This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
In a stunning decision that assists the pro-life cause across America, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled against abortion industry giant Planned Parenthood's demand that a state be ordered to consider it a "qualified provider" and thus eligible for Medicaid program cash.
The justices ruled 6-3 in Medina v. Planned Parenthood South Atlantic that South Carolina is allowed to legally block the leading player in America's abortion industry from demanding payment through the Medicaid program.
Seven years ago, Republican South Carolina Gov. Henry McMaster signed an executive action telling the state's Department of Health and Human Services to take the abortion provider off of the state's Medicaid provider list.
His explanation was that funding to abortionists, even if not used directly for abortions, indirectly funded abortions and such public funding was banned by state law.
He said in a recent statement, "This case is about protecting the sanctity of life and preserving South Carolina's right to govern itself in a way that reflects the values of its people."
Justice Neal Gorsuch delivered the majority opinion of the court, and was joined by Roberts, Thomas, Alito, Kavanaugh and Barrett.
Ketanji Jackson, one of the three pro-abortion activists on the court, wrote a dissent that would have insisted taxpayers in the state revert to paying their cash to the abortionists, and was joined by Sotomayor and Kagan.
McMaster had said, "South Carolina has made it clear that we value the right to life. Therefore, taxpayers should not be forced to subsidize abortion providers who are in direct opposition to their beliefs. Just as I was in 2018, I am confident in our authority to terminate funding for Planned Parenthood, and I trust that the U.S. Supreme Court will agree."
A spokesperson for the abortion company's South Carolina's two sites claimed, "In just under two years, we've already heard countless stories of distress, bodily harm, persecution, and even death, from patients whose care was delayed or denied due to these bans. If anti-abortion lawmakers are allowed to act unchecked, they will revoke our access to this care altogether—with no exceptions. We must continue to take them to task—in the legislature, in the courts, and in our communities."
Priests for Life National Director Frank Pavone said, "This is one of the unfolding victories of the 2022 Dobbs decision and rightly shows deference to the states. People should not have the right to bar states from disqualifying abortion providers from receiving taxpayer money."
The court ruling concluded that Medicaid laws do not give individuals the right to bring federal lawsuits against states over this issue.
A statement from the Charlotte Lozier Institute, a pro-life research arm, said, "South Carolina's victory marks a meaningful step forward in the fight to stop forced taxpayer funding of the abortion industry. It offers a glimpse of what can be achieved nationwide with congressional passage of the One Big Beautiful Bill, which would defund big abortion businesses in Medicaid through the budget reconciliation process. Although the Hyde Amendment and similar policies in the majority of states prevent taxpayer dollars from being spent on most abortions, abortion businesses – like Planned Parenthood – still receive hundreds of millions of dollars from taxpayers each year, freeing them to spend donations on abortion on demand, partisan politics and litigation instead of health care."
The ruling found the state's decision to exclude the abortionists from Medicaid's list of "any qualified provider," was allowed in this case as the plaintiff's lacked any legal grounds for challenging it.
Mat Staver, chief of Liberty Counsel, which filed an amicus brief in the case, said, "The U.S. Supreme Court has rightfully ruled that states can defund abortion. It makes no sense to require states to fund an organization that kills children. Congress did not create a right for individuals to have states pay for their abortions. Taxpayer dollars should never be used to fund abortion or subsidize practices that kill children and harm women."
Liberty Counsel's briefs noted, "the law's language allows for states to disqualify providers that engage in unethical and illegal practices, in which Planned Parenthood has been credibly implicated."
The corporation boasts of doing more than 400,000 abortions a year, collecting nearly $800 million from U.S. taxpayers.
Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America Director of Legal Affairs Katie Daniel said, "By rejecting Planned Parenthood's lawfare, the Court not only saves countless unborn babies from a violent death and their mothers from dangerously shoddy 'care,' it also protects Medicaid from exposure to thousands of lawsuits from unqualified providers that would jeopardize the entire program. Pro-life Republican leaders are eliminating government waste and prioritizing Medicaid for those who need it most – women, children, the poor, people with disabilities. Planned Parenthood was rightly disqualified. Multi-billion-dollar abortion businesses are not entitled to an unending money grab that forces taxpayers to fund America's #1 cause of death: abortion."
