This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
A federal judge is allowing to move forward a lawsuit over the Biden administration's decision to deregulate an abortion chemical that is used to kill unborn babies.
The ruling comes from U.S. District Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk, and allows the states of Missouri, Kansas and Idaho to continue their claims against the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's anti-life agenda.
Liberty Counsel chief Mat Staver said, "The FDA must be held accountable for its dangerous and unlawful actions. The FDA should no longer be allowed to circumvent safety laws to allow a eugenic drug to destroy innocent children and harm women. Abortion drugs have never been safe and harm women and kill children."
At issue is access to the dangerous Mifepristone drug, and the feds' decision to allow the drug to be shipped into those states and undermine their prolife legal frameworks.
"The ruling denied the FDA's request to dismiss the case and granted the states more time to amend and strengthen their complaint," explained a report from Liberty Counsel.
The states now can transition from a previous case brought by a group of pro-life doctors, who the Supreme Court said didn't have legal standing to use.
The new, and amended, claims, "could end up back at the Supreme Court in the future," the report said, as "The states assert they have the legal standing to sue the FDA because its relaxed restrictions involving a dangerous drug like Mifepristone puts lives and health at risk and undermines state pro-life laws protecting women, girls, and unborn children."
The focal point of the case is the FDA's allowing of the drug to be handed out via telehealth, without the patient ever seeing a doctor in person. Then the drugs are delivered by mail.
The report explained, "In April 2023, Judge Kacsmaryk presided over the original abortion pill case from the pro-life doctors and determined that the FDA shouldn't have approved Mifepristone for public use in 2000 and voided its approval. He noted the agency approved the abortion pill under political pressure, its safety studies were improperly conducted, and that the FDA's regulatory decisions allowing them to be prescribed via telemedicine, sent by mail, and dispensed at retail pharmacies were unlawful."
The Supreme Court then reversed the judicial course and allowed the deregulation scheme to remain.
"The states now want a ruling, including a preliminary injunction, that restores regulations on Mifepristone, including a plan for follow-up visits by the patient with a doctor, limiting the use of the drugs on unborn, restoring a requirement that doctors be involved, and demanding all serious and non-fatal adverse events be documented.
In the case, the states charge the federal bureaucrats have disregarded the health and safety needs of Americans, and have created conditions "where women and girls can face severe and life-threatening complications due to easy access to the drugs through the mail and little to no medical oversight while taking them – conditions that bypass state pro-life protections and send women and girls to emergency rooms."
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
GOLAN – As Israel's seven-front war approaches 470 days and with more than 800 IDF soldiers and security forces killed, the tiny Jewish state has been stretched thin. Hamas has been all but eliminated in Gaza, and likewise, Hezbollah in Lebanon. The murderous Assad regime in Syria fell with minimal action by the IDF, but solutions for what comes after are still a quandary and the path to any kind of lasting peace is still unclear.
While morale remains high among the troops, many reserve soldiers have been away from their families and careers with little respite for a year and a half. This has taken a personal toll on the lives of Israeli civilians and soldiers.
Many Israelis have compared the current conflict with the 1973 Yom Kippur War when Israel's security establishment was caught off guard and forced to pay a heavy price in a multi-front war for the country's survival. Other similarities reflecting the mental state and attitude of Israelis are becoming apparent.
One symptom common to both wars is emigration. Immigration to Israel is referred to as "Aliyah," literally "ascending," hinting at the perception that moving to Israel is a spiritual ascension. Conversely, emigration is referred to as "Yeridah" or "descending."
The Central Bureau of Statistics reported that last year, immigration to Israel, compared to emigration, represented a net loss of 18,200. In 2024, 82,700 residents left Israel, and only 23,800 returned. The number of new immigrants to the country was 32,800, about 15,000 lower than in 2023. In total, during 2024, the population of Israel grew by 1.1 percent, a decrease in the growth rate compared to 2023 (1.6 percent).
Some 117,000 Israeli citizens have left the country for an extended period and have stopped living in Israel since the outbreak of the war on October 7, 2023 – a figure three times higher than from previous years.
According to the data, more Israelis emigrated from Tel Aviv and Haifa, considered secular enclaves, than from any other city.
The country has experienced several waves of emigration associated with wars. In the 1960s, Israel was hit with a crippling recession, leading to a period of increased emigration. The 1967 Six-Day War followed this wave. The most significant wave of emigration in Israeli history followed the Yom Kippur War. This has been attributed to a national trauma intensified by the belief that the government and military establishment failed the nation.
Once the war is over, Israel will need to cope with the economic repercussions of a protracted conflict.
