Britain';s National Health Service is re-evaluating all so-called ";gender-affirming care"; treatments in the wake of a damning new report‚ which underscores the sex-change regime is built on weak and unreliable evidence.Dr. Hilary Cass‚ a British medical doctor who previously served as president of the Royal College of Pediatrics and Child Health‚ was appointed by NHS England in 2020 to lead an independent investigation into the U.K.';s sex-change regime and its youth-facing services.Cass recently submitted her final report‚ entitled ";The Independent Review of Gender Identity Services for Children and Young People‚"; and it does not paint a flattering picture of so-called ";gender-affirming care.";Cass previously intimated in her 2022 interim report that gender ideologues in smocks had more or less been freewheeling. The interim report specifically noted that the so-called Gender Identity Development Service had ";not been subjected to some of the normal quality controls that are typically applied when new or innovative treatments are introduced.";The interim report further suggested that the controversial and now-defunct Tavistock gender clinic was ";not a safe or viable long-term"; option for young people.Cass'; final 388-page report‚ released just weeks after England';s top health authority confirmed that minors will no longer be prescribed puberty blockers at so-called gender identity clinics‚ makes the same point but goes much farther‚ recommending:a moratorium on prescriptions of powerful hormone drugs to minors; an understanding that children who undergo cross-sex medical interventions may later come to deeply regret it;a holistic assessment of prospective patients'; needs and screenings for ";neurodevelopmental conditions‚ including autism spectrum disorder‚ and a mental health assessment";;a re-evaluation of the policy on cross-sex hormones and ";extreme caution"; when considering their use in minors;the mandatory provision of fertility counseling and preservation to children before permitting them to seek a ";medical pathway";;assurances that clinical services operated at the ";highest standards of evidence";;support services for de-transitioners; andother reviews of current policies‚ services‚ and approaches.Beyond making these recommendations‚ the Cass report also offers a number of penetrating observations about the sex-change regime.The report notes that the ";systematic review showed no clear evidence that social transition in childhood has any positive or negative mental health outcomes‚ and relatively weak evidence for any effect in adolescence.";While ";social transition"; apparently had no discernible impact on mental health‚ the report indicated that those children so groomed were much more likely to undergo sex-change medical interventions at a later stage.The report also noted that while puberty blockers ";exert their intended effect in suppressing puberty‚"; they compromise bone density and have no apparent impact on ";gender dysphoria or body satisfaction.";";There was insufficient/inconsistent evidence about the effect of puberty suppression on psychological or psychosocial wellbeing‚ cognitive development‚ cardio-metabolic risk or fertility‚"; added the report.As for cross-sex hormones‚ the Cass report noted that the University of York';s systematic review found ";a lack of high-quality research assessing the outcomes of hormone interventions in adolescents with gender dysphoria/incongruence‚ and few studies that undertake long-term follow-up.";The university is quoted as emphasizing‚ ";No conclusions can be drawn about the effect on gender dysphoria‚ body satisfaction‚ psychosocial health‚ cognitive development‚ or fertility.";The Cass report also indicated there was no evidence to support the conclusion that cross-sex hormones reduce the elevated risk of deaths among those suffering from gender dysphoria. This finding corresponds with the conclusion reached in an explosive Finnish study published February in the esteemed journal BMJ Mental Health‚ which found that sex-change medical interventions ";do not have an impact on suicide risk.";Besides underscoring the ";weak"; and unreliable nature of the evidence in support of ";gender-affirming care‚"; the Cass report also indicated that clinicians ";are unable to determine with any certainty which children and young people will go on to have an enduring trans identity.";That';s a critically important point because many kids sterilized and transmogrified by the sex-change regime could have otherwise gone on to lead healthy lives and naturally start families.Blaze News previously reported that Finland';s leading child psychiatrist Riittakerttu Kaltiala told her government that the vast majority of kids will grow out of the delusion that their gender and sex are misaligned.The mutilation of children who would otherwise outgrow their confusion is all the more egregious because children cannot properly consent to sex-change procedures‚ as members of the World Professional Association for Transgender Health have recently been exposed