A federal judge dismissed claims against Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis brought by attorneys representing illegal aliens that the Republican governor had flown to Martha’s Vineyard‚ Massachusetts‚ in 2022. District Judge Allison Burroughs ruled Friday that illegal immigrants could sue the charter flight company Vertol Systems‚ which contracted with Florida to transport them in September 2022. But Burroughs dismissed other claims brought against DeSantis and state defendants‚ finding that the court lacked jurisdiction‚ while leaving open the possibility of future legal action. “On the present record‚ the court cannot ascertain what actions were undertaken by whom and therefore cannot determine which‚ if any‚ of the individual defendants transacted business or caused injury here‚ leaving it no choice but to find that‚ at least on this record‚ personal jurisdiction has not been established‚” Burroughs wrote in her 77-page ruling. However‚ the judge wrote that the facts “support an inference that Vertol and the other defendants specifically targeted plaintiffs because they were Latinx immigrants.” “The court finds that‚ for purposes of a motion to dismiss‚ the allegations that Latinx individuals were (1) specifically targeted‚ (2) the only ones approached‚ and (3) the only ones on the flight … allow for the inference that Vertol and the other defendants invidiously discriminated against plaintiffs because of their race‚” Burroughs held. The judge wrote that “no reasonable person should have to endure the anxiety that comes with being unwillingly inserted into a divisive national debate.” The organization Lawyers for Civil Rights Boston filed the class action lawsuit in September 2022 on behalf of the nearly 50 illegal aliens transported from San Antonio‚ Texas‚ to Martha’s Vineyard. Julia Friedland‚ deputy press secretary for DeSantis‚ told the Daily Caller News Foundation that the flights “were conducted lawfully and authorized by the Florida Legislature.” “We look forward to Florida’s next illegal immigrant relocation flight‚ and we are glad to bring national attention to the crisis at the southern border‚” Friedland said. In a written statement‚ Lawyers for Civil Rights Boston called the ruling a “major victory.” “The favorable ruling is a major victory in the Martha’s Vineyard case‚ and it sends a crucial message: Private companies can—and will—be held accountable for helping rogue state actors violate the rights of vulnerable immigrants through illegal and fraudulent schemes‚” the group said. Originally published by the Daily Caller News Foundation The post Judge Hands DeSantis Legal Win in Lawsuit Over Flying Illegal Aliens to Martha’s Vineyard appeared first on The Daily Signal.

California Democrats’ incorrigible obsession with racial preferences is the definition of insanity: They keep trying and failing to legalize racial preferences‚ and yet‚ they expect a different outcome each time. When will they learn from their failures? Not any time soon. Their futile cycle has restarted with another effort to legalize racial preferences. The California state Assembly passed a proposed constitutional amendment‚ ACA 7‚ that would effectively nullify a provision of the California Constitution that prohibits the state from “discriminating against‚ or granting preferential treatment to‚ any individual or group on the basis of race‚ sex‚ color‚ ethnicity‚ or national origin.” That anti-discrimination provision‚ known as Proposition 209‚ affirms the constitutional right to equal protection under the law for all individuals‚ regardless of race. Left-wing politicians and activist groups have assailed it relentlessly and continuously since its adoption in 1996. They want to reinstate racial preferences within California’s institutions‚ but they have failed every time. Before ACA 7‚ California legislators had attempted to overturn the anti-discrimination provision in a measure known as Proposition 16‚ which was decisively rejected by California voters in the November 2020 general election. A comfortable majority of voters voted “No” on the measure‚ despite the “Yes” proponents outspending the opposition by more than 19 to 1. Although California voters emphatically rejected racial preferences in education and hiring‚ the supporters of racial preferences still have not taken “No” for an answer. This time‚ they’re hoping to trick the people into changing their minds. Whereas Prop 16 was open and honest about abolishing racial neutrality‚ ACA 7 is much more deceptive. Rather than repeal race neutrality‚ ACA 7 creates “exceptions” that look modest‚ but which would effectively nullify the rule. Assemblyman Corey Jackson introduced the bill to create