President Donald Trump hinted of revoking other universities’ certification to host international students in response to a question about his move against Harvard. Harvard University filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration on Friday in response to the Department of Homeland Security revoking the school’s certification to host international students. The Trump administration had stripped Harvard of its ability to enroll foreign students earlier Friday, accusing the school of failing to heed the law with respect to his anti-diversity, equity, and inclusion executive orders. The Daily Signal asked the president whether he was considering similar action against other schools that fail to comply with his executive orders. I asked @POTUS if he is considering revoking universities besides Harvard's abilities to accept foreign students."Harvard is going to have to change its ways, and a couple of others," he told @DailySignal . pic.twitter.com/Fp2irhwl2i— Elizabeth Troutman Mitchell (@TheElizMitchell) May 23, 2025 “Harvard is going to have to change its ways, and a couple of others,” he said. “Billions of dollars has been paid to Harvard,” he told The Daily Signal. “How ridiculous is that? Billions, and they have $52 billion as an endowment. They have $52 billion, and this country is paying billions and billions of dollars, and then gives student loans, and they have to pay back the loans.” A federal judge on Friday issued an injunction temporarily blocking the Trump administration’s latest action against Harvard, meaning that for now, foreign students can continue attending the university.   Currently, there are more than 6,700 international students studying at Harvard, making up about 27% of the Ivy League school’s student body, according to the university.  Harvard is losing its “Student and Exchange Visitor Program certification as a result of their failure to adhere to the law,” according to Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem. “Let this serve as a warning to all universities and academic institutions across the country.”  The Department of Homeland Security operates the Student and Exchange Visitor Program to ensure foreign students are in the country legally. Harvard President Alan Garber called the administration’s latest move part of a “series of government actions to retaliate against Harvard for our refusal to surrender our academic independence and to submit to the federal government’s illegal assertion of control over our curriculum, our faculty, and our student body.”  The post Harvard ‘And Others’ Need to Get in Line or Lose Foreign Students, Trump Says appeared first on The Daily Signal.

If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. Steven Guilbeault, once Canada’s Environment Minister is now poised to spearhead a different kind of oversight, this time, over what Canadians can see and share online. In his new post as Minister of Canadian Identity and Culture, Guilbeault has been entrusted with executing Bill C-11, a contentious piece of legislation passed in 2023 that gives the federal government unprecedented power over online streaming platforms. More: Guilbeault uses statements from Trudeau government-funded campaign groups to justify censorship bill Celebrating the appointment, Guilbeault publicly thanked newly elected Prime Minister Mark Carney, expressing his intent to “build a stronger country, based on the values of Canadians.” This shift in leadership places Guilbeault at the center of an ongoing battle over internet regulation. Bill C-11, which was rushed into law during Justin Trudeau’s final term as Prime Minister, obligates major tech companies to fund and prioritize Canadian content, particularly that of the mainstream media, regardless of whether users are seeking it. While the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) was initially expected to enforce the new requirements, it recently admitted that the regulatory framework won’t be ready until late 2025. That leaves platforms, creators, and consumers in limbo, uncertain about how deeply the government’s hand will extend into digital media. Carney, seen as a political continuation of Trudeau’s legacy, appears ready to go even further. Before the most recent election, the Liberal Party was already moving to introduce Bill C-63, a so-called Online Harms Act. While framed as a tool to protect minors from exploitation, the bill also includes expansive measures to monitor and penalize what it terms “hate speech.” This vague language has prompted concern from legal scholars and civil liberties organizations about the law’s potential to suppress legitimate expression. With Guilbeault now steering Canada’s cultural and digital policies, free speech advocates worry the government is tightening its grip not only on environmental and economic life but on the very flow of information and dialogue in the digital sphere. What began as a push for national content promotion may ultimately serve as a model for broader censorship under the guise of cultural stewardship. If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. The post Canada’s PM Mark Carney Revives Online Censorship Agenda appeared first on Reclaim The Net.

