Leftists try to shut down Turning Point USA at Rutgers for criticizing Antifa professor
Tyler Robinson, the homosexual leftist accused of assassinating Charlie Kirk, claimed in advance of the fatal Sept. 10 shooting at Utah Valley University that the Turning Point USA founder was "spreading hate," charging documents say.
Leftists have now leveled the same accusation against the TPUSA student chapter at Rutgers University, using a pressure campaign in hopes of shutting down speech deemed hateful.
How it started
Mark Bray is an assistant teaching professor at Rutgers University who has not only seemingly championed the terrorist group Antifa and its use of violence but wrote the 2017 book "Antifa: The Anti-Fascist Handbook."
Within hours of stating that "only mass antifascism, legal or not, can save us," Bray claimed on the liberal X knockoff Bluesky that he received "multiple death threats + doxing" following alleged harassment from Turning Point USA.
It appears he was referring to the attempt by the Rutgers chapter of TPUSA to get him fired.
The petition started by the TPUSA student chapter's treasurer, Megyn Doyle, states, "We, the students of Rutgers University, are deeply concerned to learn that an outspoken, well-known antifa member, Dr. Mark Bray, is employed by the university."
"With the current trend of left-wing terrorism, having a prominent leader of the antifa movement on campus is a threat to conservative students on campus," continues the petition. "Dr. Bray has regularly referred to mainstream conservative figures such as Bill O’Reilly as fascist while he calls for militant actions to be taken against these individuals. This is the kind of rhetoric that resulted in Charlie Kirk being assassinated last month."
In addition to flagging Bray's apparent defense of political violence and incendiary rhetoric, the petition highlighted a note in the professor's book that indicates 50% of the proceeds would go to the International Anti-Fascist Defence Fund, which supports Antifa activists around the world.
After Bray was called out for his radicalism — with receipts provided — the leftist professor presented to the liberal media as a victim, suggesting he intended to flee to Europe but proved unable.
"I've never been part of an antifa group, and I'm not currently," Bray told the New York Times. "There's an effort underway to paint me as someone who is doing the things that I've researched, but that couldn't be further from the truth."
Radicals circle the wagons
Leftist students and faculty members at Rutgers rushed to Bray's defense.
The Rutgers chapters of the American Association of University Professors and the American Federation of Teachers joined the Rutgers Adjunct Faculty Union in condemning the attempt by the TPUSA's student chapter to get Bray canned over his apparent support for Antifa terrorists. The unions further smeared the student chapter, suggesting it was responsible for the threats Bray has supposedly received.
"The threats against ... Bray are a predictable consequence of Turning Point’s campaign to distort Dr. Bray’s views," said the unions' joint statement. "Silence in the face of these assaults will only embolden the far right."
A Change.org petition that had over 3,500 signatures at the time of writing appeared on Sunday in the wake of Bray's recent claims of victimhood, demanding that the university disband the Rutgers chapter of TPUSA.
RELATED: Anarchy doesn’t start with firebombs — it begins with excuses
"The Rutgers chapter of Turning Point USA (TPUSA) has been continuously promoting hate speech and inciting violence against our community," said the petition, reportedly created by a former student from the Rochester Institute of Technology. "This disturbing behavior has created a toxic environment that has already led to tragic consequences."
'Any opinion that challenges their worldview is immediately branded as "hate speech."'
"We urge Rutgers University to immediately disband the Turning Point USA chapter from its campus," continued the petition. "By doing so, we will not only be upholding our commitment to educational excellence but also ensuring a safe and inclusive environment for every individual within our community."
"The petition to disband our Turning Point chapter is blatantly defamatory," Ava Kwan, outreach coordinator for the Turning Point USA chapter at Rutgers, said in a statement.
"The accusations of 'inciting violence' and 'making threats' are complete lies," continued Kwan. "The same people claiming we're suppressing their free speech are actively trying to silence us for speaking the truth. It's not just ironic, it's hypocritical and absurd. Any opinion that challenges their worldview is immediately branded as 'hate speech,' a meaningless term weaponized to control dissent and protect their false narrative."
Blaze News has reached out to TPUSA for comment.
When asked whether Rutgers is considering disbanding the TPUSA student chapter, the university said in a statement to Blaze News, "The university does not comment on specific personnel or student conduct matters."
