The nationwide battle for congressional seats shifted dramatically Friday after Virginia’s Supreme Court struck down the state’s Democrat-favored congressional map, even as Republican-led states across the South charge ahead to redraw their own. The Virginia ruling undercuts what Democrats had expected to be a 10-1 advantage in the state’s House delegation. Instead, the map reverts to a narrower 6-5 Democrat edge that was in place before the April special election, giving Republicans a clearer path to compete.  The decision comes on the heels of a U.S. Supreme Court ruling last week striking down requirements for black-majority districts in Southern states, prompting a wave of redistricting efforts in Republican-led states.  Florida and Tennessee have already approved new maps, with more red states likely to follow.  Tennessee lawmakers on Thursday approved a congressional map expected to hand Republicans control of all nine of the Volunteer State’s congressional districts come November. The map, signed by Republican Gov. Bill Lee, spreads out the heavily Democratic population centers in Memphis and Nashville across multiple Republican-favorable districts.  The new map is likely to eliminate Tennessee’s lone Democratic seat, currently held by Rep. Steve Cohen of Memphis.  In Florida, lawmakers led by Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis passed new district lines projected to give Republicans four additional House seats. The changes target Democratic-leaning areas in Tampa, Orlando, and South Florida, aiming to flip those districts to Republican control. Alabama could be next. Lawmakers are considering legislation that would produce a congressional map favoring Republicans 6-1, shifting one seat away from Democrats.  Prior to the Supreme Court decision last week, Alabama was forced to maintain one majority-black district and a second with a near-majority black population under an interpretation of the Voting Rights Act that has now been ruled an unconstitutional racial gerrymander.  Lawmakers in Louisiana, South Carolina, and Mississippi are also reviewing potential redistricting plans that could further shift even more seats to Republicans.  President Donald Trump called on states to redraw maps after the Supreme Court decision last week.  “We cannot allow there to be an Election that is conducted unconstitutionally simply for the ‘convenience’ of State Legislatures,” Trump said Sunday. “If they have to vote twice, so be it. We should demand that State Legislatures do what the Supreme Court says must be done. That is more important than administrative convenience. The byproduct is that the Republicans will receive more than 20 House Seats in the upcoming Midterms.”

The Virginia Supreme Court struck down the state’s partisan congressional redistricting plan in a 4-3 decision Friday, plunging Democrats into meltdown mode. The ruling triggered backlash from Democratic officials and leftist activists, with one prominent left-wing commentator warning that a “violent revolution” is “inevitable.” In its decision, the court found that Democratic lawmakers violated the Virginia Constitution’s intervening-election requirement for amendments, rendering the referendum invalid. “In this case, the Commonwealth submitted a proposed constitutional amendment to Virginia voters in an unprecedented manner that violated the intervening-election requirement in Article XII, Section 1 of the Constitution of Virginia,” the court wrote. “This violation irreparably undermines the integrity of the resulting referendum vote and renders it null and void.”  The decision delivers a major defeat to Virginia Democratic Gov. Abigail Spanberger, who forcefully pushed the measure, and for Democrats nationwide as the national redistricting fight intensifies. “More than three million Virginians cast their ballots in Virginia’s redistricting referendum, and the majority of Virginia voters voted to push back against a President who said he is ‘entitled’ to more Republican seats in Congress with a temporary and responsive referendum. They made their voices heard,” Spanberger said in a statement.  More than three million Virginians cast their ballots in Virginia’s redistricting referendum, and the majority of Virginia voters voted to push back against a President who said he is ‘entitled’ to more Republican seats in Congress with a temporary and responsive referendum. They… — Governor Abigail Spanberger (@GovernorVA) May 8, 2026 “I am disappointed by the Supreme Court of Virginia’s ruling, but my focus as Governor will be on ensuring that all voters have the information necessary to make their voices heard this November in the midterm elections.” Left-wing streamer Hasan Piker, who has gained influence in Democratic circles, reacted in stark terms on social media. “The va supreme court denied the results of the redistricting referendum. scotus gutted the voting rights act and tennessee carved up the last dem district destroying black voter power in the state,” Piker said on social media. “Those who make peaceful revolution impossible, make violent revolution inevitable.” the va supreme court denied the results of the redistricting referendum. scotus gutted the voting rights act and tennessee carved up the last dem district destroying black voter power in the state. those who make peaceful revolution impossible, make violent revolution inevitable https://t.co/Ul1nW2oz29 — hasanabi (@hasanthehun) May 8, 2026 Democratic leaders also condemned the ruling. Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) called the decision “vile,” accusing Republicans of attempting to “rig the elections in their favor.” House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) described the ruling as “an unprecedented and undemocratic action” and said Democrats are “exploring all options to overturn this shocking decision.” Lefty media figures echoed the criticism. Former CNN anchor Jim Acosta questioned the ruling, asking, “What is happening to our democracy?” CNN senior political analyst Nia-Malika Henderson called the outcome “a big blow for Hakeem Jeffries,” saying “he was all in on it.” “Thirty-eight million dollars spent from a group affiliated with him,” Henderson said. “[Former President Barack] Obama was in on this. And now this; this is a big defeat.” .@niamalikah on the Virginia Supreme Court striking down Democrats’ gerrymandering effort: “This is a big blow. Hakeem Jeffries… 38 million dollars spent from a group affiliated with him. Obama was in on this… It has been a big, big waste of money.” pic.twitter.com/dP3g3sClD4 — Bobby LaValley (@Bobby_LaVallley) May 8, 2026 Republicans, however, said the ruling is final. “The Virginia Supreme Court is the final authority on Virginia constitutional questions. This is the end, folks,” former Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli said in a briefing with reporters. “This case is over. There is no challenge for the Attorney General to make at this point.” On Thursday, Tennessee Republican lawmakers enacted a new congressional map expected to wipe out the last Democratic congressional seat. Florida has enacted changes projected to give Republicans up to four additional House seats, while Alabama, Louisiana, and South Carolina are also expected to redraw maps. 

