This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Yet another lawsuit has been filed against the state of Colorado over its years-long agenda to impose anti-Christian beliefs on Christian people and organizations.
The state, run by leftist Democrat Gov. Jared Polis, Democrat-majority House and Senate bodies, and an all-Democrat state Supreme Court that in pursuit of its partisan agenda tried to bar President Donald Trump from the 2024 presidential election ballot, has taken actions dating back years already in its pro-LGBT, pro-abortion ideologies.
The problem is they conflict with the Constitution, as the Supreme Court already has ruled multiple times.
A new report at the Christian Post explains the latest action comes from a national grassroots group, Defending Education, which sued Colorado over its new law that also punishes parents who don't support transgender beliefs adopted by their children.
A new state law makes it "a discriminatory act to refuse to call trans-identifying individuals by their chosen name."
The group was joined by Colorado Parent Advocacy Network, Protect Kids Colorado, Do No Harm and Dr. Travis Morrell in the lawsuit over House Bill 25-1312.
Nicki Neily, the founder and president of Defending Education, told the Christian Post she believes that the new law "compels speech on sex and gender and punishes citizens who disagree."
Neily explained, "Citizens cannot be forced to say what the government wants them to say. That's why we have a First Amendment."
Morrell, a medical doctor, has discussions with patients on difficult topics like "alcohol abuse, smoking, anxiety, body dysmorphia, self-harm, and, relevant here, gender dysphoria," the lawsuit says.
"In these cases, it is vital that he be able to address the root cause," including the negative impacts of cross-sex hormones and body-mutilating surgeries that are part of the transgender beliefs.
"For example, sex-change surgeries can result in 'extensive scarring,' and patients who take testosterone may experience 'severe cystic acne.' The suit argues that Morrell must be permitted 'to provide accurate information regarding the risks associated with these interventions,'" the report explains.
The state already has lost twice at the Supreme Court in its agenda to force Christian business operators in Colorado to spout the pro-LGBT agenda in their dealings, once with a cake baker and once with a web designer. A third similar case is pending before the Supreme Court now regarding the state's attempts to control the beliefs and speech of counselors. In the first case, the Supreme Court scolded the state for its "hostility" to Christianity.
Colorado taxpayers already have been stung for millions of dollars in legal expenses in the failed ideology imposed on them by leftist leaders.
Further, another lawsuit was filed against the state just days ago.
It involves a policy change by the Colorado Department of Early Childhood that is trying to force a longtime Christian youth camp to promote the anti-Christian mindset of transgenderism.
In direct violation to its religious beliefs and constitutionally protected religious rights.
"The government has no place telling religious summer camps that it's 'lights out' for upholding their religious beliefs about human sexuality," said ADF lawyer Andrea Dill. "Camp IdRaHaJe exists to present the truth of the Gospel to children who are building character and lifelong memories. But the Colorado government is putting its dangerous agenda—that is losing popularity across the globe—ahead of its kids. We are urging the court to allow IdRaHaJe to operate as it has for over 75 years: as a Christian summer camp that accepts all campers without fear of being punished for its beliefs."
The ADF announcement confirmed it has filed a lawsuit in federal court in Colorado on behalf of IdRaHaJe, which takes its name from the hymn, "I'd Rather Have Jesus."
The state policy change would, in fact, force all licensed resident camps in the state to believe and teach the fiction that boys can be girls and girls can be boys.
Such transgender ideologies exploded under the promotions adopted by Joe Biden when he was in the White House.
For those who follow the science, such ideology in fact is a myth, as being male or female is embedded in the human body down to the DNA level.
The camp has operated in the Bailey, Colorado, area, southwest of Denver, since 1948.
Colorado also recently embedded an abortion "right" in its state constitution.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
It turns out Ed Martin, the Justice Department's director of the Weaponization Working Group, before he left the office of interim U.S. attorney for D.C., had begun an investigation into the last-minute "autopen" pardons of then-President Joe Biden.
And now Martin is naming names and identifying people in the former administration who were presidential "gatekeepers."
On Tuesday, Martin talked to journalist Mark Halperin on the streaming show "2WAY Tonight."
