This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
The University of Pennsylvania broke federal law by allowing a transgender swimmer, a man who calls himself a woman, to be on the women's swim team and go into locker rooms where female team members were required to change.
The ruling is from the U.S. Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights, and while the report itself does not name Lia Thomas, the man who identifies himself as a woman and insisted on being on the women's team, it does mean that he could lose the medals he won while he was swimming as a woman.
Thomas has become an activist for privileges for transgenders, after he and female swimmer Riley Gaines tied for first place in one event, and he was given the medal for victory, not her.
The department has investigated the school for some time, and concluded it violated Title IX, which bans sex discrimination in schools and colleges. The school is accused of "denying women equal opportunities by permitting males to compete in women's intercollegiate athletics and to occupy women-only intimate facilities," according to a report posted online at ESPN.
Thomas "won" a Division I title while swimming on the women's team at Penn, and the report noted that award is one that "Thomas now faces losing."
School officials had no comment on the problem they created, but the report noted in the past, they blamed the NCAA and Ivy League policies, claiming they followed them closely.
Federal officials said Penn has "10 days to voluntarily resolve the violations or risk prosecution."
The report said the Department of Education is calling for the school to issue a statement that it will follow Title IX requirements, a move that effectively would strip Thomas of "any awards or records in Division I swimming competitions."
Also, the school must apologize to those female swimmers "whose individual recognition is restored expressing an apology on behalf of the university for allowing her educational experience in athletics to be marred by sex discrimination," the report said.
"Little girls who look up to Riley Gaines and Paula Scanlan can find hope in today's action – the Trump Administration will not allow male athletes to invade female private spaces or compete in female categories," said Acting Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights Craig Trainor.
The misbehavior identified by the federal investigation already has resulted in the administration of President Trump suspending some $175 million in federal funding to Penn that had been coming from the Defense Department and the Department of Health and Human Services.
The NCAA had fallen into alignment with the transgender ideology, but abruptly reversed its policy when Trump took office and announced the federal government's position is that there are two genders, male and female.
Actually, following the science, changing genders doesn't happen, as being male or female is embedded in the human body down to the DNA level, a factor unchanged by cosmetic surgeries and the like.
The government also has opened investigations into other entities, including Denver Public Schools, over the issue.
Thomas, meanwhile, has demanded that Title IX be changed to provide more accommodations to men who say they are women and want to compete on women's teams, joining females in their locker room showers and such.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
All across the United States the nation is becoming more and more divided, since the Supreme Court threw out the faulty and unconstitutional Roe v. Wade ruling from decades ago that created a so-called "right" to abortion.
Since that ruling returned regulation of abortion to the medical powers in each state, officials have taken two paths. One is for a regulation structure that recognizes the health and life of the mother, as well as the health and life of the unborn infant, and that has involved several standards.
The other has been a free-for-all regarding abortion, when unborn children can be killed, legally, up to the moment of birth.
One of those scenarios has developed in New Mexico, which has no restriction on abortion, allowing the unborn to be destroyed just before birth.
And more specifically, the industry has exploded in Albuquerque, where there now are six abortion businesses operating.
Those circumstances have led the American Center for Law and Justice, a prominent player in fights against the abortion industry, to begin a new investigation into four New Mexico operations that do abortions past 23 weeks.
The legal team noted, "Such late-term abortions raise grave moral, medical, and legal concerns."
"New Mexico has no restrictions on abortion – it is available on demand up until birth. Further, New Mexico remains one of the few states in America that does not have a Born-Alive Infant Protection law. Such a law would ensure that if a child survives an abortion attempt, that child is recognized as a living human being under the law and must receive immediate lifesaving medical care. In the absence of this basic protection, the state's permissiveness on late-term abortion raises deeply troubling questions about whether infants born alive during abortion procedures are being left to die – or worse," the ACLJ reported.
Further triggering concern is the fact that a new abortion business, the Valley Abortion Group, recently opened and boasts of abortions throughout all three trimesters.
"This marks the sixth abortion center in the city, and it is operated under a radical ideological banner that promotes abortion as its sole service. No prenatal care, counseling, or adoption services are offered – only abortion. This facility is not an outlier, but rather the latest example of an unregulated and ideologically driven abortion industry operating with little accountability," the ACLJ reported.
