In a landmark decision that should have all Americans cheering, a Louisiana federal court recently upheld their First Amendment right to speak without being censored by the government. Judge Terry Doughty said the case, Missouri v. Biden, "arguably involves the most massive attack against free speech in United States’ history."
Most people in the media don’t want you to believe that election crimes are committed. They say it is easier to find Bigfoot. But election crimes are not a myth, and The Heritage Foundation has been systematically documenting them for years. When those who deny the crimes occur are forced to confront the data, the response sometimes shifts to “It doesn’t matter anyway.” After all, does it really matter if a single vote is improperly or criminally cast?
Chief Justice John Roberts made a major error in judgment last week in rejecting the State of Alabama’s 2022 congressional redistricting plan in Allen v. Milligan, an error that, as dissenting Justice Samuel Alito says, puts the Voting Rights Act “on a perilous and unfortunate path.”
Numerous studies and turnout data from states that have improved the security of their election process through commonsense reforms have shown that making integrity a primary goal of the laws and regulations governing the election process does not “suppress” votes. In fact, it seems to increase voter confidence in elections, which in turn can help to increase turnout. As the U.S. Supreme Court said in 2008 when it found Indiana’s voter ID law to be constitutional and not to be a burden on voters, maintaining “public confidence in the integrity of the electoral process has independent significance, because it encourages citizen participation in the democratic process.”
On March 20, my friend and former Justice Department colleague J. Christian Adams published the first article in our series of exposés, “Do They Teach Law?” We examine what’s actually being taught at the top 10 law schools, as ranked by U.S. News and World Report.
The cherry blossoms aren’t the only things blooming early this year in Washington. Radical ideas have been blossoming in the D.C. City Council, too—ideas that will both disenfranchise and endanger the city’s citizens.
In a scathing opinion on Wednesday that questions the credibility of the Department of Homeland Security, U.S. District Court Judge T. Kent Wetherell II for the Northern District of Florida has ordered a stop to the Biden administration’s “Parole Plus Alternatives to Detention” (“Parole+ATD”) policy that has been illegally releasing hundreds of thousands of aliens into the U.S., concluding that it violates the Administrative Procedure Act, which governs rulemaking by federal agencies.
For yet another exampansle of how out-of-control federal bureaucrats think they can stretch the law beyond recognition to meet their policy preferences, look no further than a recent decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. The F-1 student visa program that allows foreigners to enter the country and study at American universities is the center of the case, Washington Alliance of Technology Workers v. Department of Homeland Security.
Mayorkas has violated his oath of office by repeatedly violating the laws he swore faithfully to enforce. He has abused the powers of his office through reckless conduct that threatens the sovereignty of the U.S. and risks the safety and security of the American people and the law enforcement personnel of the Department of Homeland Security. And he has betrayed the public trust by repeatedly making false statements to Congress and misleading the public about the nature and effects of his misconduct.
Trust the science, we’ve all been told. Well, the science has spoken again: Voter ID laws aren’t discriminatory and don’t suppress anyone’s vote.
