Christian Artists’ Free Speech: Will SCOTUS Take up Vital Issue?

/0 Comments/in , /by

Should artists be forced to promote messages against their conscience? The Supreme Court could be taking up the question soon, if a recent lower-court ruling out of Kentucky is any indication.

Late last week, news broke that the Kentucky Court of Appeals sided with Hands On Originals, a print shop in the Bluegrass State, saying that business owner Blaine Adamson did not have to engage in business that conflicts with his religious beliefs. The ruling comes five years after he told a prospective client that he could not make T-shirts for a gay pride festival in 2012.

The Associated Press has more details:

Chief Judge Joy Kramer wrote in her opinion that the city’s ordinance prohibiting discrimination based on sexual orientation does not prohibit the owners of Hands On Originals from “engaging in viewpoint or message censorship.” Kramer said the business objected to the message of gay pride, not anyone’s sexual orientation.

“Thus, although the menu of services HOO provides to the public is accordingly limited, and censors certain points of view, it is the same limited menu HOO offers to every customer and is not, therefore, prohibited by the fairness ordinance,” the ruling states.

The legal question at hand is one of the biggest religious liberty issues facing the country, as religious business owners have faced a number of struggles following the 2015 “Obergefell v. Hodges” gay marriage decision and a slew of state-level LGBT laws that seek to eliminate traditional beliefs on marriage, biology, and sexuality from the marketplace.

Plaintiffs argue that not creating pro-LGBT messages amounts to class-based discrimination prohibited in federal law. Proponents argue that this is inaccurate and that it constitutes abstaining from an action based on belief – a long-respected protection of the First Amendment.

The Kentucky ruling differs from other recent lower-court rulings on similar questions. The Washington Supreme Court ruled that a Christian florist was not within her rights to decline serving a same-sex wedding ceremony.

Now that the lower courts have split in their opinions, the issue is more appealing for the U.S. Supreme Court, Jim Campbell, senior counsel at Alliance Defending Freedom, tells Conservative Review. ADF is the pro-religious liberty legal nonprofit representing Blaine Adamson in Kentucky.

The case to watch now is that of owner Jack Phillips and Masterpiece Cake Shop in Lakewood, Colo. Phillips was recently turned down by the Colorado Supreme Court after the Colorado Civil Rights Commission previously found him guilty of discrimination, but it could very well be on the docket for the next judicial session in D.C.

(As ADF notes, “In contrast to the ruling against Phillips, the commission found last year that three other Denver cake artists were not guilty of creed discrimination when they declined a Christian customer’s request for a cake that reflected his religious opposition to same-sex marriage.”)

“They’re holding [the case] for two months now, which is kind of odd,” Campbell says. “Whenever they’re holding something, it obviously means that it’s caught someone’s attention. Which is a good sign … because the default is to be denied.” He says a decision on the petition could come as soon as Monday.

There are a handful of other cases that all evaluate the intersection of conscience rights, free expression, and non-discrimination that are currently working through the courts. Should the current petition on Masterpiece be denied, these cases will likely continue to work their own ways up in its stead.

But there are still many variables in this equation. Despite the messianic treatment Neil Gorsuch received from many conservatives, and as often as he is used as the go-to counter-example to complaints about Trump’s betrayals on a host of other issues (like immigration and religious liberty), one must remember that there are still eight other justices on the high bench. In replacing Antonin Scalia, the balance of the court was restored to the same makeup that gave the American people decisions like “Obergefell” and “Windsor.”

Hopeful rumors are currently buzzing around the beltway conservative enclaves about the prospect of Justice Anthony Kennedy’s retirement this summer. If true, the vacant seat and nuclear appointment rules would give the Trump administration the ability to tip the balance of the bench in a more originalist direction, which would bode well for any of these cases. But this nothing more than speculation and rumor at this point.

