Meet The Mysterious Billionaire Paying American Troops During Government Shutdown
'I don't have to say why'
Jonathan Karl Blames Trump For Kimmel’s Suspension: All The Questions From ABC’s This Week
Remove the answers and leave just the questions, and Jonathan and Karl’s blatant anti-Trump tone is easy to spot.'No b*** j** for you': State House silences Republican for reading smut Democrats fought to keep in elementary schools
The Democratic deputy speaker of the Connecticut House silenced a Republican colleague during debate over the state budget on Monday, thereby proving her point: Some of the content in the Constitution State's public schools is far too obscene to be read even before a crowd of adults.
While important, Republican state Rep. Anne Dauphinais' concerns about pornographic content in elementary school libraries would normally be irrelevant to a state budget.
However, in an apparent effort to limit public scrutiny, Democratic lawmakers Trojan-horsed legislation into the Connecticut budget that would greatly restrict concerned parents' ability to have sexually graphic content, LGBT propaganda, and other inappropriate materials removed from school libraries.
'Parents are going to really have to pay attention to their own school libraries.'
In addition to painting resident "school library media specialists" as the experts on what content American children should consume, the legislation:
- prohibits the removal, exclusion, or censoring of any book on the basis that "a person with a vested interest finds such book offensive";
- prohibits the removal of content or the cancellation of library programs on the basis of "the origin, background or viewpoints expressed" therein;
- demands that library materials and programs be excluded only for "pedagogical purposes or for professionally accepted standards of collection maintenance practices";
- bars challengers of offensive content from favoring or disfavoring "any group based on protected characteristics";
- requires challengers to file their grievances with a school principal and provide their name, address, and telephone number;
- requires a review committee, weighed heavy with educational personnel, including a librarian and a teacher, to make the determination; and
- requires the offensive material to remain available in the school library until a final decision is made.
In the wake of the controversial budget's passage on party-line votes and Gov. Ned Lamont's (D) subsequent indication that he plans to sign it, Dauphinais told Blaze News that "if it should pass, parents are going to really have to pay attention to their own school libraries."
RELATED: Texas bans explicit content in schools — and Democrats are not happy
Some of the books at issue made an appearance during a February press conference where Dauphinais, state Sen. Henri Martin, and other Connecticut Republicans underscored the need for greater parental control. Among the books cited for their sexually graphic content were "Let's Talk About It: The Teen's Guide to Sex, Relationships, and Being a Human (A Graphic Novel)" by Erika Moen and Matthew Nolan, and Cory Silverberg's "You Know, Sex: Bodies, Gender, Puberty and Other Things."
'Let's try to keep some decorum.'
During the budget debate in the state House, Dauphinais, the ranking member of the Children's Committee, provided a better sense of the kinds of obscenities to which state schools are exposing Connecticut children.
After warning onlookers with children to remove them, Dauphinais read an excerpt from Lauren Myracle's book "l8r, g8r," saying, "Have you ever given Logan a blow job? No blow job for you, missy? What about plain old sex?"
The material appeared to make some of Dauphinais' colleagues across the aisle uneasy, even though they were effectively fighting to protect kids' access to it.
Dauphinais, among the Republican lawmakers who stressed that parents should have a say in whether obscene content remains in school libraries, also read from the book, "Me and Early and the Dying Girl," quoting a character as saying, "'Are you gonna eat her p***y?' 'Yeah, Earl, I'm going to eat her p***y.'"
Democratic Deputy Speaker Juan Candelaria interrupted the conservative Republican, banging his gavel and saying, "Madam, I would ask that if we not try to use that type of language in the chamber. Let's try to keep some decorum."
Candelaria asked Dauphinais to refrain from uttering such words out of respect for children and for "others that might get offended."
Dauphinais, who previously suggested that an adult reading such books to kids outside of school would justifiably be accused of "grooming," responded to Candelaria, "This is in elementary school libraries, approved by the very individuals that are supposed to be the experts."
