Stephen A. Smith criticizes open borders, tells CBS he's still open to presidential run: 'I'm not ruling it out'

Sports broadcaster Stephen A. Smith says he is a fiscal conservative but a social liberal.

For those reasons, the ESPN personality says he is not completely opposed to running for office, but it would be as a Democrat.

'I couldn't see myself running as a member of the GOP.'

The 58-year-old critiqued policy from both of the last two administrations during an interview with "CBS Sunday Morning" and host Robert Costa, remarking that he has "no desire to be a politician."

"Zero. I have no desire to run for office," he told Costa. But when asked if he would "run for president," Smith revealed that the door is still open.

"I'm not ruling it out because I'd love to be on the debate stages against some of these individuals that think they're better suited to run the country, because I think that the American people deserve to listen to and hear from somebody who genuinely cares about making life better for them instead of yourself."

When asked which party's banner he would fly, Smith said he would run as a Democrat chiefly because of the fact that he is more left on social issues.

"I couldn't see myself running as a member of the GOP. I'm a fiscal conservative. I can't stand high taxes, but I'm a social liberal in the same breath because I believe in living and let live. I pay attention to the desolate and the disenfranchised. Yes, I like strong borders. That's absolutely true. We never needed open borders, but we don't need it to be completely closed either. We're a gorgeous mosaic."

The sports analyst criticized both President Biden's and President Trump's policies during an extended version of the interview, calling out Biden's open-border policies.

"The borders needed to be closed. [Trump] was right to do that, but only because Biden opened them," he explained.

Smith's criticisms of Trump mainly focused on deportations by Immigration and Customs Enforcement, which he described as "grabbing people up [and] snatching people off the streets."

Stephen A. Smith is moving closer to a 2028 campaign... spending a few days with him in recent months reminded me of spending a few days with Trump back in 2013-2014. Many laughed at the prospect of a bid. But in an age of celebrity and social media... https://t.co/VrTmJUWtsB
— Robert Costa (@costareports) February 13, 2026

Smith took issue with the targets of the agency and claimed the Trump administration had previously characterized enforcement as "going after the criminals," only to then enforce immigration laws against "anybody who crossed the border illegally."

The interview touched on a lot of different topics, including racism. At one point during the interview, Costa noted that Smith's broadcasting style had garnered him the nickname "Screaming A. Smith." The analyst quickly retorted.

"White men are all over the place screaming all the time. They don't call them screaming whatever," Smith declared. "Matter of fact, they call them passionate, and they never associate the word 'anger.' But somehow they do that with me despite this fact that I smile a lot. A lot of reasons to be happy."

On the subject of race, Smith later noted that he does not believe racism is "as prevalent as some on the left would like us to believe."

Smith said he does believe that the vast majority of Americans judge each other on the content of their individual character rather than skin color.

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

WATCH: Shoddy AI-Generated Campaign Ad Raises Questions About Jasmine Crockett's Competence

Jasmine Crockett is barely trying to win the Democratic primary for U.S. Senate in the state of Texas. No one knows who is managing her campaign. Crockett's opponent, James Talarico—a baby-faced Bible expert who said "God is non-binary"—has spent almost 20 times more on ads. Some of her ads appear to have been created with the help of AI. The most notable thing Crockett has done so far is insinuate that Talarico is racist by amplifying accusations from a TikTok user. Nevertheless, she's probably going to win.

The post WATCH: Shoddy AI-Generated Campaign Ad Raises Questions About Jasmine Crockett's Competence appeared first on .

‘They aren’t trying to hide their racist agendas anymore’: Texas lawmakers show 'true colors'

Democrats are no longer even pretending they’re not pushing an inflammatory, racially charged agenda — and BlazeTV host Sara Gonzales is grateful that they’re being honest, calling it “beautiful.”

“The beautiful part of it is that they aren’t trying to hide their racist agendas anymore. They’re just saying everything out in the open. They’ve just been emboldened to just be blatantly, publicly racist. And then that’s where you know their true colors,” Gonzales says.

