This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

Next Friday, April 26, the U.S. Supreme Court will decide whether to accept the case of 38 Defense Department military chaplains who are challenging Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin’s implementation and enforcement of the Biden administration’s 2021 COVID-19 vaccine mandate.

WND spoke to Chaplain Milton Corby (a pseudonym), one of 38 chaplains in Alvarado v. Austin who filed a petition with the Supreme Court to challenge the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals’ dismissal of their claims for an injunction against continued retaliation for requesting religious accommodation, as well as the district court’s dismissal of their constitutional and statutory claims.

Corby spoke to WND using a pseudonym because of concern over reprisals.

Arthur A. Schulcz Sr., a retired Vietnam War veteran and lead attorney for the case, told WND the chaplains on March 21 filed an application for injunctive relief with the Supreme Court, asking the high court to protect them from the Defense Department’s continuing retaliatory actions for refusing to take the COVID-19 vaccine due to their religious objection.

On April 26, the Supreme Court will make the decision to stay, or pause, the policies that have continued to impact chaplains like Corby.

"It’s important for the Supreme Court to pick up our case," Corby told WND, "because the Department of Defense has been picking and choosing winners and losers, deciding which religious accommodation they want to accept and which to deny." While serving as an Army chaplain for over 10 years, he has helped process religious accommodations not only for Christians, but for Jews, Muslims, paganists and others.

To that end, he said, "I am not there to proselytize, but rather fulfill my oath to the U.S. Constitution – to protect and advocate for the free exercise of religion [of all service members regardless of their religion]."

"The free exercise of religion is supposed to be protected and the government is not allowed to pick winners and losers regarding which religious beliefs it accepts and which ones it does not," he said. "If one group loses its protections, then no group is safe from losing their protections."

According to the chaplains' lawsuit, "The Department of Defense didn’t play by their own rules while strictly enforcing the mandate." Varying within each branch of service, there are regulations in place that allow for the religious objection to specific issues, but these were not followed, Corby explained.

For this reason, he told WND, "SCOTUS [should] take our case because the Secretary of Defense’s mandate defied the religious conscience of thousands who were subsequently denied accommodation for their sincerely held religious beliefs."

"In order to keep a job, or gain promotion," Corby said, "thousands felt as if they had to violate deeply held religious beliefs." He added, "The widespread denial of religious accommodation to the shot does not exhibit the free exercise of religion guaranteed to us by the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution."

Schulcz explained to WND how fitness reports retaliating against chaplains for exercising those rights remain in their records despite Congress's specific protections for chaplains adhering to their conscience and Congress’s order to remove such adverse actions – which, he said, "DOD deliberately ignores."

If the Supreme Court refuses to hear the case, Corby will consider it "an erosion of one of our most basic, constitutionally guaranteed freedoms." Schulcz agreed, adding that the court’s message would suggest "forbidden retaliation is acceptable."

If SCOTUS does accept the case, Corby said, "it will pave the way for future chaplains to come into service with solid precedent protecting the nation’s constitutionally held freedoms." Again, Schulcz agreed.

"Brave people had to stand up and say the Department of Defense was wrong," Corby said. "If DOD had it their way, they would purge us."

Uncertain promotion

The 2021 military vaccine mandate, insisted Corby, should never have been implemented and enforced as it was during the coronavirus pandemic, and at the very least, should have allowed for any service member to claim religious objection to it.

"Religious accommodation is supposed to be different for everyone because every individual is different," he explained. "Every person was supposed to have the right to file a religious accommodation, and each accommodation was supposed to either stand or fall on its own on its own merits – but that didn’t happen."

Thousands of religious accommodations were either blanketly denied or ignored. In January 2023, the military vaccine mandate was rescinded, due to Congress passing the 2023 National Defense Authorization Act. And according to Corby and Schulcz, if the Secretary of Defense Austin had his way, the COVID mandate would still exist.

Prior to the enforcement of the mandate, Corby had superior ratings on Officer Evaluation Reports, or OERs. After objecting to the COVID vaccine, reports began to reflect a downgrade to a lower rating, which were intentionally accompanied by "blandly written comments," he said. Schulcz emphasized, "That is clearly retaliation for a protected right."

"The lower rating and bland comments made clear to any promotion board that I should not be considered for promotion," Corby told WND. Because he remained unvaccinated, like many other service members, he was also denied the ability to relocate with a "permanent change of station," or PCS, from his location to another, as his orders were revoked only due to his vaccination status.

After his PCS was re-instituted, Corby was finally able to move to his current location. Under new command, he began to receive higher ratings for his service. However, with the previous disparaging OER’s in his permanent file, all for exercising his religious rights, he questions whether he will be given the opportunity to be promoted to a higher rank. "I’m not sure how any future board will look at me," he told WND.

"That is why a judicial decree is essential," Schulcz argued.

Corby emphasized that his views do not reflect those of the Department of Defense or the Department of the Army. The DOD did not respond to WND’s requests for comment.

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

Congress has the constitutional right and authority to investigate the possible reasons for impeaching Joe Biden, and his refusal to answer questions actually provides further impeachable offenses to investigate.

