Rep. Chip Roy urges colleagues to axe Clinton law used to toss peaceful pro-lifers in prison



Texas Rep. Chip Roy (R) is urging his colleagues to vote before year end or in early January on the repeal of the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act. While Republicans might have enough votes — and will have a trifecta as of January — it is unclear whether they have the requisite will.

"We're after the election now, so I feel like we ought to put it out there this year. Go ahead and vote on it," Roy told the Daily Signal, "so that more Americans can’t get persecuted."

The FACE Act, ratified by President Bill Clinton in 1994, is supposed to protect access to churches and abortion facilities but has been weaponized by the Biden Department of Justice to lock up peaceful pro-life protesters, such as Paulette Harlow, 75; Jean Marshall, 74; Joan Bell, 76; John Hinshaw, 69; Progressive Anti-Abortion Uprising director of activism Lauren Handy; and 89-year-old concentration camp survivor Eva Edl.

According to the legal organization Alliance Defending Freedom, "the DOJ brought at least 26 charges against pro-life individuals under the FACE Act in 2022. What were the total number of charges against abortion activists who obstructed or vandalized pro-life pregnancy centers in the wake of the Dobbs decision that year? Zero."

'Free Americans should never live in fear of their government targeting them because of their beliefs.'

The DOJ continued its lopsided application of the law the following year, revealing an institutional commitment to holding pro-lifers to a different standard from their violent counterparts.

The Daily Caller reported in July that from 1994 to 2024, there were 205 cases brought under the FACE Act against pro-life activists and only six brought against abortion activists; 55 of those cases were prosecuted during the Biden administration, only five of which reportedly concerned attacks on pregnancy resource centers.

Months after urging the House Appropriations Committee to bar the use of taxpayer funds for the enforcement of the FACE Act, Rep. Roy introduced legislation in September 2023 that would repeal the law. The FACE Act Repeal Act of 2023 found 47 sponsors in the House. Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) subsequently introduced a companion bill in the U.S. Senate.

Roy stated at the time, "Free Americans should never live in fear of their government targeting them because of their beliefs. Yet Biden's Department of Justice has brazenly weaponized the FACE Act against normal, everyday Americans across the political spectrum, simply because they are pro-life."

"Our Constitution separates power between the federal government and the states for a reason, and we ignore that safeguard at our own peril," continued the Texas congressman. "The FACE Act is an unconstitutional federal takeover of state police powers; it must be repealed."

'Republicans are going to have to get the nerve to actually stand up.'

Lee noted in an X thread earlier this year, "The FACE Act criminalizes an odd assortment of offenses, including blocking access to and vandalizing (1) abortion clinics, (2) places of worship, and (3) pregnancy centers. How many prosecutions has Team Biden brought in the second category? Zero. Not even one."

"The FACE Act, it seems, is being used by DOJ to punish pro-life protesters but not their pro-abortion counterparts," wrote Lee. "In enacting the FACE Act, moreover, Congress relied on now difficult-to-defend readings of both the Commerce Clause and the Fourteenth Amendment. I suspect most of the Republicans who voted for the FACE Act in 1994 would've voted differently had they anticipated the one-sided manner in which it would be enforced by DOJ."

Roy, who has repeatedly called for the the House GOP to take up his bill in the months since, told the Daily Signal this week, "Obviously, we need to move the bill forward, and it would be critical because of what we're seeing with respect to the persecution of Americans being put in jail."

"I think with the trifecta, we should be able to pass it," said Roy. "We should bring it forward. But look, Republicans are going to have to get the nerve to actually stand up for both free speech and life."

Although it is up to lawmakers to axe the FACE Act, President-elect Donald Trump suggested in a June 22 speech to the Faith and Freedom Coalition that he will pardon peaceful pro-life activists such as Paulette Harlow upon taking office.

In May, U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly, a Clinton-appointed judge who chastised a nun for daring to make the sign of the cross in court, sentenced Harlow to 24 months in prison. Harlow, an elderly woman suffering from a debilitating medical condition, was among the pro-life activists convicted for blocking access on Oct. 22, 2020, to the Washington Surgi-Clinic, operated by the late-term abortionist Cesare Santangelo.

“Paulette is one of many peaceful pro-lifers who Joe Biden has rounded up, sometimes with SWAT teams, and thrown them in jail," said Trump. "Many people are in jail over this. … We're going to get that taken care of immediately — [on the] first day."

