An ESPN commentator urged fans to listen to Minnesota Lynx head coach Cheryl Reeve’s pro-transgender comments, all while Reeve took to the court wearing a “Trans Kids Belong” shirt on Sunday. During Sunday’s clash between the Lynx and the Indiana Fever, ESPN color analyst Rebecca Lobo didn’t hold back in hyping up the Minnesota coach’s political message. “I would encourage anyone to go and listen to Cheryl Reeve’s comments; incredibly thoughtful, easy to find online. I would just encourage anyone to go and listen,” Lobo declared during the broadcast. Play-by-play caller Ryan Ruocco pointed out that Reeve was sporting the pro-trans statement on her chest following a week of mounting tension. The wardrobe choice and broadcast plug came in the aftermath of comments made by Fever guard Sophie Cunningham, who ignited a league-wide culture war last month by speaking out against biological men competing in female athletics. “I want to protect young girls in a locker room, or young girls in sport who shouldn’t have to go against biological men,” Cunningham told ESPN in a profile, later defying online outrage with a blunt follow-up on Instagram: “I said what I said.” The two opposing figures met face-to-face at center court for a pre-game chat on Sunday. While the mid-court meeting appeared cordial, Reeve had spent Saturday taking direct aim at the rhetoric surrounding the debate. “It is not the case that we have, quote, biological men in girls’ locker rooms, the way it’s being phrased, the innuendo there that somehow transgender women are predators of some kind in the locker room,” Reeve fired back to reporters, pushing for inclusion while claiming “exclusion is not the answer.” The rift highlights a growing divide inside the WNBA. Cunningham’s fiery stance has drawn enthusiastic rallies of supporters outside arenas in Seattle, Portland, and Minneapolis. It has also earned her backing from high-profile figures like female sports advocate Riley Gaines and White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt. However, the debate has boiled over into ugly arena confrontations. During a recent Fever road trip to Seattle, Storm co-owner Celeste Keaton was reprimanded after reportedly launching an expletive-laced tirade against two 16-year-old female fans who were wearing gear in support of Cunningham’s position. Meanwhile, Fever head coach Stephanie White threw up her hands when asked where she stands on the issue, offering a classic corporate dodge. White claimed she wasn’t “educated enough from a scientific standpoint” to say whether biological males belong in women’s sports. While leadership equivocates and ESPN announcers point fans toward progressive talking points, Cunningham remains steadfast in her position, proving that the hottest court in basketball right now is the culture war.

Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche officially rescinded a proposed $1.8 billion fund intended to compensate the targets of government weaponization opposed by some Republican senators.  Blanche issued a document on Sunday stipulating that the $1.8 billion “anti-weaponization” fund created in May 2026 is “rescinded and shall have no force or effect.” The decision could pave the way for his confirmation as permanent head of the Justice Department after multiple Republican senators said they would not support his nomination until the fund was discontinued. “My team and I have met with committee members and Senators over the past several weeks and addressed any concerns or outstanding questions,” Blanche said. “We have enjoyed good faith discussions, and as a result issue the following order and update with regard to the May IRS settlement. The Department always welcomes and appreciates productive engagement with all members of Congress.” Outgoing Senators John Cornyn (R-TX) and Thom Tillis (R-NC) have stood in the way of Blanche’s confirmation, saying they will not vote to advance him until the fund is “dead.” Blanche previously told the senators there was no plan to move forward with the fund.  Both Cornyn and Tillis increasingly feuded with President Donald Trump after the president signaled that he did want them back in the Senate for another term. Tillis decided not to run for re-election after Trump declined to endorse him, and the president endorsed Ken Paxton in the Texas GOP primary. The pair sits on the Senate Judiciary Committee, which is set to vote on Blanche’s nomination on Tuesday. “Todd Blanche is a very, very good man, and he shouldn’t be in the middle of this. He should get approved because you will never get anybody like him,” Trump said last week. “And to make him a pawn in this whole thing … this is being done by a senator [Cornyn], and I don’t really blame him to be honest with you. … The man that lost, the man that I didn’t endorse has become very angry, and that’s okay.” Trump floated the idea last week of yanking Blanche’s nomination until Cornyn and Tillis are out of office.  “Remember, both Cornyn and Tillis voted for Merrick Garland, and others, too numerous to mention,” Trump said in a Truth Social post. “I have no objection to temporarily withdrawing Todd’s name, if they do not do the right thing, and putting him back after Cornyn and Tillis are out of office.”  Over the weekend, Trump said that if Blanche was not confirmed, he would continue to “push hard to get the Anti-Weaponization Bill, which takes care of those who have been so badly treated by the Crooked Joe Biden (and Obuma!) Administration.” Responding to Trump’s post, Tillis said that the president “clearly intends to resurrect the payout pot for punks either by inappropriately establishing another bogus fund or pushing Congress to vote for a bill that the majority of Republicans in the Senate would be against.” Tillis said he considered Blanche “qualified for the job” but would not vote to move him forward over the weaponization fund. 

