Trump judge sides with North Dakota Catholics, blocks 'anti-religion' Biden regulations



A Trump judge sided Wednesday with Catholic organizations in North Dakota, shielding them from the enforcement of a Biden Equal Employment Opportunity Commission rule and guidance that required their complicity in employees' efforts to kill their unborn children as well as gender ideology.

The outcome was unsurprising given U.S. District Court Judge Daniel Traynor's suggestions in September when granting a preliminary injunction to the Bismarck Diocese and the Catholic Benefits Association that "this case is not hard" and that the Biden EEOC's rule served as a "reminder of the danger of government action that is clearly anti-religion."

Background

The Biden EEOC went out of its way to issue regulations and enforcement guidelines that ran roughshod over Christian employers' constitutional freedoms.

One rule in particular, the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act, proved especially troubling for the Bismarck Diocese and the CBA, the latter of which serves over 9,000 employers nationwide, as it would have both required them to provide paid leave and other accommodations to employees seeking abortion and restricted their ability to criticize employees' decision to kill their children.

The EEOC also issued enforcement guidance under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which the plaintiffs' original complaint noted would effectively require Catholic employers to "use false pronouns, to avoid speaking the truth regarding human sexuality around certain employees, and to permit opposite-sex employees to intrude into private spaces reserved to those of the other sex."

The Bismarck Diocese and the CBA sued the EEOC and former EEOC Chair Charlotte Burrows in July 2024, seeking an injunction against the rule and guidance.

'The goal may be to find new ways to infringe on religious believers' fundamental rights.'

The plaintiffs — well positioned at the outset legally to take on the Biden administration, as a federal court in Mississippi had already enjoined the EEOC rule at issue in another case — argued that the EEOC had run afoul of the Administrative Procedure Act and the Religious Freedom Restoration Act; violated their First Amendment freedoms of speech and association along with the Free Exercise Clause; and infringed upon church autonomy.

Judge Traynor evidently agreed.

Biden admin notches another loss

Traynor permanently blocked the EEOC this week from interpreting or enforcing the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act and implementing regulations against the Diocese of Bismarck and the Catholic Benefits Association "in a manner that would require them to accommodate abortion or infertility treatments that are contrary to the Catholic faith, speak in favor of the same or refrain from speaking the same."

The Trump judge also blocked the EEOC and its agents from interpreting or enforcing Title VII in a manner that would require the Bismarck Diocese, the CBA, and future Catholic members to speak favorably about abortion or sex changes, require them to remain silent about their opposition to either, or require them to indulge transvestites' desire to use the pronouns or private spaces belonging to the opposite sex.

Traynor previously acknowledged that the suit fell "into a long line of cases that should be unnecessary in a country that was built on the concept of freedom of religion."

"One would think after all this litigation, the government would respect the boundaries of religious freedom," wrote Traynor. "Instead, it seems the goal may be to find new ways to infringe on religious believers' fundamental rights to the exercise of their religions."

The judge, a member of the Federalist Society, suggested that the "repeated illegal and unconstitutional administrative actions against one of the founding principles of our country, the free exercise of religion," possibly signal that it is indeed now "a post-Christian age."

'The Court has upheld our religious freedom rights.'

Attorney Martin Nussbaum told the Associated Press that his clients are "very thankful to the federal judiciary for vindicating religious freedom rights" in this case.

"One of the things that we've seen is an emerging practice on behalf of some of the federal administrations — we also see this in certain states — a desire not only to mandate immoral benefits but to impose speech codes that would be contrary to Catholic values," said Nussbaum. "But the speech codes go beyond pronouns to even speaking about what Catholic teaching is, and we're just grateful to this court for protecting the freedom of speech of Catholic organizations as well."

Bishop David Kagan of the Bismarck Diocese stated, "The Court has upheld our religious freedom rights, and that is all we ever wanted."

A Better Balance, a liberal activist group that previously opposed President Donald Trump's Supreme Court nominees, condemned the ruling. Inimai Chettiar, the group's leftist president, suggested the case was "extremist" in nature and claimed the ruling was "part of a broad trend of attacks on women's rights and reproductive freedom."

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

Pro-gangster protesters crash Marjorie Taylor Greene rally. Two get the high-voltage treatment: 'There ya go.'



Several radicals descended Tuesday on a town hall hosted by Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) in Cobb County, Georgia. Some protesters fought with police while others repeatedly screamed out in support of Kilmar Abrego Garcia, the Salvadoran MS-13 member deported on March 15 by the Trump administration.

The disruption did not go in the protesters' favor.

The radicals — at least one of whom came from outside the district — not only failed to intimidate Greene, who laughed off their protest and underscored her support for the president, but were unceremoniously shown the way outside or, in some cases, to the ground by police officers who proved unwilling to tolerate leftist violence.

Footage shows one particularly unruly protester violently grab a police officer by the collar near a gaggle of journalists and cameramen. Additional cops can be seen rushing in to help march the protester toward the exit. A second camera captured footage of the same protester thrashing and lashing out at officers until one officer gives the order: "Put your hands behind your back."

An officer can be seen drawing his taser, then lighting up the protester.

'Blessed are the peacemakers.'

Greene, still at the podium, can be heard saying in response to the tasing, "There ya go!" as members of the audience cheered.

One of the protesters who decided to walk out without attacking police repeatedly screamed, "Free Kilmar!" in reference to Abrego Garcia, an illegal alien who was found by more than one immigration court to be a "danger to the community."

Another cried out, "Free Garcia."

Greene noted on X Wednesday morning, "For anyone questioning or criticizing the police at my townhall last night, the GREAT police officers conducted themselves in textbook fashion and protected every single person there by keeping the peace!"

"These protestors were deranged and aggressive and lost control of themselves the second the townhall started," continued Greene. "Police officers should make more money, have better pensions, and deserve everyone's gratitude and respect!!! Blessed are the peacemakers, because they will be called sons of God."

The Acworth Police Department indicated in a release that while preparing for the event, crime analysts discovered posts online indicating that radicals had something planned for the town hall at the Acworth Community Center.

"Sadly, as soon as the Congresswoman began her presentation, several members of the audience became disruptive and created an imminent public safety threat for all in attendance," stated the APD, which worked in conjunction with the Cobb County Police Department, the Cobb County Sheriff's Office, the Kennesaw Police Department, and the Georgia State Patrol. "Their intentions were clear, to place the members of our beloved police department in a no-win situation in front of numerous media outlets."