“I always tell people the day the Latino, African-American, Asian, and other communities realize that they share the same oppressor is the day we start winning because we are the majority in this country now. We have the ability to take over this country,” state Rep. Gene Wu (D-Texas) said in an interview on “Define America” with Jose Antonio Vargas.

“Oh, OK, that sounds, like, a little insurrection-y,” Gonzales comments.

“He’s calling on all of the minorities, all of the non-whites to take over the country. By what means, Gene?”

And Attorney General Ken Paxton is on the same page as Gonzales.

“Gene Wu is a radical racist who hates millions of Texans just because they’re white. This is who the modern Democrat party is,” Paxton wrote in a response to Wu’s comments on X.

But Wu isn’t the only one who has made inflammatory comments recently.

“There are those that have their own motivations for critiquing,” Rep. Jasmine Crockett (D-Texas) said in an interview on VOX’s “Today, Explained.”

The interviewer then pressed Crockett, asking, “Is it just racism and sexism?”

“I think there’s a lot of things. I think it depends on who it’s coming from, but I’ve been a black woman my whole life. So this idea that I’m going to go and be like, ‘Oh, well, they’re being racist and misogynistic towards me,’” Crockett said.

“Like, you think I didn’t know I was a black woman when I woke up and decided that I was going to run for the United States Senate. You think I didn’t factor in and make sure that we had enough room to account for that?” she asked.

“I’m going to be honest ... I am a little bit black-pilled. I feel like every clip that I’ve played this show just makes me dumber somehow. It’s difficult to follow the logic there,” Gonzales comments.

“White people in this country are tired of hearing that they’re racist because they have brains,” she adds.

Want more from Sara Gonzales?

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

You need photo ID for ALL THESE THINGS — but Chuck Schumer says voter ID is racist

In a recent poll from Pew Research Center, a whopping 71% of Democrats said they favored requiring photo ID to vote — a shocking departure from what Democrats like Chuck Schumer appear to believe.

“We’ve got to get this done and we’ve got to get it done very quickly. The SAVE Act is an abomination. It’s Jim Crow 2.0 across the country. We are going to do everything we can to stop it,” Schumer told reporters.

“How is it Jim Crow to ask for ID, a picture ID? That’s what the SAVE Act is. That you’d be required to have picture ID to go in and vote or to register to vote and then to vote. OK, that is not unreasonable,” Blaze Media co-founder Glenn Beck explains.

“You need a photo ID to get a driver’s license to drive a car, or to renew your driver’s license, or replace your lost license, get a learner’s permit. You need a photo ID to rent a car, to pick up a rental car, even if you prepaid it, to buy car insurance, to file auto insurance claims, to register your vehicle, transfer your vehicle's title,” he continues.

But that’s not all, as Glenn also points out that you need a photo ID to get a parking permit, use car sharing apps, buy an airline ticket in person, to board a commercial flight, and enter the TSA pre-check.

“Is it Jim Crow to ask for photo ID as they scan your eye? Is it racist to ask for photo ID when you check a bag at the airport or when you rent a U-Haul truck or a moving truck, buy a bus or a train ticket in person? Is that really ‘no blacks'?” Glenn asks.

“No blacks can ever go on the bus or the train or an airplane. Really? Really? No, it’s just too hard for them to get a photo ID,” he says, joking, “What a racist.”

And of course, the list of reasons one might need a photo ID is never-ending.

“You want to open a bank account. You want to withdraw a large amount of cash. You want to cash a check, even your own check at many banks ... you need a photo ID to deposit cash, to wire money,” Glenn says.

“But let’s get into your daily life of just housing. You want to rent an apartment, you need a photo ID. No blacks have ever rented an apartment? Really? No Hispanics, no blacks. It’s racist to say we need a photo ID voting, because you can’t get a photo ID somehow or another,” he continues.