a procedure for agencies to appeal to the governor for “exceptions” to Prop 209. The amendment would give the governor power to approve exceptions if a state-funded‚ “research-informed” program that uses racial preferences “increases the life expectancy of‚ improves educational outcomes for‚ or lifts out of poverty specific groups based on race‚ color‚ ethnicity‚ national origin‚ sex‚ or sexual orientation.” In other words‚ this bill is just an attempt to restore racial discrimination under the guise of science. Find some ideologically driven‚ low-quality research that appears to support a program that allegedly “increases the life expectancy” or “educational outcomes” of any minority group‚ and voila‚ racial discrimination is lawful again. Jackson insists that Prop 209 is an “unjust law” and a “barrier.” Yes‚ it’s unjust‚ he says‚ not to discriminate on the basis of race. He’s wrong about that‚ but he’s right about Prop 209 being a barrier. Prop 209 bars the state government from racially discriminating against the state’s residents.It guarantees one of the fundamental tenets of justice; namely‚ that all are equal before the law. Jackson is happy to sacrifice equal justice to “rectify the enduring disparities that have afflicted California for far too long.” But even assuming that racial discrimination would rectify disparities and would do so without causing even worse problems (both faulty assumptions)‚ that doesn’t change the fact that racial discrimination is unjust and immoral. Most Californians know this. So‚ thankfully‚ there’s still hope in the fight against racial preferences. The resounding defeat of Prop 16 in 2020 pointed to the reality that California voters‚ despite their infamously deep-blue political leanings‚ are not in favor of considering race in education or hiring decisions. According to Berkeley’s Institute of Governmental Studies’ post-2020 election survey of Californians‚ although 56% of African American voters supported Proposition 16‚ only 30 percent of Latinos and just 35 percent of Asians did. If ACA 7 passes the California state Senate‚ it will appear on the November ballot. If past is prologue‚ California voters will demonstrate—as if twice wasn’t enough—that racial discrimination is not tolerated in California‚ no “exceptions.” The post Some in California Want to Legalize Racial Discrimination—Yet Again appeared first on The Daily Signal.

When Did America Become a State Sponsor of Terror?

Imagine a colossal yet tender presence‚ quietly making its way closer to the smallest member of the family‚ setting the stage for a heartwarming interaction. This gentle giant‚ Phil‚ a magnificent dog‚ finds his world revolving around the newest‚ tiny human in the house. Every movement he makes‚ though subtle‚ is infused with the purest... The post Dog falls in love with new baby brother and quickly becomes obsessed appeared first on Animal Channel.

Imagine a colossal yet tender presence‚ quietly making its way closer to the smallest member of the family‚ setting the stage for a heartwarming interaction. This gentle giant‚ Phil‚ a magnificent dog‚ finds his world revolving around the newest‚ tiny human in the house. Every movement he makes‚ though subtle‚ is infused with the purest... The post Dog meets new baby brother and his response is beyond heart-melting appeared first on Animal Channel.

"I personally think it's good for them." Kate Bedingfield couldn't possibly have meant what that sounded like‚ even though she's a communications professional--Biden's former communications director. Surely she's not so heartless as to describe the deaths of seven World Central Kitchen aid workers in Gaza in an Israeli strike as being "good for" the Biden administration. But however she meant her shocking line‚ one thing was clear: Bedingfield did see the tragedy as a good opportunity for the Biden administration [read‚ campaign] to distance itself from Bibi Netanyahu and his policies. As Bedingfield put it in an appearance on Tuesday's CNN This Morning: "Every instance of horror like this gives the Biden administration more opening to put clear contrast between what they're trying to do‚ what they would argue they're trying to do responsibly in the region‚ and what Netanyahu has been unwilling to do.  I‚ I personally think it's good for them." Even seen in the most forgiving light‚ that is some stone-cold realpolitik. Could the vulture not have waited a bit longer before swooping down to exploit the tragedy for its maximum political benefit for her former boss?  