The nonprofit organization Independent Women’s Forum (IWF) is preparing to sue the U.S. Secret Service over what it alleges are “arbitrary” diversity, equality and inclusion (DEI) guidelines at the agency.
Read More
Indiana University is violating students’ First and 14th Amendment rights through its “far-reaching” bias reporting policy, a civil rights organization alleges.
Speech First filed a federal lawsuit against Indiana University on Wednesday arguing that the school is violating the rights of students by enacting a speech policy that “is designed solely to deter, discourage, and otherwise ‘prevent’ students from expressing disfavored views about the political and social issues of the day.” Under the policy, students can report others for “any conduct, speech, or expression, motivated in whole or in part by bias or prejudice meant to intimidate, demean, mock, degrade, marginalize, or threaten individuals or groups” on some aspect of their identity, like race or gender identity, according to Indiana University’s website.
Read More
For the first time in my 94 years on earth, I fear for the future of our democracy. I see the federal government using its enormous powers with contempt for the governed instead of with the consent of the governed as our founders envisioned.
Fundamental change in America is occurring by executive order or the force of the government’s police powers instead of through the legislative process required by the Constitution. From this, I fear that free market capitalism may be replaced by big government socialism. I also fear the erosion of our rights and freedoms, including parental rights, freedom of speech and religion, and due process.
Read More
Maryland Democratic Rep. Jamie Raskin, who led the second impeachment effort against former President Donald Trump, pledged to work on legislation that would set up a process for Congress to determine who cannot run for office under the 14th Amendment’s “insurrection” clause.
Raskin spoke about the legislation Monday on CNN hours after the Supreme Court unanimously ruled that Trump can remain on the 2024 presidential ballot in response to a case in Colorado, where the state supreme court ruled that Trump was ineligible under the 14th Amendment for his alleged efforts to overturn the 2020 election and in the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol riot.
Read More
An Illinois judge on Wednesday ordered former President Donald Trump’s removal from the ballot under the 14th Amendment, following in the footsteps of Colorado and Maine.
Read More
Parents Defending Education filed a federal civil rights complaint with the U.S. Department of Education against Burnsville High School in Minnesota based on race and national origin in programs that receive federal financial assistance.
Burnsville High School offers programming to affinity groups only open to some students.
Read More
There are many reasons why the United States Supreme Court must overturn the Colorado Supreme Court’s decision holding that former President Trump is barred from the presidential ballot under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, which purports to prohibit a person who has engaged in “insurrection” from holding office.
Read More
Former President Donald Trump will remain on the Illinois Republican primary ballot, per a state election board decision Tuesday, although the matter is likely to be appealed.
In a unanimous bipartisan vote, the Illinois State Board of Elections dismissed the challenge to Trump’s eligibility. The state panel determined that it did not have the jurisdiction to make a decision on the 14th Amendment argument invoked against Trump’s candidacy.
Read More
In what may turn out to be the most pivotal election case since Bush v. Gore, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a short order on Jan. 5 granting the request by former President Donald Trump asking the court to overturn the Colorado state Supreme Court’s Dec. 19 decision disqualifying him from appearing on the state’s presidential primary ballot. The U.S. Supreme Court moved with unprecedented speed; Trump filed his petition for certiorari on Jan. 3, and the court granted the appeal only two days later.
The case has been put on what, for the Supreme Court, is a “rocket docket.” Trump’s brief and any amicus briefs supporting the former president in Trump v. Anderson have to be filed by Jan. 18; the challengers’ brief and amicus briefs supporting Trump’s removal have to be filed by Jan. 31. Trump’s reply brief is due on Feb. 5, and oral arguments will be held on Feb. 8.
Read More
Republicans are calling for President Joe Biden to be removed from the 2024 primary ballot as former President Donald Trump is facing challenges to remove him from ballots in multiple states.
As challenges are brought to disqualify Trump from 2024 GOP primary ballots in more than 30 states for allegedly instigating an insurrection on Jan. 6, 2021, Republicans are suggesting that Biden should be removed from the ballot in response, but because of the increased volume of illegal immigrants entering the U.S. through the southern border.
Read More
The Supreme Court on Friday announced it would hear former President Donald Trump’s appeal of a Colorado Supreme Court decision to disqualify him from the ballot under the 14th Amendment.