Martin said the investigation had been underway for weeks and that as part of it, he has reached out to Biden family members. He also noted that some persons of interested have already begun to "lawyer up."
"I had a whistleblower in my office 10 day ago – senior, senior Democrat – saying, 'Look, it was these three people that controlled access, and they were making money off of it,'" Martin told Halperin. "I don't know if I believe it yet, but the point is, I think, we have to get to the bottom of it for the American people and to protect the process, and that's what we're doing."
Martin indicated that the whistleblower he spoke to was involved with the 2020 Biden campaign at the highest levels.
Though refusing to name the actual alleged exploiters in the autopen scandal, Martin provided Halperin with the names of "gatekeepers" who were "dominant characters in the White House."
As reported at The Blaze, Martin identified the following three "gatekeepers": Ron Klain, Biden's White House chief of staff from 2021 to 2023 who returned to the fold last year amid Biden's debate preparation; former senior Biden adviser Anita Dunn; and Barack Obama's former personal attorney Robert Bauer.
Martin also mentioned Steve Ricchetti, former counselor to Biden who previously served as chairman of his 2020 presidential campaign, and "obviously Jill [Biden]."
As WND reported, President Donald Trump on Tuesday vowed an investigation into the Biden administration's use of the autopen, the electronic presidential signature device, as he said, "This government was illegally run for four years."
As Trump appeared at the U.S. Capitol to rally support for his "big, beautiful bill" to lower taxes, Trump discussed at length the problems created by a mentally incapacitated Biden.
"We're gonna start looking into this whole thing with who signed this legislation," Trump said.
"Who signed legislation opening our border? I don't think he knew. I said there's nobody that could want an open border. Nobody. And now I find out that it wasn't him. He autopenned it.
"Who was operating the autopen? This is a very serious thing. We had a president that didn't sign anything and he autopenned almost everything."
Martin initially was Trump's nominee as the permanent D.C. U.S. attorney, but his name was pulled after opposition by Republican Sen. Thom Tillis of Oklahoma.
The Daily Mail reported that Wendy McMahon has decided to step down from her role as CEO of CBS News. This follows internal disagreements over the network's business direction and the ongoing $20 billion lawsuit filed by former President Donald Trump.
McMahon's departure comes amidst significant executive turnover and declining ratings within CBS News.
McMahon announced her resignation on Monday, marking a turbulent period for CBS News. She expressed discontent with the network's current trajectory, emphasizing her misalignment with recent business decisions. Her exit was first reported by The New York Times, three months after speculation about her potential removal had surfaced.
Central to the turmoil at CBS News is the lawsuit initiated by Donald Trump regarding a "60 Minutes" interview with Kamala Harris. The suit amounts to $20 billion and alleges deceptive editing of the interview. CBS maintains that edits were necessary due to time restrictions.
Both McMahon and Bill Owens, previously at the helm of "60 Minutes", opposed proposals to resolve the lawsuit. They were joined by Shari Redstone from CBS's parent, Paramount, in settlement discussions, highlighting the contentious nature of the case within the company.
In an internal memo, McMahon described her tenure as a valuable chapter of her career, while acknowledging the difficult circumstances that have affected the network. She thanked her colleagues for their passion and dedication.
McMahon's leadership at CBS News was marked by a worrying dip in viewership, particularly among the demographic aged 25-54. Her initiatives, which featured magazine-style elements introduced to the CBS Evening News, failed to resonate with the audience, leading to a ratings decline.
Amid these challenges, rumors of discord between McMahon and then-deputy Adrienne Roark emerged, with Roark resigning after a brief tenure. Insiders suggested neither McMahon nor Roark possessed the necessary editorial experience for their roles at CBS.
The executive turnover at CBS News is further underscored by the earlier departures of Neeraj Khemlani and Susan Zirinsky, contributing to a period of instability in leadership.
Meanwhile, a potential media merger between Paramount and Skydance is on the horizon, awaiting approval from the Trump administration. This development may affect both CBS's strategic direction and its legal battles.
