In a victory for election security, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals has greenlit the United States Postal Service’s ability to move forward with a significant mail-in voting change. This new rule would require states to provide voter lists and serialized ballot barcodes in order for the USPS to mail out ballots for federal elections. Take a look at the ruling here: The D.C. Circuit has temporarily allowed the U.S. Postal Service to move forward with its proposed election-mail rule requiring states to submit voter lists and serialized ballot barcodes before USPS will mail federal ballots, staying a district judge's order. pic.twitter.com/MRfGcBWa8S — SCOTUS Wire (@scotus_wire) July 17, 2026 The implications of this ruling are huge. While the decision is not final, and there will be more legal battles ahead, this temporary win sets the stage for reshaping how mail-in ballots are handled nationwide. For instance, if California refuses to turn over its voter rolls, then residents may not be able to use mail-in ballots at all in this year’s midterm elections. The New York Post reported further: The DC Circuit Court of Appeals on Friday temporarily allowed the US Postal Service to move forward with a proposed election-mail rule requiring states to provide voter lists and serialized ballot barcodes before federal ballots are mailed — a move supporters say will strengthen election safeguards. For California, where nearly all voters receive ballots by mail, the decision could mark a major turning point in the ongoing battle over election confidence following repeated complaints about slow vote counts and unproven allegations of widespread fraud… The appeals court’s order does not resolve the underlying lawsuit but temporarily allows the Postal Service to move forward with the proposal while the case is reviewed. Supporters say the changes are aimed at restoring confidence in a system that has faced mounting scrutiny, particularly in California, where mail ballots dominate elections. In response to the ruling, U.S. Attorney Bill Essayli called it a “win for election integrity”: This ruling is a win for election integrity and would have significant implications for states like California that refuse to submit their voter rolls to verify compliance with federal election laws. https://t.co/6p60ZKlYu1 — F.A. United States Attorney Bill Essayli (@USAttyEssayli) July 18, 2026 President Trump has been pushing for major restrictions on mail-in ballots for quite some time. This new USPS rule on mail-in voting was part of the Executive Order on election integrity that President Trump signed back in March. Of course, this order has been contested in court ever since. Democracy Docket provided some additional background: The rule stems from President Donald Trump’s March executive order attacking mail-in voting. The rule stems from President Donald Trump’s March executive order attacking mail-in voting. Under the proposal, states would have to send USPS information about voters who requested mail-in or absentee ballots, along with barcode information tied to those ballots. USPS would then use those lists to determine whether to transmit ballot mail. Voting rights advocates have warned that Trump’s rule could allow USPS to refuse to deliver ballots to eligible voters if they are not on approved lists or if states fail to comply with new federal requirements. The NAACP challenged the rule in a 2020 case over USPS delays that threatened mail voting during the COVID-19 pandemic. In 2021, USPS agreed to a court-enforced settlement requiring it to prioritize the timely delivery of election mail through 2028. Earlier this month, Sullivan agreed with the NAACP that the proposed rule would violate that settlement and ordered USPS not to implement it. But on Friday, a three-judge D.C. Circuit panel paused Sullivan’s order while USPS appeals. Today’s ruling by the D.C. Circuit is a good sign that things are swaying in favor of President Trump. Eric Daugherty noted on X: JUST IN — TRUMP WINS IN COURT: Federal court UPHOLDS the US Postal Service advancing President Trump’s requirement to mandate states send in their voter rolls for citizenship checks, if they want their ballots mailed in the midterms — for now The order also requires proper… pic.twitter.com/w4QeHei6HZ — Eric Daugherty (@EricLDaugh) July 18, 2026 JUST IN — TRUMP WINS IN COURT: Federal court UPHOLDS the US Postal Service advancing President Trump’s requirement to mandate states send in their voter rolls for citizenship checks, if they want their ballots mailed in the midterms — for now The order also requires proper tracking KEEP PUSHING! This EO is still being battled in court and an activist judge could still step in to block it once full enforcement begins SECURE ELECTIONS! Keep pushing to make our elections safe and secure! What are your thoughts? TAP HERE TO ADD YOUR VOTE This is a Guest Post from our friends over at WLTReport. View the original article here. The post HUGE WIN: D.C. Circuit Clears Path for MAJOR Mail-in Voting Change appeared first on 100PercentFedUp.com.

