Tag Archives: Legal Insurrection

Where Your Taxpayer Dollars Go

Posted on by

On Thursday, Legal Insurrection posted an article based on information from The College Fix.

The article reports:

The U.S. Department of Agriculture granted Southern University Agricultural & Mechanical College in Louisiana $600,000 to study menstrual cycles in “transgender men,” according to a new database compiled by the American Principles Project.

The database, “Funding Insanity: Federal Spending on Gender Ideology under Biden-Harris,” states the school “will Study Menstrual Cycles in ‘Transgender Men And People With Masculine Gender Identities, Intersex, And Non-Binary Persons.’”

“The first occurrence of menstruation occurs at approximately 12 years of age and ends with menopause at roughly 51 years of age,” the grant description states. “A woman will have a monthly menstrual cycle for about 40 years of her life, averaging to about 450 periods over the course of her lifetime.”

“It is also important to recognize that transgender men and people with masculine gender identities, intersex and non-binary persons may also menstruate,” it states. “At any given moment about 26% of the world’s population is menstruating.”

So what? Why do I care about men pretending to be women menstruating?

The article concludes:

Reached by The Fix, an APP spokesman said the grant and others listed in the database are “the tip of the iceberg.”

“We know that this is just the tip of the iceberg. Our project looked only at grants and contracts that specifically pertained to gender ideology in some way. But there is far more spending out there relating to DEI, critical race theory, and other left-wing ideologies that we did not capture here,” Paul Dupont told The Fix via email.

“There is a great deal of work that still needs to be done to identify and hopefully eliminate this graft. DOGE [Department of Government Efficiency] is going to have some busy weeks and months ahead,” Dupont said.

Let’s do more research on things like cancer and less on this foolishness.

This May Change Quickly

Posted on by

On Saturday, Manhattan-based District Judge Paul Engelmayer issued a sweeping emergency injunction essentially removing the authority of Secretary of Treasury Scott Bessett over the Treasury Department. The injunction blocks the Secretary and any political appointees from accessing records within the Treasury Department. The injunction also blocks any ‘special appointee’ of President Trump from having access records within the Treasury Department and demands that all information previously extracted be destroyed. What the judge is essentially saying is that the Treasury Secretary is not allow to look at the Treasury records nor is he or the President allowed to hire anyone to look at those records. This is an amazing combination of chutzpah, arrogance, ignorance of the U.S. Constitution, and stupid. I expect the ruling to be overturned quickly.

On Saturday, Legal Insurrection reported:

It was an unusual procedural context. I’ve reviewed the court’s electronic docket, and it appears to have been ex parte. There’s no indication of notice to the government and opportunity to be heard before the Judge ruled. The procedure was a Proposed Order To Show Cause including a Temporary Restraining Order. It’s the type of procedure used in only the most extreme emergencies (the OSC is not unusual, but including an ex parte TRO is unusual).

What was the emergency that couldn’t wait until the next day for the government to have a chance to be heard?

It was a Friday night move to deny access that, by the papers submitted, had been going on for over two weeks. The 60 page Complaint, and 40 Page Memorandum (plus a short Affirmation) obviously took a long time to prepare, arguing against an emergency so dire and time sensitive on a Friday night the court couldn’t even wait until the next morning for the government to be heard. It also reeks of judge shopping, because plaintiffs would have known who was the emergency duty judge so by going in on a Friday night they evaded the normal random assignment system for this purpose.

Whatever the ultimate merits, depriving the Secretary of Treasury of the ability to run the Department of Treasury as he deems proper is not something that should have been decided this way, even temporarily. I understand that litigants play these games, but it’s a bad look that damages faith in the judiciary when a court allows it.

The short version of the complaint and claims is that Secretary Bessent violated various procedural requirements and that there is a threat that sensitive private information could be exposed. Considering that the Chinese government thoroughly hacked the Treasury computer systems under Biden, it’s odd that the mere possibility that DOGE might mishandle the information required a Friday night court intervention. I think there are serious ‘standing’ issues with the states bringing the case as well as the harm being speculative.

The article also notes:

I can’t really assess the underlying merits on such short notice, other than it seems like what it is, a political objection in search of a legal theory. The Executive Branch gets to run the Executive Branch, and this seems like an overstep by a different branch of government.

This seems to be a repeat of 2017, where the Resistance had good luck with District Court Judges, less luck with Appeals Court Judges, and very little luck with Supreme Court Justices. But that’s besides the point, this is all about slowing down the Trump agenda, and wasting months or years before a final resolution is reached. Democrats don’t have to win in the end to achieve Democrats’ goals.

It is telling that there was less fuss when the Chinese hacked into the system.

When The Punishment Doesn’t Fit The Crime

Posted on by

On Saturday, Legal Insurrection posted an article about Asif Rahman, a former CIA officer, who has been arrested and has pleaded guilty to sharing classified documents about Israel’s plans to launch a missile strike on Iran.

The article reports:

A former CIA analyst arrested in November and charged with leaking highly classified records showing Israeli plans to launch a retaliatory strike on Iran pleaded guilty Friday in a federal court in Virginia.

Asif Rahman, 34, pleaded guilty to two counts of transmission of national defense information, according to court records.

Rahman faces up to 10 years in prison for the first count and up to three years for the second count. His sentencing was set for May 15.

Rahman admitted to accessing and printing out two documents regarding Israel’s retaliatory strike plans on Oct. 17 and transporting them to his residence, where he later uploaded images of them and provided them to “multiple individuals he knew were not entitled to receive them,” according to the plea agreement.

He later took various steps to try and conceal his involvement in the leak, even as authorities were able to track him down remarkably quickly given he was the only individual found to have printed out the documents, according to logs reviewed by investigators.

On Friday, Ynet news noted:

Rahman, a Yale University graduate, faces up to 20 years in prison under the Espionage Act. However, a plea deal under negotiation could limit his sentence to six and a half years. Federal prosecutors reportedly agreed to the reduced penalty after Rahman took responsibility for his actions and expressed a desire to resolve the case.

Rahman’s sentencing is scheduled for May 15. Prosecutors indicated they might recommend further leniency if Rahman continues cooperating with authorities.

I don’t care if he took responsibility for his actions, there needs to be a much longer prison sentence.

The Biggest Lie Of 2024

Posted on by

On December 31st, Legal Insurrection posted an article about what they considered the biggest lie of 2024.

The article reported:

All politicians lie from time to time, but the Democrats have elevated it to an art form. They understand that if a lie is repeated often enough, it gains traction, and most people will eventually believe it. They’ve also learned that the most effective lies are the ones that are the most difficult to disprove, such as their insistence in 2016 that President-elect Donald Trump was an agent of Russia.

