This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
"Prince" Andrew of England, King Charles' brother, no longer is "Prince."
He's just Andrew Mountbatten Windsor.
That official announcement from the "Royals" in England is the latest fallout over Andrew's links to Jeffrey Epstein, the New York billionaire and convicted sex offender who died in a city jail awaiting more charges.
It is Virginia Guiffre, who died weeks ago, who had confirmed several times that she was trafficked as a teenager to Andrew by Epstein.
Andrew earlier gave up his various "honors" but that apparently was not enough.
In a "Royal Communications" the crown released a "statement."
"His Majesty has today initiated a formal process to remove the Style, Titles and Honours of Prince Andrew.
"Prince Andrew will now be known as Andrew Mountbatten Windsor. His lease on Royal Lodge has, to date, provided him with legal protection to continue in residence. Formal notice has nowt been served to surrender the lease and he will move to alternative private accommodation. These censures are deemed necessary, notwithstanding the fact that he continues to deny the allegations against him.
"Their Majesties wish to make clear that their thoughts and utmost sympathies have been, and will remain with, the victims and survivors of any and all forms of abuse."
The 76-year-old king released the changes for his brother, 65.
A report from the Daily Mail revealed, "Andrew is said to have not objected."
But the report noted his daughters, Princess Beatrice and Princess Eugenie, will keep their titles.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
A woman in Columbine Valley, Colorado, just south of Denver, has beaten a citation delivered by a traffic-camera-citing cop with her own indisputable evidence. And she got a congratulations from the police chief for her detective work, but still hasn't gotten an apology for the wrongful accusation.
The charge against Chrisanna Elser came from Officer Jamie Milliman, of the Columbine Valley Police Department.
He was so overconfident that his tracking of Elser's vehicle on traffic cameras proved his case he refused to show her the video evidence.
"You have not been honest with me, so I'm not going to extend you any courtesy of showing you a video when I don't need to," he snarked at her.
She then spent days collecting evidence, mailed it to the chief, Bret Cottrell, who responded via email: "After reviewing the evidence you have provided (nicely done btw), we have voided the summons we issued."
The officer had claimed to Elser that a conviction was a "lock" because he doesn't "make stuff up."
According to the Colorado Sun, the officer's wrongful allegations were based on Flock cameras, which record traffic, and Ring doorbell cameras.
Milliman had accused Elser of stealing a $25 package from a doorstep in nearby Bow Mar.
"You know we have cameras in that town. You can't get a breath of fresh air in or out of that place without us knowing," Milliman boasted.
According to the Colorado Sun, the officer's wrongful allegations were based on Flock cameras, which record traffic, and Ring doorbell cameras.
Milliman had accused Elser of stealing a $25 package from a doorstep in nearby Bow Mar.
"You know we have cameras in that town. You can't get a breath of fresh air in or out of that place without us knowing," Milliman boasted.
Elser, fighting the obstinacy of the officer, assembled snapshots from her Google timeline, a phone tool that tracks her stops, statements from people she met that day, and more. She collected surveillance images from the locations she stopped. And dashboard video from her car.
Flock is one of the big spy camera operations in the country, providing its "evidence" to multiple police agencies. However, civil liberties advocates argue its operations threaten privacy and can be abused.
She eventually obtained access to the victim's doorbell camera, which showed the thief running away, not getting into her vehicle.
She said problems, after her exoneration, still are alarming. "We had to basically exonerate ourselves," she charged. "It's fortunate that we have our own footage to fight back something like this.
"It's a little upsetting that everyone knows that the answer to be, you are innocent until proven guilty. It seemed to be the other way around that it was guilty until you prove yourself innocent," she warned.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
A new survey from the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression reveals the massive damage inflicted by hate campaigns that are launched against academics across America when they say something of which "the mob" disapproves.
FIRE surveyed more than 600 academics listed in its Scholars under Fire database who were sanctioned or targeted from 2020 to 2024, and 209 responded.
"Nearly all (94%) who participated in the survey described the impact of their experience as negative. Roughly two-thirds (65%) experienced emotional distress, and significant chunks reported facing harrowing social setbacks, such as being shunned at work (40%) or losing professional relationships (47%) and friendships (33%)," the organization reported. "For some, the consequences were severe. About a quarter of the scholars who completed the survey reported that they sought psychological counseling (27%), and 1 in 5 lost their jobs entirely (20%)."