The facility, the ACLJ reported, charges as much as $17,500 for abortions, a price funded by taxpayers as the state pays for abortions through Medicaid.
Its work, the ACLJ said, now involves an "Inspection of Public Records Act (IPRA) request" that was filed with the New Mexico Department of Health and the New Mexico Medical Board.
"Our objective is clear: to uncover whether these facilities are complying with the state's reporting laws and to expose practices that may be violating the law or placing women and viable preborn children at risk," the ACLJ said.
Requested were all records, including emails, provided to the CDC for the National Vital Statistics System that reference abortion, institutional records about the abortion businesses, records from attending physicians, records that reference an infant who survived an abortion and records of abortions past 24 weeks.
The report, compiled by ACLJ staff members John Monaghan and Olivia Summers, said, "The ACLJ will not stand by while the most vulnerable among us – preborn children – are subjected to inhumane procedures behind closed doors. We will continue to demand transparency, uphold the rule of law, and advocate for protections that recognize the sanctity of every human life."
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Colorado, with its Democrat governor, Democrat House, Democrat Senate and Democrat state Supreme Court, which flagrantly tried to impose its own politics and ban President Donald Trump from the 2024 ballot only to get slammed by the U.S. Supreme Court, has turned itself into a haven for leftists.
And as leftists are apt to do, sometimes they go too far.
As it has now with a new gun restriction.
A report from broadcaster KDVR-TV explained a list of elected officials representing the Centennial State in Congress, as well as a list of sheriffs, are asking Attorney General Pam Bondi to investigate the state for violating the Constitution.
The Colorado State Shooting Association organized the letter that cites the law that also is the target of a lawsuit.
"We respectfully request that the Second Amendment Enforcement Task Force launch a thorough investigation into Colorado's anti-Second Amendment agenda," the letter explained.
Bondi had confirmed the creation of that task force just a short time earlier.
Its goal is to advance President Donald Trump's "pro-gun agenda and protect gun owners from overreach."
The report noted an official for the state organization, Huey Laugesen, confirmed that "tens of thousands" of voters' signatures already had been collected in protest of the leftist ideology adopted by Democrats.
"When we have government coming in and putting in insurmountable obstacles for a lot of people, and particularly low-income individuals who are much more likely to be victimized by violent criminals, that's a major problem. That's some serious overreach," Laugesen said. "We won't stand for it because it's a very dangerous path that we're headed down."
Colorado repeatedly has imposed restrictions on guns and ammunition over the past few years, prompting 37 of the state's counties to declare themselves to be "Second Amendment Sanctuaries."
The newest scheme will demand that anyone seeking to buy a semiautomatic firearm with a detachable magazine, a common self-defense weapon, must buy a permit after getting a background check and special state-mandated "training."
Jared Polis, the governor, claimed, "Again we want to make sure that it was a real thing to get that learning … overall I really think this bill will make Colorado communities safer and prevent both accidents as well as reducing violence and ultimately that means saving lives while protecting our Second Amendment rights and of course holding up Colorado's proud tradition of sport shooting and hunting."
Ray Elliott, chief of the shooting association, called out the governor for his claims.
"Senate Bill 3 is not about public safety — it's a deliberate attempt to disarm law-abiding Coloradans and erode our constitutional protections. We are calling on Attorney General Bondi and the DOJ's Second Amendment Task Force to intervene and hold the State of Colorado accountable for its flagrant violations of the Second Amendment."
The letter cites the state's agenda to create a "burdensome permit-to-purchase" plan that assaults the constitutional rights of law-abiding residents.
Signers include U.S. Reps. Jeff Crank, Lauren Boebert, Jeff Hurd and Gabe Evans, along with long list of sheriffs.
Also signing the letter were all of the Republicans in Colorado's General Assembly.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Long have there been questions about how some of America's elected leaders acquire so much wealth.
While those who seek seats in Congress generally come from a background of political or business successes, and their salaries, currently $174,000 for members, are far above the average for Americans, still questions arise because after a number of years in office, some report net worth of not just tens of millions of dollars but hundreds of millions.
