The Supreme Court is being asked to weigh in on a legal battle over a Texas law requiring app stores to implement age verification for users and require parental permission for minors to download apps after a federal appeals court allowed the law to go into effect. Students Engaged in Advancing Texas, a left-wing education […]
The Supreme Court declined to hear a 98-year-old federal judge’s challenge of her suspension by her peers on the federal appeals court she serves on, leaving the oldest active federal judge suspended from her duties. The high court did not explain its decision not to hear the case brought by U.S. Circuit Judge Pauline Newman, […]
On Monday, a new Supreme Court announcement complicated the fate of a settlement paid by the Department of Justice to an ally of President Donald Trump, turning down a request by Trump 2016 advisor Carter Page to revive a lawsuit filed against former FBI director James Comey and others. The Trump administration had previously paid Page a $1.25 million settlement tied to the lawsuit, but now the top court’s decision means that the case prompting the payout had no legal merit. The matter dates back to the FBI’s investigation into Russian interference during the 2016 election, during which Page was targeted with a FISA wiretap due to allegations surrounding his travel to Russia, which fueled rumors about Trump’s ties to the Kremlin. While Page was never charged with a crime, a DOJ investigation during Trump’s first term turned up errors and omissions that made Page appear more suspicious than he was in order to justify the surveillance. As the New York Times notes, “Although the wiretapping was just a part of a much larger investigation of Russian interference in the 2016 campaign, Mr. Trump and his allies used it to try to broadly discredit the inquiry.”Page filed suit against Comey and seven others in 2020, claiming that the public revelations of his surveillance had harmed his reputation and business. While lower courts dismissed his claims, saying that he had taken too long to file them, he appealed to the Supreme Court. Then in April, while waiting on the Court’s decision, the Trump administration abruptly agreed to the $1.25 million settlement, paying Page even though an inspector general — and appointee of George H.W. Bush — said he could find no evidence that the case against Page had been motivated by political bias. Though the settlement was reached, his appeal to the Supreme Court continued. Now the Court has declined to revive the suit, including the decision among a list of others it has elected to decline or accept without further explanation. While this ends the lawsuit, it also likely raises new questions about the legality of the settlement, as the case it was based upon has essentially been deemed invalid. The settlement is among several similar recent payments or efforts that have raised controversy. The Trump administration also paid $1.2 million to former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn, who faced allegations of misconduct in the Russia investigation. More recently, the Trump administration drew bipartisan outrage by announcing the creation of a $1.8 billion “anti-weaponization fund” for the benefit of those “harmed” by the Biden administration. The fund, which was widely decried as a “slush fund” for Trump’s allies, has been stymied by the courts as well as lawmakers on both sides of the aisle, though the president has persisted in pursuing it.
The increasingly barbecue-centered Texas Senate race has taken an oddly specific turn as each candidate tries to prove their regional food bonafides.Republican Attorney General Ken Paxton challenged his Democratic opponent, state Rep. James Talarico, to prove he likes barbecued meat as much as he claims, reported Chron."Let's meet at a barbecue restaurant and let's see how much you love barbecue," Paxton says in a video posted by conservative influencer Benny Johnson. "Let's have a real barbecue lunch."Paxton and other conservatives have questioned Talarico's masculinity and Texas credentials by criticizing his eating habits and suggesting he's gay, and the Democratic legislator has insisted that he's not a vegan by posting photos of himself eating meat – but even that has prompted criticism that he's not sloppy enough."Who eats ribs with a napkin by the way? Is that normal in the State of Texas?" Johnson asks Paxton in the video, showing a photo of Talarico eating a beef rib while holding a napkin."We eat with our hands," Paxton said, "and we don't eat with a napkin until after it's all over."The campaign to replace ousted Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX), who President Donald Trump declined to endorse, has focused on increasingly personal attacks Talarico and Paxton."I'm an 8th-generation Texan — I've been eating BBQ since before Ken Paxton's first indictment," Talarico wrote on the X post mocked by Paxton and Johnson.Talarico also accused the scandal-plagued but Trump-endorsed attorney general of giving "Epstein-style sweetheart deals" to child sex offenders, referring to renewed scrutiny surrounding a plea agreement for a politically connected sex offender.It's not clear whether the proposed barbecue summit will actually happen or where it would be hosted, and Chron said Talarico's campaign has not yet responded to a request for comment.