If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. Ireland’s refusal to fully adopt the European Union’s “hate speech” directives has ignited tensions in Brussels, with Independent MEP Michael McNamara voicing staunch opposition to what he calls a misguided and authoritarian push to punish noncompliance. He dismissed the EU’s legal threats as deeply flawed, asserting that there is no evidence” that these laws accomplish their stated goals of reducing discord or promoting unity. According to McNamara, attempts to legislate acceptable speech do little more than sow fear and resentment. “People resent the fact that they’re threatened with prosecution for expressing their views,” he said, highlighting a growing unease across Europe as more individuals feel unable to voice opinions, whether popular or not. He warned that such policies do not alter underlying beliefs, they simply force them underground. Instead of fostering a more harmonious society, McNamara argued that these measures build resentment. “It doesn’t affect how people think in any way, it just affects what they are afraid to say and what they resent,” he said. He drew a parallel to the United Kingdom, where, he noted, citizens are witnessing elderly individuals facing prosecution for speech offenses, while police resources are increasingly diverted from public safety to policing online expression. “Hate speech laws are counter-productive. They are also profoundly illiberal. They’ve damaged the UK and we don’t want the same,” he wrote in a message on X, calling on the European Commission to abandon any proceedings against Ireland related to speech legislation. https://video.reclaimthenet.org//articles/1925470507899461736.mp4 The EU’s position, outlined in a recent notice from the Commission, faults Ireland and Finland for not yet implementing legal measures to criminalize specific categories of speech, including statements denying historical atrocities or inciting hatred against protected groups. While Ireland has made partial moves, Brussels remains unsatisfied and has issued formal opinions giving the two nations two months to comply before potential escalation to the European Court of Justice. Despite an earlier attempt to introduce hate speech legislation, one that passed easily through the Dáil, the lower house of the Irish parliament, the Irish government eventually shelved the bill. Resistance from the Seanad and significant public discontent led to its demise, with many viewing the proposal as a direct threat to civil liberties. That backlash is widely believed to have influenced the outcome of the March 2024 referendums, where voters rejected two constitutional amendments by wide margins. McNamara reiterated his stance before the European Parliament, stating plainly that pressing charges against Ireland over its refusal to implement these rules would be “misguided.” He urged the Commission to reconsider, framing the issue as one of national integrity and democratic principles rather than regulatory compliance. If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. The post Ireland Clashes with EU Over Hate Speech Laws as MEP Michael McNamara Denounces Brussels’ Legal Threats appeared first on Reclaim The Net.

If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. This content is available exclusively to supporters of Reclaim The Net Subscribe for premier reporting on free speech, privacy, Big Tech, media gatekeepers and individual liberty online.   Subscribe   Already a supporter? Login here.                       If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. The post Your Personal Messages Are Just Waiting to Go Public appeared first on Reclaim The Net.

The national media use polls the way they deploy all kinds of facts. They very carefully organize things to make it look like their worldview is winning. Throughout these first months of the second term, they've presented Trump's actions as chaotic and (they hope) politically damaging to Republicans.  So they may not notice polls that offer some good news. Let's take the Real Clear Politics average of polls on whether the country's going in the right or wrong direction. The numbers are more positive than anyone watching the networks would expect. It could be defined as voters stiff-arming the relentless media negativity. It isn't just our numbers. @RCPolitics Right Direction number is 1 point away from being better than at any point in their last 16 years. pic.twitter.com/HFiDSivt6x — Mark Mitchell, Rasmussen Reports (@honestpollster) May 23, 2025 So in the RCP average, "right direction" is only at -7. RCP lists the newest polls and their margins: Economist/You Gov (-7.3), Harvard/Harris (-11), Rasmussen Reports (tied at 47), Marquette (-16), Quantus Insights (-6), Big Data Poll (-7) and Emerson (-4). All of these are surveys of "registered voters," except Rasmussen polled "likely voters" and Marquette just polled "adults." This poll number doesn't always translate to actual politicians. Some conservatives right now might say "wrong direction" because they don't like the Trump trade policies, for example, but they're still Trump voters. We heard routinely in 2004 that George W. Bush was going to lose because of "wrong direction" numbers.  There are other signs that discourage Democrats. Margaret Talev of Axios.com reported on Wisconsin focus groups who are sticking with Trump:  Wisconsin swing voters who switched from former President Biden to President Trump in our latest Engagious/Sago focus groups are mostly standing by Trump despite reservations….Nine of the 12 participants said they approve overall of Trump's actions since taking office. None of the 12 said they would pick Kamala Harris if they could get a do-over. It could also be argued that no one should need an opinion poll for at least the first six months of a new presidential term. But this is one way that the media tries to intimidate Republicans out of passing policies they hate. "Oh, you're sinking in the polls!" When the polls don't look grim, they'll likely be skipped, like this. 