A multitude of factors affect the final outcome. Will the First Amendment be weakened or buttressed in post-Obergefell America? It would appear that the answer will not have to wait very long — at least on judicial time. (For more from the author of “Christian Artists’ Free Speech: Will SCOTUS Take up Vital Issue?” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Levin Gets Down to the REAL Crisis Exposed by the Media’s Leaks

/0 Comments/in , , /by

Conservative Review Editor-in-Chief Mark Levin has noticed something the mainstream, liberal media seems to be conveniently ignoring.

An exclusive report from Reuters, citing anonymous “U.S. officials,” asserts that the Trump campaign had at least 18 “undisclosed contacts with Russians” during the closing months of the 2016 presidential campaign. Buried six paragraphs down in the report is the admission that there is “no evidence of wrongdoing or collusion between the campaign and Russia” from these leaked communications.

No evidence of wrongdoing by the Trump campaign. That’s because the real wrongdoing is by members of the bureaucracy illegally leaking information to the press — information, Levin points out, that could only come from one place.

Listen:

“The only way that they know this is through the domestic surveillance, oh excuse me, the incidental surveillance information and the unmasking of Flynn, among others,” Levin said. “It’s the only way they know this information that’s being leaked to Reuters.”

“Once again, I bring us back, I pull us back to what the media are exposing but don’t know they’re exposing and don’t want you to believe,” Levin said.

“This is part of the domestic surveillance that took place. This is part of the unmasking of Trump advisers, Trump transition team members, Trump campaign members, American citizens. This is part of the unmasking of American citizens and abuse of power by the prior administration being used and being leaked to the media!” (For more from the author of “Levin Gets Down to the REAL Crisis Exposed by the Media’s Leaks” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

VA Employee Convicted of DUI 3 Times Returns to Work at Memphis Medical Center

/0 Comments/in , /by

An employee at the Memphis, Tenn. Veteran’s Affairs (VA) medical center who was convicted of driving under the influence three times has returned to work as of Monday.

Brittney Lowe, a senior interior designer at the Memphis VA was convicted in 2009, 2013 and most recently in 2017 of driving under the influence and is now back working at the medical center, The Daily Caller News Foundation has learned.

Her most recent conviction took place on March 9, 2017, after which point she served a 60-day sentence.

In March, Memphis VA whistleblower Sean Higgins told Communities Digital News that Lowe was on paid leave during her sentence under the category of “donated leave,” which is usually made available to employees experiencing sickness.

But now that she’s served her 60 days in Jail, Lowe has been spotted back at work. (Read more from “VA Employee Convicted of DUI 3 Times Returns to Work at Memphis Medical Center” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Clock Boy Loses yet Another Lawsuit in Battle Against School, Local Officials

/0 Comments/in , /by

A federal judge in Texas has dismissed a lawsuit brought by the family of Ahmed Mohamed — which alleged his high school discriminated against him when officials mistook his homemade clock for a bomb.

The Daily Mail reports the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas dismissed the Mohamed family’s suit for failing to allege facts showing discriminatory or unconstitutional actions on the part of school administrators or local officials.

“Plaintiff does not allege any facts from which this court can reasonably infer that any IISD employee intentionally discriminated against Ahmed Mohamed based on his race or religion,” court documents read.

The family alleged that school administrators discriminated against Ahmed because of his religion and ethnicity — he is Sudanese and practices Islam. They also claim his detention and interrogation without access to his family or a lawyer violated the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution.

Mohamed was taken into police custody after he displayed a homemade clock to teachers at MacArthur High School in Irving, Texas. Police and school officials feared the device was a bomb, though they quickly determined the gadget was harmless. (Read more from “Clock Boy Loses yet Another Lawsuit in Battle Against School, Local Officials” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Trump Says He’s ‘Very Close’ to Naming an FBI Director

/0 Comments/in , /by

President Donald Trump says he is “very close” to naming a new FBI director.

