PrairiePundit

 DC Daily Journal: ... And an attempted assassination of a Supreme Court justice has this Republican on the attack. Radical left judges are twisting the law to push their woke agenda, letting dangerous criminals off easy just because of their “gender identity.” But Senator Tom Cotton (R-AR) isn’t sitting idly by. On Wednesday, he dropped a legislative bombshell aimed at restoring fairness and protecting Americans from this insanity. His new “Fair Sentencing Act” is a direct shot at judges who think gender confusion should mean shorter prison time. This move comes hot on the heels of a disgraceful ruling by a Biden-appointed judge who gave Nicholas Roske—a man who plotted to assassinate Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh—a measly eight-year sentence. That’s 22 years less than the 30-year minimum federal guidelines recommend. Why? Because the court spent over seven hours obsessing over Roske’s transgender identity, arguing it justified leniency, according to The Daily Wire . “Crim...

Federalist Wire: ... In a bold push to secure America’s borders and preserve the integrity of citizenship, the Trump administration has petitioned the Supreme Court to greenlight an executive order ending automatic birthright citizenship for children of illegal immigrants and temporary visitors, framing the move as essential to countering decades of lax immigration policies that have strained national resources. The administration’s appeal, filed last Friday and first reported by CNN, seeks to overturn rulings from four federal courts that struck down President Trump’s Day One executive order as unconstitutional. Solicitor General D. John Sauer argued that these decisions reflect a “mistaken” interpretation of the 14th Amendment, wrongly extending citizenship to those not fully subject to U.S. jurisdiction. “Those decisions confer, without lawful justification, the privilege of American citizenship on hundreds of thousands of unqualified people,” Mr. Sauer told the justices in the und...

 National Review: The Brett Kavanaugh Assassination Plot Aimed to Kill Multiple Justices to Preserve Roe v. Wade ...  A map saved in the defendant’s Google account contained location pins marking what the defendant believed to be the residential addresses of four sitting Supreme Court Justices. . . . [Defendant conducted] extensive research on guns and shooting, body armor, breaking and entering, and methods to be silent and avoid detection . . . Roske visited over 30 websites showing head and neck anatomy and graphics depicting knives in the neck . . . [Defendant] also closely researched various manner and means of homicide, including stabbing, strangulation, and killing a human being in a quiet manner. ...  In the spring of 2022, the defendant meticulously researched, planned, and attempted to assassinate at least one — but had a stated target of three — sitting judges of the United States Supreme Court. The defendant’s explicit objective was to single-handedly alter th...

  Daily Signal: If the Supreme Court wants to correct one of the worst decisions of the progressive era, one that violated basic separation of powers principles and vitiated the constitutional authority of the president as head of the executive branch, it will finally overturn Humphrey’s Executor v. U.S. after 90 years of poisoning the government well. If you’ve never heard of the case, don’t be embarrassed. Most people, aside from government wonks and constitutional nerds, haven’t. However, it’s finally being brought to the fore because of President Donald Trump’s firing of government officials at so-called independent agencies , and it’s about time. The Supreme Court just issued a temporary stay of lower court orders in Trump v. Slaughter that told Trump he couldn’t fire Rebecca Slaughter, a commissioner on the Federal Trade Commission. This followed other recent cases in which the justices stayed lower court decisions banning Trump from firing officials such as Gwynne Wilcox...

 Daily Signal: The Supreme Court moved Wednesday to allow a female identifying as male to use a male restroom while her case is heard. The one-page unsigned order keeps South Carolina from enforcing a law requiring public school students to use restrooms aligning with their sex. The law, enacted as part of South Carolina ’s 2024-2025 budget bill and reincorporated into its 2025-2026 bill, says sex is “determined by anatomy and genetics existing at the time of birth.” ... Would they also allow a male who identifies as female to use the girls' room?  I doubt it.  BTW, there is a nude resort near where I live, and it is my understanding that it has separate toilet areas for men and women.