The Russian collusion narrative was a stunning success for the Democrats, creating endless challenges for candidate and eventually President Trump. Buoyed by its effectiveness, party operatives felt emboldened, pushing them to concoct even bigger and bolder lies.

When former Vice President Joe Biden entered the race for the 2020 Democratic presidential nomination, the party quickly rallied behind him, convinced he was their best chance to defeat Trump. It was evident, however, that Biden had changed during his time out of the spotlight. He had slowed down, struggled to speak without a teleprompter, slurred his words, and frequently lost his train of thought. While Republicans and foreigners recognized the early signs of cognitive decline, Biden’s handlers worked tirelessly to cover it up.

Unfortunately, Americans are the ones paying the price for that lie. The staff surrounding President Biden included a number of people who were in the Obama administration. I don’t think that is a coincidence. The last four years were President Obama’s third term. We got to see the soul of the Obama Democrat Party–bad economic policy, bad foreign policy, bad energy policy, and suffering everyday Americans. In 2024, the American voters decided that they were done with bad polices and changed course.

The article concludes:

Rep. Byron Donalds (R-FL) sums up the Democrats’ hypocrisy perfectly in the tweet below:

They blamed it on a “Stutter.”
They blamed it on “Russian Disinfo.”
They blamed it on “Cheap-Fakes.”
They hid him at every opportunity.
They scripted every public event.
They denied the Hur Report findings.
They sent him on vacation for 570 days.
They brazenly lied to you FOR… pic.twitter.com/ovnQtFsX8t

— Byron Donalds (@ByronDonalds) December 30, 2024

I am looking forward to a great 2025.

What Have We Been Teaching Our Children?

Posted on by

On Tuesday, Legal Insurrection posted an article about the reaction to the killing of the CEO or UnitedHealthcare.

The article includes the following chart:

The article reports:

  • Most voters (68%) think the actions of the killer against Thompson were unacceptable, while 17% found them acceptable, an Emerson College poll out this week found.
  • Young voters were far more split: 41% found the killer’s actions acceptable, while 40% found them unacceptable, per the poll. About 24% found them “somewhat acceptable” and 17% “completely acceptable.” ….
  • Even before Mangione was arrested, posters hailed him as a folk hero and posted jokes and memes celebrating the suspect and his purported cause, Axios’ Ivana Saric reported.
  • TikTok, a top social media app for young people, was awash with comedy over the killing.
  • Online storefronts also began selling merchandise, including sweatshirts, wine tumblers and hats emblazoned with words “deny,” “defend” and “depose” — industry parlance found on shell casings at the crime scene….
  • 22% of Democrats found the killer’s actions acceptable, while 59% found them unacceptable. Among Republicans, 12% found the actions acceptable while 16% of independents said the same.
  • Men (19%) found the killer’s actions slightly more acceptable than women (14%).

This is frightening.

The article quotes an interview with William A. Jacobson, who wrote the article:

And so I think that’s what you’re seeing is a destruction of the values in the younger generation via the education system on the rule of law, of the notion that you just don’t get to kill people you don’t like. And so I think that’s a problem, I think, that this should be the reaction from the younger generation to this assassination, this premeditated assassination, which has resulted in a very rare first degree murder charge in New York State, because it’s an act, was an act considered an act of terrorism, which pushes it up from second degree murder to first degree murder. You’re seeing that reaction is something that is very frightening for our society, and I think you may see play out in other cases that people think it’s okay to kill somebody you disagree with or you think has a bad capitalist job.

If we continue to teach our young adults that capitalism is evil, where will the next generation of entrepreneurs come from?

 

In Today’s America, Privacy Is An Illusion

Posted on by

On Tuesday, Legal Insurrection posted an article explaining how the government spies on Americans without the inconvenience of getting a warrant.

The article reports:

A report from the House Judiciary Committee and Government Weaponization Subcommittee exposed the FBI for abusing the Bank Secrecy Act (BSA) to spy on Americans’ bank accounts without a warrant.

“Documents show that federal law enforcement increasingly works hand-in-glove with financial institutions, obtaining virtually unchecked access to private financial data and testing out new methods and new technology to continue the financial surveillance of American citizens,” according to the report.

The article notes:

However, the law prohibits federal law enforcement from asking about a bank’s customer information without a legal process.

“All Americans should be disturbed by how their financial data is collected, made accessible to, and searched by federal and state officials, including law enforcement and regulatory agencies,” the committees added. “With the rise in e-commerce and the widespread adoption of cash alternatives like credit cards or peer-to-peer payment services, the future leaves very little financial activity beyond the purview of modern financial institutions or the government’s prying eyes.”

Here’s a mic drop (emphasis mine): “This is because, as a condition of participating in the modern economy, Americans are forced to disclose details of their private lives to a financial industry that has been too eager to pass this information along to federal law enforcement.”

Yup. Our financial institutions had no problem cooperating with the FBI. It seems a few even helped formulate ideas to spy on us.

The article concludes:

The institutions and FinCEN have been working together to develop new ways to spy on Americans with the Bank Secrecy Act Advisory Group (BSAAG). The new plans include requiring “Americans to have a digital identification to access financial services, testing artificial intelligence to surveil Americans’ financial activity, and working towards even closer coordination between financial institutions and federal law enforcement.”

“As promoted by the BSAAG, this surveillance will be catalyzed by even greater government entanglement with financial institutions as they begin to integrate new technology to more effectively track their customers’ financial habits,” concluded the committees. “Absent renewed safeguards, the federal government and financial institutions will continue to siphon off Americans’ sensitive financial data, place it into the hands of bureaucrats, and erode any remaining semblance of financial privacy in the United States.”

After January 6th, 2021, Bank of America was asked to hand over records of anyone who used a Bank of America credit or debit card in the Washington, D.C., area between January 5th and January 7th of 2021. Those records were used as one method of identifying people who were at the Trump rally or at the Capitol building. There was no warrant involved.

A New Level Of Chutzpah

Posted on by

President Biden has pardoned his son Hunter of all crimes committed between 2014 and 2024. In his statement regarding the pardon, President Biden cited the fact that he felt the charges against Hunter Biden were politically motivated and that he feared that the incoming administration would use the Justice Department politically. Wow. You mean like he has done for the past four years? It is telling that Baron Trump’s bedroom was searched by the FBI, but Hunter’s residence was never searched. Looking at the dates mentioned, I wonder if there is a statute of limitations involved here. There have been valid charges of child pornography on Hunter’s laptop. Is he now immune from those charges? President Biden was Vice-President from 2008 through 2016. When did the selling influence operations begin? Is there a statue of limitations on peddling influence? Are we about to find out?

