This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
The top legal officers from 24 states are urging the Supreme Court to fix the nation's birthright citizenship problem.
The 14th Amendment, created after the Civil War, was intended to protect the newly freed slaves and their children, but was not intended to give U.S. citizenship to every baby of every illegal alien or foreign visitor to America, President Trump has argued.
He's now being joined by attorneys general from 24 states.
The arguments were filed by attorneys general Jonathan Skrmetti, R-Tenn., and Brenna Bird, R-Iowa, and in a brief asked the Supreme Court to support Trump's argument that American citizenship isn't actually automatic for any newborn born of illegal alien parents or visitors to America.
Trump make that clarification by executive order when he took office in January, "discarding ridiculous left-wing arguments about 'birthright citizenship' — which have allowed illegals to stay in the United States with anchor babies for decades."
But leftist officials in Washington, Illinois, Oregon and Arizona sued.
A report at the Federalist noted, "If the Supreme Court ends up taking the case and rules in line with the true understanding of the Fourteenth Amendment and the Citizenship Clause, the Trump administration could start turning the corner on removing the true number of illegals in the country."
"The idea that citizenship is guaranteed to everyone born in the United States doesn't square with the plain language of the Fourteenth Amendment or the way many government officials and legal analysts understood the law when it was adopted after the Civil War," Skrmetti said. "If you look at the law at the time, citizenship attached to kids whose parents were lawfully in the country. Each child born in this country is precious no matter their parents' immigration status, but not every child is entitled to American citizenship. This case could allow the Supreme Court to resolve a constitutional question with far-reaching implications for the States and our nation."
Leftists at entry level courts in the federal judiciary have sided, so far, with the citizenship-for-all agenda. They issued nationwide injunctions, a move that already has been rebuked by the Supreme Court.
But those justices have yet to rule on the merits of the "birthright" dispute.
The Federalist said, "The brief shows the history surrounding the ratification of the 14th Amendment and its Citizenship Clause from the 1860s through the early 1900s, laying out the proper understanding of the clause before it was twisted by opportunistic leftists who wanted to destroy the country by importing culturally unrecognizable people who refuse to assimilate."
The report said, "'Birthright citizenship' incentivizes illegal immigration, which inherently takes a toll on states both through sapping government resources meant for Americans and degrading culture and community."
The state attorneys charged, "Recent years have seen an influx of illegal aliens — over 9 million — overwhelming our nation's infrastructure and its capacity to assimilate. Conferring United States citizenship requires a more meaningful connection than mere presence by happenstance or illegality. That connection, originalist evidence repeatedly instructs, was parental domicile."
Opponents of Trump's executive order claim a federal court case from 1898 supports their argument, but it likely doesn't.
In that case a baby was born in American of two Chinese nationals, and was declared a citizen, because the parents were in the United States legally, not illegally.
Key is that the amendment applies citizenship to those who are subject to the jurisdiction of the United States.
In fact, Congress in 1866 excluded from citizenship children of "persons temporarily resident" so that those who did not "owe a complete, permanent allegiance" to the U.S. would not benefit.
The report explained, "In 19th century lectures on naturalization and citizenship, Supreme Court Justice Samuel Freeman Miller explained that 'if a stranger or traveller [sic] passing through, or temporarily residing in this country, who has not himself been naturalized, and who claims to owe no allegiance to our Government, has a child born here which goes out of the country with its father, such child is not a citizen of the United States, because it was not subject to its jurisdiction.'"
States joining included: Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Georgia, Florida, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, Utah, West Virginia, and Wyoming.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
The Casa Bonita restaurant in Lakewood, Colo., just outside of Denver, long has been known for its novel entertainment.
Sure, it has Mexican food. But it also has cliff divers, who dive from indoor perches into an indoor pool stories below. There also are roaming mariachi musicians, and there have been actors in various costumes who entertained children.
It's more that 50 years old, given its entire history, but it went dark during COVID only to be resurrected by South Park multimillionaires Trey Parker and Matt Stone, who reportedly turned over cash by the tens of millions to unlock its doors again.
Many of the traditional features are there, but the prices have exploded to some $30 a meal now.
But its latest fight is over what it pays those actors who provide the show for patrons.
