Home Blog Page 14

She Voted With Democrats—Now Students Are Paying the Price

(Kevin Dunlap/Unsplash)

Just three weeks before a shooting injured multiple students at Florida State University, Republican state Sen. Ileana Garcia joined Democrats to block a bill that would have allowed students to carry firearms for self-defense. Senate Bill 814, which aimed to restore Second Amendment rights on campus, was shut down in committee due to Garcia’s pivotal vote. The FSU shooting has reignited calls to reexamine Florida’s gun policies, particularly concerning self-defense on college campuses.

SB 814, sponsored by Republican state Sen. Randy Fine, sought to allow concealed carry permit holders to carry their firearms on public college and university campuses. Fine argued the bill was essential for student safety, pointing out that criminals do not abide by gun-free zone policies. He emphasized that students deserve the same rights on campus as they do off it, especially as antisemitism and threats of violence have escalated across universities.

Despite a Republican majority, the Senate Criminal Justice Committee rejected the measure on March 26 in a narrow 4–3 vote. Garcia’s decision to side with Democrats effectively killed the bill. Two Republican senators were notably absent, leaving the outcome in Garcia’s hands. The vote marked a significant setback for campus carry advocates who have pushed for this legislation for nearly a decade.

On April 17, an individual opened fire at the FSU student union, injuring at least six unarmed students. The suspect was apprehended by police and multiple firearms were recovered, including a handgun, a shotgun, and another weapon located in a vehicle. The shooting occurred in a gun-free zone, where law-abiding students were prohibited from carrying firearms for self-defense.

The incident has renewed concerns about the effectiveness of gun-free zones in preventing violence. Critics of Florida’s current policy argue that such zones leave students defenseless in the face of armed attackers. SB 814 would have allowed licensed adults to carry on campus, potentially deterring such attacks or enabling quicker response in active shooter situations.

Calls are now growing among conservatives and Second Amendment advocates for the Florida legislature to revisit the issue. With increasing threats on campuses, the debate over arming responsible students and staff is far from over.

ACLU Demands Defense Department Restore Books Indoctrinating Children

Library Books (Tom Hermans/Unsplash)

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) filed a lawsuit this week against the Defense Department’s school system after removing books discussing gender and race.

“Since January, their schools have systemically removed books, altered curricula, and canceled events that the government has accused of promoting ‘gender ideology’ or ‘divisive equity ideology,'” the ACLU claimed in a press release. “This has included materials about slavery, Native American history, LGBTQ identities and history, and preventing sexual harassment and abuse, as well as portions of the Advanced Placement (AP) Psychology curriculum.”

According to the group’s lawsuit, the Department of Defense Education Activity is “quarantining library books and whitewashing curricula in its civilian schools. Right now, DoDEA is scrubbing references to race and gender from its libraries and lessons with no regard to how canonical, award-winning, or age-appropriate the material might be.”

“DoDEA’s book and curricular removals violate students’ First Amendment right to receive information,” the filing says. “While the government has broad discretion to populate public school libraries and create curricula, the First Amendment imposes guardrails to ensure removals are justified.”

A mother of three children in the Defense Department’s schools said the executive orders removing the books were a “violation of our children’s right to access information that prevents them from learning about their own histories, bodies, and identities.”

President Trump issued an executive order in January that sought to end the “radical indoctrination” of children in K-12 schools.

“In many cases, innocent children are compelled to adopt identities as either victims or oppressors solely based on their skin color and other immutable characteristics,” the order said. “In other instances, young men and women are made to question whether they were born in the wrong body and whether to view their parents and their reality as enemies to be blamed.”

Supreme Court Schedules Trump’s Birthright Citizenship Case

trump
President Donald Trump (Photo by Joe Raedle/Getty Images)

The Supreme Court will consider the Trump administration’s challenge to the injunctions against the president’s order ending birthright citizenship.

Oral arguments will be heard on May 15.

“These cases – which involve challenges to the President’s January 20, 2025 Executive Order concerning birthright citizenship – raise important constitutional questions with major ramifications for securing the border,” the Trump administration argued.