That's according to House Oversight Chairman James Comer, who commented on the refusal by the White House to respond to congressional questions.

"[The] White House’s continued hostility towards Congress's prerogative to investigate these matters constitutes obstruction and contempt of Congress – which are themselves impeachable offenses," he informed the White House in a letter.

report from Just the News explained Comer's comments came after Biden refused an invitation from Congress to answer questions about the issues being investigated.

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

At one time, dealers who sold illegal, and addictive, drugs like heroin were called "pushers," as that's what they did with their lethal wares.

Now that label apparently can be applied to China, according to a committee of the U.S. House of Representatives.

report from Just the News documented a new congressional report that confirmed, and provided details of, the Chinese Communist Party's role in pushing the fentanyl crisis that is infecting multiple nations, including the U.S.

The report revealed the Chinese government "subsidizes the manufacturing and export of fentanyl materials and refuses to crack down on the illicit market."

The report is from the House Select Committee on the Chinese Communist Party and coincided with a hearing that included former Attorney General Bill Barr, former DEA Chief of Operations Ray Donovan, and others.

"As President Reagan once said, 'If you want more of something, subsidize it.' Through its actions, the Chinese Communist Party is telling us that it wants more fentanyl entering our country. It wants the societal chaos and devastation that has resulted from this epidemic," explained Chairman Mike Gallagher, R-Wis.

"And yes, it wants more dead Americans," he charged.

The Chinese government claims it is cracking down on drugs, but actually, the committee warned, it is giving Value-Added Tax rebates that "incentivized" the sales of at least 17 illegal narcotics.

Just the News noted, "These rebates alone may have had a significant impact on the amount of fentanyl and fentanyl-like substances exported abroad, specifically to the United States. Studies cited by the committee found that for every percentage point increase in the VAT rebate for a product, exports increased by 13%."

The report said the evidence revealed China not only subsidizing the narcotics trade but providing grants to companies that trafficked fentanyl.

Former Attorney General Bill Barr called the scandalous details "eye-opening."

"The committee’s work has uncovered persuasive evidence that the PRC and CCP are not just bystanders; they are the prime movers. They are knee deep in actively sponsoring, encouraging, and facilitating the production and export of fentanyl and fentanyl precursors for distribution in the United States," he said.

report in the Daily Mail called the House documentation "damning" of Chinese leaders and their support for a drug culture.

The Mail said, "America suffered more than 111,000 overdose deaths in the year to April 2023 — more than 70 percent of them due to fentanyl and other synthetic opioids, says the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention."

The report noted that in light of Chinese verbal commitments to fight drugs, and the evidence of the promotions, questions are raised about whether Beijing can be trusted.

Barr suggested part of the solution could be victims bringing civil actions companies and individuals involved in the drug trade.

Fentanyl is so strong that even a minor overdose can be lethal.

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

A coalition whose goal includes censoring select Christians who make reference to their personal faith has demanded that the University of South Carolina censor its women's basketball coach.

But officials with the Rutherford Institute have volunteered to help defend the school from the attack by the Freedom From Religion Foundation.

The fight is over comments by Dawn Staley, the coach of the Gamecocks, which came after the team defeated Oregon State last month to advance to the NCAA's Final Four. The team later won the title.

Staley was interviewed, and was asked, "Since the last two games have been close and tough,…what’s impressed you about this [team]?"

She praised the players' resilience and added, "I'm giving all the glory to God, though. …The devastating loss that we had last year, to put us back here with a totally different team—if you don’t believe in God, something’s wrong with you, seriously. I’m a believer. I’m a believer because He makes things come true. When you’re at your worst, He’s at His best."

Within hours, the FFRF had ordered the school to "take action to protect its student-athletes and to ensure that Staley understands that she has been hired as a basketball coach and not a pastor."

It also issued a demand that Staley "be educated as to her constitutional duties under the Establishment Clause."

The protest group also complained that Staley had posted Bible verses on her own social media accounts and was involved in devotionals.

Rutherford now has advised the school that, "To prohibit Coach Staley from making any reference to biblical passages as a source of motivation and team building, while allowing her to make references to secular writers and stories, would be discriminatory and 'may evidence hostility to religion…,'" the letter said.

"Coach Staley is tasked with motivating her players as a team to win. After winning the NCAA championship this year, freshman Tessa Johnson credited the team's success with the environment Staley helped create: 'We're unselfish people and that's how we win it,'" the letter said.

"Indeed, the Bible contains many passages that call for people to be unselfish and work as a team: 'Do nothing from selfish ambition or conceit, but in humility count others more significant than yourselves. Let each of you look not only to his own interests, but also to the interest of others;' 'the body is one and has many members,…[i]f one member suffers, all suffer together; if one member is honored, all rejoice together;' and 'love your neighbor as yourself.'"

The letter to South Carolina chief Michael Amiridis explained that while the Constitution says the government "may not establish or compel a particular religion, it also may not silence and suppress religious speech merely because others take offense."

It continued, "People are free to ignore, disagree with, or counter the religious speech of others, but they cannot compel the government to censor such speech."