There have been negotiations going on for some time, and restaurant officials said they don't comment.
But actress Brooke Shields, of "Law & Order: Special Victims Unit" and "The Blue Lagoon" did.
She called out the wealthy owners for not paying their employees a "living wage."
On social media, she said, "Hey Matt and Trey, nice to meet you. As you know, I'm the president of Actors' Equity Association, the union that represents the performers who work for you at Casa Bonita. You probably know that we've been in bargaining for their first union contract for quite a while now. But maybe you don't know that your restaurant management has been playing really fast and loose with this bargaining process and it's just not respectful to the performers who put their all into making Casa Bonita the one-of-a-kind destination that it is and that you've created.
"And things are kind of escalating. And I just want to say that these workers are not making a living wage- like actually not. And, in fact, they are being paid less than their coworkers who are actually serving the food, and you know, that's before you factor in tips. So, they've not only been hard at work entertaining Casa Bonita guests and spending their volunteer hours in bargaining – they've also been putting their names on a petition. So, I hope you see their petition, and I do hope you take it seriously, and take seriously their requests for you to accept the proposed contract so that we can all put this chapter way behind us. Because without the performers who bring Casa Bonita to life, it's just a big, pink restaurant. It's time to do the right thing. Please agree to a fair contract, and please enable these performers to focus on providing the world-class experience that Casa Bonita's guests expect and deserve and help them get it."
A report from a local Fox outlet said Shields, "called out" the rich owners.
A strike has been authorized by the Actors' Equity Association, at the discretion of their lead negotiator, the report said.
A petition from workers was also promoted.
"The petition said that since performers voted to unionize in November 2024, the association and Casa Bonita management have been in negotiations since April, and the majority of workers on the contract have stated that they support a strike," the report said.
The restaurant also has been accused of cutting more than 1,000 hours from the employees, and has refused to respond to concerns about worker safety.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Few states can speak with any accuracy of being further left than Colorado.
That's where abortion is a constitutional right, where Democrats run the governor's office, the legislature, and even the state Supreme Court. That was where justices wildly tried to bar President Donald Trump from the 2024 ballot. In the legislature, lawmakers decided to simply run around a constitutional limit on tax hikes by calling the new charges "fees."
It's gone even further, in some situations, than California, by creating circumstances where teachers have been known to sexually assault students.
Now these leftists are on trial for continuing … slavery.
In fact, a Denver judge has held a two-week trial on the issue, just visited a state prison to review the situation, and soon will rule.
A report from Courthousenews said the state initially abolished slavery in 1877. But lawmakers left an exception that allowed slavery and involuntary servitude to be used as punishment for crimes.
Then in 2018, voters changed their state constitution to remove that exception.
David Maxted, representing inmates who complained that they lost privileges if they refused to work, said, "Part of the reason voters passed this is because they believed the state should not have the power to compel individuals to work against their will. This is a moral judgment."
When the change was made in 2018, the state prison department didn't change its work requirements, rules that require inmates to do certain jobs in order to obtain certain privileges.
An earlier court ruling, from Judge Alex Myers, gave the state a partial win, determining laws requiring inmates to work did not violate their rights unless they faced legal or physical force as punishment. That ruling said losing privileges did not violate their rights, since they are, in fact, privileges.
The state Court of Appeals then declined to review the case, initiated on behalf of inmate Harold Mortis.
And the case was moved for other issues to another judge.
Ann Stanton, a lawyer for the state, said in closing, "This case isn't about the fact that there are consequences, it's about the degree of consequences. You haven't heard evidence that the consequences reach the level of involuntary servitude."
She pointed out some inmates were in restrictive housing for being difficult to manage, having banned items, or some other rule infraction.
The new judge gave the two sides time to submit findings, questioning, "Do the plaintiffs have to prove that involuntary servitude is rampant throughout the state corrections system, or do they just have to prove that the current policies and practices enable involuntary servitude?"
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
President Donald Trump has emerged with a win from a fight with European officials over their agenda to create another carbon tax and raise the cost of items shipped to America.
It was in the United Nations where globalists who adhere to the ideology called climate change, called global warming before the warming essentially stopped, hatched a plan to charge shipping companies for their travels.