An announcement could come Friday, the soft deadline Trump set for himself. The president departs Friday on his inaugural overseas trip, a four-country, five-stop journey tour of the Middle East and Europe that will keep him out of the country for more than a week.

“We’re very close to an FBI director,” Trump said Thursday when asked about the search during an Oval Office appearance with Colombian President Juan Manuel Santos. He said an announcement could come “soon” and that former Sen. Joe Lieberman was among his top candidates. (Read more from “Trump Says He’s ‘Very Close’ to Naming an FBI Director” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

The Double Standard for Muslims and Christians

/0 Comments/in , /by

I’m sure you’ve already seen the unfolding controversy. It seems that country singer Toby Keith agreed to sing for a gathering of the Christian group Promise Keepers. It’s an all-male group. In the name of fostering “comradeship,” the organization planned to restrict attendance to men. That’s what sparked the outrage.

Major articles appeared in Vanity Fair and the New York Times. They denounced the concert as “misogynist” and “transphobic.” Feminist groups condemned Promise-Keepers as “patriarchal woman-haters” who “use the rhetoric of theocracy and male control over women’s bodies.” The National Organization for Women threatened to launch a boycott of the state of Alabama.

Leading Alabama legislators asked state regulators to look into prohibiting the conference. The state’s Chamber of Commerce chimed in to support a ban. It warned of the need to “protect the business atmosphere here for future jobs and investment.”

Priests from the local Jesuit college, Springhill, sponsored a campus-wide “teach-in.” The topic? Female empowerment and the need for more headline female country singers, plus women in the Catholic priesthood.

Spin magazine ran a piece by the head of Toby Keith’s record label. It warned of canceling Keith’s upcoming album.

At last, within 48 hours of the concert being announced, Keith pulled out and apologized. Organizers might cancel the conference itself. Antifa protestors from colleges across the country and leaders of Black Lives Matter warned on social media that they would show up and “disrupt Promise Keepers, disrupt Trump!” Several prominent business leaders on the board of Promise Keepers have withdrawn from membership. Social media protests had targeted their companies’ shareholders and customers.

Okay, Kidding!

Now, strictly speaking, none of the above is true. Not a word.

But did you find it implausible? Or didn’t it seem exactly the way that cultural coercion plays out in today’s America — when conservatives or Christians are involved?

In fact what is happening is this: Mr. Keith is performing at an all-male concert, all right. But it is in Saudi Arabia. The concert coincides with Donald Trump’s state visit to that theocratic absolute monarchy. CNN reported on the concert. It didn’t even mention that women can’t attend. Excluded. CBS News did note the ban on both women and beer. But it didn’t seem to consider either exclusion controversial. It just noted the female ban deadpan, as if reporting on the weather. Spin magazine weighed in, but only to snark about Keith’s apparent fondness for Donald Trump.

I was only able to find one prominent voice criticizing the concert for keeping out women. Washington Post blogger Alyssa Rosenberg wrote a piece. She complained that the concert is “segregated.” She noted briefly that the Saudi government oppresses women. But even she spent more than half her column sniping at Keith for his right-leaning views.

Strict Scrutiny for Westerners, Whites, and Christians

Isn’t that funny? Why are mostly white, Western or Christian institutions subject to the strictest scrutiny? Progressives weigh their every policy against the latest list of tender sensibilities. Their every choice goes under a microscope. Does it offend one of an ever-expanding (updated hourly) list of “marginalized” groups? Any violation will be punished with maximum savagery, innocent bystanders be damned.

Muslim Autocracies Are Just Exotic and Cool

But whole countries like Saudi Arabia get a pass. Meanwhile, their record of abusing women is staggering and inhuman. Rape victims in Saudi Arabia can be flogged for committing adultery. The only loophole? If they can produce four adult male witnesses to testify that the sex was non-consensual. There is no law forbidding marital or statutory rape.