Nathan Honeycutt, the organization's manager of polling and analytics, said, "Cancellation campaigns are often wrapped in the language of preventing 'emotional harm.' But our survey shows that it's the mobs themselves that inflict lasting mental anguish on academics, many of whom still suffer the consequences long after the controversy subsided."
The report found the attacks to be one-sided, citing large numbers of professors, one in three, who say they have "toned down" their statements for fear of causing controversy: "These concerns are especially pronounced among politically moderate and conservative faculty members, who report self-censoring more frequently than they liberal and progressive colleagues.
"They also express greater worry about damaging their reputations or losing their jobs. In the 2024 faculty survey, for instance, more than half of conservative respondents reported at least occasionally hiding their political beliefs from peers in order to protect their careers. It remains unclear whether this climate of fear is primarily driven by the threat of cancellation itself or by the broader unwillingness of faculty to defend foundational principles of free expression," the report said.
The database from which FIRE drew contact includes a list of those who faced calls for sanction for their speech from 2000 to now.
"This database includes almost 1,700 documented sanction attempts, including a record number this year, with 300 of these attempts resulting in faculty terminations. Most of these incidents have occurred over the past decade."
One professor wrote, "Due to the extreme amount of hate mail and voicemails I received, I had a campus police officer posted outside my class for a period of time and an escort to my vehicle. My husband was constantly worried about my safety, we rarely went places in public, and my mother was harassed online by complete strangers."
Another found an email message: "You are unintelligent. You are poorly educated. You are nauseatingly fat and hideous. Your life has no value. Kill yourself."
They reported their families frequently were caught in the fallout, and there was a chilling effect.
""Overall, scholars were split on whether they'd speak similarly again. Along ideological lines, liberals were more likely to report their speech being chilled (i.e., that they were less likely to say similar things in the future), while conservatives were more likely to indicate they were not detracted (i.e., that they were as much, if not more likely, to say similar things in the future)," the survey found.
Further, "Public silence sends a message about what views are acceptable and safe to express, effectively narrowing the range of ideas deemed reasonable to discuss on campus. This may result in topic avoidance in teaching and research, especially on contested or policy-relevant issues."
Of the respondents, 65% reported emotional distress, 53% lost sleep, 47% lost professional relationships, 40% were shunned at work, 29% had family members with collateral damage, 27% sought counseling, and 20% lost jobs.
One of the problems that was revealed, FIRE said, was that "Nearly all institutions of higher learning promise academic freedom and free speech rights to their scholars. But many of the targeted scholars reported that they received no support from precisely the institutions and individuals who were supposed to have their backs in moments of crisis and controversy. Only 21% reported that they received at least a moderate amount of public support of their faculty union, for example, and a paltry 11% reported that they received public support from administrators."
FIRE said its report "also found a noticeable partisan gap in the level of public support reported by scholars. Larger proportions of conservative than liberal faculty reported that they received support from the general public (55% vs. 37%). But far fewer than their liberal peers reported that they received public support from their faculty union (7% vs. 29%) or their university colleagues (19% vs. 40%)."
"Support for academic freedom should never depend on the views being expressed, but our survey shows that's exactly what's happening," said FIRE research advisor Sean Stevens. "If faculty unions and institutions of higher learning won't stand by scholars in their moments of crisis, they can't claim to stand for free speech and inquiry."
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
The American people still do not know, and may never know, all of the players in Washington and elsewhere who carried out the Democrat party's lawfare against President Trump over the years.
But they now know those who were the pushers behind the agenda: Former Attorney General Merrick Garland, ex-Deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco and ex-FBI chief Chris Wray.
Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley has released documents showing those names as the activists who were pushing for the "Arctic Frost" investigation that produced much of the Democrats' lawfare against Trump.
Already released, earlier this year, were documents proving the FBI and DOJ weaponized themselves in order to put a bull's-eye on Trump, former Vice President Mike Pence and others.
It was that investigation, "a taxpayer-funded witch hunt," that was begun in early 2022, seizing government-issued cell phones from Trump and Pence.
Jack Smith, the inappropriately appointed lawyer who orchestrated the scheme after it was launched, also spied on eight Republican senators during his campaign against Trump.
