but I do object when they try to impose their lifestyle on the majority of Americans. Most Americans are tolerant, but that doesn’t mean we have to condone something we believe is wrong. That battle recently came to a head in North Carolina when the City of Charlotte (in violation of the home rule provisions of the North Carolina Constitution) declared all restrooms (and locker rooms) open to whatever sex the occupant considered themselves. Aside from the problems with the law itself, only the North Carolina legislature has the power to write a law that impacts public buildings in the state. The legislature then passed a law requiring people to use the restroom (or locker room) corresponding to the sex they were at birth. Some companies and organizations have chosen not to do business in North Carolina because of this law, known as HB2. Meanwhile, many of those companies and organizations continue to do business in countries that execute homosexuals in cruel ways.

Breitbart posted a story on the continuing controversy on Wednesday.

The article reminds us:

GOP leaders in North Carolina are pushing back twice as hard against the Democrat-led alliance of business, gay and transgender advocacy groups which is now trying to damage the state’s economy in the run-up to the November gubernatorial election. 

…GOP leaders have been trying to finesse this transgender issue, because voters strongly oppose the transgender push while business leaders are pleading for an end to the Democrat-organized economic war against the state’s business community. But Gov. Pat McCrory and his deputies have now decided to go on the offensive against the far-reaching and unpopular transgender agenda, which would gradually stigmatize and outlaw the public’s recognition that the two sexes — men and women, boys and girls — want a civic society that supports their equal and different preferences. 

The problem here is not the LGBT community itself–it does not represent a danger to anyone. The problem is that there are disturbed people who will take advantage of an all-access law for their own nefarious purposes. I have no doubt that there would be abuses of the all-access law, particularly at the high school level. Do you really want the high school football team in your daughter’s high school locker room? Most Americans think that would be a really bad idea. Separate facilities for transgender students would easily solve the problem.

The Billy Graham Evangelistic Association issued a statement by Franklin Graham.

Here are some highlights from that statement:

The ACC website proudly features Toyota as an “Official Corporate Champion,” yet Toyota maintains factories and distribution centers in several of these discriminatory countries, including Pakistan, Sri Lanka and Egypt. Where is the moral outrage of the presidents of Boston College, Clemson, Duke, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Louisville, Miami, UNC, North Carolina State, Notre Dame, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, Virginia, Virginia Tech and Wake Forest?

Indeed, the ACC’s member schools compete in 25 sports divided by gender—12 men’s sports and 13 women’s. Though gender issues may be becoming more complicated in higher education and other parts of society, the athletic conference you serve as commissioner doesn’t seem to have any problem distinguishing between the two genders—male and female. Yet, when a state like the one I live in seeks to make the same distinction with regard to use of public bathrooms in an effort to protect its citizens from those who would use the men’s room today and the women’s room tomorrow, the academic elites who comprise your conference fake a moral outrage that is frankly shameful.

Ironically, the NCAA is more discriminatory towards transgender people than the public policy they apparently wish to see as law in America. For example, opponents to legislation like NC House Bill 2 support permitting people to use the bathroom which corresponds to the sex they identify with on a given day—meaning someone might feel like a man today and a woman tomorrow, switching bathrooms at will.

Yet even the NCAA doesn’t allow such casual gender identity for participation in collegiate athletics. The NCAA Policy on Transgender Student-Athlete Participation states, “Any transgender student-athlete who is not taking hormone treatment related to gender transition may participate in sex-separated sports activities in accordance with his or her assigned birth gender.” This is precisely what supporters of HB 2 have been requesting—that people use public restrooms in accordance with their assigned birth gender.

I think I represent the views of millions who would rather preserve gender-specific public bathrooms—a mainstay for generations—than to attend a football game in my state to determine the champion of a conference governed by politically-correct, morally hypocritical academics.

Mr. Graham concludes:

Commissioner Swofford, you maintain your conference’s decision is “one of principle” and that “core values…are of utmost importance.” Well, millions of us who oppose your decision do so as a matter of principle and core values—values of privacy, safety and protection of our sons and daughters in public restrooms, and the principle that God created just two genders and assigned them at birth.

