THE CENTER SQUARE—The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday declined to decide whether individuals can carry firearms on public transportation. The court declined to take up Schoenthal v. Raoul, which challenges an Illinois law banning citizens from carrying firearms on public transportation. Three Illinois residents challenged the ban, arguing it violates the Second and Fourteenth Amendment rights. “There is no historical tradition of banning law-abiding citizens from possessing firearms in crowded public locations where they may be more vulnerable,” lawyers wrote in a petition to the court.Illinois requires gun owners to acquire a Firearm Owner’s Identification Card and a concealed carry license in order to carry a firearm in public. However, the state bans individuals from carrying a loaded or unsecured firearm onto buses, trains or any other type of public transportation that is paid for in part or whole by public funds. Kwame Raoul, Illinois’ attorney general, argued the prohibition on guns in public transportation is consistent with the nation’s historical tradition limiting firearms in sensitive places, like court rooms, schools and polling places. “Like historical sensitive places, public transit features ‘confined areas with a high density of people,’ making firearms ‘exceptionally dangerous,’” Raoul wrote. Originally published by The Center Square. The post Supreme Court Declines to Hear Challenge to Illinois Public Transport Gun Ban appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Now that the White House has passed the baton to Congress to codify a National Framework on Artificial Intelligence, an advocacy blitz is underway to shape the future of American tech policy.  President Donald Trump previously directed Michael Kratsios, his science and technology adviser, and David Sacks, former AI czar, to recommend federal AI legislation preempting state laws in conflict with the administration’s policy. The White House unveiled its AI framework on March 20, advising Congress “to ensure a minimally burdensome national standard consistent with these recommendations, not fifty discordant ones.”  The child-first tech coalition and the AI accelerationist movement are now seeking to conform the framework to their agendas. The child safety coalition wants the strongest possible protections for children, while accelerationists want to impose minimal restrictions on AI innovation. The White House framework is largely open-ended, giving Congress agency in crafting legislation to accomplish the president’s goals. Nathan Leamer, executive director of the pro-AI advocacy group Build American AI, says this was intentional.  “It’s kind of open-ended to allow it to be cognizant of many of the changes and recommendations that conservative activists have been calling for,” Leamer said.   Pro-Family Lobbying A new nonprofit, which launched March 23 and is investing at least $10 million to fight for online protections for children, has already held 15 Capitol Hill meetings urging lawmakers to institute strong protections.  “The framework is everything,” Janet Vestal Kelly, CEO of Alliance for a Better Future, told The Daily Signal. “The White House framework is an excellent start,” Kelly said. “It sets the direction on kids’ safety, and we’re pleased to see protections like age verification.” Kelly said she was encouraged by how many lawmakers expressed interest in addressing child safety concerns, particularly Sen. Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn., Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., and Rep. Erin Houchin, R-Ind. She would like to see Blackburn’s Kids Online Safety Act and Hawley’s Guidelines for User Age-Verification and Responsible Dialogue Act included in the final framework.  Despite tech companies launching a lobbying push in Washington, D.C., Kelly is confident public opinion is on her side.  More than 80% of likely voters said they supported government guardrails on AI, according to a recent poll from OnMessage Strategies. Only 10% supported the idea that companies should innovate without restrictions. On March 23 and 24, juries in New Mexico and Los Angeles found social media company Meta liable for intentionally harming young people’s mental health. Kelly believes that, for parents who lost children to suicide due to online abuse, these rulings will empower them to fight to protect other children.  “They have more lobbyists,” she said of tech companies, “but we have leverage.”  Pro-AI Lobbying Tech companies are also dedicating time and resources toward preventing the codification of barriers to AI acceleration.  Build American AI, the advocacy arm of the $100 million pro-AI super PAC Leading the Future, plans to continue “education efforts” through meetings with legislators, panel events, and regular communication with policymakers, according to Leamer.  “Our mission is to aggressively support Congress in adopting a comprehensive national AI framework in partnership with the administration and responsible leaders across the AI industry,” Leamer told The Daily Signal. “This national framework is essential to ensure that the United States remains the global leader in innovation, job creation and user safety.” The AI advocacy group will also deploy a “digital army of activists” to call and email lawmakers. A new pro-AI group called Innovation Council Action announced Sunday it plans to spend $100 million to oppose AI regulation. The group is backed by David Sacks and Taylor Budowich, former White House deputy chief of staff. Dealmaking Tool  Both sides of the AI debate will have to make deals for the framework to pass the House and Senate. Many child safety advocates criticized the current guardrails for placing the duty of care for children on parents instead of Big Tech companies. However, Neil Chilson, head of AI Policy at the Abundance Institute, thinks those advocates must be willing to negotiate.  “The art of the deal here will be finding out how everybody can claim to have won something while getting it across the line,” he told The Daily Signal. “And I think that that’s possible here, but it’s going to take some willingness to negotiate from all parties.” Leamer said that including child safety protections in the framework is the only way tech accelerationists will be able to get that coalition on board with preemption of state AI laws.  “Not only are kid protections good policy,” he said, “but it’s also smart politics.”  The framework features “the realism and pragmatic approach we’ve been pushing for,” Leamer said.  Senior Advisor at American Principles Project Jon Schweppe believes members like Blackburn who introduced child safety policies can use the framework to secure policy wins.  These include “website-level age verification for adult content, via the SCREEN Act, and app store-level age verification, via the App Store Accountability Act,” as well as empowerment for parents and protection for kids from AI chatbots. If the framework has these elements, it will continue to earn support from pro-family groups like American Principles Project, Schweppe said.  “We just have to make deals,” he said. The post ‘The Framework Is Everything’: Advocacy Blitz Begins to Shape Federal Standard on AI appeared first on The Daily Signal.

As speculation builds around the 2028 presidential election, Gov. Andy Beshear, D-Ky., is creating a lane for himself by relentlessly challenging the 2028 Republican favorite, Vice President JD Vance. Beshear is claiming the mantle of a pugnacious yet moderate Democrat as the Democrat field for 2028 is wide open. ABC News recently highlighted Beshear’s desire to specifically prevent Vance the White House. “There is no one who will work harder—no matter what I am doing that year—to beat JD Vance in 2028,” Beshear claimed in a speech at the Spring Gala in Butler County, Ohio “He is the most arrogant politician I have ever seen—and given his current boss, that’s saying something,” he added. Even before he took the Spring Gala stage, Beshear took to X to lash out against Vance’s memoir “Hillbilly Elegy.” About to take the stage in the Cincy suburb, where JD Vance is actually from. This doesn’t appear to be where his book full of poverty tourism and tired stereotypes against my people is set.— Andy Beshear (@AndyBeshearKY) March 21, 2026 “Every time Andy Beshear attacks the vice president to try to get himself publicity, he ends up humiliating himself in the process,” Taylor Van Kirk, a spokesperson for Vance, said in response to Beshear’s X post. “But maybe that’s something he’s into?” That post was only the start of attack lines against Vance. “JD Vance is a bully who says that addiction is the fault of struggling Americans — not the opioid manufacturers that flooded our communities with pills,” Beshear wrote in an X post with a clip of the speech. “I’ve focused on delivering results by suing the companies responsible and increasing access to treatment and support.” That’s why, in my home state of Kentucky, we’ve seen three straight years of declines in overdose deaths.— Andy Beshear (@AndyBeshearKY) March 22, 2026 Beshear’s X account was still sharing clips of that appearance days later. Beshear’s comments caught the attention of Brent Buchanan, Cygnal’s pollster and CEO. “Andy Beshear went to JD Vance’s home county to call him arrogant, which is what you do when 66% of Independents say your party is either just opposing Trump or out of touch with everyday Americans, and you’ve got nothing affirmative to run on,” Buchanan said, referencing Cygnal’s March poll. The barbs from Beshear are nothing new. As the 2024 Democratic National Convention took place in Chicago, Beshear became Democrats’ anti-Vance attack dog. In an interview with Mika Brzezinski on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe,” about “what some people have had to go through because of these [abortion] laws,” Beshear made it about Vance and his family. “Make him go through this!” Beshear exclaimed when talking about pregnancy as a result of rape. William Martin, the communications director for Vance, called Beshear’s comments “vile” while Vance himself posted on X that Beshear was “a disgusting person.” DISGUSTING: Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear wishes for a member of JD Vance's family to become pregnant due to rape."Make him go through this." pic.twitter.com/y9e82YEfHe— Trump War Room (@TrumpWarRoom) August 20, 2024 Beshear attempts to present as a moderate blue governor from a red state, but his record on abortion in particular is radical. Beshear similarly weaponized the tragedy of rape and abortion against his Republican gubernatorial opponent, former Kentucky Attorney General Daniel Cameron. As governor, Beshear repeatedly vetoed pro-life bills from the state Legislature, a move praised by abortion advocates. Beshear has also taken radical-left positions on transgender