So, the letter said, the FFRF "has the right to complain about the actions of the university's women's basketball coach Dawn Staley, but it does not have the right to compel the University of South Carolina to suppress the religious speech and expression made by Coach Staley as a private citizen."

It notes the Supreme Court previously has ruled: "Learning how to tolerate speech or prayer of all kinds is part of learning how to live in a pluralistic society." The court further has affirmed that while public officials and employees "can act on behalf of the state, they are also private citizens with their own constitutional rights."

"While the government may not establish or compel a particular religion, it also may not silence and suppress religious speech merely because others take offense," said constitutional attorney John W. Whitehead, president of The Rutherford Institute.

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

“Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!” The famous biblical passage from Isaiah offers a chilling but disarmingly accurate characterization of today’s Democratic Party, which has descended to its darkest, most perverse and pathological low point in history – except perhaps for its fierce defense of slavery, until the Civil War put an end to that.

Whether viewed through the prism of power politics, ideology, psychology or religious faith, the Democratic Party of 2024 has become a daily showcase of exactly the kind of remorseless lying, gaslighting and projection – i.e., calling “evil good, and good evil” – that is condemned in the Bible.

In fact, Democrats’ 180-degree moral-inversion modus operandi has become so reliably extreme that it has evolved into something of a crystal ball, allowing one to discern not only what the far-left ruling elites are secretly doing right now, but also what they intend to do next.

How can that be? By careful noting the crimes, conspiracies and corruption which Democrat leaders falsely accuse conservatives of perpetrating, one can gain uncannily accurate insight into the very crimes, conspiracies and corruption they themselves are covertly pursuing right now – and planning for the future.

Consider:

* Democrats accuse Republicans of being lawless, a claim epitomized by their massive lawfare campaign against the GOP’s current leader, President Donald J. Trump, who in a short period of time has been accused of over 100 different crimes in left-wing jurisdictions nationwide – all in an effort to block his reelection and make sure he dies in prison. Yet despite the prevailing Opposite Land narrative, reality turns out to be quite different: Democrats have proven to be the lawless party, abusing America’s best-in-the-world legal system in its wild persecution of Trump. The truth of this assessment was affirmed recently by the Supreme Court’s humiliating unanimous decision annihilating one of the Democrats’ lawfare cases against Trump. Ironically, while Democrats claim the 45th president is a big-time criminal, in reality it is Joe Biden, America’s 46th president, who heads up an actual crime family involving at least a dozen family members, as House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer has revealed.

Rep. Harriet Hageman, R-Wyo., recently put it this way: "I believe that this is the most corrupt family ever in a position of power in this country's history. We’re talking about a level of corruption that is so far beyond what we’ve seen with previous political leaders."

* Far worse than Democrats’ persecution of Donald Trump and simultaneous defense of an epically corrupt man like Joe Biden is their mass criminal prosecutions and imprisonment of hundreds of innocent, patriotic Americans for simply protesting the theft of the 2020 election. In so doing, the Biden administration has embraced the kind of unthinkable political weaponization of the legal system that previously was associated with the most brutal and corrupt Third World dictators.

Ultimately, the hundreds of unjust Jan. 6 prosecutions, convictions and lengthy incarcerations are simply part of Democrats’ appalling campaign to brand not just Trump, but his supporters, as terrorists and “insurrectionists” attempting to overthrow America’s constitutional system of government.

But being Opposite Land, that analysis is not only nonsensical, it is precisely opposite to the truth: Attempting to undermine the American constitutional system, for which the elites have barely disguised contempt, is precisely what today’s Democratic leadership does 24/7, as many of the following examples demonstrate.

* Democrats daily accuse Republicans, as well as essentially the entire American middle class, of being racists, bigots and white supremacists. In reality, of course, it is Democrats who have historically, generation after generation, practiced and championed overt racism: Democrats were the party of slavery, while the Republican Party came into existence in 1854 explicitly as the “anti-slavery party.” Democrats opposed Reconstruction after the Civil War and founded the Ku Klux Klan in 1865, making up most of its membership. They were likewise the main force behind Jim Crow laws for many decades afterward.

Fast-forward to the Civil Rights Movement of the 1960s. The great American middle class had largely been persuaded by the noble, nonviolent movement, capped off by Rev. Martin Luther King’s stirring “I have a dream” speech in August of 1963, that they too, like King, desired to “live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.” Yet the following year, it was Senate Democrats who filibustered the historic 1964 Civil Rights Act for an astounding 60 days – the longest filibuster in U.S. history – in a desperate attempt to block the anti-segregation bill’s passage.

Today, 60 years later in 2024 America, it is Democrats, not Republicans, who are utterly obsessed with hiring and firing, promoting and demoting, rewarding and punishing, favoring and rejecting people solely on the basis of their skin color. Long forsaken by the left is the entire Civil Rights Movement and MLK’s cherished “dream” of a color-blind America.

And yet, according to the party that championed slavery, opposed Reconstruction, pushed Jim Crow laws and tried desperately to kill the ’64 Civil Rights Act, the United States of America – hands-down the least racist nation in all of history – is irredeemably racist. And all because of those racist, white-supremacist, Klan-loving Republicans!

That’s what it means to live in Opposite Land.