The Supreme Court declined to revive a lawsuit Carter Page, a former aide for President Donald Trump’s 2016 campaign, brought against former FBI officials, including former Director James Comey, over the government’s secret spying on him as part of the FBI’s Trump-Russia investigation. The high court did not elaborate on its decision not to take […]
Japan managed to sneak out a tie against the Netherlands after falling behind twice in a World Cup match on Sunday, but it was the Japanese fans who went viral after the game.Making the trip to watch their team at AT&T Stadium in Arlington, Texas, fans saw a late goal in the 89th minute earn Japan a 2-2 draw against its Dutch opponents. After the game, though, Japanese fans truly went to work.'Return it the way you found it.'Viral videos from all over the stadium quickly hit the internet, showing the Asian visitors whipping out blue garbage bags and methodically cleaning up their sections of the stadium.The fans first used the bags as a way to celebrate their team, raising them in the air and letting them ripple like a wave until impressing the world by using the same bags to gather garbage later on."There's a Japanese culture ... which means we should be cleaner [than when] we came here," a fan told Singapore outlet CNA. "So this is our mindset and this is very obvious that we are to clean up the stadium and that will [showcase] our good Japanese culture."RELATED: Japan is close to finding cure for rare disorder that devastates children KDFW reported on comments from a Japanese teacher who further explained why the fans were all acting in unison."Japanese sports fans at world events who clean up the stadium are behaving much the same way they did when they learned how to enjoy sports as school boys and girls," said Koichi Nakano, a politics and history teacher at Sophia University in Tokyo, Japan.A popular Japanese phrase apparently embodies the idea: "Tatsu tori ato wo nigosazu," which reportedly means "return it the way you found it."RELATED: Brazil sends off its World Cup team in the most Catholic way possible L-R: Charlotte Wilson/Getty Images; Michael Steele/Getty ImagesBeloved NFL quarterback Jameis Winston was also among the Japanese crowd cleaning up the garbage. At 6'4", Winston stuck out like a sore thumb in the crowd of fans, but seeking no attention, he grabbed a blue bag and helped the Japanese supporters with their mission.The New York Giants quarterback happened to be in that section of the stadium while reporting on the game for Fox Sports and decided to join in.Japan's next game is Sunday at 12:00 a.m. ET against Tunisia, taking place at Estadio BBVA in Guadalupe, Mexico, where the Japanese fans will most likely show up their Tunisian counterparts.Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
The Supreme Court announced it would take up a case deciding whether the federal government can hold criminal immigrants in detention indefinitely pending removal, adding to the immigration cases the high court has heard in recent years. The high court said Monday that it would hear the case Genalo v. Black, part of an orders […]
Even for a president known for imposing his own reality on every situation, Mr. Trump has not outrun scrutiny over his age.
A Supreme Court expert warned on Sunday that the Court has a "self-serving" interest in helping Republicans hold their majority in Congress after the midterm election, and that this could influence how the court rules in a major upcoming case. Lisa Graves, executive director of True North Research and co-host of the "Legal AF" podcast, argued during a recent episode that the Supreme Court has already signaled to Republicans that it is willing to help them during the midterms. She noted that the court previously operated under the dictum that it would not interfere in the election process during election years, but threw that principle out when it decided to allow Louisiana to redraw its congressional map in Louisiana v. Callais. That raises the stakes for a forthcoming Supreme Court decision regarding a case from Mississippi that could determine when states are allowed to count mail-in ballots, Graves argued."All bets are off because we know the Roberts court has been actively, aggressively intervening in our elections while elections are underway to put their thumb or their fist on the scale of justice on the side of Republicans," Graves said. "I think not just because Donald Trump has wanted to change the maps and basically cheat to get an advantage in this midterm election, but also because John Roberts has a multi-decade antipathy for the Voting Rights Act."He's joined in that by people like Sam Alito who have been opposed to the apportionment cases and more," she continued. "And also, it cannot go unmentioned by me that if Congress were to become controlled by Democrats, there would probably be a robust investigation of this Roberts court. So, they have a self-serving interest as they are trying to move the law to aid what the RNC wants or what Republicans want." Graves noted that the Callais decision highlighted the Supreme Court's "self-serving" interest in helping Republicans, because a Republican majority would not investigate the court, whereas Democrats would.Graves added that there are several things Democrats could investigate the Supreme Court for. She noted that Justice Clarence Thomas has not yet answered questions about his financial disclosures and a recreational vehicle that he purchased on loan from a wealthy associate that was later forgiven. Justice Sam Alito has also not answered questions about trips he took that were funded by wealthy donors. "There's a lot of investigations that need to take place," Graves said.