A JetBlue Airways airplane collided with a drone while landing at New York City’s John F. Kennedy International Airport. “We collided with a drone back there in the turn,” the pilot said while on approach. Listen below: This morning, JetBlue Airbus A321-231 (N979JT) operating flight B6948 from Las Vegas to New York JFK reported a drone strike while on approach to JFK. According to the crew, the drone struck the aircraft just above the cockpit at approximately 3,000 feet around 7:15 a.m. The… pic.twitter.com/VJNVOoBrW5 — Turbine Traveller (@Turbinetraveler) June 29, 2026 NBC News shared further: The plane was traveling from Las Vegas to New York when it reported a drone encounter, according to a statement from JetBlue. The plane landed without incident and passengers were safely deplaned before the aircraft was removed from service for inspection. There was no damage or evidence of a collision, the airline said. “Safety is JetBlue’s first priority, and we will assist with any relevant investigations,” JetBlue said. The collision happened while the plane was at 3,000 feet on its final approach to JFK, the Federal Aviation Administration said in a statement. A pilot reported the incident just as it was cleared to land by air traffic control, according to the audio. The pilot said the incident occurred about two miles before it was cleared to land. The JetBlue incident follows a United Airlines airplane nearly colliding with a drone while landing at Newark Liberty International Airport. United Airlines Plane Nearly Hits Drone While Landing CNN has more: If confirmed, it could be one of the first known collisions between a drone and a US commercial passenger plane. Drones have, however, hit other aircraft. In January 2025, a civilian drone struck a CL-415 “Super Scooper” battling the Los Angeles wildfires, punching a hole in the wing, forcing the aircraft out of service and leading federal authorities to prosecute the drone operator. Some other suspected strikes have turned out to be damage from birds or mechanical problems. Drones are prohibited from flying around airports, however, the FAA receives about 100 reports of sightings a month. The post JetBlue Airplane Hits Drone While Landing appeared first on 100PercentFedUp.com.

The Supreme Court on Monday ruled that police conduct a Fourth Amendment search when they obtain cell phone location data through a “geofence warrant.” Thus, individuals have a reasonable expectation of privacy in records of their cell phone’s location. The case in question pertained to law enforcement officials using a geofence warrant that instructed Google to provide location data for cellphone users who were near a particular place during a specific time period to obtain evidence used to convict a Virginia man of a 2019 bank robbery. The high court ruled they conducted a “search” for purposes of the Fourth Amendment. “By a vote of 6-3, the justices sent Okello Chatrie’s case back to the lower court for it to consider whether, as the Fourth Amendment requires, the search was ‘reasonable,'” SCOTUSblog reports. Writing for the majority, Justice Elena Kagan wrote that “[a]n individual has a reasonable expectation of privacy in records about his cell phone’s location, and police intrude on that constitutionally protected interest when they demand the information—even though for only a limited time, and from a third-party tech company.” “Important SCOTUS ruling. Get a d*** warrant if snooping on cell phone locations!” Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY) commented. Important SCOTUS ruling. Get a damn warrant if snooping on cell phone locations! https://t.co/K4a69amqpn — Thomas Massie (@RepThomasMassie) June 29, 2026 SCOTUSblog explained further: Justice Samuel Alito, in a dissenting opinion joined in part by Justices Clarence Thomas and Amy Coney Barrett, contended that the majority’s opinion “will send seismic waves through our Fourth Amendment doctrine” but would ultimately not have any effect on Chatrie’s case. The issue at the center of Chatrie v. United States arose after a man armed with a gun entered a federal credit union outside Richmond, Virginia, and gave the teller a note demanding money. He made off with nearly $200,000, but law enforcement officials did not have any leads until they served Google with a geofence warrant, which directed the tech company to provide location data for cellphone users who were near the bank at the time of the robbery. The information that Google provided to law enforcement officials came in three tranches. First, Google gave law enforcement officials a list of the 19 accounts (but without the names attached to those accounts) linked to devices that were within 150 meters of the bank during the 30 minutes before and after the robbery. Second, based on