The Trump administration further argued that the “nationwide injunctions exceed the scope of the federal courts’ equitable powers and disregard Article III’s limitations on the power of the judicial branch. By allowing single, unelected federal judges to co-opt entire executive-branch policies at the drop of the hat, they create needless interbranch friction and perpetrate a truly lupine encroachment by the Judiciary on the President’s Article II authority.”

President Trump’s order ending birthright citizenship has been consistently blocked by courts.

The order, titled Protecting the Meaning and Value of American Citizenship,” said the “Fourteenth Amendment has never been interpreted to extend citizenship universally to everyone born within the United States.”

“The Fourteenth Amendment has always excluded from birthright citizenship persons who were born in the United States but not ‘subject to the jurisdiction thereof.’ Consistent with this understanding, the Congress has further specified through legislation that ‘a person born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof’ is a national and citizen of the United States at birth, generally mirroring the Fourteenth Amendment’s text,” the order explained.

Opponents argue that this interpretation contradicts over a century of legal precedent, notably the 1898 Supreme Court decision in United States v. Wong Kim Ark, which affirmed birthright citizenship for nearly all individuals born on U.S. soil, regardless of their parents’ nationality.

Declassified Documents Reveal Effort to Limit Gun Rights to Curb ‘Domestic Terrorism’

Gabbard
(Photo by Kayla Bartkowski/Getty Images)

Director of National Intelligence (DNI) Tulsi Gabbard declassified Biden-era documents, exposing an effort to limit gun rights as a means of countering domestic terrorism.

The documents discuss how the government can “confront long-term contributors to domestic terrorism,” explaining how officials may “rein in the proliferation of ghost guns; encourage state adoption of extreme risk protection orders; and drive other executive and legislative action, including banning assault weapons and high-capacity magazines.”

According to the documents, the government sought to counter domestic terrorism threats by seeking to implement the “COVID-19 Hate Crimes Act” to address reporting barriers faced by “disadvantaged communities by promoting law enforcement training and resources to prevent and address bias-motivated crimes.” The documents specifically describe the effort to “mitigate xenophobia and bias.”

Sharing the declassified materials, Gabbard wrote on X, “As promised, I have declassified the Biden Administration’s Strategic Implementation Plan for Countering Domestic Terrorism.”

Second Amendment group Gun Owners of America condemned the previous White House administration’s efforts, describing the documents as “Biden’s secret plan to eliminate the Second Amendment in the name of ‘counterterrorism.’”

The declassification comes as Gabbard announced earlier this month that she formed a task force to investigate the Intelligence Community (IC) as a means of restoring transparency and accountability.

“In order to rebuild trust in the Intelligence Community and execute the tasks required by President Trump’s intelligence-related Executive Orders, I established the Director’s Initiatives Group to bring about transparency and accountability across the IC. We are already identifying wasteful spending in real time, streamlining outdated processes, reviewing documents for declassification, and leading ongoing efforts to root out abuses of power and politicization,” Gabbard said in a statement.

EPA Targets Geoengineering Company Injecting Pollutants in Air

(engin akyurt/Unsplash)

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Office of Air and Radiation (OAR) has demanded information from a geoengineering company launching sulfur dioxide into the air.

Sulfur dioxide poses a risk to respiratory health.

The company, called Make Sunsets, has launched balloons with the compound in an effort to generate “cooling” credits.

“It is unclear where the balloons are launched and where the SO2 is from,” the EPA said. “Furthermore, it is not known if the company has been in contact with any state, local or federal air agencies.”

“The idea that individuals, supported by venture capitalists, are putting criteria air pollutants into the air to sell ‘cooling’ credits shows how climate extremism has overtaken common sense,” EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin said in a statement. “Based on Make Sunsets’ responses to our information request, we will look into all our authorities to ensure that we continue maintaining clean air for all Americans.”

According to Make Sunsets, the balloons act as a “sunscreen for the Earth” to combat so-called climate change.

Addressing its participation in geoengineering, the company argued that any human release of carbon dioxide is geoengineering, stating that “the earth is a bit warmer for every flight you take. We think it’s wrong to suddenly draw a line at the stratosphere: we screwed up the atmosphere, and now we have a moral obligation to fix things!”

Some states, such as Florida, have taken steps to combat geoengineering.