“Yet you need one to rent a house or an apartment or to apply for public housing,” he adds.

Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn’s masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis, and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

Black mother, attorney ginned up hate hoax that turned white teen's life upside down. Now Texas judge makes them pay.

A white Texas student's life was turned upside down by a hate hoax perpetrated by a black acquaintance's mother, Summer Smith, and her lawyer, Kim Cole.

Smith and Cole were at last visited by consequence on Jan. 22, when a Texas judge awarded the student, Asher Vann, $3.2 million in attorneys fees and damages from the duo.

A mother's hate hoax

Smith, of Plano, Texas, came forward in March 2021 with allegations about her black son's supposed bullying by a white acquaintance and other classmates.

'They knowingly and intentionally launched a crusade of false facts, allegations, and narratives to create a social media and public outrage.'

After lobbing various accusations and sharing images of minors from the Plano Independent School District online, Smith held a press conference where she alleged that her then-13-year-old son, SeMarion Humphrey, was subjected to racially charged abuse, forced to drink urine from a plastic cup, shot with BB guns at a sleepover, and threatened so that he would not speak out.

"This is not a prank. This is beyond bullying. You are evil. They are evil," Smith said at the press conference.

Cole — a lawyer who briefly represented Karmelo Anthony, the man accused of murdering 17-year-old Austin Metcalf at a track meet last year — claimed that the supposed abuse at the sleepover was "pre-calculated" and "racially motivated" and alleged further that Humphrey's peers used racial and "homophobic" slurs against him.

Photographer: Angel Garcia/Bloomberg via Getty Images

The duo's claims were not only gobbled up by Dominique Alexander, the founder of Next Generation Action Network, and other leftist activists who demanded "justice" and marched with the supposed victim but amplified by the liberal media and in a viral petition that secured over 182,000 signatures.

The school district, faced with intense scrutiny after Smith's press conference, launched an investigation into the matter. The Plano Police Department similarly indicated that it was looking into the matter.

Facing similar pressure, then-Plano Mayor Harry LaRosiliere joined other officials in condemning the alleged "abhorrent behavior" and spoke of the need to "end bullying and racial abuse in our school and certainly in our community."

The false victim narrative that prompted all this hand-wringing initially proved lucrative for Smith.

With Cole's help, Smith was able to raise nearly $120,000 on GoFundMe in the name of therapy, private schooling, and "justice for SeMarion."

The Washington Free Beacon, citing court records, reported that less than $1,000 of the money raised went toward Humphrey's schooling. The rest was blown on luxuries including dining, travel, beauty products, liquor, cell phones, car payments, rent, and a designer dog.

While Smith raked in the cash, Asher Vann, the white student accused of organizing the alleged attack on Humphrey, was vilified and attacked.

"I was getting death threats from thousands of people on social media," Vann told the Free Beacon. "People leaked my address and my name. During one of the protests, they walked all the way to my house and threw bricks through my house."

"It was scary," continued Vann, whose family apparently often looked after Humphrey. "These were adults, and I was in middle school at the time. Full-grown adults were rushing my house and causing harm to it. What if I was home and they saw me? They could have ripped me from my home and beaten me. It was very scary."

In addition to bricks and vitriol, Vann was slapped along with some of his friends with criminal charges — charges that a grand jury declined to accept and a Plano Police Department officer admitted last year likely lacked probable cause, the Free Beacon reported.

A father's justice

Aaron Vann ultimately sued Cole and Smith on behalf of his son, Asher.

The lawsuit accused the duo of:

creating an "outrageously false narrative for the purposes of raising money and garnering attention, at the expense of children's privacy";
invasion of privacy, noting that Smith and Cole apparently publicized the teen's name and address "with the express purpose of causing humiliation, public ridicule, and inspiring public hatred and harassment" of the teen; and
acting "intentionally and/or recklessly, when they knowingly and intentionally launched a crusade of false facts, allegations, and narratives to create a social media and public outrage designed to torment [Asher] and subject him to intense ridicule, hatred, embarrassment, and fear – all based on facts Defendants knew to be false."