The APD indicated that six protesters were ultimately removed from the town hall without issue. Another three were arrested, two of whom were subdued with the aid of tasers.

'I'm not intimidated by the Democrats who tried to shut down my town hall tonight.'

Andrew Russell Nelms, 40, of Atlanta and Johnny Keith, 45, of Dallas were both charged with simple battery on a law enforcement officer and obstruction of a law enforcement officer. Kiyana Name Davis of Dallas was cited for vulgar language.

Police indicated that in the process of removing the radicals from the event, officers "were threatened, physically resisted, and harmed."

Greene stated, "I'm not intimidated by the Democrats who tried to shut down my town hall tonight. I refused to tolerate their selfish attempts to disrupt an event that was for all of my constituents, not just the ones who could make the most noise."

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

Trump admin freezes billions in funding to Harvard after woke school defies ultimatum over anti-Semitism, DEI



The Trump administration notified Harvard University President Alan Garber and Penny Pritzker, senior fellow of the Harvard Corporation, on Friday that their once-esteemed institution would need to undertake critical reforms in order to continue receiving billions of dollars in federal funds.

Rather than agree to the government's terms — requiring that the school take additional action to remedy its anti-Semitism problem and discriminatory practices and to take steps to prevent the admission of radical foreign students — the school responded by suggesting the necessary reforms were already underway and that the government's demands were unlawful.

"The university will not surrender its independence or relinquish its constitutional rights," legal counsel for the university said in a Monday letter, which was celebrated by former President Barack Obama and other leftists. "Harvard will not accept the government's terms as an agreement in principle."

The government's response to Harvard's defiance was immediate.

The Education Department's Joint Task Force to Combat Anti-Semitism announced a $2.2 billion freeze in multi-year grants and a $60 million freeze in multi-year contract value to Harvard University.

"Harvard's statement today reinforces the troubling entitlement mindset that is endemic in our nation's most prestigious universities and colleges — that federal investment does not come with the responsibility to uphold civil rights laws," the task force said in a statement.

'Harvard has in recent years failed to live up to both the intellectual and civil rights conditions that justify federal investment.'

"The disruption of learning that has plagued campuses in recent years is unacceptable," continued the task force. "The harassment of Jewish students is intolerable. It is time for elite universities to take the problem seriously and commit to meaningful change if they wish to continue receiving taxpayer support."

Harvard, which has an endowment of $53.2 billion, said in a statement obtained by CNN, "For the government to retreat from these partnerships now risks not only the health and well-being of millions of individuals, but also the economic security and vitality of our nation."

Contrary to the school's suggestion, it appears that Harvard — by refusing to entertain the government's request for policy changes — is the party retreating from a partnership wherein it was the primary beneficiary.

The government had asked for Harvard's cooperation in implementing these reforms:

  • foster "clear lines of authority and accountability," empower tenured professors who are devoted to the scholarly mission of the university, reduce the power held by students and untenured faculty, and reduce forms of governance bloat;
  • adopt merit-based hiring and admissions policies and cease all discriminatory admissions, hiring, promotion, and compensation practices;
  • "reform its recruitment, screening, and admissions of international students to prevent admitting students hostile to the American values and institutions inscribed in the U.S. Constitution and Declaration of Independence, including students supportive of terrorism or anti-Semitism";
  • commission an external party to audit the student body, faculty, staff, and leadership for viewpoint diversity;
  • reform programs with "egregious records of anti-Semitism or other bias";
  • eliminate DEI-based policies; and
  • clamp down on student disruptions and misconduct.

"[Federal investment] is not an entitlement. It depends on Harvard upholding federal civil rights laws, and it only makes sense if Harvard fosters the kind of environment that produces intellectual creativity and scholarly rigor, both of which are antithetical to ideological capture," the Trump administration said in its Friday letter. "Harvard has in recent years failed to live up to both the intellectual and civil rights conditions that justify federal investment."

While $2.2 billion in federal funds are now frozen, the university could stand to lose access to even more taxpayer money.

'It has reciprocal obligations that must be honored.'

The Harvard Gazette indicated that the Trump administration is reviewing $9 billion in research funding, which includes $256 million in research support for Harvard plus $8.7 billion in future commitments to the school and associated hospitals.

Garber, the Harvard president who took over after his predecessor, Claudine Gay, resigned in disgrace, suggested in a Monday letter to the school community that the ends desired by the government — namely the elimination of anti-Semitism and the maximization of viewpoint diversity — "will not be achieved by assertions of power, unmoored from the law, to control teaching and learning at Harvard and to dictate how we operate."

The Harvard Republican Club said in a statement, "It is not the constitutional right of any private university to receive federal funding in perpetuity. While some of the funding has been allocated to reasonable programs, Harvard has shown itself to be a partisan consumer of the American taxpayer dollar."

Jeremy Carl, senior fellow at the Claremont Institute, noted, "Harvard and other universities are violating civil rights law and defying the Supreme Court as well. The Trump administration is well within its rights to withhold funding."

"If Harvard would like more 'independence,' it is free to follow Hillsdale College and refuse to accept federal funds," wrote Christopher Rufo of the Manhattan Institute. "Until then, it has reciprocal obligations that must be honored."

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

Radical teen who lived with corpses of slain parents allegedly plotted to assassinate Trump, flee to Ukraine: FBI



Local authorities received a call on Feb. 28 requesting a welfare check on a family in Waukesha County, Wisconsin, after 17-year-old Nikita Casap failed to turn up to high school for two weeks. The Waukesha County Sheriff's Department soon made a grisly discovery: the bullet-riddled bodies of the teen's mother, Tatiana Casap, and stepfather, Donald Mayer, stuffed under blankets on the premises. Nikita Casap had apparently been living with their decomposing remains for weeks.

The Wisconsin teen went on the run in Mayer's car and was arrested on Feb. 28 in Kansas. He has since been charged with two counts of first-degree homicide, two counts of hiding a corpse, theft of property over $10,000, operating a motor vehicle without owner's consent, and two counts of identity theft for financial gain.

It turns out, however, that Nikita Casap's alleged murder of his mother and stepfather may have been only the first stage in a sequence of planned atrocities.