Fashion’s most spectacular event returned. Anyone who is apparently someone gathered in Manhattan for the Met Gala.  And I know what you’re thinking: “Sorry, Klavan, what were you saying? I dozed off after the word spectacular. One moment, I was listening to you blather about fashion, then suddenly I was walking through a sky-blue emptiness decorated entirely with pictures of my mother, and mysterious voices were revealing all my secret sexual fantasies so that suddenly I started screaming, ‘Just a minute, this isn’t heaven, this is the other place!’ Then I woke up, and you were talking about celebrities or something. So what the hell is going on?” Alright, that may not be exactly what you were thinking. In fact, maybe that’s what I was thinking. Or maybe that was reality, and this is the nightmare, in which case, let’s get back to the Met Gala. Every year, rich people who seem to think highly of themselves for no discernible reason gather at the Metropolitan Museum of Art to desecrate its wonderful art collection by dressing up like idiots and then posing and flouncing around for the cameras like idiots who are also pansies but still idiots. These are the individuals whose fabulous glamor holds our cultural elites in fascinated thrall, while the rest of us are watching Shane Gillis because at least he has some talent, so we know why we’re looking at him. But, of course, the Met Gala’s biggest attraction is the amazing outfits that show off how God gifted these women with beauty and these men with homosexuality. Famous designers go to the absolute limits of their lack of talent to create dresses for women who have absolutely everything except the simple dignity to cover themselves when they go outside lest they be exposed as narcissistic exhibitionists with nothing to contribute to society besides an inappropriate glimpse of their supposed-to-be-private parts. This year’s prize for the least amount of modesty went to Kylie Jenner, who simply sent her bare breasts to the gala while the rest of her stayed home watching “Temptation Island” with a Budweiser Select 55 and a bucket of wings. Madonna arrived shrouded in black as if she were dead. Which really wasn’t all that shocking, until the EMTs showed up to carry her out to the hearse and she started shrieking, “Wait, wait, I’m still alive,” which surprised everyone. Doctors examined Madonna and declared that, yes, she was still alive, so only her career should be buried. Sarah Paulson, who is very famous for I have no idea what, bought her $100,000 ticket out of her $12 million net worth in order to wear a dollar bill mask to protest wealthy people by dramatizing the fact that money is blind. Paulson made a dramatic entrance until she walked forehead first into a low-hanging water pipe, reeled backward and smashed into a wall, then stumbled to the very brink of a descending stairway and murmured, “Maybe I should’ve put some eye-holes in this dollar mask,” before she tried to walk away but instead somersaulted down the stairs into the museum’s Egyptian wing, where she had a flirtatious chat with a man who’d been dead for three and a half thousand years. Singer Stevie Nicks was also there. Nicks recently revealed she was glad she had had an abortion, because if she’d let her child live, there would have been no Fleetwood Mac. Nicks wore an outfit with a large empty space in the middle to show where her soul used to be. Cultural elites were also delighted to see their new favorite celebrity, White House Correspondents’ Dinner attacker Cole Tomas Allen. Allen, wearing an elegant orange jumpsuit, was released from jail to attend the Met Gala after DEI Judge Zia Faruqui apologized for having him locked up when all he’d done was try to shoot the president, and let’s face it, who hasn’t at this point? All in all, the fashion spectacular was a sparkling and glamorous reminder that even the mightiest nations ultimately succumb to corruption and produce an elite class so useless and perverse, it drags a civilization that was the labor of centuries into a hellish oblivion. But at least they dress badly.

