The United States Supreme Court (SCOTUS) ruled in a 6-3 vote that a Texas law which mandated pornography websites have age verification is Constitutional.

Kamala will no longer be a player in 2028, but Buttigieg will. The post Buttigieg Rises Over Kamala and Newsom appeared first on Frontpage Mag.

After years of open borders and a massive invasion of unvetted, anonymous people from all around the world, the Trump administration is about to challenge the long-standing practice of putting illegal aliens in the US census for the purpose of political representation. A recent study claims that based on 2020 census figures, before the massive […] The post President Trump Will Challenge Practice of Counting Illegals appeared first on www.independentsentinel.com.

The Supreme Court ruled 6-3 on Friday to uphold a Texas law requiring users to verify their age before accessing pornography, handing a defeat to a trade organization for the porn industry. The case, Free Speech Coalition v. Paxton, focused on a requirement for users to demonstrate that they are 18 years old or older to access pornographic websites. The law prompted PornHub to suspend access for all Texas users while claiming that the legislation infringed on free speech. The ruling affirms a lower court’s decision against a trade group working on behalf of the pornography industry. “Age-verification laws … fall within States’ authority to shield children from sexually explicit content. The First Amendment leaves undisturbed States’ traditional power to prevent minors from accessing speech that is obscene from their perspective,” Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas wrote. “That power necessarily includes the power to require proof of age before an individual can access such speech.” “The power to verify age is a necessary component of the power to prevent children’s access to content that is obscene from their perspective,” Thomas went on to note, adding that the legislation “falls within Texas’s traditional power to protect minors from speech that is obscene from their perspective.” Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan dissented, alongside Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson. “For adults cannot be limited to ‘only what is fit for children,’” Kagan wrote in the dissenting opinion. “Their right to view ‘[s]exual expression,’ outside the traditional obscenity category, is ‘protected by the First Amendment,’” she went on to say before charging that Texas’ law “impedes the exercise of that right.” “It imposes what our First Amendment decisions often call a ‘chilling effect,’” Kagan said of the law. The Supreme Court’s ruling could clear the way for other states to impose age restrictions on pornographic websites, with 18 states already passing similar legislation.

A Leftist California bookstore is banning J.K. Rowling’s “Harry Potter” series but remains committed to sending “queer, affirmative” titles all over the country through an anti-book banning nonprofit. Booksmith is located in San Francisco’s renowned Haight-Ashbury neighborhood — the epicenter of the 1960s hippie counterculture and the Summer of Love. It stopped selling “Harry Potter” books after Rowling announced the creation of the J.K. Rowling Women’s Fund. The fund says it “offers legal funding support to individuals and organizations fighting to retain women’s sex-based rights in the workplace, in public life, and in protected female spaces.” Its website never mentions transgender-identifying individuals, but Booksmith claims the fund is “dedicated to removing transgender rights.” “With this announcement, we’ve decided to stop carrying her books. We don’t know exactly what her ‘women’s fund’ will entail, but we know that we aren’t going to be a part of it,” a sign in the bookstore reads. But ironically, Booksmith — a self-described “group of queer booksellers” — participates in the Books Not Bans program, which is dedicated to mailing “crates of queer, affirmative, necessary books all over the country,” it says, that are actively being banned. JULY 4 SALE: Get Six Months Of DW+ Free “These are going to people who desperately need them but who live in book deserts and communities where new book bans are rolling out daily,” the store’s announcement said. “We don’t need to tell you things are serious out there: this is a lifeline for people whose lives and wellbeing are in danger. ” Books Not Bans, now a separate nonprofit, started at a different San Francisco bookstore, Fabulosa Books, that “[specializes] in LGBTQ+ books.” Fabulosa Books also stopped selling Rowling’s work, saying on social media that the author “is devoting her life to nastiness.” Books Not Bans has sent more than “2200 books to community groups around America,” according to a social media post. One popular shipment is “All Boys Aren’t Blue,” which has been at the center of fights to keep sexually explicit books away from children, The Daily Wire previously reported. The book includes graphic descriptions of anal rape and incest. “[‘All Boys Aren’t Blue’] was recently named the most banned book in America,” Books Not Bans said in a social media post. “We’ve sent ‘All Boys Aren’t Blue’ to 20 different organizations all over America.” Rowling has drawn criticism for her commitment to protecting women and women’s spaces, but the bestselling author has refused to back down or apologize. In December, she celebrated the social media post that resulted in her becoming a global icon for women’s rights. “Five years ago today and my only regret is that I didn’t speak out sooner,” Rowling said on social media. “To every girl and woman who’s paid a heavy price for fighting to retain their rights and boundaries, to every person striving to halt an appalling medical experiment on minors, I salute you. We will win.”

