This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
A federal judge has trashed a leftists' scheme that would have forced pro-life pregnancy centers to promote abortion.
Pro-life physicians also would have been targeted by the agenda.
According to a report from the Thomas More Society, U.S. District Court Judge Iain D. Johnston has released a decision in Schroeder, et al. v. Treto, Jr., and it struck down as unconstitutional a provision in the Illinois Health Care Right of Conscience Act.
That provision would have compelled pro-lifers to promote abortion "talking points" to women.
The report explained, "In striking down the HCRCA's mandate that pro-life physicians and pregnancy centers share the 'benefits of abortion,' Judge Johnston wrote, 'Constitutionally, to obtain the liability shield, the State can't require medical professionals to discuss with patients what the State believes are the benefits of abortions.'"
The court noted pro-life physicians and pregnancy centers "are required to effectively endorse a course of conduct they find morally abhorrent."
However, the judge upheld a mandate for referring for abortion, and an immediate appeal to a higher court was confirmed.
The center explained, "In 2016, Illinois passed Senate Bill 1564, amending Illinois' HCRCA to require healthcare providers to discussing abortion's 'benefits' and, upon request, referring clients to abortion providers, in order to receive legal protection for conscientious objection. The law was signed into law by then-Governor Bruce Rauner despite pushback from pro-life groups. Thomas More Society sued against both mandates, on behalf of Dr. Ronald Schroeder, 1st Way Pregnancy Support Services, and Pregnancy Aid South Suburbs. In 2017, a federal judge issued a preliminary injunction, temporarily blocking both amendments to the HCRCA—legal protection that had been in place for nearly a decade prior to final judgment."
Judy Cocks, of 1st Way Life Center and Plaintiff, said, "We're relieved that the court has permanently protected our pro-life pregnancy centers from Illinois' attempt to force us into becoming mouthpieces for the abortion industry. To share so-called 'benefits of abortion' would go against the very foundation of our ministry and our First Amendment rights. I have yet to see what the so-called 'benefits of abortion' are—what I see regularly at our centers, instead, is the pain and regret that comes with abortion. At the same time, we are deeply troubled that the court's decision upholds Illinois' abortion referral mandate. We cannot, in good conscience, recommend or refer for abortion. That's not who we are, and it hurts our hearts to even contemplate being mandated to do so."
Thomas Olp, center vice president, said, "We welcome the court's ruling striking down Illinois' attempts to force our pro-life physicians and pregnancy centers to parrot pro-abortion talking points, in violation of their First Amendment rights—a victory we've fought for since this case began nearly a decade ago. But we are greatly concerned that the court did not fully protect conscience rights, leaving our clients forced to compromise their deepest beliefs. We look forward to continuing this fight against the State of Illinois in the Seventh Circuit."
Thomas More Society litigation chief Peter Breen explained, "Thomas More Society will keep fighting to protect our heroic pro-life ministries. Forcing pro-life doctors and pregnancy centers to facilitate abortion unconstitutionally burdens their faith and conscience. We will keep fighting Illinois' abortion referral mandate and appeal to the Seventh Circuit, to ensure our pro-life clients can continue serving women and children, in accord with their faith and without penalty. This fight is far from over."
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
It's the fast-track for a court hearing on charges by Liberty University that a worker, hired and then fired, deceived the school and violated a standard to which he had agreed, all in order to undermine the school's religious rights.
The fight is over a lawsuit brought by Jonathan Zinski against Liberty. He was hired but then fired shortly after his probation period had ended.
He had agreed at hiring to follow the school's religious standards, but then after the probationary period claimed he was a woman and would be portraying himself as a "she." He also confirmed that he had been taking drugs to "transition" even before he was hired by the school.
But the school's standards, based on the Bible, recognize male and female and do not support those who claim to change from one to the other, a scientific impossibility.
Liberty Counsel is representing the school and Chief Mat Staver said, "The appeal certification allows Liberty University to appeal this critically important question of religious freedom which can result in controlling the outcome of the case. Zinski intentionally and deceptively set up Liberty University in an attempt to undermine its religious beliefs and mission. Title VII exempts Liberty University from having to employ individuals who violate its religious beliefs and doctrinal positions."
Liberty Counsel confirmed the U.S. District Court of Western Virginia now has certified the appeal for expedited consideration regarding the Title VII lawsuit, Zinski v. Liberty University.
In certifying the appeal, Liberty Counsel said, Senior Judge Norman K. Moon noted Zinski's "sole claim" invokes Title VII sex discrimination "raising the question of whether Liberty University is exempt from sex discrimination in order to uphold its religious doctrines."