"Opening of this full investigation is governed by the DOJ Memo. The DOJ Memo requires written notification to and consultation with the Assistant Attorney General and U.S. Attorney with jurisdiction over the matter and written approval of the Attorney General, through the Deputy Attorney General, prior the opening of any investigation of a declared candidate for president or vice president, a presidential campaign, or a senior presidential campaign staff member or advisor," the paperwork charges.
"It is assessed that the pool of potential subjects may include individuals who fall into one or more of these categories. Although members of the 45th Presidential administration are no longer in office, the DOJ Memo states that the scope of this policy should be broadly construed to ensure that Department leadership is made aware of the opening of matters that could potentially be disruptive to the democratic process if publicly disclosed prior to an election, encouraging the FBI to err on the side of caution or seeking approval if there could be any question as to whether such actions are required under this policy," it said.
The Washington Examiner reported that four-page memo was approved by Garland.
"Proof that Biden Attorney General Merrick Garland + Deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco + FBI Dir Chris Wray all PERSONALLY APPROVED opening Arctic Frost," Grassley wrote on X. "This investigation unleashed unchecked government power at the highest levels. My oversight will continue."
The report noted the FBI at the time cited "no confidential sources or independent corroboration of suspected wrongdoing." Instead its claims came from "media reporting, podcasts…"
Members of Congress have described the Democrats' schemes as worse than Watergate, and have demanded full access to all evidence of "Arctic Frost."
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
More than 2,000 names verified as non-citizens have been found on the voter rolls in Texas – and an unknown number of these people are illegal aliens.
The data comes from Texas Secretary of State Jane Nelson, who said Monday that 2,724 non-citizens were found to be registered to vote in the state after officials cross-referenced voter rolls with a federal citizenship database.
"Only eligible United States citizens may participate in our elections," Nelson said. "The Trump administration's decision to give states free and direct access to this data set for the first time has been a game changer, and we appreciate the partnership with the federal government to verify the citizenship of those on our voter rolls and maintain accurate voter lists."
The 2,724 voter registrations comes from the total number of Texans registered, about 18 million.
Nelson said the information gleaned will now go to each county so officials can investigate the eligibility status of each flagged registration. By Texas statue, those ineligible will be removed from the rolls and referred to the state attorney general for possible action.
"Everyone's right to vote is sacred and must be protected. We encourage counties to conduct rigorous investigations to determine if any voter is ineligible – just as they do with any other data set we provide," Nelson said.
According to the secretary of state, Texas was among the first state to partner with USCIS to compare its voter list with the federal SAVE database.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Iran's Shariah agenda, specifically the Islamic law and government's demand for "modesty" in women's attire, has taken a huge hit because of online videos.
They show Ali Shamkhani, "one of the Islamic Republic's top enforcers" of clothing for women that covers them up, parading around at his daughter's wedding, and she is wearing a very revealing strapless gown with a plunging neckline.
So is Shamklhani's wife, according to the reports.
A journalist's report said, "The daughter of Ali Shamkhani one of the Islamic Republic's top enforcers had a lavish wedding in a strapless dress. Meanwhile, women in Iran are beaten for showing their hair and young people can't afford to marry. This video made millions of Iranian furious. Because they enforce 'Islamic values' with, bullets , batons and prisons on everyone but themselves. … The same regime that killed #MahsaAmini for showing a bit of her hair, jails women for singing, whose hired 80,000 'morality police' to drag girls into vans, throws itself a luxury party. This isn't hypocrisy, it's the system. They preach 'modesty' while their own daughters parade in designer dresses."
Another commenter said, "He employs morality police and imprisons any woman who does not wear a veil in Iran. One rule for him and one rule for everyone else in Iran."
The Daily Mail reported, "Footage circulating on social media shows Ali Shamkhani, a top advisor to Iran's supreme leader and a member of the Expediency Council, escorting his daughter, Fatemeh, into a wedding hall at Tehran's luxury Espinas Palace Hotel. The bride wore a strapless white dress with a low neckline and entered the grand room to cheers and music."
Iranian social media, the report said, was "accusing Shamkhani of hypocrisy, considering the mandatory hijab and modesty laws that have restricted women's dress for decades."
Shamkhani was secretary of the Supreme National Security Council, which is responsible for the regime's national security, between 2013 and 2023.