admitting behind closed doors.Cass'; report notes that for ";most young people‚ a medical pathway will not be the best way to manage their gender-related distress. For those young people for whom a medical pathway is clinically indicated‚ it is not enough to provide this without also addressing wider mental health and/or psychosocially challenging problems.";Cass further suggested in her foreword that this is ";an area of remarkably weak evidence‚ and yet results of studies are exaggerated or misrepresented by people on all sides of the debate to support their viewpoint. The reality is that we have no good evidence on the long-term outcomes of interventions to manage gender-related distress.";The Telegraph reported that British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak has welcomed the recommendations made in the report‚ noting the massive spike of gender dysphoria among children‚ especially girls‚ in recent years.";We simply do not know the long-term impacts of medical treatment or social transitioning on them‚ and we should therefore exercise extreme caution‚"; said Sunak‚ who indicated the conservative government has already halted the routine use of puberty blockers in children under the age of 16.The charity group Sex Matters said in a statement Wednesday‚ ";Hilary Cass';s report demolishes the entire basis for the current model of treating gender-distressed children. Its publication is a shameful day for NHS England‚ which for too long gave vulnerable children harmful treatments for which there was no evidence base. It';s now clear to all that this was quack medicine from the start.";Helen Joyce of the not-for-profit Sex Matters stated‚ ";This is the end of paediatric gender medicine as we know it.";The Lesbian Project welcomed the report‚ noting that it ";hopes that real change will now be implemented on the ground in health services‚ in order to fully excise the fanatical activism that has led to the scandalous mistreatment of a vulnerable cohort of children and adolescents.";Gender ideologues are not happy that their narrative has effectively been bulldozed in recent weeks and months.In advance of the report';s release‚ LGBT activist Cal Horton at Oxford Brookes Business School penned a piece of propaganda for the International Journal of Transgender Health claiming the ";Cass Review itself can be understood as an example of cis-supremacy‚ within a cis-dominant healthcare system lacking accountability to trans communities.";Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors‚ sign up for our newsletters‚ and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

A nonbinary writer said that ";broad-based"; restrictions of males in female athletic competitions were likely unfair because scientific literature has not yet proven that men have athletic advantages over women at all times.The writer was commenting on the National Association of Intercollegiate Athletics‚ which recently voted to ban transgender athletes from competing in sports against the opposite sex.The 20-0 vote limited participating in female sports to those who were born female. The NAIA also ruled that athletes who are on hormone therapy as part of gender transitioning may also not compete in those competitions.Katie Barnes‚ who claims to be nonbinary and uses ";they/them/their"; pronouns‚ appeared on CNN';s ";The Lead"; with Jake Tapper to discuss the recent rule change.";I think it is reflective of the times that we are in‚"; Barnes said of the policy. ";The last three or four years‚ we have seen most policy updates‚ when it comes to transgender athletes‚ be reflective of restriction and be more restrictive policy.";Host Tapper then stated that there is a ";narrative"; that ";transgender female athletes have an advantage"; over actual women in sports. Tapper added that that is the reason ";men and women generally compete in separate‚ gendered categories‚"; because it is not ";particularly competitive for men.";";Do studies support that?"; Tapper asked.Barnes'; defense appeared to be that while there could be certain advantages for men when competing against women‚ it is not fair to create all-encompassing rules to keep men out of female competitions.";The reality is that from a scientific perspective‚ we know that there are differences in sexes‚ and we know that the differences do tend to lead to athletic performance differences‚ as well‚"; Barnes replied. ";However‚ when we look at broad-based restriction at all levels of sport‚ it';s very challenging to say that that is scientifically supported in all cases.";";Something that may be appropriate for swimming does not necessarily apply to basketball. When it comes to individual sports versus team sports and as well as level of competition‚"; the author added. Disgusting. CNN';s Jake Tapper brought in a non-binary ESPN writer (who uses ";they";/";them"; pronouns) to denounce the #NAIA';s new policy to protect women';s sports from biological men.