Trump noted further that upon taking office, his administration would "rapidly review the cases of every political prisoner who's unjustly victimized by the Biden regime, including Paulette, so we can get them out of the gulags and back to their families where they belong."

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

Target apologizes after employee was allegedly fired for signaling her Christian faith



Target has apologized and reportedly offered to reinstate a North Dakota employee who claims she was fired for writing "trust in Jesus" in marker on her name tag.

Target vows on its corporate site to "make decisions regarding employment opportunities, including hiring, promotion and advancement, without regard" to religious beliefs and states it wants a company "where all feel seen, heard and welcome."

Denise Kendrick of Fargo was seen and then made unwelcome on Nov. 16 by the DEI-captive organization.

Kendrick told KVLY-TV that a manager approached her and informed her that she "can't wear that name tag."

'I've seen people with rainbows on theirs.'

This came as a surprise to Kendrick because she had worn Christian-themed T-shirts for months to work allegedly without incident in the super-majority Christian state.

Kendrick noted in a video on her YouTube channel, "For several months, I had been wearing my red T-shirts that I ordered myself, my Christian red T-shirts, OK. I didn't wear the he/she/they/whatever T-shirts that Target supplied. I wore my own and never had any problem the whole entire time that I worked there."'

Besides an apparent absence of backlash from customers, Kendrick indicated that the "trust in Jesus" note was her equivalent to other employees' name-tag displays of belief and ideological affiliation.

"I replied, 'Well, I've seen people with rainbows on theirs. I’m going to continue to wear this name tag,'" Kendrick told KVLY. "And then they said, 'Well, you can't work here any more.'"

'The darker it gets, the brighter our lights should shine.'

According to Kendrick, when she asked for a written explanation detailing why exactly she was fired, the manager refused and instead provided her with a list of contact information pertaining to the company's dress code policy.

"They gave me this paper with all these phone numbers on it and said, 'If you have any questions about the violation of the dress code, just call one of these numbers,'" Kendrick told KVLY. "And he just kept repeating it, and we just kept going back and forth, and it was going nowhere."

The incident may have been triggered by the intolerance of a customer. Prior to her termination, Kendrick claimed she saw a visible member of the LGBT community, whom she served as cashier earlier in the day, communicating with the "HR lady."

On Tuesday, a spokesman said in a statement obtained by KVLY, "Upon learning of the situation, we conducted a review and determined that the team member should not have been terminated. We apologized to her and offered to reinstate her immediately."

"We are taking the appropriate steps to address the actions taken by the individual leader involved in this situation and are working with the store to ensure our policies are appropriately followed moving forward," added the spokesman.

Kendrick noted in a video on her YouTube channel, "Following Christ, you know, means taking up our cross every day and standing on the truth, guys. Now more than ever, OK, the darker it gets, the brighter our lights should shine."

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

The Injustice Department: Steve Baker pleads guilty to January 6 charges



Blaze News investigative reporter Steve Baker has been breaking down the January 6 trials of American citizens and exposing what he’s found for years now — and because of that, the hammer of the government came down on him as well.

Now he’s pleading guilty to four charges related to January 6.

“My decision was very easy after my sentencing hearing last Wednesday, which was of course the day after President Trump was confirmed to have won the election. I went through what I consider a brutal hearing in which the justice department, not only them but also the court itself, showed their inflexibility,” Baker explains to Jill Savage and Matthew Peterson of “Blaze News Tonight.”


“They showed to me that they were going to not allow us to present my case as I've imagined in my mind for three years now, that I would ultimately present my case if I was charged. And then after being charged back in March of this year, I’ve had nine, 10 months now to build that case,” he continues, noting that the court denied him on every motion made.

According to Baker, he had “behaved completely, 100% professionally as a journalist” and the prosecution is in “violation of the First Amendment.”

Because the court denied Baker the right to present his case, he decided to plead guilty instead.

“I told my attorneys in a Zoom call that we made immediately after my hearing last Wednesday that I was not going to do this. I was not going to allow the government to put me through nothing more than a shaming exercise and to be quite frank, a 100% losing record for January 6 defendants,” he explains.

“There has not been a single exoneration, not a single acquittal, so I was going up against that buzzsaw if I did go to trial today,” he adds.

While Baker was just doing his job, so were many other journalists in attendance on January 6 who are not facing the same fate. And seeing the same thing happen to others, he believes that no defendant was given a fair chance based on their political leaning.