SB 56 states that the “injection, release, or dispersion, by any means, of a chemical, a chemical compound, a substance, or an apparatus into the atmosphere within the borders of this state for the express purpose of affecting the temperature, weather, climate, or intensity of sunlight is prohibited.”

Those who participate in geoengineering, including “any public or private corporation,” have committed a felony of the third degree, the bill adds.

Shooting at Florida State University Leaves Several Hospitalized

(Kevin Dunlap/Unsplash)

At least six people have been hospitalized after shots were fired at Florida State University in Tallahassee.

“An active shooter has been reported in the area of Student Union. Police are on scene or on the way,” the university announced at 12:01 PM ET. “Continue to seek shelter and await further instructions. Lock and stay away from all doors and windows and be prepared to take additional protective measures.”

Rep. Neal Dunn (R) wrote on X that his team is “monitoring reports of an active shooter on FSU’s campus. It’s too early to understand the extent of the violence, but early reports are very disturbing.”

“Follow all local guidance. Shelter in place. Stay safe,” he wrote. “Thank you to our brave first responders for responding to the situation.”

Tallahassee Memorial Hospital told local outlets that five of the victims are in serious condition and one is in critical condition.

“TMH is actively receiving and caring for patients related to an incident that has occurred at Florida State University,” the hospital said in the statement. “We want to assure the community that our teams are fully mobilized and prepared to provide the highest level of care and support to all those affected.”

Governor Ron DeSantis (R) said, “Our prayers are with our FSU family and state law enforcement is actively responding.”

President Donald Trump said from the Oval Office: “I’ve been briefed on the Florida State University, Tallahassee active shooting…It’s a shame. It’s a horrible thing. It’s horrible that things like this take place. We’ll have more to say about it later.”

This is a developing story.

Judge Rules Google Illegally Dominates Market

Google Chrome (Rubaitul Azad/Unsplash)

U.S. District Judge Leonie Brinkema found that Google illegally monopolized online advertising technology, violating antitrust laws.

Google violated the Sherman Antitrust Act by “willfully acquiring and maintaining monopoly power in the open-web display publisher ad server market and the open-web display ad exchange market,” the judge wrote.

“For over a decade, Google has tied its publisher ad server and ad exchange together through contractual policies and technological integration, which enabled the company to establish and protect its monopoly power” in the publisher ad server and ad exchange markets.

“Google further entrenched its monopoly power by imposing anticompetitive policies on its customers and eliminating desirable product features,” Brinkema explained. “In addition to depriving rivals of the ability to compete, this exclusionary conduct substantially harmed Google’s publisher customers, the competitive process, and, ultimately, consumers of information on the open web. Accordingly, Google is liable under Sections 1 and 2 of the Sherman Act.”

The ruling may allow prosecutors to push for a breakup of Google’s advertising programs

Google’s Vice President of Regulatory Affairs, Lee-Anne Mulholland, said in a statement that the company “won half of this case and we will appeal the other half. The Court found that our advertiser tools and our acquisitions, such as DoubleClick, don’t harm competition.”

“We disagree with the Court’s decision regarding our publisher tools,” Mulholland added. “Publishers have many options and they choose Google because our ad tech tools are simple, affordable and effective.”

A similar ruling against Google was issued last year, when Judge Amit Mehta of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia wrote that “Google’s distribution agreements foreclose a substantial portion of the general search services market and impair rivals’ opportunities to compete.”

“After having carefully considered and weighed the witness testimony and evidence, the court reaches the following conclusion: Google is a monopolist, and it has acted as one to maintain its monopoly,” Mehta wrote. “It has violated Section 2 of the Sherman Act.”

WHO Reaches Pandemic Agreement

WHO
(Photo by Sean Gallup/Getty Images)

The World Health Organization (WHO) has reached a draft pandemic agreement. The development has been in the works since December 2021.

“The nations of the world made history in Geneva today,” Dr. WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus said in a statement. “In reaching consensus on the Pandemic Agreement, not only did they put in place a generational accord to make the world safer, they have also demonstrated that multilateralism is alive and well, and that in our divided world, nations can still work together to find common ground, and a shared response to shared threats. I thank WHO’s Member States, and their negotiating teams, for their foresight, commitment and tireless work. We look forward to the World Health Assembly’s consideration of the agreement and – we hope – its adoption.”

