John Roberts’ Tacit Endorsement Of Judicial Supremacy Is Undermining SCOTUS

Roberts fails to understand that SCOTUS's continued allowance of leftists' judicial coup is undermining Americans' faith in the judiciary.

SCOTUS Blocks Lower Court Injunction On Trump Admin’s Military ‘Trans’ Policy

On Tuesday, the U.S. Supreme Court blocked a lower court injunction on the Trump administration’s policy disqualifying trans-identifying individuals from military service. In its 6-3 decision, the high court granted the Trump Justice Department’s application to stay a nationwide injunction issued by a Bush appointee on the U.S. District Court for the Western District of […]

Our kids know TikTok stars — but not who freed the slaves



John and Abigail Adams envisioned an America with a school in every neighborhood and a well-informed citizenry that was adept in languages, literature, and music, as well as science, history, and religion. Their vision was practical until the ages recast it, little by little.

Then, sometime between Joseph McCarthy and Joan Baez, the status quo of the educational system came undone.

Only about 18% of colleges and universities nationwide require the study of history and government in their general education programs.

Students accustomed to a traditional 50/50 split between the humanities and the sciences were capsized academically by the surprise Sputnik launch in 1957. The space race sent higher education into a tizzy, leading to a fixation on improving science education above all. In the succeeding seven decades, resources have consistently risen for science, technology, engineering, and mathematics, which has been to our benefit. But this has come at an unnecessary cost: The humanities have been downplayed, devalued, and dodged.

That uneven ratio has bestowed an unfortunate historical illiteracy on three generations. Most people, for example, do not know the philosophical roots of the Declaration of Independence, their rights as laid out in the Constitution, or the civic virtues their teachers should have taught them. For these three reasons, many Americans do not vote in local, state, or national elections.

Universities drop the ball

Even amid this crisis of civic illiteracy, only about 18% of colleges and universities nationwide require the study of history and government in their general education programs. In years past, when the architecture of academe was different, a plethora of institutions, such as Harvard, Rice, Notre Dame, Johns Hopkins, and William & Mary, proffered requirements for focused classes in American history. But their phaseout — which began in the 1960s — was practically completed by 2000.

According to a report from the American Council of Trustees and Alumni, at Columbia University:

Students must take at least nine courses to graduate with a B.A. in history. Of these courses, four must be in a chosen field of geographical, chronological, or thematic specialization, and three must be outside of the specialization, including one course removed in time and two courses removed in space.

In other words, the major requires exposure to a variety of histories — none of which need touch on America.

That gap in Columbia’s history major requirements is deeply troubling, though it at least has a contemporary civilization requirement in its signature core curriculum for undergraduates that addresses founding documents and key concepts of United States government. Meanwhile, at Colgate University, which has no such option in its general education requirements:

Students choose one of two pathways to graduate with a B.A. in history. Both require nine courses. The Field of Focus (FoF) Pathway requires one history workshop, seven electives. ... The FoF Pathway allows students to devise individualized, intellectually coherent specializations. Possible fields of focus include environmental history, gender and sexuality, and race and racism.

This reorientation away from the study of American history — even as a point of reference for students focusing their studies on other parts of the world — is now the norm in the American academy. In the 2020-2021 academic year, 18 of the top 25 public universities did not have a wide-ranging American history requirement for students seeking a B.A. in history in the major or core curriculum — nor did 24 of the 25 best national schools.

Even the legendary linchpins of the liberal arts — Amherst, Swarthmore, Vassar, Smith, Williams, and Pomona — fared poorly: 21 out of 25 colleges examined did not have an American history requirement.

The consequences of forgoing the study of American history have a powerful effect on the population. Much of what is not learned — or stays uncorrected — turns into the misinformation that is so damaging in a free and democratic society.

The civic literacy crisis

When eighth graders were asked in 2011 "to choose a ‘belief shared by most people of the United States,’ a majority (51%) picked ‘The government should guarantee everybody a job,’ and only a third chose the correct answer: ‘The government should be a democracy.’”

In 2015, 10% of college graduates believed Judy Sheindlin — TV’s “Judge Judy” — was a member of the Supreme Court.

In 2019, the American Council of Trustees and Alumni found that 18% of American adults thought Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) was the architect of the New Deal — a package of programs President Franklin Delano Roosevelt introduced in 1933. Twenty-six percent believed Brett Kavanaugh was the current chief justice of the Supreme Court, along with another 14% who identified Antonin Scalia — even though he had been dead for two years at the time of the survey. Only 12% knew the 13th Amendment freed the slaves in the United States, and 30% thought the Equal Rights Amendment guaranteed women the right to vote.

