President Donald Trump and his administration have had pretty solid luck with U.S. Supreme Court decisions since he took office, but they suffered a major setback recently regarding the deportation of Venezuelan gang members.
The Daily Caller reported that the high court maintained a block on the administration deporting the gang members through the Alien Enemies Act, upholding a previous court ruling that's causing quite an issue for the White House.
The Supreme Court shocked Republicans with the ruling, voting 7-2 to maintain the block on the deportations.
The Trump administration wanted to use the centuries-old law to expedite deportations of the Venezuelan gang members that have wreaked havoc on United States streets and neighborhoods.
The decision marked a major blow to Trump's efforts to expedite the deportations.
CNN noted:
The justices sent the case at issue back to an appeals court to decide the underlying questions in the case, including whether the president’s move is legal and, if it is, how much notice the migrants targeted under the act should receive.
Reliable conservative justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito both publicly dissented.
Newsweek noted:
Alito accused his fellow justices of "a mischaracterization" of events leading up to the request for injunctive relief and offered a reinterpretation of those events. He stressed that in his view, "the Federal Rules do not permit such a shortcut" in regards to how the court certified a class of plaintiffs to resist the AEA use.
The Supreme Court's decision this week was the full ruling after issuing a temporary ruling back in April.
Newsweek added:
Part of Alito's dissent took issue with the class of Venezuelan migrants at question, accusing his fellow justices of preferring to "ignore the important step of class certification and skip directly to the adjudication of the class members' rights."
The conservative justice held nothing back in his dissent.
"The Federal Rules do not permit such a shortcut," Alito wrote.
He added, "Instead of merely ruling on the application that is before us—which asks for emergency relief pending appeal—the Court takes the unusual step of granting certiorari before judgment, summarily vacating the judgment below dismissing the applicants' appeal, and remanding the case to the Court of Appeals with directions regarding the issues that court should address."
"From the Court's order, it is not entirely clear whether the Court has silently decided issues that go beyond the question of interim relief," he wrote, adding, "(I certainly hope that it has not.) But if it has done so, today's order is doubly extraordinary."
President Donald Trump made another appointment that ticked off Democrats, and more specifically, Rep. Nancy Pelosi.
According to the Daily Caller, the president named "San Francisco Archbishop Salvatore Cordileone to serve on the advisory board of the newly-created Religious Liberty Commission."
Archbishop Cordileone was the one who banned Pelosi, then the House Speaker, from taking Holy Communion, which stirred up plenty of controversy.
Trump created the new Religious Liberty Commission to "vigorously enforce the historic and robust protections for religious liberty enshrined in Federal law."
The newly-appointed archbishop commented on his new position, praising Trump for creating the new commission.
"Religious liberty is a critical issue in our time that needs to be defended and addressed," Cordileone said in a statement. “I am happy to join my brother bishops in providing a Catholic voice on this important topic at a national level."
The statement noted:
On May 1, President Trump signed an Executive Order establishing the Religious Liberty Commission. He designated Texas Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick as chair and Dr. Ben Carson as vice chair, as well as 11 other commission members. On Thursday, May 15, he designated individuals to serve on the three advisory boards comprised of religious leaders, legal experts, and lay advisors, respectively.
Going back to 2022, Cordileone explained why he banned Pelosi from receiving Holy Communion.
"After numerous attempts to speak with Speaker Pelosi to help her understand the grave evil she is perpetrating, the scandal she is causing, and the danger to her own soul she is risking, I have determined that she is not to be admitted to Holy Communion," he said at the time.
The decision sparked plenty of controversy at the time, but many Catholics agreed with the archbishop's decision.
Trump's new commission is meant to battle the uptick in attacks on religious liberty within the United States, which has been much needed for years.
The Daily Caller added:
The commission will be composed of several “educated representatives of various sectors of society” who will report their findings and recommendations to the White House.
Religious liberty has been infringed upon for years under President Joe Biden's watch.
Hopefully, all of those wrongs will soon be righted.
There was drama at the Supreme Court on Thursday as Chief Justice John Roberts chastised his liberal colleague, Sonia Sotomayor, for repeated interruptions during arguments on birthright citizenship.
The Trump administration's lawyer, John Sauer, had difficulty getting a word in as Sotomayor talked over him.