Saudi women miss out on a lot more than Toby Keith concerts. They cannot drive cars. The reasons I’ve seen listed for that vary according to the Islamic cleric cited. They range from dangers to women’s reproductive systems, to that well-known side-effect of riding over bumpy roads: insatiable sexual arousal.

Saudi Arabia regularly executes homosexuals. And Muslims who announce they are leaving Islam. Indeed, that country is one of the most aggressive on earth in employing the death penalty for a wide variety of offenses. Child marriage is common. Likewise forced marriages imposed on women by their fathers and brothers.

Christian churches, bibles, and symbols are totally prohibited. They’re even denied to the thousands of enserfed foreign workers who toil in Saudi households. Even embassies (technically foreign soil) come under the ban. Female genital mutilation is widespread in parts of the country.

None of this stopped Hillary Clinton from recruiting Huma Abedin as her “body woman” and likely chief of staff (had she won). Abedin worked with her family on a Saudi-founded and funded journal promoting Saudi-style sharia around the world. None of this stopped Georgetown University from accepting $20 million from a Saudi prince in 2008 to fund its Islamic studies program. Flashback to 1978: Would Georgetown have taken that kind of money from the Republic of South Africa, for a program on race relations?

Treating Muslims Like Mischievous Pets

There’s a powerful double standard at work. It comes to us via multiculturalism. We only hold white, Western, and especially Christian institutions to fully human standards. We treat Muslims in particular as if they were lovable, mischievous pets. The same progressives who denounce Christian churches as “patriarchal” damn critics of Islam as “Islamophobes.” That’s deeply degrading to Muslims as human beings. Much more importantly, it is dangerous to us.

Since I believe that Muslims and country singers are equally human, I’ll say it: I don’t think Toby Keith should sing in Saudi Arabia. I don’t think President Trump should visit that hell on earth, or that the U.S. should pretend that the country is an ally. Instead it is the Comintern for the new face of totalitarianism — a country that exports jihad and jihadists, that accepted zero refugees from Syria but spent millions building them mosques in Germany and Sweden, that keeps a fragile peace in its unjust society by projecting discontent outward: into the West, where we are the victims. (For more from the author of “The Double Standard for Muslims and Christians” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

US Officials Criticize Turkey After Erdogan’s Security Forces’ Violent Attack on DC Protesters

/0 Comments/in , /by

U.S. officials strongly criticized the Turkish government after video appeared to show its president’s security forces pushing past police and violently breaking up a protest outside their diplomatic residence in Washington.

Attacking the small group of protesters with their fists and feet, men in dark suits and others were recorded repeatedly kicking one woman as she lay curled on a sidewalk. Another wrenches a woman’s neck and throws her to the ground. A man with a bullhorn is repeatedly kicked in the face. In all, nine people were hurt.

The clash happened at the Turkish ambassador’s residence Tuesday as President Recep Tayyip Erdogan arrived after a White House meeting with President Donald Trump. Video shows people pushing past police to confront a small group of protesters across the street in Sheridan Circle. (For more from the author of “US Officials Criticize Turkey After Erdogan’s Security Forces’ Violent Attack on DC Protesters” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Federal Communication Commission Takes Steps to Undo Obama-Era Net Neutrality

/0 Comments/in , /by

The Federal Communications Commission voted 2-1 Thursday to start a process of undoing internet rules, commonly known as net neutrality, promulgated by the Obama-era FCC.

Undoing the 2015 Open Internet Order would “encourage more investment in broadband [and] more innovation,” James Gattuso, a senior research fellow at The Heritage Foundation, told The Daily Signal in an interview.

The order did two things. First, Gattuso said, it “declared all providers of broadband service to be common carriers under Title II of the Communications Act of 1934, which allows extensive regulation of “telecommunications services.”

This means that “the FCC got virtually unlimited authority to regulate [internet providers],” Gattuso said. Using this self-created authority, the FCC then imposed net neutrality restrictions on broadband providers. These rules essentially ban any unequal treatment of data being sent on the web. Thus, blocking or slowing content is banned, as is “paid prioritization,” effectively prohibiting discounts and premium pricing.

