Judge Overturns New York Voting Law Dems Were Using To Strong-Arm Towns Into Accepting Illegal Migrants

'For Plaintiffs to suggest that the NYVRA is not a race-based (or national origin-based) statute is simply to deny the obvious,' the judge stated.

Illegal Aliens Skew Elections By Inflating Certain States’ Electoral Power. This Bill Would Change That

The proposal would prevent foreigners from skewing elections by shifting the apportionment of congressional seats and electoral college votes.

Supreme Court Approval Rating Increases After It Blocked Colorado From Kicking Trump Off Ballot

The Court's approval rating increased by seven percentage points to 47%

Smithsonian Opens ‘Latinx’ Internship Program to All Races in Face of Legal Challenge

The Smithsonian’s Latino history museum will no longer use race to evaluate applicants for its prestigious internship program, according to a settlement agreement released yesterday, the latest in a series of legal blows to race-based diversity initiatives in the wake of the Supreme Court’s ban on affirmative action.

The post Smithsonian Opens ‘Latinx’ Internship Program to All Races in Face of Legal Challenge appeared first on Washington Free Beacon.

Democrats conspire new plan to block Trump from 2024 ballot, exposing their own antidemocratic double standard



House Democrats have already hatched another plan to block Donald Trump from the 2024 ballot.

Hours after the Supreme Court ruled unanimously that Trump is not disqualified from the presidential ballot, Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) promised to bring legislation that does exactly that.

"I am working with a number of my colleagues ... to revive legislation that we had to set up a process by which we could determine that someone who committed insurrection is disqualified by Section 3 of the 14th Amendment," Raskin announced on CNN.

— (@)

In 2022, Raskin and Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.) introduced legislation that would have created a mechanism to allow the Justice Department to use Section 3 of the 14th Amendment to sue candidates and keep them off a ballot. The bill would have broadened the definition of "insurrection" to target in sweeping fashion every person who "was physically present within the Capitol Buildings on January 6, 2021, without authorization." The bill never made it out of committee, despite being introduced when Democrats controlled the House.

On Monday, Raskin confirmed that he was already working to revise that bill "in light of the Supreme Court's decision." He told CNN that he is working with Wasserman Schultz and Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.).

There are several problems with Raskin's campaign.

First, Congress has already outlawed insurrection per se (18 U.S. Code § 2383). The problem for Democrats is this: None of the Jan. 6 defendants have been charged with violating this statute, nor did special counsel Jack Smith indict Donald Trump for breaking this law. Sure, Congress could expand the definition of "insurrection" to include Jan. 6. But that doesn't erase the fact that Congress has already defined and outlawed insurrection, and neither Trump nor any of the Jan. 6 defendants stand accused of violating 18 U.S. Code § 2383.

Second, Raskin's effort to block Trump from the ballot is "crushingly ironic," according to law professor Jonathan Turley. That's because Raskin participated in an effort to block the certification of Donald Trump's 2016 victory.

Third, Republicans control the House, and Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) has already denounced Raskin's plans. This means any bill Democrats bring to target Trump will never see the light of the House floor.

"Democrats need to get a grip. In this country, the American people decide the next president — not the courts and not the Congress," a spokesperson for the speaker said.

Raskin is virtue signaling that he is a democracy protector when, in fact, he aspires to block voters from exercising their voices at the ballot box on Election Day.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

9-0 Decision Shows How Far Removed Democrat Lawfare And Its Media Cheerleaders Are From Reality

If you think the only explanation for a 9-0 Supreme Court decision in Trump's favor is because Sonia Sotomayor is a MAGA extremist, you might need to touch grass.

Supreme Court’s 9-0 Election Decision Is About The Constitution, Not Trump Or Biden

Colorado’s action was unconstitutional because it violated foundational principles of federal-state relations.