Please don’t make political pawns of student-athletes who just want to play football or basketball in North Carolina, and don’t continue to offend millions of Americans who endorse thousands of years of gender-specific bathrooms while you continue to accept corporate sponsorship money from companies proudly conducting their business in countries that discriminate against homosexuals to the point of death.

We need to be tolerant, but we need to protect our citizens and our children also. It is possible to do both of these.

 

Voter Identification

I have listened to statements that voter identification laws are racist, that conservatives want to suppress the vote, and that there is no voter fraud in America. None of that is true. However, there are people who genuinely believe that the above is true, and that is a problem. Voter registration groups have not always been honest. There are numerous videos on YouTube by Project Veritas and others showing how easy it is to commit voter fraud. Recently I heard a man from an organization that is working to stop voter fraud talk about bus loads of people brought into North Carolina from other states to register to vote as if they were residents. During the voting, people claiming to be those people show up at the polls and vote. Remember, a fraudulent vote cast in any election means that a legal vote may not count. It is time to be on the alert for voter fraud and to prosecute it to the full extent of the law.

Now about the voter identification thing that is going on in North Carolina. In the primary election this year, a picture identification was required to vote in North Carolina. Voter turnout was actually higher than it had been in the last two primary elections. Voter identification does not in any way suppress the vote. I would also like to point out that in today’s world, a photo id is not something unusual. Admittedly, not everyone drives, but most people at some point in their lives have to cash a check, enter a federal building, or purchase certain drugs, alcohol, or cigarettes. I have a basic prescription that the drug store asks for photo identification every time I fill. When I buy some allergy medications, I have to show photo identification. Voter identification is not a burdensome requirement–it is a requirement that ensures that every legal vote counts.

So where are we with the North Carolina law? The Daily Haymaker updated the story today.

The article reported:

Governor Pat McCrory has formally requested U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts to stay a ruling by the Fourth Circuit and reinstate North Carolina’s Voter ID law.

“Today we have asked Chief Justice John Roberts to stay the Fourth Circuit’s ruling and reinstate North Carolina’s Voter ID law,” said Governor McCrory. “This common sense law was upheld by the U.S. District Court. Our Voter ID law has been cited as a model and other states are using similar laws without challenges.

“Allowing the Fourth Circuit’s ruling to stand creates confusion among voters and poll workers and it disregards our successful rollout of Voter ID in the 2016 primary elections. The Fourth Circuit’s ruling is just plain wrong and we cannot allow it to stand. We are confident that the Supreme Court will uphold our state’s law and reverse the Fourth Circuit.”
 
A formal petition asking the Supreme Court to hear the case will follow this request for a stay.

The article further reports:

This IS actually a great move on McCrory’s part.  IF Roberts grants a stay, voter ID can stay alive for the November voting.  An appeal of the 4th circuit’s ruling will be filed by the state with the high court. It likely won’t be heard until 2017.  (However, we may have governor Cooper and attorney general Stein to deal with by then.)  

If this all works the way McCrory hopes, it will mean a lot less chaos and confusion on Election Day –two “crops” the Alinskyites and BluePrinters have been sowing in the state for four years now.  

Stay tuned. Just a note–I am for the suppression of all illegal votes–that’s why I support voter identification laws.

Bad News For Election Integrity

WNCN (CBS) is reporting that a federal court has overturned North Carolina’s voter identification law.

The article reports:

A federal appeals court has found that a North Carolina voter ID law was enacted “with discriminatory intent” and must be blocked.

How in the world does the appeals court know the intent of the people who passed the law? The law required photo identification to vote. The law also provided a way for people who did not currently have photo identification to obtain it free of charge. I few political groups in the state offered to provide transportation to those seeking photo identification. The supposedly ‘disenfranchised voters’ are the same people who use photo identification to cash checks, buy alcohol, enroll in government programs, etc. No one is being disenfranchised.