Far from pushing back on Bedingfield's callous take‚ Hunt accused Israel of "starv[ing]" Gaza's population. Panelist Jonah Goldberg refuted Hunt's accusation‚ saying‚ "It's very difficult to feed a population that is being used as essentially human shields by a terrorist organization‚" and that "there's this expectation that Israel should be actually carrying more about Palestinians than the supposed leadership of Gaza. And that expectation puts Israel in an impossible situation."  Here's the transcript. CNN This Morning 4/2/24 6:14 am EDT IDF SPOKESMAN DANIEL HAGARI: The work of WCK is critical. They are the front lines of humanity. We will get to the bottom of this‚ and we will share our findings transparently. KASIE HUNT: Well‚ the IDF launching an investigation into the death of seven aid workers from José Andrés' World Central Kitchen. They were killed in an Israeli air strike‚ in an Israeli strike‚ excuse me‚ in central Gaza. The organization says that they had coordinated their movements with the IDF‚ and that they were in marked vehicles with their logo on them.  World Central Kitchen is one of the few aid organizations providing desperately needed food to those in Gaza. The organization now pausing operations there. The White House this morning calling this tragedy deeply troubling. . . .  Kate Bedingfield‚ I want to start with you‚ because look‚ this‚ the World Central Kitchen‚ José Andrés' operation‚ has become world renowned for showing up in the moments when humanity is having some of its toughest experiences‚ and helping people. They are known throughout the country in this way it‚ it's clear from that video that we showed at the top‚ the IDF just put that out as this is unfolding‚ that they understand just how horrible this is. And certainly just how horrible also that it looks.  KATE BEDINGFIELD: Oh yeah. HUNT: What is the impact here for the Biden administration? Because the politics of this are already so tough for them. BEDINGFIELD: Yeah‚ well look‚ obviously this is a horrific tragedy‚ a true humanitarian disaster‚ I mean‚ it's fair to say. You know‚ for the Biden administration‚ obviously‚ this is an incredibly fraught issue. I think the more space they can continue to draw between themselves and Bibi Netanyahu‚ and Netanhyahu's government‚ the better for them politically. From a policy perspective‚ I think they've been trying to drive toward a longstanding‚ sort of post-conflict plan. I think Bibi's own domestic politics have made it so that he is unwilling to engage in that in a serious way. And so every instance of horror like this gives the Biden administration more opening to put clear contrast between what they're trying to do‚ what they would argue they're trying to do responsibly in the region‚ and what Netanyahu has been unwilling to do. I‚ I personally think it's good for them. So‚ I think they need to be clear that this was unacceptable. It was horrific. They need to move to support Israel's investigation into what happened happened‚ and to take a very tough line on this. And I think this is a moment for them to do that.

In the wake of New York City Fire Department members heckling state Attorney General Letitia James last month with boos and "Trump!" chants‚ U.S. District Court Judge Nicholas Garaufis said the incident wasn't about politics but about race‚ the New York Daily News reported.“I’ve lived in New York City all my life. I know what the problem is. And believe me‚ front and center is what happened the other day‚" Garaufis said in reference to the heckling incident‚ the paper noted. "This doesn’t have to do with politics; this has to do with race."What's the background?James was booed as she walked to the podium to speak at a March 8 FDNY promotion ceremony at the Christian Cultural Center's Brooklyn Campus. James told the not-too-happy-to-see-her firefighters‚ "Oh‚ come on‚ we're in a house of God." When they didn't stop‚ James motioned with her hands and said "simmer down" — but soon the firefighters began chanting‚ "Trump! Trump! Trump!" New York Attorney General Letitia James booed in New York City youtu.be The New York Post reported that FDNY Chief of Department John Hodges in response "fired off an email to other agency honchos warning a reckoning led by the department’s Bureau of Investigation and Trials was coming over the chorus of boos and chants of 'Trump' that James received at Thursday’s event.""BITS is investigating this‚ so they will figure out who the members are‚” Hodges wrote in an email to FDNY leadership‚ according to the Post‚ adding that "I recommend they come forward. I have been told by the commissioner it will be better for them if they come forward‚ and we don’t have to hunt them down."The heckling presumably had to do with James targeting former President Donald Trump in a civil fraud case that resulted in an over $450 million penalty Trump was supposed to pony up last