Supreme Court temporarily blocks appeals court ruling on abortion pill, restores wider access to drug

Judge Ruling on the Biden Tapes Is a Big Win for Open Government

Florida subpoenas MLB for ‘selectively enforcing’ uniform rules to reprimand Christian pitchers

Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier issued a subpoena to Major League Baseball on Friday after it threatened to punish Christian players for writing Bible verses on their Pride Night caps last week. The sports organization claims the actions of the three San Francisco Giants pitchers violated its uniform rules, but Uthmeier argues that the league […]

Trump DOJ thrashes court's demand to officially declare that 'slush fund' is dead

President Donald Trump's Department of Justice thrashed a federal judge in a new court filing for demanding that DOJ officials and two Trump cabinet secretaries officially declare that Trump's "anti-weaponization" slush fund is officially dead. Last month, the Trump administration announced plans to create a $1.776 billion fund to pay claims from people who allege they were wrongfully prosecuted by the federal government. Several of Trump's allies, including formerly convicted members of the Proud Boys, declared that they would seek restitution from the fund, which sparked significant bipartisan pushback. Political analysts and experts have described the fund as a "slush fund" because the Trump DOJ would have full control over who is eligible for payments, and the legal paperwork establishing the fund states that the federal government bears no responsibility if crimes are committed by people who receive payments. Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche told the House and Senate judiciary committees that the administration is no longer pursuing the fund, but has refused to put that in writing. On Friday, the Trump DOJ told a judge in the Eastern District of Virginia that it won't abide by a demand to declare the fund dead. The DOJ argued in the filing that multiple Trump administration officials have said the fund is not moving forward, and those past statements should satisfy the court's demand. It also attached a copy of Blanche's testimony to Congress as evidence of its claims. "Such declarations are unnecessary, and the compelled testimony of senior officials from the Executive Branch implicates serious separation of powers concerns," the DOJ wrote in its filing. "Nor is there any basis for the court to compel testimony from the Associate Attorney General and two Cabinet members. The point of Article III limitations on judicial review is to prevent such overreach," it added.

New York judges must retire at 76, says high court, ruling against age discrimination

The Court of Appeals shot down a bid by three elderly jurists challenging an 1869 law that sets the mandatory retirement age at 76, saying it violates their rights.

Televising Supreme Court Hearings Is A Terrible, Awful, No Good Idea

Americans don't need cameras in the courtroom. What they need is a Congress that functions like a serious body.

Argentina asks US to block 13K parents from World Cup matches

The individuals are accused of failing to make child support payments.

Wisconsin Supreme Court STRIKES DOWN race-based college grant program

A Wisconsin grant program intended to benefit minority students was struck down by the state's supreme court as discriminatory on Thursday.The court relied heavily on a previous U.S. Supreme Court opinion against race-based admission programs at Harvard and the University of North Carolina.'This is also a big win for taxpayers, who can now challenge many other race-based programs in state court.'The Minority Undergraduate Retention Grant Program targeted black, Hispanic, and Native American students, as well as immigrants from Cambodia, Laos, or Vietnam who migrated to the U.S. since 1975.Assistant Attorney General Charlotte Gibson argued that the state program was not restricted by the higher court order and met the standards set forth by the court.The court disagreed."The Constitution requires that every person 'must be treated based on his or her experiences as an individual — not on the basis of race,'" the ruling of the court reads.During the hearing, Chief Justice Jill Karofsky challenged the plaintiff attorney by citing a post from President Donald Trump about former President Barack Obama that many saw as racist."Just last week, the president of the United States posted a remarkably and insanely racist video of President and Michelle Obama depicted as apes," Karofsky said."In this state, people of color contribute to the vitality of our state, and they are thanked by facing disparities when it comes to housing, access to medical care, transportation, incarceration, financial stability, and education," she added. "Do you take issue with anything I just said up to that point?”Luke Berg, of the Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty, responded that the worst discrimination is "when the law treats individuals differently based on their race."RELATED: Supreme Court hands huge victory to Trump over DEI funding — John Roberts sides with liberal justices The Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty's managing vice president, Dan Lennington, praised the ruling."This is a major win for students," he said. "Race cannot be used to dole out scholarships and other financial aid. This is also a big win for taxpayers, who can now challenge many other race-based programs in state court. WILL is proud to stand for equal rights and make that case everywhere we can."Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Merz Expects US to Stand by Trade Pact After German Drug Probe

Chancellor Friedrich Merz said he expects the US to stand by its trade commitments with Europe after Donald Trump’s administration launched a tariff investigation into Germany’s drug pricing.