When the Justices on the Supreme Court are at odds over major and often contentious issues, the verbal jabs and sometimes even insults that typically play out behind closed doors can make their way into written opinions — and in the case of Trump v. CASA, Inc., Justice Amy Coney Barrett did not disappoint. Barrett penned the majority opinion in the case that revolves around the idea of birthright citizenship and whether it should apply to the children of illegal aliens — but also tackles the issue of the universal injunctions, being handed down on a regular basis by cherry-picked judges in liberal courts in an attempt to prevent President Donald Trump from implementing his policies. Trump cheered the win in a post to his Truth Social platform, saying, “GIANT WIN in the United States Supreme Court! Even the Birthright Citizenship Hoax has been, indirectly, hit hard. It had to do with the babies of slaves (same year!), not the SCAMMING of our Immigration process. Congratulations to Attorney General Pam Bondi, Solicitor General John Sauer, and the entire DOJ.” But in addition to laying out the Court’s opinion, Barrett took the opportunity to deliver a few precision strikes on the body’s newest justice, appointed by former President Joe Biden, Ketanji Brown Jackson. Barrett’s remarks aimed at Jackson — who is perhaps best known for her inability to answer, on direct questioning, “what is a woman?” — paint a clear picture of a justice more interested in activism than a Constitutional reading and application of the law. Barrett began by addressing the principal dissent — which was joined by Jackson and Justice Elena Kagan, but written by Justice Sonia Sotomayor — and then panned Jackson’s by comparison. JULY 4 SALE: Get Six Months Of DW+ Free “The principal dissent focuses on conventional legal terrain, like the Judiciary Act of 1789 and our cases on equity,” Barrett wrote. “JUSTICE JACKSON, however, chooses a startling line of attack that is tethered neither to these sources nor, frankly, to any doctrine whatsoever. Waving away attention to the limits on judicial power as a ‘mind-numbingly technical query … she offers a vision of the judicial role that would make even the most ardent defender of judicial supremacy blush. In her telling, the fundamental role of the courts is to ‘order everyone (including the Executive) to follow the law — full stop.'” Amazing. Justice Barrett goes straight after Justice Jackson’s inability to do law. Jackson wants to tell the entire executive branch what to do and refuses to comply with Constitutional limitations. Insanely dangerous, and Barrett is right to call it out. pic.twitter.com/lRmkQvEgYZ — May Mailman (@MayMailman) June 27, 2025 Still referencing Jackson’s dissent in the case, Barrett wrote, “We will not dwell on JUSTICE JACKSON’S argument, which is at odds with more than two centuries’ worth of precedent, not to mention the Constitution itself. We observe only this: JUSTICE JACKSON decries an imperial Executive while embracing an imperial Judiciary.” Amy Coney Barrett pulls no punches on judicial authoritarianism. Says Jackson is at odds with “the Constitution itself” and “ decries an imperial executive while embracing an imperial judiciary.” This is good ACB! pic.twitter.com/vPFGm078qd — Megan Basham (@megbasham) June 27, 2025 “Observing the limits on judicial authority — including, as relevant here, the boundaries of the Judiciary Act of 1789 — is required by a judge’s oath to follow the law,” Barrett continued, adding, “JUSTICE JACKSON skips over that part. Because analyzing the governing statute involves boring ‘legalese,’ post, at 3, she seeks to answer ‘a far more basic question of enormous practical significance: May a federal court in the United States of America order the Executive to follow the law?’ Ibid. In other words, it is unecessary to consider whether Congress has constrained the Judiciary; what matters is how the Judiciary may constrain the Executive. JUSTICE JACKSON would do well to heed her own admonition: ‘[E]veryone, from the President on down, is bound by law.’ Ibid. That goes for judges too.” More of Barrett nuking Jackson from orbit: pic.twitter.com/joKaIdtr0v — Conn Carroll (@conncarroll) June 27, 2025