* Democrats perennially accuse Republicans of “voter suppression” for insisting people identify themselves as U.S. citizens before voting in elections that will largely determine the future of their nation. As Kamala Harris alleged in a 2020 op-ed, Republicans, by supporting Voter ID, are "doing everything in their power to suppress and attack the voting rights of people of color."

Incredibly, Democrats’ opposition to Voter ID persists in an era when the Biden administration has intentionally engineered a massive foreign invasion of non-citizens into America, bringing in well over ten million illegal aliens so far during his term, all for the ultimate and obvious (if unspoken) purpose of creating millions of new Democratic voters.

Democrats’ end game is to transform America into a permanent one-party state – perpetually run by them. So, while Voter ID is obviously more necessary than ever for preserving election integrity and therefore preserving the nation itself, Democrats oppose it. But what sort of reason, one might well ask, could Democrats possibly concoct to justify opposition to such a clearly needed, universally accepted and common-sense measure?

Unfortunately for Democrats, who like Biden and Harris claim Voter ID serves only to suppress black voter turnout, their sole argument is transparently racist, since its unavoidable implication is that “people of color” are somehow too poor, ignorant, incompetent or stupid to obtain a government-issued ID. Yet, no one in America can open a bank account, cash a check, fly in an airplane, rent a car, stay in a hotel, pick up a doctor’s prescription or, in general, navigate this life without a government ID. Nevertheless, Biden has repeatedly called Voter ID laws – which, ironically, polls show blacks overwhelmingly support – the equivalent of “Jim Crow 2.0.”

* Thousands of America’s children are being groomed and seduced into undergoing horrendous transgender amputation surgeries and other unthinkable and irreversible medical “treatments” that literally destroy their lives – leading many to commit suicide. Indeed, Medical News Today in 2022 reported on new research showing transgender teens are more than seven times as likely to commit suicide as other teenagers. Yet President Biden, whose administration enthusiastically supports – and funds with taxpayers’ money – the mass-hysteria transgender craze, recently condemned as “close to sinful” the efforts of good people to stop the mass mutilation of America’s children. Likewise, “gender-affirming” psychologist Dr. Harriette Wimms, clinical director for the Village Family Support Center in Baltimore, Maryland, has announced publicly that parents who oppose cutting the breasts and/or sex organs off their children have a “mental illness.”

Once again, in Opposite Land the people merrily leading children into lifelong misery, disability, conflict and suicide accuse loving, protective parents and other right-thinking people who oppose the demonic transgender craze of being “sinful” and having a “mental illness.”

* Democrats are obsessed with eliminating fossil fuels in order to save the planet and keep it habitable for the human race – or so they claim. But reality is precisely 180 degrees opposite from what left-wing global-warming zealots say, a truth neatly summarized in the title of the 2022 bestseller by energy expert Alex Epstein, “Fossil Future: Why Global Human Flourishing Requires More Oil, Coal, and Natural Gas – Not Less.” Even Greenpeace co-founder Dr. Patrick Moore enthusiastically affirms the truth of “Fossil Future” and condemns the left’s obsession with imposing “Net Zero” greenhouse gas emissions on America (though mysteriously, not on China). Moore characterizes the effect Democrats’ climate-change policies would eventually have on the world’s population in the starkest terms possible: “If we actually achieved Net Zero, at least 50% of the population would die of hunger and disease.”

In Opposite Land, climate-alarmist leftists, globalists and Democrats accuse Republicans, most of whom oppose Biden’s wanton throttling of America’s fossil-fuel industries, of helping make the earth uninhabitable by driving gasoline-powered automobiles and heating their homes with natural gas or oil. But in the real world, it is the left’s radical climate-change policies that will, if pursued to their desired conclusion, result in a level of global starvation, disease and death unprecedented in recorded history.

Then again, it’s no secret that many top globalist billionaires, from George Soros to Bill Gates, have long openly campaigned for drastically reducing the earth’s population … as a means of improving life for all.

* Democrats regularly accuse Republicans of “fascism,” with Joe Biden in a major speech calling tens of millions of Trump-supporting Republicans “semi-fascists.” In reality, however, the specter of classic fascism – in the sense of totalitarian subjugation of a population by means of an unholy partnership between government and corporate power– is today manifesting in a multitude of ways, including the widespread and now-proven collusion between the Deep State and Big Tech to censor and suppress conservatives.

Understand the utterly fascist dynamic of the permanent ruling class in Washington, D.C. The Constitution explicitly prohibits the federal government from crushing the free speech and free press rights of Americans. So the government resorts instead to “outsourcing” – to the “private businesses” comprising Big Tech – the desired censorship, deplatforming and suppression of free speech and free press that are constitutionally protected. They justify this gross violation of America’s cherished First Amendment rights by labeling all expression with which they disagree – i.e., truth – as “misinformation,” “disinformation,” and a brand-new and highly confusing “1984”-type term, “malinformation” (defined as “truth used to inflict harm.”)