“Beginning with the Oath Keepers trial, which of course was the biggest, most publicized January 6 trial of all,” he says, “I saw how those defendants were denied the right to prevent evidence that was exculpatory evidence in their own trial, and yet, the government was allowed to present basically anything that they wished.”

Want more from 'Blaze News Tonight'?

To enjoy more provocative opinions, expert analysis, and breaking stories you won’t see anywhere else, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

Judge Forces Feds To Reveal More Evidence Of Social Media Censorship

A federal judge agreed to expand Missouri v. Biden to procure more evidence federal officials violated Americans' free speech rights.

4 things Elon Musk told Joe Rogan before his 11th-hour Trump endorsement



Joe Rogan, the massively popular podcaster who supported Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) in 2020 and signaled he would back Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) were he to go the distance in 2024, long expressed reluctance about having President Donald Trump on his show.

Rogan finally gave in late last month and sat down for three hours with the Republican president for an interview that went viral despite YouTube's apparent censorship efforts. Although the titular host of "The Joe Rogan Experience" appeared receptive to Trump's various policy proposals and his commentary about the issues facing the nation, Rogan refrained from endorsing the president — until Monday night after Elon Musk detailed his own reasons for backing Trump.

Rogan noted after the nearly three-hour interview Monday that Musk, a former Democrat, made "the most compelling case for Trump you'll hear" and agreed with the tech magnate "every step of the way."

While their conversation was replete with indications that might account for why Rogan finally endorsed Kamala Harris' opponent — such as the falsity of both the Democrat-constructed Russian collusion narrative and the party's promise of change; Harris' censorial reflex and dislikable personality; economic woes; Democrats' failure or unwillingness to tackle crime; reckless government spending; the border crisis; the promise of Trump's "Make America Healthy Again" movement; and the slaying of Peanut the squirrel — Musk highlighted four key reasons Trump was the optimal choice.

To save America from a 'one-party state'

Musk, who has reportedly poured hundreds of millions of dollars into efforts to see Trump elected, emphasized that should the Republican candidate lose the election, America will in turn "lose the two-party system."

The tech billionaire reasoned that there are only a handful of swing states where the margin of victory is small, "often 10 or 20,000 votes."

Musk echoed the concern Rogan raised with Sen. John Fetterman on the previous episode, namely that "the Democrat administration has been ... importing vast numbers of illegal aliens into swing states."

"What we're seeing is triple-digit increases in the numbers of illegals in every swing state. Some cases, 700% increases. These are gigantic numbers," said Musk, stressing that these numbers are far in excess of what would be necessary to permanently lock swing states for the Democrats.

'If Trump doesn't win, this is the last election.'

"Once the swing states vote blue, there is no election anymore," continued Musk. "There's only a Democrat primary."

"Which is so crazy," Rogan responded. "And it's so crazy that people are fine with that."

Musk indicated that the ultimate result would be a "one-party state" whose Democratic commissars could continue the project of overwhelming resistive states with illegal aliens until the remaining resistance is electorally neutralized.

While the Tesla CEO intimated that amnesty might play a big role in this scheme, he indicated that illegal aliens will be able to put their thumbs on the scale long before receiving citizenship, referencing successful Democratic efforts to eliminate voter ID laws.

Steven Camarota, the director of research for the Center of Immigration Studies, noted in a recent op-ed that illegal aliens are also counted in the census, meaning blue states will enjoy greater and greater representation in Congress the longer the border crisis goes unchecked.

"If Trump doesn't win, this is the last election," reiterated Musk.

Rogan replied, "I think you're right."

To save the Constitution

Musk noted that there has been a concerted campaign by Democrats to infringe upon Americans' rights and to render the Constitution a dead document.

"There have been all these attacks on the Constitution, especially on the Democrat side. They have been repeatedly saying that the First Amendment is an obstacle," said Musk. "And they're claiming, 'Oh, the First Amendment is enabling disinformation, misinformation.' And I'm like, 'Yo, there's a reason for the First Amendment.'"

Democrats have been explicit about their problems with the First Amendment and the speech rights it guarantees.

Tim Wu, a former special assistant to President Biden for competition and tech policy and author of one of Biden's executive orders, complained in July that the "First Amendment is out of control" and recommended reining it in.