According to newly unsealed court documents obtained by WISN-TV, investigators are now pursuing numerous federal charges against Casap, including conspiracy, presidential assassination, and use of weapons of mass destruction.

The FBI characterized Casap in a federal affidavit as a nihilistic violent extremist intent on assassinating President Donald Trump, possibly with an explosive-laden drone, as a means to trigger an anti-Semitic revolution and ultimately an American societal collapse. Casap apparently had a mind to flee to Ukraine after executing his alleged plot.

'As to why, specifically Trump, I think it's obvious.'

The WCSO found images and communications on Casap's phone that "referenced a self-described manifesto regarding assassinating the president, making bombs, and terrorist attacks," said the affidavit.

The FBI apparently found textual conversations indicating Casap was supportive of the teachings of the Order of the Nine Angles, a satanic pedophile cult known for its anti-Semitism, its hatred for Christianity, its identitarianism, and its admiration for Adolf Hitler and other insidious historic figures. According to the BBC, O9A has roots going back to the 1960s and seeks the overthrow of the West's Judeo-Christian order.

In the manifesto, titled "Accelerate the Collapse," Casap allegedly discussed assassinating President Donald Trump in order to trigger a political revolution and America's collapse to "save the white race" from "Jewish controlled" politicians.

"As to why, specifically Trump, I think it's obvious," Casap allegedly wrote. "By getting rid of the president and perhaps the vice president, that is guaranteed to bring in some chaos. And not only that, but it will further bring into the public the idea that assassinations and accelerating the collapse are possible things to do."

"As a side note, the other attacks that may occur, I have no idea what they are/who they target," Casap allegedly continued. "I have no idea even if they are the same ideology as I. Point being, this manifesto is specifically for the attack that targets Trump."

This is hardly the first time President Donald Trump has been targeted for assassination.

Thomas Matthew Crooks' July 13 assassination attempt in Butler, Pennsylvania, left Trump bleeding, two individuals critically wounded, and heroic former firefighter Corey Comperatore dead in the stands.

Ryan Wesley Routh, a cheerleader for a Ukrainian brigade associated with neo-Nazis since its inception, allegedly attempted to assassinate the president at the Trump International Golf Club in West Palm Beach, Florida, on Sept. 15.

'How long will I need to hide before I will be moved to Ukraine?'

While the alleged manifesto made clear that Trump was the primary target, the author, who celebrated the work of neo-Nazi groups, also called for the murder of Jewish politicians and billionaires, stating, "HAIL HITLER HAIL THE WHITE RACE HAIL VICTORY."

FBI personnel found information on Casap's phone regarding how to weaponize a drone, how to extend its range by using repeater drones, and ways to drop an explosive, a Molotov cocktail, or poison, said the affidavit. Investigators alleged further that he paid for, at least in part, a drone and explosives to be used as a weapon of mass destruction to execute his plot.

The federal affidavit made clear that "other parties, with whom Casap was in contact, appear to have been aware of his plan and action and to have provided assistance to Casap in carrying them out."

Casap allegedly discussed the plot and his escape with an individual over Telegram who used Cyrillic script and had a Ukrainian telephone number.

"How long will I need to hide before I will be moved to Ukraine?" Casap allegedly wrote. "1-2 months?"

"So while in Ukraine, I'll be able to get a normal job and have a normal life? Even if when it's found out I did it?" he allegedly asked in the conversation. "Do the other 10 people also have similar beliefs to I? Or are they different?"

In a January conversation on Telegram where Casap allegedly discussed his manifesto, an unknown party indicated that "Russia will be blamed for it, this is the goal."

A classmate told the WSCO in a March 10 interview that Casap confided to him that he was speaking to a male contact in Russia via Telegram and was plotting to overthrow the American government, said the affidavit. According to the classmate, Casap also pre-emptively claimed responsibility for 10 consecutive attacks, which he indicated would make the news.

FBI personnel also apparently found messages about obtaining a different license plate and directions from a location in southeast Wyoming to Eureka, California.

As of Monday morning, Casap was still listed as an inmate at the Waukesha County Jail. He is scheduled to appear in court on May 7. The Washington Post indicated the U.S. attorney's office in the Eastern District of Wisconsin declined to comment on the case and that neither the White House nor Casap's lawyer responded to requests 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!

Blaze News investigates: ​Democrats attack parents and parental rights in Colorado



Democratic lawmakers in the Colorado Senate are poised to pass a controversial piece of legislation that would grossly undermine parental rights and compel speech.

House Bill 1312 would, specifically, classify "misgendering" and "deadnaming" as child abuse; define both perceived offenses as discriminatory acts under state law; force schools to honor students' "chosen names" for any reason; and prohibit educational institutions from enforcing sex-based dress codes.

Democrats in the state legislature not only invoked House Rule 16 to kill debate before passing HB 1312 in a party-line vote on April 6 but smeared parental rights organizations critical of the legislation as hate groups on par with the Ku Klux Klan, indicating they were undeserving of consultation by virtue of their opposition.

Leftist lawmakers' latest attack on parental rights in the Centennial State might have largely gone under the radar had they not also viciously attacked those parents who expressed concern. The rhetorical attack has, however, helped draw attention to the legislative attack.

Blaze News reached out to some of those parental groups that Democrats have smeared as hateful and apparently want to ignore as well as to other critics of the "unlawful" legislation.

It appears that what leftists regard as "hatred" is actually an admixture of Americans' fidelity to the U.S. Constitution and their concern over further encroachments on parental rights.

As for the legislation, critics made clear that it will be challenged in the courts if ratified — although Focus on the Family culture and policy analyst Jeff Johnson indicated there was hope yet as of Thursday that the bill could die before reaching Democratic Gov. Jared Polis' desk.

Hatred, redefined

When Republican state Rep. Jarvis Caldwell raised the matter last week of whether non-LGBT parent groups were consulted ahead of the bill's passage in the state House, Rep. Yara Zokaie stated, "A well-stakeholdered bill does not need to be discussed with hate groups," adding, "We don't ask someone passing civil rights legislation to go ask the KKK their opinion."

'Colorado parents should be concerned.'

State Rep. Javier Mabrey later noted, "There's no reason to go to the table with people who are echoing the hateful rhetoric going around about the trans community."