While Sauer defended the merits of Trump's executive order to end birthright citizenship, the arguments centered largely on the use of nationwide injunctions by lower courts.
In his opening statement, Sauer noted that courts have issued 40 nationwide injunctions since Trump's inauguration, but Sauer called judicial overreach a "bi-partisan problem."
Universal injunctions, he said, encourage "forum shopping" and "require judges to make rushed, high-stakes, low-information decisions." Sauer argued that courts should rule on the plaintiffs directly in front of them, instead of blocking government actions nationwide.
The conservative justices appeared receptive to Sauer's arguments, although they had questions about the patchwork effects of curtailing universal injunctions. On the other hand, the three liberal justices seemed to have their minds made up.
“Let’s just assume you’re dead wrong,” Justice Elena Kagan said. "Does every single person that is affected by this EO have to bring their own suit? Are there alternatives? How long does it take?"
Early on in the session, Sotomayor interrupted Sauer repeatedly as he was making his argument against nationwide injunctions.
"You are claiming that not just the Supreme Court, that both the Supreme Court and no lower court, can stop an executive from universally violating holdings by this court," Sotomayor said.
"We are not claiming that, because we are conceding that..." Sauer replied, before Sotomayor cut him off.
"Can I hear the rest of his answer?" Roberts interjected.
Sauer began to explain that lower courts can issue limited injunctions, or in certain cases, certify class actions. But Sotomayor didn't let him finish his thought.
"Lower courts in appropriate cases may certify class actions..." Sauer began saying.
"So, when a new president," Sotomayor interrupted.
"Can I hear counsel?" Roberts protested.
As the exchange wrapped up, Sauer pushed back on the "profoundly incorrect" characterization Sotomayor provided on the merits of Trump's executive order, which she claimed violates four different Supreme Court rulings. She was about to take up the issue again when Roberts changed the topic.
Trump's executive order maintains the "original meaning" of the 14th Amendment, which guaranteed citizenship to the children of former slaves and "not to illegal aliens or temporary visitors," Sauer said in his opening.
Smokey Robinson, a legendary figure in the music industry, is embroiled in an investigation involving serious accusations of sexual misconduct.
Four former employees have come forward with claims of repeated assault, prompting a criminal investigation by the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department, and this development follows a recent lawsuit seeking $50 million, accusing Robinson and his wife of maintaining a hostile work environment, as Fox News reports.
The details of these allegations have surfaced over the past week, shedding light on incidents that reportedly took place over nearly two decades, from 2006 to 2024. The accusation paints a troubling picture, accusing Robinson of sexual battery and other grave misconduct at his Chatsworth residence. The lawsuit also implicates Robinson's wife, Frances, for allegedly fostering a negative atmosphere and failing to address prior misconduct reports.
One of the accusers, referred to as Jane Doe 1, states she was employed from January 2023 until February 2024. During her tenure with Robinson, Jane Doe 1 contends she experienced multiple assaults and ultimately resigned due to the hostile environment. Her allegations form a significant part of the lawsuit that highlights issues of gender violence and negligence.
The Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department Special Victims Bureau is currently in the early stages of investigating these grave allegations against William "Smokey" Robinson. An LASD representative confirmed this ongoing investigation as the allegations continue to gain attention. They have refrained from offering further details at this time.
In response to the investigation, Robinson's attorney, Christopher Frost, expressed skepticism regarding the timing of the complaint. "The report appears to have been filed only after the Plaintiffs initiated a lawsuit," he noted, implying a strategic move by the accusers. Frost welcomed the investigation, asserting confidence in Robinson’s innocence and viewing it as an opportunity to reveal the truth behind these accusations.
Robinson's legal team has expressed their belief that the civil lawsuit aims to tarnish the couple's reputation. Frost voiced his opinion, stating the lawsuit was created with the intention of causing a media frenzy. He added that the plaintiffs' anonymity only feeds speculation and misinterpretation of the situation.
The accusers have outlined severe allegations against Robinson, including sexual battery and emotional distress. These claims are part of a broader list of grievances put forth in the lawsuit, highlighting acts of harassment and labor code violations. These allegations contribute to an increasingly complex case that challenges the star's public image.