One mitigating factor to emigration might be the high inflation and unemployment in Europe, the U.S., and Canada. This is exacerbated by the preceding period of COVID which also taxed the economy with shutdowns and restrictions.
Shimon (not his real name) has experienced this difficult period firsthand. He is a religious and strongly Zionist husband and father in his 30s. He served in the IDF at 18, completing a course for religious soldiers called Hesder that incorporated periods of learning interspersed with combat service. He also volunteered for a year of "shlichut," acting as an emissary in the U.S. to educate Jews and connect them with Israel. In total, Shimon served six years in the IDF. After his service, he learned Arabic at university, going on to work for the government as a liaison with the Arab community.
His language skills were of enormous value to the IDF, and he became an intelligence officer in the reserves, embedded in a combat unit. On Oct.7, even before the IDF called, Shimon drove to the southern border to join his unit. He described the disorganization which characterized the first days of the war with Gaza.
"In the beginning, things were crazy," Shimon said. "We didn't know for the first 24 hours or so what was really going on. I had no idea what was going on down south, and if I had known what was going on, there is a good chance I would have gotten my gun from a unit and just driven down there, in which case, there is a good chance I wouldn't be alive right now."
"Thankfully, I followed the plans we had set up, and I went to where the army told me to go in times of emergency and join my assigned unit. But many of the guys in my unit just went down and fought."
Shimon's job was to interrogate prisoners and pass on the information to his officers, a function which kept him busy night and day for several months. Shimon estimates that he has been home for three weeks in the more than 450 days since the war began.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
JERUSALEM – Middle East/Israel Morning Brief
Gaza hostage, ceasefire deal on brink of finalization
Talks for a Gaza ceasefire and hostage exchange deal between Israel and Hamas continued in earnest with officials from both sides and from mediating countries estimating that a landmark agreement to end the 15-month war was near-finalized, with multiple outlets reporting details of its content.
Key mediator Qatar said Tuesday that a day earlier it had presented both parties with a "final" draft of the agreement. Israel's Channel 12 news reported Monday, Jerusalem considered it broadly acceptable, and senior Israeli officials said they were waiting for Hamas's reaction.
The Associated Press reported Tuesday that Hamas accepted the deal as well, citing two officials involved in the talks. However, CNN later cited an Egyptian official as saying the mediating countries – Qatar, Egypt, and the United States – had not yet received a response from the Palestinian terror group.
Pro-Hezbollah imam to deliver prayer at Trump inauguration
A Muslim cleric who refused to call Hezbollah a terrorist organization and has a "significant history of extremism" has been tapped to deliver a benediction at President-elect Donald Trump's inauguration next week, the New York Post reported.
Husham Al-Husainy, the imam of the Karbalaa Islamic Educational Center in Dearborn, Mich., is among four religious leaders listed in an Inauguration Day program, obtained by the Washington Reporter on Monday, who are scheduled to speak immediately after Trump's Jan. 20 address.
ICJ judge who pushed back against South Africa's claims of Israeli 'genocide' poised to take over court's presidency
In a significant shift at the International Court of Justice, or ICJ, Judge Julia Sebutinde is poised to assume the presidency, marking another milestone in her groundbreaking career, Israel Hayom reported.
The Ugandan jurist, who recently made headlines for her robust defense of Israel against South Africa's genocide allegations in the Gaza war, will take the helm following current President Nawaf Salam's departure to form Lebanon's next government.
Sebutinde's journey to The Hague reflects a remarkable career in international justice. Her ascent began with her 1996 appointment to Uganda's Supreme Court, where she distinguished herself by leading three pivotal anti-corruption investigations in her homeland.
The judge's international prominence grew with her 2005 appointment to the Special Court for Sierra Leone war crimes tribunal, where she played a crucial role in the landmark trial of Liberian President Charles Taylor. Her appointment to the ICJ in February 2012 broke new ground as she became the first woman from Africa to serve on the court.
Israeli official: Hostage deal won't include return of Sinwar's body
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
A parental rights watchdog has filed a new legal action against an Illinois school district that stands accused of discrimination, illegally, against those who are NOT "black, biracial or African American."
The civil rights complaint comes from Parents Defending Education and names the Community Unit School District 308 in Oswego.
The Washington Examiner said the allegations are that the school has used race to determine students' participation in an affinity group that has special benefits.
"It is ridiculous and, frankly, unconscionable that schools like Community Unit School District 308 are creating mentorship and educational opportunities for students based solely on their race," charged Caroline Moore, in an interview with the publication.
She is the vice president of the parents' group.
"Creating situations where students are separated in public schools by race at such a young age perpetuates race biases and discrimination that has no place in public schools in 2025," she explained.