The article includes a quote from Francis De Luca, president of the Civitas Institute:

North Carolina’s common-sense voter ID law was passed to preserve the security and integrity of our elections process. North Carolina’s voters deserve the confidence that their votes will not be diluted by fraud. Just before a crucial presidential election, the liberal judges of the Fourth Circuit are once again legislating from the bench and seem to be looking for opportunities to overturn North Carolina law at every turn. The continual overreach of the courts like the Fourth Circuit undermines the belief in self-government through elected representatives and our democratic republic.

It is simply outrageous that the court cites race as a reason for overturning North Carolina’s voter ID law. No one has been able to point to a single example of a voter being disenfranchised as a result of this law. In fact, voter turnout has increased since the law was enacted.”

If voter fraud is prevented in North Carolina, Donald Trump wins. If voter fraud is allowed, Hillary Clinton wins. It seems as if the court has already voted.

The following quote from the article echoes that sentiment:

Rep. Tim Moore, N.C. Speaker of the House and President Pro Tempore Sen. Phil Berger also disagreed with the ruling and issued a joint statement saying that the ruling will allow “Democrat politicians” to steal the upcoming election.

Since today’s decision by three partisan Democrats ignores legal precedent, ignores the fact that other federal courts have used North Carolina’s law as a model, and ignores the fact that a majority of other states have similar protections in place, we can only wonder if the intent is to reopen the door for voter fraud, potentially allowing fellow Democrat politicians like Hillary Clinton and Roy Cooper to steal the election. We will obviously be appealing this politically-motivated decision to the Supreme Court.”

Stay tuned.

 

 

About That Bathroom (Locker Room) Bill

Lady Liberty 1885 (an amazing blogger) posted an article today about the latest legal actions regarding HB2 (North Carolina‘s bathroom-locker room bill). Twenty-three states are now suing the federal government for its attempt to force schools to allow transgender students to use the bathroom or shower facilities based on ‘gender identity’ instead of biology. One of the problems with this federal overreach is that it can be taken advantage of by non-transgender people who have nefarious intentions.

The article includes the following quote:

Via Alliance Defending Freedom:

The Obama administration cannot unilaterally redefine federal law to serve its own political ends and lawlessly impose its will on local schools. Twenty-three states have now filed suit to stop this overreach, designed to force students to shower and undress in the same locker rooms and to share rooms on overnight trips with students of the opposite sex—something they shouldn’t ever be forced to do. The administration has exceeded its authority in threatening schools that choose to protect children’s privacy. Nebraska Attorney General Doug Peterson and the growing number of states across the country who joined him in this lawsuit are to be commended for exercising common sense and defending the privacy and safety of children.
– Alliance Defending Freedom Legal Counsel Kellie Fiedorek

The article reports on North Carolina Governor Pat McCrory‘s efforts to defend HB2:

A hearing has been set for August 1st at 10 a.m. in Winston-Salem by U.S. District Judge Thomas Schroeder, who will hear arguments on whether or not to block provisions of HB 2 while another lawsuit filed by six North Carolinia citizens is still pending in federal court.

Schroeder also indicated that there might be a consolidation of lawsuits at some point.

Transgender in children is a relatively new thing. Transgenders represent a very small number of people. I don’t want to see any group of people mistreated, but I think in this case we need to protect our children from people with evil intentions. There have been a number of incidents of people who are not transgender claiming to be transgender for evil purposes. We need to protect our children. If that means separate bathrooms for transgenders, so be it. At least everyone, including the transgenders, would be safe.

The Consequences Of Letting Everyone In The Same Bathroom

The bathroom bill (should be locker room bill) passed in North Carolina has caused a lot of controversy. This article is based on two articles, one posted at CBN News today and one posted at Lady Liberty 1885.

The article at Lady Liberty 1885 includes the following video (also posted on YouTube):

As the video points out, women need a safe space to change clothes or go to the bathroom. I can’t imagine thinking parents wanting their teenage daughters to share locker rooms with teenage boys.

There has been another interesting example of the fallout of this law.

CBN News is reporting today:

A former state executive director of the ACLU has resigned because her own daughters were frightened when transgendered men entered the women’s bathroom.

The American Civil Liberties Union has been a champion of transgender bathroom rights. Former director of the Georgia ACLU chapter Maya Dillard Smith says she is resigned after her daughters’ experience in a public bathroom.

