This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Democrats long have used their claim, "No one is above the law" against President Donald Trump.
That included back when they were trying twice, unsuccessfully, to impeach him and remove him from office.
That slogan actually now has come back to dog Democrats, as there is a long list of party members now facing potential charges for mortgage fraud and other claims, not to mention charges that may come out of the Department of Justice investigations into the "Russiagate" conspiracy theory that party members promoted with false claims for years.
But now the Institute for Justice is urging the U.S. Supreme Court to issue a ruling that makes the "No one is above the law" a precedent to be used across America.
"Constitutional guarantees mean little if the government can break them without consequences," said IJ lawyer Anya Bidwell. "That's why, since the country's founding, federal officials could be sued for violating people's rights. It is imperative we hold on to these sacred principles under current circumstances."
The precedent being sought means access to judicial remedies for those whose rights are violated by federal officials.
"Such remedies were a hallmark of the country's original constitutional design, as a method of implementing the protections of the Bill of Rights. But over time, the government has sought to undermine and eliminate that foundational guarantee of individual liberty. The judiciary should not go along with the government's efforts to force on the country a system of federal impunity," explained the legal team.
The brief explains the country's original system of federal accountability has been largely upended by a series of statutes and judicial decisions.
One statute the brief notes, the Federal Tort Claims Act, does in fact provide relief when government employees inflict harm.
In the case at issue, however, the government is arguing that the FTCA forecloses remedies where Texas property owner Lebene Konan alleges that postal officials engaged in a pattern of racial discrimination and economic interference against her by, among other things, refusing to deliver mail to her and her tenants and changing the locks on her mailbox.
As the Supreme Court confirmed in 1882, if the "courts cannot give remedy" for such harms, our government no longer, "has a just claim to well-regulated liberty and the protection of personal rights."
The IJ is urging the court to resist government attempts to shut down remedies.
The brief recounts several instances of lower courts eliminating remedies for outrageous rights violations by federal officials, including the brutal attack of an innocent student in Michigan and the false imprisonment of innocent teenage Somali refugees in Minnesota. And it discusses the case of a traumatic predawn raid of an innocent family's home in Georgia, in which IJ recently secured a Supreme Court victory regarding the scope of the FTCA.
"With federal police being deployed in cities around the country, it's vital for the judiciary to ensure that federal officials cannot operate with impunity," said IJ Attorney Jaba Tsitsuashvili. "The FTCA serves that function and preserves individual liberty."
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
President Donald Trump has delivered a verdict on Lisa D. Cook, a governor for the Federal Reserve who now is facing accusations of mortgage fraud.
His conclusion: She'll be fired if she doesn't resign.
WND reported only a day earlier that Cook was the third major Democrat personality in recent weeks to face mortgage fraud claims.
It was the U.S. Federal Housing FHFA that alleged, in a criminal referral to the Department of Justice, that Cook committed mortgage fraud by designating both an out of state condominium as well as a Michigan residence as her primary "home," at the same time.
Shortly later, the condo allegedly was offered for rent.
The government statement said, "When someone commits mortgage fraud, they undermine the faith and integrity of our System. It does not matter who you are – no one is above the law. We have sent a Criminal Referral to the Department of Justice with regard to the allegations against Ms. Cook, and the DOJ should go wherever the facts may lead them."
Earlier cases were assembled against Letitia James, the attorney general for New York whose massive mortgage fraud case against President Donald Trump's companies collapse in a heap of smoldering ashes this week when her $500 million plus judgment against Trump was trashed by an appeals court.
She was accused of wrongly claiming the location of her "primary residence."
Then it was Adam Schiff, the Democrat senator from California who pushed hard at the false claims of the Russiagate conspiracy theory over which Trump was impeached – and acquitted.
He apparently claimed two residences as his "primary" at the same time.
The Gateway Pundit noted Special Prosecutor Ed Martin is currently investigating Cook for mortgage fraud and falsifying bank statements.
Martin also asked Fed Chair Jerome Powell to remove Cook from her post.
The report noted, "According to housing regulator Bill Pulte's criminal referral, Lisa Cook committed mortgage fraud by lying on her mortgage application and falsifying bank statements when she designated her out-of-state Atlanta condo as her 'primary residence'—just two weeks after taking a loan on her Michigan home, which she also claimed as her 'primary residence.'"
Cook claimed she now is being "bullied" into leaving her post, which she said she won't do.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
A report at CrimeGrade.org notes that Washington, D.C., gets a "violent crime grade" of "F."