He held that position, the report said, "when the government organized a brutal crackdown on the protests following the death of Mahsa Amini, a 22-year-old Kurdish-Iranian woman, who died in police custody in 2022 after being arrested for allegedly violating rules requiring women to wear the headscarf."
The report said, "The wedding of Shamkhani's daughter was reportedly held in April 2024 and attended by members of Iran's political elite."
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
PALM BEACH, Florida – Tom Cruise has competition. It looks like President Donald Trump is suddenly the No. 2 top gun in America.
The commander in chief late Saturday posted an epic artificial intelligence video of himself piloting an American fighter jet called "King Trump," dumping what appears to be loads of feces on "No Kings" protesters who are voicing their objections this weekend against the president.
Among the protesters is left-wing influencer Harry Sisson, who is seen getting completely doused with poop.
The video even includes music from the popular "Top Gun" film, specifically the song "Danger Zone" by Kenny Loggins.
"We truly live in historic times," noted journalist Benny Johnson.
One of those flushed with amazement by the clip is Democrat U.S. Sen. Brian Schatz, (no pun intended), who wonders: "But seriously why would the President post an image on the Internet of airdropping feces on American cities?"
Sisson was also perplexed.
"Can a reporter please ask Trump why he posted an AI video of himself dropping poop on me from a fighter jet?" Sisson posted on X Sunday.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
A Democratic U.S. senator has introduced a bill that would allow federal workers not being paid during the government shutdown to forgo their rent or mortgage payments, without penalty.
The bill, introduced by Sen. Brian Schatz, D-Hawaii, and 17 Democratic colleagues, would relieve workers and contractors from their obligations to pay rent, mortgages, insurance premiums and student loan payments during shutdowns, reports Reason.
In addition, it stays eviction and foreclosure proceedings for 30 days after the shutdown ends, with a penalty of fines or even jail time.
Said Schatz: "Right now, hundreds of thousands of federal workers, federal contractor employees, and their families don't know whether they'll be able to pay rent and make ends meet. Our bill will protect these workers and make sure they aren't harmed during this shutdown."
What Schatz does not mention is that once the shutdown ends, all back pay owed will go to those same federal workers — money that can be used to catch up with rental payments.
As Reason reports, a recent study published in the Journal of Urban Economics compared the strength of tenant protections to rents. It found that stronger tenant protections reduced evictions but also reduced vacancies and were correlated with higher rents and higher rates of homelessness.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
For years, India has marketed itself as the world's next great innovation hub, the emerging Silicon Valley of the East. Politicians, business leaders and industry groups have celebrated the nation's engineers as global talent, proudly pointing to every Indian-origin CEO leading a major American tech firm as proof of India's global prominence. The narrative being pushed has been that India was no longer just the world's back office – it was the future of technology.
Yet beneath the glossy slogans of "Digital India" and "Make in India," reality dictates a very different story.
The promise of innovation has rarely matched the results. As noted in a report by The Wire, India's allure for investors stems not from its depth of talent, but from the fact that its "labor is cheap and laws are lax." Still, American venture capitalists, eager to stake a claim in the "next tech frontier," have bought into the illusion. Capital flowed, partnerships multiplied and billion-dollar valuations were built, not on genuine technological breakthroughs, but on carefully crafted narratives that sold success.
Why India copies well but fails to lead in innovation
When "multinational educational technology company" BYJU's emerged, it quickly became the perfect poster child for India's startup dream. It was marketed as a unicorn – that is, a privately held startup company with a valuation of over $1 billion – proof that India could not only serve Silicon Valley, but become it. The company promised to transform how children learn and to usher in a new age of digital education. Yet, true to the national pattern, the promise unraveled quickly.
From unicorn to black sheep
Before its eventual financial and legal collapse, BYJU's stood as one of India's most celebrated startup success stories.
Founded in 2011 and officially being dubbed a unicorn by 2018, it grew from a small tutoring operation into India's most valued startup by 2022, ultimately being valued at $22 billion.
Its learning app soon became a household name across India and founder Byju Raveendran earned a spot on the Forbes list of India's richest people, celebrated as a self-made visionary transforming education. Former employees recalled his taste for five-star hotels and luxury cars, while his wife and co-founder, Divya Gokulnath, was seen networking in elite tech circles and Silicon Valley gatherings. Together, they emerged as global power players, symbols of a new generation of Indian entrepreneurs reshaping the country's image on the world stage.