"Huge push by @SecRubio and the State Dept team. Strong diplomacy that put American business and consumers first WON THE DAY over an ideological carbon tax from the UN and EU," Mike Walz wrote on social media.
Fifty-seven countries voted in favor of delaying the adoption vote and 49 voted against. There were 21 abstentions.
The Washington Examiner explained the decision was "a shock, as many member states of the IMO, a London-based specialized agency within the U.N., were confident there were enough votes to adopt the measure as international maritime law."
Trump has been opposing the new world taxation plan for months, and recently escalated his objections.
Waltz, U.S. ambassador to the U.N., said the delay was to the component of the "net-zero framework."
The report said, "The motion to delay the vote on the measure was reportedly put forward by Singapore on Friday and called to a vote by Saudi Arabia, which was aligned with the Trump administration in its efforts to block the framework."
Trump expressed outrage that the International Maritime Organization was trying to pass a "global Carbon Tax."
The plan was to charge shipping massive fees for "greenhouse gas emissions."
Initially, ship owners were facing a minimum of $100 for every ton of carbon dioxide emitted over a baseline.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
During Barack Obama's tenure in the White House, the Internal Revenue Service was told to target and attack conservatives, Christians and critics of his leftist administration.
Remember those "Tea Party" organizations whose members were grilled about their lives, families, politics, speech, even their prayers, during his re-election campaign when they were denied authorization by the IRS, mostly likely because they would have expressed opposition to Obama.
Eventually, officials admitted their schemes, but they largely went unpunished, some retiring with lucrative government pensions.
Now President Donald Trump is working on a "massive revamp" of the agency, according to a report in the Daily Mail.
His targets, the report claimed, will be "wealthy Democratic donors whom the White House believes could be funding nefarious political activities."
A list of possible candidates for investigations, the report said, now includes Democrat funder George Soros. Other names are expected to be added.
Interim IRS commissioner Scott Bessent already has appointed an adviser, Gary Shapley, to work on possible investigations.
And the work has support in Congress, where Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, has proposed a plan to go after those who have funded the recent anti-Trump "No Kings" protests and riots under a federal law targeting organized crime.
The senator told Fox, "Follow the money. Cut off the money. You look at this No Kings rally – there's considerable evidence that George Soros and his network is behind funding these rallies which may well turn into riots."
The Open Society Foundation created by Soros, now run by his son, is the world's largest funder of leftism and leftist radicalism, the report said.
For example, the Fund for Policy Reform, now run by Alex Soros, handed out $60 million to Democrats in 2024, the report said.
Trump also has offered criticism of liberal billionaires like Tom Steyer and Michael Bloomberg, over the damage done by leftists across America.
The OSF has denied any wrongdoing and denounced violence.
The changeovers at the agency already have been in the making. There were some 100,000 IRS workers at the end of 2024, but the president's Department of Government Efficiency cut that to about 75,000.
Many of those are not at work right now because of the Schumer shutdown, where Democrats in the Senate refused to agreed to a resolution that would have kept the government funded for a few weeks.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
The state of Washington has caved in to a coalition of Catholic priests.
And the bottom line is that state authorities are giving up their quest to order Catholic priests to violate the sacred seal of the confessional.
"Washington was wise to walk away from this draconian law and allow Catholic clergy to continue ministering to the faithful," explained Becket CEO Mark Rienzi. "This is a victory for religious freedom and for common sense. Priests should never be forced to make the impossible choice of betraying their sacred vows or going to jail."
The state had adopted an agenda that purported to require priests to report certain information that they may obtain through the confessional.
"Preventing abuse and upholding the sacred seal of confession are not mutually exclusive—we can and must do both," added Jean Hill, of the Washington State Catholic Conference. "That's why the church supported the law's goal from the beginning and only asked for a narrow exemption to protect the sacrament. We're grateful the state ultimately recognized it can prevent abuse without forcing priests to violate their sacred vows."
The fight in Etienne v. Ferguson was over a state demand that priests report "information" shared with them within the sacred confines of the church's "Sacrament of Confession."
A court blocked the unconstitutional law earlier this year.