And it's "property crime grade is "F."
And its "other crime grade" is "F."
Crime in the district stings residents for just under $900 million – a year. This year, it's costing each and every household $2,620, all of which provides grounds for President Donald Trump's extraordinary efforts to dispatch federal troops to start enforcing the laws, and arresting criminals.
The report notes, "The Cost of Crime per resident in District of Columbia is $1,264 per year, which is $800 more than the national average." For nearby New Jersey, for example, the costs of crime is only $240 per person.
But that is changing, according to the White House, which posted a link to a Fox report that confirmed, "National Guard's presence slashes D.C. crime rate, with seven days homicide-free."
"The crime is minimal here. There's not a lot of crime here," said one resident in the report.
"For the first time in a long time, D.C. has gone seven days without a homicide. Carjackings have decreased by 83%, robberies by 46%, car thefts by 21%, and overall violent crime is down 22%.," the Fox report confirmed.
"When you have these numbers going down it means this is a success and people feel safer," said Sgt. Betsy Smith of the National Police Association.
The White House noted, "In just one week, 550 arrests have been made for crimes such as assault on a police officer, armed robbery, assault with a deadly weapon, involuntary manslaughter, child abuse, driving under the influence, and more. Authorities have also removed dozens of criminal illegal immigrants from the streets, including one MS-13 gang member and another charged with sex crimes against a child."
Further, "Dozens of homeless encampments have been cleared and graffiti is being cleaned up as the Trump Administration works to restore glory and prestige to our nation's capital," the White House said.
Thursday evening, Trump addressed law enforcement and others outside the U.S. Park Police headquarters in Washington, mentioning the positive trend in the nation's capital.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
There have been a multitude of indicators that suggest Gavin Newsom, California's extremist Democrat governor, is planning to claim that he is "the one" who should represent America's failing Democrat party in the next presidential election.
Not the least of that agenda has been his creation of an online persona that mimics President Donald Trump, as he uses all-caps statements and such.
But now one major American corporate presence, Bed, Bath and Beyond, has delivered its verdict already on his failed state leadership.
The company has announced it no longer with "open or operate" retail outlets in Newsom's state.
In a statement from Marcus Lemonis, executive chairman of the company, he said bluntly, "We will not open or operate retail stores in California."
He continues, "This decision isn't about politics – it's about reality. California has created one of the most overregulated, expensive, and risky environments for businesses in America. It's a system that makes it harder to employ people, harder to keep doors open, and harder to deliver value to customers."
More:
"The result? Higher taxes, higher fees, higher wages that many businesses simply cannot sustain, and endless regulations that strangle growth. Even when the state announces a budget surplus, it's built on the backs of ordinary citizens who are paying too much and businesses who are squeezed until they break.
"At Bed Bath & Beyond, our responsibility is to our customers and our shareholders. We will not participate in a system that undermines both. Instead, we are investiing in a California strategy that works: 24-48 hour delivery, and in many cases, same-day service. Californians will continue to get the products they love through BedBachandBeyond.com – but without the inflated costs created by an unsustainable model.
"We're taking a stand because it's time for common sense. Businesses deserve the change to succeed. Employees deserve jobs that last. And customers deserve fair prices. California's system delivers the opposite. That's why Bed Bach & Beyond will serve California customers directly through BedBathandBeyond.com, on our terms, and with their best interests at heart."
A report at RedState called the announcement a "rare move for a major corporation."
"By contrast, Bed, Bath, and Beyond will move ahead with reopening brick-and-mortar stores in nearly every other state in the country," the report noted.
"While Gov. Gavin Newsom (D-CA) and his cronies love to brag about California's total GDP, something largely driven by its pre-existing population size, that does not testify to economic health. China has a huge GDP, but would anyone argue it's a great place to operate a business or that their system is preferable to America's markets? Right now, California is slipping further and further into debt while more and more corporations flee to find relief from the destructive policies put in place by decades of Democrat governance," RedState explained.
"All of this was preventable. California is a textbook example of what happens when you give left-wingers total control and let their hubris run wild. Yes, long-standing industries and foundational successes that started long before the Newsom era continue to keep the state afloat, but that won't continue forever. You can, in fact, push things too far, and we've seen examples of that over recent years. For example, In-N-Out Burger, a California staple, is choosing to do its latest expansion in the Republican South, including moving its headquarters. Meanwhile, Newsom is having to get on bended knee and beg oil companies not to abandon his state, and there are a lot more companies in other sectors looking to get out as well, from healthcare to technology."