The CT Mirror reported that Democratic state Rep. Larry Butler expressed outrage — not with the fact that such books are in Connecticut school libraries but that Dauphinais read from them.
'It's a game and a gimmick to get what [Democrats] want in there.'
"I will tell you that in my 18 years here, I have never seen the demonstration of such vulgarity tonight, reaching the lowest level that I've ever seen in this chamber," said Butler. "When we're talking about books in libraries, that's one thing. You could just mention a book."
State House Majority Leader Jason Rojas said, "I think it just threw people off quite a bit to hear that kind of language being used on the floor."
RELATED: Parents fight evil in schools — and seek justice at the Supreme Court
Republican state Sen. Rob Sampson told Blaze News, "If Democrats thought this policy was defensible, they wouldn’t have buried it in a 700-page budget. They're shielding graphic, sexually explicit content in school libraries — and they know parents wouldn't stand for it if they saw it in the light of day."
"The irony?" continued Sampson. "When my colleague read a passage from one of these books aloud, they ruled it out of order. If it's too obscene for the House floor, it's too obscene for a school. This isn't about banning books — it's about protecting kids."
"Democrats claim these books are fine for kids in schools, but too explicit for adults in the House Chamber," said Dauphinais. "They’re choosing pornography over parents — and then call us crazy for speaking out. I am appalled but not surprised."
When asked whether this is the end of the story now that the budget has passed, Sampson told Blaze News, "There's still a chance to strip this garbage out of the budget, but it'll take a spine from the governor and a spotlight from the press."
Dauphinais told Blaze News that there is presently uncertainty over whether Lamont can veto the legislation as it is not a budget item.
"It's a game and a gimmick to get what [Democrats] want in there," said the Republican. "The maneuver was putting it in a budget where it didn't belong."
"Because it doesn't have dollars attached to it, we're told that that's not something that he's able to veto," added Dauphinais.
To undo the legislation, a new bill may be needed.
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
In 7 States, Officials Claim To Request Voter ID But Allow Paperwork Loopholes
If someone lacks ID while voting in person... they must simply sign forms claiming to be the voter, and officials will let them cast a ballot.Cities Offering ‘Sanctuary’ To Illegal Alien Rapists And Killers Deny It To Their Own Residents
Criminals ICE could remove are released from prison into the warm embrace of sanctuary jurisdictions to destroy the lives of more victims.Appeals court blocks DOGE records-grab ordered by lower court
A federal appeals court on Wednesday blocked a lower court's order seeking records from the Trump administration's Department of Government Efficiency regarding its plans to significantly reduce the size of the federal government.
Earlier this month, United States District Judge Tanya Chutkan directed the DOGE to turn over the documents in response to a lawsuit filed by 14 Democratic-led states, headed by New Mexico. Additional plaintiffs included Arizona, California, Connecticut, Hawaii, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Washington.
'That should be the end of this ill-conceived challenge.'
The states' lawsuit claimed that the DOGE and Elon Musk violated the U.S. Constitution's Appointments Clause and separation of powers, arguing that Musk was not confirmed by the Senate. The states aimed to block the DOGE from accessing several government systems and terminating federal employees.
The complaint requested records from the department as part of the discovery process.
"Defendants argue that the 'inner workings of government' are immaterial to an Appointments Clause claim," Chutkan wrote in her decision. "The court is not convinced, but that is a legal issue appropriate for resolution after fulsome briefing. At this stage, it is sufficient that Plaintiffs' discovery requests intend to reveal the scope of DOGE's and Musk's authority."
She noted that the plaintiffs' requested materials "seek to identify DOGE personnel and the parameters of DOGE's and Musk's authority—a question central to Plaintiffs' claims."
Chutkan ordered the DOGE to produce recordings concerning "agencies, employees, legal agreements, or data management systems" pertaining to the states. The judge gave Musk and the DOGE until April 2 to comply.