Over the past few decades, has America become better known for our strength and our freedom, or for our waste and our waistlines? If you don’t like your answer to that question, you might be one of the vast majority of Americans who see the MAHA (Make America Healthy Again) movement as essential for our country’s future. Deep down, Americans know we can and must do better for our health. That’s why the ideas and real-world impact of MAHA are so overwhelmingly popular. With a shift in focus and key policy changes, we can build a stronger, healthier future. When many of us were younger, we learned in school about the importance of fitness through the Presidential Fitness Test. If you don’t have school-age children, you might not realize that it was shut down during President Barack Obama’s second term. President Donald Trump rightly reinstated the test this past summer, and states are already working to make it part of school again. Furthermore, states are requiring a minimum amount of recess and physical activity during the school day. The federal government is backing those efforts with background facts, data, and guidelines — a partnership rather than pulling the rug out from under them. Today, nearly three out of every four American adults are overweight or obese. Until last year, all 50 states allowed junk food and soda to be purchased with food stamps, and most able-bodied food stamp recipients do not work at all. A stunning 71% of America’s youth are ineligible to serve in the military because of weight, fitness, or drug abuse. And maybe worst of all, according to CDC data, life expectancy in the U.S. is a full four years shorter than in other countries. That’s why the MAHA movement is striking such a nerve with the American public. It’s cracking down on unhealthy behaviors, fighting chronic diseases, improving Americans’ diets, and fixing broken health institutions. MAHA is helping Americans break free from an unending cycle of dependency and poor health, and preventing children from developing bad habits and trapping themselves in a lifetime of obesity. According to a national survey by the Center for Excellence in Polling, MAHA policies are overwhelmingly popular with Americans, in some cases almost unanimously so. Ninety-four percent of voters support requiring public elementary schools to provide at least 20 minutes of daily recess for all students. Sixty-eight percent of voters support banning the use of cellphones in K-12 schools during the school day. And nearly six in 10 voters support banning junk food like soda and candy from food stamps. These policies are overwhelmingly popular. And in the past year, many of them have crossed the line from “good idea” into the real world. Thanks to state-based initiatives and a supportive federal partner (finally), the tide of public opinion and policy is shifting in America. The idea of banning the worst foods from food stamps is not new. State leaders, and even some cities, have been attempting to enact such policies for decades, to little avail. Today, thanks to MAHA leadership from the White House and the executive branch, 22 states (and counting) have received approval to limit purchases of soda, candy, and junk food with food stamps. That’s a major win, one that overcame powerful industry pushback, created its own momentum, and is today delivering real change in the face of inertia. Other states have an opportunity to keep building on this momentum; the American people have a clear appetite for turning popular ideas into real-world policy. In diet and exercise, everyone knows that small changes can lead to big results. But the same is true for policy change. The truth is that America’s poor health is undermining our strength, both in our individual lives and our reputation around the world. Yes, personal responsibility and good fiscal policy are conservative values. But the wider aims of MAHA are American values as well — strength, health, family, and common sense. After all, America is the “land of the free and home of the brave,” not the land of free refills and home of an early grave. *** Paige Terryberry is a senior research fellow at the Foundation for Government Accountability.

