Supreme Court: Kids deserve protection from porn, period



The Supreme Court last week delivered not just a legal decision but a resounding moral affirmation: Children deserve protection from online pornography.

For decades, I’ve been told that “free speech” includes the right to exploit. I’ve watched Big Porn hide behind the First Amendment like a shield, as if this billion-dollar industry, built on addiction, abuse, and shattered innocence, was a sacred American institution. But on Friday, in upholding Texas’ pornography age-verification law, the court drew a line in the sand.

For children, exposure to pornographic material isn’t a neutral event. It reshapes the brain. It numbs empathy. It seeds confusion, fear, and addiction.

And I say: Thank God.

As the brother of a child survivor of sexual exploitation, I know firsthand the consequences of a culture that normalizes sexual harm. I know what it’s like when an industry like porn sees children as commodities. I’ve seen too many young people stumble into the world of violent, degrading content with nothing more than a click. No gatekeepers. No warnings. No protection.

That ended last week.

Texas’ age-verification law was never about silencing speech. It was about defending the voiceless and restoring the most basic responsibility we have as a society: to guard our children from harm.

That’s why my team at Jaco Booyens Ministries joined this case as a friend of the court. Our team submitted a brief to the Supreme Court that shared the lived experiences of survivors, the neurological science on childhood trauma, and the irrefutable consequences of exposure to online pornography.

As our brief stated in Free Speech Coalition v. Paxton: “There is no liberty in trauma. There is no freedom in addiction. When minors are exposed to pornography, they are not exercising constitutional rights, they are being wounded by the unchecked rights of others.”

Still, the porn industry screamed “censorship.” Companies sued, claiming this was a violation of their “rights.” But what about our children’s right not to be harmed? What about the parents fighting to keep predators out of their homes?

The court acknowledged what every honest parent already knows: Access to this kind of content isn’t harmless. It isn’t “education.” It is psychological, emotional, and spiritual violence. During oral arguments, Justice Amy Coney Barrett captured the heart of the issue when she asked, “Why should it be so easy for a 12-year-old to access this kind of material online, when we all know it can be incredibly damaging?”

That wasn’t a rhetorical flourish; it was a recognition of truth.

For children, exposure to pornographic material isn’t a neutral event. It reshapes the brain. It numbs empathy. It seeds confusion, fear, and addiction. I can no longer pretend this is just about speech. This is about harm. Real harm. And the court, at long last, chose to see it.

RELATED: Supreme Court slaps down Big Porn — putting kids before profit

Photo by Education Images/Universal Images Group via Getty Images

I can’t change what happened to my sister. But I can fight to make sure it doesn’t happen to someone else. I can help protect the next generation. I can work to make it harder for exploitation to find its way into our living rooms, our schools, our smartphones. I can help make justice more than just a word. I can help make it action.

To the justices who stood with us: Thank you. You did not bow to corporate pressure. You honored the Constitution as a document of liberty, not license. You remembered that freedom must be rooted in truth, and the truth is that unrestricted pornography destroys lives.

This victory isn’t just for Texas; it’s a win for every child in America. It sends a clear message to every state in this nation: You have the power to protect your children. You can draw the line. You don’t have to wait for permission. And beyond our borders, this ruling sends a powerful global signal: I still believe — and I know many others do too — that children are worth protecting, that their innocence is not up for sale, and their safety is not negotiable.

Let this ruling be a turning point — for our families, for our faith, for our future.

Pornhub flees Texas after SCOTUS ruling, citing free speech and costs — but it's hiding the malevolent truth



On June 27, the U.S. Supreme Court, in a 6-3 decision, upheld a Texas law requiring pornography websites to verify users' ages to prevent minors from accessing explicit content, ruling it constitutional under the First Amendment. The dissenters were the expected radical left-wing trio: Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson.

They apparently “really want children to have access to porn,” scoffs Sara Gonzales, BlazeTV host of “Sara Gonzales Unfiltered.”

Leading the charge for Texas in Free Speech Coalition v. Paxton was Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, whom Sara loves for the long list of wins he’s racked up as the Lone Star State’s top cop. While Paxton’s time as AG is likely limited as he gears up to challenge John Cornyn in the 2026 Republican Senate primary, kids in Texas are now safer thanks to his unwavering commitment to conservative values and to ensuring that Texas remains a stronghold for protecting families and upholding moral standards.

While Sara and the “Unfiltered” panel, which includes Matthew Marsden and Eric July, are thrilled with SCOTUS’ ruling, the sad reality remains: The decision on whether or not to protect children from pornography had to be decided by the highest court in the country — a bleak picture of our nation’s waning morality and war on children.

“An age restriction or an age verification should be a bare minimum,” says Sara. The only reason adult content companies haven’t been implementing them is they’re either “too lazy or too evil.”

Pornhub, the leading adult content platform in the world, receiving billions of monthly visits, disabled its websites in Texas, complaining that the law infringed on adults' free-speech rights, posed privacy risks through mandatory ID verification, and was too costly to implement.

