Jason Stanley, a former Yale professor now teaching at the University of Toronto, claimed that the firing of academics who celebrated or defended posts about Charlie Kirk mirrors Nazi Germany’s suppression tactics. He argued that the scale and speed of these dismissals exceed even the McCarthy era.
Stanley told MSNBC that he had identified at least forty academics dismissed for remarks tied to Kirk, a conservative activist. He insisted that this mass action is “more than McCarthy,” citing parallels to the Reichstag Fire and Kristallnacht as historical analogies to state-driven censorship and retaliation.
He also accused institutions across media and academia of targeting dissenting political views. According to Stanley, even mainstream organizations like The Washington Post have fired employees over relatively neutral posts, and he suggested those actions fit a pattern of ideological purge.
Critics say Stanley’s comparisons inflate the gravity and distort both the McCarthy era and Nazi history. Dismissals tied to social media posts—even reprehensible ones—do not equate to state‑sanctioned mass arrests, genocide, or systemic terror. Some observers warn that such hyperbole weakens the moral seriousness of historical atrocities by applying their imagery too loosely.
An Israeli student at Cornell University was publicly doxxed after prevailing in a civil rights complaint against English professor Eric Cheyfitz, who was found to have discriminated against the student based on national origin and Zionist viewpoints. The student’s identity and military history were later published by The Nation and circulated on campus, raising serious concerns about institutional bias and whistleblower retaliation.
In Spring 2025, Cornell’s Office of Civil Rights determined that Cheyfitz violated federal civil rights law by engaging in unlawful discrimination. The professor allegedly rejected the student’s course application after criticizing his Israeli background and political views. Following the ruling, Cheyfitz was removed from teaching, and a disciplinary process began. Though a faculty committee later cleared him under internal standards, Cornell administrators upheld the original finding and declined to reinstate him. Cheyfitz eventually chose to retire, keeping full pay and benefits, allowing the university to avoid further litigation.
Soon after the internal decision, The Nation revealed the student’s name, followed by similar disclosures from the student-run Cornell Daily Sun and activist groups. The leaks included private details about the student’s Israeli Defense Forces service and falsely suggested he acted in bad faith. The public exposure led to targeted harassment, both online and within the academic community.
The Equal Protection Project, a legal watchdog focused on campus bias, condemned the doxxing and announced plans to file a federal civil rights complaint. The organization stated that exposing a student who filed a discrimination grievance is a violation of federal protections and an act of intimidation meant to silence future complainants.
Cornell has not publicly condemned the doxxing or taken disciplinary action against the students and faculty who promoted the leaks. The university’s silence reflects growing hostility toward Jewish and pro-Israel voices in higher education. While the administration found discrimination occurred, its inaction following the student’s exposure signals a lack of commitment to protecting students who challenge anti-Zionist activism.
The incident underscores a dangerous trend in academia where conservative, pro-Israel, and religious students face increasing marginalization.
New York City (Image from Roberto Vivancos/Pexels via Canva Pro)
The City University of New York (CUNY) Graduate Center is offering an English course titled “Global Antifa,” openly promoting far-left ideology under the guise of academic study. The course syllabus frames militant activism as scholarly research, encouraging students to join global movements against capitalism, traditional gender roles, and national borders.
The course, set for Spring 2026, claims to examine antifascist literature from around the world. However, it quickly veers into activist territory, encouraging students to conduct “militant co-research” and “produce knowledge that contributes to the work of global movements fighting fascism.” The syllabus lists goals such as “rethinking empire,” “challenging capitalism,” and “abolishing borders”—language consistent with radical leftist activism.
Required readings include chapters on “Black Marxist Antifascism,” “Queer Antifa,” “Colonial Fascisms,” and “Eco-Fascism and Border Abolition.” The course includes materials from figures such as Angela Davis, a known communist and former Black Panther, and radical groups like the Street Transvestite Action Revolutionaries. Students are instructed to adopt “activist research methods” and to blend scholarly work with participation in real-world political movements.
According to course materials reviewed by watchdog group Parents Defending Education, students are urged to blur the lines between academic analysis and street-level activism. Assignments are designed to help students “strategize about how we might mobilize and disseminate knowledge in the service of antifascist struggle.” The course promotes “insurgent learning,” a model that elevates activism over objective scholarship.