Caitlin Clark, the Indiana Fever’s star guard and most well-known player in the WNBA, was asked Sunday to share her thoughts on men in women’s sports, a controversy that has erupted in the women’s basketball league following comments from Clark’s teammate Sophie Cunningham. As Cunningham faces intense backlash from leftists over her comments on protecting women’s sports, Clark said the issue is not discussed in the Fever’s locker room. “I think it’s for leagues and governing bodies to work with their athletes and find solutions, but our focus is on basketball. That’s what we talk about,” Clark said during her post-game press conference. After her short answer, a reporter asked if she had any reaction to the controversy surrounding Cunningham. “I just answered for you,” Clark replied. Clark was pressed on the issue one day after Indiana Fever head coach Stephanie White pushed back on Cunningham’s remarks on keeping men out of women’s sports. “I don’t know that I would say that I’m educated enough from a scientific standpoint. I don’t ever believe that exclusion is an answer. I just don’t,” White told reporters. Cunningham sparked discussion on the issue last month during an interview for a profile piece that was published by ESPN. In the interview, Cunningham was asked where she stands on men in women’s sports, and she addressed the matter head-on. “I think that I am here to extend love,” she said. “But I also think with that love is truth, being honest. And I want to protect young girls in a locker room, or young girls in sport who shouldn’t have to go against biological men.” Her comments resulted in a wave of support from many Americans, including the White House, who oppose policies by schools, athletic associations, and professional leagues that allow men to compete against women. Cunningham’s comments were also met with backlash from many people on the Left, including WNBA players, coaches, and at least one team owner. During a Fever game in Seattle last week, two young girls attended the game with XX-XY shirts and a sign supporting Cunningham and her defense of women-only sports. The young girls were heckled by some Seattle fans and berated by Seattle Storm co-owner Celeste Keaton, who reportedly called the teenage girls “f*cking insane.” Keaton was reprimanded by the Storm and suspended from attending the team’s next five home games. “Bravo to those girls for standing up for what they believe. You’ll be hearing from me soon,” Cunningham said. “Truly embarrassing of the co-owner. Unfortunately shows the type of leader she is.” Clark is familiar with being on the receiving end of harsh backlash. Ever since she came into the league in 2024 — bringing a following of loyal fans from her success in college at Iowa — Clark has been public enemy No. 1 for many WNBA players. The WNBA’s hatred for Clark is evident even in the star player’s third season. Last month, when players placed votes for the WNBA All-Star Game, they determined Clark wasn’t even among the top 10 best guards, despite Clark putting up impressive numbers and setting league records, The Daily Wire previously reported. Clark has also brought unprecedented attention to the WNBA and helped drive record-breaking attendance, viewership, and merchandise sales.

Was a public school counselor in Oregon participating in hate speech when he displayed two kids’ books about the gender binary? That’s what a federal appeals court ruled last month. The court determined Roderick E. Theis II violated hate speech legislation by showcasing the books “He is He” and “She is She.” It also ruled that displaying these books, which affirm the gender binary, was not protected under the First Amendment. In the wake of the unreasonable ruling, the books’ coauthor, Ryan Bomberger, spoke to The Daily Wire about the case and the work conservative Christians must do to save the country. He didn’t hold back. The gender binary isn’t evil Bomberger said “He is He” and “She is She,” which he cowrote with his wife Bethany, are rooted in love. “We wanted to take this insane pronoun issue and just make something that spoke truth about the human condition and celebrate what it means to be a boy, and celebrate what it means to be a girl,” he said. “It celebrates motherhood, fatherhood, the means by which all of us exist. So, what’s more inclusive than a book that speaks to the … heterosexual self-identity of more than 90% of Americans? How is that not inclusive?” Bomberger rejects the idea that the books could be seen as harmful in any way.  “The books are so beautifully illustrated. They are diverse. As someone myself, I’m mixed white, black, part Asian, part Native American. I’m a mixture of all things,” he said. “It’s laughable that the school sees these books as being hostile in any way, shape, or form.”  