The recommendation has now become an actual criminal case. The Napa County District Attorney’s Office announced Friday that it has formally charged Paul Pelosi over the July 3 crash in Yountville, California. And the filing reveals exactly what prosecutors are alleging against the 86-year-old husband of former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. Pelosi faces one misdemeanor count of leaving the scene of a property-damage collision, along with a separate traffic infraction for allegedly making an unsafe turning movement. That is the crucial development. When the crash first made headlines, the Napa County Sheriff’s Office said it planned to recommend a misdemeanor hit-and-run charge. Prosecutors had not yet reviewed the case or filed a complaint. Now they have. What The Criminal Complaint Alleges Fox News reported that the newly filed complaint accuses Pelosi of damaging a parked Tesla, leaving the scene, and failing to locate its owner or leave the information required under California law. The second allegation is an infraction under the state’s unsafe-turning rule. Prosecutors contend Pelosi moved his vehicle from a direct course when it could not be done with reasonable safety, leading to the collision and property damage. In other words, the complaint separates the alleged conduct into two parts. The misdemeanor addresses what prosecutors say happened after the impact: Pelosi allegedly left without completing the identification and notification steps required in a property-damage crash. The infraction addresses the driving movement that prosecutors say caused the collision in the first place. The parked vehicle was unoccupied, so the filing does not accuse Pelosi of causing bodily injury in this incident. That distinction is why the hit-and-run count is being prosecuted as a misdemeanor rather than a more serious injury-related offense. TMZ broke the news of the formal filing Friday afternoon: The underlying collision happened at approximately 2:30 p.m. on July 3. According to the Associated Press, the sheriff’s office said Pelosi was driving a brown convertible north through Yountville when he struck a legally parked, unoccupied car and caused what authorities described as major damage. A witness called 911 and told investigators that Pelosi briefly stopped before driving away. Deputies found Pelosi roughly a quarter-mile from the collision after damage to the front of his own vehicle left it unable to continue. Pelosi allegedly acknowledged that he knew he had hit something, but said he did not know what he had struck and kept driving until the car became disabled. No one was injured, and the parked vehicle had no occupant who could have exchanged information with Pelosi at the scene. Authorities said alcohol was not a factor after deputies contacted him. That finding is part of the official account and should not be blurred by speculation. The sheriff’s office did not arrest Pelosi at the scene, explaining that he was handled in accordance with California’s misdemeanor arrest rules. Investigators instead prepared the case for the district attorney to decide whether the evidence justified prosecution. A Pelosi family spokesperson later said he had personally apologized to the Tesla’s owner and would take responsibility for the damage. That may resolve the repair bill, but it does not erase the separate legal requirement to stop and provide information at the time of the collision. Friday’s complaint shows prosecutors believe that requirement was violated. What The Misdemeanor Can Carry The hit-and-run charge falls under California Vehicle Code section 20002. For a collision involving only property damage, the law requires a driver to stop at the nearest safe location. If the owner is present or can be found, the driver must provide names, current addresses, a driver’s license, and vehicle-registration information when requested. If the owner cannot be located, the driver must leave a conspicuous written notice identifying the driver and vehicle owner, describe the circumstances, and notify the appropriate police agency without unnecessary delay. A conviction on the hit-and-run count can carry up to six months in county jail, a fine of up to $1,000, or both. The unsafe-turning allegation is a separate infraction based on California’s rule that a driver may not move right or left from a direct course until the movement can be made with reasonable safety. The property-damage statute also makes clear that moving a vehicle to a nearby safe location does not itself determine fault. What matters for the hit-and-run count is whether the driver then fulfills the law’s notification duties. Those requirements apply even when the damaged vehicle is empty and no one is injured. Those are the duties the complaint alleges Pelosi failed to perform. The $1,000 fine and six-month jail term are statutory maximums, not a prediction of the sentence he would receive if convicted. Pelosi has been charged, not convicted, and prosecutors will still have to prove the case. Pelosi’s 2022 Napa DUI Conviction The new filing also puts Pelosi back before prosecutors in the same county where he faced a separate driving case four years ago. In 2022, Pelosi pleaded guilty to misdemeanor DUI causing injury following a Napa County collision. The county DA’s official sentencing announcement said he received three years of summary probation, a five-day jail sentence, fines, nearly $5,000 in victim restitution, a three-month DUI program, and a one-year ignition-interlock requirement. The 2022 case began after a nighttime collision on State Route 29. The DA said Pelosi admitted driving with a blood-alcohol concentration of .082 percent, and the other driver sought treatment for injuries the next morning. As part of the resolution, a second DUI count was dismissed while Pelosi accepted the sentence and restitution obligations. The county’s announcement also noted that California law did not require Pelosi to appear personally for the misdemeanor proceeding unless a judge ordered him to do so. His attorney entered the plea on his behalf. Friday’s filing concerns a different incident, and investigators explicitly ruled out alcohol in the July 3 crash. The central question hanging over this latest case has now been answered. The Napa County DA did not quietly let the recommendation disappear. Paul Pelosi is officially facing a misdemeanor hit-and-run charge, and the case is moving into court. This is a Guest Post from our friends over at WLTReport. View the original article here. The post BREAKING: Charges From Paul Pelosi’s Hit-and-Run Revealed appeared first on 100PercentFedUp.com.