Envy, as we all know, is one of the seven deadly sins.  And yet, if you are a Democrat these days, it may be the only virtue.  For tens of thousands of years, the natural state of human beings was poverty, misery, and death. Then came private property, along with governments that formed to protect it, as well as free markets formed to trade, invest, and expand that private property. We all live better now than the richest man on earth did just 100 years ago, or 80 years ago, or even 60 years ago — by far. But for the Democrats, that system of free markets is evil and immoral and wrong, not because free markets have produced poverty or misery, far from it, but because there are a lot of people who envy those who create wealth. They envy the people who innovate, compete, and win. I’ve called these envious people “scavengers.” The virus of socialist envy never, ever dies. The not-so-brilliant Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez was on a podcast with a woman named Ilana Glazer, where she made the rather incredible statement that it is not possible to earn $1 billion.  Here was the exchange: Ocasio-Cortez: You can’t earn a billion dollars. Glazer: That’s right.   Ocasio-Cortez: You just can’t earn that.   Glazer: That’s exactly correct.   Ocasio-Cortez: You can get market power. You can break rules. You can do all sorts of things. You can abuse labor laws.    Glazer: Yup.   Ocasio-Cortez: You can pay people less than what they’re worth. Glazer: Yup.  Ocasio-Cortez: But you can’t earn that, right?    Glazer: That’s right.   Ocasio-Cortez: And so you have to create a myth that — since you didn’t earn that, you have to create a myth of earning it. The amount of brainpower in that room could toast a piece of bread — lightly. Absolute oatmeal for brains there. Of course, you can earn $1 billion. The way that you earn $1 billion in the private sector is by providing goods and services to millions of people who want to pay for them. That is how you earn $1 billion. You innovate a new product. Lots of people want it, and then they pay you for it. That is how you make money. But this sort of stupidity has become de rigueur for the Left. Ocasio-Cortez then pushed this further on X, writing, “The single largest form of theft in America is wage theft. $50 billion a year are (sic) stolen from American workers.” She’s not talking here about the wage theft of the government coming in and literally confiscating a giant chunk of your paycheck every month. She thinks it is wage theft for companies not to pay wages that she thinks they should pay. Ocasio-Cortez is shrill, dumb, inexperienced, and uneducated. It has always been a Marxist lie that capitalism impoverishes the worker. It is not true. It has never been true. Every prediction Marx ever made about the future state of the world was wrong. All of them. Which is why, in order to achieve his vision, governments eventually had to kill tens of millions of human beings. He projected that there would be a gigantic class struggle: never happened. He predicted that capitalism would impoverish everyone: it didn’t. All that Marxism is really rooted in, in the end, is pure, unadulterated envy. Ocasio-Cortez cited Bernie Sanders as the founder of the movement, saying, “In a lot of ways, we’re all kind of Bernie’s successor.” There is no one who’s been a bigger leech on the ass of American society than Bernie Sanders. The man has not held a productive job for literally 80 years. For 80 years, he has lived and sponged off the taxpayer. Sanders is now targeting Sergey Brin for the great crime of founding Google, saying on X, “Google founder Sergey Brin’s wealth has DOUBLED to $311 billion since Trump’s election. Now he’s spending $57M to oppose a 5% billionaires’ wealth tax in California. He’d rather millions lose healthcare than pay his fair share in taxes. This kind of arrogance is unacceptable.” According to whom? You’re a tyrant. And by the way, it is you who are arrogant because you believe you are entitled to Sergey Brin’s wealth.  Kamala Harris has implied she should be able to basically dictate wages, imagining a world “where if you work a 40-hour week, you can afford your rent and food on the table and maybe a vacation from time to time, not scraping to get by, praying you can get through the end of the month.” That is so vague as to be utterly worthless. First of all, the vast majority of people in the United States who work a 40-hour week can afford rent. They’re not living on the streets. They’re affording rent. It may be too expensive; they may not like it, but the vast majority of them are not homeless, and they can afford food because starvation in the United States is at zero. No one is starving to death in the United States. Socialists and people who hate free markets posit that if you work 40 hours a week in the United States, you should be able to afford all sorts of things, and the only thing stopping you is this system they don’t like. It’s just crap. It’s just nonsense. It’s important to note that places like California that have decided to follow the AOC-Bernie Sanders path — wealth is terrible, and innovation is awful — are losing people. They are losing income. So the question is, why do the Democrats keep doing this? It can only be envy. The promise of Marxism is not a better future. The promise of Marxism is a better human being. That was always the promise of Marxism. It is a lie. It is untrue. Human beings are human beings wherever you go. Human nature is human nature wherever you go. The idea that you’re a better person if you believe in redistributionism is a lie. Free markets are good. Free markets are based on a simple principle: You, as an individual, have creative power in the universe. You’re made in the image of God. You have control over your autonomy. You have the ability to control your labor. Your innovation is your own, and you ought to own it. There are time machines on planet Earth. They’re called airplanes. Take an airplane to a third-world country that does not protect private property, that does not believe in equal rights before the law. See how it works out for you. It’s terrible. It’s awful. Meanwhile, you’re living here in the United States, the greatest country in the history of mankind, and you have a magical device you carry in your pocket every day, filled with more technology than the tech used to put a man on the moon. You’re carrying that around every day, and you have a button on that phone that will magically deliver a product to you without any effort on your part, other than hitting the button. That product will have been sourced from 80 different countries, and you’ll never know about it. That’s the power of free markets, which is rooted in your specific priorities. You’re not a victim in the system. You get to decide what you want to buy. You get to decide what you want to sell. You get to decide how much you’re going to spend on a thing, or whether you don’t want to spend that much money on a thing. The idea that you, as an individual, get to decide what a thing is worth to you is the basis for free-market economics, meaning that it is the most individualistic system that has ever been conceived of by mankind. That’s what price systems do. We aggregate the value over time, and then we figure out what the average person is willing to pay. You innovate; you compete; things get better. It is not just a utilitarian case. It is a moral case. The Left hates that moral case. They want something completely different. They are driven by envy. And that’s a sin.