Moon previously said after the Supreme Court's decision in Bostock v. Clayton County, neither the Fourth Circuit nor the Supreme Court have clarified the interplay between Title VII's statutory exemptions for religious institutions and individuals claiming to be "transgender."
Moon noted that if the higher court finds that Title VII exempts Liberty University from sex discrimination, then it would be "wholly immune" from this lawsuit. He stated such a ruling could lead to the possible ending of the case saving Liberty University significant pre-trial effort and expense.
Liberty Counsel said it will push both the Fourth Circuit and, if necessary, the Supreme Court to recognize what the First Amendment and Title VII both require— "that Liberty University is permitted to maintain its religious beliefs and practices and to require its employees to comport their lives with Liberty University's Doctrinal Statement and religious beliefs."
Zinski had been terminated "after he flagrantly and intentionally violated Liberty University's doctrinal statement and policies regarding the biblical understanding of gender. When Zinski was hired, he acknowledged and affirmed the doctrinal statement, but then as soon as his 90-day probation period expired he revealed he had begun taking female hormones four months before he was hired, and that he planned to 'identify' as female."
Liberty Counsel charged, "Zinski set up this case when he applied to be hired."
WND previously reported when the lower court judge, Moon, refused to dismiss the case, claiming the school cannot "erect a shield against antidiscrimination laws by asserting that mere acceptance of a member from a particular group would impair its image."
He also claimed having the Christian school employ Zinski does not significantly burden its ability to maintain its views and does not affect its freedom of expressive association.
Liberty University's doctrinal statement clearly states that human beings were directly created in the very image of God as either biologically male or female from the womb, and it is a sinful act prohibited by God to deny one's birth sex by self-identification with a different gender.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
'The real concern for the State Department was one concerning public relations and how it might look in the media'
The Joe Biden administration "completely ignored" a government official's warning that his plan to pull American troops out of Afghanistan abruptly would "almost certainly result in an extreme loss of morale among the Afghan military and that the territorial gains of the Taliban indicated the current government would likely collapse after the withdrawal…"
Which is what happened.
The report comes from the American Center for Law and Justice which pursued Freedom of Information Act projects after Biden's orders cost the lives of 13 American soldiers during that pullout, as well as the lives of 170 Afghan civilians.
Further, Biden ordered left behind for the Taliban to take over U.S. military bases and billions of dollars worth of American war machinery, some of which now has been sold to other terror organizations around the world.
"We have uncovered that the dissent cable appears to have been completely ignored in principle. This particular cable warned that the current U.S. withdrawal plan would almost certainly result in an extreme loss of morale among the Afghan military and that the territorial gains of the Taliban indicated the current government would likely collapse after the withdrawal was complete," the organization reported.
It explained such a cable is the "last resort" for a foreign service officer whose warnings about a situation have not been considered.
"They can send a dissent cable directly to leadership in the State Department. That's what happened, and the warning was still clearly ignored by Biden's top officials," the report said.
"The State Department repeatedly claimed that Secretary [Antony] Blinken had seen the cable, but there was no indication that anyone else did. But at this point, we know that Deputy Secretary Sherman, Deputy Secretary McKeon, and Under Secretary Nuland received the dissent cable on July 13, 2021," the ACLJ reported.
They all reported to Blinken, who was to report to the president, the report said.
"So, what was the response after receiving such dire news via the dissent cable prior to the imminent withdrawal from Afghanistan? Was it candid advice to the secretary? No. Nor was it a reconsideration of the advice provided to the president, nor a proposal to change or modify the withdrawal," the ACLJ explained.
Instead, the Deep State at State inquired, "Please let me know if you would like to provide initial guidance to shape our response on this matter."
The ACLJ explained, "The real concern for the State Department was one concerning public relations and how it might look in the media ('shape our response') and not actually addressing the very real concerns expressed in the dissent cable.
"The contents of these documents should deeply concern every American. They reveal the troubling actions of a misguided administration; and to this day, no one has been held accountable for the disastrous withdrawal. This serves as a stark reminder that, as commander in chief, President Biden bears the ultimate responsibility for the U.S. military's actions."
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Colleges and universities across America have an estimated $837 billion stashed away for a rainy day if they want, in their endowments.
And Republicans in Congress are eyeing that trove as a possible source for tax revenue for the nation.
Reports say that Harvard alone has about $49 billion stashed away, and the University of Texas some $45 billion.