This fascist collaboration between government and corporate power constituted a major component in the rigging of the 2020 presidential election. Evidence of massive Biden family criminality revealed in the contents of Hunter Biden’s infamous “laptop from hell” – which included major corruption on the part of “the big guy” Joe Biden himself – were ruthlessly suppressed by Big Tech in the last couple of weeks before the November 2020 election. Post-election polling of Biden voters revealed that had they known about the damning revelations before they voted, Biden would have lost the election and Donald Trump would have been president for the last three years.

Also on the fascism front, there is the violent, fascist domestic-terror group Antifa, which ironically stands for “anti-fascist,” and which in 2020 Joe Biden bizarrely announced was a nonexistent group, calling it “an idea, not an organization.” In reality, of course, as the world saw during the summer of 2020, Antifa, along with Black Lives Matter, engaged in a five-month mega-orgy of violence across America. During this unprecedented rolling riot, they terrorized and ransacked many major U.S. cities, caused over $2 billion in property damage, wounded some 1,200 law enforcement officers and caused the deaths of at least 25 people.

That’s what nonexistent organizations can do in Opposite Land.

In reality, of course, Antifa – the “anti-fascist” group that is just “an idea” according to Biden – is a violent army of genuine fascists who look, talk and act exactly like WWII-era street fascists – masked and dressed in black, carrying out violent criminal attacks on innocent people and businesses. As president, Donald Trump strongly recommended Antifa be officially designated as a terror group.

Coming to grips with the lawless left

The bottom line of Opposite Land 2024? Left-wing Democrats controlling the nation’s government and culture accuse traditional-values Republicans of being lawless, fascist extremists who embrace violent insurrection to overturn this nation’s lawfully elected constitutional government.

Yet that turns out to be a perfect mirror image of the accusers – and a clear picture of what they are planning for the United States of America.

Remember that the left is fundamentally lawless. Repeat: The left – not traditional liberals, as Dennis Prager likes to point out, but the radical left that is currently dominating America’s government and culture – is literally lawless in its essence. Lawlessness is its core identity.

Diving just a bit deeper, the real reason for this “lawlessness” phenomenon comes clearly into view: Opposition to God and His laws of life in order to play god, to invent their own reality and force everyone else to accept it – that comprises the mind and substance of the lawless left, and always has since the days of Karl Marx. To justify this lawlessness and maintain their illusion of moral superiority over others, leftists have to portray conservatives – i.e. normal people who hold to society’s traditional values derived largely from the Bible – as evil. Which is why Democrat leaders in the U.S. and their allies in the media continually, year after year, compare Donald Trump to Hitler. It’s transparently insane, of course; Hitler murdered 11 million people, Trump murdered zero. Yet they persist because they desperately need their lying, cheating and lawless ways to somehow be counted as just, noble and good.

Consider that Nazi Germany was the one scenario in modern history regarding which most people would agree that lying, cheating and even attempts at assassination were moral in the quest to rid that nation of a true monster of a leader, to end a terrible war and save millions of innocent lives. Therefore, lying, cheating and breaking all the rules, at least in that time and place, were not only moral, but a moral imperative. This is precisely why Democrats persist in the abominable and dangerous practice of defaming the 45th president as another Hitler. They detest rules, and if Trump is Hitler, they can break free of all the moral and legal rules that hold decent civilizations together.

But to pull off their grand rebellion – the left’s secret revolution against God and His will on earth – they have to posit a total inversion of moral reality. Not only does their evil thus become “good,” but good must, of necessity, be seen and condemned as evil.

Taking the long view, in the end God and His goodness and righteousness will ultimatel prevail, and all those who stubbornly cling to evil, corruption and deception will meet their just fate.

But in the meantime, good Americans have a lot of work to do. And that work starts with seeing with crystal clarity exactly how those who would steal not just elections – but innocence, souls and entire nations – are operating.

The preceding is adapted from David Kupelian’s introductory story in the April 2024 issue of WND’s critically acclaimed Whistleblower magazine, titled “OPPOSITE LAND: A stunning tour of the Left’s total inversion of morality, history and reality.”

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

A long list of discriminatory gender requirements has been identified across the nation in a new study from the Pacific Legal Foundation that encompasses public service opportunities.

But that now has been eliminated in one state, because of a plan adopted by lawmakers and signed by the governor specifically to remove those hindrances.

The change happened in Iowa, following a case brought by Charles Hurley, a father and grandfather who has for 40 years served his community as a lawyer, representative, and church member.

The foundation explained despite having served on the state legislature's Judiciary Committee, he was not appointed to the state Judicial Nominating Committee because he's a man.

"For nearly the entirety of Charles’s career, Iowa law has demanded a fixed 'gender balance' that dictates how many men or women can serve on the State Judicial Nominating Commission. The commission has 17 members, nine of whom are appointed. The other eight are elected: two members from each of Iowa’s four congressional districts," the foundation noted.

"State law requires the two commissioners elected in each district to be one male and one female. Further complicating matters is that the elections are staggered, so come election time, only one vacant seat in a district can appear on the ballot, and candidates are eligible to run only if they match the departing commissioner’s gender."

The foundation was blunt: "In other words, it’s a gender quota."

So Hurley challenged the process based on the Constitution's equal protection guarantee.

He won, with a district court ruling that Iowa failed to show how sex discrimination survived court scrutiny.