The university noted further that it is "committed to providing a secure environment — to learn, teach, work, and research, where all members of our community can share their opinions without fear of intimidation or harassment. Rutgers is committed to upholding the rights of students and faculty to free speech and academic freedom as fundamental to our community."
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
Masked pro-Hamas agitators turn violent — 4 cops injured, 13 arrested in Boston
Violence broke out in Boston on Tuesday evening when pro-Palestine protesters gathered for a rally on the two-year anniversary of Hamas' October 7 terrorist attack that caused the deaths of more than 1,200 Israelis and sparked the ongoing war.
'From my perspective, this is all the same ball of wax: Antifa, free Palestine, trans-tifa. They're all the same effectively, far-left/communist agitators.'
Flyers of the protest feature an illustration of people masked in kaffiyehs and a police car on fire.
"Flood downtown for Palestine," the flyer reads. "Rally and march."
John Gately, the host of the "John F Gately Show," captured footage of the downtown protest, which he estimated was attended by roughly 175 people.
Gately recorded a video of a group of masked protesters sitting on the ground, trying to conceal their activities. When Gately approached the group, they quickly formed a barrier, holding up kaffiyehs to block his view, and even appeared to move a police barrier. One protester claimed they were providing first aid to one of their comrades who needed to "rest."
Gately told Blaze News that when the march arrived at Boston's Downtown Crossing, "things got ugly" as protesters blocked emergency vehicles.
"There was a kerfuffle. There was a report of pepper spray; I didn't see that," Gately said. "It was a fight in the middle of Tremont Street."
RELATED: Two years after October 7: God hasn't been silent
Content warning: language
— (@)
He described seeing protesters pushing and shoving before police swarmed in to arrest 13 individuals, eight men and five women.
Four officers sustained injuries, all of which were non-life-threatening but included broken bones.
RELATED: Hamas agrees to Trump Gaza deal, plans to release all Israeli hostages
Content warning: language
— (@)
Tensions in the community were already high before Tuesday's demonstration, Gately stated. He explained that a visiting professor from Harvard Law School fired off a pellet rifle near a Brookline synagogue last week on the eve of Yom Kippur. The professor allegedly told law enforcement he was "hunting rats."
"From my perspective, this is all the same ball of wax: Antifa, free Palestine, trans-tifa. They're all the same effectively, far-left/communist agitators," Gately told Blaze News. "It's all the same oppressor versus oppressed dialectic."
"I think that effectively, the far-left promotes violence," Gately added.
In a statement provided to Blaze News, Mayor Michelle Wu (D) said, "We are extremely grateful for the work of the Boston Police in keeping the city safe and in supporting the right to peacefully protest. Boston will not tolerate violence, and we categorically condemn those who came into our community to attack our police officers. The individuals who engaged in these attacks must be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law."
Blaze News contacted Gov. Maura Healey's office for comment.
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
Who checks the judges? No one — and that’s the problem.
One would think a federal judge trying to block the president from deploying the National Guard to protect federal agents would mark the breaking point for judicial supremacism. Yet the Trump administration still behaves as if the Supreme Court can rescue it from judicial overreach. It cannot. You can’t comply your way out of judicial tyranny, appoint your way past it, or count on the high court to stop it. The judiciary must be delegitimized completely.
Congress passed by overwhelming margins a law banning Chinese-owned TikTok in the United States. President Trump ignored it. He ordered Attorney General Pam Bondi to keep the app online, and no one in Washington blinked. The president defied a duly enacted law, extended TikTok’s life beyond the 90-day limit, and still allows just under 20% Chinese ownership. Yet the same Washington class insists that any judge can command the president on immigration, national security, or even his use of the National Guard — and that such rulings are the word of God.
The proper response is not to plead for Supreme Court review — it’s to ignore such rulings outright.
Late Saturday night, U.S. District Judge Karin Immergut, a Trump appointee, ruled that the president lacked authority to deploy the Oregon National Guard to Portland to protect ICE facilities. The same judiciary that called a few hours of chaos on Jan. 6, 2021, an “insurrection” now dismisses eight months of rioting, doxxing, and targeted attacks on ICE agents as “lawful protest.”
On Sunday, Immergut extended her injunction to every state’s National Guard units, even those like Texas, whose governors had granted Trump permission to federalize.
