Trump’s Big Win Against Universal Injunctions
Nate Jackson - natriotjackson on X
“Universal injunctions likely exceed the equitable authority that Congress has given to federal courts,” the Supreme Court ruled today in a big win for the Trump administration and a rebuke for power-hungry lower-court judges. “The Court grants the Government’s applications for a partial stay of the injunctions entered below, but only to the extent that the injunctions are broader than necessary to provide complete relief to each plaintiff with standing to sue.”
The 6-3 Trump v. Casa opinion, written by the lately beleaguered Justice Amy Coney Barrett, concluded, “The issuance of a universal injunction can be justified only as an exercise of equitable authority, yet Congress has granted federal courts no such power.” Furthermore, “When a court concludes that the Executive Branch has acted unlawfully, the answer is not for the court to exceed its power, too.”
Lower courts must now reconsider numerous cases filed by litigious activists against everything Trump has done.
Read more {here}.
SCOTUS Slaps Planned Parenthood
Say what you will — and there’s plenty to be said — about the constitutional wobbliness of Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts and Associate Justice Amy Coney Barrett, but this much must also be said: They’re real Catholics, not fake ones like Joe Biden and Nancy Pelosi.
We got a sense of this three years ago, when the duo stood up for babies and helped strike down the half-century-old abomination known as Roe v. Wade. Further evidence of their support for the unborn came yesterday when the duo joined fellow Catholics Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, and Brett Kavanaugh — along with Catholic-turned-Episcopalian Neil Gorsuch — in ruling 6-3 that South Carolina can block Medicaid funding for Planned Parenthood clinics. (The only Catholic apostate was, predictably, Sonia Sotomayor, who continues to believe that the leftist sacrament of abortion trumps the Church’s 2,000-year-old teaching that abortion is a “moral evil.”)
Specifically, the High Court’s decision in this case, Medina v. Planned Parenthood, makes it easier for states (read: easier for red states) to boot Planned Parenthood clinics out of their Medicaid programs if their citizens don’t like the idea that their tax dollars are funding such a barbaric procedure, and it made it harder for pro-abortion forces to sue those states for honoring the life-affirming will of their citizens. And since more than three-fourths of abortions are undergone by low-income women, the decision is a serious financial throat punch to the entity that can be aptly understood as the Amazon.com of abortions.
Read more {here}.
Democrats Offer Little but Socialism and Infighting
In the days leading up to President Donald Trump’s decision to bomb Iranian nuclear facilities, media outlets brimmed with enthusiasm that Trump’s move was ripping apart the MAGA coalition. They’d been reporting for months that the Republican Party was coming apart at the seams over budget fights, border enforcement disagreements, and the direction of the MAGA movement.
The fact that the Leftmedia is fixated on finding cracks in Republican support for President Trump and within the party itself seems to be a case of projection, as the real civil war is among Democrats. Infighting in the GOP is the result of differing opinions, not a lack of party unity. On the other hand, Democrats are at a crossroads, pitting the young, radical Left against the old guard.
Democrats “are engaged in bitter infighting and struggling to come up with a unified strategy to oppose Trump,” veteran political analyst Byron York observes. “Meanwhile, Trump is pushing forward on all fronts, setting the agenda — just look at the recent bombing of nuclear sites in Iran — and putting together one of the most consequential presidencies in years.” York adds, “It’s more an indicator of the Democratic Party’s impotence in the face of the Trump presidency. And behind the embarrassing stories, Democrats have substantial problems that could render the party ineffective for quite a while.”
One of the main issues is that Democrats are completely out of touch with Americans.
Read more {here}.
‘Jihadi’ Mamdani Fallout
While the Left is praising Mamdani’s victory, there are several red flags emerging in the post-election analysis.
Turnout in Tuesday’s primary was low. So low, in fact, that one analysis suggests only five to seven percent of New Yorkers actually voted for Mamdani in the primary, hardly a sign of a popular mandate.
Working-class voters overwhelmingly voted for Andrew Cuomo. College-aged, white liberals voted for Mamdani. How do you explain that? They’ve been indoctrinated.
Mamdani’s voters have gone through the four-year Marxist bootcamps we call “higher education.” They come out hating America, Israel, free markets, and the police. Working-class Americans know the reality of life. They know what works and what doesn’t.
Speaking of his views, Mamdani is a follower of the Shia Muslim Twelver sect, the official religion of the Islamic Republic of Iran. The Twelvers are waiting for the 12th imam, the “hidden imam” known as the Mahdi, to reveal himself and conquer the world in the name of Allah.
That would be bad for Christians, Jews, women, and, I hate to break it to them, the LGBTQ community. But Mamdani says he’s a huge supporter of LGBTQ rights. His platform calls for publicly funded transgender surgeries.
Supreme Court upholds Texas age-verification law for adult websites: Justice Clarence Thomas wrote the 6-3 decision for Free Speech Coalition v. Paxton, which determined that Texas has the right to enforce its age-verification law for pornographic content. The case brought by advocates of the porn industry argued that the law impeded the free speech of adults accessing the content. Thomas's decision explains that this only "incidentally burdens" adults' protected speech, while the main focus is on preventing minors' access to harmful content. This is very similar to the minor burden adults face in accessing alcohol. Tradition has established that sexual content that is harmful to minors but ostensibly not harmful to adults is protected in part and unprotected in part; this decision reinforces that tradition. Writing for the dissent, Justice Elena Kagan wishes for a more perfect law that restricts access to minors without burdening adults.
SCOTUS rules parents have opt-out rights: In a 6-3 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in the case of Mahmoud v. Taylor in favor of parents in Maryland who sued the Montgomery County Board of Education after their petitions to opt their children out of classes that promote LGBTQ ideology was denied. Writing for the majority, Justice Samuel Alito wrote, "Today, we hold that the parents have shown that they are entitled to a preliminary injunction. A government burdens the religious exercise of parents when it requires them to submit their children to instruction that poses 'a very real threat of undermining' the religious beliefs and practices that the parents wish to instill." This ruling is a significant victory for both parental rights and religious freedom. It's also a blow to the groomers.
In other news -
I hope you all have a wonderful weekend! Next Friday is Independence Day and we'll be celebrating with family and friends! I'm thankful for this nation, thankful to have the privilege to be born and raised here, and thankful for all God is doing in our nation.
No comments:
Post a Comment