The foundation just recently confirmed that Gov. Kim Reynolds now has signed into law a plan that ends gender discrimination for state boards and commissions.

"The 14th Amendment guarantees equal protection under the law, and now Iowa's laws fulfill that promise to board and commission applicants of either gender," said PLF spokeswoman Kileen Lindgren.

Iowa was the only state that specifically ordered that state boards must be balanced by gender.

But the PLF said its research found gender discrimination isn't uncommon.

The organization revealed it examined membership requirements for boards in all 50 states that license 20 different occupations, and "25 states have race- or sex-conscious mandates or quotas for public board membership."

"The animating moral principle of America’s founding is that each person is endowed with natural human rights that cannot be taken away by any other person, any majority, or even the state, except by due process of law. The concepts of individual rights and liberties are America’s heritage and are the indispensable basis for its future success. The government is a servant of individual rights, established to secure those rights," the foundation reported.

"Our Constitution creates the legal structure to guarantee that promise. Yet, slavery persisted in glaring contradiction for nearly 100 years after the Founders signed the Declaration of Independence. The Reconstruction Amendments, also known as the Thirteenth, Fourteenth, and Fifteenth Amendments, aimed to remedy that contradiction by promising full equality of liberty," the foundation said.

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

A months-long effort to crack down on government spying on Americans, which has been happening under one section of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, failed because the point of the law is to "spy on Americans."

That's the explanation from columnist John Daniel Davidson at The Federalist.

The renewal of the law was adopted by the House on Friday, and a plan to require warrants to spy on Americans failed on a 212-212 tie vote.

There still are several procedures pending before it can be moved to the Senate.

It has been controversial because of the probably millions of times that national bureaucracies have used its provisions to spy on Americans.

The commentary explained the law lets U.S. intelligence agencies "spy on foreign nationals based overseas, but it also lets the FBI comb through the massive amounts of data the intelligence community collects and gather information about American citizens."

Those are called "backdoor searches."

It was an odd coalition of conservatives and leftists in Congress that had concerns about that spying.

They wanted to insist the FBI obtain a warrant before searching.

But large numbers of Congress opposed that plan because "the main purpose of the intelligence community’s surveillance programs isn’t to spy on terrorists or foreign adversaries overseas, it’s to spy on American citizens. So of course the intelligence community opposes FISA reforms that would make it harder to spy on Americans."

Especially in the bull's-eye, he said, are "Americans who express views and opinions the government deems to be a threat."

He explained historically, warrantless spying readily was defined as a violation of the Constitution.

"But we’re in a new era now, and the intelligence agencies have no qualms about violating our rights without pretending it has anything to do with national security," he said.

There were multiple plans to reform the law but what ended up being considered was a plan "that masquerades as reform but is carefully designed to preserve the status quo when it comes to backdoor searches."

He noted even the government itself has admitted that during 2021 there likely were well over a million "illegal" searches regarding Americans.

He said powerful opposition to reforms came from insiders "because they use it to spy on Americans all the time."

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

Since the onset of the Hamas-Israel conflict on Oct. 7, 2023, the Iranian theocratic regime has steadfastly maintained that Hamas was solely responsible for orchestrating and executing the lethal incursion from Gaza into Israeli territory.

However, in the aftermath of Israel's assault on an Iranian stronghold in Syria, culminating in the deaths of seven commanders from the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps at the nation's consulate in Syria, one faction within the Iranian government, helmed by Haddad Adel, a close confidant to Iran’s supreme leader Ali Khamenei, extolled the most prominent IRGC commander killed in the attack – Mohammad Reza Zahedi.

"The invaluable strategic contributions of martyr Zahedi in forging and fortifying the resistance front, alongside his pivotal role in conceiving and enacting the Al-Aqsa Storm, stand as monumental tributes that shall eternize the silent endeavors of this esteemed commander in the chronicles of valor against the oppressive regime," the faction proclaimed. "The reprehensible assault on the Islamic Republic of Iran's consulate in Damascus unequivocally substantiates this assertion."

It was widely acknowledged that the intricate tunnel networks, sometimes extending 80 meters underground and surpassing in length the Tehran Metro, the city's rapid transit system, along with the drone manufacturing operations, could not have been Hamas' handiwork. Thus, these assertions were clear acceptance of the Iranian regime’s role in the conflict.

Syria acts as the central command for Iran's regional operations. A summit in Syria was convened subsequent to visits to Tehran by Ismail Haniyeh, the leader of Hamas' political bureau, and Ziyad al-Nakhaleh, the head of Islamic Jihad. The summit aimed to actualize the strategies discussed in Tehran during sessions attended by Ali Khamenei, the armed forces' chief, as well as other key regime figures.

State-controlled media outlets report that Khamenei is advocating the prolongation of the conflict, albeit cautiously to avoid adverse repercussions for himself. Consequently, Tehran's foreign ministry has indicated that a forceful reprisal in response to Israel's offensive will be withheld to prevent further escalation of hostilities.