"As part of its commitment to Safe Environment, the Catholic Church already requires priests to report abuse and neglect to law enforcement and other state authorities. The Church originally supported the law's broader goal of strengthening protections for minors and asked only for a narrow exemption to protect the Sacrament of Confession," Becket, working on the case, said.
"For centuries, the Catholic Church has upheld the belief that confession is a sacred encounter between a repentant sinner and God, acting through the priest, and must remain confidential so as to encourage such repentance. This principle—known as the seal of confession or sacramental seal—requires absolute secrecy from priests about anything said while administering the sacrament. A priest has a sacred obligation to keep everything he hears during the sacrament of confession completely confidential. The seal is so vital to the Catholic faith that any priest who violates it faces automatic excommunication. Over the centuries, priests have been imprisoned, tortured, and even killed for upholding the seal. Penitents today need the same assurance that their participation in a holy sacrament will remain free from government interference," Becket said.
Then came state officials, who wanted to punish priests, with up to 364 days in jail, a $5,000 fine and civil liability, if they refused to deliver information the state demanded.
"It is a credit to the attorney general of Washington, the governor, and the archbishop and bishops that they were able to come together and find common ground under the First Amendment to protect religious liberty while seeking to eradicate the scourge of sexual abuse," said Hiram Sasser, of First Liberty Institute.
The resolution came through a stipulated motion and permanent injunction that confirmed the state plan "infringes Plaintiffs' free exercise of religion in violation of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution as applied to the Catholic Sacrament of Confession…"
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Eight people have been indicted in Texas over a scheme to provide illegal abortions.
Attorney General Ken Paxton announced on social media, "I arrested eight individuals, including foreign nationals, connected to a Houston abortionist. This cabal of abortion-loving radicals has been running illegal clinics staffed with unlicensed individuals who endangered the very people they pretended to help."
Paxton continued, "Beyond being illegal, it is evil. These dens of fake doctors will not be allowed to operate in Texas. Those responsible will be held accountable. I will always protect innocent life and use every tool to enforce Texas's pro-life laws."
The announcement came after Maria Margarita Rojas was arrested in March on charges of illegally operating a network of clinics in Northwest Houston.
"Rojas was accused of falsely portraying herself and employees as licensed medical professionals. She was also accused of performing abortions that violated restrictions set in place by the Texas Human Life Protection Act," the Washington Examiner explained.
The defendants allegedly worked with Rojas in Waller, Cypress, Spring, and Katy.
Those charged included Yaimara Hernandez Alvarez, Alina Valeron Leon, Dalia Coromoto Yanez, Yhonder Lebrun Acosta, Liunet Grandales Estrada, Gerardo Otero Aguero, Sabiel Bosch Gongora, and Jose Manuel Cendan Ley.
The indictments were handed up Sept. 26, according to Waller County court records.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
James Comey, the ex-FBI chief who recently went to social media with a message suggesting a threat against President Donald Trump, posting, then pulling, an image of seashells placed to carry the message "86 47," has pleaded not guilty to charges of obstruction and lying.
He was indicted for his actions during the Democrats' weaponization of the federal government against Trump, which included fabrications about Trump 2016 campaign links to Russia and more.
The Washington Examiner noted he was indicted last month by U.S. Attorney Lindsey Halligan, making him the "first former FBI director to be criminally charged after leaving office."
He's accused of lying to Congress and obstructing a congressional proceeding. The evidence released so far comes from the government's own documentation about what he knew and when, and video of his own claims about those events.
Comey already has begun trying to build public support, claiming in statements that he's released that he's innocent and "eager" to go to trial.
The charges say he "willfully and knowingly" made a false statement during a 2020 Senate Judiciary Committee hearing when he denied he authorized any FBI official at "act as an anonymous source in media reports" on the FBI's investigation that widely was understood to refer to Trump.
Prosecutors charge Comey actually approved a subordinate to serve as a source for that material.
He could be in prison for five years if convicted.
He reportedly was allowed the special privilege of entering the courthouse where he entered his pleas through a little-used entrance, avoiding video cameras stationed at the front door.