Marjorie Dannenfelser, president of SBA Pro-Life America, said, "Planned Parenthood's taxpayer-funded gravy train is swiftly coming to an end. Its days of posing as a 'trusted health care provider' are over as the truth is exposed – most recently, by revelations of botched procedures, open sewage and other horrifying conditions at their facilities across America and the tragic death of yet another young woman following a late-term abortion. The profit-driven abortion industry isn't merely uninterested in fixing these systemic issues, the Planned Parenthood organization actually forbids donor funds from being spent on quality health care, funneling millions into political activism and litigation instead. Women, children and families deserve so much better – and with community health centers that offer comprehensive care outnumbering Planned Parenthoods 15 to one, women have real choices."
The ruling found the state's decision to exclude the abortionists from Medicaid's list of "any qualified provider," was allowed in this case as the plaintiff's lacked any legal grounds for challenging it.
Mat Staver, chief of Liberty Counsel, which filed an amicus brief in the case, said, "The U.S. Supreme Court has rightfully ruled that states can defund abortion. It makes no sense to require states to fund an organization that kills children. Congress did not create a right for individuals to have states pay for their abortions. Taxpayer dollars should never be used to fund abortion or subsidize practices that kill children and harm women."
Liberty Counsel's briefs noted, "the law's language allows for states to disqualify providers that engage in unethical and illegal practices, in which Planned Parenthood has been credibly implicated."
The corporation was "implicated in unethical and illegal profiteering of aborted baby body parts revealed through undercover videos by undercover journalists Sandra Merritt and David Daleiden. This 'shadowy proliferation' of fetal tissue trafficking gives states like South Carolina a compelling interest to deem the abortion giant unqualified and keep Medicaid funds from subsidizing these 'abhorrent' practices," the statement said.
The court said federal law "does not clearly and unambiguously confer individual rights" in such cases.
"Congress sometimes allows private enforcement through §1983, which authorizes suits against state actors who deprive individuals of federal 'rights, privileges, or immunities.' But statutes create individual rights only in 'atypical case[s].' … To prove an enforceable right, plaintiffs must show the statute 'clear[ly] and unambiguous[ly]' uses 'rights-creating terms' with 'an unmistakable focus' on individuals."
It continued, "Congress may not wish to authorize private suits."
And, "Private enforcement requires showing States 'voluntarily and knowingly' consented to private suits, meaning Congress must 'clearly' and 'unambiguously' alert States that private enforcement was a funding condition."
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
A new testimony has surfaced confirming what reports have documented over recent months and years: That Christianity is alive and well inside Iran, now run by the extreme Islamic regime that took over by force nearly 50 years ago.
Even by some descriptions thriving.
A report at Not the Bee explains the testimony comes from Ramin Parsa, born in Iran in 1986, who has experienced being kidnapped by Islamic morality police and tortured.
He had been taught to hate.
"In the school, everything was Islamic. In our textbooks, we had the caricatures of Israeli soldiers killing these Palestinian babies. And the babies crying… it was not real but they wanted to sow the seed of hatred in our hearts toward the Jews and Israel," the report said he explained.
At one point, he came upon a gospel message on a Christian television station. He paid attention.
Ultimately, he prayed, "Jesus, if this is true, if you are truly the son of God, if you died for me on the cross – if you rose from the dead – I ask you to come into my life, show me. I want you to show me. I want you to prove it to me."
That moment, "Heat went through my hand. It went through all of my body. I started shaking and I started crying. I felt a love I had never felt before. I felt a peace I had never felt before. I felt as if a 500-lb weight was lifted off of my shoulders. I began to feel love, even for the people who beat me and tortured me."
He now works with, among other projects, a ministry helping those in Israel targeted by Hamas terror attacks on Oct. 7.