On Sunday, Legal Insurrection posted an article about President Biden’s pardon of Hunter Biden.

The article includes the following statement from President Biden:

From the day I took office, I said I would not interfere with the Justice Department’s decision-making, and I kept my word even as I have watched my son being selectively, and unfairly, prosecuted. Without aggravating factors like use in a crime, multiple purchases, or buying a weapon as a straw purchaser, people are almost never brought to trial on felony charges solely for how they filled out a gun form. Those who were late paying their taxes because of serious addictions, but paid them back subsequently with interest and penalties, are typically given non-criminal resolutions. It is clear that Hunter was treated differently.

The charges in his cases came about only after several of my political opponents in Congress instigated them to attack me and oppose my election. Then, a carefully negotiated plea deal, agreed to by the Department of Justice, unraveled in the court room – with a number of my political opponents in Congress taking credit for bringing political pressure on the process. Had the plea deal held, it would have been a fair, reasonable resolution of Hunter’s cases.

The reason for the pardon is simple–it is an attempt (it may or may not be successful) to end any further investigation into influence peddling by the Biden family. I am hoping investigations will continue and that the guilty will be held accountable for their actions.

The End Of The Scam?

Posted on by

On Monday, Legal Insurrection posted an article about a two-day climate conference in Prague on November 12-13, 2024. At that conference, climate scientists declared that the “climate emergency” is over.

The article reports:

The declaration has 18 different point referencing climate science and facts that counter the narratives being pushed by the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) and those who want to push their green agendas. I have listed the first six below (which should be familiar to Legal Insurrection readers); there remainder can be found in the copy of the declaration.

1 The modest increase in the atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide that has taken place since the end of the Little Ice Age has been net-beneficial to humanity.
2. Foreseeable future increases in greenhouse gases in the air will probably also prove net-beneficial.
3. The rate and amplitude of global warming have been and will continue to be appreciably less than climate scientists have long predicted.
4. The Sun, and not greenhouse gases, has contributed and will continue to contribute the overwhelming majority of global temperature.
5. Geological evidence compellingly suggests that the rate and amplitude of global warming during the industrial era are neither unprecedented nor unusual.
6. Climate models are inherently incapable of telling us anything about how much global warming there will be or about whether or to what extent the warming has a natural or anthropogenic cause.

Though I have to say, #17 is a favorite of mine:

Since wind and solar power are costly, intermittent and more environmentally destructive per TWh generated than any other energy source, governments should cease to subsidize or to prioritize them, and should instead expand coal, gas and, above, all nuclear generation.

But, perhaps most importantly, the conference attendees demand the end of persecution of those researchers doing real science who struggle to share their reasonable and reliable findings whenever the data counters the political narratives.

As I have reported multiple times (article here):

Christiana Figueres, one-time executive secretary of United Nations’ Framework Convention on Climate Change, admitted that the climate activists’ agenda is not to protect the environment but to break capitalism. The task ahead, she said in 2015, is “to change the economic development model that has been reigning for at least 150 years, since the Industrial Revolution.”

It was never really about the climate.

Wisdom From Someone Who Executed Successful Middle East Policy

Posted on by

On Sunday, Legal Insurrection posted an article about the recent events in the Middle East.

The article reports:

Former President Donald Trump’s son-in-law and advisor, Jared Kushner, had some wise words yesterday about Israel.

Israel has to finish the job. Now. She cannot stop.

People have responded, “I don’t agree with you politically at all, but this is true!”

Kushner wrote:

September 27th is the most important day in the Middle East since the Abraham Accords breakthrough.

I have spent countless hours studying Hezbollah and there is not an expert on earth who thought that what Israel has done to decapitate and degrade them was possible.

This is significant because Iran is now fully exposed. The reason why their nuclear facilities have not been destroyed, despite weak air defense systems, is because Hezbollah has been a loaded gun pointed at Israel. Iran spent the last forty years building this capability as its deterrent.

President Trump would often say, “Iran has never won a war but never lost a negotiation.” The Islamic Republic’s regime is much tougher when risking Hamas, Hezbollah, Syrian and Houthi lives than when risking their own. Their foolish efforts to assassinate President Trump and hack his campaign reek of desperation and are hardening a large coalition against them.

Iranian leadership is stuck in the old Middle East, while their neighbors in the GCC are sprinting toward the future by investing in their populations and infrastructure. They are becoming dynamic magnets for talent and investment while Iran falls further behind. As the Iranian proxies and threats dissipate, regional security and prosperity will rise for Christians, Muslims and Jews alike

The article concludes with more of Jared Kushner’s statement:

The philosopher Bernard-Henri Lévy wrote on X, “I keep reading everywhere that Lebanon is ‘on the brink of collapse.’ No. It is on the brink of relief and deliverance.”
Moments like this come once in a generation, if they even come at all.

The Middle East is too often a solid where little changes. Today, it is a liquid and the ability to reshape is unlimited. Do not squander this moment.

Let’s all pray for success, for peace and for the good judgement of our leaders.

Lebanon used to be the garden spot of the Middle East. I pray that someday it will again be the beautiful, free land it once was.

 

I Hope This Gets To The Supreme Court Quickly

Posted on by

On Monday, Legal Insurrection reported:

A policy that allows school staff to keep a child’s transgender status a secret does not violate a parent’s fundamental rights under the New Hampshire constitution, the state’s Supreme Court has held.

The policy was challenged by a New Hampshire mother who sued the Manchester school district after finding out from a teacher that her minor child (identified as M.C.) had asked school staff and students to be called by a name typically associated with the opposite sex.

According to the lawsuit, when the mother first asked the school to continue using her child’s given name and sex-appropriate pronouns, two teachers wrote to her saying they were willing to comply.

After the teachers stated that they were willing to comply, the mother got an email from the school principal that stated:

Good Morning [Jane Doe]. While I respect and understand your concern, we are held by the District policy as a staff. I have quoted our district policy below, which outlines the fact that we cannot disclose a student’s choice to parents if asked not to. If [M.C.] insists on being called [M.C.’s desired name] as a staff we have to respect that according to the policy or unfortunately we can be held accountable despite parents’ wishes.

The principal was reiterating district policy that, absent the child’s consent, “[s]chool personnel should not disclose information that may reveal a student’s transgender status or gender nonconforming presentation to others.” The school justified the policy as recognizing transgender students’ “rights” to privacy.