week or risk James seizing his properties. But a New York appellate court at the 11th hour ruled that Trump instead could post a $175 million bond — which he did April 1 — as the appeal process plays out.It's worth noting that James' political campaign for the AG chair focused on her insistence that she would go after Trump.What else?Garaufis' "this has to do with race" declaration directed toward the FDNY was part of his reaction to a complaint from the Vulcan Society of Black firefighters‚ which is in the midst of a civil rights settlement with the department that Garaufis is overseeing‚ the Daily News said.Vulcan Society President Regina Wilson told the judge at a March 14 status conference that the FDNY members heckling James demonstrates a racist culture at the the department‚ the Daily News added: “I don’t know if you had an opportunity to just see the vile nature of these members even when we were at Christian Cultural Center where they started booing and saying ‘Trump‚ Trump Trump‚’ while Letitia James was at the podium. This behavior is who this department is. Not all of them‚ but a large portion of them. So when black people go to work and have to deal with this‚ and you don’t get any help or support really from the department‚ it’s horrific.”In response‚ Garaufis demanded that FDNY Commissioner Laura Kavanagh and New York City's Corporation Counsel Sylvia Hinds-Radix appear before him at the next status conference in the case in May to explain why it’s taking so long for the department to answer equal opportunity complaints‚ the Daily News noted.How are observers reacting?About 1‚200 comments already have been posted under a Fox News story about Garaufis' "race" slap-down that Yahoo News published Tuesday — and many of them weren't happy. Here's a sampling:"When all else fails‚ race is the answer‚" one commenter wrote. "It's possible people just don't like her or what she did or didn't do or how she did it or whatever simply because they don't like her as a person. To blame the dislike on race is itself [racist] against those who are upset‚ but that's the way it's done today.""Has to do with free speech‚ judge. Or can you read peoples' minds. The beginning of the thought police‚" another commenter pondered."James is all about lawfare against Trump. It’s blatantly obvious. That is why so many people dislike her‚" another commenter stated. "She earned it.""Why is it when someone disagrees with policies or decisions of the current administration it always about race or a threat to democracy?" another commenter wondered. "This had nothing to do with race.""The race card yet again. Over and over it's played. This was about politics. and they tuned it into race‚" another commenter declared."Free speech is our right whether the judge likes it or not‚" another commenter stated.Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors‚ sign up for our newsletters‚ and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

NBA Hall of Famer Paul Pierce expressed his shock that Iowa's Caitlin Clark was able to beat a "bunch of black girls" from Louisiana State University.Pierce was speaking on FS1's "Undisputed" with NFL legend Keyshawn Johnson and host Skip Bayless when he reacted to Iowa's historic win over LSU during the NCAA women's basketball tournament.Clark is now viewed as one of the best female basketball players of all time and has recorded the most points in NCAA women's basketball history. The player has had a rivalry with LSU's Angel Reese leading up to their game in the Elite Eight‚ the quarterfinals of the tournament.After Iowa won 94-87‚ Pierce was in awe that Clark‚ a white woman‚ was able to beat black women."We saw a white girl in Iowa do it to a bunch of Black girls…that gained my respect‚" he told his cohosts. "That gained my respect! That’s like‚ oh she didn’t do this to some other little white girls that were over in Colorado or wherever. She did it to some girls from LSU who we thought were some dogs!"Pierce added that Iowa took LSU and "put 'em on their knee and spanked them. I didn’t expect that." "We saw a white girl in Iowa do it to a bunch of Black girls. That gained my respect...I didn't expect that." - Paul Pierce — (@) The LSU team garnered attention for all the wrong reasons following their disappointing loss. Fans quickly realized that LSU wasn't present during the national anthem after video circulated showing only the Iowa players present on the court‚ holding hands. Iowa players holding hands during the American National Anthem. LSU players left the court before the anthem was performed. — (@) LSU coach Kim Mulkey explained that the move wasn't intentional and claimed she didn't know when the Star-Spangled Banner would