\n\nThe guest‚ Katie Barnes‚ claims that it';s not scientifically proven that biological men would\u2026 (@) Barnes went on to claim that it remained unclear if ";transgender women have an advantage in all sports at all times‚"; regardless of medical procedures. ";I don';t think that scientific literature supports that‚ at this time.";As footage of Barnes'; interview circulated online‚ the ESPN writer fell back into the position that no clear opinion was given during the CNN segment.";Me: I don';t think it';s right for me to say whether or not a policy is fair. Them: Look at this they/them reporter condemning a policy‚"; Barnes wrote on X. Me: I don';t think it';s right for me to say whether or not a policy is fair. \n\nThem: Look at this they/them reporter condemning a policy. (@) At the same time‚ Barnes has published the book ";Fair Play: How Sports Shape the Gender Debates."; Multiple reviews have revealed that the book discusses ";the difference between using testosterone to medically transition and using it for competitive advantage"; in sports.According to a review by NBC News‚ the book also stated that there is no scientific or empirical evidence to support categorical bans in sports on people who believe they are the opposite gender. At the same time‚ Barnes said in the book that there should be some restrictions for collegiate-level sports (or higher) for individual competitions. However‚ Barnes also said there should be a pathway for all transgender athletes to compete in the category of their choice.The above sentiments are quite a distance from the claim it was not ";right"; for Barnes to state whether or not a policy was fair. it\u2019s happening! My book‚ Fair Play: How Sports Shape the Gender Debates is out TODAY! Get a copy‚ tell a friend‚ tell 10. I\u2019m so excited this is out in the world and really proud to share it with all of you. (@) Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors‚ sign up for our newsletters‚ and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

As the chief policy officer of BitChute‚ a video sharing platform serving millions of U.S. users‚ Im closely watching the House and Senates discussions on possibly renewing or changing Section 702 of the 2008 FISA Amendments Act. For anyone unaware‚ Section 702 currently permits warrantless interception‚ collection‚ storage‚ and queries of communications related to foreign intelligence information. For well over a decade‚ Section 702 has enabled our government to conduct warrantless surveillance of foreigners and Americans alike.With the expiration of the programs authorization looming‚ and a vote on a proposal scheduled to take place as early as Wednesday‚ lets see what sort of reforms our elective representatives might enact.Privacy shouldnt be something we enjoy only at the whim of our elected representatives.The House Intelligence Committee recently introduced HR 6611‚ also known as the HPSCI bill. If enacted‚ the legislation would likely further impede my teams efforts to protect the privacy of our users from unconstitutional invasions of privacy.First‚ the bill would reauthorize Section 702 for eight years‚ during which time a program rife with abuse would effectively be sheltered from scrutiny. In addition‚ it would significantly expand the definition of the already notoriously broad foreign intelligence. That term would now encompass communications related to international production‚ distribution‚ or financing of a wide range of drugs‚ or even their precursors‚ such that a whole new swath of communications could be swept up into Section 702s already vast database.The House Judiciary Committee passed a somewhat less awful proposal. It would reauthorize Section 702 for only three years and at least require a warrant to query the stored communications of Americans. It also makes gestures toward closing the data broker loophole‚ a separate program whereby our government has been spending our tax dollars to purchase troves of private data about us from data brokers.As with Section 702‚ these purchases have taken place without a warrant and without our consent or knowledge. Closing the loophole would be welcomed by those of us who dont believe weve consented to an extended stay in Benthams Panopticon by using a Starbucks frequent caffeinator card.Late Friday we learned‚ however‚ that the bill House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) plans to push is neither one of these‚ but instead a compromise bill‚ long on reauthorization five years and short on reform.Johnsons scheme shuns any warrant requirements‚ not even to search the database. It provides not so much as a gesture toward closing the data broker loophole. But it does add a section imposing fines‚ imprisonment of up to 10 years‚ or both for anyone who discloses the existence of an application for an order for electronic surveillance. Perhaps meant to discourage whistleblowers?A warrant requirement amendment is scheduled for a vote‚ but Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) says its unlikely to pass. Johnson said hell allow a vote on a proposal to close the data broker loophole‚ but only as stand-alone piece of legislation. Senator Mike