Former Biden-Harris climate czar John Kerry noted during a World Economic Forum panel discussion on trade and so-called sustainability in September that "our First Amendment stands as a major block to the ability to be able to just, you know, hammer ['disinformation'] out of existence."

The Biden-Harris administration has evidenced in practice its hostility toward free speech. For instance, it leaned on social media companies to silence dissenting voices during the pandemic; launched the Department of Homeland Security's short-lived Disinformation Governance Board and tasked an advocate for deplatforming Trump to run the censorship outfit; weaponized the State Department to clamp down on undesirable speech; and worked to control speech on the internet.

"If you don't have freedom of speech, you don't have democracy," Musk told Rogan. "If you don't have freedom of speech, people cannot make an informed vote. If they're just being fed propaganda, and there's no freedom of speech, democracy is an illusion."

Musk noted further that the Second Amendment — similarly under assault by Harris and her fellow Democrats — serves to ensure Americans can fight off those tyrannical forces that would dare undermine the First Amendment.

"I've had these debates, especially with people in L.A., because they want to take everyone's guns away, and I'm like, 'Yo, can you guarantee me that the government — that we'll never have a tyrannical government in the United States? Can you make that guarantee?' They're like, 'Well, nobody can make that guarantee.' I'm like, 'Then we need to keep our guns,'" said Musk. "Because that's what's going to stop it."

Harris' campaign website noted that if elected, she would "ban assault weapons and high-capacity magazines, require universal background checks, and support red flag laws that keep guns out of the hands of dangerous people."

In the past, Harris has threatened to storm the homes of law-abiding Americans for surprise gun inspections and sponsored a handgun ban.

To save America from suffocating regulation

Musk told Rogan that regulation has stymied innovation, such that it apparently takes longer for Space X to gain approval from regulatory agencies for a rocket launch than it takes to build the actual rockets.

When making his case for why a return to Trump's style of relative deregulation is optimal, Musk likened regulators to referees in a game of football.

"You don't want to have no refs. You want to have some number of refs. But you don't want to have way more refs than players," said Musk. "'Well, the running back couldn't complete the pass because there were too many regulators in the way because the football field was full of regulators.' Like, you can't even play the game."

Musk said in September that if Trump wins, "We do have an opportunity to do kind of a once-in-a-lifetime deregulation and reduction in the size of government."

To save America from foreign entanglements

The duo broached the subject of the left's desperate attempts to liken Trump to Adolf Hitler. Musk made a point of noting that Hitler is so despised because he committed genocide and effectively started war with Western civilization.

"Tell me about the wars and genocide that Trump did. Uh, I don't remember that, and he was president for four years," said Musk. "It's insane. It makes no sense."

Rogan noted, "He's campaigning on stopping all the wars. It's like his primary concern."

'Vote like your life depends on it because I think it does.'

"Exactly! The war mongers like Liz Cheney hate him," added Musk. "Because they love war. ... They profit off of war."

Former Jan. 6 committee member Liz Cheney and her father, Dick Cheney — a champion of the invasion of Iraq, which cost thousands of U.S. service lives and trillions of dollars — are among the interventionists who have backed Harris. Harris and Cheney recently denounced Trump's "isolationism," calling his aversion to foreign entanglements "dangerous."

Rogan indicated that he felt a sense of cognitive dissonance when the left celebrated Dick Cheney's Harris endorsement: "It's the craziest turn — the craziest 180 I've ever seen in my life."

"Yeah, can we play all the videos where you said Dick Cheney was the devil?" Musk replied, laughing.

"The war-profiteers hate Trump," said Musk. "Which is f***ed up. ... We should be like, 'Yeah, let's vote for the guy war-profiteers hate. That sounds like a great idea.'"

The tech billionaire noted further that the "Kamala puppet regime" is a guarantee for more war.

Musk concluded the interview by emphasizing the "men need to vote."

"This is a message to the men out there: Vote like your life depends on it because I think it does," said Musk. "Nothing is more important."

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

Judge Throws The Book At 69-Year-Old Tina Peters For Minor Infraction Because She Believes The 2020 Election Was Stolen

The judge clearly went overboard and illegally focused on Tina Peters’ constitutionally protected viewpoint about election theft.

How To Combat The Censorship-Industrial Complex No Matter Who Wins The Election

We must keep talking and throwing wrenches into the machinery of loneliness. We must keep coming together in love for our neighbor.