A new Pew Research poll indicates that President Trump gained ground with several unexpected groups in his historic comeback 2024 presidential victory. Among Hispanic voters — who preferred former President Biden in 2020 over Trump by a whopping 25 percentage points, and preferred Hillary Clinton to Trump by an even wider margin in 2016 — Trump only trailed former Vice President Kamala Harris by three percentage points, going from 36% of Hispanic voters in 2020 to 48% in 2024. Among black voters, Trump showed a significant increase, doubling his support from 8% in 2020 to 15% in 2024. Trump drove turnout among both blacks and Hispanics in 2024. “Increased shares of Black voters who favored Trump were driven not by individuals shifting their preferences, but by changes in who turned out to vote,” Pew reported, adding, “9% of eligible Hispanic voters voted in 2020 but not in 2024, and these voters favored Biden in 2020 by roughly two-to-one (69% to 31%). By contrast, among Hispanic eligible voters who voted in 2024 but not in 2020, 60% voted for Trump in 2024 and 37% voted for Harris.” In another significant change, voters ages 18 to 49 only preferred Harris by 7 percentage points in 2024; they had preferred Biden by 17 points in 2020. JULY 4 SALE: Get Six Months Of DW+ Free Suburban voters only preferred Harris by 4 points, while in 2020, they preferred Biden by 10 points. Trump showed strong gains with religious voters; Protestant support grew from a 19-point lead in 2020 to 26 points in 2024; Catholic support went from Biden and Trump splitting them evenly in 2020 to Trump posting a huge 12-point lead in 2024. Jewish support went up at least 4% from 2020 to 2024, according to Associated Press/Fox, the highest percentage since George H.W. Bush in 1988. Among naturalized citizens, in 2020, Biden led Trump 59%-38% in 2020, but in 2024, Trump got 57% of that vote.

President Donald Trump said Friday that he would “absolutely” start bombing Iran again if the regime resumed enriching uranium to high levels. “If the intelligence report concludes that Iran can enrich uranium to a level that concerns you, would you consider bombing the country again?” a reporter asked the president during a White House press briefing. NEW: President Trump says he would "absolutely" start bombing Iranian again if they begin enriching uranium to concerning levels again. pic.twitter.com/xQFuelVkFD — Kassy Akiva (@KassyAkiva) June 27, 2025 “Sure, without question, absolutely,” Trump responded, before praising the success of American attacks on Iranian nuclear facilities with Tomahawk missiles and 30,000-pound “bunker buster” bombs carried by B-2 Spirit bombers. HAMAS IS PREPARING ATTACKS ON AMERICAN CONTRACTORS HELPING DISTRIBUTE AID IN GAZA Prior to Israel and the United States delivering significant blows to the Iranian regime’s nuclear ambitions, the International Atomic Energy Agency found in February that Iran’s uranium stockpile was enriched to 60 percent purity — close to the 90% level considered weapons-grade. According to both Israeli and American officials, the Iranian regime was within days or weeks of obtaining a nuclear bomb. JULY 4 SALE: Get Six Months Of DW+ Free Iran entered into a ceasefire with Israel, brokered by Trump, after 12 days of conflict during which the Iranian regime suffered significant blows to its nuclear program and military infrastructure. Prior to the ceasefire, Iran launched 19 missiles at the American Al Udeid Air Base in Qatar, 18 of which were intercepted, with one causing minimal damage. Trump said Iran had provided advance warning to his administration, allowing American personnel to shelter or evacuate before the strike, which has been regarded as a coordinated attack for the regime to save face. “I want to thank Iran for giving us early notice, which made it possible for no lives to be lost, and nobody to be injured,” Trump wrote in a Truth Social post on Monday. TRUMP ANNOUNCES ‘COMPLETE AND TOTAL CEASEFIRE’ BETWEEN ISRAEL AND IRAN Throughout Israel’s entire 12-day campaign against Iran, dubbed “Operation Rising Lion,” Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said the IDF removed the threat of a significant number of Iranian ballistic missiles, and helped severely harm Iran’s nuclear program. The IDF eliminated much of Iran’s senior military command and several leading nuclear scientists, destroyed the enrichment facility in Natanz, the uranium conversion plant in Isfahan, and the heavy water installation in Arak, according to Netanyahu. Other laboratories, factories, ballistic missile production facilities, and regime targets were also struck. The United States was able to help by using the bunker busters that damaged Iran’s Fordo nuclear facility — a target that Israeli bombs would have been unable to damage, according to experts. TRUMP HAS BEEN CLEAR FOR 14 YEARS THAT IRAN CANNOT HAVE A NUCLEAR WEAPON Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the Supreme Leader of the Islamic Republic of Iran, on Thursday proclaimed victory over the United States. “My congratulations on our dear Iran’s victory over the US regime,” Khamenei posted. “The US regime entered the war directly because it felt that if it didn’t, the Zionist regime would be completely destroyed. It entered the war in an effort to save that regime but achieved nothing.” The Iranian leader went so far as to claim that his regime’s missile attack “destroyed the U.S. air base in Al Udeid, Qatar.” Trump responded to Khamenei in the press conference, telling him he needs to “tell the truth.” “You got beat to hell,” Trump said.