At its peak, BYJU's went on a buying spree, acquiring 19 companies for more than $2.6 billion. The goal was to expand its main products and strengthen its presence in the United States. The company added new areas such as coding, job training and lifelong learning to its offerings and even pushed into the Middle East by becoming the official sponsor of the 2022 FIFA World Cup in Qatar.
BYJU's also hinted at plans to go public within a year, through an initial public offering (IPO) either in India or the United States. Both options were said to be under review, with no immediate deadline. Industry reports also suggested a possible merger with a U.S. special purpose acquisition company (SPAC) that could have valued the business at around $40 billion, though co-founder Divya Gokulnath declined to comment.
Yet, beneath the optimism, warning signs were already visible. Despite being valued at $22 billion in September 2022, BYJU's parent company, Think & Learn Pvt. Ltd., reported a staggering $554.77 million loss for fiscal 2021, largely attributed to soaring marketing and employee expenses, leading to layoffs and cost-saving measures to push towards achieving profitability. The company's rapid rise had been built on hype and expansion, but the financial foundation was already starting to crack.
A fall from grace
In December 2022, when India's child-rights commission called out BYJU's over complaints of overly aggressive sales targeting families and first-generation learners. In the months that followed, scrutiny widened to its coding unit, WhiteHat Jr, amid allegations regarding advertising claims and hard-sell tactics. WhiteHat Jr filed defamation suits against critics, but then withdrew the cases after public backlash.
In April 2023, India's Enforcement Directorate raided BYJU's offices and later issued a $1.12 billion show-cause notice under the Foreign Exchange Management Act. The agency reported uncovering "incriminating" documents and digital evidence during the raid, citing serious financial violations, including missing regulatory filings, delayed export payments and unreported foreign direct investment transfers totaling about $3.37 billion between 2011 and 2023.
Investigators also found that the company had transferred about $1.18 billion to multiple foreign jurisdictions during the same period, allegedly under the guise of overseas direct investment. Despite being issued multiple summonses, founder Byju Raveendran repeatedly failed to appear before authorities, remaining evasive throughout the investigation.
The troubles didn't stop there. The startup, backed by major investors including Prosus, Peak XV, Sofina, BlackRock, UBS and the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative, missed its revenue target for the financial year ending March 2023, according to financial statements released months behind schedule.
Soon after, the company's chief financial officer, Ajay Goel, resigned to return to Vedanta, marking yet another senior exit following the abrupt departures of auditor Deloitte and three key board members in June. The turmoil deepened when Prosus, one of BYJU's earliest and largest investors, holding over 9% of the company, publicly criticized the firm in July for failing to evolve and for repeatedly ignoring investor guidance.
These cascading resignations and public rebukes signaled that BYJU's once-glowing image had fully unraveled and its troubles were only beginning.
BYJU's has raised a total of $4.45 billion over 27 funding rounds: 2 Early-Stage, 22 Late-Stage and 3 Debt rounds. BYJU's' largest funding round so far was a conventional debt round for $1.2 billion in November 2021. BYJU's had a total of 132 investors, 105 being institutional investors and 27 Angel investors.
From loan disputes to courtroom battles
Through 2023 and into early 2024, BYJU's mounting troubles spilled into the courts as disputes over a $1.2 billion U.S. term loan escalated. Court filings and investigative reports revealed that about $533 million had been routed through BYJU's U.S. subsidiary, Alpha, into accounts tied to Camshaft Capital Management, a fund linked to a 23-year-old portfolio manager whose Miami business address once corresponded to an International House of Pancakes. The findings painted a picture of questionable transfers and lax oversight surrounding the billion-dollar loan.
The financial strain only deepened. On July 16, 2024, the Board of Control for Cricket in India filed an insolvency case against BYJU's over roughly $19 million in unpaid sponsorship dues. By the end of the year, both Deloitte and BDO had resigned as auditors, while major investors, including the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative, Prosus and Peak XV (Sequoia India) quit the board entirely.
India's Byju's can't pay employees
At the same time, Qatar Holding petitioned the Karnataka High Court to enforce a $235 million arbitral award against Byju Raveendran and Byju's Investments Pte Ltd tied to a 2022 $150 million loan for the Aakash acquisition, with interest sought at 4% per annum compounded daily from Feb. 28, 2024.