The article continues:

But that policy violated her fundamental parental rights, the mother alleged, among other claims, by encouraging school officials to affirmatively conceal her child’s “open and public” gender identity transition in school from her.

After all, if the whole school knows the child is transitioning, why shouldn’t the parent?

Notwithstanding these arguments, the trial court found the policy did not infinge a fundamental parenting right so as to warrant the application of strict scrutiny. And because the policy was rationally related to legitimate governmental interests, it was not unconstitutional, the court held, dismissing her claim.

In a 3-1 decision on appeal, the New Hampshire Supreme Court agreed.

I may take a village to raise a child, but that is a problem if the village is inhabited by villagers trying to take away parents’ rights.

What Happened On July 13th?

Posted on by

On Tuesday, Legal Insurrection posted an article containing more information on the shooting of President Trump on July 13th. The information comes from Senator Josh Hawley who appeared on the Jesse Watters show on Monday night.

The article reports:

It turns out that the security lapses that day were even worse than previously thought. Hawley also stressed that this information was being shared with him because these whistleblowers are worried that this could happen again.

…The incident has led both Republicans and Democrats to intensely scrutinize the Secret Service in recent weeks. On “Jesse Watters Primetime,” Hawley claimed that the lead site agent was known to be inexperienced and “incompetent.”

“The site agent, the lead agent, was known to the Trump campaign to be inexperienced, to be ineffectual, to be, frankly, incompetent at their job,” Hawley said. “I’m also told by whistleblowers that on that day, she was not enforcing the normal security protocols.”

“She was not checking people’s IDs. She did not use Secret Service agents,” Hawley added. “Most of the agents there that day were not Secret Service agents. They were Homeland Security agents.”…

“Whistleblowers are coming forward from the Secret Service because they can’t believe what leadership is doing,” Hawley said. “They cannot believe that Secret Service is not taking action to clear out the rot.”

The fact that most of the agents were Homeland Security agents rather than Secret Service agents is troubling. No one wants to view this as an inside job, but the level of incompetence is stunning.

Clean Up Your Own Back Yard

Posted on by

The Biden administration is doing some serious meddling in both the internal and external affairs of Israel. Internally they are trying to bring down the Netanyahu administration, externally they are trying to give Hamas a victory in Gaza. Both of these things will create more instability in the Middle East.

To understand the reason behind the Biden administration’s horrible foreign policy, we need to go back to the Obama administration. The Obama administration, for whatever reason, sought to stabilize the Middle East by strengthening Iran and weakening Israel. The foreign policy personnel of the Obama administration are the people dictating the foreign policy of the Biden administration.

On Monday, Legal Insurrection posted an article about the  Biden administration’s latest Middle East peace proposal. The goal of the Biden administration is to pressure Prime Minister Netanyahu into agreeing to this proposal. The proposal would be a death warrant for Israel.

The article reports:

I smelled a rat as soon as Biden announced it: “This has all the appearances of Team Biden trying to box Israel into something it did not propose and does not agree to – and dropping it just before the Sabbath so we can’t get a full Israeli response for 24 hrs as Biden continues to build pressure.”

We previously posted about Biden’s publicized statement on Friday, May 31, as Israel was entering a quiet period for the Sabbath, that purported to present a new Israeli ceasefire proposal, Biden Presented Supposed Israeli Ceasefire Proposal Leaving Hamas In Power, But It Was His Own.

The timing was suspicious, as was the substance. Per Biden, Israel had proposed what amounted to a permanent ceasefire not even subject to all hostages (alive and dead) being returned and subject to indefinite negotiations.

The article includes a screenshot of a tweet:

The article notes:

But Israel stopped short of saying Biden lied. In remarks over the weekend, Netanyahu came pretty close to using the “L” word, as Times of Israel reports:

Israeli officials pushed back on Monday on elements of the hostage deal proposal presented by US President Joe Biden over the weekend as an Israeli offer, as Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu insisted that there were gaps between that proposal and Israel’s stance.

“The claim that we agreed to a ceasefire without our conditions being met is incorrect,” the prime minister reportedly told lawmakers.

Netanyahu said in a Knesset meeting that Israel will not end the war in Gaza until it achieves its three war aims, an Israeli official told The Times of Israel: destroying Hamas’s military and civil governance capabilities, securing the release of all hostages, and ensuring that Gaza no longer poses a threat to Israel.

“The proposal that Biden presented is incomplete,” the premier told MKs at a closed-door meeting of the Knesset’s Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee, according to media reports.

He also reportedly said that there are “gaps” between the Israeli version and Biden’s recounting of it.

If we want peace in the Middle East, we are going to have to deal with Iran. That is the head of the snake. The other countries involved in funding terrorism might reconsider if bad things happen to Iran.

Even If We Lose, We Are Going To Control Things

Posted on by

The realists in the Democrat party realize that President Biden is a weak candidate. It will take a massive amount of cheating to push him over the finish line. There have rumors of a candidate switch at the convention, but as of now those are simply rumors. So how can the Democrat party continue to control the government if they lose the presidency? They already have a plan.

On April 5th, Legal Insurrection posted an article explaining how the Biden administration plans to limit the power of President Trump if he takes office. I am not sure this is legal, but they are going to try it.

The article reports:

One of the things that frustrated me about Trump’s (first?) term was his seeming complete indifference to #TheResistance that manifested before he even took office. Unelected bureaucrats working in the ridiculously invasive executive branch’s many agencies, publicly declared war on him, and he . . . well, he did nothing.

Until the final year of his presidency when he seemed to finally take aim at the problem in his own branch of government–we can call it the deep state, the resistance, the entrenched bureaucrats who oversee far too much policy in America and who are, apparently, answerable to no one. Not the voter, not the president.

So then-president Trump launched Schedule F in late October 2020, a new rule that would allow the sitting and duly-elected president to have a say in who ran and worked in his own (overly large, sprawling, and ridiculously intrusive) branch of the federal government.

…And now we have Biden (or whomever is animating him) issue new rules to ensure that Democrats remain in their deep state positions, no matter who is actually elected by the people to run the executive branch as he sees fit.

…President Joe Biden’s administration announced its plan on Thursday to protect bureaucrats from being fired by a potential second Trump administration.

The U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM) finalized a rule that protects employees in the civil service by preventing the removal of their status and protections involuntarily, according to a press release. Under the new rule, an administration wishing to shift federal employees to a new category making them easier to fire would have to go through an elongated process, a move meant to be more time-consuming for a future president, Politico reported.