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
The administration of President Donald Trump has pressured, successfully, the United Kingdom to drop a pending demand for a "back door" access to Apple product users' data.
And that means Americans' personal information now is more secure.
It's a report at the Blaze that outlines how the confirmation comes from Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard.
The report explained that U.K. residents have been worried by their own government's insistence on having the ability to "tap into their bank records as well as their personal photos and messages through their iPhones."
It was the home secretary in the government there that had insisted Apple remove its "advanced data protection" and "end-to-end encryption" for users of its products there.
That triggered Gabbard, the report said.
"The UK and the EU have gotten in the habit of bullying American companies when they don't have a leg to stand on," said Josh Centers, tech writer.
Taking part in the reported pressure campaign were American officials to include President Donald Trump, Vice President JD Vance and others.
U.K. Home Secretary Yvette Cooper soon dropped the demand, a move that protects not only U.K. consumers but those in the U.S. as well, the report said.
Gabbard announced on social media, "Over the past few months, I've been working closely with our partners in the UK, alongside [Trump] and [Vance], to ensure Americans' private data remains private and our Constitutional rights and civil liberties are protected.
"As a result, the UK has agreed to drop its mandate for Apple to provide a 'back door' that would have enabled access to the protected encrypted data of American citizens and encroached on our civil liberties."
A U.K. government official said in an interview with the Telegraph the agreement with the United States includes "critical safeguards to prevent the U.K. and U.S. from targeting the data of each other's citizens."
Centers said now the American tech industry should push for further privacy protections.
Explained Lewis Brackpool, of Restore Britain, "When the state can read everything you say, your right to freedom of expression is put in the grave before it even begins."
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
It was the U.S. Department of Justice under Joe Biden that launched a war against the state of Georgia's election-integrity plans.
WorldNetDaily reported that Biden's DOJ schemed with the likes of the ACLU and the discredited Southern Poverty Law Center to attack the state law, and then tried to conceal its communications by claiming they were protected from public disclosure.
It was Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger who pursued Freedom of Information Act processes to uncover that DOJ worked with "some of the biggest names in the liberal legal advocacy world," such as the NAACP, the Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, and others, on the agenda.
But now that war is over, a conclusion decided by the same Department of Justice, but now under President Donald Trump.
The American Center for Law and Justice revealed that Attorney General Pam Bondi directed the DOJ to dismiss its "meritless" lawsuit over Georgia Senate Bill 202, acknowledging that the Biden administration "falsely accused Georgia of intentionally suppressing Black voters' votes."
The ACLJ reported, "This complete vindication of Georgia's election integrity laws – and the dismissal of all federal claims challenging Georgia's election laws – represents a triumph for the constitutional principles the ACLJ has steadfastly defended since filing our amicus brief in this case on behalf of 57 Members of Congress."
The DOJ, in fact, said, "The Biden administration fabricated an untrue narrative following the passage of Senate Bill 202 and sued the state of Georgia, claiming without evidence that SB 202 was an intentional scheme to 'depress the Black vote' and referring to the basic election legislation as 'Jim Crow 2.0.'"
The ACLJ said, "This admission confirms what the ACLJ argued from the beginning – that this lawsuit was not about protecting voting rights, but about federal overreach designed to prevent states from implementing commonsense election security measures. The Biden DOJ weaponized federal litigation to attack a state for exercising its clear constitutional authority under the Elections Clause."
Bondi pointed out, "Black voter turnout actually increased under SB 202," demolishing the Biden administration's made-up claims.
"The reality is that 'SB 202's commonsense reforms – photo ID for all voting, strengthened absentee ballot procedures, and rapid reporting of results – spurred record voter turnout, including among black Georgians,'" the report said.
The report said the Elections Clause gives state legislatures – not federal bureaucrats or activist judges – primary authority to regulate the "times, places, and manner" of elections.
The DOJ's new statement said it now is "done with this disgrace" and instead will work to dismantle "weaponized litigation."
"Instead of wasting time on false, divisive lawsuits, the Department of Justice will continue to root out real discrimination, promote common-sense election safeguards, and ensure equality for every American," the report said.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
In the wake of his Alaskan summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin, U.S. President Donald Trump on Sunday said there's "big progress."
"BIG PROGRESS ON RUSSIA. STAY TUNED!" Trump wrote in all capital letters on Truth Social.