Caldwell told Blaze News in a statement that "equating caring and concerned parents to 'hate groups' and the KKK is typical Democrat propaganda."

"Colorado parents should be concerned," continued Caldwell. "It's not hateful to be outraged by their agenda. We have crossed the Rubicon for parental rights in this state."

Blaze News reached out to Zokaie and Mabrey as well to Colorado House Speaker Julie McCluskie (D), the office of Gov. Jared Polis (D), and the Colorado House Democratic Caucus about the Democratic smear of parents across the state. They did not respond by deadline.

The El Paso County chapter of Moms for Liberty is among the groups critical of the legislation that were not consulted and then smeared as hateful by the Democratic lawmakers.

Chapter chair Kristy Davis clarified to Blaze News that Moms for Liberty's opposition to HB 1312 isn't rooted in hatred but rather in the U.S. Constitution. After all, the Democratic bill "infringes on parental rights and compels speech."

"Our advocacy for parental rights is rooted in the U.S. Constitution and should never be labeled as 'hate,'" wrote Davis. "We strive to ensure that all parents' rights are protected, and we oppose HB25-1312, which seeks to use legislation to separate parents from their children."

"Sections 2 and 3 [of HB 1312] represent government overreach by mandating the judicial system to apply transgender ideology in custody cases, while Sections 4, 5, and 6 force policies that limit parental authority over their children's names and gender expression," wrote Davis. "This legislation appears to be anti-family, pushing an agenda that appeals to only a fraction of Colorado taxpayers. It is harmful to both parents and children, creating unnecessary stress, fear, and separation and negatively impacting their mental health."

Davis, who has faced apparent threats online in recent months, noted that "parents have every right to be concerned about policies that affect their children's well-being and their ability to make decisions for their families."

'We hate that children are getting sterilized and mutilated.'

Corey DeAngelis, senior fellow at the American Culture Project and executive director at the Educational Freedom Institute, told Blaze News that Zokaie "let the mask slip."

"She detests parents who disagree with her so much that she doubled down on comparing them to the KKK," said DeAngelis. "Colorado Democrats are control freaks trying to force their insane ideology onto the rest of society. Colorado Democrats want to punish parents who don't accept the delusions of a small child."

"They're stomping on the rights of parents and hoping no one notices," added DeAngelis.

Alvin Lui is the president of the parental rights advocacy group Courage Is a Habit — a group that has furnished some parents in the state and elsewhere with tools to tackle gender ideology and has, along with Moms for Liberty and Parents Defending Education, been designated an "extremist group" by the leftist Southern Poverty Law Center. Lui told Blaze News that his group has neutralized the "hate group" label in part by adopting it.

"I say, 'Absolutely we are a hate group. 100%. We hate what's happening to children. We hate the people that pass transgender trafficking bills, which is what this HB 1312 is, essentially. We hate that children are getting sterilized and mutilated before they can even get their driver's license,'" said Lui. "'We hate everything that you stand for. We want to run you out of schools. We want to run you out of any political office.'"

'Colorado Democrats just told Virginia's Terry McAuliffe "hold my beer."'

Regardless of what parent groups do with Democrats' "hate" label, its use in the first place is telling.

"What these assertions reveal is a troubling disconnect between some Democrats and the real, everyday concerns of parents," said Davis. "It feels as though they're dismissing the legitimate worries of moms and dads who simply want to have a say in their children's well-being. Parents are the ones who know their children best, and when they speak up, they should be heard — not labeled as radicals or adversaries."

Battle lost, war undecided

"Colorado Democrats just told Virginia's Terry McAuliffe 'hold my beer,'" DeAngelis told Blaze News. "Mr. McAuliffe, a Democrat, lost his race for governor after revealing he didn't want parents to have a say in their children's education."

McAuliffe was governor of Virginia from 2014 until 2018. He ran again for governor in 2021. Whereas his opponent, Gov. Glenn Youngkin (R), championed parental rights — particularly parents' prime authority over their children's education — the former Democratic governor signaled a desire for a difference balance of power.

During a gubernatorial debate in September 2021, McAuliffe stated, "I'm not going to let parents come into schools and actually take books out and make their own decision."

At the time, the battle over critical race theory and LGBT propaganda in the classroom was a hot-button issue for Virginia parents.

"I don't think parents should be telling schools what they should teach," added McAuliffe.

Youngkin handily beat the critic of parental authority and remains governor of the state.

With McAuliffe's defeat in mind, DeAngelis told Blaze News, "Colorado Republicans should follow Glenn Youngkin's playbook and capitalize on this issue. They need to fight back to rescue parents from socialist takeover."

Numerous Republican lawmakers in the state Senate — where they are outnumbered 23-12 — have indicated they will oppose the legislation, which as of April 9 had not been assigned to a committee.

In a statement shared with Blaze News, Colorado Senate Minority Leader Paul Lundeen (R) noted that "HB25-1312 undermines one of the most sacred and time-honored principles of our society: the right of parents to raise their children in accordance with their values, beliefs, and faith."

"When government policies attempt to substitute the judgment of bureaucrats for that of parents, we risk eroding a foundational pillar of liberty and personal responsibility," added Lundeen.

'Colorado used to be very red.'

Lundeen insinuated that the legislation would not only undermine the "sacred right of parents to direct the upbringing of their children without unjust interference," but "pave the way for future intrusions into how families educate, discipline, or spiritually guide their children."

Lundeen vowed to "stand firmly" against the bill and comparable legislation.

While Republicans could, as DeAngelis suggested, capitalize on this issue, it will take time to gain ground in the state legislature.

Both Brittany Vessely, executive director of the Colorado Catholic Conference, and Jeff Johnson of Focus on the Family separately told Blaze News that Colorado's political capture by leftists was decades in the making, orchestrated in part by a cabal of billionaires who poured billions of dollars into the state to strategically flip local districts.

"Colorado used to be very red," Vessely told Blaze News. "It was more of a libertarian state — very rancher-dominated."

"But [entrepreneur] Tim Gill, Jared Polis, and a couple others poured money into the state and flipped these districts," said Johnson. "Once Democrats had control, they passed legislation that appealed to the left, to radicals."

The legalization of marijuana, the promise of other forms of social deregulation, and the state's general leftward shift apparently drew multitudes of radicals to the state, especially from California.