Lee (R-Utah) said this means basically killing it‚ as it has zero chance of being taken up by the Senate.Now‚ nearly 11 years after Edward Snowdens revelations of our governments unconstitutional warrantless surveillance programs‚ many Americans are no longer subdued by the pablum that if they have nothing to hide‚ they shouldnt care about invasions of their privacy. They realize something is very wrong with allowing the government to vacuum up our private communications and data and store them in vast databases‚ available to query at any time all without probable cause or suspicion.To help everyone understand the current proposals‚ I';ll explain the background of the ";third-party doctrine"; that has historically made programs like Section 702 appear legal without a warrant. Remember the intense debate in February';s House session about requiring a warrant just to search the Section 702 database? You';ll soon realize that these databases shouldn';t even exist because they contain vast amounts of private information and communications gathered without a warrant.The third-party doctrine‚ as expanded by the Supreme Court in the 1970s‚ denies Fourth Amendment protection to any information shared with third parties‚ such as your telephone company‚ bank‚ or email service provider. When the doctrine applies‚ no warrant is required when the government obtains that shared information‚ even if the sharing is only for the purpose of receiving services pursuant to an ordinary legal contract.Prior to the Supreme Courts rulings in Smith v. Maryland and United States v. Miller‚ the doctrine was applied only when information had been shared with a third party as part of a criminal endeavor involving what the common law would have called an illegal contract. I examined this history in 2014 law review article‚ distinguishing the reasonable expectation of privacy you and I have when we share information with‚ for example‚ our cellular service provider‚ from the expectation a Tony Soprano might have when he shares information with a criminal co-conspirator.I concluded that the Supreme Court got it wrong. Our expectations of privacy when we share information with third parties should be respected‚ and the Fourth Amendments warrant requirement should apply when the government obtains that information.Our government should not be collecting any Americans side of any conversation even the explicitly authorized incidental collection of Americans conversations with foreign persons located abroad‚ i.e. the targeting standard of Section 702. That standard permits surveillance of any foreign person located abroad who is believed to possess foreign intelligence information.Set aside for now the question whether it is morally justified to target anyone according to this notoriously broad standard. Should an American be deemed to have relinquished his or her reasonable expectation of privacy‚ simply for communicating with a person who has been so targeted?At this point‚ you may be starting to suspect that Section 702 and the data broker loophole arent the only unconstitutional warrantless surveillance programs in desperate need of reform. The proper solution for all such programs is to overturn the Supreme Courts rulings in Smith and Miller and thereby restore the protection of the Fourth Amendments warrant requirement for private data we entrust to others for a limited purpose.Until then‚ unfortunately‚ privacy is something we enjoy only at the whim of our elected representatives. And if they cant even muster up the courage to enact a reform bill that includes a warrant requirement‚ the best we can hope for is for nothing to pass and for the current authorization to lapse. In that case‚ the program would continue as is‚ pursuant to the one-year recertification currently allowed by statute. Then‚ next year‚ after some much-deserved accountability in November‚ perhaps a new Congress will be ready to deliver a reform bill worthy of the name‚ one that honors lawmakers'; oath to uphold the Constitution.

The latest installment of Blaze Originals documentaries‚ ";Bought and Paid For: How Politicians Get Filthy Rich‚"; drops on Wednesday for Blaze Media subscribers‚ and it covers a topic that is sure to interest and infuriate viewers of all political persuasions: insider stock-trading by members of Congress.In this 30-minute episode‚ host James Poulos travels to Washington‚ D.C.‚ the belly of the proverbial beast‚ to learn the extent of the problem. Even Poulos‚ a seasoned conservative thinker‚ appeared shocked by what he learned‚ noting that ";some of the most richly rewarded investors in the world"; are members of Congress and that running for Congress would give average Americans their best chance at earning ";outsized returns"; on stock trades.During his time in D.C.‚ Poulos chatted with some of the good guys in the fight‚ including Republican Reps. Matt Gaetz of Florida and Chip Roy of Texas‚ and learned that the issue is both bipartisan and bicameral‚ meaning it has infiltrated the U.S. House and Senate. Rep. Gaetz even takes Poulos on a tour of Capitol Hill‚ walking past or visiting the offices of some of the worst stock-trading offenders‚ including Sen. Bob Menendez (D-N.J.)