The killer has a rule. He only chooses people who got away with it. No arrest. No trial. Sometimes no suspicion at all. By the time Detective Logan Hollister sees the pattern, the dead appear to have nothing in common. Different neighborhoods. Different lives. Different secrets. But each victim left behind something the police cannot easily explain: A handwritten confession on a yellow legal pad. That is where The Confessor, the new Logan Hollister novel by Noah Christopher, begins tightening its grip. See The Confessor hardcover on Amazon here. Logan is not a detective waiting for his first real case. He already has the money, the house down the coast, and the quiet life other men spend decades chasing. He just does not know how to live inside that quiet for very long. So he keeps the badge. He keeps working. And when the yellow pages begin connecting bodies that should not be connected, Logan recognizes the case that will not release him. The story moves between hunter and hunted, giving the reader access to both sides of the chase without surrendering the mystery at its center. Los Angeles is not merely a backdrop. Its night roads, money, private institutions, polished public faces, and hidden rooms become part of the investigation. The novel even extends one piece of its fictional world beyond the page: the in-story newsroom known as WLTLH was built as a real companion experience for readers. It is an unusual level of immersion, but the strongest proof is what happens after readers finish the final chapter. “The main characters are so believable,” wrote Margaret L. “When I drive my new Tesla, I feel a little like Logan. Superb writing.” Another reader wrote, “This is the kind of novel that will not be forgotten because it seems real.” That sense of reality matters because The Confessor is not built around an untouchable superhero. Logan is capable, wealthy, observant, and experienced. He is also close enough to the killer’s reasoning to understand why the method works. And understanding it may be the most dangerous part of the case. What if the killer’s evidence is real? What if every victim escaped justice? What if the man who is never wrong finally chooses the wrong person? The answers sit at the center of a procedural thriller built for readers who enjoy intelligent detectives, alternating viewpoints, sharp dialogue, and an investigation that accelerates instead of wandering. No plot summary can safely reveal where Logan’s case ends. It can only reveal the choice waiting at the beginning: Watch from the outside — or step into the investigation. Start reading the Kindle edition of The Confessor here. Choose an edition: Hardcover on Amazon: https://amzn.to/4vhvun5 Paperback on Amazon: https://amzn.to/4vcnX8U Kindle on Amazon: https://amzn.to/44gCTYC Signed first edition: https://books.wltlh.com/TheConfessor/ The killer has a rule. The detective hunting him is beginning to understand it. (Note: Thank you for supporting patriotic businesses like the one presenting a sponsored message in this article and ordering through the included links, which benefits this website. This is a promotional advertorial for The Confessor. As an Amazon Associate, commissions may be earned through qualifying purchases. Amazon prices and availability can change. The signed edition is sold separately through books.wltlh.com. We appreciate your support! MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!) This is a Guest Post from our friends over at WLTReport. View the original article here. The post The Killer Has A Rule. The Detective Hunting Him Is Starting To Understand It. appeared first on 100PercentFedUp.com.