Not the Bee noted it's not the first word that Christianity is moving across Iran.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
'As for Tehran's hardliners, someone please bring them chamomile tea, a therapist, and a globe. It's time they realize the world isn't flat, and it doesn't revolve around them'
Key voices in the Arab community in the Middle East, those voices described as liberal, have praised the United States strike on Iranian nuclear facilities, with one going so far as to share an image of Iranian chief Ali Khamenei costumed as a "clown" and call for his death.
The comments were compiled b the Middle East Media Research Institute, which documented how that ridicule of the radical Islamic regime leader came from Amr Bakley, an Egyptian liberal based in the U.S.
MEMRI reported, "The June 22, 2025 U.S. strike on Iran's nuclear facilities was met with approval and satisfaction by many Arab journalists and liberals, who took to X to express their support for it. Some thanked U.S. President Donald Trump, saying he had 'made history' and 'saved humanity' from the nuclear threat posed by the Iranian regime. Others expressed hope for the downfall of this regime, and several mocked Iran's Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, calling on him to surrender unconditionally or else face a grim fate. It should be mentioned that some of these writers also expressed support for Israel's attack on Iran, launched on June 13, stating that this country was not defending only itself but the entire Middle East."
"The dream, the danger and the Iranian nuclear project have come to an end for a long time. Iran wasted billions that went down the drain at the expense of its people's livelihood. Will reason prevail, with Iran launching an economic development project instead of a military one of nukes and missiles?" wrote Saudi journalist Abd al-Aziz Al-Khames.
Another Saudi journalist, Wafa Al-Rashid, released a series of posts, including, "Some regimes are not only a burden on their own people but on all of humanity! They feed on oppression, export chaos, impoverish the world and destroy the people. Their existence is not a 'sovereign decision' but a danger to the future of the world."
Dalia Ziada, a liberal Egyptian researcher who lives in the U.S., explained, "President Trump has made history in the Middle East… for the second time. God bless America! I pray this will trigger the geopolitical reset that the Middle East has been craving since 1979. In case you are wondering, the first time president Trump made history in the Middle East was the Abraham Accords in 2020."
Emirati liberal Amjad Taha was effusive in praise of President Donald Trump.
"To those still struggling with English or math: the U.S. won. Israel won. The Islamist in Iran lost. The Middle East just took its first breath of fresh, non-radioactive air. Trump didn't just send missiles, he sent a message. No nukes. No bullies. No threats to America's allies, especially Israel. This wasn't just war. This was diplomacy with a spine, a masterclass in keeping promises and crushing bad deals. Fordo was flattened. Natanz was neutralized. Esfahan was erased. These weren't peace-loving labs. They were ticking bombs. And now, they're gone with precision."
Taha continued, "God bless America. God save lives. As for Tehran's hardliners, someone please bring them chamomile tea, a therapist, and a globe. It's time they realize the world isn't flat, and it doesn't revolve around them. In the end, peace isn't given. It's earned, protected, and sometimes enforced. And those who chase destruction always forget.. justice doesn't knock. It lands."
Baghdad Post website chief Sufian Al-Samarrai wrote, "[Trump] did it along with the Lord of the World and saved humanity from the nuclear [program] of the extremist Nazi Islam."
Ahdeya Ahmed Al-Sayed, Bahraini liberal, wrote, "It is a historic turning point that will transform the Middle East, [leading to] a future in which the terror of the 'rule of the jurisprudent' [i.e., the Iranian regime] no longer threatens the region. With this step America fulfilled its obligation and put an end to the matter."
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
A plan is being developed by a Senate advocate for the Department of Government Efficiency to sell off multiple federal buildings in Washington, D.C., worth an estimated $500 million.
The buildings are underutilized now, and they just are costing taxpayers a pile of money to keep open and maintained.
The new "For Sale Ace" targets six buildings, including the James Forrestal Federal Building that holds the Department of Energy.
Workers still occupying offices in those buildings will be relocated.
It's part of the DOGE campaign to address the nation's $36 trillion national debt.
The Forrestal Federal Building, known also as the "Little Pentagon," and other buildings were listed following reports from the Office of Management and Budget and the Government Accountability Office about the millions of dollars in costs in keeping and maintaining buildings where only a few of the offices are occupied.