The merits of her decision aren’t the core issue. The problem is structural: Federal courts claim abstract standing to decide national-security questions that belong to elected branches. Judicial power was never meant to work this way.
If a citizen suffers injury, he can seek damages in court. But no judge has constitutional authority to referee political disputes as if she were deciding some sort of civil case between Microsoft and Amazon. The proper response is not to plead for Supreme Court review — it’s to ignore such rulings outright.
If the judiciary holds the final say in every political or constitutional conflict, checks and balances collapse. When judges alone define their own powers and the limits of the other branches, we cease to be a republic and become an unelected oligarchy. Abraham Lincoln, citing Thomas Jefferson, warned that once a free people submits absolutely to any department of government, liberty is lost.
When one branch violates the Constitution, the others — and the people — must push back. The founders never vested final authority in any single branch, least of all the one insulated from elections. Presidents come and go; judges remain for decades, accountable to no voter.
I don’t like that Trump sets tariff rates and hands out exemptions by executive order. He even granted Qatar de facto NATO protection without Senate approval. Those moves deserve political resistance — but not judicial vetoes. Questions of national policy belong to voters and legislators, not to courts hunting for imaginary plaintiffs.
Immergut granted standing to Oregon and Portland to challenge Trump’s finding of a “violent domestic insurrection,” claiming there were only four clashes with federal officers in the prior month. Even if that number were correct, no judge has the power to second-guess an executive’s determination of an uprising. Governments cannot sue one another over political facts. We are either a constitutional republic or a dictatorship of robes.
The founders understood this. James Madison originally proposed that the Supreme Court share a “council of revision” with the president to veto legislation. Once the Constitution created an independent executive with its own veto, no serious thinker imagined adding a judicial one. In 1789, Madison made clear that while courts interpret law in specific cases, no branch “draws from the Constitution greater powers than another in marking out the limits of the several departments.”
RELATED: Americans didn’t elect a Boston judge president
When branches clash, each uses its own powers to persuade the public. Madison wrote that differences between the legislative and executive “may be an inconvenience not entirely to be avoided.” That friction, he said, reflects the “concurrent right to expound the Constitution.” In other words, conflict is not a crisis — it’s republican government at work.
Today’s judicial supremacy replaces that rough balance with North Korean-style obedience to unelected authority. What’s next? Will judges write the 2026 federal budget while the president and Senate argue?
Waiting for the Supreme Court to reverse rogue lower-court rulings is a fool’s errand. As Justice Samuel Alito warned in Trump v. CASA, class-action suits and nationwide injunctions make such limits meaningless. Even if the high court eventually reverses Immergut, the administration will have wasted precious time and capital — while worse precedents, like birthright citizenship rulings, remain untouched.
How far must this usurpation go before the executive reasserts its authority? Until the presidency and Congress together reject the judiciary’s false supremacy, the United States will remain trapped in a system unworthy of a free people.
NOT ON OUR WATCH: Patriots stand up to Antifa in Portland
The city of Portland, Oregon, is allegedly being taken over again by blue-haired Antifa leftists — but of course, officials are claiming that everything is fine.
“Portland is not war-ravaged. There’s no insurrection. There’s no threat to national security, and there’s no need for military troops. Military service members should be dedicated to real emergencies,” Oregon Governor Tina Kotek (D) said in a promotional video.
“It’s like, this is the meme,” BlazeTV host Sara Gonzales jokes. “This is literally the ‘everything is fine’ meme. We’re seeing the fire, the fireworks, the Molotov cocktails, the tear gas dispersed, and governor of Oregon says, ‘Everything’s fine.’”
Meanwhile, Antifa has been leading the state through months of unrest — and tax-paying American citizens have had enough of the gaslighting from their local government.
“When you see that Democrat-run cities will not actually handle things, will not actually address things, patriots in this country decided, you know what, we’re going to show up instead,” Gonzales explains, referring to a clip of young men who tried to drown out Antifa by chanting “USA.”
“And you’ve got even more patriots showing up saying, ‘You know what? We’re going to challenge the city of Portland, but we’re going to do it in a respectful, constitutional way. You want to allow Antifa to take over the sidewalks with their medic tents? What happens when we do the same thing?’” she continues.