According to the lawsuit, plaintiffs have suffered significant harm and humiliation due to Robinson's alleged actions. This accusation frames a narrative that significantly contrasts with the public persona maintained by Robinson over the years. The case captures attention as it navigates through complex legal challenges.
Robinson's lawyer remains steadfast in defending the singer's character. He emphasized that the evidence would demonstrate that these accusations are motivated by financial gain rather than genuine grievances. Frost's statements underscore an ongoing battle not only in the courtroom but also in the court of public opinion.
As the investigation progresses, the spotlight remains on the responses from both parties. While the plaintiffs maintain their claims, Robinson's representatives continue to discredit the motivations behind the lawsuit. This clash presents a significant narrative surrounding the cultural and social implications of the allegations.
The case highlights the importance of transparency and accountability, both legally and socially. With the sheriff's department now involved, the investigation's outcome may have broader implications for how similar allegations are handled in the future.
As the legal proceedings unfold, the focus will remain on ensuring a comprehensive and fair assessment of all claims. Robinson's responses and the plaintiffs' continued assertions will play a crucial role in shaping the developments in this significant case.
With the situation still evolving, both the legal and public narratives are critical to understand. The evolving nature of these allegations highlights a critical dialogue around power, responsibility, and accountability, making it a pivotal case in the ongoing discussion surrounding misconduct allegations.
Tulsi Gabbard has fired two top intelligence officials for misconduct, sending a clear message that the era of unchecked politicization in America's spy agencies is over.
“The Director is working alongside President Trump to end the weaponization and politicization of the Intelligence Community,” a spokesperson told the Washington Post.
Gabbard, the National Intelligence director, fired Michael Collins, the acting chair of the National Intelligence Council, and Maria Langan-Riekhof, who served as Collins’ deputy.
The firings came after intelligence leaks to the New York Times and Washington Post, both reliably anti-Trump newspapers, as well as the publication of a National Intelligence Council report on the Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua.
The intelligence report claimed that Tren de Aragua is not tied to the government of Venezuela, undercutting Trump's rationale for invoking the Alien Enemies Act to summarily deport members of the gang.
An FBI assessment found some evidence that Tren de Aragua is acting as a proxy of the communist Maduro regime.
A spokesperson for Gabbard, Alexa Hanning, said in response to the Washington Post that the two "Biden holdovers" were sacked for leaking and politicizing intelligence and not simply for contradicting Trump.
You are genuinely bad at your job but that is likely a prerequisite for WaPo.
No one from ODNI told you that, so of course you inject your own politically motivated opinion. That’s wrong but who cares about facts, right?
These Biden holdovers were dismissed because they… https://t.co/kccRnpUBrQ
— Alexa Henning (@alexahenning) May 14, 2025
The sackings were first reported by Fox News, which noted that Collins has ties to a former CIA deputy director who coordinated the notorious letter speculating that Hunter Biden's laptop was Russian disinformation.
During Trump's first four years in the White House, the intelligence community emerged as one of his chief antagonists and a key player in the undemocratic, elite-driven "Resistance" that sought to effectively nullify his 2016 election victory. Trump was cleared of "Russian collusion" charges after an exhaustive FBI investigation that dominated the news for much of his term.
Gabbard, a longtime critic of the intelligence community and a former Democrat, joined forces with Trump as the weaponization of government continued to escalate under the Biden regime.
The political corruption that has long run rampant in the intelligence community was on full display Thursday as former FBI Director James Comey sent out a coded threat to Trump on Instagram. Comey, who Trump fired in 2017, has long been unafraid to weigh in on politics, but the post brought his anti-Trump commentary to a new and dangerous extreme.
Gabbard said Comey should go to jail over the quickly deleted post, which featured the message "8647", widely interpreted as a call to eliminate or kill Trump.
“We’ve already seen assassination attempts. I’m very concerned for his life,” Gabbard said on Fox News. “And James Comey, in my view, should be held accountable and put behind bars for this.”
The co-founder of Ben & Jerry's, the famous ice cream company, was dragged out of a Senate committee hearing in handcuffs for protesting the war in Gaza.
Ben Cohen, 74, was charged with crowding, obstructing or incommoding, a misdemeanor offense, after he disrupted Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s opening statement to the Senate health committee. Six other protesters were charged with crimes like assaulting police and resisting arrest.