Across the nation, maintenance for federal buildings costs more than $10 billion a year and ridding the government of some of them offers considerable cast savings.
A report at Fox News explained Sen. Joni Ernst, R-Iowa, points out in her planning that no layoffs would be part of the sales, as the workers would move.
Also on the list would be outbuildings for the Agriculture Department, one of which is at 25% capacity and needs nearly $2 billion in upgrades.
The Hubert H. Humphrey Jr. building also is listed. It houses the Department of Health and Human Services. Also the headquarters of the Department of Housing and Urban Development, and the Theodore Roosevelt Building and Frances Perkins Federal Building.
The report notes that safeguards have been written into the legislation so that no unfriendly entities, like China, would be allowed to purchase. Nor would any group in which a foreign national is a "beneficial owner."
The OMB previously reported that taxpayers are charged $81 million to maintain underused federal offices.
"About 7,700 federal office spaces are vacant and 2,200 are majority-empty, according to a Congressional Research Service report," Fox reported.
DOGE already has addressed the sale of the Wilbur J. Cohen Building, with 1.2 million square feet of offices and only 72 people.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Leftists, Marxists, activists for illegal immigration into America and even gangs have objected to President Donald Trump's agenda to secure America's borders and deport illegal alien criminals.
His plans come after Joe Biden essentially unlocked the doors, opened the borders and let millions of illegal aliens into America to take jobs, benefit from government social programs and more.
Trump's work has shown results: Statistics show during May border agents released no illegal aliens into the U.S., compared to more than 60,000 given that privilege under Biden a year earlier.
But this the agenda has come criticism, legal opposition, organization resistance and even riots, like those in Los Angeles that activists tried to spread across the country in their "No Kings" protests.
But one state now is offering an addition to Trump's program that takes will take a few breaths away.
It's proposed by Florida and it's called "Alligator Alcatraz," a secure detention facility to be located in the Everglades on land surrounded by alligators and pythons.
A report from the Washington Examiner said Florida officials now are considering the plan for a large immigration detention facility there.
The land currently is owned by Miami-Dade County.
"The proposal by Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier comes as the Trump administration has set a quota for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers to make 3,000 arrests of illegal immigrants per day," the report said.
It already has an airstrip, which would benefit programs to process and deport illegal aliens.
"If somebody were to get out, there's nowhere to run, nowhere to hide," Uthmeier told Fox Business. "Only the alligators and pythons are waiting. That's why I like to call it 'Alligator Alcatraz.'"
Construction could begin within weeks if the project gets the proper permissions, he said.
The Examiner reported, "Uthmeier's proposal comes as ICE detention centers have reached capacity for detaining immigrants. Almost 90% of individuals held by ICE are being detained in facilities operated by private, for-profit corporations."
Congress currently is working on a plan to raise the funding for ICE detention operations from $3.4 billion to $45 billion.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
A SpaceX rocket on Elon Musk's Texas base erupted in a stunning fiery explosion, but officials confirmed there were no injuries and Musk himself called it "just a scratch."
The flash of bright white light followed by yellow flames and billowing clouds was caught on camera by several livestreams.
It happened about 11 p.m. Wednesday, a report at Fox Business explained.
SpaceX said, "The Starship preparing for the tenth flight test experienced a major anomaly while on a test stand at Starbase. … A safety clear area around the site was maintained throughout the operation and all personnel are safe and accounted for.
"Our Starbase team is actively working to safe the test site and the immediate surrounding area in conjunction with local officials. There are no hazards to residents in surrounding communities, and we ask that individuals do not attempt to approach the area…"
"Cameron County Constable Precinct 1 shared a NASASpaceflight stream on his Facebook page.
'Whoa! Whoa! No,' a man can be heard saying once the explosion happened. 'Oh, my God,'" the report said.
"The caption at the bottom of the stream read: "SpaceX is expected to perform a static fire test of ship 36. The second in this series of testing for flight 10."
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Two hundred forty-two people are believed to have died when an Air India passenger jet leaving Ahmedabad en route to London crashed on takeoff.
