Caitlin Clark will add pure excitement to a boring girls game that might draw 10,000 tops. Some teams averaged less than 5,000. Who wants to watch a bunch of men wanna Be’s?
Now we see where a so called journalist is upset that Clark may get a great shoe endorsement. “If she does,” Freeman writes of Clark’s pending shoe deal, “Clark would join only three other WNBA players with signature shoes: Breanna Stewart, Elena Delle Donne, and Sabrina Ionescu. You may notice a pattern there.”
It’s all because of racism, Freeman exclaims.
“What so much of this comes down to is a lack of respect for the Black women of the WNBA. A lack of respect for Black Americans overall isn’t something new to the marketing world. This is old hat. That doesn’t change the ugliness of it,” he claimed.
Trumps finally getting the media attention and the lefts not happy. A Columbian judge and an affirmative action DA are in a tizzy not knowing how to control Donald Trump. The MSM are following and covering Trump as he goes where Democrat politicians are afraid to. Harlem and restaurants that cater to black folks.
Is it helping Trump? A Decision Desk HQ average of polls showed Trump leading in Arizona by 4 percentage points, in Georgia by 5 percentage points, in Michigan by 3 percentage points and in North Carolina by 3 points. The two candidates are neck-and-neck in Pennsylvania and Wisconsin. Now you see why Trumps being shadowed by Biden.
We had a few victories in both the courts and with the state legislators the past 7-10 days. Remember it’s the legislators and not the Secretary of State who make the laws.
In Florida. Judge Cannon spurned Smith’s demand that she quickly decide whether the personal documents claim will be relevant to the trial, saying making a decision at this stage would be “unprecedented and unjust”.
Wisconsin voters approved two amendments to the state’s constitution — making sure that private money to fund elections will be banned and that only election officials can administer elections.
Georgia — where the Georgia General Assembly actually passed three election integrity bills last Thursday.
The three bills — SB189, HB974, and HB1207 — ban unverifiable QR-coded voting and also require improved ballot chain of custody procedures to stop ballot fraud. They also mandate visible watermarks on all ballots to stop fake ballots.
The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals on Thursday blocked Biden’s plan to cancel loans for borrowers who claim they were victims of ‘misleading information’ by colleges.
The seal of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission at SEC headquarters, June 19, 2015, in Washington. (AP Photo/Andrew Harnik, File)
Visits: 12
Winning. For now. Court halts SEC climate disclosure rule. The Biden Administration has been using the SEC and other government agencies from moving forward with exploration, drilling, etc. All in the name of the phony climate change. Well the 5th Circuit stepped in.
A federal court on Friday halted a new federal rule that would require publicly traded companies to reveal climate change-related information.
A panel of Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals judges issued an order that pauses the rule as litigation against it plays out. Vote was 3-0.
It also requires some large and mid-sized companies to disclose how much carbon dioxide they are directly emitting and how much comes from their energy use.
Stories we missed. Republicans control all major offices in Louisiana. Something changed this past January. Republicans had a clean sweep. They took the Governor, Secretary of State, Treasure, and Attorneys offices. And some thought it may turn purple or blue. I see Red.
The result gives the GOP a 100 percent lock on all the state’s top offices as well as control of the state Senate and House of Representatives. The GOP is back after only having full control of the top positions between 2011 and 2015, before losing the governor’s office between 2016 and 2023.
The GOP also controls the second tier of state offices including, Agriculture Commissioner Mike Strain, and Insurance Commissioner Tim Temple. Strain also became the first Republican in state history to win the AG office.
California Gov. Gavin Newsom talks to reporters in the spin room at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library in Simi Valley, Calif., on Sept. 27, 2023. (Mario Tama/Getty Images)
In his March 11 ruling, a federal judge said that the one-gun-a-month (OGM) law does not adhere to requirements for gun restrictions outlined by the U.S. Supreme Court in a pivotal 2022 decision.
“Defendants have not met their burden of producing a ‘well-established and representative historical analogue’ to the OGM law,” U.S. District Judge William Q. Hayes wrote in the decision.
“The court therefore concludes that plaintiffs are entitled to summary judgment as to the constitutionality of the OGM law under the Second Amendment.”
The U.S. Constitution’s Second Amendment states: “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”
The Supreme Court’s 2022 ruling in New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. Bruen says that if a law regulates conduct covered by the Second Amendment, officials defending the law must show it is “consistent with the Nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation.”
Defendants must provide “historical precedent from before, during, and even after the founding [that] evinces a comparable tradition of regulation,” the high court stated.
Justices instructed lower courts not to “uphold every modern law that remotely resembles a historical analogue” but that “analogical reasoning requires only that the government identify a well-established and representative historical analogue, not a historical twin.”
They also issued guidance for judges to consider “how and why the regulations burden a law-abiding citizen’s right to armed self-defense” and to examine “whether modern and historical regulations impose a comparable burden on the right of armed self-defense and whether that burden is comparably justified are central considerations when engaging in an analogical inquiry.”
The law, signed by California Gov. Gavin Newsom in 2019, barred people who bought a handgun or semiautomatic centerfire rifle from a dealer from applying to buy another handgun or semiautomatic centerfire rifle for at least 30 days.
“Gun violence is an epidemic in this country, one that’s been enflamed by the inaction of politicians in Washington,” Mr. Newsom, a Democrat, said at the time.