As he was being escorted out, Cohen criticized Congress for sending weapons to Israel and called for an end to the blockade of Gaza, which has left many Palestinians without food.
“I said that Congress is paying to bomb poor kids in Gaza and paying for it by kicking poor kids off Medicaid in the U.S.," Cohen said. "They need to let food to starving kids."
This is not the first time Cohen has been arrested for protesting. In 2023, he was arrested for protesting in support of Julian Assange.
Cohen and his business partner Jerry Greenfield are known for their progressive activism and support of Vermont Sen. and former presidential candidate Bernie Sanders in particular.
In 2021, Ben & Jerry's controversially ended sales in the Israel-occupied West Bank, calling business there "inconsistent" with the company's values. The co-founders, who are both Jewish, defended the move in an article for the New York Times.
“As Jewish supporters of the State of Israel, we fundamentally reject the notion that it is antisemitic to question the policies of the State of Israel,” they wrote.
Ben & Jerry's political advocacy has led to clashes with its parent company Unilever, which was recently sued by the ice cream brand over the firing of its chief executive David Stever.
"Ben Cohen takes stances as an activist citizen on issues he finds personally important," Unilever told BBC after Cohen's recent arrest. "These actions are on his own as an individual and not on behalf of Ben & Jerry's or Unilever."
Over 53,000 people, including many children, are believed to have died in Israel's Gaza offensive since the conflict began. In March, Israel imposed a total blockade and relaunched its bombing campaign, ending a brief cease-fire. Israel is currently escalating its airstrikes in an effort to pressure and ultimately destroy Hamas, which continues to hold hostages taken in the deadly Oct. 7, 2023, assault that started the war.
The humanitarian situation in Gaza has become concerning to President Trump, who notably did not stop in Israel on his travel through the Middle East this week, the first major foreign trip of his second term. Trump briefly commented on the blockade in Gaza as he wrapped up his trip on Friday.
"We’re looking at Gaza. And we’re going to get that taken care of. A lot of people are starving," Trump said.
A recent poll from Reuters/Ipsos revealed that President Donald Trump's poll numbers are trending positive, Fox News reported. The president gained two percentage points this week, reversing the downward trend since January.
In a poll conducted on May 12 and 13, Trump had 44% approval and 52% disapproval. This is an increase over the 42% approval Trump garnered last month, though it is within the poll's margin of error.
The increase is no doubt at least in part due to his handling of the economy. The poll shows Americans are more confident in key indicators, including the stock market, inflation, and recession.
🧐 https://t.co/fpio1Vwhtq pic.twitter.com/hUt7qN3d6w
— Ben Welsh (@palewire) May 13, 2025
In April, Trump imposed tariffs on nations throughout the world, including some of America's adversaries. The plan was off to a bumpy start as investors got nervous and a Wall Street selloff began.
However, there are signs of improvement both in the implementation and in their perception this month. The stock market rallied this week over news that China reached an agreement with the U.S. over tariffs, as did other nations.
The worries about recession have subsided with the changes, and the poll reflects that reality as well. In April, 76% of voters polled were concerned about the possibility of a recession, and now that number is just 69%.
Colin Reed, a seasoned GOP strategist, said that Trump has made it clear "that you are going to have to break some eggs to make an omelet and his voters will give him the latitude to do so," he told Fox News. It seems that the American people have taken that into consideration.
"We’re still less than 150 days in, he’s got some time to make the hard calls that have to be made and still give the economic plane runway to take off ahead of the midterms, which is when all of these early decisions will be graded," Reed said. However, the news hasn't been all positive.
Trump fought hard to get back into the White House in the 2024 presidential election, and his voters were behind him through it all. He promised big things, many of which he has achieved in a short time.
However, on the economic front, Trump has yet to truly tackle inflation as promised and as many people had hoped. Even with the slight bump this month, Trump is still experiencing more disapproval than approval, and political scientist and New England College president Wayne Lesperance believes it's due to the disparity between expectations and reality.
"Trump’s return to office did not begin as he and his supporters had hoped. Campaign promises about inflation and interest rates appeared deferred while the daily news coverage focused on the many distractions plaguing the White House," Lesperance said.