“I have shared my personal experience of having taken my elementary school age daughters into a women’s restroom when shortly after three transgender young adults, over six-feet tall with deep voices, entered,” Smith wrote in a statement.

“My children were visibly frightened, concerned about their safety and left asking lots of questions for which I, like many parents, was ill-prepared to answer,” she continued.

She also said the incident highlighted the ALCU‘s “hierarchy of rights.”

She wrote in a statement that the ACLU is “a special interest organization that promotes not all, but certain progressive rights….based on who is funding the organization’s lobbying activities.”

Transgender people constitute a very small percentage of our population. They deserve to be respected and not bullied, but their desires should not be used to put the safety of other Americans in jeopardy. The transgenders themselves are not the issue–it’s the people who will use the issue for their own nefarious purposes.

 

Bullies Don’t Stop Until You Stand Up To Them

Yesterday The New York Times reported that the Obama Administration will now direct all public school to allow students to use the bathrooms (and locker rooms) that conform to their sexual identity. I doesn’t matter what parts you have, you use the bathroom (or locker room) that corresponds to the way you feel at that particular time.

The article reports:

A letter to school districts will go out Friday, adding to a highly charged debate over transgender rights in the middle of the administration’s legal fight with North Carolina over the issue. The declaration — signed by Justice and Education department officials — will describe what schools should do to ensure that none of their students are discriminated against.

It does not have the force of law, but it contains an implicit threat: Schools that do not abide by the Obama administration’s interpretation of the law could face lawsuits or a loss of federal aid.

…“A school may not require transgender students to use facilities inconsistent with their gender identity or to use individual-user facilities when other students are not required to do so,” according to the letter, a copy of which was provided to The New York Times.

I don’t want to see anyone discriminated against or bullied, but it seems to me that this directive (aside from being unconstitutional) opens the door for bullying and all sorts of other high-jinks. Can the imagine the ‘dare you’ going around various teenage boys about going into the girls’ locker room? This is just plain silly.

The obvious answer to this is a private bathroom and changing area for anyone who feels that they need extra privacy. No questions asked. It is really sad that we are talking about discrimination in this matter rather than talking about protecting women and children from people claiming to be transgender who are not. There are already a number of criminal cases filed in various states where nefarious people have used transgender-sympathetic laws to gain access to women’s restrooms. What happened next was traumatizing for the women involved and has severe legal consequences for the man involved. Men do not belong in ladies’ rooms or in women’s locker rooms.

Fighting Back

The Alliance Defending Freedom posted an article on its website about actions it will be taking regarding North Carolina‘s bathroom bill.

The article reports:

Alliance Defending Freedom attorneys representing students and parents at North Carolina public schools and universities filed suit Tuesday against the U.S. departments of Justice and Education for making federal student aid and educational funding dependent on students sharing restrooms and locker rooms with the opposite sex. The suit is similar to one ADF filed against the two agencies on behalf of parents and students in Illinois last week.

The DOJ disregarded student privacy and safety when it issued letters threatening the suspension of federal funding for North Carolina’s schools and university system, as well as federal financial aid for North Carolina’s university students, unless the state government repudiated the law known as House Bill 2. That law ensures that government facilities and public schools protect personal privacy by maintaining sex-specific restrooms, locker rooms, and showers. The DOJ then filed suit against the state on Monday, the same day that the governor and the General Assembly each sued the agency over its illegitimate demands.

“The administration shouldn’t condition the ability of women to receive an education on their willingness to shower with members of the opposite sex,” said ADF Senior Counsel Jeremy Tedesco. “On behalf of North Carolina students and families—and by extension all students and families across the nation affected by the DOJ’s and DOE’s overreach—we have filed suit to stop both agencies from bullying schools and universities. The agencies must stop using falsehoods about what federal law requires to threaten student access to educational opportunities and financial assistance.”

Do you want boys allowed in your high school or college daughter’s locker room?

Before you sign on to support the idea of men in women’s locker rooms, please watch the following video posted on YouTube by the Alliance Defending Freedom:

If the ‘right of privacy‘ is somehow enshrined in the U.S. Constitution, why are we taking that right away from the women of America?