"So there's just been, in the last 10 years specifically, a huge move from Colorado being very red to purple for a while to now being dominated with majorities of progressive Democrats in both chambers and an LGBTQ progressive governor and very progressive courts," said Vessely. "So we have a trifecta in Colorado in the legislation where parental rights are being completely violated."

'HB 1312 is going to end up in litigation.'

The disconnect between leftist lawmakers and traditional Coloradans has been enough to drive majorities in numerous counties to vote either to break away and form their own state, "North Colorado," or to become part of Wyoming.

For the time being, they are stuck with lawmakers who are keen to undermine parental rights; to force them to fund abortion; to bar health benefit insurance plans from denying or limiting coverage for sex-change mutilations; and to keep up the lies about transvestites' sexes even after death.

From Polis' desk to the courts

Opponents of HB 1312 do not presently have sufficient time to change the state of play politically; hence the ongoing discussions of legal action.

Colorado state Rep. Brandi Bradley (R), for instance, vowed to sue and "keep suing" if the bill succeeds, stating, "I've birthed five children" and "will protect them to the Nth degree."

Brittany Vessely told Blaze News that "HB 1312 is going to end up in litigation because it directly impedes upon the religious freedom of conscience and expression for all Coloradans across the state but especially for the faith-based community."

Vessely explained that the public accommodation section of HB 1312 requiring compliance with gender ideology-based speech codes refers to the Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act — the law at issue in the case 303 Creative LLC v. Elenis decided by the Supreme Court in 2023 — which was amended in 2021 to add the terms "gender expression" and "gender identity" to statutes prohibiting discrimination against members of a protected class.

While there is a religious exemption in the state anti-discrimination law, Vessely indicated it really protects only places like parishes and church halls — not diocesan offices, not Catholic schools, hospitals, homeless shelters, or cemeteries.

"These are areas where a lot of our Catholic ministries are going to be directly impacted by the effects of this bill," said Vessely, adding that Christian publications could similarly be impacted.

Jeff Johnson suggested to Blaze News that HB 1312 is clearly unconstitutional and fit for a challenge, adding that he has never seen a piece of legislation "try to do so many things at once."

"So you have the attack on parents' rights, which is unconstitutional," said Johnson. "The Supreme Court has said over and over again that parents have the right to raise their children — they're the ones in charge of their nurture and care and education — and this bill basically usurps that and says, 'No, it's abusive if a parent doesn't go along with the child's sexual identity confusion.'"

Johnson noted that while the bill presently targets court decisions in custody cases, once so-called "deadnaming and misgendering" have been "defined as abusive in this realm, it would be pretty easy for regulations to follow along saying, 'Hey, if you're not affirming your child's sexual identity confusion, that's abusive in any case. And [Child Protective Services] could step in and start taking children away."

In addition to standing on shaky ground because of the abuse classification, Johnson said that HB 1312 is vulnerable to legal challenges both because it tells the court to ignore other states' court mandates regarding parenting and because "it also coerces speech, requiring schools and businesses and employees to agree to the idea that a man can become a woman or a woman can become a man, and it forces people to use a person's 'chosen name' and pronouns rather than going by the biological sex."

'They're waking up to the agenda, and they're saying, "No."'

Courage Is a Habit's Lui suggested that besides legal challenges, Coloradans also have the choice of civil disobedience.

"They can arrest one or two people" for reality-affirming language, said Lui. "They're not going to arrest 1,000 people. They're not going to arrest 5,000 people for calling a man a man."

"It's not an easy answer once you get to this point," continued the parental rights advocate. "Once you make fear a habit, they keep pushing you until they've got you over a barrel. And that's why we always remind people: You got to make courage a habit."

Vesseley noted that while the pro-life cause is presently facing neglect, especially at the federal level, there is a "tremendous amount of momentum right now for the parents in those organizations that are fighting back against the LGBTQ narrative that's happening, especially in schools. We're seeing that across the nation."

Johnson suggested that Democrats have unwittingly awoken the sleeping giant by "trying to get every area of society in Colorado to comply with this agenda."

"I don't know if the pushback is from [the transgender agenda] or if it's the parental rights issue, but I think people are starting to wake up and say, 'A man can't become a woman, a boy can't become a girl, and vice versa.' They're waking up to the agenda, and they're saying, 'No, this is harmful to children and adults, and you can't force me to go along with this,'" said Johnson.

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

'Gender identity crap': Colorado Dems kill debate on bill threatening custody of reality-affirming parents



Democrats in the Colorado legislature invoked House Rule 16 on Sunday to avoid debate ahead of a vote on a controversial new bill that would effectively classify "misgendering" and "deadnaming" as child abuse. The bill is now headed to the Democrat-controlled Senate, where it is likely to pass.

Republican state Rep. Jarvis Caldwell, among those "robbed" of the opportunity to speak on behalf of their constituents with regard to House Bill 1312, noted in a video shared to X, "I believe they did this to silence us because they know how much negative attention this has been getting nationwide."

'If your child is confused about their gender identity, and you don't affirm that confusion, that delusion, then you are guilty.'

When Caldwell raised the matter of whether non-LGBT parent groups were consulted during a committee meeting last week, Democratic state Rep. Yara Zokaie said, "A well-stakeholdered bill does not need to be discussed with hate groups," reported Fox News Digital.

"We don't ask someone passing civil rights legislation to go ask the KKK their opinion," the radical added, securing applause from her fellow travelers.

"House Bill 1312 says that if your child is confused about their gender identity, and you don't affirm that confusion, that delusion, then you are guilty of child abuse and you can lose custody of your children," said Caldwell.

Blaze News previously reported that the Democratic legislation would classify "deadnaming or misgendering" as a form of "coercive control" that courts must consider when making child custody decisions.

"Misgendering" means using an individual's reality-based pronouns — "he" and "him" in reference to a boy, "she" and "her" in reference to a girl. "Deadnaming" is the practice of calling transvestites by their original names — for example, Brian for Colorado state Rep. Brianna Titone or Tim for U.S. Rep. Sarah McBride (D-Del.).

'Help good candidates unseat these radical people.'

Under the legislation that passed the Colorado House Sunday in a party-line vote, "deadnaming and misgendering" would be both defined as discriminatory acts in the "Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act" and prohibited in most private businesses. Under the bill, local schools would not only be required to honor students' "chosen names" for any reason but would also be prohibited from enforcing sex-based dress codes.