Still, Lesperance believes "signs of progress may be emerging" that could give Trump a boost. "Possible trade deals with Britain, China, and India are providing hope that some good may come from his tariff strategy. Add to that a rebounding stock market and lower gas prices at the start of summer vacation season, and the president may see some calming of public nervousness."
Trump is doing a great job, but he can't do everything he wants to right out of the gate. Voters will have to trust that Trump will deliver for the American people just as he did during his first term as president.
Tiffany Trump, the youngest daughter of President Donald Trump, gave birth to a baby boy on Thursday, the UK Daily Mail reported. The president became a grandfather for the 11th time as the family welcomed Alexander Trump Boulos.
As announced in a post to social media, Alexander was born at 4:44 a.m. on Thursday. This is the first child for Tiffany Trump, 31, and husband Michael Boulos, 27.
"Welcome to the world our sweet baby boy, Alexander Trump Boulos. We love you beyond words! Thank you for coming into our lives! 5.15.2025," Tiffany Trump captioned the baby's photo in a post to X, formerly Twitter, on his birthday.
Welcome to the world our sweet baby boy, Alexander Trump Boulos. We love you beyond words! Thank you for coming into our lives! 5.15.2025 🩵👶🏻🩵 pic.twitter.com/tYSgZDGivr
— Tiffany Ariana Trump (@TiffanyATrump) May 15, 2025
Marla Maples, Tiffany Trump's mother and Donald Trump's second ex-wife, was elated for her only daughter. "No greater joy in the world," Maples reacted to her daughter's social media post.
"Michael and Tiffany this Gran Mar Mar loves you all so much!! You rocked it, my girl," Maples wrote.
Her father was also happy for the new grandchild, so much so that he had accidentally spilled the beans about her pregnancy last year. Tiffany Trump confirmed the pregnancy in December after her father let it slip publicly.
The Trump siblings also celebrated the new baby in the family. Just last month, Ivanka Trump, Donald Trump's other daughter he shared with the late Ivana Trump, threw a lavish baby shower for her half sister.
It was Peter Rabbit themed after Beatrix Potter's famous children's book series, and Ivanka Trump shared photos with a sweet caption. "'Tiff, you're going to be the most wonderful mama. Your baby boy is already so loved - and so lucky to have you! Love you!"
Donald Trump is a blessed man with five grandchildren through his eldest son, Donald Trump Jr. He has another two through his next eldest son, Eric Trump, and three through his eldest daughter, Ivanka Trump.
His youngest son, Barron Trump, whom Donald Trump shares with first lady Melania Trump, is just 18 and recently finished up his first year at New York University. Tiffany Trump was the latest to add another in-law to the family after her Mar-a-Lago wedding in November 2022.
It's clear that the Trump family is a tight-knit clan as Donald Trump's grown children have worked for him and helped him throughout his first presidential campaign. In July 2024, Donald Trump's granddaughter, Kai Trump, became the first of the next generation to do so.
"To me, he’s just a normal grandpa. He gives us candy and soda when our parents aren’t looking. He always wants to know how we’re doing in school," Kai Trump said at the Republican National Conference in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, about her grandfather, USA Today reported.
It's always a precious miracle when a family adds a new baby, especially for a proud grandparent like Donald Trump. Unlike his predecessor, Donald Trump is a wonderful grandfather who dotes on and acknowledges all of his grandchildren.
House Democrats have indicated that they will open an investigation into President Donald Trump's acceptance of a $400 million jet from Qatar on the grounds that it might not be legal for him to do so, even on behalf of the Defense Department.
Ranking member of the House Judiciary Committee Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD) led his panel in a letter to Attorney General Pam Bondi and White House counsel David Warrington on Thursday, asking for a reported legal memo she wrote arguing that the gift was legal.
"Any legal memo purporting to make such a claim would obviously fly in the face of the text of the Constitution’s Foreign Emoluments Clause, which explicitly prohibits the President from accepting any ‘present [or] Emolument... of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State’ unless he has ‘the Consent of Congress,'" the letter read.
But Trump wasn't accepting the gift for himself, exactly. Technically, he was accepting it for the country as a whole.
Kind of like the Statue of Liberty, which certainly wasn't unconstitutional.