A federal appeals court ruled on Friday that New Jersey’s ban on so-called “assault” firearms and magazines that can hold more than 10 rounds is unconstitutional. In a 10-5 vote, the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled the ban violates the Second Amendment. “The Third Circuit, sitting en banc, has struck down New Jersey’s ban on semi-automatic rifles and its ban on magazines holding more than 10 rounds, ruling both violate the Second Amendment under Bruen,” SCOTUS Wire stated. The Third Circuit, sitting en banc, has struck down New Jersey's ban on semi-automatic rifles and its ban on magazines holding more than 10 rounds, ruling both violate the Second Amendment under Bruen. pic.twitter.com/T5iwFJAeGD — SCOTUS Wire (@scotus_wire) July 17, 2026 More from the Associated Press: This is the first time a federal appeals court has struck down a state ban on such weapons, and it comes as the U.S. Supreme Court is set to consider whether bans on semiautomatic rifles violate the Second Amendment. Just last week, a different federal appeals court upheld Illinois’ ban on semiautomatic weapons. Friday’s appeals court ruling in the New Jersey case goes further than a July 2024 ruling from a federal judge, who said that the state’s ban on AR-15s specifically was unconstitutional but upheld the provision barring larger magazines. The 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said Friday in its opinion that the state’s entire ban on weapons it deems to be “assault firearms” and restriction on “large capacity ammunition magazines” were unconstitutional. New Jersey Attorney General Jennifer Davenport, a Democrat whose office defended the law, said in a statement that the decision is “as unfortunate as it is legally incorrect.” “Every other federal circuit court to consider the issue has come out the other way,” Davenport said. “Assault weapons and large capacity magazines play a dangerous role in the modern epidemic of mass shootings, and New Jersey acted reasonably and lawfully in restricting them. We are considering our options.” John Commerford, executive director of the National Rifle Association Institute for Legislative Action, called the ruling a “historic victory for the NRA, the Second Amendment, and law-abiding Americans.” Other gun rights advocates celebrated the ruling. “The Third Circuit just held New Jersey’s ban on the full class of semi-automatic rifles and its standard-capacity magazine ban unconstitutional under Bruen. The court expanded the district court’s ruling from Colt AR-15s to all semi-automatic rifles,” the Gun Owners Foundation stated. HUGE 2A NEWS The Third Circuit just held New Jersey’s ban on the full class of semi-automatic rifles and its standard-capacity magazine ban unconstitutional under Bruen. The court expanded the district court’s ruling from Colt AR-15s to all semi-automatic rifles. — Gun Owners Foundation (@GunFoundation) July 17, 2026 “Third Circuit strikes down New Jersey’s ‘assault weapon’ and magazine bans in an en banc decision whose 192 pages include numerous concurrences and dissents,” the Firearms Policy Coalition said. FPC WIN: Third Circuit strikes down New Jersey's "assault weapon" and magazine bans in an en banc decision whose 192 pages include numerous concurrences and dissents: https://t.co/XrjnZkKX5L pic.twitter.com/gxyxESuvg7 — Firearms Policy Coalition (@gunpolicy) July 17, 2026 “Today’s decision is dangerous, wrong, and make no mistake, it will make New Jersey communities less safe. I served nearly 10 years in the Navy and qualified as an expert shot – I’m familiar with firearms. It’s because of that experience that I know weapons of war do not belong on the streets of New Jersey. And like so many parents, I’ve seen the impact and trauma gun violence and mass shootings have created for our kids,” New Jersey Gov. Mikie Sherrill said in a statement. “This decision is not only legally wrong, it’s completely out of step with parents and the people of the Garden State. Our commonsense gun safety laws have saved lives and protected communities – and shootings have declined for the last three years. We will not back down from extreme, right-wing attempts to weaken the laws of New Jersey,” she continued. The New Jersey Governor responds: "We will not back down from extreme, right-wing attempts to weaken the laws of New Jersey.”" pic.twitter.com/aaNFkycGKe — Firearms Policy Coalition (@gunpolicy) July 17, 2026 POLITICO shared further: The court’s decision stems from the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2022 ruling in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, which held that restrictions on guns must be rooted in the nation’s “historical tradition of firearm regulation.” That means state laws restricting guns must have a historical analogue from centuries ago. “Our Court today returns the Second Amendment to its appropriate place in our constitutional design,” Circuit Judge Paul Matey, a Trump nominee, wrote in one of several