The result is obvious: questions about insider trading, because they are the ones who set policy and establish actions that actually change the economics of certain industries or investments, and they have advance knowledge of their own plans.
One such situation involved two-time House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, a Democrat from California, when reports confirmed she pushed billions in federal aid for electric vehicles and her husband's stock in Tesla, an EV manufacturer, surged in value.
So U.S. Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., is proposing a new law that would crack down on such situations that certainly create the appearance of conflicts of interest and insider knowledge.
And he's calling it the PELOSI Act, an acronym for "Preventing Elected Leaders from Owning Securities and Investments."
It would bar members, and their families, from trading stocks while in office.
A report at American Greatness explained, "The name of the act is a direct nod in the direction of 20 term Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) whose net worth has soared from $160,000 when she was first elected in 1987 to more than $140 million in 2024." That's an increase in her worth of more than $3.5 million, per year.
Her husband was described in the report as an investor "who has made significant financial gains on stock trades that some speculate may have been based on insider information."
President Donald Trump has said he would sign the bill if it arrives on his desk.
"Americans have seen politician after politician turn a profit using information not available to the general public. It's time we ban all members of Congress from trading and holding stocks and restore Americans' trust in our nation's legislative body," Hawley explained.
The plan bans lawmakers and their spouses from purchasing, selling or holding stocks during the time that the lawmaker is in office.
Previous reports have confirmed that Pelosi, for example, saw her portfolio grow nearly 71% between Dec. 29, 2023, and Dec. 30, 2024. That compares to the S&P 500's 24.9% return for the period.
"Pelosi outdid many of the world's oldest and largest hedge funds in 2024, including Citadel, which had $66 billion in assets under management as of December, and Discovery Capital, which has been around for over 25 years and had $15 billion in assets under management at its peak. She also outperformed legendary investor Warren Buffet's Berkshire Hathaway, more than doubling its 27.1% 2024 return," the Daily Caller News Foundation has reported.
A spokesman for Pelosi's office said Pelosi does not own stocks, and has "no prior knowledge or subsequent involving in any transactions."
But the report added, "Pelosi has made other shrewd trades in the past, unloading more than $1.5 million worth of stock in Google's holding company Alphabet one month before the Department of Justice announced an antitrust lawsuit against the tech giant."
Reports confirmed that in 2023, Pelosi made a 65% profit on her stock trading portfolio.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
President Donald Trump, when elected to his second term, created the Executive Branch office called the Department of Government Efficiency, told billionaire Elon Musk to start saving taxpayer money, and let the Tesla company owner and his hired staff loose.
Billions of dollars were cut from the federal spending plan, hundreds of thousands of federal jobs were cut.
But by the nature of the actions under executive order, a later president, leftist in his or her leanings, could reverse them.
So there's a plan now to embed the changes in federal law, which also can be changed but is a much more laborious process.
A report at Just the News explains it is Florida Rep. Anna Paulina Luna who has introduced a bill to accomplish that goal.
It would codify actions by DOGE into federal law.
The bill is called, "Establishing and Implementing the President's 'Department of Government Efficiency.'"
Luna confirmed, "For the first time in decades, we are seeing a successful effort to save valuable taxpayer dollars from the federal government's rampant waste, fraud, and abuse. My legislation will ensure that Americans can continue to enjoy a more efficient government and less burdensome regulatory environment. The American people deserve no less."
The department has estimated it has saved American taxpayers $160 billion since January.
An online report from TPM said there also is planned a rescission package that would allow money to be clawed back if it was approved by Congress but not spent.
Politico recently reported that DOGE, in 100 days, has reshaped Washington, reducing the federal workforce levels to that of the 1960s and more.
Politico reported, "Nearly a quarter of a million workers have or are expected to leave their federal jobs. That includes more than 112,000 federal workers who have opted into the deferred resignation program, according to a POLITICO analysis of previous reporting and conversations with administration officials. It also includes some 121,000 workers across agencies who have been fired, according to a CNN analysis."