Vann's complaint, which also suggested that Cole helped manufacture the controversy in order to gain exposure and "free publicity for her law firm," emphasized that Humphrey wasn't the victim of a "sadistic racist fantasy" but rather one among a group of boys who "acted stupidly by playing with BB guns and playing gross pranks on each other."

According to Plano Police Department Officer Patricia McClure's 2025 testimony cited by the Beacon, the boys attending the sleepover apparently went outside with airsoft rifles and BB guns in search of frogs during a winter storm. Absent any sign of amphibian targets, the boys reportedly took turns shooting one another. Later, they pranked one another.

Vann suggested to the Beacon that there was no ill will between him and Humphrey after the sleepover but that Smith later caught wind of the events and pushed an alternate version in the press.

The case was called to trial in late October, and a jury — which included four black members — found that Smith and Cole effectively blew up Asher Vann's life with a false narrative.

Judge Benjamin Smith of Texas' 380th Judicial District Court ruled late last month that for their "intentional infliction of emotional distress and invasion of privacy" against the young man, Smith and her lawyer must each pay $1,599,000, accruing interest at a rate of 7.5% per annum. The judge also ordered both women to each pay several thousand dollars more for Vann's attorney fees.

Smith told the Beacon she plans on filing an appeal and maintains that her preferred narrative is the truth. Cole did not return Blaze News' request for comment.

This is not the Vann family's first court victory in recent years.

The Vanns took the Plano Independent School District to court after it suspended Asher Vann for three days and placed him in an off-campus disciplinary program for 75 days amid Smith's hate hoax campaign. In 2022, a U.S. district court found that the district had indeed violated the boy's substantive due process rights.

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

My court fight over DEI at Arizona State isn’t culture-war noise

“Who will rid us of this meddlesome philosopher?”

Arizona State University hopes the Arizona Supreme Court will. I’m confident that my case against required diversity, equity, and inclusion training raises issues far larger than one professor or one ideological program. Fundamental questions about employee rights, public accountability, and the rule of law hang in the balance.

If I succeed in showing that ASU bears legal responsibility — and that employees can hold it accountable — the implications reach far beyond one HR program.

Why would the largest state university in the country defend mandatory DEI training in court? Why would it spend thousands — likely tens of thousands — defending its “inclusive communities” training, a program that teaches employees about the alleged moral and social failures of “whiteness” and “heteronormativity”?

The answer defies common sense. Yet ASU presses forward. In doing so, it has turned what many dismiss as a culture-war skirmish into an employment-rights case with statewide consequences.

Most people hear “DEI” and instantly map the political lines. This case deserves a different reaction. Required ideological training should make any employee — left, right, or indifferent — pay attention.

First, the training relies on racial essentialism. It instructs ASU employees to view themselves and others primarily through skin color, then assigns moral weight and collective guilt on that basis.

Second, it attacks traditional Christian moral teaching, especially marriage as the union of a man and a woman.

Either flaw should have pushed administrators to retire the program long before I raised formal objections.

A third issue should unite every employee, regardless of where they stand on DEI: ASU treated this as an employment matter. The university did not admit error, revise the program, and move on. It hired Perkins Coie to defend racial essentialism. Yes, Perkins Coie — the firm widely associated with the Hillary Clinton-era Steele dossier controversy. ASU employs a full team of in-house attorneys. Why pay a nationally prominent and politically charged firm to defend a training program many already viewed as controversial — and, I argue, unlawful?

ASU’s posture gets stranger. The university has since taken down the required training, yet it continues paying lawyers to defend it in court. When this ends, Arizona lawmakers and taxpayers will want a number: How much did ASU spend on legal fees, and which administrators approved the contracts?