Despite public outcry, Khamenei's stance is for the ongoing devastation of children and civilians in Gaza to persist until, in his view, "the Palestinian question becomes a worldwide concern." His supposed empathy for Palestinian youths contrasts sharply with the deployment of over a million Iranian students to neutralize mine-fields during the fruitless 1980-1988 Iran-Iraq war. Mirroring the tactics of other autocrats, Ali Khamenei consistently seeks to redirect domestic scrutiny towards international dilemmas, effectively masking them. Thus, the atrocities and carnage resulting from the Hamas-Israel war ultimately serve Khamenei's interests.

Emerging almost five decades ago and foisted onto the 21st century by an accident of history, Iran’s radical Islamic clerical regime has become, in many ways, the primary challenge in an already unstable region that has seen many wars in the last century. As such, all subsequent developments inevitably bear its imprint or emerge from its shadow. Western strategies of appeasement seem unrealistic and ill-fated, especially in light of the fact that 600 American troops in Iraq fell victim to roadside bombs planted by the Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.

Rooted in archaic religious dogmas, the Iranian theocracy has, from its inception, failed to meet the populace's economic and cultural needs and demands, resorting to unparalleled oppression and the engendering of crises, wars and terrorism abroad as a distraction from domestic subjugation. This approach underscores the survival tactics of a religious autocracy. Yet, war, as a mechanism for sustenance and redemption, is now starting to backfire, with the recent setback in Syria revealing a trajectory of events increasingly aligning against the regime.

Iran's 2022 uprising, which lasted several months, heralded the regime's impending collapse. Neither direct gunfire nor barbaric torture could quash it. The economic turmoil and myriad factors that historically have ignited regional and national uprisings persist unabated. Yet a far more formidable insurrection looms on the horizon. Khamenei perceives this emerging threat acutely, aware that thousands of resistance cells have been established across Iran under the aegis of the People's Mojahedin Organization of Iran, or MEK, the theocracy's archenemy, poised to propel any revolt towards the regime's downfall.

Trapped in a quagmire of intractable crises encompassing widespread poverty, water scarcity, unemployment and spiraling inflation, Khamenei has – akin to his portrayal of the coronavirus pandemic as a divine boon – now likewise employed the Hamas-Israel war as a bulwark against a resurgence of the 2022 uprising. The unmistakable outcome of the recent legislative elections, with a mere 8% of the electorate participating – forcibly including prisoners and military personnel – reveals Khamenei's lack of a genuine support base, with his belligerence merely serving as a veneer to suppress the Iranian populace's burgeoning dissent.

The root of the regional issue lies in Tehran. Addressing proxy forces sporadically while continuing relations with Iran will not be an effective Western approach to this radical theocracy with near-term nuclear-weapon ambitions. Rather, the West ought to back the Iranian people and their growing resistance movement in pursuit of regime change to establish a republic, secular and democratic.

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

The Supreme Court already has taken up one of the biggest cases in years – the Joe Biden administration's collusion with Big Tech to censor Americans whose ideas he dislikes.

The trial court judge originally described his schemes as Orwellian, and the ruling will impact much of American life whenever it is decided.

But the original judge's order that Biden's bureaucrats stop communicating with those social media conglomerates on their agenda was suspended, so technically they are allowed to be doing that right now.

And they are.

And that means, according to House Judiciary Chairman Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, that records of those communications need to be given to Congress.

Jordan confirmed on Tuesday that he sent letters to the chiefs of Alphabet, Amazon, Apple, Meta and Microsoft as well as Attorney General Merrick Garland and FBI chief Chris Wray.

He wants documents of Biden's "recent interactions with social media and technology companies."

"Given the FITF's improper role in communicating with social media and technology companies during the 2020 presidential election, the resumption of meetings between the FITF and Big Tech before the 2024 presidential election is deeply troubling. These meetings stopped after the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Louisiana issued a preliminary injunction against the FBI that prohibited it from coercing or significantly encouraging social media companies to censor content, which was largely affirmed by a unanimous panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. But following the Supreme Court’s recent stay of the injunction, the FITF 'resumed outreach' with social media companies. According to an FBI spokesperson, the purpose of this outreach is 'to facilitate sharing information about foreign malign influence with social media companies,'" charged the letter to Mark Zuckerberg of Meta.

Jordan's announcement explained his committee "is conducting oversight of how and to what extent the executive branch has coerced or colluded with companies and other intermediaries to censor lawful speech. In February 2023, the committee issued subpoenas for documents related to Big Tech's communications with the executive branch, including the FBI's Foreign Influence Task Force (FITF) and San Francisco field office."

It continued, "A federal court enjoined the executive branch's collusion with Big Tech in July 2023; but the injunction was stayed. On March 20, 2024, an FBI spokesperson confirmed that the FITF has recently resumed communicating with major social media and technology companies."

The letter to Zuckerberg notes, "The communications and documentation pertaining to Meta's ongoing communications with the FBI are covered by the February 15, 2023, subpoena. The subpoena is 'continuing in nature.' Therefore, all documents and communications relating to the FBI's new outreach efforts to Meta and FITF meetings are responsive to the committee's subpoena as they refer or relate to how the FBI is communicating with Meta regarding content moderation."

WND has reported on the fight that is before the Supreme Court already.

It recently heard arguments that Biden, using the influence of the federal government, pushed social media companies to censor ideas and comments that the administration dislikes.