The school district isn’t just being unreasonable here. It’s hypocritical. Bomberger pointed out that many of the teachers showcased BLM or LGBT propaganda, which he called “highly discriminatory against the nuclear family, against fatherhood, against black conservatives” and “anti-science,” respectively. “What’s laughable to me is this is the same school district that pushes things like ‘How To Be An Anti-Racist,’ which has an animus toward white people, [and says] in fact, the only way to deal with past discrimination is present discrimination,” Bomberger said. “So that book violates Oregon’s law.”   View this post on Instagram   A post shared by Ryan Bomberger (@ryanbomberger) Battling in court The fact that a scuffle over his commonsense books made it to court, he says, was by design. Reports said Theis, who worked for the InterMountain Education Service District for over 15 years, was fired after a teacher recorded him showing the books to some eighth graders. Bomberger says that the whole situation was a setup. “There was one complaint from a teacher who only saw the covers. This teacher never even read the books — only saw the covers and objected to the covers,” Bomberger explained. “That teacher is the one that set up the two 8th graders who came and insisted on reading the books. It was not genuine interest. It was set up. That was the teacher that actually recorded the whole interaction, where Rod allowed them because they kept pressing him to read the books.” Bomberger expressed sorrow about the recent ruling, arguing that it will set a bad precedent in the West Coast. “My hope is that Alliance Defending Freedom does appeal it,” he said. “They have a very strong case.” Though Theis’ appeal was rejected by the court, ADF lawyers have promised to “continue to defend Rod’s First Amendment freedom to express his views like other employees.” Bomberger said the lower court misunderstood the case Kennedy v. Bremerton School District, in which the Supreme Court ruled that public schools could not stop a football coach from kneeling midfield to say a quiet prayer. “They said that [Kennedy’s prayer] was a private, personal thing. It wasn’t private. It was very public,” Bomberger said. “It was during his duty and his role. So simply based upon that, I think they have a case and the fact that the First Amendment doesn’t get stripped from government employees when they walk onto taxpayer-funded property.” When woke fights back Bomberger also argued that the recent case shows that wokism is not dead, but simply has been rebranded, hiding in the shadows while it grows stronger. “We need to be forever vigilant about where this stuff goes,” Bomberger said. “The public school system is so deeply rooted in ideologies that are anti-American, that are anti-science, and certainly in many cases that are anti-truth. So, we have to be aware that this is not something that’s going away anytime soon.” The Left’s goal is to fake outrage, foster ignorance, and silence dissension, Bomberger said. “Well, honestly, we hear the phrase all the time: ‘Ignorance is bliss,’ and apparently, it’s a goal. It’s a virtue of the woke Left,” Bomberger said. “They want to pretend that they are in some sort of fascist society where they can’t get [their favorite] books.” While Democrats hand-wring about book bans, they don’t seem to care when librarians make explicit material available to kids. “They’re feigning outrage about fake book banning, but [they’re fine] when it comes to completely inappropriate content for children that is sexually explicit, that is violent and violent and gory, I mean the list goes on and on,” he said. “But it’s perfectly fine if it could be categorized as a diversity book — diversity being LGBTQ/DEI.” Bomberger ended by calling on his fellow Christians to stand up and not be afraid to speak the truth. “The most important thing, as a Christian, I see this first and foremost as a spiritual battle, not just this book battle, but the battle for objective truth,” Bomberger said. “First of all, don’t despair. There is always hope, but we have to be vigilant. We cannot leave the major influence of our children up to … the education establishment. We can’t leave it up to Hollywood, and we often do.” “We’re called to love every human being, not every human doing,” he added. “So as Christians, we have to see the world differently, and we have to react differently.” *** This article is part of Upstream, The Daily Wire’s new home for culture and lifestyle. Real human insight and human stories — from our featured writers to you.