Proposals in the agreement include creating a pathogen access and benefit-sharing system, utilizing a One Health system, technology transfers, establishing a global health emergency team, and developing a global supply chain and logistics network.

According to the WHO, the draft agreement does not allow the health body to “mandate States to take specific actions, such as ban or accept travellers, impose vaccination mandates or therapeutic or diagnostic measures or implement lockdowns.”

Tedros announced earlier this week that the WHO has “established the Pandemic Fund, the WHO Hub for Pandemic and Epidemic Intelligence, the mRNA Technology Transfer Programme, the BioHub, the Global Health Emergency Corps, the Interim Medical Countermeasures Network, the Universal Health and Preparedness Review, and more.”

President Trump signed an executive order in January to begin the process of withdrawing the United States from the WHO.

SpaceX the ‘Frontrunner’ in Missile Shield Development: Report

Trump and Elon
Elon Musk and President Donald Trump (Photo by Brandon Bell/Getty Images)

SpaceX and two partners are considered frontrunners in constructing part of President Trump’s missile defense system.

Reuters reports that SpaceX is partnering with software company Palantir and defense technology company Anduril for the bid. The plan would involve the construction and launch of at least 400 satellites to track missiles around the globe. Another fleet of 200 attack missiles would shoot down enemy missiles, sources told the outlet.

One of the sources familiar with the matter said the discussions are “a departure from the usual acquisition process. There’s an attitude that the national security and defense community has to be sensitive and deferential to Elon Musk because of his role in the government.”

Reuters noted that SpaceX may establish its role in the defense project as a “subscription service.”

“It remains to be seen whether SpaceX and these tech companies will be able to pull any of this off,” a source added. “They’ve never had to deliver on an entire system that the nation will need to rely on for its defense.”

The development comes as President Trump signed an executive order in January to construct an Iron Dome for the United States.

“The threat of attack by ballistic, hypersonic, and cruise missiles, and other advanced aerial attacks, remains the most catastrophic threat facing the United States,” the order said, calling for the U.S. to “provide for the common defense of its citizens and the Nation by deploying and maintaining a next-generation missile defense shield” as well as “deter — and defend its citizens and critical infrastructure against — any foreign aerial attack on the Homeland.”

Update: Appeals Court Halts Obama-Appointed Judge’s Order

Lee Zeldin
(Photo by Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images)

U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan ruled this week that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) cannot terminate parts of the billions of dollars in climate grants awarded under the previous White House administration.

According to Chutkan’s order, the EPA cannot “deny, obstruct, delay, or otherwise limit access to funds in accounts established in connection with Plaintiffs’ grants, including funds in accounts established by Plaintiffs’ subgrantees.”

Climate United Fund CEO Beth Bafford celebrated the ruling, saying the order “gives us a chance to breathe after the EPA unlawfully — and without due process — terminated our awards and blocked access to funds that were appropriated by Congress and legally obligated.”

“After a year-long application process, we were hired to do a job that we’ve done for decades: investing in communities and strengthening markets. We want to get back to work,” Bafford said.

Chutkan issued a temporary restraining order against the EPA’s grant terminations in March. “Based on the record before the court, and under the relevant statutes and various agreements, it does not appear that EPA Defendants took the legally required steps necessary to terminate these grants, such that its actions were arbitrary and capricious,” Chutkan wrote at the time.

“The Biden EPA handled politically connected and inexperienced nongovernmental organizations tens of billions in taxpayer funding in a manner that deliberately reduced the ability of EPA to conduct proper oversight,” EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin said following the March order. “I will not rest until these hard-earned taxpayer dollars are returned to the U.S. Treasury. Every penny EPA spends will go towards our core mission of protecting human health and the environment, and Powering the Great American Comeback.”

Update:

The D.C. Court of Appeals issued a hold on Chutkan’s ruling, writing, “The purpose of this order is to give the court sufficient opportunity to consider the district court’s forthcoming opinion in support of its order granting a preliminary injunction together with the emergency motion for stay pending appeal and any response thereto, and should not be construed in any way as a ruling on the merits of that motion.”

1...131415...3,171Page 14 of 3,171
This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. ©2023 American Faith News Media. All rights reserved.