Police confirmed it "appears there are no survivors."
Air India flight AI 171 crashed into Meghani Nagar, a residential area of the city.
Local video showed smoke billowing from the wreckage at the crash site. Pilots had issued a "MayDay" call to air traffic controllers before hitting the ground and buildings there.
Video also showed the jet, with its landing gear still down, gradually losing altitude.
"With profound sorrow I confirm that Air India Flight 171 operating Ahmedabad London Gatwick was involved in a tragic accident today. Our thoughts and deepest condolences are with the families and loved ones of all those affected by this devastating event," Air India Chairman Natarajan Chandrasekaran wrote on X.
"At this moment, our primary focus is on supporting all the affected people and their families. We are doing everything in our power to assist the emergency response teams at the site and to provide all necessary support and care to those impacted," Chandrasekaran added.
The airline said 169 passengers are from India, 53 from Britain, 7 from Portugal and 1 from Canada.
In America, the Federal Aviation Administration confirmed it was in contact with the NTSB about the crash.
The plane had just taken off from Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel International Airport en route to Gatwick.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
An appeals court hearing has been scheduled on Juan Merchan's lawfare case against President Donald Trump.
Merchan was the judge in so-called "hush money" case brought by Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg against Trump over some contractual agreements and payments he made, and provided the appearance of so much bias against Trump that one constitutional expert described the judge as a "tyrant."
The one-sided jury instructions resulted in 34 convictions against the president, and Merchan then, during sentencing, spent seven minutes complaining about how he was restricted in his sentencing options.
Merchan imposed an "unconditional discharge" on Trump, providing for no fines, jail or probation time while formalizing his status as a convicted felon.
Merchan, whose daughter is a consultant who was making money off of her father's multiple rulings against Trump, claimed "extraordinary" legal protections handed to the president of the United States required him to hand down a minor sentence that Trump would allegedly not have received without being reelected.
"While one can argue that the trial itself was in many respects somewhat ordinary, the same cannot be said about the circumstances surrounding this sentencing and that is because of the office [Trump] once occupied, and which you will soon occupy again," Merchan told the president-elect. "To be sure, it is the legal protections afforded to the office of the president of the United States that are extraordinary, not the occupant of the office. The legal protections, especially within the context of a criminal prosecution, afforded to the office of the president have been laid out by our founders, the Constitution and most recently interpreted by the United States Supreme Court in the matter of Trump versus the United States, which was decided on July 1, 2024.
"As with every other defendant in your position, it is my obligation to consider any and all aggravating and mitigating factors to inform my decision … The considerable, indeed, extraordinary legal protections afforded by the office of the chief executive, is a factor that overrides all others," the judge continued.
Merchan, in extraordinary fashion, allowed a wide range of inflammatory testimony to come into his courtroom against Trump. The substance of the complaint was that Bragg claimed a $130,000 non-disclosure agreement with former porn actress Stormy Daniels, paid through Trump's then-lawyer as legal fees, were not legal fees. Bragg claimed that calling legal fees legal fees was "falsifying business records."
A long list of legal experts charged that the case never should have been created by Bragg. Merchan, in fact, inexplicably told the jurors their verdict didn't have to be unanimous.
A report from the Washington Examiner reports now that a hearing is scheduled before the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Manhattan.
Trump's lawyers are seeking to have the claims moved into a federal court, rather than state, and have explained to the appeals court the prosecution was not only politically motivated, but also constitutionally flawed.
Previously, Alvin Hellerstein, a federal judge, twice rejected similar requests, but Trump's team has explained those rulings are outdated in light of the Supreme Court's decision granting Trump presumptive immunity for official acts.
Leading the charge this time is Jeff Wall, a former acting solicitor general and Supreme Court advocate with Sullivan & Cromwell, said is pointing out that "the case should have been removed from state court under the federal officer removal statute." He cited Supremacy Clause concerns and said Trump was targeted by 'hostile local officials,'" to include Bragg and Merchan.
Trump's lawyers also cite Merchan's aggressive bias, including his gag order, his contempt claims, and his donation to a Democrat cause.
