This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

An appeals court has ruled that two Douglas County, Colorado, sheriff's deputies do not have immunity in a lawsuit over their decision to sic a police canine on a defenseless suspect.

"It is clearly established under Tenth Circuit law that it violates the Fourth Amendment to use force without warning against a non-violent, non-resisting suspect who is given no chance to comply," explained the opinion from Judge Carolyn McHugh of the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. "It was clearly established under our case law in February 2022 that using a canine to restrain a non-violent, non-fleeing suspect could constitute excessive force."

The case developed when a deputy and a dog handler were sued for blindly sending a police dog into a home with a broken window that they were investigating in Highlands Ranch.

According to a report from Courthouse News, it happened on Feb. 22, 2022, when someone called 911 to say a man was breaking a window to climb into a home.

Deputy Scott Kelly and canine handler Tyler Kyle responded.

They heard a voice inside, and claiming they feared a "hostage" was being held, sent the dog, Sig, in through the window. The dog promptly found – and bit – the sleeping homeowner, Tyler Luethje.

Luethje said he broke the window because he couldn't find his key.

The officers handcuffed him, shoved him into a patrol car wearing only his sweatpants, and called for an ambulance, the report said.

Then deputies searched his home but failed to find evidence of a crime.

Luethje sued in 2023, charging excessive force and unlawful search and arrest, violations of the Fourth Amendment.

A trial judge refused to give the deputies immunity because they had no justification for using force and lacked probable cause for an arrest.

The deputies then insisted the appeals court protect them, which it refused to do.

The court concluded that the deputies had no reason to enter the home without permission.

McHugh found the deputies' claims stretched "the facts alleged beyond recognition."

An official for the sheriff's office said it is "clear" that the deputies "acted legally and properly."

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

An irate subway rider in New York City failed quite miserably in her attempt to steal a man's red MAGA hat – this after berating him for supporting President Trump.

"He's a racist! If you voted for Trump, you are a racist!" she can be heard complaining, as reported by the Gateway Pundit.

"How can I be racist?" the Trump fan fires back while pointing out he is a person of color.

Watch the video, including the lady's comeuppance at the end:

This woke hate peddler attacked a stranger on the NYC subway.

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

One of the massive chores facing President Donald Trump when he took office was to remove bias from the federal government, and its contractors.

The Democrats under Joe Biden openly had weaponized government, filing charges against Trump and his associates for matters that now have been dropped into the dustbin.

The anti-Trump ideology, often called Trump Derangement Syndrome, was rampant, extending even to Congress which orchestrated evidence and testimony to try to make it look like he was responsible for the Jan. 6, 2021, events at the U.S. Capitol.

Now those members of Congress who pursued that agenda are subject to investigation, as are Department of Justice officials responsible for the weaponization.

And Trump also has targeted those private law firms that appeared to have been part of that weaponization. He's ordered that federal contracts cannot be handed to those organizations that have been part of that weaponization.

Now, however, he is withdrawing his March 14 executive order concerning the bias at Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison, a major Washington law influence, after officials there agreed to de-bias their operations.

The president wrote, on social media, that the law firm agreed to the following:

1. Paul, Weiss agrees that the bedrock principle of American Justice is that it must be fair and nonpartisan for all. Our Justice System is betrayed when it is misused to achieve political ends.
Lawyers and law firms play a vital role in ensuring that we live up to that standard as a Nation. Law firms should not favor any political party when it comes to choosing their clients. Firms also should not make decisions on whom to hire based on a person's political affiliation. To do otherwise is to deny some Americans an equal opportunity for our services while favoring others.
Lawyers abandon the profession's highest ideals when they engage in partisan decision-making, and betray the ethical obligation to represent those who are unpopular or disfavored in a particular environment.
2. Paul, Weiss affirms its unwavering commitment to these core ideals and principles, and will not deny representation to clients, including in pro bono matters and in support of non-profits, because of the personal political views of individual lawyers.
3. Paul, Weiss will take on a wide range of pro bono matters that represent the full spectrum of political viewpoints of our society, whether "conservative" or "liberal."
4. Paul, Weiss affirms its commitment to merit-based hiring, promotion, and retention, and will not adopt, use, or pursue any DEI policies. As part of its commitment, it will engage experts, to be mutually agreed upon within 14 days, to conduct a comprehensive audit of all of its employment practices.
5. Paul, Weiss will dedicate the equivalent of $40 million in pro bono legal services over the course of President Trump's term to support the Administration's initiatives, including: assisting our Nation's veterans, fairness in the Justice System, the President's Task Force to Combat Antisemitism, and other mutually agreed projects.