But members of the GOP have talked about raising the tax on those assets significantly, to help bring in revenue to balance the tax cuts they intend to create in a "sweeping fiscal overhaul," according to a report in the Washington Examiner.
"I love it. We should do it," U.S. Rep. Troy Nehls, R-Texas, said in an interview with the publication about taxing endowments.
The report explained the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, during President Donald Trump's first term, set an excise tax of 1.4% on the investment income of universities if their endowments exceed $500,000 per student.
That has raised, over the years, not even a billion dollars.
But Nehls is proposing a plan that would make that rate 21%, "which would bring it in line with the rate paid by for-profit corporations," the report said.
That is estimated to be able to raise $70 billion over a decade, the report said the Tax Foundation suggested.
The GOP could adopt that through reconciliation, a process in Congress that allow proposals to bypass the Senate filibuster, where Democrats could halt such an idea, and be adopted with a simple majority vote.
Universities already had been facing significant financial turmoil because of the cuts they have faced under the Department of Government Efficiency's efforts to reduce fraud, waste and corruption in government spending.
Multiple grant programs have been affected.
The report explained the GOP generally likes the idea, because universities are viewed "as overrun by left-wing radicalism."
Another possible change facing universities is a plan to end the tax exemption from municipal bonds, where the interest, under current law, is excluded from taxable income.
A spokeswoman for the National Association of College and University Business Officers said the options are part of the "tools that colleges and universities use to keep costs low."
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
In another example of how extremists are demanding that all of society submit to a minority's transgender ideologies, a nurse in the United Kingdom has been punished for calling a convicted pedophile who preyed on boys "Mister."
It was claimed to be offensive, of course, because the offender was "transgender."
A report from LifeSiteNews explains that nurse Jennifer Melle, of the National Health Service, was disciplined and now is responding with legal action against the Epsom and St. Helier University hospitals.
"She was investigated and disciplined last year for referring to a male patient – a large, six-foot, homosexual and gender-confused pedophile – as such," the report said.
Christian Concern reported that the patient, whose name was not released, is held "in a high-security male prison after multiple convictions for luring boys into sex acts while pretending to be a teenage girl on social media."
Melle explained, "Ever since I have expressed my Christian beliefs under extreme pressure, I have been a marked woman."
The male pedophile was being treated for a urinary problem, and while discussing the case with a doctor and not knowing he claimed to be female, Melle used the words "Mister" and "he."
The fact the patient is a man was significant because of the options for medical treatment.
She confirmed, "This was a real-life medical scenario that required accurate terminology to avoid any doubt between medical professionals."
The patient, overhearing, erupted in rage, demanding he be addressed by pronouns used for women.
Melle said that violated her faith, but she offered to call him by his name.
According to the report, the patient responded by physically lunging at her and using racial epithets.
Officials overlooked the patient's rage, and instead disciplined Melle, the report said.
And she's still be assessed for her ability to work as a nurse, the report said.
"I have been put at risk, but I am being treated like a criminal," she said. "Sadly, if you put your head above the parapet and speak truthfully on these issues in the NHS, the risk is that you will be knocked down, punished severely and demoted."
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Members of the U.S. military always have faced some unique stresses, especially those that are related to battle, as well as being separated from their families for extended periods of time. On top of that, in recent years, the Biden administration created entirely new stresses on service members by imposing Marxist "diversity, equity and inclusion" practices on all branches, inviting and paying for hundreds of transgender surgeries for gender-confused military recruits, imposing the COVID-19 vaccine mandate throughout the U.S. military, causing many to be ejected from their service, and more.
Even while such "woke" madness is being rapidly eliminated from the military by the new Trump administration, the traditional mental health hurdles some service members and veterans face – from post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) to depression and suicidality – unfortunately remain. Such mental-emotional challenges often stem from combat exposure and then transitioning to civilian life after years of serving in the military. Many of the issues thus encountered are often compounded by the use of alcohol or drugs.
As service members and others try to deal with such difficult emotional issues, one retired U.S. Navy officer, who has successfully trained many service members with life-saving principles of staying sane and balanced even under severe stress, has written a short self-help book to reach even more people, both in and out of the military. In an interview with WorldNetDaily, former Senior Chief Petty Officer Dennis Stager recalled how a "commanding officer asked me to write a book about a subject I taught to his very large command, which triggered amazing results." The 83-page self-help book is titled "Surviving Your Feelings: Deal with your emotions and proceed into the light of freedom."
Starting with the basic premise that "dealing with our emotions is better than running from them," Stager offers "historically proven truths and values" that have an unsurpassed track record of helping people manage their thoughts and behaviors.