And Jenin Younes, litigation counsel for the New Civil Liberties Alliance, which brought the dispute to the court system, said it's just not allowed under the Constitution for politicians to pick "disfavored" statements and order them suppressed.

"Our clients, who include top doctors and scientists, were censored for social media posts that turned out to be factually accurate, depriving the public of valuable perspectives during a public health crisis. We’re optimistic that the majority will look at the record and recognize that this was a sprawling government censorship enterprise without precedent in this country, and that this cannot be permitted to continue if the First Amendment is to survive," Younes said.

A ruling in the case isn't expected from the court for some time, but it likely will have a massive impact of the concept of free speech and the First Amendment across America.

The trial court judge likened the government's scheming in the case to the Orwellian "Ministry of Truth" that propagated nothing but lies.

Many of the details of that ruling were affirmed by an appeals court, but the government, insisting on the right to determine the information to which people have access, took it to the Supreme Court.

Much of the censorship at the time concerned the COVID-19 pandemic and the experimental shots that were developed and given to millions of people at the time, shots that evidence shows now actually injured many.

A report from NCLA said the case is Murthy v. Missouri, and the high court considered whether to affirm a historic preliminary injunction granted by the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

It originally was U.S. District Judge Terry Doughty who blasted the government for its program to blacklist, shadow-ban, de-boost, throttle and suspend social media activity by those who disagreed with the Biden administration's chosen, and sometimes faulty, opinions on COVID.

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

Facebook has taken the next step in its agenda to censor comments critical of Islamic terror, disabling the account of Frontpage Editor Jamie Glazov, his publication has confirmed.

Facebook has a long history of banning speech that opposes Islamic violence, and the new report explains the censorship was announced after Glazov posted a recent episode of his "Glazov Gang" program, which featured radio host Alex Newman.

The subject was the danger to America from "the Nazi terror group Hamas."

The focus was the threat to America from the Islamic terror group's butchering last Oct. 7 of some 1,200 innocent Israeli civilians, sometimes in horrific ways such as beheading babies and burning families alive.

The report explained on April 4, "Facebook disabled the account of Frontpage Editor Jamie Glazov."

The report explained, "Facebook notified Jamie that it had removed his post and disabled his account because the post violated its 'community standards' and posed a threat to 'the security of people on Facebook.' Jamie has appealed the disabling of his account but has received no response."

The magazine noted, "Why, exactly, is Facebook trying to cover up the barbarities Hamas inflicted on Israelis on Oct 7 – and the barbarities that it promises to inflict on innocents around the world in the future? And why is Facebook disabling the accounts of individuals who are telling the truth about it? Meanwhile, Facebook’s Oversight Board has decided that calling terrorists 'martyrs' is an acceptable form of free speech. This, of course, opens the door for Hamas supporters to celebrate the murder of Jews. Facebook did this in response to pressure from Sen. Elizabeth Warren and other Democrats."

The result, the report explained, is that celebrating "Hamas murderers, rapists, and kidnappers as 'martyrs'" is fine on Facebook but Glazov "isn’t allowed to tell the truth about what Islamic terror means not only for Israel but for America."

The magazine asked people to share the news, and object to Facebook through the massive corporation's Help Center at:

disabled@fb.com
support@fb.com
appeals@fb.com

WND has reported that Facebook for years has intervened in the free speech of "counter-terrorist activists" who were being restricted by Silicon Valley.

At the time Sam Westrop, the director of the Middle East Forum's Islamist Watchwrote for National Review that many critics of "Islamist political ideology" have found themselves subject to bans and restrictions on social media "for articulating reasonable ideas and criticisms that deserve debate rather than restriction."

At the time YouTube recently banned a video he uploaded four years ago that had received about a million views, he pointed out. It featured Muslims and non-Muslims "on both sides of a balanced and well-moderated argument and broadcast on British state-funded national television."

At the time, Google also censored videos from Prager U by moderate Muslim or ex-Muslim voices such as Kasim Hafeez, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, and Khurram Dara. In 2017, Ex-Muslims of North America, which offers "a home to apostates" facing persecution, was targeted by "a coordinated reporting and flagging campaign," even though "nothing it posts on social media is remotely hateful," Westrop said.

It was in 2015, that Facebook removed a post of an image of outraged Muslims captioned, "Jokes don't kill people, Muslims who are offended by jokes kill people."

A woman in Germany was banned from Facebook for 30 days for posting a set of two pictures: One showed the Iranian women's national volleyball team from the 1970s, wearing T-shirts and shorts. The other was of the current Iranian team, wearing hijabs and clothes that cover arms and legs.

Benjamin Weingarten at the Gatestone Institute also revealed in 2015 Facebook censored images of Muhammad in Turkey, and later suspended the account of Swedish writer Ingrid Carlqvist for posting a video, produced by Gatestone Institute, on "Sweden's Migrant Rape Epidemic."

Facebook also trotted out the "community standards" claim when in 2017 it blocked and then shut down the pages of two popular moderate Muslim groups managed and followed by Arabs who reject not only violence and terrorism but Islam as a religion.

© 2024 - Patriot News Alerts