"I look forward to OCR investigating and discontinuing such discriminatory practices that pit kids against each other."
Among the allegations is that the school produced a promotion for an affinity group called Black Students Alliance Buddies, "promoting programming facilitated by a subset of the district's Equity and Engagement Department called the 'Teachers on Special Assignment Division,'" the report said.
Under "Who can Attend" there is a requirement for students to qualify by identifying as "black, biracial, or African American."
The parents' organization said that's a clear violation of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 as well as the equal protection clause in the Constitution's 14th Amendment because the school is offering benefits "on the basis of race."
The report explained, "The watchdog group cited a 2015 case in which the Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights found a school district in violation after holding a 'Black Lives Matter' assembly for 'African American students only.' Just holding a race-exclusive assembly violated Title VI and the equal protection clause, according to OCR, which is why PDE is confident that offering race-exclusive educational benefits presents a similar if not more egregious civil rights violation."
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
JERUSALEM – Middle East/Israel Morning Brief
U.S. residents of Judea and Samaria sue Biden over sanctions
A pair of Israeli-Americans recently filed a lawsuit against the Biden administration alleging that it had improperly imposed sanctions on them under an executive order intended to combat "extremist settler violence" in Judea and Samaria.
Matthew Mainen, a lawyer representing the plaintiffs on behalf of the National Jewish Advocacy Center, told JNS that the case, filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, raises basic questions about the rights of U.S. citizens to due process under the law.
American citizens have a right to be heard and to challenge the government before the government takes action against them or deprives them of some interest," Mainen said. "The Biden administration, with what appears to be zero due diligence, did just that."
In February, U.S. President Joe Biden Biden issued executive order 14115, "on imposing certain sanctions on persons undermining peace, security and stability in the West Bank," which was intended to combat "extremist settler violence" in Judea and Samaria that the Biden administration had determined to be undermining a path to a two-state solution.
The text of the order says that it could be applied to any "foreign person" that the Biden administration determines to be undermining peace and security in the "West Bank," but makes no provisions for U.S. nationals.
In first, U.S., U.K., Israel conduct joint strikes on Yemeni targets
Arab media outlets reported an unprecedented military operation Friday, marking the first coordinated strikes by U.S., U.K., and Israeli forces since the escalation of regional hostilities. According to international sources, the operation comprised three waves of strikes targeting critical infrastructure across Houthi-controlled territories, Israel Hayom reported.
The operation, totaling approximately 30 strikes, focused on several strategic locations: underground military installations in the Amran governorate, military complexes in Sanaa, a power generation facility south of the capital, and the strategic western ports of Al-Hudaydah and Ras Issa.
A mass pro-Hamas demonstration took place in Sanaa concurrent with the military operation. Participants rallied behind the Shia-Zaidi terrorist movement's ideological slogan, chanting "Death to America, Death to Israel, Curse upon the Jews, Victory for Islam." Eyewitness documentation captured smoke plumes rising from multiple strike locations across the capital.
Congress hits ICC officials in response to Netanyahu, Gallant war crimes arrest warrants
The U.S. House on Thursday approved H.R. 23, the Illegitimate Court Counteraction Act, a bill imposing sanctions on International Criminal Court officials in response to the court's issuance of an arrest warrant last year against Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and then-defense minister Yoav Gallant, reported the Jewish Press.
The bipartisan vote, 243-140, demonstrated continued majority support in Congress for Israel's military response to the October 7, 2023, Hamas atrocities, even as most House Democrats opposed the measure. Forty-five Democrats supported the legislation. Last summer, 42 Democrats supported a similar bill.
U.S. Rep. Chip Roy, R-Texas, who authored the bill, issued a statement saying, "This bill is about protecting America and our allies' sovereignty from a rogue, globalist court. The ICC investigating and issuing arrest warrants for the sitting Prime Minister of Israel is a blatant assault on a critical ally's sovereignty amid an existential fight against Hamas. Make no mistake, if the ICC is allowed to target Israel unchecked, they will go after American service members and veterans again in the future."
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Many people consider the abuse of children for pornography to be one of the most egregious crimes around.
A recent case in which two homosexuals were convicted of abusing their adopted sons for that purpose got them sentences that essentially amount to life in prison.
But now a video report from OMG, O'Keefe Media Group, charges that the federal Bureau of Prisons is working to categorize such offenses as "low severity."
The organization said it has obtained documents "detailing a controversial proposal by the BOP to reclassify child exploitation offenses from 'high severity' to 'low severity.'"