CUNY has faced criticism in the past for leftist bias, but this course signals a deeper shift—using public education to advance an ideological mission. Rather than fostering academic inquiry, the class promotes the dismantling of long-standing Western institutions, including capitalism, family, and national sovereignty.
A dramatic protest unfolded this week at a school board meeting in Augusta, Maine, where three activists stripped down to their underwear in protest of a district policy allowing transgender-identifying males into girls’ sports and locker rooms. The demonstration, led by local activist Nick Blanchard—known by his nickname “Corn Pop”—was aimed at exposing what the group sees as the uncomfortable reality facing young girls under current school policy.
The incident occurred at the conclusion of the Augusta School Department meeting Wednesday evening. As Blanchard gave a speech condemning the district’s stance, two women and one man gradually removed their clothing, standing in their underwear to make their point.
“I’m about to show you guys how uncomfortable it is for girls,” Blanchard said. “You feel uncomfortable? Because that’s what these young girls feel like when a boy walks into their locker room and starts unchanging in front of them.”
The protest triggered a range of reactions from school board members—some looked away, others appeared irritated, and a few remained stoic. Blanchard told local media that the stunt has since gone viral across the state, and he claims over 150 supporters have reached out in favor of his position.
Blanchard admitted the tactic may not lead to immediate policy changes but said the point was to grab national attention. “The only way to get them to listen to us is to do something crazy and get in the national spotlight,” he said.
The school board voted to uphold a policy aligned with the Maine Human Rights Act, allowing individuals to participate in school programs based on “gender identity” rather than biological sex. The state of Maine has publicly stated it will not comply with President Donald Trump’s federal executive order, “Keeping Men out of Women’s Sports,” which directs federal departments to pull funding from non-compliant education programs.
The Trump administration is pursuing a lawsuit against the state and has already determined Maine to be in violation of Title IX. Some school districts in the state, however, have passed resolutions in support of complying with the federal order.
The Augusta protest echoes a similar event in California last month, where a female protester removed her clothing at a school board meeting in Davis to oppose transgender policies affecting girls’ locker rooms.
Tensions are boiling between Spokane city and county officials over more than 100 empty jail beds amid growing concerns about rising downtown crime. Spokane City Councilmember Zack Zappone claims the county is turning away detainees due to “red-light” jail status, while Spokane County leaders say the city is spreading misinformation and failing to understand how the system works.
At the center of the controversy is the East Broadway jail facility, which reportedly has up to 180 available beds. Zappone, backed by frustrated constituents, argues that Spokane Police are being blocked from booking arrestees due to red-light status, which he says equates to a full jail. But county officials, including Detention Services Chief Don Hooper and Sheriff John Nowels, firmly dispute that interpretation.
“SPD can fill every one of those beds today if officers make those arrests,” said County Spokesman Pat Bell. He explained that red-light status, often triggered by incidents such as officer exposure to fentanyl or understaffing, is temporary and doesn’t mean inmates are turned away—it only pauses intake briefly.
Sheriff Nowels blasted Zappone’s claims, saying they are “unhelpful, irresponsible and put the community’s safety at risk.” He urged city officials to check with jail leadership before making public statements.
Zappone pushed back, accusing the county of dodging his repeated attempts to get answers. He released emails showing multiple unanswered meeting requests and phone calls to detention leaders dating back to early September. “It’s disappointing that Spokane County public safety officials would hide behind a press release targeting me rather than answer the serious questions me and my constituents have,” he wrote.
As the blame game escalates, the jail’s Detention Services Dashboard shows fluctuating red-light status data. While Zappone claims the jail spent 20% of the last 30 days on red-light status, Bell said tracking methods may inflate those numbers and stressed that SPD officers simply need to wait until the temporary status ends to proceed with bookings.
City officials continue to face pressure from residents as open-air drug use, theft, and assaults remain persistent issues downtown. The county is currently working through a $20 million budget deficit, with top detention leaders tied up in budget preparations. County CEO Scott Simmons offered to schedule a meeting with city officials in December and encouraged Zappone to tour the jail firsthand.
Until then, both sides remain locked in a public dispute over safety, transparency, and responsibility—while dozens of jail beds remain unused and Spokane’s crime woes continue.
As the federal government shutdown enters its third week, Senate Majority Leader John Thune is shifting tactics after Democrats repeatedly blocked Republican-led efforts to extend government funding. Thune announced a new strategy: push through standalone funding for the Department of War to ensure military paychecks continue uninterrupted.