Further, DOGE has cut back or shut down 11 federal agencies and says it has terminated more than 8,500 contracts and 10,000 grants. "It has wiped out foreign aid and volunteerism in the U.S., slashed education spending and made sweeping changes to the way the government makes procurements, hires contractors and shares data," the report said.
President Donald Trump's administration has revoked some 4,000 student visas primarily from those with criminal records, the New York Post reported in an exclusive. Some 90% were charged with a crime, including at least 500 who were accused of assault.
The other crimes included domestic abuse, DUI, child endangerment, wildlife and human trafficking, arson, and robbery. "They came and they were breaking the law with no consequences," a source told the Post.
"We set up a special action team to handle this," the source added. The State Department and the Department of Homeland Security cross-checked criminal records to target only the most "serious" offenders.
"There were cases like where it was not a serious thing, like littering, or somebody had charges that were dropped, where we didn’t revoke those. Because it should be a serious matter," the source explained.
The administration has been going full steam ahead to address immigration problems in Trump's first 100 days. "Perhaps in the future other visa categories, not just students, will be looked at," the source promised.
Meanwhile, Secretary of State Marco Rubio has committed to Trump's "zero tolerance" policy for those on student visas who sided with pro-Palestine protestors. "No one’s entitled to a student visa," Rubio noted during a cabinet meeting.
"If you come to this country as a student, we expect you to go to class, study, and get a degree. If you come here to vandalize a library, take over a campus, and do all kinds of crazy things, we’re going to get rid of these people," Rubio added.
Notices were sent out to the impacted students who were largely from nations in the Middle East and Asia. Already, several students have self-deported after the State Department removed their legal status, while others could face immigration authorities.
Trump made fixing immigration one of his campaign promises, and he is clearly intent on keeping it. While some are crying foul over these moves, the State Department emphasizes that this is all part of its routine responsibilities.
When Fox News Digital reached out for comment, a spokesperson for the State Department said it "revokes visas every day in order to secure America's borders and keep our communities safe – and will continue to do so." The spokesperson stated that they do not track statistics on revoking student visas.
However, this aspect is important to the safety of the U.S. "The Trump Administration is focused on protecting our nation and our citizens by upholding the highest standards of national security and public safety through our visa process," the spokesperson said.
"Every prospective traveler to the United States undergoes interagency security vetting. Prohibiting entry to the United States by those who might pose a threat to U.S. national security or public safety is key to protecting U.S. citizens at home," the spokesperson explained.
"The Department of State will continue to work closely with the Department of Homeland Security to enforce zero tolerance for aliens in the United States who violate U.S. laws, threaten public safety, or in other situations where warranted," the person added. This is a far cry from how his predecessor viewed illegal immigration, but that's exactly the aim.
Trump is doing precisely what he was elected to do when it comes to closing the borders and kicking out criminals. People who are not citizens don't have the same rights as Americans, and student visas are just another privilege that can and should be withdrawn any time there is a crime.
Meghan Markle insisted her marriage to Prince Harry is in the "honeymoon period," Fox News reported. Rumors persist about the pair, who have been married for seven years, and whether they may be getting a divorce.
The Duchess of Sussex appeared on an episode of The Jamie Kern Lima Show podcast released Monday. In an effort to address persistent rumors of divorce, host Lima asked Markle if she thinks she "will be married forever" to the Duke of Sussex.
Markle gave a firm "yes" to the question before protesting a little too much. "He’s also a fox, if you haven’t noticed. My husband’s very, very handsome. But his heart is even more beautiful," Markle responded.
As part of a softball setup, Lima quoted Harry's recent praise of his wife that was given to the press. "I'm so happy for my wife and fully support absolutely everything she’s done and continues to do," Harry said, no doubt also trying to dispel rumors of an impending split.
"He’s such a great partner. I feel that every day, how supportive he's been and is, but I didn't know he said that, so that's really nice," Markle responded to Harry's supportive words.
"That man loves me so much and, you know, look what we’ve built. We’ve built a beautiful life, and we have two healthy, beautiful children." However, this life they built came after Harry and Meghan famously left the royal family to pursue their current endeavors.