Following McMahon's resignation, George Cheeks, Co-CEO of Paramount Global, will temporarily oversee CBS News operations. McMahon's former deputies will now report directly to Cheeks, as the network seeks stable leadership amid ongoing challenges.
In her farewell memo, McMahon expressed gratitude for the chance to lead CBS News, saying, "To George: Thank you for this opportunity." She also extended her thanks to CBS's viewers, emphasizing the role of accountability and trust in journalism.
Bill Owens expressed admiration for McMahon's dedication to her team, despite the obstacles she faced during her tenure. "Fighting for her team week by week," he noted, underscoring the struggles with which McMahon contended.
As CBS News navigates this period of transition, industry watchers will closely follow whether the network's strategic adjustments can reverse declining ratings and resolve its legal entanglements. In closing her memo, Wendy McMahon remarked on the privilege of leading such an "extraordinary organization," reflecting on the professional challenges and rewarding experiences made during her time with CBS News.
The Supreme Court has upheld President Trump's authority to deport more than 300,000 Venezuelans who received a form of amnesty from Joe Biden.
The ruling wasn't close, with only one liberal justice, Ketanji Brown Jackson, voicing dissent. The case has to do with Temporary Protected Status (TPS), which was abused during the Biden era to wave hundreds of thousands of aliens into the country from nations like Venezuela and Haiti.
Established in 1990, TPS was meant to allow immigrants fleeing war or disaster to live and work temporarily in the United States. Under Biden, TPS was repurposed into another weapon or tool in an effort to permanently resettle millions of people in the United States.
Biden's Homeland Security Secretary, Alejandro Mayorkas, renewed TPS status for nearly 1 million immigrants shortly before the end of Biden's term, giving the whole game away.
The Trump administration has emphasized that temporary legal status should be just that - temporary. In February, Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem revoked TPS for 350,000 Venezuelans, finding that a Biden-era extension was "contrary to the national interest."
A district court blocked Noem's move nationwide, continuing a pattern of judicial activism that has prevented Trump from exercising the core powers of his office.
The ruling from District Court Judge Edward Chen "wrested control of the nation's immigration policy away from the Executive Branch and imposed the court's own perception," Trump's Solicitor General John Sauer wrote to the Supreme Court.
"The district court's decision undermines the Executive Branch's inherent powers as to immigration and foreign affairs," Sauer wrote.
Chen, an Obama appointee, claimed that Trump had singled out Venezuelans because of race. The judge insisted there were no good reasons for ending their TPS status, pointing to the supposed economic benefits of letting them live and work in the U.S. continually.
The Supreme Court's ruling lifts Chen's blatantly political injunction, allowing Trump to move forward with deportation proceedings while litigation continues.
Ahilan Arulanantham, one of the lawyers for the Venezuelans, called Trump's move "the largest single action stripping any group of noncitizens of immigration status in modern US history.”
The tone of this complaint could almost lead one to think that Trump was trying to strip Americans of their citizenship. His critics clearly do not see any distinction between a temporary legal status and a guaranteed right to reside in the U.S. permanently.
While the Supreme Court has ruled against Trump in other immigration disputes, they're getting out of the way this time and letting him do his job.
Rightfully so: the case is so clear-cut than only one liberal justice (a Biden appointee) disagreed with the court.
It's really simple: if Biden can wave in hundreds of thousands of at the stroke of a pen, then Trump can send them back.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
O'Keefe Media Group has released video of the "temple" found on Little St. James island in the U.S. Virgin Islands, the retreat belonging to the late convicted sex-abuse kingpin Jeffrey Epstein.
A report at the Gateway Pundit said the footage obtained by James O'Keefe and his OMG organization "shows a 360 degree view of Epstein's temple with a celestial ceiling, astrological figures and bizarre statues."
The report noted, "Many of Jeffrey Epstein's crimes were committed on his private island Little St. James in the Caribbean."
An earlier video showed Epstein's bedroom, and the ominous names and numbers on the speed dial for his bedside telephones.
OMG has been releasing details about Epstein's residence.
Previously, O'Keefe released images and details about Epstein's private library.
Epstein died in a New York jail while awaiting further court hearings on new charges.