Hopefully this rule can be overturned either by a functioning Congress or an Executive Order. The Federal Government needs to shrink, regardless of who is in charge!

Taking Pre-Emptive Action

Posted on by

As I reported in a previous article, America is about to experience an epidemic of ‘squatters.’ There have already been cases in New York, and I am sure other states are also experiencing people with no right to a property deciding to live there rent-free. Well, at least one state is prepared to take action.

On Thursday, Legal Insurrection reported the following:

For some inexplicable reason, squatters’ rights laws are commonplace throughout these United States. In many states, a person or persons can enter and inhabit another person’s vacant property, set up house, and after—in most cases—a mere 30 days claim some form of bizarre “right” to inhabit the home in which they did not pay a day’s rent nor a single mortgage payment: a home they do not own, did not buy, and have no right to occupy.

But states, including red states, have an array of “squatters’ rights” rules and laws that will offend—nay, even assault—the senses of all normal, law-abiding Americans.

The article cites a few examples. This is only one of many:

A Georgia man claims he returned home from caring for his sick wife to find that squatters had changed the locks on his home and moved in — and now local laws are blocking him from evicting the alleged freeloaders.

“Basically, these people came in Friday, broke into my house and had a U-Haul move all their stuff in. It’s frustrating. It’s very frustrating. I can’t even sleep,” DeKalb man Paul Callins told WSB-TV.

Callins had sunk thousands of dollars into the home and renovated it with his own hands after he inherited it from his late father, but since squatters moved in, he’s found himself facing nothing but obstacles to evicting the alleged intruders.

. . . . Rather than forcibly evicting the squatters, Georgia law requires homeowners file an “Affidavit of Intruder,” which then needs to work its way through the court system before police can act, Callins explained.

Situations like Callins’ have become all too common in Georgia.

About 1,200 homes across DeKalb County are occupied by squatters, according to the National Rental Home Council trade group.

There is a solution:

Fox Business reports (archive link):

The Florida Legislature unanimously passed a bill that would allow police to immediately remove squatters — a departure from the lengthy court cases required in most states.

“It gives me a real feeling of positive hope that we still have the ability to discuss challenges in our society and work with our legislatures in a bipartisan way,” Patti Peeples, a Sunshine State property owner who was barred from her own home after squatters refused to leave, told News4Jax.

The legislation, which passed both chambers earlier this month, would allow police to remove squatters without a lease authorized by the property owner and adds criminal penalties.

And that, my friends, is how it’s done.

Using Your Tax Dollars To Influence An Election

Posted on by

This is an election year. When you consider everything that has gone on for the past four years, you realize that things were bound to get a little crazy. However, the craziness and dishonestly has reached levels very few of us ever realized they would reach.

On Thursday, Legal Insurrection posted the following headline:

Biden Admin to Use Tax Dollars to Pay College Students to Register Voters Ahead of 2024 Election

Does anyone want to guess the political leanings of college students?

The article reports:

The Biden administration is already facing accusations of trying to buy the votes of college student aged voters by ‘cancelling’ billions in student loan debt. Now they have announced that they will pay college students to register voters, and they’re doing this with tax dollars.

The corruption is right out in the open, for all to see.

The article quotes The Daily Caller:

Vice President Kamala Harris announced Tuesday that college students would be able to collect federally-funded work study for registering voters.

Harris’s announcement of the new policy was posted on X, formerly known as Twitter. The federal work-study program is intended to allow students to earn money for day-to-day expenses while at college, according to the Department of Education.

“We have been doing work to promote voter participation for students,” Harris said. “For example, we have under the Federal Work-Study program now allow students to get paid through Federal Work-Study to register people and to be non-partisan poll workers. As we know, this is important for a number of reasons. One, to engage our young leaders in this process and activate them in terms of their ability to strengthen our communities.”

Do you really think that college students are interested in registering conservative voters? Conservatives and patriots are going to have to come out to vote in very large numbers to overcome the cheating that the Democrats are already planning.

The Truth Is Too Gruesome To Watch

Posted on by

On Monday, William A. Jacobson posted an article at Legal Insurrection about the atrocities of October 7.

The article states:

“I just saw indescribable, raw footage of Hamas’ massacre along with 100 other international journalists”

We reported yesterday that Israel was planning on providing a viewing of raw footage from Hamas and other terrorist bodycams, Israeli dashcams, and security cameras, in light of the denialism being spread about Hamas butchery.

That showing took place today:
These are some of the things shown:

The footage was collected from call recordings, security cameras, Hamas terrorists’ body cameras, victim dashboard cameras, Hamas and victims’ social media accounts, and cellphone videos taken by terrorists, victims and first responders. Over 1,000 civilians were slaughtered by the terrorists, and at least 224 people were abducted.

In one pair of videos that were screened, Hamas terrorists are seen dressed in IDF uniforms, flagging down passing cars and then shooting their occupants.

In another video, first responders are seen pouring bottled water over still-smoldering bodies, hoping to snuff out the remaining embers.

In another, a man writhes on the ground, bleeding from his stomach, as a terrorist tries repeatedly to decapitate him with farming equipment. The man appears to be southeast Asian, possibly one of Israel’s foreign agricultural workers.

In another clip, from after the assault, an Israeli woman is seen trying to work out if a partially burned woman’s corpse, with a mutilated head, is that of a family member. The dead woman’s dress is pulled up to her waist and her underpants have been removed.

Major Gen. Mickey Edelstein, who briefed reporters after the viewing, said that “we have evidence” of rape but “we cannot share it,” declining to elaborate further….

In the second segment, captured through a call recording application on a victim’s phone, a different son reaches out to a different father. “Dad, I killed 10 with my bare hands,” the terrorist excitedly tells his father in Gaza. “Their blood is on my hands, let me speak to Mom.”

“Please be proud of me, Dad,” he adds.

There is no way anyone can justify this. The article continues, but it is very difficult to read. Follow the link at your own risk.

When Reality Shows Up

Posted on by

Green energy is a wonderful theory. So is the perpetual motion machine. However, both are limited by the laws of physics, and the first is limited by practicalities regarding cost.

On Saturday, Legal Insurrection posted an article about some of the current problems being encountered by wind farms.

The article reports:

A couple of weeks ago, Sweden’s government ditched plans to go all-in on “green energy,” green-lighting the construction of new nuclear power plants. Shortly afterward, fossil fuel giant Shell announced it was scaling back its energy transition plans to focus on . . . gas and oil!