Markle leaned into the royal angle, perhaps having learned that it was the only thing that made her and her husband interesting. "I always think about it like the end of Super Mario Brothers, and you get to the final final level, and what’s the goal in Super Mario Brothers? Slay the dragon, save the princess," the 43-year-old As Ever founder claimed.
"I’m like, that’s my husband. He’s just out there constantly… going to do whatever he can to make sure our family is safe and protected and uplifted, and still make time for date nights," Markle claimed.
Markle's over-the-top praise for her husband and their marriage continued when she claimed they were more in love now than ever. "You have to imagine, at the beginning, everyone has butterflies, and then we immediately went into the trenches together right out of the gate, six months into dating," Markle claimed.
"So now, seven years later when you have a little bit of breathing space, you can just enjoy each other in a new way, and that's why I feel like it's more of a honeymoon period for us now," Markle claimed. The host then gave the duchess a letter "via Papa" from her children, Archie and Lilibet.
"We love your cooking. We love your pancakes and we love love love your hugs," they purportedly wrote.
"You're the best mummy, and we love you," Markle read from the letter. Of course, this all seemed a little too on the nose since, Markle has been trying to brand herself as a homemaker and mom influencer in her With Love, Meghan series on Netflix.
Whatever is happening in their marriage is their business. However, Markle seems to be trying extra hard to be more likable while also trying to convince everyone that her marriage is solid, and this smacks of overcompensation.
A federal judge ruled Friday to temporarily prevent President Donald Trump from stopping collective bargaining activity for federal employees whose jobs deal with national security, a move that could prevent hundreds of thousands of federal workers from joining unions.
The sticking point is a law passed by Congress to strengthen federal employees' collective bargaining rights, which the National Treasury Employees Union (NTEU) argued the Trump executive order bans.
The March order applies an exception in the law to employees in the departments of Treasury, State, Defense, Justice, Veterans Affairs, and parts of Health and Human Services, Interior, Energy, Commerce, and Homeland Security, among others.
The NTEU argued in the suit that the exception was narrow and applied to the FBI and a few other agencies, not to jobs in the agencies above.
In the NTEU's view, the president just wants to be able to fire federal employees more easily.
“The President’s sweeping Executive Order is inconsistent with the narrow exception that Congress provided,” the NTEU said. “None of the NTEU-represented agencies that the Order targets … do national security or intelligence work. Indeed, the Administration’s own issuances show that the President’s exclusions are not based on national security concerns, but instead a desire to make federal employees easier to fire and to weaken federal sector unions.”
The Department of Justice countered these arguments by saying that union negotiations could harm the readiness of federal employees to defend the nation.
After all, if union workers necessary for national security decide to strike, it could leave a gaping hole in the country's defenses.
National security is a part of many federal jobs, even if indirectly.
National president of NTEU Doreen Greenwald said after the order was issued that it was a “victory for federal employees, their union rights and the American people they serve.”
“NTEU will continue to use every tool available to protect federal employees and the valuable services they provide from these hostile attacks on their jobs, their agencies and their legally protected rights to organize,” Greenwald added.
Could Trump be trying to make it easier to fire federal workers?
It's possible he wants to expand the cuts made by DOGE so far into other areas, combine jobs, or reduce staff in certain areas to save some of the vast trillions of taxpayer dollars currently spent by agencies.
On the other hand, maybe he just wants to keep the country more secure and keep our enemies from exploiting weaknesses.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
The American Bar Association, which for now has been the only "federally recognized accreditor for Juris Doctor programs," through its Council of the Section of Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar, soon may be losing a huge amount of its influence on American lawyers.
Because others may be able to offer law schools accreditation.
The move would be a massive blow to the significance of the ABA, which has positioned itself as an extreme leftist in American society in recent years.
An analysis recently called it a "proxy for the left wing of the American legal community," and it said the ABA has been using its power as a monopoly "to promote an ideological agenda."
The change is being done through an Executive Order from President Donald Trump.