It was once generally touted that successful cheating demanded more effort than simply learning the class content, but that is no longer true. If you’re the parent of a secondary or college student, you’re likely somewhat invested in your child’s education. At the very least, I assume you would hate for your student to be suspected of illicit AI use on an assignment, and you would be willing to go to lengths to minimize that possibility if you only knew where to start. But AI moves fast. Its capabilities have quietly expanded, and it takes diligent study to understand exactly how.  I taught high school English at a private Christian school during the height of AI’s debut. Since the birth of my son, I’ve stepped into a remote position requiring me to devote a staggering percentage of work time to authenticating suspicious student work. My aim is to come alongside you in the endeavor of understanding student AI use so that you can feel equipped to enter the coming school year. While a student will generally get out of their education what they put into it, that yield will almost certainly be no more than what you’re willing to put into it yourself. Here’s what we want you to know. First, AI’s temptation does not discriminate. If you’ve made it this far but still believe your student would never dream of cheating, I would encourage you to reconsider. As a general trend, there is little discrepancy between the number of “standard” students and the number of honors students suspected of using AI. These honors students often bear other distinctions as well: National Honors Society participants, student government officers, team captains, or otherwise beloved and highly regarded members of a school culture. It is simply a desire to do well, not a desire for expedience, that does them in. These are the students whose need to succeed overrides their moral compass: They know it’s wrong, but AI feels like the only way out for a student whose day is filled with extracurriculars and stacks of honors and AP homework. Parents, if I have just described your student, my recommendation here is twofold. First, do not mistakenly assume your student will always overcome the temptation to use AI. Capable as they seem, they still need your oversight and your encouragement. Second, check in with your student; no number of resume-building pursuits will be able to distract from an academic integrity infraction. And while developing grit is important, developing virtue is crucial. Your student may be silently craving the space to act virtuously without feeling that their efforts will fall short.  Next, signs of cheating may not be what you think. You won’t catch your student copying off their friend’s assignment. Even work that appears to be human-written may have been authored by AI. “Humanizer” tools have been cleverly crafted to turn those predictably robotic AI writing patterns into variable, choppy, and even error-ridden passages. Why? This makes a piece far less likely to be flagged as AI content by an AI “detector,” and, unfortunately, less likely to draw a teacher’s eye. Now run that same piece through a humanizer tool multiple times, or through several different humanizer tools, layer in some student edits, and you have a patchwork piece that will fly under any number of radars. Thorough teachers will notice when a piece that may initially appear human does not actually correspond with the particular individual’s writing style. We get to know our students’ voices well, but the bright side to this is that you can do the same: Familiarize yourself with your own student’s “writing” voice, review their final work, and get acquainted with their stylistic quirks. And if this feels daunting, consider at least checking their browsing history from time to time; this only takes a moment, but it could be the supervision that causes your student to decide AI is not worth the risk.  Additionally, just because your student spent hours on an assignment does not prove its authenticity. Students have realized that copying and pasting AI content directly into their online document can be caught by a teacher with access to that document’s “version history,” an embedded log that captures, edit-by-edit, the document’s evolution over time. This viewable version history once provided clear-cut evidence for a conviction: One moment, a page would be entirely blank; the next, paragraphs of perfectly polished prose would appear all at once — an entire essay crafted within minutes. But students caught on to us. Now, rather than copying and pasting, they manually transcribe AI-generated content they have open in one tab into a document waiting in a different tab. This creates a human-looking writing process captured by the version history even though the piece is, by no means, human. Parents, look just a bit more closely at your student’s screens: Do they have only their document up, or are they switching back and forth between tabs? Knowing what to look for may allow you to intervene before your student fully commits to a deceitful choice.  Finally, parents, we want you to know that we dread confronting you. My coworkers and I regularly work long hours beyond what we are compensated for, pouring ourselves into lesson plans, providing comma-level feedback on writing submissions, and designing new experiments to see what we can improve upon. We do this not out of necessity, but simply because we are dedicated to our craft and to our students. But the increased volume of AI infractions, along with the general rise of disengagement and disrespect, has put us at odds with the job we love. Often it is not the cheating itself, nor the students who double down on their deception, but the reactions by parents whom we have to confront over their students’ use of AI that are the most crushing. Parents have personally insulted and hastily attributed the worst possible motivations to good teachers in response to raised suspicions surrounding AI use. These reactions have the potential to erode the passion that keeps devoted educators in the classroom. Good teachers can succeed elsewhere, and they are the ones who will eventually throw up their hands in defeat after too many disheartening battles with the families they desire to serve. You will be left with teachers who complain recreationally about your students behind their backs but will never bother to enforce AI infractions.  By all means, plead your student’s case. They are innocent until proven guilty. But know what it is that you’re arguing first. Have conversations with your student to make sure they’re not so overwhelmed by extracurriculars that they feel the only road to success is dishonesty. Get to know their writing style. Check their browsing history. Keep an eye on what tabs they have open. And when you’ve done all that, I implore you, conduct yourself as one who is simply in search of the truth, whatever that may be. The teacher on the receiving end will be tremendously blessed, but the real beneficiary, in fact, is your child. Regardless of what his or her actions may have been, they’ll have the opportunity to watch you go to bat for them while still demonstrating civility. They’ll see, in practice, that virtue outweighs grades — and emotions. And they’ll be reminded of that boundless love you have for them, a love that doesn’t fluctuate according to grades or supposed infractions. Remember, they’ll get out of their education what you put into it, and maybe they will come away with just a little bit more after all.  *** Emily Hunker is a former high school English teacher who currently supports her department in developing curricular processes and upholding academic integrity. This article is part of Upstream, The Daily Wire’s new home for culture and lifestyle. Real human insight and human stories — from our featured writers to you.