The host of the “Speak the Truth” podcast, Matt Tardio, is among the patriots standing up to the Oregon government — and he recorded a clip of himself pointing out the “medic tents” that Antifa has set up all over the streets.
“Here’s what we’re going to do, because the Portland police, I don’t think it matters if you want to walk down the street. Antifa is allowed to own this side of the street over here. These are alleged medic tents. So, this is what we’re going to do tomorrow,” Tardio said in the clip.
“This side of the street is going to belong to us because apparently you can just claim sidewalks in Portland as your own and prevent anybody from moving down them. So, my curiosity is simply whether or not we are going to be held to the same standard as Antifa,” he continued.
“Obviously, this should never happen in an American city,” Gonzales comments. “Unfortunately, that is Portland, Oregon, in 2025.”
Want more from Sara Gonzales?
To enjoy more of Sara's no-holds-barred takes on news and culture, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.
The government finally uses the FACE Act on real thugs, not praying grandmas
In 1994, 17 Senate Republicans — including Mitch McConnell — lined up behind the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act. They thought they were cutting a clever deal: In exchange for criminalizing anti-abortion protesters outside clinics, the law would also apply to anyone blocking access to churches.
Like every “bipartisan compromise,” the results were anything but balanced. For decades, pro-life activists — grandmothers singing hymns, young people praying on sidewalks — faced years in prison for nonviolent protest. Meanwhile, not a single violent leftist or Islamist was prosecuted under the FACE Act for harassing or assaulting people of faith.
Mitch McConnell and company signed on to the FACE Act thinking they were being clever and instead saddled conservatives with decades of one-sided prosecutions.
Until last week.
The Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division, under Harmeet Dhillon, filed civil charges against two radical groups — the Party for Socialism and Liberation and American Muslims for Palestine — along with six individuals. Their crime: violently blocking Jewish worshippers from entering Congregation Ohr Torah in West Orange, New Jersey.
A mob at the synagogue
In November 2024, about 50 agitators linked arms outside the synagogue, blasting bullhorns and physically charging congregants. Several Jews were attacked.
New Jersey authorities, true to form, looked the other way. In fact, the Essex County prosecutor charged two congregants — including one who fought to defend a 65-year-old man being choked unconscious — with aggravated assault and bias intimidation. Not one of the attackers was indicted.
The message was clear: When radical Islamists or communists attack Jews, the state shrugs. Imagine the reverse — 50 Christians or Jews storming a mosque. Washington would have treated it like January 6 all over again.
This time, the Justice Department did not look away. The government’s civil complaint details how defendant Altaf Sharif broke through a police line, blocked worshippers, and used a vuvuzela as a weapon, blasting it into a man’s ear to cause permanent hearing loss. He then grabbed another congregant by the throat, placed him in a chokehold, and tackled him down a hill — all while screaming anti-Semitic slurs.
The kicker: The congregant who intervened to save the victim was indicted by local prosecutors, while Sharif skated free. That’s blue-state Jim Crow in favor of Islamic radicals.
AMP’s terrorist roots
American Muslims for Palestine, one of the groups charged, is no harmless civic association. It is the successor to the Holy Land Foundation, Hamas’ old fundraising arm in the United States. When the Holy Land Foundation was forced to pay $156 million to a terror victim’s family, AMP was born in its place.
As the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals noted in 2021, AMP inherited its leadership, its conferences, and its mission. In other words, Hamas simply changed its letterhead.
The Islamic-communist axis
This case exposes a dangerous reality: Radical Islamists and communists are not just funding terror abroad; they are carrying it out here at home. That is why President Trump must follow through on his pledge to formally designate both the Muslim Brotherhood and Antifa as terrorist organizations.
RELATED: 'Hypocrisy is palpable': Former Trump lawyer blows up liberals' gaslighting about Antifa crackdown
And it is why state attorneys general should continue investigating the “charitable” and “civic” groups that serve as their domestic cover. Just two weeks ago, a Virginia judge found AMP in contempt for failing to comply with an order from Attorney General Jason Miyares requiring the group to hand over documents related to terror finance.
Using a bad law for the right reasons
The FACE Act remains a terrible law. It was written to criminalize prayer and hymn-singing, not protect churches. It should be repealed.
But if old ladies can face 10 years in prison for praying outside Planned Parenthood, then yes — the law must be used against mobs who choke Jews outside synagogues. For once, the Justice Department is pointing the weapon in the right direction.