"I wanted to say it is not me, it is not my constituents, it is not the people from my side of the aisle who are pushing this gender identity crap on the kids of Colorado. They are," continued Caldwell. "What they want to do with this bill is say that if they confuse your children and you don't affirm that confusion, they will take your child from you."

Caldwell implored his fellow Coloradans to reach out to their state senators as well as to their radical governor, Jared Polis, to let their opposition to the legislation be known. He noted elsewhere that to prevent the furtherance of this sort of cultural imperialism and erosion of parental rights, it will be essential to "help good candidates unseat these radical people."

'A cure for "deadnaming" isn't an emergency justifying late-bill status.'

The editorial board of the Denver Gazette blasted the Democratic bill on Sunday, stating, "This late-night concoction turns hyper-sensitivity into a crime and meddles in matters best left to common courtesy, families, and local school boards."

"Colorado lawmakers and courts have better things to do than police pronouns and dress codes. Our state's cratored [sic] roads need their attention," continued the board. "Our soaring crime and housing shortage cry for solutions. A cure for 'deadnaming' isn't an emergency justifying late-bill status."

In addition to indicating that the Democratic legislation would likely force its transvestite dress code mandate on religious elementary schools, the editorial board noted that the bill's "26 pages of jargon don't distinguish intent. Anyone making an accidental slip would break the law."

"This isn't about safety or civil rights," continued the board. "This is the far-left majority — much of it handpicked and appointed by Colorado's Democratic machine — dictating how people talk and bring up children."

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

Exclusive video: Leftists swarm ICE headquarters whining about deportation of pro-Hamas radicals



A motley crew of leftists descended on the nation's capital on Saturday. Blaze Media national correspondent Julio Rosas was on the scene, capturing some of the less inhibited among the activists resort to their apparent default: dehumanizing rhetoric.

As part of a nationwide "Hands Off!" protest, some radicals ambled to the National Mall to express their displeasure with President Donald Trump and his popular agenda.

While uniformly anti-Trump, there was a variety of grievances expressed by the cacophonic mob even though the organizers made clear that they had three reasons for mobilization. The reasons were: to stop Trump and Elon Musk's imagined "illegal power grab"; to condemn the administration and congressional Republicans for supposedly "gutting services, raising prices, and racing towards slashing Medicaid, Social Security, and more"; and to clutch pearls about the administration's supposed pursuit of "destruction for the benefit of their billionaire allies."

Of course, numerous protesters veered off message, dusted off the slogans of yesteryear, and championed the causes of Black Lives Matter, gender ideology, and an unaccountable federal bureaucracy.

Other radicals farther afield donned keffiyehs and swarmed the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement in Potomac Center Plaza as part of the separate "April 5 March on Washington."

Those in this second camp, which Rosas tracked over the course of the day, protested the Trump administration's foreign policy as well as its enforcement of federal immigration law; demonized ICE agents; condemned the deportation of pro-Hamas radicals, including Turkish national Rumeysa Ozturk; criticized Israel; and reaffirmed their "commitment to the liberation of Palestine."

The groups that ultimately swarmed the ICE headquarters included the Palestinian Feminist Collective, the climate alarmist group Planet Over Profit, and the local chapters of the George Soros-funded Students for Justice in Palestine — a group endorsed last year by the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, a Gaza-based terrorist group that combines Marxist-Leninist ideology with Arab nationalism.

Outside the ICE offices, protesters demanded the release of Mahmoud Khalil and other pro-Hamas international students facing deportation.

Khalil, a Syrian-born activist leader who previously attended Columbia University, allegedly hid his former employment with a Hamas-tied UN agency when filing his green card application.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio said in reference to Khalil's arrest last month, "We will be revoking the visas and/or green cards of Hamas supporters in America so they can be deported."

— (@)

Activists also called for a moratorium on ICE removal operations.

Prior to raging impotently outside the ICE offices, various activists made speeches.

'There is only one solution: antifada, revolution.'

Linda Sarsour — the Palestinian-American activist whose radicalism proved too much even for the Biden administration which disavowed her — told the mob standing near an "abolish Israel" sign that "we are all adversaries to U.S. foreign policy" and that the radical mob was "the moral consistency of America."

One speaker honored Palestinian "martyrs" killed during the Hamas-Israeli war without distinguishing between civilians and terrorists.

Another tethered Palestinian activism to the broader socialist cause, indicating that capitalism is at fault.

Muna Qadan of the Palestinian Feminist Collective threatened a "new world order" and the "vengeance of the oppressed" and stated that "there is only one solution: antifada, revolution."

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

Klaus Schwab stepping down as World Economic Forum chair after investigation, collapse of globalist dream



Klaus Schwab's days as chairman are numbered at the World Economic Forum, the technocratic globalist organization he founded in 1971 that hosts an annual conference of supposed elites in Davos, Switzerland.

Schwab told the WEF's board of trustees and staff in a letter on Tuesday seen by the Financial Times that he was beginning a year-long process of stepping down, having already stepped down as the organization's executive chairman last May.

The shake-up in Davos comes between the American-led unrealization of Schwab's proposed "great reset" of capitalism and in the wake of a probe into allegations of discrimination at the WEF.

Toxic workplace

Days after his previous title-drop, the Wall Street Journal published a damning report claiming — on the basis of internal complaints, email exchanges, and interviews with current and past WEF employees — that "under Schwab's decades-long oversight, the forum has allowed to fester an atmosphere hostile to women and black people in its own workplace."

The report noted that at least six female employees were allegedly "pushed out or otherwise saw their careers suffer" when pregnant or coming back from maternity leave. Other women claimed that senior managers had sexually harassed them.

'That was the most disappointing thing.'

"It was distressing to witness colleagues visibly withdraw from themselves with the onslaught of harassment at the hands of high-level staff, going from social and cheerful to self-isolating, avoiding eye contact, sharing nightmares for years after," said Farid Ben Amor, a former media executive who worked at the WEF before resigning in 2019.

Former staffers who worked closely with Schwab told the Journal that the problems went all the way to the top, alleging that the founder "made suggestive comments to them that made them uncomfortable."

The Journal also indicated that black employees complained about managers using racial slurs as well as about allegedly being passed over for promotions. When one employee filed a lawsuit in New York last year claiming the WEF was "hostile to women and black employees," the WEF settled the lawsuit on undisclosed terms.