The legal blows culminated in February 2025, when a U.S. bankruptcy court issued a summary judgment finding actual fraudulent transfers and breach of fiduciary duty related to the movement of funds through BYJU's Alpha, marking one of the most significant legal setbacks in the company's dramatic downfall.
The myth of India's innovation engine
Once hailed as the future of Indian innovation, BYJU's now serves as its cautionary tale. What began as a symbol of national pride, the story of a small startup that conquered global markets, has become a lesson in how hype and ego can outpace substance.
In one of his last public interviews, founder Byju Raveendran dismissed the crisis, determined that he would see success again, saying,"Why I am confident of a comeback is that the most valuable thing I had is still with me," referring to himself. It was a statement that perfectly captured the misplaced faith that defined BYJU's rise, a belief not in innovation, governance or results, but in personality and perception.
For years, U.S. investors, from BlackRock and UBS to the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative, poured hundreds of millions of dollars into a single man and his myth, while American innovators back home struggled to break into markets dominated by foreign-backed giants. The question now is unavoidable: If so many investors were willing to stake billions on a person halfway around the world, why are they unwilling to back the homegrown entrepreneurs and talent right here in the United States, those who are locked out of markets increasingly monopolized by global capital and offshore influence?
BYJU's collapse is more than the downfall of a company; it is a mirror held up to a global investment culture that prizes narrative over national interest and speculation over stewardship. It is a reminder that the same investors who helped inflate the illusion of India's innovation miracle have ignored the innovators in their own backyard.
In the end, BYJU's didn't just fail as a business, it exposed the moral and economic blind spots of an era. The myth of India's innovation engine has once again met the hard truth of execution and the cost was paid not only in rupees, but in large amounts of misplaced American capital.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
In the wake of Charlie Kirk's assassination, an Oklahoma State University student is going public after a school official reprimanded him for his support of the slain civil-rights leader, saying some people could be "triggered" simply because he wore a Turning Point USA hat with the number 47 on it.
Student Joshua Wilson is exposing the actions of Melisa Echols, OSU's coordinator of student-government programs, who told him: "As a person who doesn't look like you and has not had the same lived experience as you, I have family who don't look like you who are triggered – and I will be very candid with you – who are triggered by those hats and by that side."
While Wilson told Echols he understood her concerns, he didn't believe wearing a Turning Point hat was partisan, and he rejected the claim it was somehow harmful to other students.
Echols at one point was angered that Wilson defended his stance.
"'But' cannot be the end of every statement. That's not a learned lesson," Echols said. "It cannot just be, 'yes, but' – cannot be every response that you give me. Otherwise, this year is going to be difficult for you."
Wilson viewed Echols' comment as "a veiled threat."
The Oklahoma Council of Public Affairs reported: "Wilson pointed out to Echols that he is Cherokee and noted he routinely interacts with people from different backgrounds and viewpoints."
"I don't like to pull that card," Wilson said. "But if you're going to pull that card on me, I might as well."
LibsofTikTok reports action has now been taken against Echols: "According to TPUSA, the staff member who reprimanded a student for honoring Charlie has been placed on administrative leave. Bye Bye."
Wilson has since given an interview to LibsofTikTok, stating: "When Charlie came to our campus last April, he brought a spirit of dialogue and liberty like I have never seen."
"The day that Charlie was murdered, students began to worry what might happen or what might result from these conversations now. Students were already participating in tearing down conservative club fliers, defacing club sidewalk signs or shouting at conservative clubs while they invited conversation. So what would happen now? That was their worry."
He is encouraging others to stand up for their rights in order to "spark the flames of positive change on your campus and community that will never be put out."
Kirk is being posthumously awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom on Tuesday by President Trump, the 47th president.
An Oklahoma State University spokesperson told Fox News Digital: "The OSU Student Government Association has a nonpartisan tradition. However, the organization has no official policies to restrict partisan expression, and the organization has not enacted or enforced such a policy. The student in question spoke freely during last month's SGA meeting and expressed his views without interruption or restriction."
"The university is committed to protecting, promoting and facilitating free expression for all students, regardless of their views, and clarification regarding SGA policies has been provided to appropriate university staff. OSU embraces its role as a marketplace of ideas, and we believe a robust public discourse is essential to the process of addressing society's most pressing challenges, which is our charge as a land-grant institution."