Read More
The Colorado Supreme Court, acting as supplicants for the enemies of Donald Trump seeking the most extreme remedy for driving the former president into the ditch, may have just unwittingly gifted the former president a Rocky Mountain high – in the polls.
This time, four left-wing Colorado justices attempting to kneecap Trump were not even going to wait on due process – the very foundation of law – to effectively declare Trump guilty of insurrection, a crime for which he has not, repeat not, even been charged. After believing their attempts to wipe Trump off the ballot would be a knockout punch, it is the left that is about to get walloped to the canvas with a right hook.
Read More
Trump Derangement Syndrome became Orwellian with the recent ruling of the Colorado Supreme Court.
It approved the erasure of Trump from the Republican primary ballot in Colorado, by invoking Section 3 of the 14th Amendment.
Read More
A Colorado judge on Friday ruled in favor of former President Donald Trump in a case that had sought to keep him off the state’s ballot for allegedly inciting an “insurrection” against the United States.
Read More
Two state courts, the Minnesota Supreme Court and the Michigan Court of Claims, have thrown out the attempts by anti-democratic groups to disqualify former President Donald Trump from the ballot under the 14th Amendment, at least with respect to the presidential primary election.
The attempt to take away the ability of voters to make their own decisions on Trump’s candidacy has been temporarily halted in those states.
Read More
The people most insistent on the purity of the 2020 election work feverishly on rigging the 2024 election. It makes one wonder.
This anti-democratic effort includes interpreting the suffrage-expanding 14th Amendment to deny suffrage to Donald Trump’s supporters in 2024. A Washington, D.C.–based group, for instance, sued in Colorado this week to prevent the name of the candidate favored by most Republicans from appearing on the ballot there. If the involvement of an out-of-state group did not serve as a clue, then its board comprising partisan Democrats — and a “Republican” who endorsed Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, and Joe Biden for president — signaled the politics-by-other-means purpose of the motley crew. Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington President Noah Bookbinder justified preventing the opposition’s preferred candidate from appearing on the ballot by maintaining that “it is necessary to defend our republic both today and in the future.”
Read More
GOP presidential candidate Vivek Ramaswamy released a statement Thursday denouncing a liberal group’s efforts to bar former President Donald Trump from the primary ballot in Colorado.
Read More
Two top Democrats backed on Sunday the theory that former President Donald Trump could be disqualified from running under the 14th Amendment, Axios reported.
Democratic Representative Adam Schiff of California and Senator Tim Kaine of Virginia backed the idea that Trump could be blocked from the 2024 ballot under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, which maintains that anyone who “engaged in insurrection” cannot hold elected office, according to Axios. Free Speech For People, a Democratic-aligned group, also sent letters to secretaries of state in key 2024 states last week claiming Trump should be removed from the ballot.
Read More
Several far-left groups have begun claiming, with little to no evidence, that they can legally exclude former President Donald Trump from the ballot in 2024 by using the Constitution’s “insurrection clause.”
According to the Associated Press, such advocates point to the 14th Amendment, which bars anyone from office if they “engaged” in “insurrection or rebellion” against the government. This clause, added to the Constitution following the Civil War, has been cited by progressives who believe that the peaceful protests at the U.S. Capitol on January 6th, 2021 were an example of “insurrection” allegedly caused by President Trump.
Read More
Florida lawyer Lawrence Caplan filed a challenge in federal court earlier this week, arguing that former President Donald Trump cannot run for president because of the 14th Amendment.
Read More
Several academics — including members of the conservative Federalist Society — are now arguing that Section 3 of the 14th Amendment prohibits Donald Trump from becoming president. They focus on the language that prohibits anyone who “shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion…or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof” from holding “any office.” The amendment provides no mechanism for determining whether a candidate falls within this disqualification, though it says that “Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each house, remove such disability.” Significantly, the text does not authorize Congress — or any other body or individual — to impose the disqualification in the first place.
Read More
Americans once said, “As California goes, so goes the nation.” Hopefully after this legislative session, Americans will say, “As Texas goes, so goes the nation.”
The Lone Star State’s leaders are fighting fiercely right now to restore non-discrimination and equal rights under the law. These are American values embedded in U.S. civil rights laws and the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment, but they’re no longer practiced—or enforced.