Cheryl Martin, head of the Center for Global Industries at the WEF, said, "That was the most disappointing thing, to see the distance between what the Forum aspires to and what happens behind the scenes."

The WEF, which routinely lectures the world about racism, the supposed "gender gap," sexism, climate change, and other perceived moral failings, characterized the Journal's report as "inaccurate," stating, "We are an organization that upholds the highest standards of governance, while working to address the most pressing challenges of our time with our high-performance teams, our diverse and global outlook, and an environment that values innovation, inclusion, and well-being."

Tom Clare, legal counsel for the WEF, suggested that the report painting the WEF as a degenerate organization led by hypocrites was both defamatory and illustrative of the Journal's "steady decline."

Toothless investigation

In the wake of the Journal's indications that those keen to control the world were unable to control themselves, the WEF had the law firm Covington and Burling — whose members recently had their security clearances suspended by President Donald Trump — investigate the claims of workplace discrimination and harassment, reported the Financial Times.

The American firm, which conducted its review in conjunction with the Swiss firm Homburger, indicated in a summary of its assessment that it "did not find the forum had committed any legal violations" and "did not substantiate" the misconduct allegations against Schwab.

'Now after the turmoil of the last months, is to recover our sense of mission.'

While the external investigators were unable or unwilling to find proof of guilt, Børge Brende, president and CEO of the WEF, indicated that there was nevertheless an internal desire to make some minor changes.

Brende reportedly noted in an email that the board committee overseeing the law firms' investigation identified "leadership and management issues ... that do not meet our established standards." In addition to affirming the organization's alleged "commitment to a workplace where all employees feel valued and respected," the leadership promised additional training for managers.

Great reset

Schwab is apparently convinced that the WEF has yet to recover its "sense of mission," saying as much in his April 1 letter to trustee board members, including Salesforce CEO Marc Benioff, BlackRock CEO Larry Fink, International Monetary Fund managing director Kristalina Georgieva, failed U.S. presidential candidate Al Gore, and Tharman Shanmugaratnam, president of Singapore.

"I am deeply convinced that in today's special context the forum is more important and relevant than ever before," wrote Schwab. "It is also financially very well equipped thanks to successful financial management since its beginning. What is essential now after the turmoil of the last months, is to recover our sense of mission."

The WEF told the Financial Times that Schwab's departure should be completed by January 2027.

Schwab reportedly suggested it was personally significant that he made his announcement on April 1, as it marked the 55th anniversary of the day he began working on the concept of a "global village" — a term coined several years earlier by Canadian intellectual Marshall McLuhan.

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

Oversight Project exposes Democrat-aligned NGO's 'conspiracy' to undermine immigration enforcement



Undercover footage obtained by Anthony Rubin's watchdog outfit, Muckraker, and published by the Oversight Project shows the Chinese-American Planning Council, a taxpayer-funded group based in New York City, provide training on how to prevent U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials from enforcing federal law and removing illegal aliens from the homeland.

Mike Howell, president of the Oversight Project — now a 501(c)(4) organization independent of the Heritage Foundation — told Blaze News, "This type of conduct supported by taxpayers and far left politicians transcends just policy disagreements. This is a conspiracy of individuals and organizations to thwart law enforcement."

Howell indicated that the Oversight Project has referred this matter to the Trump administration as well as to Mayor Eric Adams (D).

"We will find out if Mayor Adams is serious about being tough on illegal immigration or just talks a big game for politics," said Howell.

The leftist group

The stated purpose of the CPC, supposedly "the nation's largest Asian American social service organization," is to address "the evolving needs of Chinese American, immigrant, and low-income communities and promot[e] an inclusive environment where everyone can thrive."

The organization has enjoyed the support of various Democratic lawmakers from New York, including U.S. Sens. Chuck Schumer and Kirsten Gillibrand, Reps. Dan Goldman, Grace Meng, Jerry Nadler, and Nydia Velazquez, and New York Gov. Kathy Hochul.

According to its latest financial statement, it received over $46.8 million in government grants and contracts between July 2023 and June 2024.

'We have a few ways that you can get ready.'

The leftist organization has made no secret of its opposition to the proper enforcement of American immigration laws.

The group has, for instance, condemned government policies that "target communities through raids, arrests, and separations," as well as American policies that "passively but intentionally erode existing pathways to immigration and naturalization."

In addition to providing illegal aliens with advanced warnings of ICE raids, the group has held multiple "Know Your Rights" seminars "explaining how New Yorkers can protect themselves and their communities from the overreach of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement."

The CPC scrubbed its page of evidence of a March 13 "Know Your Rights" webinar but not before Blaze News was able to capture a screenshot, below.

Rubin indicated that Rep. Goldman, who apparently requested $1 million federal taxpayer dollars for the CPC, was featured on promotional material for one of these anti-ICE events.

The footage

In the footage published by the Oversight Project, Carlyn Cowen, the chief policy and public affairs officer of the CPC, provided would-be subversives with an example of an ICE-evasion tactic used in a restaurant where she works weekends.

"What we train everybody to do is if we see ICE come to the door, we actually enter a button in our [point-of-sale] system that says 'la migra' and you click it, and then it prints a ticket to everywhere else in the restaurant so that everybody knows, right?" said Cowen. "So different kinds of protocols based on the type of organization or space."

"No matter what kind of organization or business that you're in, we have a few ways that you can get ready," said Cowen. "Number one is hardening your physical space."

'Such gross misuse of taxpayer funds by partisan activist organizations must be swiftly addressed.'

"Number two is doing a data audit and updating your data protection polices," continued the radical. "Number three, identifying a list of individuals that are authorized to respond if ICE comes to the door and then having a clear protocol. And then number four, training everybody who's going to be involved in the proper procedure and making sure they feel ready and confident to respond."

In another clip taken at the same ICE evasion seminar, a leftist social worker named Janice Northia played footage of Trump's border czar, Tom Homan, discussing the efforts by NGOs to help illegal aliens avoid deportation.

"[Homan] is very upset that the community is getting to know their rights," said Northia. "So when we see that's the message that they're giving us, it's showing, right, what it's — the fact that we're being informed is making it difficult for them to do their job."

Northia subsequently ran the audience through ways to identify and avoid ICE agents.