But if free-speech rights were really being jeopardized by implementing an age barrier, then why are there “age restrictions on every gun site?” asks Marsden. And as for the complaint that it’s too expensive, Eric July, who runs his own comics website, says that digital mechanisms like age verification are “automated” today, meaning it’s not nearly as expensive as Pornhub and its parent company, Aylo Global Entertainment, have made it out to be.

“What was expensive 10 years ago isn't any more, especially with regards to something like this,” he says. “Now it doesn't require a lot of money and resources.”

Marsden then brings up another excellent point: “Think about how big Texas is, and they're just like, ‘No, we're out.’ … Economically that's a crazy decision. So it’s not about the money.”

If it’s not about the money, and there are already age restrictions on websites that sell or promote adult content and products, then why is Pornhub leaving Texas over the requirement to implement age barriers that would protect children from harmful exposure?

To Sara, it’s obvious: “[They] want to get them while they're young.”

“If we get them while they're young, we've got a lifelong porn addict who's going to continue coming back to our website,” she sighs.

To hear more of the conversation, watch the episode above.

Want more from Sara Gonzales?

To enjoy more of Sara's no-holds-barred take to news and culture, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

Texas AG hopeful ROASTS NYC Democrat mayoral candidate, 'Zorban whatever his name is — the pajama-wearing socialist feminist'



As Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton gears up to challenge incumbent U.S. Senator John Cornyn (R-Texas) in the Republican primary for the 2026 Senate election, Aaron Reitz is preparing to replace Paxton as Texas attorney general. As a former deputy attorney general for legal strategy under Paxton, a U.S. Marine Corps veteran, a former chief of staff to Senator Ted Cruz (R-Texas), and a former assistant attorney general in the Trump administration’s Department of Justice, Reitz is perfectly suited to be Texas’ next top cop.

On a recent episode of “Prime Time with Alex Stein,” Reitz joined Alex to talk about a disturbing development in New York’s 2025 mayoral race: Zohran Mamdani, a "socialist-communist Muslim," just won the Democratic nomination.

Mamdani ran on promises to provide free city buses and universal child care, to freeze rent on stabilized units, to open city-owned grocery stores, to institute a $30 minimum wage by 2030, and to build 200,000 affordable housing units – all funded by taxing the wealthy and corporations.

With none other than Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) as his muse, Mamdani is as socialist as they come.

And he’s a Muslim who defends the phrase “globalize the intifada” and is an outspoken advocate for Palestinian causes. Among his long list of brow-raising campaign donors is the Council on American-Islamic Relations — a group widely criticized as a Hamas front with suspected terrorist ties, notorious for its anti-Israel propaganda and support for extremist causes.

In an ironic twist, however, Mamdani’s Muslim faith — a religion associated with deeply traditional values — hasn’t hindered him from being as socially progressive as it gets.

Alex shares a 2020 Instagram post from Mamdani that tells you exactly where he falls on the woke meter.

The caption reads: “Defunding the police is a feminist issue. Women, especially trans women, are disproportionately impacted by police violence & the violence of incarceration. We need to divest from these systems & invest in services that lift all of us up.”

“I actually think he's going to be good for New York City, because if this is what New York City wants, this is what New York City gets,” says Alex. “They are at a point where I have no sympathy for them whatsoever.”

Reitz agrees — “They say in a democracy you get the leaders that you deserve.”

And maybe electing Mamdani will actually help New York correct its course in the end.

“What helped President Trump win in 2024 was we just went through four years of a disastrous Biden administration,” says Reitz. “I think that New Yorkers are going to have to unfortunately experience this disaster administration of Zorban whatever his name is — the pajama-wearing socialist feminist — in order to learn the lesson.”

“Good luck, New York! You guys will need it,” says Alex.

To hear more of the conversation and see a clip of Mamdani in action, watch the episode above.

Want more from Alex Stein?

To enjoy more of Alex's culture jamming, comedic monologues, skits, and street segments, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

Meet the man gunning for Paxton’s Texas AG seat to squash Soros DAs



Now that Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton is taking on incumbent Republican Senator John Cornyn (R) in the 2026 U.S. Senate primary, the attorney general’s office might have some big shoes to fill next year.

Given Cornyn’s low approval ratings, there’s a good chance Texas will need a new “top cop,” says BlazeTV host Jill Savage.

Thankfully, there is “someone that has experience fighting alongside Donald Trump at the Justice Department ... someone that Trump has called a true MAGA attorney and warrior for the Constitution” who has risen to the challenge. His name is Aaron Reitz, and he’s Paxton’s former senior Department of Justice official and deputy.

On a recent episode of “Blaze News | The Mandate,” Reitz joined Jill and Blaze News editor in chief Matthew Peterson to share what motivated him to take on this challenge and how he plans to ensure Texas stays tough on crime while holding rogue, Soros-backed DAs accountable.