Now it looks like specific wind farm projects are beginning to topple due to strong economic headwinds. Recent, Rhode Island’s leading utility decided to nix a project called Revolution Wind 2 because the cost of the electricity was deemed too high.

…In Europe, Swedish energy firm Vattenfall will stop the development of a major wind project in the United Kingdom after a surge in costs (Hat-tip Hot Air’s Beege Welborne). Once again, the issue was related to surges in energy costs.

The economic headwinds associated with wind farms are beginning to be noticed.

…. Even as the White House is welcoming it with open arms and the Democrats’ climate law is channeling money in its direction, strong economic headwinds are blowing in the opposite direction – inflation and rising interest rates have hit the industry hard.

And then there’s the whales: Some citizen groups and conservative media have blamed a rise in whale strandings and deaths this year on the nascent wind farm projects – a connection scientists have so far found no evidence for.

The combination has made it a precarious time for offshore wind, said Jason Grumet, CEO of the American Clean Power Association, the trade group representing US clean energy.

“This is the vulnerable moment where the benefits are on the horizon,” Grumet told reporters this spring. “Because we don’t have the benefits of it on the table. We don’t have massive facilities producing energy, lowering prices in those states.”

Currently, green energy is not the answer to anything. The climate-change fear mongering is simply a way to eliminate the middle class and gain more control over the world’s population.

In February 2019, I posted an article that included the following:

In March 2016, I posted an article with the following:

…Then listen to the words of former United Nations climate official Ottmar Edenhofer:

“One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with the environmental policy anymore, with problems such as deforestation or the ozone hole,” said Edenhofer, who co-chaired the U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change working group on Mitigation of Climate Change from 2008 to 2015.

So what is the goal of environmental policy?

“We redistribute de facto the world’s wealth by climate policy,” said Edenhofer.

I can’t post this quote often enough. It needs to engraved in the minds of every American.

Misleading Media Happens On Both Ends Of The Political Spectrum

Posted on by

The mainstream media does not have a monopoly on biased news. Many Americans, myself included, have reached the point where if we didn’t see it with our own eyes, we are not convinced in happened. Unfortunately, the bias can go both ways. Right now we see the political left working to undermine the Second Amendment. Unfortunately they have some serious ammunition–some deeply troubled people with guns have behaved very badly lately. However, that is no excuse to take guns away from honest, hard-working people who own them for self-defense.

Recently there was a case in Texas where Daniel Perry was found guilty of murder after Soros-backed District Attorney Jose Garza sought murder charges for an act of self defense during the 2020 George Floyd riots. The words underlined are from an article posted at The Gateway Pundit on April 10. Note that the article includes the fact that the District Attorney had a connection to George Soros and that the article states self-defense as a given.

The article reports:

This weekend the lead detective in the case, David Fugitt, filed an affidavit following the shocking verdict in the case.

According to Fugitt, District Attorney Joze Garza and his office had him remove 100 pages of exculpatory evidence in the case. The DA’s office had him shorten his presentation from 158 slides to 56 slides.

Fugitt added that this was likely criminal behavior.

On April 9, Legal Insurrection posted an article about the same murder and verdict.

Legal Insurrection reports:

This past Friday, April 7, 2023, Daniel Perry was found guilty in the 2020 murder of Garret Foster during a Black Lives Matter protest in Austin.

The confrontation between the two men occurred as Perry was driving his Uber vehicle amongst a crowd of protestors in the street, and while Foster was among the protestors carrying an AK-47 on a sling. The rifle-armed Foster approached the driver’s side door of Perry’s car, Perry rolled down his window, and shot at Foster five times with a pistol, striking him with three rounds, effectively killing Foster instantly.

…From the start Perry would be arguing that he shot Foster in self-defense, and only after Foster had pointed his rifle at Perry.

And right there we have the key issue in this murder trial. Certainly, if the jury believed that Perry fired only after Foster pointed his rifle at him, there could hardly be a clearer case of self-defense. Indeed, as someone who personally carries a firearm for self-defense on a regular basis, anyone who unlawfully points a rifle at me ought to have a high expectation of getting shot in self-defense.

Social media was outraged at the conviction of Daniel Perry. However, there is more to the story:

The problem with this outrage, however, is that it presumes as an indisputable fact that Foster initiated the deadly force confrontation by pointing his rifle at Perry.

That “fact,” however, is not indisputable. Indeed, that fact was aggressively disputed by the prosecution, which argued to the jury that Foster never pointed his rifle at Perry, and so Perry’s claimed legal grounds for shooting Foster in self-defense simply doesn’t exist.

In support of this narrative of guilt the prosecution presented the testimony of multiple witnesses who told the jury that Foster never pointed his rifle at Perry. The confrontation itself was captured on poor quality video, from which screen captures were secured, and neither video nor stills ever show Foster pointing his gun at Perry.

My point is this. If we are going to argue for the Second Amendment and the idea that a man has a right to defend himself, we should be careful to check our facts. Both sides of the argument are very capable of stretching the truth to achieve a goal.

A Sad Day In America

Posted on by

On Saturday, Legal Insurrection reported the following:

There have been reports swirgling the last couple of days that Donald Trump will be charged and arrested next week by Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s office on charges relating to payments to Stormy Daniels. The exact nature of the charges and the basis is not known yet, but based on prior leaks to the media, it appears that Bragg has come up with a novel theory that an otherwise lawful payment become criminal if it is accounted for incorrectly, a so-called falsifying business records offense. Even the NY Times noted this is highly unusual:

In New York, falsifying business records can amount to a crime, albeit a misdemeanor. To elevate the crime to a felony charge, Mr. Bragg’s prosecutors must show that Mr. Trump’s “intent to defraud” included an intent to commit or conceal a second crime.

In this case, that second crime could be a violation of New York State election law. While hush money is not inherently illegal, the prosecutors could argue that the $130,000 payout effectively became an improper donation to Mr. Trump’s campaign, under the theory that because the money silenced Ms. Daniels, it benefited his candidacy.

Combining the criminal charge with a violation of state election law would be a novel legal theory for any criminal case, let alone one against the former president, raising the possibility that a judge or appellate court could throw it out or reduce the felony charge to a misdemeanor.

Alvin Bragg is a deeply destructive D.A elected with the help of a Soro-funded polical PAC:

The article concludes:

The charges, if not more substantial than described so far, are a fraudulent abuse of power aimed at manipulating the politicial process as we enter a presidential election cycle. Make no mistake, this has happened before and cost Republicans politically, including the fraudulent prosecution of then Senator Ted Stevens, which was overturned due to prosecutorial misconduct but not before Stevens resigned setting in motion events that gave Democrats the votes they needed to pass Obamacare.