that list of 19 accounts, the government asked for additional information about nine accounts that were in the area during a two-hour period. At the third step, a detective asked for, and received, the names and information associated with three accounts – one of which was Chatrie’s. Relying on the location data, law enforcement officials obtained a warrant to search two residences linked to Chatrie, where they found almost $100,000 of the stolen cash, a gun, and demand notes. Prosecutors charged Chatrie with bank robbery. He asked the trial judge to bar prosecutors from using the evidence obtained as a result of the geofence warrant at his trial, arguing that the warrant violated the Fourth Amendment. Kagan said courts have to guard against “undue encroachment” on Fourth Amendment rights. “The Fourth Amendment must, as ever, protect against unjustified government intrusion on the privacy of the individual,” she added, according to NBC News. The Supreme Court has limited law enforcement's use of sprawling "geofence warrants" that track a suspect using cellphone location data from a broad swath of users, including people with no connection to a crime. https://t.co/vVIIdk13MQ — ABC News (@ABC) June 29, 2026 NBC News has more: The concern as it relates to cell phone location-based searches is that the amount of data available gives the government a “virtual panopticon with which to scrutinize its citizens’ activities,” Kagan wrote. In dissent, conservative Justice Samuel Alito said he would have found that no warrant is required, calling the ruling an “irresponsible escapade” that the court should never have agreed to hear. He accused the majority of “striking a pose as a great champion of privacy in the digital age.” Privacy rights advocates have raised concerns about geofence warrants, calling them a form of dragnet surveillance because the information is not just about one suspect but anyone who was in the location in question. They have warned that such warrants could be used to target disfavored political groups, including protesters. In the Chatrie case, Google initially provided information about 19 users, and a police officer later narrowed it down. Chatrie pleaded guilty to federal charges of armed robbery and brandishing a firearm, and he was sentenced to almost 12 years in prison. But he reserved the right to appeal on the issue now decided by the Supreme Court. When the case returns to lower courts, Chatrie’s lawyers will argue that the warrant was too broad and therefore violated his Fourth Amendment rights. The post “Get A D*** Warrant” – Supreme Court Rules Law Enforcement Use Of Cell Phone Location Data Requires Warrant appeared first on 100PercentFedUp.com.

The left has been up in arms over the recent decision to end “temporary protected status” immigration exemptions for individuals from Syria and Haiti. But when talking heads like CNN’s Jake Tapper begin to make the left’s argument, the Trump administration is ready with a dose of reality. That was evident this weekend during Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin’s appearance on CNN’s “State of the Union.” As the Daily Caller reported, his simple argument hinged on the definition of the word “temporary”: “[F]irst of all, Temporary Protective Status was never intended to be permanent,” Mullin told Tapper. “And there’s a lot of people that came over here 15, 20 years ago underneath TPS that’s [sic] already changed their status. The whole time these individuals have been here underneath the Temporary Protected Status, they could have applied for a visa. They could have applied for LPR [Lawful Permanent Resident status]. They could have applied for different directions. But the status itself can be ended in its name itself by saying ‘Temporary.’” “So, these individuals have a couple of choices: they can try to apply for a permanent residence here, they can apply for a temporary visa if they choose to, or they can choose to go back,” Mullin continued. “And if they want to go back, we will help them with that.” President George H.W. Bush signed the Immigration Act of 1990 into law, creating TPS in November 1990. TPS was intended for situations involving war or natural disasters where the home countries of illegal immigrants were considered too dangerous for deportation, according to the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services website. Following a devastating earthquake in Haiti in 2010, the Obama administration granted Haitians TPS. An apparently confused Tapper kept pressing Mullin over the end of TPS. “If I was talking directly to the individuals with the Temporary Protected Status: either try to fill out the paperwork and be here underneath a permanent status, or we will help you get back to your country,” Mullin said. “We will