While the president did not provide more specifics about the nature of the progress, he posted two other messages in which he voiced a common theme, his disdain for "fake news" media.
"It's incredible how the Fake News violently distorts the TRUTH when it comes to me," Trump indicated.
"There is NOTHING I can say or do that would lead them to write or report honestly about me.
"I had a great meeting in Alaska on Biden's stupid War, a war that should have never happened!!!"
"If I got Russia to give up Moscow as part of the Deal, the Fake News, and their PARTNER, the Radical Left Democrats, would say I made a terrible mistake and a very bad deal," Trump continued.
"That's why they are the FAKE NEWS! Also, they should talk about the 6 WARS, etc., I JUST STOPPED!!! MAGA."
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
An innocent property owner in New York City is asking the Supreme Court to rein in an out-of-control municipal fine scheme that doesn't reliably let people know they're being charged with an offense – and then argues that they've lost their ability to dispute it because they didn't respond to something they didn't know about.
"Being punished for a violation I did not commit, never receiving notice of the violation, and having the city routinely ignore my pleas to prove my innocence was incredibly frustrating," explained owner Serafim Katergaris. "What happened to me could happen to any New Yorker, which is why I'm asking the Supreme Court to hear this case."
It is the Institute for Justice that provided details of the horrifying situation that could threaten many people.
"In 2014, Serafim bought a home in Harlem and the title search came back clean. However, when Serafim went to sell the home in 2021, he learned for the first time that the city had issued him a $1,000 fine in 2015 for failing to submit a boiler inspection report in 2013. He never received the violation in 2015. And he had no way to know about it: Serafim didn't own the home when the inspection should've been done, and by the time he bought the house, the boiler had been removed," it explained.
"The Department of Buildings (DOB) claimed that it issued Serafim a notice of violation on March 3, 2015, but Serafim never received the notice. By the time he was selling the home in 2021, the violation now showed up the prospective buyers' title search. Serafim explained the situation to DOB and asked for a waiver, but DOB refused to grant him one. He then requested a hearing with DOB but was ignored. Without any other legal options available, Serafim paid the fine so the sale could move forward, but submitted a letter to DOB explaining that he was paying under protest and that he wanted a refund. DOB refused. It rebuffed him at every turn."
"New York City's scheme of issuing unreviewable fines for code violations and giving people no way to appeal in state courts a clear violation of basic due process rights enshrined in the Constitution," said IJ lawyer Diana Simpson.
"On top of that, the city's methods for informing owners of these fines are sloppy, leaving many without knowledge of them for years. By then, the city says it is too late to challenge the system in federal court. The city cannot insulate itself from the Constitution."
William Maurer, another IJ lawyer, said, "In America, you're supposed to be innocent until proven guilty, but New York's code enforcement system flips that principle on its head. New Yorkers from all walks of life are issued fines for minor code violations every day, and they deserve a way to be able to contest these fines."
A federal court ruling in 2024 assumed that the city had mailed the notice, and assumed that it had been received, despite no evidence of either.
The court didn't acknowledge "evidence that hundreds of people never received their notices for boiler violations that year and that Serafim himself swore he hadn't received it."
The IJ noted that the standards in 13 other federal courts are in opposition to this case.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
An appeals court decision has delivered to President Donald Trump permission to move forward with layoffs at Sen. Elizabeth Warren's pet bureaucracy, the Consumer Financial Protection Board.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, through a three-judge panel, overturned a lower court's block of Trump's plan to dismantle the agency, and mass layoffs are expected to resume.
The decision was based on the fact the employee unions and groups that use the CFPB services don't have a right to bring their challenge in federal court. Instead, it is the .Merit Systems Protection Board that should be hearing the concerns.
"If the plaintiffs' theory were viable, it would become the task of the judiciary, rather than the Executive Branch, to determine what resources an agency needs to perform its broad statutory functions," wrote U.S. Circuit Judge Gregory Katsas in the majority opinion, which was joined by U.S. Circuit Judge Neomi Rao.
The decision lifts a block that for months has prevented the planned layoffs affecting about 80% of its force.
The Hill reported Cornelia Pillard was the lone dissent.
The report explained how the bureaucracy was a target of the Department of Government Efficiency when it was being led by former White House aide Elon Musk.
It was created in 2008 as a result of that year's financial crisis and Trump tapped Office of Management and Budget Director Russell Vought to be acting director, where he immediately started the dismantling.