An initial video release disclosed images from Epstein's kitchen, including a disturbing image in a photograph of a nude infant sitting in a sink.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Don't mess with Texas – at least not after a law goes into effect barring men from competing in women's sporting events.
As a result of a man winning five gold medals at a San Antonio swim meet in April, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton has launched an investigation into the sponsor of the event, U.S. Master's Swimming.
According to Fox News Digital, multiple female swimmers were unaware that the winning competitor was a biological male.
"The policy of U.S. Masters Swimming, which allows men to compete in women's events, is reprehensible and could violate Texas's consumer protection laws," Paxton said in an announcement. "Not only is this policy insulting to female athletes, but it also demonstrates deep contempt for women and may violate Texas law. I will fight to stop these unfair policies and never back down from defending the integrity of women's sports."
The swimmer in question, a 47-year-old who goes by Ana Caldas, won every race he entered, taking gold in the women's age 45-49 category in five races, including the 50- and 100-yard breaststroke, freestyle and the 100-yard individual medley.
Louisiana woman and long-time swimmer Wendy Enderle said she filed a request for an eligibility review. Besides the Paxton investigation, Enderle is also calling for action by the U.S. Department of Justice.
"I hope that U.S. Masters Swimming quickly adopts a more appropriate and fair policy in line with World Aquatics policy. I also would like to see U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi look into whether U.S. Masters Swimming violates Presidential Executive Order number 14201, Keeping Men Out of Women's Sports, dated Feb. 5, 2025," Enderle told Fox – though the president's order applies only to publicly funded entities, and U.S. Master's Swimming is a private organization.
"Thank you to the great state of Texas for standing up for women and girls!" added Enderle.
In June 2023, Texas passed the Save Women's Sports Act, which bans trans athletes from competing in girls and women's sports and only allows students to compete in the gender category listed on their birth certificate.
According to Fox News Digital, USMS policy allows transgender swimmers to participate in the gender competition category in which they identify, and they may also be recognized for accomplishments, if certain conditions are met.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
The U.S. Supreme Court issued an unsigned order on Tuesday instructing the Maine state legislature to revoke its censure of Republican state Rep. Laurel Libby.
Libby had been in the penalty box of the Democrat majority in the legislature since February when she commented on social media about a boy who won a girls' athletic competition in the state.
Expressing an intolerance for her beliefs about transgenderism, the Democrat majority demanded she apologize before she could speak – or vote – in the legislature again, effectively depriving her constituents of their constitutionally protected right to representation.
Maine House Speaker Ryan Fecteau had demanded an apology from Libby for her beliefs and she refused.
The court's order said, "The application for injunction pending appeal presented to JUSTICE JACKSON and by her referred to the Court is granted pending disposition of the appeal in the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit and disposition of the petition for a writ of certiorari, if such writ is timely sought. Should the petition for a writ of certiorari be denied, this order shall terminate automatically. In the event the petition for a writ of certiorari is granted, the order shall terminate upon the sending down of the judgment of this Court."
Two of the extremists on the Supreme Court bench, Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Jackson, would have kept the punishment on Libby.
Sotomayor didn't comment on her opinion but Jackson, the justice who as a nominee before the Senate famously was unable to, or refused to, define what is a woman, ranted for pages about what she wanted.
"We have long recognized that this injunctive relief is appropriate only when 'critical and exigent circumstances' exist necessitating intervention," and she didn't consider the fact that thousands of Maine residents were being deprived of their legislative voice important enough.
She claimed there are not "any significant legislative votes scheduled in the upcoming weeks" and the First Circuit already has arguments scheduled.
It had only been reported hours earlier that the U.S. Department of Justice had joined the battle on the side of the Maine lawmaker who was censured by Democrats in the state legislature over her beliefs.
Republican state Rep. Laurel Libby has been banned from speaking in the legislature or representing her constituents by voting since February over her social media posting about a boy who won a pole vault competition in girls track in the state.
She's sued to have that move, which effectively punishes her constituents by depriving them of a voice in the lawmaking body, reversed and her request now is pending before the Supreme Court.