Making it worse, the ambiguity of the rules mean that providers end up going to the FCC for permission each time their service changes. “Every time [broadband service providers] do something, they have to go to the FCC and ask, ‘Does this violate any of the rules?’” Gattuso said.

The 2015 rule, Gattuso said, also banned practices that “unreasonably” limit consumer choice, or the ability of content providers such as Google or Netflix to make their offerings available to consumers.

The vote Thursday will commence a public comment period, which will allow Americans to weigh in on the decision to undo the 2015 Open Internet Order rules.

Ajit Pai, the FCC’s chairman who President Donald Trump appointed in January, said he believes in the free market rather than government control of the internet. Pai also said he wants the FCC to have more of a “light touch” in regard to regulations.

Mike Needham, chief executive officer of Heritage Action for America, the lobbying affiliate of The Heritage Foundation, said in a statement that this deregulation move is welcome.

“Chairman Pai and his colleagues at the FCC have demonstrated leadership by jump-starting the process of rolling back these so-called net neutrality rules,” Needham said. “The political left’s desire to treat internet service providers as publicly regulated utilities will erode choice and competition in the marketplace.”

Sen. Roger Wicker, R-Miss., supports the deregulation.

Sen. Edward Markey, D-Mass., opposed the rule change.

Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, approved of the move by the FCC.

“I commend the FCC for taking the first step in returning the internet to the state of permissionless innovation it thrived under until just two short years ago,” Lee said in a statement, adding:

Today’s action begins the process of undoing the agency’s 2015 Open Internet Order, which upended the decades-old bipartisan consensus that consumers—not government regulators—should control the information superhighway.

Comments for the public comment period will be accepted until August 16, Gattuso said, with the final rule change likely to come in the fall. (For more from the author of “Federal Communication Commission Takes Steps to Undo Obama-Era Net Neutrality” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Underreported: How This Nonprofit Is Solving Homelessness Without Government Funding

/0 Comments/in , /by

Growing up, Teena Faison never imagined she’d find herself a single mom and homeless.

“We didn’t wake up one day and go, ‘Hey, I just want to be homeless with my kids,’” she told The Daily Signal “No. There’s many, many contributing factors to that—lack of education, lack of resources, addiction.”

At 34 years old, Faison decided to change her ways and go to Solutions for Change, a family homeless nonprofit located in Vista, California, 45 minutes outside San Diego. Instead of simply providing residents a place to sleep, Solutions for Change takes a holistic approach to solving homelessness, requiring residents to go through counseling, take courses in financial literacy, parenting, leadership, and anger management, and eventually, get a job.

Over the past 17 years, Solutions for Change has gotten 1,200 families off government assistance and back on their feet. But because its program requires residents to be drug-free, Solutions for Change is ineligible to receive government funding.

Watch the video to learn more about why, despite its high success rates at solving family homelessness, Solutions for Change chose to maintain its drug-free policy instead of accepting government funding. (For more from the author of “Underreported: How This Nonprofit Is Solving Homelessness Without Government Funding” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

The Major Entitlement Overhaul That Could Be Part of Trump’s Budget

/0 Comments/in , /by

President Donald Trump’s budget proposal, to be rolled out Tuesday, likely will include Medicaid reform. But with several approaches having been floated, definitive answers will have to wait until the White House releases the fiscal plan.

During his Senate confirmation hearings in January, Health and Human Services Secretary Tom Price said he would look at changes to Medicaid, the federal-state health insurance program for the poor.

Medicaid covers about 70 million low-income Americans. Thirty-one states and the District of Columbia expanded eligibility for Medicaid under Obamacare.

When serving as House Budget Committee chairman as a congressman from Georgia, Price advocated giving Medicaid funds to states in block grants as a way of providing more flexibility.