issues, too. In 2022, Beshear vetoed a bill that would have banned boys from girls sports teams. The Legislature overrode Beshear’s veto. He also vetoed a bill in 2023 that included a ban on puberty blockers and hormone therapy. The Legislature again overrode his veto. Beshear defended those vetoes on “The View” in February, claiming it was a matter of his Christian faith. “My decisions are based on ‘we love our neighbors like ourselves’ and the parable that says everyone is our neighbor,” Beshear claimed. “When I vetoed one of the nastiest pieces of anti-LGBTQ legislation that came through my state, I described it in those terms.” pic.twitter.com/NUTQSsPjzT— Andy Beshear (@AndyBeshearKY) March 31, 2026 “I said my faith tells me that all children are children of God and I didn’t want people picking on those things,” the governor added. Beshear remains one of the most popular governors in the country. According to Morning Consult polling, Beshear is the third most popular governor overall and the most popular Democrat governor, with a 65% approval rating among registered voters in his state. Morning Consult poll | Q4 2025 (released 2/2)US Governors approval (net approval)Most popular to least popularVT ?Phil Scott +55KY ?Andy Beshear +37PA ?Josh Shapiro +35MD ?Wes Moore +33GA ?Brian Kemp +32NC ?Josh Stein +31CA ?Gavin Newsom +26MI ?Gretchen…— Politics & Poll Tracker ? (@PollTracker2024) February 2, 2026 But how popular will Beshear be when his radical record is scrutinized under the national spotlight? Beshear’s office did not respond to The Daily Signal’s request for comment. The post Do Beshear’s Barbs Against Vance Give Us a Preview for 2028? appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Charlie Kirk revealed a fundamental problem in our modern education system, and Hillsdale College is working to combat it. Hillsdale College has launched a new feature to accompany our free online courses: curricular paths. We have begun to organize our more than 50 courses into structured paths that guide you to a more robust education. We currently offer a liberal arts path that reflects the core curriculum at the college and three paths in honor of Charlie Kirk. Charlie’s insight was that, while debate over education often focuses on technology, policy, institutions, or curriculum, the true problem is deeper. Too often, students don’t take responsibility for their own education. Charlie showed that learning depends on the student more than those formal structures. Contemporary American culture expects teachers and professors to do the work of education. We realize the student must show up and complete assignments, but we fail to cultivate a sense of wonder at the world and an understanding that it is our duty, as human beings with minds that are free, to exercise that freedom and learn. Schools, universities, teachers, and curricula are all important. They play crucial roles in most people’s education. But the greatest teacher in the world cannot learn for the student. It’s natural that we want to learn. Aristotle recognized that. All of us can find something we want to know more about. Sometimes that curiosity is directed towards frivolous ends, maybe just wondering what will happen on the next episode of our favorite show, but the desire to learn is there. It’s our duty to cultivate that desire towards things that contribute to genuine happiness. Charlie Kirk reminded us of that duty. He sought ways to learn even without attending college. His faith taught him that he owed a duty to himself and to God to make the most of his brief life and exercise the freedom of his mind. He did so by reading books and engaging in conversations. Although he did not attend Hillsdale College, he admired many of our free online courses, and he completed many in his pursuit of learning. At Hillsdale, we have organized the 16 courses that Charlie completed into “The Charlie Kirk Path.” It includes required courses on the Constitution, Genesis, Aristotle’s “Ethics,“ American citizenship, and Western philosophy, as well as optional courses on an array of political, economic, historical, and religious subjects. With TPUSA, we also structured two shorter paths around the things that mattered most to Charlie’s work: his faith and his love for America. As he worked through these courses, Charlie would often invite the professors onto his podcast to engage further with the ideas he was contemplating from the videos. And Charlie’s education rewarded him. He made enemies, but that is because he accomplished amazing things. He challenged others’ ideas and welcomed them to challenge his own, and in the conversations that followed, he often found friends. He used those friendships to start an organization that grew to national influence and that continues to have a real impact on political discourse even after he is gone. Thomas Jefferson claimed that the human mind is created free, and Socrates once called education the greatest human good. Charlie helps us make sense of these claims. The mind is free, and whether we attend formal institutions is far less important to our learning than whether we take responsibility for our own education. Charlie chose to educate himself. That’s the only way to learn. And from his education, he received even greater benefits than he could have achieved through his labor. Education is the greatest human good because it is within our abilities to learn, and learning prepares us to enjoy goods