Just_Super via iStock/Getty Images

ASU’s legal strategy aims at dismissal. The university claims I lack standing. Put plainly, ASU argues that an employee cannot hold his public employer accountable for violating state law. At that point, the dispute stops being about DEI and becomes about every employee in Arizona. If ASU wins at the Arizona Supreme Court, employees across the state lose a crucial tool for legal accountability.

Professors to my political left may sneer at my critique of DEI. They should still worry about the precedent.

Imagine a scenario pulled from their nightmares: A future administration takes over ASU and imposes mandatory ideological training from the opposite end of the political spectrum — required ICE-themed training, or MAGA-themed training. If that training violated Arizona law, those same professors would demand the right to sue. ASU’s argument would bar them. This case concerns enforceable employee rights, not just contemporary politics.

ASU’s first bid to dismiss the case failed. A lower court rejected the university’s argument. ASU appealed, and the appellate court sided with the university. That posture put the case on a path to the Arizona Supreme Court.

AndreyPopov via iStock/Getty Images

Two facts matter here. The Arizona Senate and the state representative who authored the law I claim ASU violated have filed an amicus brief supporting my position. Their message is simple: A public employee has standing to hold a public employer accountable for breaking the law. The statute prohibits the kind of racial blame and collective guilt that ASU’s training promoted. The principle should not require explanation: Don’t assign moral fault to entire groups based on skin color.

So why does ASU defend this?

Because ASU does not view this fight as one training module that can be swapped out and forgotten. Race-based blame sits near the center of the contemporary left’s approach to education. If I succeed in showing that ASU bears legal responsibility — and that employees can hold it accountable — the implications reach far beyond one HR program. ASU’s initiatives aimed at combatting “whiteness” would come under scrutiny. Its embedded social justice goals face legal challenge and public examination. Students could follow with suits over race blame in a “decolonized curriculum.”

“Who will rid us of this meddlesome philosopher?” ASU really hopes the Arizona Supreme Court will.

Every employee in Arizona should watch what happens next. The outcome will determine whether public institutions answer to the law — or whether employees must comply silently, no matter what ideology administrators impose from above.

Drama Erupts in Texas Senate Primary as Crockett Opponent Slammed for Racist Attack on Black Men

The Democratic primary for U.S. Senate in Texas is finally starting to heat up. James Talarico, the baby-faced state lawmaker running against congresswoman Jasmine Crockett, has been slammed as a racist for allegedly dissing former congressman Colin Allred (D., Texas) as a "mediocre black man."

The post Drama Erupts in Texas Senate Primary as Crockett Opponent Slammed for Racist Attack on Black Men appeared first on .

Stephen A. Smith criticizes open borders, tells CBS he's still open to presidential run: 'I'm not ruling it out'

WATCH: Shoddy AI-Generated Campaign Ad Raises Questions About Jasmine Crockett's Competence

Trump Admin Sues Harvard for Withholding Race-Related Admissions Data

Democrats Openly Fantasize About Anti-White Revolution While GOP Grovels Over A Race Hoax

Want more from Sara Gonzales?

Want more from Glenn Beck?

Black mother, attorney ginned up hate hoax that turned white teen's life upside down. Now Texas judge makes them pay.

A mother's hate hoax

A father's justice

My court fight over DEI at Arizona State isn’t culture-war noise

Drama Erupts in Texas Senate Primary as Crockett Opponent Slammed for Racist Attack on Black Men

Democrats May Win The 2024 Election By Buying Swing State Votes

‘Twisters’: Summer Blockbuster Succeeds Because It Leaves Sex and Politics Behind

Disney’s Emotional ‘Inside Out 2’ Is Tailor-Made For A Therapy-Obsessed Culture

Michelle Obama’s Dark Money Group Launches Campaign To Turn Out Likely-Democrat Voters

Want more from Sara Gonzales?

Want more from Glenn Beck?

A mother's hate hoax

A father's justice

We’ll keep you informed with top stories for conservatives who want to become informed decision makers.