The payment was for Daniels' silence about an alleged affair, which Trump has confirmed never happened.
Trump said the payments were part of a standard legal retainer and denied knowing of any unlawful scheme.
The "offenses" actually were misdemeanors until Bragg theorized they were part of the furtherance of another, unidentified, crime, and that made them felonies.
Experts called Bragg's machinations "legally creative."
Other parts of the Democrats' lawfare against Trump, indictments over the Jan. 6, riot and a dispute over classified documents, were dropped when he was re-elected.
And an organized crime case against him, created by Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis, collapsed when she was removed from the case over her conflicts and behaviors.
Yet another case, a wild civil claim from New York Attorney General Letitia James, which resulted in a penalty from a leftist New York judge of hundreds of millions of dollars, also remains on appeal.
James claimed Trump committed fraud in his business dealings with lenders. Those lenders testified in court they were happy doing business with Trump, didn't lose any money, and wanted to do additional business, but Arthur Engoron, the judge, handed down the massive penalty anyway.
Ironically, James herself now is facing the possibility of criminal trial, conviction and sentencing for committing fraud on mortgage documents.
Trump has not been silent about the lawfare:
Trump continued, "….I am the only Political Opponent in American History not allowed to defend myself – A despicable First Amendment Violation! Merchan took the Manhattan D.A.'s Witch Hunt, that, according to all Legal Scholars, including Jonathan Turley, Elie Honig, Andy McCarthy, Alan Dershowitz, Gregg Jarrett, David Rivkin, Elizabeth Price Foley, Katie and Andy Cherkasky, Paul Ingrassia, and many others, is a nonexistent case, barred by the Statute of Limitations, and should have never been brought and, through his fraud and misconduct, gave it a semblance of 'life.' While Deranged Jack Smith was sent packing back to The Hague after losing all of his politically manufactured cases against me, Merchan, who is far worse and even more corrupt than Smith in his fight for my hopeless political opponents, just cannot let go of this charade. Is it because of his conflicts and relations that he keeps breaking the Law? This has to stop! It is time to end the Lawfare once and for all, so we can come together as one Nation and, Make America Great Again."
Experts have noted the trial itself was "replete with layers of reversible error."
A report at Fox News said Dershowitz, a Harvard Law professor emeritus, "called out" Merchan for "outrageous" rulings against Trump.
He told "The Brian Kilmeade Show" host Brian Kilmeade that Merchan is a "tyrant" for threatening to strike the testimony of defense witness Bob Costello, who expressed disbelief at some of Merchan's anti-Trump rulings.
Dershowitz charged, "I've been in courthouses in every part of the world and in China, in Russia, in Ukraine, in Israel. I've been all over. I've never seen a spectacle like this. And that's why it should have been on television, so the American public could see how outrageous this judge is. And CNN just does his bidding. CNN lies, lies through their teeth about what happened in court yesterday between Judge Merchan and Bob Costello. Bob Costello testifies, Merchan rules against him at every point, keeps out his testimony, makes outrageous rulings that any first-year student taking evidence would know was wrong."
He continued, "And Bob Costello does what I did: He rolled his eyes. And I rolled my eyes, I said, I couldn't believe the judge was making these rulings. And the judge, thinking he's a tyrant, clears the courtroom, throws out everybody from the media. For some reason, they allowed me to stay, and I watched as the judge berated him. And the judge said something I have never seen in a courtroom in my history, 60 years. He threatened to strike the testimony of the main witness for the defendant because of punishment of the witness for staring at the judge. Can you imagine the violation of the Sixth Amendment? The Sixth Amendment allows any defendant to confront witnesses and to present evidence in his defense. Can you imagine if this judge had actually struck the testimony of Bob Costello? It would result in an automatic mistrial, new trial, and a verdict against the prosecution. The judge was bluffing. He ought to be disciplined for making that threat because the threat was an idle threat. He obviously didn't act on it. …":
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
The federal government has been asked to investigate a Wisconsin company after it reportedly fired a worker for refusing to deny science and his faith and use a chosen pronoun for another worker, a transgender.