A report at Fox explained the DOJ and Attorney General Pam Bondi now have come out in her support.
The department has filed a friend-of-the-court document supporting Libby's request and Bondi has spoken out personally.
The DOJ explains that the Democrats in Maine are in violation of the Constitution's Equal Protection Clause, which allows for "one-person, one-vote," because they have deprived her voters of their rights over a "private act."
"Stripping District 90's voters of their house representation and vote because their chosen representative will not apologize for fulfilling this obligation is well beyond the bounds of an appropriate sanction," the DOJ explains.
Bondi told Fox, "The Department of Justice is proud to fight for girls in Maine and stand alongside Rep. Libby, who is being attacked simply for defending girls in her home state. As our lawsuit against the state of Maine illustrates, we will always protect girls' sports and girls' spaces from radical gender ideology."
Bondi has a separate action going against Maine now as the state's Democrats, led by Gov. Janet Mills, have refused to comply with President Donald Trump's "Keeping Men Out of Women's Sports" plans.
Democrats in Maine are demanding Libby apologize, but they have insisted the apology is for her "actions" and their punishment does not affect her "beliefs.
Maine House Speaker Ryan Fecteau and House Clerk Robert Hunt have claimed that the punishment over Libby's beliefs is like punishment for other members at times.
Surveys have revealed that Maine's residents are in opposition to the Democrats' agenda to push transgenderism for children, and in sports.
Fox reported, "A survey by the American Parents Coalition found that out of about 600 registered Maine voters, 63% said school sports participation should be based on biological sex, and 66% agreed it is 'only fair to restrict women's sports to biological women.'"
WND earlier reported Libby's case to the Supreme Court questions whether Democrats can remove the representation rights of thousands of state residents in a dispute over personal beliefs.
The state of Maine also is under investigation and has had federal grants withheld because it refuses to accept the biological reality that men do not become women, or vice versa. The state now is in noncompliance with Title IX.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
In a stunning decision Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court, with support even from leftists like Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan, gave a green light to President Donald Trump's efforts to deport hundreds of thousands of individuals given special protected status by Joe Biden.
The court's only leftist to oppose the move was Ketanji Jackson, Biden's appointee and a known opponent to just about anything that Trump proposes.
The Star-Advertiser explained decision allows the White House to strip temporary protected status from Venezuelans living in the U.S., who under Biden's leftist ideologies, had been protected.
The massive victory for Trump comes "as the Republican president moves to ramp up deportations as part of his hardline approach to immigration," the report explained.
The court agreed to the Justice Department's request to overturn an order from Edward Chen, a trial court judge in California who had halted Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem's decision to terminate a Temporary Protected Status program.
The court did leave open a door to challenges by migrants.
And the Department of Homeland Security documented that 348,202 Venezuelans were given the special protection by Biden. They claimed at the time was that Venezuela was an unsafe country.
The report noted the program is a designation under U.S. law for nations experiencing war or other disasters, giving those protected permission to stay in the U.S.
"The U.S. government under Biden, a Democrat, twice designated Venezuela for TPS, in 2021 and 2023. In January, days before Trump returned to office, the Biden administration announced an extension of the programs to October 2026," the report said.
Noem then rescinded that decision.
Chen had claimed, at the time he decided to take over the decision-making process for the executive branch, "Generalization of criminality to the Venezuelan TPS population as a whole is baseless and smacks of racism predicated on generalized false stereotypes."
It was that fault by Chen that Department of Justice lawyers had pointed out to the Supreme Court.
They explained, "The (lower) court's order contravenes fundamental Executive Branch prerogatives and indefinitely delays sensitive policy decisions in an area of immigration policy that Congress recognized must be flexible, fast-paced, and discretionary."
The report said, "In a separate case on Friday, the Supreme Court kept in place its block on Trump's deportations of Venezuelan migrants under a 1798 law historically used only in wartime, faulting his administration for seeking to remove them without an adequate legal process."
Trump pointed out over the weekend that decision was "a bad and dangerous day for America."
The Daily Mail said the latest decision was a "major immigration win" for Trump, "as he seeks to speed up mass deportations."