‚ currently under federal indictment for bribery‚ and Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.)‚ whose net worth has skyrocketed in the last 15 years or so from $21 million in 2008 to a current net worth somewhere between $300 and $350 million‚ the documentary claimed.Some of the names mentioned‚ however‚ are less familiar to the public. They include Rep. Michael Guest (R-Miss.); Rep. Josh Gottheimer (D-N.J.)‚ who reportedly sold his stock of Silicon Valley Bank the day before the bank collapsed in March 2023; and Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.)‚ who sits on several influential committees such as the Armed Services Committee and the Committee on Agriculture‚ Nutrition‚ and Forestry.";It';s less about the insider trading‚ although that';s a thing. But it';s more about the fact that [members of Congress] have an inherent conflict of interest‚"; said Roy‚ who has repeatedly introduced failed legislation‚ cosponsored by Democrat Rep. Abigail Spanberger of Virginia‚ that would prohibit equities trading for members of Congress and their immediate families.Viewers of ";Bought and Paid For"; will likely be outraged that so many federal lawmakers brazenly and wantonly seem to engage in unethical stock-trading‚ but with almost no outside force to police the private behavior of lawmakers and their families‚ participants in the documentary are skeptical that things will change anytime soon.";It turns out that congressional stock trading will occur in an ecosystem of shamelessness‚"; Gaetz quipped.While Blaze Originals documentaries have covered such hot-button topics as the Maui fires and the deplorable conditions at the Texas development Colony Ridge‚ Blaze Media personalities believe this may be the most powerful episode yet.";This is maybe the best work our platform has ever done‚"; said BlazeTV host Steve Deace. ";It';s among the greatest works right-of-center alternative media has ever done. ... It';s phenomenal. Don';t miss it.";";Bought and Paid For"; debuts on Wednesday‚ but you must have a Blaze Media subscription to see it. Click here to subscribe today. You can also check out a trailer for the episode below:Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors‚ sign up for our newsletters‚ and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

President Joe Biden (D) stated during a recent interview that his administration is currently determining whether he has the authority to shut down the southern border.In an interview with Univision';s Enrique Acevedo‚ Biden said that he is not sure that he is able to stop the surge of migrants coming into the United States via the border.Biden blamed Republicans for failing to support legislation that he claimed would have granted him the authority to curb the migrant crisis. The president admitted that Customs and Border Protection does not have enough officers to properly vet migrants entering the country.";We';re in a situation where‚ for example‚ we don';t have enough officers to even interview people to discern whether they have a legitimate fear or concern to qualify to come in. We don';t have enough people at the border with our Border Patrol people. We don';t have enough machinery that we can detect fentanyl and illegal drugs coming in‚"; Biden stated.";We worked this with a very conservative Republican from Oklahoma‚ a senator‚ came along‚ and he ran on one side and Democrats on the other side‚ and they worked for four months‚ and they came up with a proposal. It didn';t have everything I wanted‚"; he continued‚ referring to the $118 billion‚ 370-page bill released by the Senate in February. The legislation lumped together massive funding for military aid for Ukraine and Israel‚ humanitarian assistance for Gaza‚ and southern border security provisions.Biden touted that the bill ";provided for a significant more personnel [at the border] to make an orderly transfer and allow legal immigration to increase‚ not decrease‚ and diminish illegal immigration.";He blasted President Donald Trump for allegedly pressuring Republicans to vote against the legislation.The reporter asked Biden whether he had ";made a final decision on taking executive order in terms of what you want to do at the border‚ that includes the power to shut down the border.";The president claimed that he had ";suggested that.";";We';re examining whether or not I have that power. I would have that power under the legislation. When the border has over five‚ 5‚000 people a day trying to cross the border because you can';t manage it‚ slow it up. There';s no‚ there';s no guarantee that I have that power all by myself without legislation. And some have suggested I should just go ahead and try it. And if I get shut down by the court‚ I get shut down by the court. But we';re trying to work that‚ work through that right now‚"; Biden said.Over the first five months of fiscal year 2024‚ the Border Patrol reported over 1‚151‚000 encounters. CBP';s data does not account for known and unknown gotaways who are not being tracked by law enforcement authorities. Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors‚ sign up for our newsletters‚ and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