A report at the Washington Stand cites a complaint filed by the Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty on behalf of Spencer Wimmer, whose employment with a company called Generac was ended for not adopting the corporation's leftist ideology.
"As a Christian, Spencer Wimmer believes he can't affirm an attempt to transition to another gender," the report explained. In addition, following the science, changing from male to female or vice versa does not happen as being male or female is embedded in the human body down to the DNA level.
He worked at Generac for almost five years before being ordered out of his office, without even his personal belongings including a Bible, which was returned later, "damaged."
The company had ordered him to comply with its faith-violating speech code: "[R]efusal to refer to an employee/subordinate by their preferred name/pronouns is in violation of the company's Code of Business Conduct and No Harassment Policy."
A Generac official told the Washington Stand, "The company complies with all federal and state employment laws." Further, the spokesman insisted, "We've never had a policy on gender pronoun usage."
The complaint, filed with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, accuses the company of violating Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 by discriminating against Wimmer based on religion.
The request explains, "Generac's bias and hostility toward Mr. Wimmer's religious beliefs — including the company's discipline, harassment, denial of a reasonable accommodation, and ultimate termination of Mr. Wimmer — constitute religious discrimination under Title VII."
According to the Stand, "Cara Tolliver, an attorney with WILL, believes the case has far greater implications than whether Wimmer regains his position or not. She said, 'Employers, I think, have kind of become seemingly fixated on a lot of identity politics in the workplace, including the topic of gender identity. …But it's crucial to keep in mind that even where Title VII may provide some protection to employees against workplace discrimination and harassment on the basis of a gender identity, this does not supersede or eliminate Title VII protections against religious discrimination and the fact that religious discrimination is illegal.'"
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
A nonprofit group that advocates for domestic energy production is calling on Congress to investigate several executive actions during the Biden administration, saying they should be declared null and void based on their allegedly being signed by an autopen.
As reported by Fox News, the organization, Power the Future, reviewed eight Biden executive orders that it says were significant shifts in domestic energy policy and said it found no evidence of the president speaking about any of them publicly, raising concerns that the orders were signed by autopen and that he was not aware of them.
"These are not obscure bureaucratic memos; these were foundational shifts in American energy policy, yet not once did Joe Biden speak about them publicly," Daniel Turner, founder and executive director of Power The Future, told Fox News Digital.
The specific orders cited by the group include an Arctic drilling ban in 2023, a 2021 executive order committing the federal government to net-zero emissions by 2050, an executive order mandating "clean energy" AI centers, and an offshore drilling ban executive order shortly before leaving office in 2025.
Power The Future contacted several federal agencies and House and Senate Oversight Committees, calling for an investigation to determine who actually drafted and approved the orders.
"In light of the growing evidence that actions purportedly taken by the former president may not have been approved or signed by him, but instead promulgated by a small coterie of advisers in his name without his knowledge or over his signature using an 'autopen,' the need for congressional access to information has grown in importance with these revelations," the letter to GOP House Oversight Chairman James Comer states.
"Congress deserves to know how or whether these executive actions were authorized, and whether the former President was aware of such orders before they were implemented by the federal bureaucracy. Were these actions taken on behalf of the president and purporting to execute his authority undertaken with the president's knowledge and approach? It appears incumbent upon Congress to inquire about all parties involved in these actions, who instructed them to do what, when."
On Tuesday, President Trump took to TruthSocial to highlight the autopen scandal, saying, "Other than the Rigged Presidential Election of 2020, the Biggest Scandal in American History is the 'AUTOPEN!'
"Whoever used it was usurping the power of the Presidency, and it should be very easy to find out who that person (or persons) is.
"They did things that a Joe Biden, of sound mind, would have never done, like Open Borders, Transgender for everyone, men in women's sports, and far more. Fear not, however, we will bring America BACK, BIGGER, BETTER, AND STRONGER THAN EVER BEFORE!"
Comer has already identified five Biden aides allegedly involved in the cover-up of Biden's deteriorating cognitive abilities as well as the autopen scandal.