 DC Daily Journal: ... Justice Amy Coney Barrett, a rock-solid Trump appointee, took a well-deserved swipe at Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson during a September 4, appearance at Manhattan’s Lincoln Center, defending her sharp rebuke in a recent Supreme Court ruling on universal injunctions. Speaking to a packed auditorium to promote her book Listening to the Law, Barrett stood by her June 2025 majority opinion in Trump v. CASA, which curbed lower courts’ ability to issue sweeping injunctions against President Trump’s policies. When asked by The Free Press’ Bari Weiss about her pointed words for Jackson, Barrett said, “I thought Justice Jackson had made an argument in strong terms that I thought warranted a response,” proving she’s not afraid to confront judicial overreach. Barrett’s jab was spot-on—Jackson’s dissent pushed an activist agenda that threatens the Constitution and Trump’s America First mission. Barrett, a New Orleans native with a knack for precision, explained her appro...

DC Daily Journal: In a massive victory for President Donald Trump’s immigration crackdown, the Supreme Court has cleared the way for Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to resume hard-hitting raids in Los Angeles. The decision, handed down on Monday, shuts down a lower court’s attempt to tie the hands of federal agents enforcing the nation’s laws. This ruling is a bold move toward restoring order and ensuring illegal immigration doesn’t run rampant in one of America’s largest cities. The Supreme Court’s 6-3 decision put a stop to a restrictive order from U.S. District Judge Maame Ewusi-Mensah Frimpong, a Biden appointee, who tried to block ICE from targeting individuals based on practical indicators like their occupation or language. The justices’ ruling allows ICE to get back to work, stopping illegal immigrants who’ve been gaming the system while hardworking Americans bear the cost. This is a win for law-abiding citizens who demand secure borders and a government that prioritiz...

 TownHall: The Supreme Court ruled 6-3 in favor of the Trump administration today, blocking an order by a federal circuit court judge that had limited federal agents from making 'indiscriminate' immigration-related stops in Los Angeles and other areas in central California. ...  Justice Brett Kavanaugh said: ... The interests of individuals who are illegally in the country in avoiding being stopped by law enforcement for questioning is ultimately an interest in evading the law. That is not an especially weighty legal interest.  ... I suspect that Los Angeles has many non-citizens on its streets and in some jobs in the city.

 DC Daily Journal: ... The U.S. Supreme Court, as the pinnacle of the nation’s judiciary, has faced scrutiny from a group of anonymous federal judges for its decisions to overturn lower court rulings, particularly those involving President Donald Trump’s administration, according to an NBC News report. Twelve judges, appointed by both Democratic and Republican presidents, including Trump, expressed concerns about the Court’s use of emergency rulings to reverse lower court decisions. However, the Supreme Court’s actions reflect its constitutional duty to ensure legal consistency and uphold executive authority, often necessitating swift intervention to correct missteps by lower courts. “It is inexcusable,” one judge stated, critiquing the Supreme Court’s approach. “They don’t have our backs.” Yet, this perspective overlooks the Court’s responsibility to provide definitive guidance, ensuring that lower court rulings align with established precedent and constitutional principles. The S...

 DC Daily Journal: ... The American judicial system is under siege, and the culprits are activist lower court judges who think they can override the Supreme Court and the will of the people. Justice Neil Gorsuch called out lower courts on Thursday for a pattern of defying Supreme Court rulings, and he’s absolutely right to sound the alarm. These rogue judges are trying to sabotage President Trump’s agenda, and it’s time for patriots to take notice. The latest battleground is the Trump administration’s push to cut millions in National Institutes of Health (NIH) grants tied to divisive diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs and gender ideology nonsense. The Supreme Court, in a 5-4 ruling, allowed the administration to move forward with these cuts, marking the “third time in a matter of weeks” the Supreme Court had to reverse a lower court on an issue it had already addressed, Gorsuch wrote. This isn’t a one-off mistake—it’s a deliberate pattern of defiance that threatens the...