The Senate is expected to hold a procedural vote Thursday on a House-passed full-year appropriations bill for the Department of War (formerly the Department of Defense). The measure would not reopen the entire government but would secure pay for service members and advance the broader appropriations process stalled since Sept. 30.
“The entire country would like to know when Democrats are going to end their tantrum,” Thune said, accusing Democrats of putting political priorities over national defense while military families turn to food banks for support.
The government officially shut down on Oct. 1 after Senate Democrats rejected a clean continuing resolution (CR) passed by House Republicans. The CR would have kept the government funded through mid-November, giving lawmakers more time to negotiate all 12 annual spending bills. Democrats tanked the proposal, demanding the inclusion of massive health care expansions—most notably a $662 billion extension of pandemic-era enhanced Obamacare subsidies.
Republicans have refused to include those policies in a short-term funding bill. “Democrats’ motivation is pleasing their far-left base and preserving their political careers,” Thune said.
Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), defending the Democratic position, said delaying health care funding is unacceptable. “People can’t get sick on Republicans’ timeline,” he posted on X after voting against the CR.
While Congress remains deadlocked, the Trump administration is using the shutdown to aggressively downsize the federal bureaucracy. Office of Management and Budget Director Russ Vought said 4,000 non-essential positions have already been eliminated, calling it a “snapshot” of deeper cuts ahead. Vought expects total job reductions to exceed 10,000.
However, government employee unions have pushed back. A federal district judge issued an injunction Wednesday temporarily blocking the firings, after lawsuits were filed challenging the legality of the reductions.
If the Senate approves Thune’s Department of War funding bill, it would mark the first successful breakthrough in the shutdown standoff—but it would leave most of the federal government still unfunded.
Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite, File)
During oral arguments in the Supreme Court case Louisiana v. Callais, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson drew sharp attention by comparing black American voters to individuals with physical disabilities. The case centers on whether Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, which mandates race-based remedies in redistricting, violates the Constitution’s 14th and 15th Amendments.
Justice Jackson invoked the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) to argue that remedial policies don’t require discriminatory intent to be valid. “Congress passed the ADA against the backdrop of a world that was generally not accessible to people with disabilities,” she said. “That’s a way in which these processes are not equally open… they’re disabled.”
Her remarks appeared to frame black Americans as functionally “disabled” within the political process, sparking criticism for equating race with physical impairment. Jackson asserted that even if a state’s intent wasn’t discriminatory, race-based remedies should still apply if current systems result in unequal access to the ballot.
Attorney Edward Greim, representing the plaintiffs challenging Louisiana’s congressional map, pushed back strongly. He emphasized that remedies under the ADA don’t rely on racial stereotypes. “It’s not whether it relates to race,” Greim said. “It’s whether the remedy that relates to race involves stereotyping voters… and that’s the problem.”
The case stems from a challenge to Louisiana’s redrawn congressional map, which includes two majority-black districts. Plaintiffs argue the map is racially gerrymandered. Louisiana officials, including Governor Jeff Landry, maintain that federal courts are forcing states into racial quotas under the outdated 1986 Thornburg v. Gingles precedent.
Landry and Attorney General Liz Murrill have asked the Court to overturn that precedent, arguing that states are being placed in a legal bind—sued for both drawing and not drawing majority-minority districts. The case could redefine how race can be used in election maps and may signal a major shift in how Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act is interpreted.
Justice Jackson’s comments added fuel to an already politically charged case, with many questioning the appropriateness of her analogy and what it suggests about how the left views racial identity in public policy.
Image from Canva Pro/KatieDobies via Getty Images Signature
A New York City judge released a repeat offender accused of a violent subway knife attack—only for the same man to be arrested weeks later for slashing another innocent commuter. The case has reignited criticism over lenient bail policies and a justice system that critics say prioritizes criminals over victims.
Police say 32-year-old Demitri Marshall was arrested Tuesday after slashing a 27-year-old man in the face near the East Broadway subway station. The attack was unprovoked. The victim, identified only as Fernando, said he had just left work and was walking home when Marshall suddenly struck him across the mouth and nose, requiring seven stitches.
“He’s a criminal who got released by a judge and he could’ve killed me,” Fernando said. “I don’t know why the justice system lets him go free.”
Marshall had already been arrested last month for a similar attack on a 21-year-old man aboard a Bronx subway train. Prosecutors requested $50,000 bail for that case. Judge Ralph L. Wolf instead granted supervised release. Now, Marshall is being held without bail on a felony first-degree assault charge.