"Comey's indictment represents a stunning turn for a man who once led the nation's premier law enforcement agency and has long been both vilified and praised for his handling of politically charged investigations. As FBI director, he angered Democrats by reopening the probe into Hillary Clinton's emails shortly before the 2016 election, and infuriated Republicans by pursuing the Trump-Russia investigation months later," the report said.
After he was fired, he called Trump a "mob boss."
"Earlier this year, he sustained criticism and was even visited by the Secret Service after posting an image of seashells in the sand that stated '86 47,' a message that was interpreted by Trump and allies as a veiled threat or wish for harm to come to the president. Comey subsequently deleted the post and issued an apology after the backlash," the Examiner reported.
Following the indictment, Comey's son-in-law quit his post as a federal prosecutor in New York. His daughter, Maureen, is suing over her removal from her post as a federal prosecutor in New York.
FBI Director Kash Patel has said that "previous corrupt leadership" "weaponized federal law enforcement, damaging once proud institutions and severely eroding public trust."
"Every day, we continue the fight to earn that trust back, and under my leadership, this FBI will confront the problem head-on," Patel said. "Nowhere was this politicization of law enforcement more blatant than during the Russiagate hoax, a disgraceful chapter in history we continue to investigate and expose. Everyone, especially those in positions of power, will be held to account – no matter their perch."
Comey posted a video after the indictment claiming that the case is part of the cost "of standing up to Donald Trump."
"My heart is broken for the Department of Justice, but I have great confidence in the federal judicial system and I am innocent," he said.
The FBI, in fact, opened its lie-based "Crossfire Hurricane" investigation into Trump and his campaign days after Comey was fired during Trump's first term. Then Robert Mueller spent two years and millions of tax dollars as special counsel investigating, and found no evidence of criminal conspiracy or coordination between the Trump campaign and Russian officials.
A later special counsel, John Durham, concluded the FBI had a "clear warning sign" that it was the target of a Hillary Clinton scheme to "manipulate or influence the law enforcement process for political purposes," but refused to act.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Patricia Heaten is an Emmy Award winner. She's also an advocate for Israel who has worked with various campaigns such as one from The Lawfare Project that fights anti-Semitism and such.
And she's warning the nation things could get very bad if Americans don't wake up to the threats that are coming from leftist campaigns against Israel and Jews, and in support of Islamic extremists.
"It's hard to believe, but we're going to see a 9/11 again in this country if people don't wake up, take a stand, and make their voices heart," she said in an interview with Fox News.
Tuesday is the second anniversary of the Hamas terrorist attacks on Israeli civilians, an act of war that saw some 1,200 people slaughtered and hundreds more kidnapped. President Donald Trump continues to work on a plan to eliminate that threat from the Middle East.
"Heaton said she was dismayed that many Americans and people around the world have embraced anti-Israel propaganda and sided with radicals who seek to destroy the West," the report said.
"After October 7, I assumed that all of America, and particularly Christians, would be standing up for Israel, that there would be a massive outcry on October 8th, and 9th, and 10th in support of Israel and condemning what had happened. And instead, there was sort of silence from most Americans and a lot of churches and huge support for Palestine and for Hamas and for Gazans who went in and participated in this slaughter," she warned.
Heaton has founded the October 7th Coalition after seeing Americans turned against Israel following the Hamas terrorism.
It works to coordinate Christians to battle anti-Semitism across the U.S.
"This is a horrible thing that we witnessed. And now the whole world is supporting the perpetrators. It's outrageous," Heaton said.
She explained Christians must defend Jewish people not just to protect them, but because "attacks on them are attacks on all Judeo-Christian communities," the report said.
"It's very important for Christians to recognize this and support the Jewish people. And for our own self-interest, also for the interest, as Brooke said, for democracy, for Judeo-Christian values that we all cherish, and we benefit from," Heaton said. "But you have to remember 9/11. You have to remember the first attack on the World Trade Center, and you have to take seriously these attacks on Jews that are happening on American soil."
She referenced Brooke Goldstein, who founded The Lawfare Project. Goldstein said Americans who had lost sight of the threat from radical Islamists – who hijacked those jets on 9/11 – might be perceiving a problem again.
"I think Americans are starting to wake up and understand that radicalization — especially theologically motivated radicalization — is a threat to the United States," Goldstein said. "Why has it taken us so long after 9/11, when Islamist radicals flew planes and killed thousands of civilians, to realize this is not just about the Jews?"