that are beyond our own power to achieve. It is a challenge to learn, it requires us to wonder and care enough to forgo mere amusements and pleasures, to set aside distractions and spend time in contemplation and reflection, and to communicate with others who will challenge and sharpen our ideas. Let us all learn from Charlie’s example. Let’s find in ourselves the desire to learn by cultivating a sense of wonder at the world around us. We will discover the freedom of our minds and the duty to learn that comes with it—a duty to ourselves, to our friends, to our nation, and to God. And along the way, we will find meaningful friendships, greater wisdom, deeper faith, and happiness. We invite you to start learning like Charlie at https://learnlikecharlie.hillsdale.edu/. We publish a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of The Daily Signal. The post Learning From Charlie appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Gov. Josh Shapiro keeps repeating the claim that Pennsylvania is the only growing state in the Northeast. But that’s not true. Residents continue to leave Pennsylvania for greener pastures. New data from the Internal Revenue Service shows that Pennsylvania lost 15,000 residents on net to other states in 2023. Those residents took with them $2.3 billion in annual income. This outmigration spans all age groups, but it is especially pronounced among working-age professionals and higher-income earners. These are the very people who drive economic growth. And they are leaving for more-competitive states, such as Florida, Texas, and the Carolinas. To be sure, Pennsylvania is doing better than some of our neighbors, especially New York and New Jersey, and far better than California, which lost almost $12 billion in income to other states. You’d think that lawmakers would want to imitate the states that are gaining residents and avoid the policies that are driving people away. But it’s the opposite. Shapiro and House Democrats are copying the worst policies from the very states they claim to outperform. While Americans are moving from high-tax, high-regulation states to their low-tax, low-regulation counterparts, Shapiro and House Democrats are moving Pennsylvania in the wrong direction. House Democrats are advancing policies that make it more expensive to hire, invest, and build in Pennsylvania. They recently passed legislation to “regulate” data centers, including enacting onerous fees and imposing energy mandates so restrictive that they would effectively block any data center investment anywhere in Pennsylvania. At the same time, they are pushing new mandates on employers. A statewide minimum wage hike will raise labor costs for small businesses already operating on thin margins. Mandatory, government-dictated paid leave also adds significant costs and unnecessary bureaucracy to struggling businesses. These policies may energize political allies and union leaders, but they are unaffordable for small businesses and working families. The result is fewer jobs, lower wages, and fewer opportunities. Ironically, the argument for these policies is that some of our neighboring states are experimenting with them. But these are also the very same states that Shapiro claims that we are outperforming. You can’t have it both ways. It gets worse. Not satisfied with the new and increased taxes in the governor’s proposed budget, a group of progressive activists and Democrat lawmakers recently gathered in the Capitol rotunda to demand even higher taxes, claiming the Commonwealth is “leaving billions on the table” by not taxing Pennsylvanians enough. Translation: They want to take more money out of your wallet. Their proposals are extreme and unaffordable. They include raising income taxes on small business owners and investors, increasing corporate taxes, and imposing a new tax on digital advertising. There are even new proposals for a severance tax on natural gas, on top of Pennsylvania’s impact tax, even as consumers are irate over high energy costs. Some lawmakers are even pushing a constitutional amendment to impose a “millionaires’ tax,” the same kind of radical policy that has driven wealth out of states like California, Illinois, and Washington. Others are floating proposals to tax wealth itself. This radical agenda would send the message that Pennsylvania is closed for business. To prevent Pennsylvania from becoming California, we need policies to make it more affordable and attractive to live and invest here. That starts with lowering the tax burden on work and investment, not raising it. It means continuing to reduce business taxes, rejecting new energy taxes, and unleashing Pennsylvania’s natural gas industry to create jobs and lower costs. It means cutting red tape and reforming a regulatory system with more than 164,000 restrictions that drive up costs and delay investment. It means expanding educational choice, so families have real options and employers can attract talent. And it means reforming welfare programs to prioritize work and reduce waste, ensuring resources go to those who truly need them. States that are gaining people and income are doing these things. Pennsylvania can, too. This article was originally published by RealClearPennsylvania and made available via RealClearWire. We publish a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of The Daily Signal. The post Radical Tax Hikes Will Accelerate PA’s Outmigration appeared first on The Daily Signal.