“While Washington has refused to act on even the most basic gun safety reforms, California is once again leading the nation in passing meaningful gun safety reforms.”
Gun owners and groups sued in 2020, saying the law violated their constitutional rights.
After the 2022 Supreme Court ruling, defendants were ordered to provide historical examples of similar laws.
California officials offered four categories of historical restrictions, including regulations on selling guns to Native Americans and regulations on gunpowder.
Those regulations are not relevant to the law in question, Judge Hayes said.
Differing Objectives
The restrictions on Native Americans, for instance, “do not impose a comparable burden” to the California law, he wrote.
“The identified historical laws targeted only a narrow subset of the population perceived as dangerous, while the OGM law, with limited exceptions, affects all people acquiring handguns and semiautomatic centerfire rifles in California.
“Further, laws restricting the sale of arms to Native Americans impose neither a quantity nor time limitation similar to that of the OGM law.”
The gunpowder regulations were comparable because they “placed limits on the ownership and storage of gunpowder,” but “did not completely prevent people from purchasing gunpowder,” the state argued.
The regulations and the 2019 California law are “comparably justified” because both were imposed to “promote public safety,” the state said.
Judge Hayes, though, noted that officials have said previously that the California law was aimed at reducing firearms trafficking and disarming criminals, while the gunpowder regulations were put in place to prevent fires and explosions.
“Put simply, gunpowder regulations addressed fire-related risks, while the OGM law addresses risks associated with illegal gun trafficking and gun violence. Gunpowder restrictions and the OGM law are therefore not comparably justified,” he said.
Judge Hayes, a George W. Bush appointee, entered a stay of the order for 30 days to enable California officials to appeal.
“We are currently evaluating the decision, but it is important to acknowledge that the law limiting firearm purchases to one every thirty days remains in effect at this time,” a spokesperson for California Attorney General Rob Bonta, a Democrat, told The Epoch Times via email.
“Another week, another California gun control law declared unconstitutional by a federal court,” Cody J. Wisniewski, vice president and general counsel of the Firearms Policy Coalition, said in a statement. Some of the group’s members are among the plaintiffs.
“California’s one-gun-a-month law directly violates California residents’ right to acquire arms and has no basis in history,” Mr. Wisniewski said. “Given it seems certain California will refuse to learn its lesson, we look forward to continuing to strike down its gun control regime and to defending this victory.”
“This is a win for gun rights and California gun owners,” Alan M. Gottlieb, founder and executive vice president of the Second Amendment Foundation, another plaintiff, said in a statement. “There is no historical justification for limiting law-abiding citizens to a single handgun or rifle purchase during a one-month period, and Judge Hayes’ ruling clearly points that out.”
Wisconsin Supreme Court rules Phillips is on the ballott.
Visits: 18
Biden loses in court again. Court rules Phillips on the Primary ballot. The Wisconsin Supreme Court ordered state election officials to include Rep. Dean Phillips (D-MN) on the ballot with Joe Biden in the April primary.
What is Joe afraid of? Is it that he may have to debate Phillips? If Phillips get more support or starts winning delagates, Joe may be in big trouble.
Phillips, who represents neighboring Minnesota in Congress, filed a lawsuit on Jan. 26 demanding the Wisconsin Elections Commission add his name to the ballot after Democratic leaders on the selection committee left him off it following a meeting on Jan. 2.
Winning for now. Labor Secretary Fails Senate Confirmation. Acting Labor Secretary, Julie Su wasn’t confirmed by the Senate who refused to confirm or deny her appointment.
This now goes back to Biden’s desk for him to renominate her.
“Upon Secretary Walsh’s departure, acting Secretary Su automatically became acting secretary under its organic statute, not under the Federal Vacancies Reform Act,” a White House official said in July. “As a result, Su is not subject to the time limits of the Federal Vacancies Reform Act and she can serve as acting secretary indefinitely.”
Jack Smith request to hide evidence from Trump legal team is denied. Last month Jack Smith’s lawyers asked Judge Cannon to keep documents under seal because it is considered “highly sensitive classified information.”
Aileen Cannon, the judge presiding over former President Donald Trump’s classified documents case, on Monday ordered the unsealing of documents filed by Special Counsel Jack Smith, who had asked that they be kept under wraps because they could reveal his trial strategy.
On Monday, Cannon ordered the unsealing of documents filed by Smith in the case, making them public, adding that she was “mindful of the strong presumption in favor of public access to judicial documents.”
On November 22, Smith asked that the filing be kept under seal because it contained government plans to delete “highly sensitive classified information” from sharable discovery.
Cannon said that Smith had not provided “sufficient justification” for his filing because the motions did not “contain or otherwise reveal classified information.”
Additionally, a Friday court document revealed the response to the initial order of unsealing in which Smith’s team agreed to unseal the documents, as requested by the defense, though prosecutors insisted on some redactions.
“The defendants did not oppose the Government’s request, but reserved the right to challenge them later,” Smith wrote, adding that a full unsealing could disclose classified defense counsel information about how government’s CIPA motion.
“This is the same information that the Government proposed redacting. Because the Court rejected that position and ordered the Government to provide unredacted versions of the two docket entries to defense counsel, there is no justification for keeping them from the public.”
49