actually give you a plane ticket, plus roughly $2,100, to help you re-establish when you get there. But Temporary Protected Status, according to the courts and in its name itself, is not permanent status.” The CNN host continued pushing back by noting that both nations still have their problems, as if the solution would be to import everyone from troubled regions of the world. But many social media users were similarly focused on what the “T” in “TPS” stands for:   Poor Jake, he thought he made news. — Mad Bomber Hat (@MadBomberHat) June 29, 2026 Read it twice if you need to… pic.twitter.com/WUxIBSYEDb — M Shea 76 (@WhiskeyBentMN) June 29, 2026 Jake Tapper keeps missing the point on Haiti. The country isn't dangerous by magic, it's dangerous because of the predictable patterns of the people who live there. Importing those patterns doesn't fix Haiti. It imports the danger here. The media has been on the wrong side… — Gregory K Bovino (@GregoryKBovino) June 29, 2026 Here’s the full text from the post above: Jake Tapper keeps missing the point on Haiti.  The country isn’t dangerous by magic, it’s dangerous because of the predictable patterns of the people who live there.  Importing those patterns doesn’t fix Haiti.  It imports the danger here.  The media has been on the wrong side of American interests for years, pushing policies that put us last.  Why does Tapper fight so hard to keep them in America unless he wants to put Americans in jeopardy? Temporary Protected Status means temporary.  Time for mass removal. Send them home.  Protect America first.  Deport. Deport. Deport. Mediaite also covered the exchange: “The reason I ask is because I heard Stephen Miller, who is driving a lot of this, say that Haiti is safe for Haitians,” Tapper said. “And I just looked at the State Department’s website, and they have a level four do not travel advisory for Haiti just from a few months ago, from April, and it says, ‘Violent crime is rampant. The expansion of gang organized crime and terrorist activity has led to widespread violence. Crimes involving firearms are common. Crimes include robbery, carjacking, sexual assault and kidnappings for ransom.’ That doesn’t sound safe to me.” “Well, that do not travel is not for Haitians,” Mullin said. “That’s do not travel for the United States, because they are kidnapping or trying to kidnap individuals from the United States because they feel like their family has the money to pay the ransom.” “I understand that,” Tapper said in reply. “But based on everything I have read, including the U.N. and Human Rights Watch, it doesn’t sound safe for Haitians. More than 8,100 killings documented last year, those weren’t Americans. Haiti is among the top five countries with the highest rates of rape and sexual abuse, with more than 1,200 cases of sexual violence last year. That’s not Americans; 1.4 million people have been displaced. Those aren’t Americans.” Mullin paused a beat and said, “Is there a question in that?” Here’s the full interview:     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 WATCH: DHS Sec. Mullin Sets Jake Tapper Straight On TPS Decision With Simple Grammar Lesson appeared first on 100PercentFedUp.com.

Hey everybody! Noah here and I am so excited to show you this… If you’re anything like my parents, you probably have a huge bin or tub or container full of old photos that you’ve been keeping for decades.  Or realistically, you probably have MULTIPLE tubs of them. They’re probably old, scratched, bent, creased, torn, faded, and some might even be black & white. What if you could easily and perfectly restore them to brand new? All in one click? Now you can! That’s why I built Photo Fixer and I’m so excited to show it to you! You can find it right here at: MyPhotoFixer.com They say a picture is worth a thousand words, and nothing could be more perfect to explain this project. So instead of me telling you about it, let me just show you…. You don’t need a scanner or a printer or anything fancy. You just need your phone. And you don’t even need to do a good job with it, my software will clean everything up for you! Like this…. Let’s say you want to start with this old photo you had from what looks like the 1980s. You put it on the table and snap a picture of it with your camera phone: Wow, that’s ugly! It’s small, off-center, tons of glare from the overhead lights, kind of hard to see all the details…. But none of that matters. You just upload it to MyPhotoFixer.com and in about 10 seconds this pops out for you: Perfection! Here’s another. Before: And After: I have a ton of them on the homepage at MyPhotoFixer.com and there’s a slider bar you can slide left and right to see BEFORE and AFTER of a bunch of examples. It can even upscale and clean up blurry photos. How cool is this? BEFORE: AFTER: I actually had a lot of fun with this yesterday, putting it to the ultimate test…. I took the kids to an amusement park and you know how they have those photos on the screens after you get off the ride where they take your photo at the craziest part of the rollercoaster and then try to sell you one for like $50? And you feel like a terrible parent if you don’t spend the $50 to remember the moment? After you already just spent $4 per bottled water for 5 people, so after dropping $20 on water then you drop another $50 on a photo they guilt you into? Well, I thought I’d see if Photo Fixer could “fix” this problem for me…. And you’re not going to believe this. So I snapped this photo of one of the images on the screens: Terrible photo, right? PROOF PROOF PROOF watermarked all across the whole thing. Kind of fuzzy/blurry. Hard to really see anything. At least, hard for YOU and ME to see anything….. But not hard for Photo Fixer to see it. Photo Fixer not only read it plain as day but it perfectly cleaned it up, upscaled it, enhanced it, colorized it and gave it back to me like this: Seriously….how cool is that? It’s PERFECT! And here’s what people are saying about it: Anyway, I had so much fun making this and I know it will help so many people — I know because so many of you have already grabbed it and told me how much you’re loving it.  Makes me very happy to hear all the positive feedback. If you don’t have a copy yet, you can grab one here:  MyPhotoFixer.com Enjoy! And happy Photo Fixing! This is a Guest Post from our friends over at WLTReport. View the original article here. The post Introducing….Photo Fixer By Noah! appeared first on 100PercentFedUp.com.

The Colorado Supreme Court on Monday blocked all attempts to redraw the state’s congressional districts for the 2028 election from reaching the ballot. The court ruled that each of the proposed ballot measures “violated the constitutional single-subject requirement,” Colorado Politics reports. The effort to redraw the state’s congressional map would have given Democrats three additional seats in the U.S. House of Representatives. The Colorado Supreme Court unanimously blocked three ballot initiatives aimed at redrawing the state's congressional map, holding the proposals violated Colorado's constitutional single-subject requirement. pic.twitter.com/7JHiMXrxFj — SCOTUS Wire (@scotus_wire) June 29, 2026 Colorado Politics explained further: The court considered five distinct, but related, ballot measures. Half of the proposals would have redrawn U.S. House of Representatives districts to give Democrats an overwhelming advantage, while the other half would have alternatively given Republicans a slightly larger advantage over the status quo. There was also a separate measure to alter the redistricting commission that drew the current boundaries. The Supreme Court held that changing the state’s process for redistricting and approving new maps, either together or through separate interlocking initiatives, violated the Colorado Constitution. “To conclude otherwise and to allow initiative proponents to proceed with interlocking measures like those at issue here would allow proponents to achieve indirectly what they could not achieve directly and would endorse an end run around the single subject requirement. This we cannot do,” wrote Justice Richard L. Gabriel in the June 29 opinion pertaining to the three interlocking ballot measures. According to The Colorado Sun, the initiatives were funded by a group linked to House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY). Voters in Colorado added the state’s independent redistricting process to the state constitution in 2018. Colorado Supreme Court: Redistricting plans for 2028 election cannot proceed under state constitution https://t.co/OGH2m1rcNS — The Gazette (@csgazette) June 29, 2026 More from The Colorado Sun: Had voters approved the ballot measures, they would have put new maps in place for the elections in 2028 and 2030, making Democrats favored to win seven of Colorado’s eight congressional seats, up from the four they hold today. In two decisions on Monday, the state Supreme Court ruled that the proposal violated the “single subject” requirement in the state constitution, which requires that ballot initiatives have only one central purpose. “Changing the constitutionally mandated frequency of redistricting — however temporary the change — is not merely a mechanism to administer the new congressional district map,” Chief Justice Monica Marquez wrote in the court’s unanimous decision blocking Initiative 240. “Instead, it represents a seismic shift to Colorado’s longstanding redistricting process enshrined in the state constitution.” The post Blue State’s Redistricting Plan Hits Setback appeared first on 100PercentFedUp.com.