Now 87, Stager retired from the U.S. Navy in 1990 after 29 years of service.
Confiding in WND, Stager said he once considered himself not to be much of a "people person," yet said his experiences as a Naval petty officer taught him to "read people well." In fact, he said, it was this ability that also made him "a good instructor," which prompted a former executive officer in the Navy to invite Stager to help "clean up his command." After meeting that task with clear success through his instructional sessions with Navy personnel, Stager was challenged to write the book, since – as he was told by his executive officer – "what I have is what people need to have," he said, recalling his conversation to WND.
Published in March 2024, Stager said, the book offers readers "a path to living life with freedom." Although people are often told to deal with their emotions by compartmentalizing or dismissing them, he noted that simply doesn't work, at least not for long. "We must," Stager said, "learn to live with them successfully."
"The bottom line," he told WND, "is that when people learn to handle their own emotional bucket, they can become successful in living life." This is something Stager has emphasized in more than 20 years of hosting his seminar. It can apply to relationships, business and many other parts of an individual's daily life, he added.
"Our thoughts must be utilized to manage our emotions and our behaviors," Stager argued. "By doing this, a person can often avoid failing and release themselves from the burdens of life."
For the former Naval officer and instructor, it's simply better – much better – to talk about feelings than keep them bottled up inside. "Name it, claim it, own it and deal with it" is the mantra unpacked in his book. To effectively deal with emotions, Stager said, a person must be encouraged to commit to these steps.
In the book, he added, "One near universal tool to apply is to 'talk, not walk.' Walking away from problems only allows the pressure to build, so that the eventual explosion of emotions is greater than first imagined." It is his desire for readers to throw out the "garbage" and irrational thoughts generated by one's negative feelings and emotions.
Finally, said Stager, the book provides the tools to help a person move forward "into the light of freedom." And personally speaking, he affirmed, "God is in charge, and Christ is the key to peace of mind. He owns it, runs it, and designed it."
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
In an interview Tuesday, President Trump vowed to look into the fact the U.S. Justice Department is still officially opposing the $30 million wrongful-death lawsuit brought by Aaron Babbitt, the husband of Ashli Babbitt, the woman shot and killed by a Capitol Police officer Jan. 6, 2021.
Speaking to Greg Kelly of Newsmax, Trump said he also plans to look into Capitol Police Lt. Michael Byrd, the man who gunned down Babbitt outside the House Speaker's Lobby, and the government's treatment and remuneration of the officer.
"I am a big fan of Ashli Babbitt, and Ashli Babbitt was a really good person," Trump told Kelly. "She was innocently standing there … and a man did something to her that was unthinkable when he shot her, and I think it's a disgrace. I am going to look into that."
Kelly mentioned the DOJ's opposition to the 2024 lawsuit, to which Trump responded, "You're just telling me that for the first time. I haven't heard that."
Watch a portion of Kelly's interview with President Trump.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
One of the White House X accounts, Rapid Response 47, which posts positive news and stories about President Trump and his policies, has highlighted a CNN segment reporting on how many Americans say the nation is "on the right track."
Watch the network's senior data reporter, Harry Enten:
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
In response to a letter from U.S. President Donald Trump, Iran's Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei stated: "Some people inside the country keep bringing up the issue of negotiations, asking, 'Why don't you negotiate with the U.S.?' I want to be clear: If the goal of negotiations is to lift sanctions, that will not happen. Instead, it will only tighten the noose and increase the pressure."
That was March 12. Two days later, former President Hassan Rouhani, who served two terms between 2013 to 2021, responded to Khamenei's remarks, warning: "The situation is extremely critical, and the more we move forward, the harder and worse it becomes."
Rouhani further emphasized that negotiations should not be seen as a personal stance of Khamenei, stating: "We argue over whether to negotiate or not. But what kind of debate is this? Then we attach it to the idea that the supreme leader opposes negotiations. The truth is, that the supreme leader is not fundamentally against negotiations. Under current conditions, he may reject them today, but in a few months, given new circumstances, he might support them."
Seeing negotiation as a way out, Hassan Rouhani is deeply concerned about the rising tide of public anger. Four decades of clerical rule have left a nation simmering with frustration – anger that, like a ticking time bomb, threatens to detonate beneath the regime.
Khamenei is more aware than anyone of the existential threats facing his rule. He knows economic collapse and widespread hunger – now affecting more than two-thirds of Iran's population – have pushed the country to the brink of a massive uprising. He also understands that this time, the regime is up against more than just spontaneous protests. Thousands of resistance units across Iran are waiting for the right spark to ignite a nationwide rebellion, one that would drive the regime toward its downfall.