According to Lauren Chen‚ the new Ghostbusters: Frozen Empire hits the sweet spot but not in a good way.Here‚ we have a movie that is just gay enough that Westerners will applaud it for being diverse and inclusive‚ but it';s not so gay that it would potentially be censored in overseas markets‚ she says.The film is the sequel to Ghostbusters: Afterlife‚ which Lauren says wasnt amazing but also wasnt terrible.So‚ going into Ghostbusters: Frozen Empire‚ I guess my expectations were pretty mid‚ she says‚ adding that she doesnt ";think that this film is unwatchable‚ but its nonetheless very messy.The writing is all over the place‚ the structure of the film is very questionable‚ and I';m sorry‚ but they have managed to deliver one of the most unlikable female protagonists I have seen in a very long time.Without giving spoilers (although Laurens review has plenty)‚ the conflict is cliche in that the Ghostbusters work‚ which objectively helps the city‚ is halted when the mayor decides its causing too much collateral damage.Its so formulaic‚ sighs Lauren.Further‚ one of the main characters Phoebe‚ a 15-year-old girl who Lauren says is very much embracing the angsty teenage archetype engages in a pseudo gay love story with a ghost.While their relationship is not explicitly romantic‚ Lauren is 99% sure that the writers behind this movie absolutely intended this to be a romantic storyline.At one point‚ Phoebe even decides to use some experimental tech to separate her spirit from her body so that [she] and Melody can be on the same plane.As for the plot‚ This movie really is everywhere‚ says Lauren‚ adding that there are so many characters in this film who are included for seemingly no reason‚ [as] they don';t contribute anything but have a considerable amount of screen time.Removing Paul Rudd‚ who plays Mr. Grooberson‚ does not change things at all‚ and the same goes with Finn Wolfhard‚ who stars in the role of Trevor Spengler.Its almost like in their contracts‚ [Finn Wolfhard] and Paul Rudd had minimum screen time guarantees that they were trying to meet‚ even though the writers basically just wanted to tell the pseudo-gay love story‚ says Lauren.Further‚ The characters who are from the original ';Ghostbusters'; film‚ including Dr. Stantz and Zeddemore‚ could have been given more important roles in the plot‚ which would have made the inclusion of their characters feel a lot more substantial.The one character who they really do give a lot of screen time to is Phoebe‚ and she';s the worst character‚ laments Lauren. I cannot overstate how annoying she is in this movie; she is angsty and scowling and awkward the entire film.To hear more of Laurens review (spoilers included)‚ watch the clip below.Want more from Lauren Chen?To enjoy more of Laurens pro-liberty‚ pro-logic‚ and pro-market commentary on social and political issues‚ subscribe to BlazeTV the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America‚ defend the Constitution‚ and live the American dream.

A Colorado school bus aide was caught on video allegedly torturing an autistic‚ nonverbal 10-year-old child and the victim';s tearful parents are expressing outrage.What';s more‚ the boy reportedly isn';t the only victim of the now-former Littleton Public Schools paraprofessional.What are the details?KCNC-TV reported that the suspect allegedly caused injuries such as fractured bones‚ a knocked-out tooth‚ and deep bruises to at least three students with autism while they rode a bus the district provides‚ which brings the students to the Joshua School one of the state';s most highly regarded private schools for students with autism.The families of the victims asked that their last names not be shared‚ KCNC added.";They took my trust and spit on it‚"; Devin‚ the father of 10-year-old Dax‚ tearfully stated during a press conference‚ the station said. Image source: YouTube screenshotDax';s parents wanted the disturbing video of what happened to their son made public without blurring his face‚ as they said their nonverbal boy';s facial expressions and body language are what speak for him‚ KCNC reported. Image source: YouTube screenshot";It was a heavy decision to make to uncover it‚ but we cannot bring attention to this if we don';t look at it‚"; Dax';s mother‚ Jess‚ said‚ according to the station. ";It';s ugly to look at‚ but it';s important to see how confused and afraid he was in that video. It just speaks to his vulnerability‚ and it speaks to the terror he had to endure while on that bus.";More from KCNC:That video was shared Tuesday morning‚ showing Dax aboard that LPS bus sitting next to paraprofessional Kiarra Jones. It was recorded March 18 and captures Jones‚ 28‚ physically abusing the 10-year-old boy repeatedly elbowing him in the stomach‚ slapping his face‚ and stomping on his feet.";How