The White House explained, "The president is agreeing to this action in light of a meeting with Paul, Weiss Chairman, Brad Karp, during which Mr. Karp acknowledged the wrongdoing of former Paul, Weiss partner, Mark Pomerantz, the grave dangers of Weaponization, and the vital need to restore our System of Justice."

Pomerantz was a key player in the weaponization of the courts against Trump.

He, in fact, left his position with the prominent legal team to step down to a line-level job in the Manhattan district attorney's office to "investigate" Trump's finances.

He was part of the groundwork of a lawfare attack on Trump, even though he later left his position and in his resignation letter, complained loudly that Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg had not yet pursued an indictment of Trump.

Pomerantz claimed there was evidence against Trump.

He then wrote a book in which he likened Trump to a career criminal, drawing a threat of a defamation case.

Legal professionals determined Pomerantz violated professional standards by releasing a book about an ongoing case.

Despite the legal firm's admission that Pomerantz had done wrong, he still claimed he did not.

Bragg eventually brought a case against Trump, on strange charges. He obtained convictions from a leftist Manhattan jury on business records misdemeanors for which the statute of limitations had expired. He claimed, against Trump, those violations were felonies. The conviction is on appeal.

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

Government schools, teachers' unions, and others with financial interests in high taxes for public schools long have opposed homeschooling.

When parents school their children at home, schools, and therefore teachers, have fewer students and get less tax money.

When homeschooling surges, as it has since the catastrophic public school response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the move of students out of public institutions actually could threaten their future.

So in Illinois, state lawmakers are reviewing a scheme from Democrats that would threaten homeschooling parents with jail sentences if they don't perform exactly as the public schools demand.

A report in the Federalist outlines the scheme.

The Democrats are demanding homeschool parents report themselves to local public school "officials," or face fines, charges, and jail.

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

Authorities in Colorado have begun a criminal investigation into Columbine High School, known around the world for its mass shooting there in 1999, after officials there falsely claimed an underage student was homeless so that she could move in with her female teacher.

And why the school's actions all were concealed from the student's concerned parents.

A report from a local CBS affiliate says the Jefferson County sheriff's office is doing the criminal investigation.

"This is not a story, this is a nightmare," the mother told the station's Shaun Boyd.

The family's names have been withheld in reporting.

It was three years ago that the mom found paperwork in her daughter's room revealing that teachers, counselors and even the principal had developed a plan to help her daughter run away from home.

"This was deliberate, it was calculated, it was intentional," the mom explained.

The school reportedly helped the student, a 17-year-old girl, lie on a federal form declaring she was homeless, then hid it from her parents.

An investigator hired by the school confirmed the student "was involved in an inappropriate relationship with social studies teacher Leann Kearney. They say Kearney was 'grooming' the girl," according to CBS.

School emails obtained through an open records case "show counselors purposefully kept the parents in the dark while they helped their daughter declare herself homeless so she could move in with a teacher," the report said.

It continued, "While counselors helped the girl fill out the form, they say Columbine Principal Scott Christy also knew about the girl's plans and didn't tell her parents."

When the mom originally uncovered the scandalous behavior, and confronted the principal with evidence, she was told, "Kearney takes interest in helping kids navigate their sexuality."

The teacher shortly later quit, and eventually lost her teaching license. But the results included the daughter, when she turned 18, leaving her home and being found months later, with Kearney.

The CBS report said there could have been a motivation behind the school's agenda, as, "Jefferson County receives hundreds of thousands of dollars for students who are homeless."

The district denied that.

The criminal investigation is reviewing, among other things, why the school employees "filled out a federal form claiming the girl was homeless when they knew she wasn't, even discussing in emails how to conceal it from her parents by not using their contact information."

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

Under the regime of Joe Biden, transgenderism was a top priority, to be promoted everywhere across the federal government's presence in America and around the world.

He tried to change the definition of the word "sex" in 60-year-old nondiscrimination statutes to promote the transgender agenda. He tried to require schools and public facilities to expose young girls to nude men who said they were women in showers and lockers.

But when President Donald Trump took office he simply stated a scientific fact, that there are two sexes, male and female, and that's what the U.S. government recognizes, an announcement that undermined virtually every transgender argument across the nation.

Now even the far-left 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which rarely supports a conservative concept, has done just that.

According to the ADF, that appeals court has voted to uphold an Idaho law "that protects the privacy, safety, and dignity of all K-12 students in public school locker rooms, showers, restrooms, and overnight stays."

Idaho Attorney General Raúl Labrador, with the ADF, had asked the 9th Circuit in December to uphold a district court decision affirming the law while the case proceeds.

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

A campaign by Democrats that involved putting up billboards in various districts where they believe GOP congressional incumbents could be vulnerable, making false accusations about "cuts" to Medicaid, have been taken down.