That order said, "The American Bar Association's Council of the Section of Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar (Council), which is the sole federally recognized accreditor for Juris Doctor programs, has required law schools to 'demonstrate by concrete action a commitment to diversity and inclusion' including by 'commit[ting] to having a student body [and faculty] that is diverse with respect to gender, race, and ethnicity.' As the Attorney General has concluded and informed the Council, the discriminatory requirement blatantly violates the Supreme Court's decision in Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President and Fellows of Harvard College, 600 U.S. 181 (2023). Though the Council subsequently suspended its enforcement while it considers proposed revisions, this standard and similar unlawful mandates must be permanently eradicated."
The order continued, "American students and taxpayers deserve better, and my Administration will reform our dysfunctional accreditation system so that colleges and universities focus on delivering high-quality academic programs at a reasonable price. Federal recognition will not be provided to accreditors engaging in unlawful discrimination in violation of Federal law.
"The Attorney General and the Secretary of Education shall, as appropriate and consistent with applicable law, investigate and take appropriate action to terminate unlawful discrimination by American law schools that is advanced by the Council, including unlawful 'diversity, equity, and inclusion' requirements under the guise of accreditation standards. The Secretary of Education shall also assess whether to suspend or terminate the Council's status as an accrediting agency under Federal law."
While Trump's order addressed the issue of accreditation generally, where accreditors "have … abused their enormous authority," it was the ABA that was singled out for special mention.
The order gave power to the secretary of Education to "hold accountable, including through denial, monitoring, suspension, or termination of accreditation recognition, accreditors who fail to meet the applicable recognition criteria or otherwise violate Federal law, including by requiring institutions seeking accreditation to engage in unlawful discrimination in accreditation-related activity under the guise of 'diversity, equity, and inclusion' initiatives."
The secretary, along with the attorney general, shall investigate and "take appropriate action to terminate unlawful discrimination by American law schools that is advanced by the Council, including unlawful 'diversity, equity, and inclusion' requirements under the guise of accreditation standards."
In fact, the ABA could be canceled entirely as an accrediting agency.
The order also banned accreditors from "engaging in practices that result in credential inflation that burdens students with additional unnecessary costs."
A commentary at Legal Insurrection had just warned that the ABA was preparing to "mandate race-focused study as a prerequisite to graduating from law school. It's another instance of woke ideology being forced on the nation, and may necessitate that states revisit the ABA's government-granted near-monopoly accrediting power."
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Joe Biden's legacy may end up including a lot of different things: his leftist promotions of abortion for all and transgenderism for children likely will be there.
Also, possibly there will be his record as a president who continued in office even though his mental powers were obviously declining, to the point that a special counsel gave him a pass on a potential criminal case involving secret government documents because of his lack of mental powers.
But also will be his decision to open America's borders, allowing in millions of illegal aliens, including criminals and even terrorists.
White House spokeswoman Karoline Leavitt explained, "We are in the process of carrying out the largest deportation campaign in American history. After four years of being vilified by the Biden-Harris administration, our heroic ICE officers can finally do their jobs."
And Immigration and Customs Enforcement chief Tom Homan pointed out that Joe Biden was the first president in the nation's history "who came into office and unsecured a border on purpose."
He noted he'd worked for six presidents.
"Every president I ever worked for took border security seriously because you can't have national security if you don't have strong border security."
He said even Barack Obama and Bill Clinton acknowledged the need for border security.
"Joe Biden was the first president in the history of this nation who came into office and unsecured a border on purpose," he said.
Homan noted that under President Donald Trump, the number of illegal aliens found at the border have dropped from 15,000 a day, during Biden's tenure, to 178.
"When 96% less people are coming [across the border], how many women aren't being sexually assaulted by the cartels? How many children aren't dying making that journey? How many women and children aren't being sex-trafficked into this country? How many known and suspected terrorists aren't making it into this nation? How many pounds of fentanyl isn't getting into this country to kill young Americans?"
A report from Fox News said, "Recent high-profile deportations have seen migrants deported to an El-Salvador mega prison after the president invoked the Alien Enemies Act, a 1798 wartime immigration law, to deport Venezuelan gang members. That move has since been held up in court with the Trump administration opting to deport 17 alleged members of Tren de Aragua to El Salvador from Guantánamo Bay on Sunday night via Title 8."
The Trump administration also on Monday posted pictures of illegals who have been arrested, with a list of charges against them, on the White House lawn.