could someone that I trusted‚ someone that I was so friendly with‚ do this to my little boy?"; Jess asked tearfully‚ the station said. ";The torture and torment of my sweet boy could';ve been stopped."; Image source: YouTube screenshotKCNC reported that Jess said she began noticing bumps and bruises on her son dating back to September 2023‚ after which she told Joshua School staff‚ who confirmed with her that Dax didn';t suffer those injuries while in their care.She added to the station that she pivoted to LPS‚ but they said there was nothing to be concerned about. After Dax';s injuries worsened‚ Jess told KCNC she demanded answers from the district. Image source: YouTube screenshot";I notified LPS on March 18‚ and on March 19 got a phone call from Littleton police informing me that an LPS employee had severely abused my child‚"; she added‚ according to the station. ";I went to the LPS transportation building and was in utter shock.";Then‚ Jess was informed that Jones allegedly abused other children as well‚ KCNC noted.";My son does not have the ability to tell me when someone';s hurting him‚"; another victim';s father said‚ according to the station. ";My son does not have the ability to tell me that he was forced to watch someone hurt his friends.";';Traumatized and tortured';Now‚ the parents of these three students are prepared to sue the school district‚ KCNC reported‚ adding that they claim LPS knew about their abuse concerns for months and did nothing.";They had everything they needed to stop it faster‚ and they didn';t‚"; attorney Ed C. Hopkins of the Rathod Mohamedbhai law firm stated‚ according to the station. ";They had notice‚ and they ignored it. These children have been traumatized and tortured because they failed them."; Image source: YouTube screenshotKCNC added that Jess said she wants to bring attention to an issue that is ";unfortunately more common than you would think. There needs to be change.";Anything else?The station said the school district declined multiple requests for an interview but shared a letter a district spokesperson said the superintendent emailed Friday to LPS parents. The letter states that an internal investigation began March 19‚ Jones was fired‚ and police were notified‚ KCNC reported.";This kind of behavior cannot be and is not tolerated‚"; the letter reads‚ according to the station. ";As parents‚ you trust us with the well-being of your children and you should never have to worry about them being harmed when they are in our care.";More from KCNC:The letter also claims Jones was hired in August 2023 ";after satisfactory reference checks and after passing through a background check."; Jones was arrested on April 4 after the incident was reported to the Englewood Police Department by Littleton police on March 28. She was released from the Arapahoe County Jail on a $5‚000 bond on April 5.Jones is scheduled for a preliminary hearing in Arapahoe County Court on May 3 at 1:30 p.m. on charges of crimes against at-risk juvenile third-degree assault and crimes against at-risk juvenile-injury. Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors‚ sign up for our newsletters‚ and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Seven more states filed another lawsuit on Tuesday againt the Biden administration over its continued attempts to circumvent the Supreme Courts ruling against sweeping federal student loan debt handouts‚ Fox Business reported.So far‚ 18 states have sued Biden for passing billions of dollars in student loan debt on to taxpayers.The latest lawsuit‚ led by Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey‚ claims that Bidens Saving on a Valuable Education Plan‚ also referred to as SAVE‚ is illegal. According to the administration‚ SAVE is a new income-driven repayment plan that uses borrowers income to calculate a monthly payment. The program has unique benefits that will lower payments for many borrowers.The White House has used the plan to roll out so-called debt cancellation for roughly 1 million Americans with at least $45.6 billion of debt. The Supreme Court previously rejected the Biden administrations plan to enact unilateral debt cancellations. The federal government has since announced many smaller‚ similar programs despite the court';s decision. The Biden administration reported that nearly 8 million borrowers are enrolled in the presidents SAVE plan‚ and 4.5 million now have a monthly payment of $0.AG Bailey told Fox Business‚ With the stroke of his pen‚ Joe Biden is attempting to saddle working Missourians with a half-trillion dollars in debt. The United States Constitution makes clear that the president lacks the authority to unilaterally cancel student loan debt for millions of Americans without express permission from Congress.The president does not get to thwart the Constitution when it suits his political agenda‚ he continued. Im filing suit to halt his embarrassing attempt to buy the 2024 election in direct violation of the law. The Constitution will continue to mean something as long as Im attorney general.We beat his