On Wednesday, a three-judge panel on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit temporarily blocked Chutkan's order, suggesting she first rule on the Trump administration's motion to dismiss before moving to discovery.
Chutkan canceled a Thursday status hearing following the appeals court's ruling.
The administration's motion to dismiss argued, "By the Complaint's own terms, the States agree that Elon Musk 'does not occupy an office of the United States'; they allege only that he wields 'de facto power.'"
"That should be the end of this ill-conceived challenge," it read. "The States' contrary view rests on conflating influence and authority."
The White House has insisted that Musk is not the head of the DOGE but a senior adviser to President Donald Trump.
Despite facing an onslaught of litigation, the DOGE has not slowed its cost-cutting efforts. On Wednesday, the DOGE applauded the Department of Labor for terminating $557 million in "America Last" grants, totaling $237 million in savings.
According to the department, the wasteful awards included $10 million for "gender equity in the Mexican workplace," over $12 million for "worker empowerment in South America," $5 million for "elevating women's participation in the workplace" in West Africa, more than $4 million for "assisting foreign migrant workers" in Malaysia, $3 million for "enhanc[ing] social security access and worker protections for internal migrant workers" in Bangladesh, another $3 million for "safe and inclusive work environments" in Lesotho, and $6.25 million for "improving respect for Worker's rights in agricultural supply chains" in Honduras, Guatemala, and El Salvador.
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
20 Democrat AGs sue Trump's Education Department over 'massive' staff cuts
A coalition of attorneys general from 20 states and Washington, D.C., filed a lawsuit on Thursday against the Trump administration over its move to lay off nearly 50% of the Department of Education's workforce.
Earlier this week, the Education Department terminated over 1,300 employees. Education Secretary Linda McMahon called the action the "first step" in President Donald Trump's "mandate" to shut down the department.
'Elected with a mandate from the American public to return education authority to the states.'
"What we did today was to take the first step of eliminating what I think is bureaucratic bloat," McMahon stated.
In February, the Education Department fired 63 probationary workers. Another 600 staffers voluntarily quit as part of the Trump administration buyout offer.
Earlier this week, a DOE spokesperson stated that the layoffs were meant to cut the department's workforce "roughly in half," adding that 131 teams would be eliminated.
"We are focusing on eliminating full teams whose operations are either redundant or not necessary for the functioning of the department," the spokesperson said.
"We're going to have these folks roll over their responsibilities by Friday, March 21. They will then go on paid administrative leave until the reduction in force is complete," the DOE official continued. "They will be teleworking from tomorrow until March 21. Then all of that is being done for safety reasons to protect the 2,183 employees that are going to remain after the [reduction in force] is complete."
The states suing the administration, the department, and McMahon included New York, Massachusetts, Hawaii, California, Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, and Wisconsin.
The Democratic attorneys general wrote in their lawsuit that the layoffs were "an effective dismantling of the Department." They argued that the Trump administration lacks the authority to eradicate the Education Department.
Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea Joy Campbell stated, "Neither President Trump nor his secretary have the power to demolish a congressionally created department."
New York Attorney General Letitia James said, "This outrageous effort to leave students behind and deprive them of a quality education is reckless and illegal."
The complaint contended that the department is "essential."
"The dismantling of the Department will also result in the termination of afterschool programs," the lawsuit read. "Regardless of what alternative resources are put in the place of the Department of Education, the process of the Department's dismantling will create and has created chaos, disruption, uncertainty, delays and confusion for Plaintiff States and their residents."
Madi Biedermann, an Education Department spokesperson, declared that Trump was "elected with a mandate from the American public to return education authority to the states."
She noted that the layoffs were "strategic, internal-facing" and "will not directly impact students and families."
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
This college student says she can't read or write. Now she's suing.
A young college student is now suing her old school district in Connecticut after she graduated with honors even though she supposedly cannot read or write.