The House Majority Forward organization had launched the billboards in districts involving Reps. Gabe Evans, Colo., Don Bacon, Neb., Ryan Mackenzie, Penn., Monica De La Cruz, Texas, Jen Kiggans, Va., and Rob Wittman, Va., all Republicans.

But a report from the Washington Examiner explains they now are gone.

The vendor providing the billboards, Lamar Advertising, confirmed they were gone after it was warned by the National Republican Congressional Committee in a demand letter that it would be "liable for the defamatory messages spread to voters in each district."

The billboards accused the elected Republicans of "voting to cut Medicaid and give tax breaks to Elon Musk."

The GOP letter, obtained by the Examiner, warned, "Medicaid has not been cut by the federal government. No member of Congress has voted for cuts to Medicaid. House Majority Forward can only point to wishful speculation that cuts could occur sometime somewhere in the future— they cannot point to any cuts that have already taken place."

The letter warned the Democrats' agenda "willfully ignores the fact that their Republican targets have publicly voiced their support for Medicaid and perpetuates false claims to the contrary."

Lamar lawyer Wendi Loup responded, in a letter reviewed by the Examiner, that her staff confirmed the billboards are "no longer running."

The report cited a controversy about whether every billboard had been taken down, as some had been run by another vendor, but the Republicans said they would be taken down "in seconds."

Mike Marinella, a spokesman for the NRCC, explained to the Examiner, "This proves what we've been saying all along: Democrats have no winning message so they resort to lies and fear-mongering in a disgusting effort to distract voters. The American people aren't buying it, and House Democrats should be ashamed of themselves."

Such accusations against Republicans, false claims they want to cut Medicaid and Social Security, have "been the rallying call for Democratic lawmakers and progressive opposition groups since President Donald Trump took office," the report said.

The report said the billboards were up only some 24 hours in some districts.

Democrat spokesperson CJ Warnke said the claims were "verified," and the dispute involved Republicans trying to "silence free speech…"

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

Various pastors and other faith leaders met in the Oval Office Wednesday to pray for President Trump, gathering around him as he sat at the Resolute Desk.

Margo Martin, a special assistant to the president and communications adviser, posted a photo on X after the meeting:

William Wolfe, the executive director of the Center for Baptist Leadership, was among the attendees, according to a report in the Washington Examiner.

"It was a huge honor to represent @BaptistLeaders and meet @realDonaldTrump today along with other Christian leaders and pray for him in the Oval Office," Wolfe wrote on X. "It's been an incredible day—been keeping this under wraps until it happened, but can't wait to share more!!"

Also in attendance was David Barton, founder of WallBuilders, who said it was an honor to pray for Trump at the White House.

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Removal would have been proper in 'a number of cases in our history'

Facing a long list of federal judges who have ruled against his agenda, including judges with documented personal biases on the disputes, President Donald Trump erupted on social media when one demanded that terrorists being removed from its shores for the security of America be returned.

He called for the judge's impeachment.

And that prompted Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts to scold, in a fashion.
Without mentioning the president, Roberts explained, "For more than two centuries, it has been established that impeachment is not an appropriate response to disagreement concerning a judicial decision. The normal appellate review process exists for that purpose."

And that's right. Mostly. According to constitutional lawyer Alan Dershowitz.

He, in fact, said there are times when impeachment is the appropriate remedy.

"Impeachment is proper — Chief Justice [Roberts] is wrong when he says it's never proper for a decision — after the Dred Scott decision, for example, which declared black people not to be eligible for citizenship, impeachment would have been a proper remedy," Dershowitz said. "There have been a number of cases in our history where impeachment would have been a proper remedy, but not generally. Generally, appellate remedies are available, particularly in cases of this kind."

WND has reported that the judge criticized by Trump is James Boasberg, in Washington.

The president said on social media;

Boasberg interfered in Trump's responsibilities to make sure the U.S. is secure by opposing the president's decisions to deport a number of criminal illegal aliens, including some affiliated with a Venezuelan gang, Tren de Aregua, whose members are considered terrorists.

Over the weekend, Boasberg ordered a halt to those deportations. Further, he claimed the authority to order planes carrying those deportees that already had taken off, and were in international airspace, to be returned to the United States.

The Trump administration let the planes continue to their El Salvador destination, explaining that the judge's order didn't have any authority over international territories. Further, the judge's verbal order and subsequent written ordered were different.

WND reported further, investigative journalist Laura Loomer revealed there appears to be a huge conflict of interest for Boasberg, suggesting he should have, under ethics standards, removed himself from the case.
She explained, "Less than 12 hours after I exposed Judge James Boasberg's conflict of interest with his daughter Katharine Boasberg, who works for a 501c3 called 'Partners For Justice' @PFJ_USA that gives criminal illegal aliens and gang members legal advice, Katharine Boasberg has DELETED her @LinkedIn page and her Instagram account. I have exclusively uncovered a massive CONFLICT OF INTEREST involving Judge James Boasberg, the Chief judge of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. Judge Boasberg recently made the decision to prevent the deportation of criminal illegal alien gang members on planes out of the country. This is enough for President Trump's legal team to push for a MOTION FOR RECUSAL for Judge Boasberg."