Detractors did point out that Qatar was a sponsor of terror in the Middle East and supports Palestine and Hamas.
Also, Trump apparently plans to have the plane donated to his presidential library after he's out of office, so in that way it is rather more personal than some gifts might be.
But Democrats went all in on their accusations, saying that it's entirely possible that the "gift" was actually a bribe.
"President Trump’s statements expressing displeasure with delays in the delivery of his new Boeing aircraft to serve as Air Force One and the timing of this ‘gift’ suggest that President Trump or a member of his Administration may have improperly solicited this 'nice gesture' from the Qatari government," the Democrats said.
"The fact that, according to President Trump, the plane would not remain in service to the United States but would rather be donated to his presidential library after his term concludes further raises the possibility that this ‘nice gesture’ is intended as a bribe to Donald Trump."
I'm sure they'll end up impeaching him over it, because of course they will.
Never mind that their guy, former President Joe Biden, reportedly extorted every foreign nation he could for the better part of 15 years for money that went directly into his pocket or the pockets of his kids and other family members.
Like the great Rush Limbaugh always said, if you want to know what the other side is doing, just look at what they are accusing Republicans of.
In this case, they've managed to muddy the waters enough to make it look bad, even if it isn't.
Cassandra "Cassie" Ventura, who is testifying against Sean "Diddy" Combs in his sex trafficking trial, appeared visibly pregnant in court Wednesday, Fox News reported. Legal experts believe this could evoke even more sympathy for the singer as she recounts the abuse allegedly suffered at the hands of the music mogul.
During her second day of testimony, the 38-year-old star shared the horrific details of the violence she allegedly endured. Cassie revealed that she was allegeldy raped multiple times by the music mogul after their relationship ended.
"I can't carry this anymore. I can't carry the shame, the guilt … what's right is right. What's wrong is wrong," Cassie said in court.
The alleged abuse was so traumatic that she had "horrible flashbacks" about it while making a music video. In 2023, she entered rehab and sought counseling to deal with the aftermath of those experiences.
As if her testimony isn't compelling enough, legal experts believe the fact that she's pregnant could sway the jury even more to believe her version of events. Cassie and husband Alex Fine are expecting their third child together.
Criminal defense attorney Dan Rubin described the impact Cassie's condition would have on jurors. "Cassie being pregnant may make her an even more sympathetic figure on the stand," Rubin told Fox News Digital in an exclusive.
"It certainly invokes the maternal side of the singer, and that could really impact the way some members of the jury view her. They may find it interesting that — even if it's not said out loud — Cassie is looking at the dark events of what happened through the new lens of motherhood," Rubin went on.
Attorney Jo-Anna Nieves similarly believes "Cassie Ventura’s pregnancy brings a strong layer of visual and emotional impact that makes it harder for the defense to paint her as violent or dangerous," she told Fox News Digital. "Jurors are human, and whether they realize it or not, they often associate pregnancy with vulnerability, nurturing, and innocence," Nieves went on.
"That image alone makes it a tough sell to argue that she was a real physical threat or equally responsible for the violence," Nieves said. With so much evidence stacked against Combs, it will be the defense's job to tear down the witnesses and attack their credibility.
For Combs' attorneys, this may be a losing battle before it even begins for the defense. "Even if the defense introduces evidence of her alleged aggression, that version of events may not line up with what the jury sees in front of them," Nieves said, anticipating the strategy.
"It’s not just about the facts. It's about how those facts land and trying to position an attractive, visibly pregnant woman who also has her own celebrity status as abusive can easily flop with this jury and damage the defense’s credibility," Nieves added.
Nieves explained that Cassie's pregnancy "may not change the legal standard, but it can definitely shape how jurors perceive the story, and that makes the defense’s job a lot harder," the attorney said. As it is, jurors are already showing signs of sympathy for Cassie.
A juror was seen looking to Combs' side of the courtroom while Cassie recounted a "bad fight" with the 55-year-old former rapper. Another juror nodded in agreement when Cassie said she was too ashamed to tell her own mother about the alleged abuse.
This trial has revealed the worst allegations anyone could make against another person. If even a fraction of this turns out to be true, Combs' accusers, pregnant or not, will have no trouble getting a conviction.