“Block grants would save the federal government money, but would shift that cost to the states,” Marc Goldwein, senior vice president for the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, a bipartisan research group in Washington, told The Daily Signal. “When a state has more skin in the game, will it be more cost-effective? Yes. But perhaps not enough to deal with the new expense.”

Another solution, Goldwein said, is to cap “provider taxes,” which states impose on health care providers. He said states use the tax to get more money from the federal government without losing revenue. The federal government prevents states from taxing health providers more than 6 percent.

He said most states make deals with hospitals to increase Medicaid payments in exchange for taxing the hospital by the same amount, then go to the federal government presenting a need for a larger subsidy based on the larger payment from the state to the hospitals.

“If you phased [the state provider taxes on hospitals] out to 0 percent, it would save $100 billion” on Medicaid, Goldwein said. “If you cut to 5.5 percent, it would save about $10 billion.”

Fiscal hawks long have argued that the federal government’s main entitlement programs—Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid—are the key drivers of the national debt and deficit spending.

In March, four Republican governors—John Kasich of Ohio, Rick Snyder of Michigan, Brian Sandoval of Nevada, and Asa Hutchinson of Arkansas—touted their own proposal to reform Medicaid.

In a letter to Congress, the four governors said any reform should have work requirements, allow options on eligibility and what drugs are covered, and continue to allow the Medicaid expansion that occurred under Obamacare.

A better solution would be for the government to provide premium supports to encourage people to move on to private health insurance plans, said Robert Moffitt, senior fellow for health policy at The Heritage Foundation.

“Able-bodied Medicaid recipients, we’re not talking about someone who is disabled or in a nursing home, could receive a defined premium support to be mainstreamed into private insurance,” Moffit told The Daily Signal.

This would accomplish two things—reducing spending and helping patients, he said:

This Medicaid population would then have access to more doctors, since most doctors take private insurance and fewer are taking Medicaid. This population is also relative younger, which usually has a positive impact on the insurance pool. That could drive down cost for the rest of the American population.

Government data found 11.5 million able-bodied adults were on Medicaid.

In their recently passed American Health Care Act, House Republicans adopted a Heritage Foundation policy proposal that would change Medicaid to a per capita cap on funding for states that would be limited to medical inflation plus 1 percent.

Medicaid recipients’ access to doctors has become more limited, according to a study last year that found 1 in 3 available physicians don’t see Medicaid patients.

The White House Office of Management and Budget did not respond to email inquiries Friday from The Daily Signal about whether, and which, Medicaid reforms would be part of the budget proposal.

“I assume the reform will probably be tied to the House Budget Committee, and would propose to block-grant Medicaid, as the House Republican budget has proposed for years,” Chris Edwards, director of tax policy studies at the Cato Institute, told The Daily Signal.

Edwards said he also anticipates the Trump administration will go after waste, fraud, and abuse for all entitlements, including Social Security and Medicare. Doing so could save tens of billions of dollars, but still make only a little dent in budget deficits or the debt.

A report by the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, released Friday, dismissed tackling waste as a long-term solution. The report by the private group says:

Importantly, there is no way to make Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid even close to sustainable simply by reducing fraud. However, broadly defined program integrity—for example, reducing excessive provider payments and using competition or negotiation to get better prices in Medicare, restricting the ability of states to inflate their federal match in Medicaid, or encouraging and helping workers with disabilities return to work in Social Security—can represent a starting point for entitlement reform. Still, it would be impossible to fix Social Security and Medicare solely through program integrity—even using a broad definition—and, ultimately, tough choices will need to be made to bring the costs of these programs under control.

Of the three main entitlements, Medicaid is the most sustainable, Moffit said.

“You can’t get control of federal debt and deficits unless you address Social Security and Medicare,” Moffit said. “Otherwise, it’s just not going to happen.” (For more from the author of “The Major Entitlement Overhaul That Could Be Part of Trump’s Budget” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.