unlawful student loan plan in court last summer‚ so he quickly rolled out Plan B. Now that were challenging that‚ hes panicked and is rolling out a Plan C. We will continue to watch him closely and take action whenever hes overstepped his authority‚ Bailey told Fox Business.Arkansas‚ Florida‚ Georgia‚ North Dakota‚ Ohio‚ and Oklahoma joined Missouri in the newest lawsuit.The complaint argued that the SAVE plan demonstrates a long but troubling pattern of the President relying on innocuous language from decades-old statutes to impose drastic‚ costly policy changes on the American people without their consent.Arkansas Attorney General Tim Griffin told the news outlet‚ President Biden has already lost on this question once‚ and he is refusing to follow the law. The Supreme Court could not have been clearer: President Biden cannot unilaterally cancel student debt and force taxpayers to bear the multibillion-dollar cost.Late last month‚ Kansas Attorney General Kris Kobach and 10 other states filed a similar lawsuit against the Biden administration‚ challenging its efforts to wipe out federal student loan debt‚ Blaze News previously reported.Not since the Civil War has a president told the Supreme Court‚ Yeah you blocked me‚ but Im gonna do it anyway‚ Kobach told Fox News Digital. Biden is trying to twist federal law once again‚ and his new plan is just as illegal as the old plan.The Education Department responded to the initial lawsuit‚ telling the news outlet‚ The Department does not comment on pending litigation. However‚ Congress gave the U.S. Department of Education the authority to define the terms of income-driven repayment plans in 1993‚ and the SAVE plan is the fourth time the Department has used that authority.The Biden-Harris Administration wont stop fighting to provide support and relief to borrowers across the country no matter how many times Republican elected officials try to stop us‚ the department added.Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors‚ sign up for our newsletters‚ and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Arizona Republican Kari Lake‚ the presumptive GOP nominee for a United States Senate seat‚ opposes the pro-life ruling in Arizona.On Tuesday‚ the Arizona Supreme Court ruled that a state law‚ passed in 1864 decades before Arizona became a state‚ is enforceable. The law not only prohibits abortion except in cases to save a mother';s life but makes it a felony to perform one or help a woman procure one.In a statement‚ Lake condemned the ruling and claimed the ";pre-statehood law is out of step with Arizonans.";";I am the only woman and mother in this race. I understand the fear‚ anxiety and joy of pregnancy and motherhood. I wholeheartedly agree with President Trump this is a very personal issue that should be determined by each individual state and her people‚"; Lake said. ";I oppose today';s ruling‚ and am calling on [Gov.] Katie Hobbs and the State Legislature to come up with an immediate common sense solution that Arizonans can support‚"; she added.Not only did Lake voice her opposition to the ruling‚ but she promised not to support a federal ban on abortion if she is elected to the Senate.";I am not going to D.C. to legislate an issue that has been returned to the states‚"; Lake explained.The problem with Lake';s position‚ pro-life advocates might argue‚ is that because the overturn of Roe v. Wade returned the issue of abortion to individual states‚ some states have no restrictions on abortion at all‚ theoretically permitting abortion up until the moment of birth.In fact‚ seven states Alaska‚ Colorado‚ Minnesota‚ New Jersey‚ New Mexico‚ Oregon‚ and Vermont plus Washington‚ D.C.‚ have no gestational limit on abortion. That';s why one of the leading pro-life organizations‚ Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America‚ fiercely denounced Donald Trump';s position on abortion‚ which Lake';s mirrors.";Unborn children and their mothers deserve national protections and national advocacy from the brutality of the abortion industry. The Dobbs decision clearly allows both states and Congress to act‚"; said Marjorie Dannenfelser‚ president of SBA Pro-Life America. ";Saying the issue is ';back to the states'; cedes the national debate to the Democrats who are working relentlessly to enact legislation mandating abortion throughout all nine months of pregnancy. If successful‚ they will wipe out states rights.";Lake';s opposition to the Arizona law is an about-face. Just two years ago‚ she praised the statute as ";a great law.";Lake';s position on the issue is important because‚ if she is elected to the U.S. Senate‚ she could be part of Republicans winning back control of the upper house. That means her opposition to a federal ban on abortion could sink efforts to pass one if Republicans win control of both the House and Senate.Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors‚ sign up for our newsletters‚ and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Gun-savvy social media users spot numerous things wrong with photo promoted by DoD branch.