The abuse of prosecutorial power by Democrats will, to paraphrase Chuch Schumer’s attack on the Supreme Court, unleash the whirlwind. We just don’t know in which direction it will hit. I think there are several things going on here, including Democrats hope for violence that will allow a J6 crackdown on Trump supporters more far reaching than the prosecution of people for “parading” because they peacefully attended a protest where other committed violence. I also think that keeping the Trump prosecution (with more to come) front and center as he (likely) leads the Republican primaries is a political strategy – it’s no wonder the charges are coming now.

Meanwhile there seem to be no consequences for the Biden crime family and their drug-addicted son.

Did He Accidentally Tell The Truth?

Posted on by

On Wednesday, Legal Insurrection posted an article about a recent statement by former secretary of state John Kerry.

The article reports:

While speaking at the World Economic Forum this week, former secretary of state John Kerry seemed to inadvertently admit that the issue of climate change is all about money.

It makes perfect sense. Climate change and all of the activism around it have become big business. All those private jets in the parking lot aren’t going to pay for themselves.

This is the full quote:

“I’m convinced we will get to a low-carbon, no-carbon economy — we’re going to get there because we have to,” he said.

“I am not convinced we’re going to get there in time to do what the scientists said, which is avoid the worst consequences of the crisis,” he added.

“And those worst consequences are going to affect millions of people all around the world, [in] Africa and other places. Of the 20 most affected countries in the world from [the] climate crisis, 17 are in Africa.”

In his remarks, Kerry also spoke about the task of keeping the goal of limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius alive.

“So, how do we get there? Well, the lesson I’ve learned in the last years and I learned it as secretary [of State] and I’ve learned it since, reinforced in spades, is: money, money, money, money, money, money, money. And I’m sorry to say that.”

Actually, I doubt that he is sorry to say that. How many government-subsidized green energy companies is he invested in? You did notice that the majority of the delegates (if not all) to the WEF in Davos flew there in private jets. Where is their effort to save the planet (other than to impose restrictions on the rest of us)?

To illustrate how the political left plans to make money by forcing the rest of us to depend on green energy, please read about the collapse of the Chicago Climate Exchange in 2010 (article here).

That article reports:

“The biggest losers have been CCX’s two biggest investors – Al Gore’s Generation Investment Management and Goldman Sachs – and President Obama, who helped launch CCX with funding from the Joyce Foundation, where he and presidential advisor Valerie Jarrett once sat on the board of directors.”

If you have questions about climate change and global warming, the two best sources of truth are Joe Bastardi and Anthony Watts. Joe Bastardi has written a number of books about climate cycles and how they impact our weather, and Anthony Watts blogs at wattsupwtihthat.com. Both authors provide scientifically valid information on the earth’s climate.

Finally!

Posted on by

On Tuesday, Legal Insurrection reported that the Oberlin College case is finally over.

The article reports:

Hopefully the long, hard road Gibson’s Bakery has traveled in its fight with Oberlin College has come to an end.

The Ohio Supreme Court just refused to accept jurisdiction over Oberlin College’s appeal (the Court also refused to hear the Gibsons’ appeal seeking to reinstate the full punitive damages award). It was a 4-3 decision, and it means the Gibsons now can collect approximately $36 million.

We received the following comment from Lee Plakas, lead trial counsel for the Gibsons:

Statement:

On behalf of the Gibson family and the trial team, Truth Still Matters, David can still overcome Goliath.

We and the Gibson family are gratified that all judges on the court of appeals and the majority of the Ohio Supreme Court recognized the rights of individuals rather than the bullying tactics of the big institutions.

We received quotes from the Gibsons and the trial team:

“Oberlin tried to frame this case with claims and issues that weren’t on trial. This has never been a case about a student’s first amendment rights. Individuals’ reputations should never be sacrificed at a false altar of free speech. The Gibsons and the entire State of Ohio should appreciate that the jury, a unanimous Ninth District Court of Appeals, and a majority of the Justices on the Ohio Supreme Court recognized that the deplorable conduct of Oberlin College could not be camouflaged by misleading claims of free speech.”

“The jury recognized Oberlin College’s bullying tactics. The students admitted their misconduct, but Oberlin College could never admit that they were wrong. They presumed that they could bring the Gibsons to their knees. The power of truth has enabled the Gibson family to survive Oberlin’s onslaught.”

This case should never have dragged on this long. The goal of the college was to drag the case out so that the Gibson family could no longer afford to fight. This is the equivalent of a person in a poker game with no high cards driving up the bidding until the other players can’t keep up. It is wonderful to see the good guys win.

 

Some Legal Perspective

Posted on by

I am not a lawyer (and have no intentions of ever becoming one), but have some very smart friends. This article will be information from smart friends and various other sources.

From Robert DuChemin (who is a lawyer) on Facebook:

The big news is the FBI’s illegal raid on Donald Trump’s home. The FBI broke the law in several ways. First, in order to execute a search warrant on documents that may be in a safe, police can only secure the safe. They exceeded their legal authority when they broke into the safe.
Secondly, the warrant only gave the FBI the authority to seize top-secret documents. They made no cursory review while at the President’s home, however, and therefore clearly retrieved documents that were outside of the scope of the subpoena. That was an invasion of the President’s rights and creates a constitutional crisis.
Third, The president has the ultimate authority on what is declassified and what needs to be sent to the US archives. He has no obligation to notify anybody of his decision. Therefore, when he packed the boxes and was still president he clearly indicated that what was going into the boxes was not something he considered sending to the archives. It was his decision alone. Nobody else has the constitutional authority to overrule him. Not even congress.
The bureaucrats are not in charge. In the USA, as in any uncorrupt republic, the elected officials are in charge.
This is a usurpation of power just like in the Obama administration, when the FBI helped the very corrupt Hillary Clinton try to steal that election.

Why bother hiding your cards when the media won’t challenge you?

Democrat lawyer Marc Elias knows what’s up. He shows us why the Democrats raided Trump’s home at Mar-a-Lago.

Because this would never apply to anyone else, right? Looking at you, Hillary.

18 U.S. Code § 2071 – Concealment, removal, or mutilation generally:

(b)Whoever, having the custody of any such record, proceeding, map, book, document, paper, or other thing, willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, falsifies, or destroys the same, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both; and shall forfeit his office and be disqualified from holding any office under the United States. As used in this subsection, the term “office” does not include the office held by any person as a retired officer of the Armed Forces of the United States.

I don’t know if we can get the blindfold back on Lady Justice.