The OMG report said, "Additionally, the new policy would classify terrorism-related offenses for female inmates as 'low security' and animal cruelty as a 'low-moderate' offense. These changes stem from a draft of the Security Designation and Custody Classification Manual, signed by BOP Director Colette S. Peters."
The plans were outlined in a recent memo from Christopher Wade, chief of labor relations, to Jennifer Hinton, a labor relations specialist.
A report from the Gateway Pundit said O'Keefe obtained the documents from a "high-level" source in the Bureau of Prisons.
The source said, "I can say with absolute certainty that the BOP is an agency in an existential crisis. If I looked at this agency through the lens of a CEO, I would probably think that complete privatization would be the most sensible route.
"We need at least $5B in infrastructure repairs agency-wide, our health care (especially at my institution) is in absolute shambles, fentanyl and other hard drugs are being used by inmates and can be found anywhere without much effort, contraband cell phones are abundant and we have a very serious drone problem (especially at my institution) that's uncontrollable and extremely dangerous. The BOP is a failed agency where corruption and incompetence, at the management level, run rampant."
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
A court ruling has destroyed Joe Biden's agenda to open girls' showers, locker rooms, restrooms, and other private facilities to boys and men.
The case was fought by the state of Tennessee against the White House scheming that essentially was a promotion of the transgender lifestyle choice.
Tennessee Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti won the fight over the administration's unconstitutional Title IX rule changes.
"This is a huge win for Tennessee, for common sense, and for women and girls across America," Skrmetti said. "The court's ruling is yet another repudiation of the Biden administration's relentless push to impose a radical gender ideology through unconstitutional and illegal rulemaking. Because the Biden rule is vacated altogether, President Trump will be free to take a fresh look at our Title IX regulations when he returns to office next week."
The ruling comes from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Kentuck, which said the Department of Education's Title IX changes "would have compromised girls' privacy in locker rooms and bathrooms and required teachers and administrators to use pronouns that do not align with students' biological sex," and that "exceeded the federal government's authority and violated the Constitution," Skrmetti said.
Biden has repeatedly tried to change the definition of "sex" in federal law to mean the politically charged "gender identity." His court fights even have claimed that when America's nondiscrimination laws were written 50 years ago or more, lawmakers actually intended that "sex" meant "gender identity."
College athlete Riley Gaines, who was a victim of the Biden campaign, called it a "huge win."
"This is a colossal win for women and girls across the country," explained Kristen Waggoner, of the ADF, which was involved through a related dispute. "The Biden administration's radical attempt to redefine sex not only tossed fairness, safety, and privacy for female students out the window, it also threatened free speech and parental rights. With this ruling, the federal court in Kentucky rejected the entire Biden rule and the administration's illegal actions."
At least seven circuit courts had already temporarily blocked Biden's agenda, and the Supreme Court had previously affirmed two lower court temporary injunctions.
The court ruling applies nationwide.
The ruling said, "There is nothing in the text or statutory design of Title IX to suggest that discrimination 'on the basis of sex' means anything other than it has since Title IX's inception—that recipients of federal funds under Title IX may not treat a person worse than another similarly-situated individual on the basis of the person's sex, male or female."
It continued, "As this Court and others have explained, expanding the meaning of 'on the basis of sex' to include 'gender identity' turns Title IX on its head. While Title IX sought to level the playing field between men and women, it is rife with exceptions that allow males and females to be separated based on the enduring physical differences between the sexes. For example, institutions that receive federal funds may permit separation of the sexes for purposes of living facilities, boys and girls conferences, and social sororities and fraternities. And these are just a few examples."
The ruling said the Biden plan actually violates the First Amendment, the Constitution's spending clause, and is "arbitrary and capricious."
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
A sheriff in Wyoming has posted a warning sign to wannabe criminals: A red, blinking "vacancy" sign over the door to the county jail.
"We put (the sign) up to make sure everyone knows we're open for business. We take people to the jail that need to be arrested," Laramie County Sheriff Brian Kozal told the Cowboy State Daily.
He explained the red neon, all-caps sign is "meant to let people know the jail has room, and that deputies are willing to book suspected criminals charged with crimes into the jail," the report said.
One of the issues is that for more than two years during COVID-19 and after, a prior administration suspended many of its booking protocols and allowed many defendants suspected of nonviolent crimes to remain free.
"We're making it clear we have vacancy, so criminals are welcome in our jail" Kozak confirmed to the publication.
The sign is at a busy intersection of Pioneer Ave. and 20th Street in downtown Cheyenne.
Kozak is not new to unusual ploys. Last year he used part of his advertising budget to advertise in downtown Denver, 100 miles away, that he had open deputy positions for officders "dissatisfied with some of Colorado's laws that are less friendly to law enforcement than Wyoming's," the report said.