It's not the first time such a situation has arisen for a judge working on a lawfare case against Trump. When Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg wildly claimed that business reporting misdemeanors, for which the statute of limitations already had passed, actually were felonies and put Trump on trial, Judge Juan Merchan allowed testimony from a former porn star and a convicted perjurer to be used against Trump to obtain a conviction.

It also was revealed that Merchan's daughter is a Democrat operative who was advising campaigns, and making money off the decisions her father was making against Trump in court.

Boasberg is continuing his agenda this week, demanding the Trump administration answer his questions about why it didn't order the airplanes to turn around mid-flight, exactly what time they took off, and more.

He is insisting his "equitable powers" should attach to a plane even if it has departed the U.S. and is in "international airspace."

Trump has been using the Alien Enemies Act and other federal laws to deport known criminal illegal aliens.

The unprecedented work by trial court judges to block Trump's agendas, including deporting criminal aliens, eliminating fraud, waste and corruption in the executive branch spending, and more, already is being described by analysts as a constitutional crisis for the country.

The Washington Examiner explained, "A grave threat to democracy was revealed during the first weeks of President Donald Trump's second term. But it does not emanate from the White House. Judges, acting in coordination with left-wing activist groups, are abusing the judicial power to thwart the will of the people and undermine temperate and deliberate jurisprudence."

Already some of the questions, especially about nationwide injunctions from local judges, have been submitted to the Supreme Court.

The report explained, "The power of courts to enjoin parties from taking action to prevent harm to a litigant is older than the Constitution, stretching back to English common law. This tradition is preserved in the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, which allow a party to secure a preliminary injunction if he establishes that 'he is likely to succeed on the merits, that he is likely to suffer irreparable harm in the absence of preliminary relief, that the balance of equities tips in his favor, and that an injunction is in the public interest.'"

It continued, "This is a high bar. It typically means a court's power to limit a party's actions is confined to named plaintiffs in the suit. This can make challenges to federal government actions tricky because any national policy, such as a nationwide employer vaccine mandate, could affect almost everyone."

Nationwide injunctions historically have been used rarely, except against President Trump, who has been targeted by dozens and dozens from often leftist judges.

The Supreme Court, in fact, has expressed concern over the multitudes.

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Exclusive: Roger Simmermaker comments on Packard-Juniper merger plan

There is a lot of talk these days about national security and American competitiveness regarding China, and for good reason. And it certainly didn't start after the November 2024 elections. China's push to displace the United States as the world's number one superpower extends into virtually every category of industry, including the all-important tech sector.

That is why the Department of Justice (DOJ) needs to drop its challenge to the Hewlett Packard Enterprises (HPE)-Juniper merger – a challenge that began prior to Pam Bondi being confirmed to run the current administration's DOJ. This is one area where the market must be allowed to prevail to protect American tech and its potential future advances.

It's no secret that China wants to delete American tech completely. China made its intention during the Biden administration in what is referred to as "Delete A" (the "A" stands for "America") in a paper titled Document 79, which China issued in September 2022.

The Chinese communist government has made it clear that it wants to completely muscle out American technology in China. That is why we need to support American tech champions here at home in the U.S. The DOJ dropping its challenge to the HPE-Juniper merger is a vital step in the right direction.

Unblocking the HPE-Juniper merger would not only massively help advance American tech and national security, it could also keep Chinese companies in check. companies like Huawei, which commands an alarming 30% of the world's telecom market. Cisco, the closest American-owned competitor and formerly a technological powerhouse in the Land of the Red Dragon, has only 6%.

Database provider FactSet estimated that HPE, which makes servers, data storage, and networks, received 14.1% of its earnings from China in 2018. By 2023, that percentage had plummeted to 4%.

In December 2020, Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe labeled China as the No. 1 national security threat to the U.S., suggesting the current struggle is equal to or possibly more severe than our previous struggle against Moscow in the Cold War. He also stressed that America's allies need to wake up and respond appropriately to the challenge.

We beat the Soviets in that former challenge, and now we must win the battle with Chinese communists in this current challenge.

In the next 10 years, 5G is predicted to usher in global economic output topping over $13 trillion, aiding in creating 22 million jobs globally. If the U.S. leads in 5G, we will have the advantage in shaping future waves of economic growth worldwide. We would also stand to reap trillions of dollars in economic benefits and set technological development standards across the world.