Read More
President Joe Biden issued a sweeping executive order last week that will embed woke critical race and gender ideologies into every agency of the federal government, an agenda Legal Insurrection’s Professor William Jacobson asserts amounts to “outright discrimination on the basis of race.”
Jacobson announced the launch of the Equal Protection Project Thursday night on Fox News’ Tucker Carlson Tonight.
Read More
When the U.S. Supreme Court takes up Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization today, it will be asked to overrule Roe v. Wade, the court’s 50-year-old precedent that created a constitutional right to abortion. Legions of commentators are turning out to defend Roe, claiming that the Supreme Court’s legitimacy depends on reaffirming it. They are wrong.
The majority’s opinion in Roe has undermined the court’s legitimacy for nearly a half-century. Roe relied on dubious reasoning to remove a contentious policy issue from the reach of the American people, placing all abortion policy in the hands of the unelected and unaccountable judiciary. As a result, Roe has politicized the court and poisoned the judiciary. The most legitimate thing the Supreme Court can do is overrule Roe.
Read More
While schools like the University of Wisconsin Madison have considered canceling President Abraham Lincoln, one Princeton professor wants to preserve his legacy and help students learn more about the nation’s 16th president.
The Ivy League university will offer a course called “Abraham Lincoln’s Politics: Concepts, Conflict and Context” this semester taught by Professor Allen Guelzo, a Civil War historian and author. He also serves on the board of the Abraham Lincoln Association.
Read More
In the April issue of the conservative journal First Things, the esteemed natural law philosopher John Finnis wrote an essay titled “Abortion Is Unconstitutional.” Finnis’ basic argument was that the traditional conservative or originalist stance on abortion and the Supreme Court’s infamous 1973 Roe v. Wade decision—namely, that the Constitution is “silent” on the matter and that it is properly an issue for states to decide among themselves—is both morally insufficient and legally dubious.
According to Finnis, unborn children are properly understood as “persons” under the 14th Amendment’s equal protection clause, and state-level homicide laws, therefore, cannot discriminate by protecting live people but not unborn people. The upshot under this logic is that overturning Roe and its 1992 successor, Planned Parenthood v. Casey, would not merely return abortion regulation to the ambits of the various states, as earlier conservative legal titans such as the late Justice Antonin Scalia long argued. Rather, it would mandate banning the bloody practice nationwide.
Read More
Our men and women in uniform are prepared to lay their lives on the line every day to uphold the Constitution and protect the nation from enemies who would do us harm, but what many service members may not realize is that a personal threat to their families exists much closer to home.
As parental outrage with “progressive” curriculums—for example, comprehensive sex education, gender identity, and “anti-racist” programs—sweeps across the country, military parents have good reasons to be up in arms.
Read More
The Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board unanimously voted in favor of repealing its Proper Attire Required ordinance (PB 2-21) during a Wednesday meeting. This discussion had been tabled from a July 16 Park Board meeting.
The conversation about the nudity ordinance was prompted by an incident of alleged public nudity in July at a Golden Valley beach and the subsequent media response.
Read More
The Trump administration is reportedly preparing to crack down on foreign nationals who visit the United States with the explicit intention to give birth, taking advantage of the country’s birthright citizen laws.
Read More
In an interview on The Tennessee Star Report Michael Patrick Leahy – live broadcast Friday morning on Nashville’s Talk Radio 98.3 and 1510 WLAC weekdays from 5:00 am to 8:00 am – Leahy was live from Washington, D.C. and spoke with Dale Wilcox, Executive Director, and General Counsel for the Immigration Law Reform Institute.
Read More
by Dr. Carol M. Swain On October 30, President Donald Trump announced plans to issue an executive order ending the practice of giving U.S. citizenship to children of illegal aliens. By taking this bold action, the President is poised to make history by forcing the U.S. Supreme Court to…
Read More
by James D. Agresti Michael Anton, a former national security official in the Trump administration, recently argued in a Washington Post op-ed that the current federal practice of granting citizenship to the children of illegal immigrants “is an absurdity—historically, constitutionally, philosophically and practically.” A number of media outlets have published fiery rebuttals declaring that…
Read More
by James D. Agresti Michael Anton, a former national security official in the Trump administration, recently argued in a Washington Post op-ed that the current federal practice of granting citizenship to the children of illegal immigrants “is an absurdity—historically, constitutionally, philosophically and practically.” A number of media outlets have published fiery rebuttals declaring that…
Read More