A federal judge appointed by Donald Trump has blocked the president’s deployment of the National Guard to Portland, Oregon, asserting that the justification of civil unrest was unsubstantiated. Judge Karin Immergut stated the deployment risked violating the Constitution, citing that claims of violence targeting immigration authorities were false. The judge’s decision followed Trump’s announcement describing Portland as “war-ravaged” and ordering troops to protect ICE facilities. Oregon Governor Tina Kotek praised the ruling, emphasizing the importance of the rule of law and the absence of an insurrection in Portland.
Read More
Second US appeals court rejects Trump’s order curtailing birthright citizenship. Well, isn’t that something? The second court of appeals has now tossed out Trump’s attempt to chip away at birthright citizenship. You know, the one enshrined in the 14th Amendment? This isn’t just a legal issue; it strikes at the very heart of who we are as Americans. It’s about the promise of equal protection under the law, a promise that’s been a cornerstone of our nation since the Civil War.
This whole situation is like watching a slow-motion train wreck. You know where it’s headed: potentially all the way to the Supreme Court.… Continue reading
President Trump’s address to military leaders on September 30, 2025, was marked by highly unusual rhetoric. He called on the armed forces to confront an internal enemy and suggested utilizing American cities for military training exercises. This unprecedented statement has raised concerns among observers like Paul Rieckhoff, the founder and CEO of Independent Veterans of America. The specifics of the address suggest a dramatic shift in presidential tone.
Read More
The Trump administration has asked the Supreme Court to review the constitutionality of an executive order that would end birthright citizenship, marking the second time this year the issue has been brought before the justices. The administration’s appeal argues that the long-held understanding of the 14th Amendment, which grants citizenship to those born in the U.S., is “mistaken.” The order was blocked by lower courts, with the administration now seeking a final ruling to resolve the issue. The executive order, signed in January, stated that the federal government will not recognize the U.S. citizenship of children born on American soil to parents who were in the country unlawfully or temporarily.
Read More
Senator Lindsey Graham expressed hope for Donald Trump to run for a third term in 2028, suggesting “Trump 2028. I hope this never ends” during an interview on Fox News. Graham praised Trump’s performance at the United Nations, echoing the former president’s claims of resolving global conflicts. He also commented on Trump’s approach to Russia, advocating for the end of the war while avoiding humiliation of Russia. This is not the first time Graham has alluded to this idea, having previously mentioned it on social media.
Read More
Trump says he will order voter ID requirement for every vote, and the immediate reaction is a mix of disbelief and frustration. The core issue, as many point out, is the simple fact that he doesn’t have the authority to do this. The United States Constitution, in no uncertain terms, grants the power to regulate elections to the individual states, with potential oversight from Congress. The idea of a presidential “order” on this front is immediately seen as unconstitutional and legally unenforceable. It’s like a fundamental misunderstanding of how the country’s system of government actually works.
The comments quickly shift from the legality to the practicalities.… Continue reading
President Trump has vowed further changes to U.S. elections, despite having limited constitutional authority to do so on his own. Trump’s statements, often fueled by false claims about voter fraud and conspiracy theories, propose eliminating mail voting and voting machines, which were used in his own 2024 election victory. The article explains that the U.S. Constitution primarily grants states the power to determine election procedures, while Congress can influence federal elections. Legal experts clarify that the president’s involvement in election conduct is minimal, and any alterations to federal election rules would require congressional action, which is unlikely given the current political landscape.
Read More
In a recent announcement, President Trump declared his intention to spearhead an initiative to ban mail-in ballots and voting machines for the upcoming midterm elections, sparking immediate criticism. Trump falsely claimed that no other country utilizes mail-in voting and repeated the debunked assertion that the 2020 election was lost due to mail-in ballot fraud. He stated he would sign an executive order that forbids mail-in ballots and automatic tabulation machines. However, legal experts such as Marc Elias argue such an executive order would be unconstitutional, representing a significant threat to free and fair elections.
Read More
The official congressional website, congress.gov, has removed Sections 9 and 10 of Article I from its “Constitution Annotated” resource, raising concerns about the integrity of the document. Section 9, which includes the right to habeas corpus, has been deleted, along with other constitutional protections. This act mirrors former President Trump’s past actions, where he edited out parts of the Constitution that didn’t align with his views, showcasing an assault on the rule of law. This act is a bold step, laying the groundwork for misinformation and making it easier to disregard fundamental rights, despite the law itself remaining unchanged.
Read More
Military communities are grappling with the implications of deploying the armed forces domestically, a situation that has broken constitutional norms and sparked internal concerns. Veterans like Brittany Ramos DeBarros see this as a catalyst for organizing, as service members and their families seek support and grapple with difficult moral choices. The legal complexities surrounding unlawful orders are also a significant issue, with service members facing the potential for court-martial and imprisonment for defiance, or moral injury for compliance. Ultimately, the situation places military personnel in a challenging position, forcing them to navigate a complex landscape of legal and ethical considerations.
Read More
John Q. Hosedrinker 
Matt Underwood