Aleysha Ortiz, 19, has filed a lawsuit against the Hartford Board of Education and the city of Hartford for alleged negligence after she spent 12 years in the district but apparently never learned these essential skills. The lawsuit claims Ortiz began manifesting problems with "letter, sound, and number recognition" as early as first grade and could not read at a first-grade level until she was in sixth grade but was swept along through the system anyway.
"They would just either tell me to stay in a corner and sleep or just draw pictures, flowers for them," she told CNN about her early education.
Ortiz also claimed that her struggles with schoolwork caused her to act out in class. "I was the bad child," she admitted.
"Sometimes I would feel proud to be the bad child because at least I was something to them and I wasn’t invisible."
'We have a powerful community that wants to do better.'
Ortiz, a native of Puerto Rico, said that her mother, Carmen Cruz, tried to alert school officials to her daughter's problems but had difficulty communicating herself because of a language barrier. "I didn’t know English very well. I didn’t know the rules of the schools," Cruz claimed.
By her sophomore year at Hartford High School, Ortiz was assigned a special education teacher and case manager, Tilda Santiago. However, according to the lawsuit, Santiago bullied and even stalked Ortiz and was eventually removed from her case.
The following year, Ortiz became more outspoken about her struggles, and teachers suggested that she be tested for dyslexia. Unfortunately, the testing was not completed until the final day of her senior year. She was ultimately determined to be dyslexic and required "explicitly taught phonics, fluency, and reading comprehension." School officials offered Ortiz a deferred diploma to receive additional services.
"All I see is words everywhere," she said.
"I know we can do better, and I know we have a powerful community that wants to do better."
In May, Ortiz addressed the city council about her experiences with illiteracy. Nevertheless, she graduated from Hartford Public Schools with honors just weeks later.
She also earned scholarships to attend the University of Connecticut, where she is currently enrolled full-time but not attending classes due to mental health concerns. Ortiz claimed she managed to complete her college coursework through talk-to-text and other such apps, stating they gave her the "voice" she didn't know she had.
Newsweek noted that SAT results are not required for admission into UConn, which uses a "holistic approach" and mainly considers GPA, class rank, essays, and extracurricular activities on applications. According to its website, the university identifies "intellectually curious, highly motivated, and academically accomplished individuals of strong moral character" so as to build "a diverse student body" as part of a wider "inclusive community."
In response to the lawsuit, the district said: "While Hartford Public Schools cannot comment on pending litigation, we remain deeply committed to meeting the full range of needs our students bring with them when they enter our schools — and helping them reach their full potential."
Ortiz, who is interested in studying public policy and becoming a writer someday, said the efforts of her former district aren't good enough.
"They had 12 years," she told CNN. "Now it’s my time."
'In this system, failing students are socially promoted to the next grade without mastering even the most basic skills.'
Leaders of the Yankee Institute, a Connecticut watchdog group, believe public schools in their state have failed to deliver a quality education to all students as promised.
"This horrifying circumstance highlights the fact that Connecticut really has a two-tier education system. It’s excellent for affluent students who live in high-performing school districts — or those with the resources to be able to afford educational access and opportunity. Low-income students, however, are effectively told by our state: 'You'll take what we give you and like it,'" Carol Platt Liebau, Yankee Institute president, told Blaze News.
"Connecticut lawmakers have the chance to pass Opportunity Scholarships and give low-income students a real shot at success. But too many leaders are clinging to a broken system that has failed our most marginalized communities," added Timothy Anop, director of external affairs.
"Teacher unions, in collaboration with complicit superintendents, have social-engineered a system where students begin with a grade of 50 instead of a zero — undermining the value of hard work and homework. In this system, failing students are socially promoted to the next grade without mastering even the most basic skills, perpetuating a cycle of mediocrity," claimed Frank Ricci, a Yankee Institute fellow.
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
Connecticut Can’t Refute Estimate Showing It Spent $1.3B On Illegal Immigration In One Year
It’s time for Connecticut’s officials to commit to an audit of government spending and honor state and federal law by prioritizing those living here legally.Today's top stories
www.theblaze.com