For the past decade, these units – established by the People's Mojahedin Organization of Iran, or MEK, the regime's sworn enemy – have spread into every neighborhood, town, and city. Despite the regime's extensive surveillance networks and security forces, the opposition has managed to carry out 60 anti-repression operations across Iran in March alone, relying on their deep social base.
Khamenei is also fully aware that this time, the international community – particularly Europe and the U.S. – stands united in its efforts to curb Iran's nuclear ambitions and regional influence.
In their latest statement, G7 members declared: "Iran is the primary source of instability in the region and must never be allowed to develop nuclear weapons. Iran must change course, de-escalate tensions, and choose diplomacy."
The recent U.S. attack on the Houthis at Trump's direction was another strong warning to Khamenei intended to bring him to the negotiating table.
Khamenei knows negotiations will inevitably force him into a step-by-step retreat. First, he will have to abandon Iran's nuclear program. From there, his authority will begin to erode, like a crumbling, decaying structure. This collapse will only deepen the rifts within the regime, pitting rival factions against each other in an all-out power struggle. Under such conditions, and due to the presence of major organized resistance within Iran, Ali Khamenei prefers to avoid negotiations, even at the cost of potential attacks on his nuclear facilities. The fall of Khamenei's rule is no longer a possibility – many see it as a foregone conclusion.
In a nation that has endured 45 years of repression and bloodshed at the hands of violent, dictatorial religious fanatics, tensions have reached a breaking point. Iran today is a powder keg, and Ali Khamenei's authority – already weakened by internal dissent following Syria's collapse – hangs by a thread. Once it unravels, the "wolves" within the regime will turn on one another. And when that moment of weakness arrives, the final uprising will not just be possible. It will be inevitable.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
When President Donald Trump took office, his plans for his executive branch Department of Government Efficiency already were well-known. X owner Elon Musk promptly was given directions, as a special employee in the executive branch, to find waste, fraud, and corruption in the federal government's spending, and to cut it out.
So far the department has worked in dozens of federal offices, from the Internal Revenue Service to Voice of America, proposed slashing tens of thousands of dollars, and tens of billions of dollars in spending.
The backlash is as was expected: Leftists who created those spending channels, who like them, or possibly even benefit from them, have gone with lawsuits against Trump's work to make America fiscally responsible again to their favorite left-leaning judges, who promptly have delivered to their causes injunctions against Trump.
They've ordered him to rehire thousands of workers who were dismissed because their jobs were not part of the legally required operations of their agencies, they've ordered billions of dollars to be spent and be lost forever, they've ordered illegal alien criminals to be brought back to the United States.
Now there's a response to that problem: A new Department of Legal Accountability, DOLA, that would require legal accountability in America's justice system that for years was weaponized by Democrats against Republicans, conservatives, Christians, and even those who just viewed the government from a perspective other than huge programs and spending.
The announcement comes from lawyer Larry Klayman of Freedom Watch.
He's noted for earlier founding Judicial Watch. He also was on the legal team that broke up the AT&T monopoly. He is a former U.S. Senate candidate.
His status rose so high that a television show even created a character in his likeness (Larry Klaypool).
He told WND the DOLA program for right now is under the umbrella of Freedom Watch.
But that may not necessarily remain that way.
"It is time that We the People rise up and take action to reform and enforce an honest legal system that is not weaponized and which represents all Americans, not only the left. DOLA is designed to work closely with the Trump Department of Justice and all entities that believe in the rule of law and the Constitution," he said. "Stay tuned for more particulars, but the time has come for Americans to assert the legitimate rights of the citizenry and to clean up a compromised legal profession comprised of partisan and dishonest prosecutors and federal judges in particular."
During the Joe Biden regime, the DOJ was weaponized to bring multiple lawfare cases against Trump, even coordinating with state prosecutors to bring additional state claims against him.
Those ultimately died when he was elected president again.
Klayman explained he and other conservatives who believe in the vision of the Founding Fathers are working on DOLA.
His announcement explained, "In addition to prominent public interest attorneys such as Klayman, a trial lawyer of many decades, and the only lawyer ever to have a court rule that a sitting president committed a crime, which occurred during the Clinton administration, constitutional scholars and friends of Freedom Watch, such as former presidential candidate and U.N. Ambassador Alan Keyes who served under the Reagan administration, are being recruited by Freedom Watch for this crucial endeavor."