 Red State: Over time, we have learned that when Democrats and the left have nothing left to fight with, they take their issues into court. They shop whatever they would like to force onto the American people around to a left-leaning Democrat-appointed judge to get the outcome they want. They couldn't stop President Donald Trump's return to the White House, so they figure they will stop anything he tries to do through the court system. It literally took an act of Congress to put the brakes on activist judges, and a few of them continue to issue edicts. But now, Supreme Court Justices have had enough and are speaking out. ... On Thursday, in a rare instance of public comment, Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch called out lower courts and their judges for repeatedly ignoring Supreme Court rulings. In a ruling that allows the Trump administration to move ahead with cutting millions of dollars in National Institutes of Health (NIH) grants, Gorsuch slapped back at a lower court, w...

  Daily Signal: ... On Feb. 20, the State Department designated eight transnational gangs and cartels as FTOs, including Tren de Aragua, a criminal organization that began as a prison gang in Venezuela in 2010. On Mar. 14, Trump made the proclamation required by the Alien Enemies Act , emphasizing Tren de Aragua’s connection with Venezuelan leader Nicolas Maduro and his “regime-sponsored, narco-terrorism enterprise.” Tren de Aragua, the proclamation explained, “commits brutal crimes, including murders, kidnappings, extortions, and human, drug, and weapons trafficking.” The Trump administration moved quickly to act on this proclamation, apprehending dozens of suspected Tren de Aragua members and detaining them at a facility in Texas. The plan was to deport them on March 15 and transfer physical custody to officials in El Salvador who had agreed to house them. Enter the lawyers, who filed a lawsuit at 1:12 a.m. on March 15 to block the removal of any suspected Tren de Aragua membe...

  DC Daily Journal: ... Lower federal courts have been issuing decisions that challenge the Trump administration’s initiatives, often appearing to contradict Supreme Court guidance. The executive branch has encountered repeated legal obstacles from federal judges as it advances its strict immigration policies. Despite securing key victories at the Supreme Court, including a ruling that limited the scope of nationwide injunctions, some judges have continued to issue orders that seem to bypass higher court decisions. ... On Friday, U.S. District Judge Jia Cobb, a Biden appointee, issued a ruling that stopped the Trump administration from using “expedited removal” to quickly deport undocumented migrants, court records show. This decision temporarily halts the administration’s deportation plans. An administration spokesperson sharply criticized the ruling, accusing Judge Cobb of disregarding a prior Supreme Court decision. “Judge Cobb is flagrantly ignoring the United States Supreme Co...

  Publius @OcrazioCornPop · 18h BREAKING: The Supreme Court is considering BANNING "Racially-Based" Congressional District maps, as it violates the Civil Rights laws of the USA. This would cause Democrats to LOSE 10-25 House seats in 2026 midterm elections. DO YOU SUPPORT SCOTUS OVERTURNING THIS CIVIL RIGHTS VIOLATION? If it was wrong to discriminate against blacks by racially based Congressional districts, it is also wrong to discriminate against others for the same reason. Democrats should not get the advantage of racially based districts.

 The Hill: ... Trump’s Justice Department asserts the burst reflects how “activist” federal district judges have improperly blocked the president’s agenda. Trump’s critics say it shows how the president himself is acting lawlessly. ... In his second term, Trump has almost always emerged victorious at the Supreme Court. The administration successfully halted lower judges’ orders in all but two of the decided emergency appeals, and a third where they only partially won. On immigration, the justices allowed the administration to revoke temporary legal protections for hundreds of thousands of migrants and swiftly deport people to countries where they have no ties while separately rebuffing a judge who ruled for migrants deported to El Salvador under the Alien Enemies Act. Other cases involve efforts to reshape the federal bureaucracy and spending. The Supreme Court allowed the administration to freeze $65 million in teacher grants , provide Department of Government Efficiency person...