The earlier victim was hospitalized and survived, but prosecutors had warned of the risk Marshall posed. According to records, Marshall has been arrested at least seven times since 2012, with prior charges for robbery, burglary, fare evasion, and two other assaults on transit riders. He served over a year in state prison for a 2023 robbery and was released on parole earlier this year.
Despite the pattern of violence, the court previously chose not to detain Marshall pretrial. A spokesman for the Office of Court Administration declined to address the case specifically but defended the court’s discretion, saying bail decisions are based on individualized assessments of flight risk—not public safety risk.
Marshall’s next court appearance is scheduled for October 30. Both victims, and many New Yorkers, are left wondering why a known violent offender was allowed back on the streets at all.
Scott Bessent (Photo by Drew Angerer/Getty Images)
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said Wednesday that the recent slowdown in U.S. job growth is partly due to the departure of two million illegal aliens from the American workforce since President Donald Trump took office. Speaking at CNBC’s Invest in America Forum in Washington, D.C., Bessent defended the administration’s policies, stating, “In terms of Americans having jobs, we’re doing quite well.”
Bessent cited both deportations and voluntary returns as major factors in the labor shift. “With the securing of the border, and then maybe between deportations and voluntary deportations, we’ve seen two million people leave the workforce,” he explained.
The Department of Homeland Security recently confirmed that roughly 1.6 million illegal aliens have self-deported since January 20, while Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has deported over 400,000 and is on pace to hit nearly 600,000 by year-end. DHS added that for four consecutive months, no illegal migrants were released into the U.S. interior — a sharp contrast to Biden-era policies.
In addition to labor supply shifts, Bessent pointed to cuts in federal employment as another contributing factor to slowed job growth. “I think we are starting to see the rightsizing of the federal government,” Bessent said. He described the federal workforce as “bloated” and claimed that trimming it down will spark a private-sector capital expenditure boom.
Asked whether this transition is underway, Bessent replied, “We are right on the cusp of that, and government needs to get out of the way, reopen, and create the conditions for this boom.” He blamed the ongoing government shutdown, now in its 15th day, on Senate Democrats, despite pushback from CNBC host Sara Eisen.
“How’s that?” Bessent said, responding to claims Republicans would be blamed. “Mike Johnson passed a clean CR. Three Democratic senators have come over. Thune has a vote every day, and they want to negotiate. We’re saying reopen the government. Negotiate.”
When asked about the shutdown’s economic impact, Bessent warned, “I’ve seen numbers that are starting to hurt the economy, maybe up to $15 billion a day.”
Louisiana Governor Jeff Landry is urging the U.S. Supreme Court to overturn a 40-year-old precedent that he says has locked states into an unconstitutional redistricting trap. In a public statement, Landry declared that Louisiana, with Attorney General Liz Murrill, is challenging the 1986 Thornburg v. Gingles ruling that requires states to consider race when drawing voting districts under the Voting Rights Act.
Landry argues that the Gingles framework forces states into a no-win scenario: either they draw majority-minority districts and face lawsuits for racial gerrymandering, or they don’t—and get sued for violating the Voting Rights Act. “That is not justice; that is a legal trap,” Landry said. “And Louisiana knows it all too well.”
The challenge centers on the Louisiana v. Callais case, which is being argued before the Supreme Court. Landry called it “the most consequential redistricting decision in a generation.” At stake is not just the configuration of congressional maps, but the broader question of whether states or federal courts should control redistricting policy.
In 2022, Louisiana passed a new congressional map. A federal court rejected it. After the legislature complied with a court order and drew another map, lawsuits followed again. Landry noted that since 2012, Louisiana has spent over $40 million in taxpayer funds fighting redistricting lawsuits—resources he says should have gone to local infrastructure and education.
“The Constitution guarantees equal protection – not racial engineering,” Landry stated. He also argued that the Voting Rights Act was intended to ensure access to the ballot, not to enforce racial quotas.
Landry is calling for a race-neutral legal standard that reflects a color-blind Constitution. He says Louisiana is not only standing for its own sovereignty but also for every state tired of being micromanaged by federal courts.
With the Supreme Court now taking up Louisiana v. Callais, the decision could reshape how race is factored into redistricting nationwide. The governor made it clear: “The best way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race.”