The county jail has some 170 inmates now, in a facility with a capacity of about 450.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
The infamous, and faulty, Roe v. Wade decision that created out of essentially nothing a federal "right" to an abortion remained the controlling standard in America for nearly five decades before it was banished to the ashcan of corrupted legal ideologies.
Campaigners are hoping that it doesn't take that long to get rid of Obergefell, the ruling from just a few years back that even Supreme Court justices admitted was unrelated to anything in the Constitution in its political campaign to promote the LGBT lifestyle choices by legitimizing same-sex "marriage."
There's already a legal case that the constitutional experts at Liberty Counsel are suggesting could be the basis for a reversal.
And now the organization MassResistance has confirmed that there are at least six state legislatures that will have the opportunity in coming months to adopt a resolution encouraging the high court to reverse itself.
The organization said it has drafted sample language and resolutions are pending in Idaho, North Dakota, Montana, Michigan, Iowa and Kansas.
For example, MassResistance volunteers in Idaho have been working with numerous lawmakers on pro-family bills in recent years, and now one state representative has offered "to spearhead this effort this year."
In North Dakota, a lawmaker who previously worked on legislation to ban the body-mutilating "sex change" procedures on children is working on filing an anti-Obergefell resolution.
The organization said its proposed text "calls on the U.S. Supreme Court to reverse its infamous and illegitimate Obergefell ruling. That 2015 decision forced the idea that the U.S. Constitution requires states to allow same-sex 'marriage.'"
There are discussions already, too, with lawmakers in multiple other states.
"The Obergefell v. Hodges ruling was passed by a slim 5-4 majority of activist Supreme Court Justices," MassResistance reported. "It has caused immense societal havoc across the country. States have been forced to ignore their legitimate laws and constitutional amendments regarding marriage. Governments, businesses, and even schoolchildren have been forced to accept same-sex 'marriage' – and by extension homosexual behavior – as normal, under pain of punishments, fines, and even imprisonment."
The problem with that ruling?
"The First Amendment guarantees free speech, freedom of assembly, religious liberty, and the right to petition government for redress of grievance. By forcing same-sex 'marriage' on the country in this way, Obergefell challenged all those rights," the group reported.
Unlike in 2015, when the Supreme Court was dominated by leftist ideologues, there now is a majority of constitutionalists on the bench, the report said.
"In order to invent a previously unknown constitutional 'right' to same-sex marriage, the 5-4 majority of activist Supreme Court Justices used a strategy concocted by the LGBT lawyers. They redefined the Fourteenth Amendment to allow them to effectively change the definition of marriage from one man and one woman to 'two people who love each other,'" the group reported.
But the 14th Amendment actually states: "No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws," and does not mention marriage.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
A city ordinance that put a bull's-eye on a church food-distribution program has been repealed, opening the door for the Seventh-Day Baptist Church in Daytona Beach, Florida, to continue its program to help people.
According to a report from the First Liberty Institute, the city's ordinance that banned such programs was suspended earlier.
But now there's been confirmation the provision has been repealed by the city, meaning the church can continue its food distribution ministry without the threat of immediate closure.
"The city previously agreed to allow the church to resume its food distribution ministry while it repealed its ordinance, and the city's latest action of repealing the ordinance makes that temporary agreement permanent," the legal team explained.
It was aided by the law firm Sidley Austin LLP in reaching the resolution.
"We are grateful to Daytona Beach city officials for working with us so that Seventh Baptist can resume its mission of providing food for the hungry, hurting people in the community," Ryan Gardner, a First Liberty Institute lawyer, said in a statement. "People who take action to care for the hungry should be encouraged and affirmed. The church is thrilled to be able to continue helping those in need."
The church has run a food pantry for the most vulnerable families in the community since about 2007.
"For most of that time, the city, and its citizens, not only allowed the church's food ministry to thrive, but they also supported it and encouraged it. Even after the church moved to its current location – within what the city calls a 'redevelopment area,' just like its prior location – the city allowed the church to operate the food pantry without issue," First Liberty Institute reported.
Then came an enforcement that forced the closure, and the filing of a now-dismissed lawsuit.
When the city brought its case against the church, a First Liberty official described it as "unconscionable."
"People who take action to care for the hungry should be encouraged and affirmed, not threatened and fined. The city is criminalizing compassion," Gardner said at the time.
The conflict apparently resulted from a complaint by a former city commissioner and her spouse that "these types of feeding programs are plagues to the efforts to redevelop a neighborhood" and that "crowds of people [are] sleeping on church steps and in alleys beside homes."
The church had been threatened with a fine of $5,000 per day for running its food pantry.