Sanctuary jurisdictions have sprouted up in many areas around the nation and, in many cases, created an undesired spillover effect for neighboring communities that reject such policies.New Hampshire has grappled with this issue due to Democratic leaders in Massachusetts implementing measures to shield illegal aliens, including criminals, from federal immigration authorities.'I'm very glad to see New Hampshire setting the standard for the rest of New England.'Massachusetts' shelter system became overrun and a hotspot for criminal activity amid the Biden administration's illegal immigration crisis. With limited shelter space available, many homeless individuals and families slept on the floor of the Boston Logan International Airport.RELATED: Blaze News original: Inside Massachusetts migrant shelters where crime flourishes under Democrats' watch Jodi Hilton for The Washington Post via Getty ImagesOn Thursday, New Hampshire Governor Kelly Ayotte (R) drew a line in the sand by signing into law House Bill 511 and Senate Bill 62, which place a ban on sanctuary cities and support cooperation between local authorities and federal immigration enforcement.Ayotte channeled her former campaign slogan, "Don't Mass up New Hampshire," in a statement regarding the new law."I said from the beginning that we won't let our state go the way of Massachusetts and their billion-dollar illegal immigrant crisis," Ayotte stated on Thursday. "Today, we're delivering on our promise by banning sanctuary cities and supporting law enforcement cooperation with federal immigration authorities. New Hampshire will never be a sanctuary for criminals, and we will keep working every day to remain the safest state in the nation."Ayotte told Fox News Digital, "New Hampshire is ranked the safest state in the nation, and I was glad I was able to sign the bill banning sanctuary cities to make sure we remain that way."Thursday's action made New Hampshire the first state in New England to ban sanctuary jurisdictions. RELATED: Massachusetts frees illegal alien child rape suspects on low bail as Mayor Wu doubles down on sanctuary laws New Hampshire Governor Kelly Ayotte. Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty ImagesBlaze News asked New Hampshire state Rep. Mike Belcher (R) for his reaction to the new law."I'm very glad to see New Hampshire setting the standard for the rest of New England. It's only a shame that we can't keep them [sanctuary cities] out of the rest of New England. So it's going to continue impacting us, but it's a start," Belcher said."We need to take a hard look at what is legitimate asylum and what is not, and maintain an America First policy," he continued. "I think as long as the federal government is properly enforcing good law, we should do everything we can to assist with that. Where they fail to do so, the states should pick it up and do it on their own because we have the right to do that as well."Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

If we were to put it to a democratic vote, the people would undoubtedly elect Doom as their boomer shooter president. But is it the best? Many would argue that title belongs to Dusk, the 2018, retro-style FPS that feels like a throw back to the golden age of Doom. Built primarily by just one man, it’s one of the best-reviewed boomer shooters ever, and one of the highest-rated by Steam users. Now though, it’s received the ultimate praise. John Romero, the co-founder of id Software and designer of the first Doom game, has finally got around to playing it - and he loves it. Continue reading Doom co-creator finally plays the best boomer shooter: "son, you did a good job" MORE FROM PCGAMESN: Best old games, Best FPS games, Best zombie games

IMAGINE If a Republican Did This! Democrat Rep Invited Dad of D.C. Hamas Shooter to Trump's March Speech

Newspaper Op-Ed of the Day: 'Could You Ever Imagine Trump Risking His Life for His Country?'

Guy Who Set Up COVID Snitch Line and Wanted Hate Speech Registry Warns We're on Road to Authoritarianism