This issue has been one of a multitude on which judges in entry-level courts to the federal judiciary repeatedly have taken control of executive branch decisions with nationwide injunctions, a separate issue that also is pending before the Supreme Court.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
A lawsuit against the government over the shooting by a Capitol police officer of an unarmed Ashli Babbitt, who was at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, to protest what many saw as an unfair election result, apparently has been settled.
Reports say the settlement to the family is for just about $5 million, with about one-third going to lawyers who advocated for her.
A RedState report said the government apparently has agreed to those details to resolve the fight.
"Two people briefed on the matter said the Justice Department has agreed in principle to pay just under $5 million to Babbitt's family, with about one-third to go to their attorneys, who include the conservative group Judicial Watch and Alexandria, Virginia, lawyer Richard Driscoll. The two people spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss a pending court matter," the report said.
The case had been seeking $30 million.
The legal case alleged the police officer involved, Michael Byrd, used excessive force and unjustly caused the woman's death.
The case was brought on behalf of Ashli Babbitt's husband, Aaron.
"Lt. Byrd later confessed that he shot Ashli before seeing her hands or assessing her intentions or even identifying her as female. Ashli was unarmed. Her hands were up in the air, empty, and in plain view of Lt. Byrd and other officers in the lobby. Ashli posed no threat to the safety of anyone. Not one member of Congress was in the lobby, which was guarded by multiple armed police officers," RedState commented.
WND reported earlier when it was documented that a settlement was being pursued.
At that time, Department of Justice Lawyer Joseph Gonzalez and Robert Sticht, representing Babbitt's husband, Aaron, confirmed the settlement was in process.
Byrd shot and killed Babbitt as she was part of a group of protesters who had entered the Capitol and ended up near the House chamber.
The filing described that Byrd "negligently discharged his firearm and failed to warn Babbitt or de-escalate the situation. The suit also alleged negligence on the part of other officers near the Speaker's Lobby at the time of the shooting as well as the U.S. Capitol Police and the Capitol Police Board in failing to properly train Byrd in tactical decision-making."
Babbitt was an Air Force veteran but was killed during the protests that day.
After reviewing files related to the death of Jeffrey Epstein in 2019 a Manhattan prison, FBI Deputy Director Dan Bongino said he believes Epstein did kill himself as the medical examiner ruled at the time.
“I have reviewed the case. Jeffrey Epstein killed himself. There’s no evidence in the case file indicating otherwise,” Bongino posted on X.
Speculation has raged for years about Epstein's real cause of death. Conspiracy theorists have said almost since it happened that someone killed him to prevent revelations about who participated with him in the sexual abuse and trafficking of young girls at his compound.
It even became an iconic tagline added to the end of a statement whenever anyone wanted to debunk a talking point: "And Epstein didn't kill himself."
But Bongino seemed pretty sure in his declaration, and director Kash Patel agreed. “I’m not asking you to believe me, or not, " Bongino said. "I’m telling you what exists, and what doesn’t. If new evidence surfaces, I’m happy to reevaluate.”
Theories have run rampant about what happened the night of Epstein's death at the Metropolitan Correctional Center after it was discovered that the guards supposed to be monitoring him on suicide watch failed to do their jobs.
Epstein didn't have a cellmate, and the guards were working overtime and lied on their logs about whether they checked on him when they were supposed to. Cameras also malfunctioned that could have caught his actions.
Apparently, Epstein saw their negligence as a chance to end his life, as he had allegedly wanted to do since being put in the prison.
When no one was looking on that night in August 2019, Epstein allegedly took the bed linens and made a noose, from which he hung himself.
It does sound a bit fantastical, but could it have happened that way? Sure.
Some information has come out about some high-profile people who were involved with Epstein, including Prince Andrew and former President Bill Clinton.
Surprisingly, however, no definitive proof that they had sex with minors has caught on so far, and no charges have succeeded against figures like Clinton and the prince.
The whole Epstein mess has mostly stayed in the shadows, shrouded in questions but without too many definitive answers.
Who knows what other political figures may be desperate to keep their involvement with this disgusting human being under wraps, or what lengths they might have gone to in order to do so?