be performed."Honestly‚ I don't even know when the anthem was played‚" Mulkey said in the post-game press conference. "We kind of have a routine when they’re on the floor and they come off at the 12-minute mark. I don't know‚ we come in and we do our pregame stuff. I'm sorry‚ listen‚ that’s nothing intentionally done." Kim Mulkey said her team didn't intentionally leave the floor prior to the playing of the United States National Anthem. \n\n"Honestly‚ I don't even know when the anthem was played. We kind of have a routine [for leaving the court at a certain time]." — (@) LSU star Reese had her own controversial segment during the press conference and detailed how she has felt abused online and hasn't been able to stand up for herself."I don't really get to stand up for myself. I have great teammates‚ I have a great support system‚ I have my hometown‚ I have my family that stands up for me‚" she began."I don't really get to speak out on things because I just try to ignore. I just try to stand strong. I've been through so much‚ I've seen so much‚ I've been attacked so many times. Death threats‚ I've been sexualized‚ I've been threatened...I'm still a human. All this has happened since I won the national championship‚ and I said the other day‚ I haven't been happy since then‚" she added.Interestingly enough‚ minutes earlier‚ teammate Hailey Van Lith said that media and online criticisms do not affect Reese's psyche."Y'all do not get to her. Let me say it again. Y'all do not get to Angel Reese. You might want to throw the towel in because you're wasting your energy. Angel is one of the toughest people I've been around‚" Van Lith declared. — (@) While it is obvious that threats of physical violence are unwarranted‚ Reese's claims of being sexualized are indeed strange given that she posed for the Sports Illustrated Swimsuit Edition in 2023.It is equally strange given that after LSU's win in the previous round of the NCAA tournament‚ Reese spoke about how much she enjoyed modeling."Me being able to be on the court but also off the court‚ I like to model and do other things. I can do both‚" she said‚ according to Outkick. View this post on Instagram A post shared by Sports Illustrated Swimsuit (@si_swimsuit) Reese still noted that she is "unapologetically" herself‚ with no plans to change."I wouldn't change anything‚ and I would still sit here and say I'm unapologetically me‚" she said. "I'm going to always leave that mark and be who I am and stand on that."Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors‚ sign up for our newsletters‚ and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

On February 14‚ 2018‚ 17 individuals needlessly lost their lives to 19-year-old gunman Nikolas Cruz at the Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland‚ Florida. Two fathers‚ Andrew Pollock and Ryan Petty‚ lost children in the massacre and have dedicated their lives to fighting for legislation that actually makes sense in combating school shootings. While their loss is devastating‚ they aren’t on board with the Biden administration’s latest policies that they believe would hurt more than help — like the now federalized red flag system. “In Parkland‚ the sheriff’s department was out to my daughters’ murderer’s house over 40 times and never arrested‚” Pollock tells Sara Gonzales. “Red flag gun laws only work if they’re enforced. If these people commit crimes and nothing ever gets put on their background‚ it’ll never show up‚” he continues‚ noting that you can’t entrust the police with just taking innocent civilians' weapons — there has to be due process. “We don’t need any more laws. We need to enforce the laws that are on the books right now. Arrest criminals‚ put them in jail‚ hold them accountable where they learn a lesson‚ and don’t put them back on the street to hurt innocent children.” As for the Democrats‚ Pollock and Petty agree — they’re focused on the wrong thing. “They’re so simple-minded they can’t look at anything in the facts or in the past. ... They spew this gun control BS‚ which really kills me and Ryan‚” Pollock says. Gonzales is disturbed by the lack of real action on the government's part concerning these mass shootings. “The majority of these mass shootings‚ whether it be at school or somewhere else‚ it’s like‚ well‚ this person was on someone’s radar. Whether it be FBI‚ federal‚ or local law enforcement‚” Gonzales says‚ adding‚ “Sounds like they’re not actually connecting the dots here all the way or they don’t want to.” Want more from Sara Gonzales?To enjoy more of Sara's no-holds-barred take to news and culture‚ subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America‚ defend the Constitution‚ and live the American dream.