“I know that if the president doesn't get a true MAGA attorney or a warrior for the Constitution in that Texas AG spot ... all kinds of dominoes are going to fall, and it's going to be very bad, not only for Texas but really for the nation,” says Reitz. “I can’t accept that scenario.”

“What we need out of a Texas AG is somebody who first and foremost understands the civilizational crisis that we're in. It's not an exaggeration to say that we are in the midst of a war for the soul and the heart of our country,” he continues. “Texas in particular, just out of its sheer size, influence, scope, and power, is really always going to be where the heart of that fight is, and it's why Democrats are always competing to try to take Texas.”

It would be a mistake, says Reitz, if Texas falls into what he calls “red-state complacency” — a phenomenon where red states forget that we are currently in the throes of a “civilizational and frankly even a spiritual cold war for our state and for our nation.” These states mistakenly figure that “tinkering on the margins” will “preserve liberty, preserve justice, and advance law and order.”

But it’s not enough — not since Soros-funded district attorneys began “undermining law and order in Texas.” Texas counties, Reitz explains, “have massive amounts of autonomy and discretion,” meaning “ideological Democrats get governmental capture over their city and their county political apparatuses, and they just start advancing an aggressive left-wing agenda.”

“The Texas AG, though, as a statewide elected official representing the interests of the whole state and robed with immense constitutional powers, plays a critical part in suppressing the extent of the damage that these blue Soros-funded DAs do,” says Reitz, noting that this calculated suppression requires the AG “to get creative with the exercise of the weapons that are in statute.”

One creative legal strategy he plans to employ is called a "quo warranto memo" — a common-law mechanism allowing a state to challenge the authority of a public official or entity, such as a district attorney, if they are repeatedly and flagrantly violating the law.

“I want to seek affirmative measures for the state of Texas — state versus Soros-funded DA — because if that Soros-funded DA is making our streets unsafe, releasing criminals, making families paranoid ... and they are abusing their prosecutorial discretion to the extent that the cities are rotting, I want to be the kind of Texas AG that comes directly for you,” says Reitz. “You've got a state attorney general who is going to come and hold you accountable and ideally get you out of office.”

To hear more of Reitz’s plans to keep Texas tough, watch the episode above.

Want more from 'Blaze News | The Mandate'?

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.

DOJ attorney resigns — but vows to keep fighting in Texas in major announcement on Glenn Beck show



Aaron Reitz, the former assistant attorney general for the Department of Justice's Office of Legal Policy, made a major announcement during an interview on "The Glenn Beck Program" Thursday morning after declaring his immediate resignation from his DOJ position the day before.

He shared his resignation letters addressed to President Donald Trump and Attorney General Pam Bondi in a post on social media on Wednesday afternoon.

'Duty now calls me to continue that fight on a new front.'

"My fight for Law, Order, Justice, and the Constitution continues in Texas. Thank you, @POTUS and @AGPamBondi for your leadership and for the privilege of serving our great nation under you," he wrote.

In his resignation letters, Reitz hinted at waging a bold, new fight in Texas but stopped short of revealing the details of his next move.

Reitz told Trump that the assistant attorney general role was "one of the finest honors of my life."

RELATED: Pam Bondi opens federal investigation into EPIC Muslim community proposal in Texas, Cornyn says

Aaron Reitz. Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

"Under the leadership of Attorney General Bondi, I am proud to say we have made historic strides in that mission," he told the president.

"Duty now calls me to continue that fight on a new front," Reitz continued. "After much prayer and careful reflection, I have decided to resign from my position at the Justice Department, effective today, and to return home to Texas. In Texas, I will serve you, your Administration, and our America First movement in an even greater capacity."

RELATED: Texas drops hammer on alleged vote-harvesting judge, officials after multi-year election crime probe

Aaron Reitz. Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images

During a Thursday morning interview with Blaze Media co-founder Glenn Beck, Reitz revealed his next step, declaring his run for Texas attorney general.

"I'm proud to share this news with Texans on your show for the first time," Reitz told Beck. "With Attorney General [Ken] Paxton now throwing his hat in the ring for the United States Senate, it's giving Texans a once-in-a-decade opportunity to put what President Trump called a true MAGA attorney and a warrior for the Constitution to succeed Paxton and keep his foot on the gas, to press in hard, on all of the things that Texans really care about."

Reitz vowed to partner with President Donald Trump to "really hold the line" by investigating and litigating "blue state agitators," including George Soros-funded district attorneys, mayors, and nonprofits.

Before his position at the DOJ, Reitz was chief of staff to Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) and deputy attorney general for legal strategy to Texas AG Paxton.

While under Paxton, Reitz was described as Texas' "offensive coordinator," leading dozens of lawsuits against the Biden administration on matters concerning immigration, consumer protection, and election integrity.

— (@)

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

Texas And Trump Administration Team Up To End ‘Unconstitutional’ In-State Tuition For Illegals

U.S. District Judge Reed O’Connor agreed in his final judgment issued that carve-outs ‘are unconstitutional and invalid.’