In 2024, an American Council of Trustees and Alumni survey of college students showed that fewer than half identified ideas like “free markets” and “rule of law” as core principles of American civic life. The survey also found that 60% of American college students failed to identify term lengths for members of Congress. A shocking 68% did not know that Congress is the branch that holds the power to declare war; 71% did not know when 18-year-olds gained the right to vote.

All of these results were based on multiple-choice questions. All the respondents had to do was select the correct option out of four possibilities.

Forget history, forgo your future

The late Bruce Cole, chairman of the National Endowment for the Humanities from 2001 to 2009, admonished, “Unlike a monarchy, a democracy is not automatically self-perpetuating. History and values have to be renewed from generation to generation.”

Our failure to educate future citizens for informed civic participation compromises the country. Institutions need to take the American Council of Trustees and Alumni’s findings to heart and, starting with their requirements for the history major, embrace their obligation to address the crisis in civic education.

Editor’s note: This article was originally published by RealClearPublicAffairs and made available via RealClearWire.


Go East, Young Man

I have known the author of this memoir, Professor Jerome Cohen, on and off for some decades through his son, Ethan Cohen, a top gallerist in New York who introduced the likes of Ai Weiwei to America. As part of the respect you show the parents of a friend, you don’t probe in detail about their history or achievements or stature in the world—appropriate interest is fine, but not too much direct questioning. They will tell you stuff if they want to. Well, as it turns out, there was a lot I wasn’t told.

The post Go East, Young Man appeared first on .

Florida is now ground zero in the national fight for educational freedom



Education doesn’t begin in the classroom. It starts at the kitchen table — often after a family prayer — where parents pass down common sense and values through everyday conversations.

That’s why the stakes were so high last week when the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Mahmoud v. Taylor. At the heart of the case lies a core American principle that conservatives defend: the God-given right of parents to raise and educate their children free from government interference.

A parent’s most important job is raising his child. We cannot outsource this responsibility to institutions that reject our values.

During the hearing, even Justice Elena Kagan — no ally of conservatives — acknowledged that “some nonreligious parents might not be ‘thrilled’” with the storybooks Montgomery County selected for young children. The books? “Pride Puppy!” “Uncle Bobby’s Wedding,” and “Born Ready: The True Story of a Boy Named Penelope.” These titles feature references to underwear, leather, lip rings, and drag performers.

We’ve come a long way from “Little House on the Prairie.”

This raises a fundamental question: Why is parental authority suddenly up for debate?

Regardless of how the court rules, don’t expect this to end. For the left, the fight isn’t just political — it’s spiritual. As Rod Dreher writes in “Live Not by Lies”:

Christians today must understand that, fundamentally, they aren’t resisting a different politics but rather what is effectively a rival religion.

While the rest of the country argues, Florida leads.

As a father of three school-age children, I see daily how policy decisions affect our kids’ future. In Florida, parental rights don’t just get lip service — they shape law. They stand at the center of our education policy.

Thanks to the leadership of Education Commissioner Manny Diaz Jr., Florida ranks number one in the nation for education freedom. Our state approaches education with an unapologetic commitment to faith, family, and freedom.

The 2024-2025 “Focus on Florida’s Future” plan reflects that commitment. It raises teacher salaries, strengthens school safety, and invests a record $28.4 billion in K-12 education — all while expanding school choice.

Over the past year, Florida delivered:

  • House Bill 931, which established a statewide school chaplain program, ensuring students can access faith-based counseling with parental consent.
  • House Bill 1291, which strengthened teacher training programs by banning political indoctrination and reaffirming the goal of teaching facts, not ideology.
  • An expanded Family Empowerment Scholarship Program, which gives more military families and students with disabilities the freedom to choose the education that fits them best.

Florida also continued its leadership in protecting Jewish schools, allocating $20 million for security upgrades, $3.5 million for transportation, and $7 million for Holocaust education centers.

Florida stands as a model. But the rest of the country must join the fight.

As Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth warned in “Battle for the American Mind,” the left has waged a strategic campaign to capture public schools. He explains how classical Christian education once taught wisdom through history and the great books. Today, that has been replaced by activist ideology. Physical education gave way to diversity, equity, and inclusion. Geology became gender theory. Civics became critical race theory.

This fight extends far beyond education. At stake is the authority of the American family.

Will we allow the state to replace parents as the primary moral guide for children?

If the Supreme Court upholds the current approach, no limiting principle will remain to stop the erosion of parental rights. We would do well to remember the court’s own words in Pierce v. Society of Sisters (1925): “The child is not the mere creature of the state.”