Republicans in the West Virginia Legislature passed a bill that would eliminate the vaccine requirements for students in virtual public schools and enable private schools and parochial schools to set their own policies. Requirements would‚ however‚ remain in place for students participating in sanctioned athletic events organized by the West Virginia Secondary School Athletics Commission. While House Bill 5105 passed the House of Delegates in a 57-41 vote and then the state Senate in a March 20-12 vote‚ Gov. Jim Justice (R) killed it last week. Justice indicated he was swayed by the "overwhelming majority" — not in the state legislature but in the Mountain State's "medical community." The governor noted in his veto letter that medical professionals who reached out to him had suggested the legislation would "do irreparable harm by crippling childhood immunity to diseases such as mumps and measles. West Virginia historically has seen very few instances of these diseases‚ specifically because the vaccination requirements in this State are so strong." Children entering schools or state-regulated child care centers in West Virginia must be immunized against chickenpox‚ hepatitis-b‚ measles‚ meningitis‚ mumps‚ diphtheria‚ polio‚ rubella‚ tetanus‚ and whooping cough. The state does not currently provide a religious exemption. "I have always and will always defend our freedoms as West Virginians and as Americans‚" added Justice. "I hear how strongly people believe in one side or the other on this subject‚ and I respect all opinions. But I must follow the guidance of our medical experts on this subject. ... Their wisdom should not be ignored–especially when it comes to the health and safety of our children." Clay Marsh‚ the vice president of West Virginia University who served as COVID-19 czar for the state during the pandemic‚ was among those who had Justice's ear ahead of the veto‚ reported the Associated Press. The ACLU of West Virginia also opposed the bill‚ stating‚ "Vaccines actually further civil liberties. They protect the most vulnerable in society – those with disabilities and fragile immune systems and those who are too young to get vaccinated." The legislature does not presently have the power to override Justice's veto. WCHS-TV noted that the veto has some parents fuming. Krystle Perry‚ a Fayette County mother who removed her second-grade daughter from virtual school to avoid the mandated vaccinations‚ said‚ "That's my choice. I birthed her." "I got a phone call a couple months ago stating that if she wasn't up to date on her immunizations that she wasn't allowed to attend anymore‚" continued Perry. "To me‚ I mean‚ she's not in public classes whatsoever. She's behind a laptop." "I feel to me it's religious exemptions why I don't have her up to date on vaccines‚" added Perry. The bill's lead sponsor‚ Del. Laura Kimble (R)‚ originally suggested the bill was about buttressing individual freedom of choice‚ reported the Charleston Gazette-Mail. "When I found out that virtual public-school students also were required to have all of the mandated immunizations‚ I thought the absurdity in the policy was evident‚" said Kimble. "That is how this bill came to be." "We acknowledge that we're guaranteed the right to religious liberty‚ yet our West Virginia government has attempted to infringe on this right‚" added Kimble. "I'm not anti-vaccine. I do believe‚ however‚ that the role of the government is not to give a false sense of security‚ but is to defend and protect individual rights." The reception of the veto appears to be mixed in Charleston. Officials associated with the West Virginia Sate Medical Association are pleased with Justice's decision‚ reported WOWK-TV. "The governor looks at the data and the numbers‚" said Dr. Lisa Costello‚ a pediatrician. "Preventable disease outbreaks can cost state governments millions of dollars. Further‚ they can disrupt daily activities by closing offices‚ schools‚ and childcare facilities." State Sen. Mike Moroney (R) underscored that historical context is important‚ stating‚ "Most diseases have been eradicated or so minimized that people don’t realize the rage that they went through the communities with‚ and the countries‚ and our states and countries‚ just the whole world." For critics of the veto‚ liberty appeared to be at issue contra public health. "I'm big on parents having a choice when it comes to the decision they make for their children‚" said Del. Chris Pritt (R). "A lot of parents‚ based on religion and other reasons‚ feel that they don't need to vaccinate their children." Rep. Alex Mooney‚ a West Virginia Republican running against Justice in the U.S. Senate primary‚ suggested the veto was "[a]nother sign of Liberal @JimJusticeWV disregarding religious freedom &; parental rights. He's always supported longer shutdowns than even @JoeBiden. Once again‚ this is further proof that Justice is what he has been all long: a big government RINO." State Sen. Mike Stuart (R) noted on X that "'IF' there is an unfortunate veto of the minor immunization bill‚ it is but one small battle in the war for freedom. Next year there will be many more conservatives in the Legislature and next year's bill won't be so small. We will go for full religious exemptions." Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors‚ sign up for our newsletters‚ and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!