Blaze News reached out to the CPC for comment but did not receive a response by deadline.

— (@)

"Where are the Chinese-Americans and the Planning in this Council?" Howell quipped on X.

The Oversight Project president told Blaze News, "Opposing basic immigration enforcement policy is one thing, actually being aware of and supporting efforts taken to impede it is a whole different ballgame and one that can get into criminal territory fast."

"Why are our taxpayer dollars going to radical political organizations, which actively seek to undermine the rule of law in our country?" said Anthony Rubin of Muckraker. "Organizations such as the CPC should have no place receiving taxpayer dollars while they engage in anti-law, pro-illegal immigration activism. Such gross misuse of taxpayer funds by partisan activist organizations must be swiftly addressed."

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

It’s not a ‘power-grab’ — it’s a rescue mission for higher ed



Last week, Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced that the State Department had revoked more than 300 student visas. The move allows the Trump administration to deport noncitizens who participated in pro-Palestinian protests at universities across the country.

Rubio defended the decision when asked about concerns over free speech — specifically, whether protesting or writing about foreign policy issues could justify a visa revocation.

No serious nation should defend the rights of foreign nationals actively working to harm it under the banner of ‘free speech.’

“If you are in this country on a student visa and are a participant in those movements, we have a right to deny your visa,” he said. “We are not going to be importing activists into the United States. They’re here to study. They’re here to go to class. They’re not here to lead activist movements that are disruptive and undermine our universities. I think it’s lunacy to continue to allow that.”

Rubio is right.

Whether someone supports Israel, supports the Palestinian cause, or criticizes both, that debate is beside the point.

No one has a right to a U.S. visa — student or otherwise. If a visa-holder engages in speech or activism that violates the terms of the visa — such as promoting violence, disrupting public order, or engaging in unauthorized political activity — the government has the authority to revoke the visa and deport the individual.

A free people's suicide

The Trump administration has made this position clear, particularly in cases involving pro-Palestinian protesters who have expressed support for Hamas, which the United States designates as a foreign terrorist organization.

But the issue of foreign student activism extends beyond the Israel-Hamas conflict.

An analysis by the Capital Research Center found that many “pro-Palestinian” groups share ties with broader movements that oppose the United States and the West in general. These groups frequently advocate violence to achieve their goals, including the destruction of the U.S., which they label an imperialist “settler-colonial” state.

Revoking the visas of foreign students who disrupt public order or seek to undermine American society is both legal and necessary. But the issue goes beyond campus protests. With hundreds of thousands of student visa-holders from adversarial nations like China, the threat is not just ideological — it’s also a national security concern.

No serious nation should defend the rights of foreign nationals actively working to harm it under the banner of “free speech.”

The Constitution does not guarantee the right to a U.S. education. Attending an American university is a privilege, not a right.

Ideological takeover

Understanding the difference between rights and privileges is essential — especially considering the influence universities have on shaping American political discourse. While student visas are intended for academic study, today’s universities increasingly promote ideological activism over traditional education. And that shift is happening at the same time as the number of international students in the U.S. has grown to over 1 million annually.

At Columbia University, more than 55% of students are foreign nationals — an 18% increase between 2017 and 2022. NYU’s student body is 42% international, up 24% over the same period. This trend is just as pronounced at the graduate level. In 2023, international students made up 42% of Princeton University’s graduate program.

As foreign student enrollment rises alongside campus political activism, the Trump administration has the authority and obligation to respond decisively to the growing influence of ideological movements within universities.

In a series of aggressive actions, the administration has withheld hundreds of millions in federal funding from institutions like Columbia University for what it calls “inaction in the face of persistent harassment of Jewish students.” It has also launched investigations into other universities over allegations of race-based segregation and transgender athletic policies. Through executive order, the administration has taken steps to dismantle the U.S. Department of Education — a long-standing goal for many conservatives since the department’s establishment in 1979.

Whose ‘political will’?

Unsurprisingly, the left has responded with swift opposition, deploying both legal challenges and familiar media outrage.

Several academic groups have filed lawsuits against the Trump administration to stop the deportation of foreign students. Teachers’ unions have sued to block the administration’s move to revoke federal funding from Columbia University, while others have challenged its attempt to shutter the Education Department.

Mainstream media outlets have framed these actions as an “authoritarian power-grab,” accusing the administration of trying to “impose its political will on American universities, which foster curiosity and independent thought.”

Some critics have gone even further, likening Trump’s efforts to confront anti-American activism on college campuses to the Nazi-era program of Gleichschaltung — a system of totalitarian “social control.”

While American universities may be called many things, bastions of “independent thought” are not among them. Claims that Trump is seeking total “social control” are difficult to take seriously, given how heavily university faculty skew left.

A 2023 Harvard Crimson survey found that just 0.4% of Harvard faculty identified as “very conservative,” while 31.8% described themselves as “very liberal.” A broader study of 51 leading liberal arts colleges revealed a 10.4-1 ratio of Democrat to Republican faculty, underscoring a deep ideological imbalance.

This dominance of progressive ideology on campus doesn’t stay confined to the classroom. It flows into national politics, funding Democratic candidates and fueling an activist pipeline that often promotes anti-American narratives.

According to OpenSecrets, Democrats have received more than 70% of all political donations from the education sector in every election cycle since 2002. In 2018, donors from the education industry gave over $64.5 million to Democrats and just $7.8 million to Republicans.

Teachers' unions show an even sharper tilt. In the 2024 cycle, the National Education Association contributed 98.48% of its donations to Democrats and only 0.79% to Republicans. Employees of the U.S. Department of Education gave zero dollars to Republican candidates.

Rooting out radicals

Given the dominance of left-wing ideology on college campuses and the steady stream of campaign donations from the education sector to Democratic politicians, it’s no surprise that Democrats are fiercely defending what functionally operate as their institutions. Trump’s actions threaten not just campus activism but a political pipeline that helps sustain the left’s long-term dominance.

Far from representing an “authoritarian power-grab,” the Trump administration’s efforts mark one of the first serious attempts by the political right to challenge a system that has traded education for progressive indoctrination.

If the country hopes to reclaim its universities — a goal critical to the republic's long-term health — rooting out radical activism and defunding ideological strongholds must continue and accelerate. Republicans cannot afford to hand over the nation’s future to those who openly disdain it.