"The CFPB is now free to right-size itself in accordance with the law to best serve the American people," Attorney General Pam Bondi said of the ruling.
It had been Amy Berman, a judge whose agenda often is in conflict with the president, who originally had demanded that the firings be halted, and fired workers be reinstated. She also took over the agency to the extent that she was deciding what contracts would be pursued.
Employee unions had gone to court to fight the president's agenda to save American taxpayers money.
Trump's plan involves removing about 1,400 staffers from the agency, leaving 200 behind.
Katsas said, "We hold that the district court lacked jurisdiction to consider the claims predicated on loss of employment, which must proceed through the specialized-review scheme established in the Civil Service Reform Act."
The CFPB is an independent agency uniquely funded by transfers of cash from the Federal Reserve System.
It has worked to regulate consumer financial products and services.
However, critics have charged that it oversteps its authority.
Trump's lawyers have explained 200 staff members are all that are needed for the agency to handle its duties.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
First Lady Melania Trump has put Hunter Biden, the ne'er-do-well black sheep of the Biden family business schemes, famous for his taking a million dollars allegedly to try to influence his father on behalf of a Ukrainian company, his documented encounters with prostitutes, his drug career and his "art" projects with the sky-high prices, on notice for "defamatory" claims he made about her.
A report at Fox News states her litigation counsel, Alejandro Brito, has sent Biden and his lawyer, Abbe Lowell, a letter threatening a $1 billion lawsuit because of his statements, described as "false, defamatory, disparaging, and inflammatory."
The letter demands an immediate retraction of the statements from Biden, in a video interview that was posted to Youtube days ago.
"Failure to comply will leave Mrs. Trump with no choice but to pursue any and all legal rights and remedies available to her to recover the overwhelming financial and reputational harm that you have caused her to suffer," Brito wrote.
Among Biden's claims:
"Epstein introduced Melania to Trump. The connections are, like, so wide and deep."
And "Jeffrey Epstein introduced Melania, and that's how Melania and the first lady and the President met."
"These false, disparaging, defamatory, and inflammatory statements are extremely salacious and have been widely disseminated throughout various digital mediums," Brito wrote. "Indeed, the video has since been re-published by various media outlets, journalists, and political commentators with millions of social media followers that have disseminated the false and defamatory statements therein to tens of millions of people worldwide.
"Consequently, you have caused Mrs. Trump to suffer overwhelming financial and reputational harm."
Biden, in a profanity-laced interview, later responded to the legal demand with, "F— that. That's not gonna happen."
Biden claimed his "source" for the false statements was "serial fabulist Michael Wolff," the report said.
Wolff's claims were published by the Daily Beast, which immediately took down its article and apologized to Melania Trump when confronted about them.
Brito also warned Biden not to "destroy, conceal, or alter any paper or electronic files, physical evidence" or other records relating to the false claims."
Fox reported, "The letter comes after the Daily Beast pulled the article detailing allegations by journalist Wolff that Melania Trump was introduced to her husband Donald Trump via a modeling agent connected to Epstein, after a challenge from the first lady's lawyers."
The Daily Beast even modified its story URL, so that it now reads: "thedailybeast.com/epstein-this-story-has-been-removed."
Veteran Democrat operative James Carville also made similar statements, and publicly apologized, stating, "In last week's podcast episode, we spoke with Judd Legum. After the episode, we received a letter from Melania Trump's lawyer. He took issue with our title of one of those YouTube videos from that episode and a couple of comments I made about the first lady. We took a look at what they complained about, and we took down the video and edited out those comments from the episode. I also take back these statements and apologize."
Constitutional expert Jonathan Turley noted the letter charges Biden with defamation per se.
"The common law has long recognized per se categories of defamation where damages are presumed and special damages need not be proven. These include: (1) disparaging a person's professional character or standing; (2) alleging a person is unchaste; (3) alleging that a person has committed a criminal act or act of moral turpitude; (4) alleging a person has a sexual or loathsome disease; and (5) attacking a person's business or professional reputation."
He continued, "The notice letter is ironic given Hunter Biden's scorched Earth strategy of threatening lawsuits, including defamation, against critics. It did not work. Indeed, Biden abandoned lawsuits after his pardon by his father."
And he explained, "Hunter Biden is reportedly facing financial challenges and the threat of a lawsuit cannot be welcomed news. Biden has been engaging in unhinged, profane diatribes attacking both Democrats and Republicans. The thrill of trash-talking will likely end if Hunter finds himself yet again in court."