Do Laws Actually Mean Anything?

Posted on by

The source of this article is a Legal Insurrection post of August 5th. The article is about the lawsuit filed by Gibson’s Bakery against Oberlin College charging that the college had engaged in false accusations of racism against the bakery. When a black Oberlin College student was caught attempting to steal wine from the Bakery, the bakery clerk who tried to stop him was assaulted by the thief and two of his friends. The students were arrested and plead guilty to the charges against them. At that point, students at the college erupted in protests, citing racial profiling. When the case came to trial, it was reported that the jury found that the former dean of students, Meredith Raimondo, attended the protests and handed out a flyer that said, “This is a RACIST establishment with a LONG ACCOUNT of RACIAL PROFILING and DISCRIMINATION.”

I hate to be difficult here, but if the thief and his friends were found guilty, how can you claim racial profiling? They did the crime. What difference did it make what color they were?

The article at Legal Insurrection reports:

The historically liberal Oberlin College, located in Oberlin, Ohio, is still refusing to pay up for defaming Gibson’s Bakery as racist in 2016.

The college, which is financially underwater, has now asked the Ohio Supreme Court to halt the multi-million dollar judgment while it appeals the decision for the second time. Earlier this year, the Ninth Ohio District Court of Appeals upheld a jury’s finding that Oberlin committed libel, slander, and interference with business relationships against Gibson’s after it encouraged student protests over a bakery employee’s pursuit of a black student who had shoplifted.

For delaying making the payment, Oberlin has added on $4 million in interest to the original judgment of $32 million, raising the cost to $36 million. Handing over the $36 million will have enormous ramifications for the financially struggling institution, which had a deficit of $44.7 million in 2020 and whose monetary woes stem back years. The college also had a deficit in 2017, which forced it to institute a rescue plan.

The president of Oberlin, Carmen Twillie Ambar, has been defiant in the face of the judgment and has continued to deny any fault on the part of Oberlin. Unwilling to accept the jury’s decision, Ambar said in 2019, “This is not the final outcome. This is, in fact, just one step along the way of what may turn out to be a lengthy and complex legal process.”

I believe the strategy here is to delay the payment until the bakery goes out of business and there is no one left to collect the payment. Hopefully someone in the legal or law enforcement community will step forward and prevent this from happening.

Is Anyone Surprised?

Posted on by

Most of us quietly acquiesced to the restrictions imposed by Washington, D.C. during the Covid pandemic. What we didn’t consider, unfortunately, was the Washington, D.C., loves power and would do pretty much anything to maintain increased power, regardless of what the U.S. Constitution says. We are about to see that principle in action.

On Thursday, Legal Insurrection reported the following:

One day, I will no longer write about covid.

But today is not that day.

After two years of covid lockdowns, restrictions, and progressive virtue signaling with promises of being able to contain an uncontainable virus, the country is seeing a surge in covid cases.

Laughably, officials say they “know how to manage it.”

Top U.S. health officials warned Tuesday that a surge of COVID-19 cases driven by the highly transmissible Omicron subvariant BA.5 has arrived, but stressed that the country has the tools — like vaccines and antiviral treatments — to prevent people from getting seriously ill.

“We know how to manage it,” Dr. Ashish Jha, coordinator of the White House’s COVID-19 response, said at a virtual press briefing. “We can prevent serious illness. We can save lives and we can minimize disruptions caused by COVID-19.”

As I predicted, the world will experience wave after wave of covid until we have built up enough immunity so future variants will join the very long list of common cold viruses. In fact, in my personal experience, I know many people who are now recovering from covid infections who did not believe me when I said that we would all, eventually, get the disease.

I predict that by the time of the mid-term election Americans will be so fearful of this new variant that drop boxes for ballots will be absolutely necessary (according to the Biden administration) to protect the health of voters. Signature matching will be waived in order to reduce the number of people handling ballots, and oddly enough, the Democrats will remain in control of Congress. I hope I am wrong, but I am not sure Americans have the backbone to stand up against the Democrat power grab that is being planned to steal the mid-term election.

The article concludes:

Dr. Anthony Fauci returned to lead the White House’s public messaging on COVID-19 this week after his own battle with the disease — urging Americans to again wear masks and get boosted amid the threat of waning immunity against surging new variants.

The administration’s 81-year-old chief medical adviser has been lying low since testing positive in mid-June.

Now recovered, the quadruple-vaccinated infectious disease expert gave a series of interviews Tuesday to warn of surging cases sparked by the latest Omicron variant, BA.5 — and caution Americans that even those recently recovered from an infection are likely still at risk.

“The threat to you is now,” Fauci warned during a White House briefing Tuesday.

After doing it Fauci’s way for two years, how about doing it my way:

    • No testing, unless symptoms warrant identification of virus.
    • Promotion of early treatment options that are inexpensive and readily accessible.
    • Focusing on good diet, vitamins and exercise as preventatives against severe covid.
    • End vaccine mandates, and allow people to make the decision about the vaccine that best suit their own risks.

Finally, end the ridiculous “public health emergency,” which at this point is a “political health emergency.”

Makes sense to me.

Freedom Of Association On College Campuses

Posted on by

Yesterday Legal Insurrection reported:

The editorial board of a Case Western Reserve University (CWRU) student newspaper slammed the student government and school administration for an early September decision to recognize the campus pro-life group, which the paper called “a danger to the student body.”

“CWRU does not care about its students. If they actually cared, they would have immediately considered concerns about the student body’s immediate safety and the broader school-community impacts, and they would have easily determined this organization to pose a danger,” The Observer editorial board wrote.

The pro-life group Case for Life seeks to “protect and promote respect for all life from conception to natural death” through education, outreach, and volunteering at local pregnancy centers. They have faced criticism and calls for denying their recognition since last year.

. . . . “It is not just that students have to worry about laws that impose on their bodily autonomy, but they also have to worry about being in an environment that is supposed to be safe but isn’t,” the students’ editorial reads. “Who could care less if someone is pro-forced-birth, but when that someone takes action to enforce that opinion on others—that’s when it becomes dangerous. “

The editorial continues to argue that CRWU’s approval of Case for Life is just another example of the attack on “reproductive rights,” referencing the new Texas law that bans abortions after six weeks.

Whatever happened to the concept of a university being a place of diverse ideas for the students to evaluate? It’s interesting that the newspaper is concerned about the laws that the pro-life people would impose on their bodily autonomy. The university requires a covid vaccine in order for you to attend classes there. Isn’t that imposing a law on their bodily autonomy? There seems to be a lack of logic here.