concurring opinions. “That is a welcome step that should end the anxiety imposed over millions of New Jerseyans who have been unable to enjoy their natural liberties without wondering what new turn of phrase will descend from Trenton to take away their freedom.” New Jersey Attorney General Jennifer Davenport said her office was “considering [their] options” on how to proceed in the case, which was brought by a coalition of New Jersey gun owners and pistol clubs. “Today’s decision from the Third Circuit invalidating New Jersey’s careful laws restricting the AR-15 and large capacity magazines is as unfortunate as it is legally incorrect,” said Davenport, a nominee of Democratic Gov. Mikie Sherrill, in a statement. “Every other federal circuit court to consider the issue has come out the other way.” Many of the New Jersey regulations in question far predate Davenport’s tenure and were defended in court by Davenport’s predecessor, former Attorney General Matt Platkin. But Sherrill, who took office earlier this year, campaigned on maintaining and strengthening the state’s gun laws. New Jersey has a long history of having some of the most restrictive gun laws in the country. In 1990, Gov. Jim Florio, a Democrat, signed into law what was at the time the nation’s toughest ban on assault weapons. Former Gov. Phil Murphy, a Democrat, approved the law lowering the magazine capacity limit to 10 rounds of ammunition in 2018. Read the full ruling HERE. What are your thoughts? TAP HERE TO ADD YOUR VOTE The post “Historic” Second Amendment Victory In Federal Appeals Court Ruling appeared first on 100PercentFedUp.com.

As much of the Northeastern United States sits under a haze caused by raging wildfires north of the border, President Donald Trump is among the growing number of GOP officials calling for Canada to pay a price. In a statement on Friday, the president outlined what he believes the appropriate steps involve. As The Hill reported: “We are holding Canada responsible for the fact that they are not properly maintaining their Forests, and Brush therein, and the United States is being unnecessarily invaded by filthy, polluted, and unhealthy air, the quality of which is dangerous, and totally unacceptable!” Trump wrote in a Truth Social post. More than a dozen U.S. states are under air quality alerts as wildfires continue to burn across Canada and in northern Minnesota, with officials urging residents in some major U.S. cities, such as Chicago and Washington, D.C., to stay indoors or wear masks to protect against potentially hazardous air pollution. The Canadian Interagency Forest Fire Centre, a fire protection service based in Winnipeg, Manitoba, reported 897 active fires as of Friday, with Ontario, Quebec and the Northwest Territories seeing the most activity. Fewer than 100 of those fires are considered “under control.” Trump said he planned to call Prime Minister Mark Carney on Friday to “find out what they are going to do about it,” accusing the Canadian government of refusing to engage in “basic Forest Management” and debris removal. The announcement sparked some discussion on social media:   Thank you, President Trump! This bad air is putting pressure on the healthcare system, as it's hazardous to people's health (I got a throat infection from it ), and it's bad for the economy as well! Canada has to make sure this never happens again! — Lonneke (@LonnekeEngel) July 17, 2026 I find it so funny that some of us Canadians are so pissed off about this. 1. It’s our government’s fault that we do not have proper equipment and/or funding to respond to this kind of emergency because we’ve given billions away to other countries, so yes we should be held… — True North Unfiltered (@RedMapleRebel) July 17, 2026 This is exactly what I asked for, post seems to have been scrubbed, I don't mind, the Pres has responded, whether he's seen it or not. — Th. Dickerson (@TH_4Real_Dson) July 17, 2026 He will probably be criticized for this, but at least someone is trying to do something. The constant division of people is leading to worse outcomes and this is something that everyone should be thankful for. — redditsentmehere (@redditsent65216) July 17, 2026 Here’s some additional reporting from Fox News: Trump did not say how such costs would be incorporated into existing tariffs or whether he intended to pursue formal trade action tied to the wildfire smoke. The comments come as smoke from nearly 850 active wildfires across Canada — including more than 180 in Ontario — has drifted into the United States, prompting air quality alerts in more than 20 states from the Upper Midwest to the Northeast, according to NASA.   And here’s what one Senate Republican is proposing:     What are your thoughts? TAP HERE TO ADD YOUR VOTE This is a Guest Post from our friends over at WLTReport. View the original article here. The post Trump Takes Action Against Canada Over ‘Willful Negligence’ Responsible For Wildfires appeared first on 100PercentFedUp.com.