A parent’s most important job is raising his child. We cannot hand off that duty to institutions hostile to our beliefs. Parental rights are not negotiable — they’re foundational. They serve as the first line of defense for a free and morally grounded society.

It’s time to bring education back home. Back to the kitchen table. Back to prayer. Back to the people who love children most — their parents.

After Years Of Leftist Threats Against Justices, KBJ Decides Trump Is The Real ‘Threat To Democracy’

If Jackson thinks criticisms of judges are 'attacks on democracy,' then what does she make of actual leftist threats against conservative justices?

This red-state attorney general has declared war on the First Amendment



We thought the Supreme Court had finally purged anti-religious discrimination from Establishment Clause jurisprudence. After years of confusion — conflating the ban on state-sponsored religion with an invented mandate to scrub faith from public life — the Court, through a series of rulings on religious schools and public funding, had restored sanity. It returned the law to its pre-Warren era understanding: Equal treatment of religion does not violate the Constitution.

Yet, here we are again.

Those who claim that equal treatment of religion violates the Establishment Clause are the ones betraying its meaning.

In a move that stunned observers, Oklahoma’s own Republican Attorney General Gentner Drummond and the state supreme court now argue that states cannot recognize religious charter schools.

On Wednesday, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Oklahoma Statewide Charter School Board v. Drummond. The case centers on St. Isidore, a Catholic online school seeking to join Oklahoma’s charter school system. Drummond contends the school’s religious affiliation disqualifies it. He sued the state charter board — a move usually made by the ACLU or militant secularist groups.

The Oklahoma Supreme Court sided with him. The court claimed that granting charter status to a Catholic school would violate the First Amendment by effectively establishing Catholicism as a state religion. Justices labeled charter schools “state actors” and argued that any religious affiliation disqualifies a school from public recognition.

This logic turns the First Amendment on its head. The Constitution does not require hostility toward religion. It requires neutrality. Denying a religious school access to a public benefit — simply because it is religious — violates precedent.

Oklahoma’s Charter Schools Act permits any “private college or university, private person, or private organization” to apply for state funding to open a charter school. Excluding religious applicants contradicts not one but three major Supreme Court rulings.

In Trinity Lutheran Church of Columbia Inc v. Comer (2017), the court ruled that excluding a religious school from a public benefit for which it is otherwise qualified “solely because it is a church” is “odious to our Constitution.” That case involved a grant for playground resurfacing. If states can’t deny rubber mulch, they can’t deny full charter status.

In Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue (2020), a 5-4 majority held that state constitutions barring aid to religious institutions over secular ones violates the Free Exercise Clause. Public benefits, the Chief Justice John Roberts emphasized, cannot be denied “solely because of the religious character of the schools.”

Then came Carson v. Makin (2022), where Maine tried to distinguish between religious status and religious use, barring religious schools from voucher funds. The court rejected the distinction. Roberts, writing again for the majority, ruled that the program “operates to identify and exclude otherwise eligible schools on the basis of their religious exercise.” He warned that attempts to judge how a religious school carries out its mission invite unconstitutional state entanglement.

So how, after such ironclad precedent, do we find a Republican state attorney general and a court in a state Trump carried in every county ruling that religious schools can’t even apply for public funding?

The answer lies in years of lukewarm Republican control. These are Republicans in name only, who blocked judicial reform and refused to challenge activist courts. Now, Drummond wants a promotion. He’s announced his run for governor after already overruling the state education superintendent’s decision to ban pornography in public libraries.

This case reveals a larger pattern. Courts act as a one-way ratchet. Even after strong Supreme Court rulings, liberal lower courts defy precedent. They delay, split hairs, and distinguish without merit. The high court may reverse Oklahoma, but its rulings rarely secure lasting victories.

And the irony? Those who claim that equal treatment of religion violates the Establishment Clause are the ones betraying its meaning.

During the House debate on the First Amendment in 1789, James Madison explained: “Congress should not establish a religion, and enforce the legal observation of it by law, nor compel men to worship God in any manner contrary to their conscience.”

That principle — freedom of conscience without coercion — shaped the American experiment. Far from excluding religion, the founders assumed its influence. As Alexis de Tocqueville wrote, “The Americans combine the notions of religion and liberty so intimately in their minds, that it is impossible to make them conceive of one without the other.” He added that politics and religion formed an “alliance which has never been dissolved.”

It’s time for the Supreme Court to reaffirm that alliance — clearly, decisively, and without leaving room for lower courts to ignore. And in Oklahoma, it’s time to elect Republicans who still believe the Bible belongs in the Bible Belt.