  Trending Politics: An ideologically divided U.S. Supreme Court on Monday paved the way for President Donald Trump to lay off hundreds of workers at the U.S. Department of Education, where he and Secretary Linda McMahon are committed to rapidly downsizing the federal agency. The 6-3 decision saw the state’s conservative majority line up against the three liberal justices. Justice Sonia Sotomayor, writing the dissent, said the decision effectively validates Trump’s claim that he can circumvent Congress “by firing all those necessary to carry them out.” “The majority is either willfully blind to the implications of its ruling or naïve,” Sotomayor wrote, “but either way the threat to our Constitution’s separation of powers is great.” “When the Executive publicly announces its intent to break the law, and then executes on that promise, it is the Judiciary’s duty to check that lawlessness, not expedite it,” she added. The brief, unsigned order by the majority was not accompanied by an...

  Trending Politics: The U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday handed down another major immigration ruling that will allow the Trump Administration to accelerate mass deportation operations. In a 7-2 ruling, the high court ruled in favor of the Trump Administration in a legal fight over deporting illegal aliens to third countries, or countries that are not their own. The new order clarifies the court’s June 23 ruling that addressed the issue of third country deportations. Justice Elena Kagan joined the court’s six conservatives in the majority, while liberal Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson dissented. The Supreme Court said in the unsigned order that its earlier ruling applied to eight men who are currently being held in a U.S. facility in Djibouti, meaning the judge’s later decision was “unenforceable.” U.S. District Judge Brian Murphy had continued to assert that the May deportation flight violated his injunction, arguing that it was still in “full force.” “The May 2...

 Blaze: Another district judge sought to block the Trump administration's mass deportation efforts by preventing the Department of Homeland Security from stripping Temporary Protected Status from over 500,000 immigrants, despite the administration's recent Supreme Court victory. DHS Secretary Kristi Noem announced Friday that the agency would end TPS for Haiti on September 2, requiring more than half a million Haitian nationals in the U.S. to return to their home country. TPS was initially provided to Haitian nationals in 2010, and the federal government executed numerous redesignations extending the program through the Biden administration. Noem's DHS argued that "Haiti no longer continues to meet the conditions for designation for TPS," claiming that the Haitian government's lack of control has resulted in "direct consequences for U.S. public safety." "Haitian gang members have already been identified among those who have entered the United St...

 Reuters: ... The ruling came after the Republican president's administration asked the Supreme Court to narrow the scope of so-called "universal" injunctions issued by three federal judges that halted nationally the enforcement of his January executive order limiting birthright citizenship. The court's decision has "systematically weakened judicial oversight and strengthened executive discretion," said Paul Rosenzweig, an attorney who served in Republican President George W. Bush's administration. Friday's ruling said that judges generally can grant relief only to the individuals or groups who brought a particular lawsuit. ... Trump has scored a series of victories at the Supreme Court since returning to office in January. These have included clearing the way for his administration to resume deporting migrants to countries other than their own without offering them a chance to show the harms they could face and ending temporary legal status held by...

 Daily Signal: The Supreme Court struck down a lower court injunction blocking the Trump administration’s executive order on birthright citizenship, laying out clear rules for courts utilizing universal injunctions going forward. The case, Trump v. CASA, concerns universal injunctions that lower court judges have ordered pausing President Donald Trump’s order interpreting the 14th Amendment as not guaranteeing what is known as “birthright citizenship.” The court ruled, 6-3, that “universal injunctions likely exceed the equitable authority that Congress has given to federal courts.” ... “Traditionally, courts issued injunctions prohibiting executive officials from enforcing a challenged law or policy only against the plaintiffs in the lawsuit,” Barrett wrote. “The injunctions before us today reflect a more recent development: district courts asserting the power to prohibit enforcement of a law or policy against anyone.” Barrett wrote that “the universal injunction was conspicuousl...