And let’s be clear: Republicans built this weapon and handed it to the left. McConnell and company signed on to the FACE Act thinking they were being clever and instead saddled conservatives with decades of one-sided prosecutions. If they want to show their repentance, they should join the fight now to repeal the law — or at the very least, stop pretending that “bipartisanship” ever serves our side.
Trump names Antifa. The establishment still pretends it doesn’t exist.
On September 25, President Trump issued National Security Presidential Memorandum 7, or NSPM-7. The sweeping directive lays out a “whole-of-government strategy” for combating domestic terrorism.
Most headlines focused on Antifa’s new designation. But NSPM-7 is the real story. It’s the game changer, and the left is only beginning to grasp its scope. Expect it to define political battles for years to come.
Naming the enemy
For the first time in years, a presidential directive names threats with specificity instead of hiding behind euphemisms. NSPM-7 defines what it calls “the anti-fascist lie” — the framing of foundational American principles like border security and support for law enforcement as “fascist” to justify violent revolution.
NSPM-7 marks a historic break with the old rules. It calls the threats by name, orders the government to follow the money, and strips the Justice Department of its wiggle room.
That lie, the document states, has become the “organizing rallying cry” for domestic terrorists. And it spells out the ideological fuel behind the violence: anti-Americanism, anti-capitalism, anti-Christianity, extremism on migration, race, and gender, and open hostility toward traditional American views on family and morality.
Political correctness has long forbidden that kind of bluntness. NSPM-7 throws it out.
In doing so, Trump’s memorandum recalls his 2016 insistence on naming “radical Islamic terror” despite Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton’s refusal to do so. As Trump said during his second debate with Clinton: “To solve a problem, you have to be able to state what the problem is or at least say the name.”
NSPM-7 says the names.
Following the money
The directive goes further than definitions. It instructs agencies to act.
Perhaps most striking: The Treasury Department is ordered to identify and disrupt the financial networks that fund domestic terrorism and political violence. That includes tracing illicit funding streams and coordinating with other agencies to choke them off.
The IRS is directed to ensure no tax-exempt entities are financing political violence — directly or indirectly. And when they are, the IRS must refer those organizations, their leaders, and their employees to the Justice Department for prosecution.
For years, Americans suspected billion-dollar left-wing institutions were underwriting street violence while hiding behind plausible deniability. NSPM-7 sets the stage to prove it. It establishes the long-demanded “follow the money” strategy — something only government agencies can do. Had it been in place before the Black Lives Matter riots of 2020, the “Summer of Love” might have cost millions in damages, not billions, as resources dried up.
Zero tolerance
The president’s directive also mobilizes Joint Terrorism Task Forces and makes domestic terrorism a national priority area. But its most consequential piece comes at the Justice Department’s expense.
The attorney general is instructed to prosecute all federal crimes tied to domestic terrorism “to the maximum extent permissible by law.” Every word matters. “All” means no discretion. If it can be charged, it must be charged. “Maximum extent” means no plea deals designed to make cases go away.
RELATED: Hollywood goes full antifa with 'One Battle After Another'
That language is a direct rebuke to the Justice Department’s pattern of selective prosecution. Think back to the Eastern District of Virginia’s refusal to pursue James Comey until a new U.S. attorney had to take it on. Trump’s team drafted NSPM-7 to make sure that kind of deep state resistance doesn’t happen again.
The test ahead
The proof will come quickly. Attorney General Pam Bondi now must prosecute at scale. No more leniency for “unpermitted protests” that turn into riots or for assaults on ICE officers. The Justice Department’s past record has been sparse, at best. NSPM-7 removes its excuses.
NSPM-7 marks a historic break with the old rules, and I’m here for it. It calls the threats by name. It orders the government to follow the money. It strips the Justice Department of its wiggle room.
The left sees the danger in this because it exposes its networks of funding and protection. Conservatives should see the opportunity.
Trump has delivered a strategy that treats domestic terrorism not as a nuisance, but as a war to be fought and won. Now, it must be enforced.
DOJ Opens Investigation Into Antifa-Indulging Portland Police
The probe follows the arrest of a conservative journalist who says he was taken into custody after being attacked by Antifa thugs.
www.theblaze.com