She said part of the problem is what she called "Islamophobi-mania," or the attacks on those who offered opposition is Islamists and were branded as "Islamophobic" or "racist."
"Americans are waking up that this is a threat to us," she said. "We have American civilians who were kidnapped and killed, and others who remain hostages in Gaza. This is an attack on Western democracies — an attack on the West by radical Islamist states funding proxy groups engaged in what they call a holy war."
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
As WorldNetDaily recently reported, some members of the U.S. military – even under President Donald Trump and War Secretary Pete Hegseth – are being ejected from the service for filing religious exemptions from taking vaccines. The main focal point of that report was Technical Sgt. William "Tony" Oslin, who feared that his Christian religious beliefs might jeopardize his military career.
Unfortunately, that reality has come to pass.
WND spoke with Oslin, whose last day in uniform after a two-year battle over the flu vaccine was last Friday, Oct. 3. Even though he feels a great deal of disappointment, Oslin expressed gratitude for the individuals he believes were put in his path by the Lord to assist him and others who have been treated unfairly. For example, he said, at the beginning of September, "when my separation date was approaching, some awesome people got my story to [Under Secretary of the Air Force] Matt Lohmeier's office and he arranged a 30-day extension while my case was being reviewed."
As Oslin explained, he submitted a Religious Accommodation Request (RAR) in September 2022 for the COVID-19, influenza, typhoid, anthrax and tetanus vaccines, maintaining his objections to each based on his sincerely held religious beliefs that his body is "a temple of the Lord" and need not be subjected to vaccines, many of which are tested and/or developed with the use of aborted fetal cells.
Then, once the military's COVID-19 mandate was rescinded in January 2023 and Oslin was clear of being forced to take that particular shot, the influenza vaccine was the next to be adjudicated.
"The Chaplain expressed that I do have a sincerely held religious belief, which according to Air Force policy and federal and state law, is all you need for an accommodation to be granted," Oslin told WND.
Yet, two years later, he has been denied accommodation and forced out of the military.
In the past 30 days, Oslin says he was "never notified of any updates or any news as to whether my separation would stand or be overturned." It was only after contacting his commander last Thursday, Oct. 2, for an update that he learned his final day in uniform would unexpectedly be the very next day, Oct. 3.
The former Air National Guard member explained, "[My commander] never responded until after the Human Resources officer brought me in to inform me that my separation for not receiving the influenza shot was being upheld – this was three hours after I asked for an update."
Contending that the Air Force is blatantly ignoring the supreme law of the land as well as the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA), Oslin told WorldNetDaily, "I am being separated for the stated reason of not following direct orders and Air Force policy, even though those orders and policy violate the Constitution of the United States and the Alabama state Constitution."
Oslin also noted, "The government claims they have a compelling government interest in vaccinating all service members or it will hinder the mission – even though they grant medical exemptions all the time and somehow these personnel are not a hinderance to the mission." In fact, medically exempt personnel are allowed to deploy and serve the same as those who have been vaccinated.
"It is a person like myself who is seeking a religious exemption that is considered a threat to those others – who are 'vaccinated and protected' because vaccination is purported to be the safest and most effective way to avoid influenza – and considered a threat to mission accomplishment," he said. "Can someone please make this make sense to me? It's obvious common sense does not apply."
"If one person that is unvaccinated is considered a non-threat, how is another considered a threat?" he questioned, adding, "This is religious discrimination and it is unconstitutional, [and] there is no other way to explain it."
"The current administration tells the American public they are for religious freedom and no one should have to choose between their religious beliefs and their livelihood," Oslin told WND, yet added, "While saying this, the administration is allowing the opposite to happen; they are allowing religious discrimination to happen."
Oslin, who loves the military, made a sad statement regarding future generations of his own family: "I have three grandsons, and I will make sure that none serves in a government that violates the very Constitution it is supposed to protect and uphold. We have reached a time and place in this country to where the government has stolen power from its Creator and has claimed a power it was never granted."
"And this is happening under President Donald Trump and Secretary Pete Hegseth's Department of War," he lamented.