Posts

Biden Has Made His Pick for Top Marine Officer

/0 Comments/in , /by

The Biden administration has nominated Gen. Eric Smith, the current assistant commandant, to be the Marine Corps top officer.

His promotion requires Senate confirmation. If approved, Smith would replace Gen. David Berger as commandant of the Marine Corps. Smith’s nomination hasn’t been announced by the service, but Congress received it on Tuesday, according to Congress’s website. . .

All military nominations are being held up by Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-AL), who has objected to the department’s updated policies put in place following the Supreme Court’s reversal of Roe v. Wade. In light of many conservative states issuing strong abortion restriction laws, the department announced it would pay for the travel expenses accumulated in the event a service member, or one’s loved one, has to travel out of state for the procedure. Tuberville insists this violates the Hyde Amendment, which blocks federal funds from being used for most abortions.

The Department of Justice has “conclude[d] that DoD may lawfully expend funds for this purpose under its express statutory authorities and, independently, under the necessary expense doctrine.” (Read more from “Biden Has Made His Pick for Top Marine Officer” HERE)

Photo credit: Flickr

Delete Facebook, Delete Twitter, Follow Restoring Liberty and Joe Miller at gab HERE.

Biden’s Push to Make Military Vehicles ‘Climate-Friendly’ Hands America’s Military Infrastructure to Red China

/0 Comments/in , /by

President Joe Biden’s newest bid to make the American military “climate-friendly” wouldn’t just weaken our military advantage, it would put Red China in control.

During a recent Senate Armed Services Committee hearing, Department of Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm was asked by Iowa Republican Sen. Joni Ernst whether she supports efforts by the Biden administration to make the U.S. military an “EV [electric vehicle] fleet by 2030,” to which Granholm replied, “I do, and I think we can get there, as well.”

“I do think that reducing our reliance on the volatility of globally traded fossil fuels where we know that global events like the war in Ukraine can jack up prices for people back home… does not contribute to energy security,” Granholm claimed. “I think energy security is achieved when we have homegrown, clean energy that is abundant.”

Granholm’s testimony was hardly the first time the Biden administration has outwardly endorsed the idea of overhauling America’s military to fit the left’s unrealistic vision of a so-called “environmentally friendly” fighting force. On Earth Day last year, Biden gave a speech in Seattle, in which he laid out his vision of using “billions” of taxpayer dollars to make “every vehicle” in the U.S. military “climate-friendly.” Unsurprisingly, the president failed to explain how he intends to achieve this ludicrous goal.

“I’m going to start the process where every vehicle in the United States military — every vehicle is going to be climate-friendly. Every vehicle,” Biden said. “No, I mean it. We’re spending billions of dollars to do it.” (Read more from “Biden’s Push to Make Military Vehicles ‘Climate-Friendly’ Hands America’s Military Infrastructure to Red China” HERE)

Photo credit: Flickr

Delete Facebook, Delete Twitter, Follow Restoring Liberty and Joe Miller at gab HERE.

Supreme Court Opinion Uses Female Pronouns to Refer to Transgender Woman

/0 Comments/in , /by

In a recent opinion, the U.S. Supreme Court used female pronouns to refer to a man who identifies as a woman.

The case pertains to a transgender woman from Guatemala who is seeking to remain in the U.S.

Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson delivered the high court’s opinion in the case, and she was joined by Justices John Roberts, Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett. Justice Samuel Alito filed a concurring opinion, in which he was joined by Justice Clarence Thomas.

“Petitioner Leon Santos-Zacaria (who goes by the name Estrella) fled her native Guatemala in her early teens. She has testified that she left that country, and fears returning, because she suffered physical harm and faced death threats as a transgender woman who is attracted to men,” Jackson wrote in the opinion, using female pronouns to refer to the man.

“Santos-Zacaria eventually sought refuge in the United States. Her first stay in the country was brief, and she was removed by immigration authorities in 2008. In 2018, she returned and was apprehended again by immigration authorities,” Jackson wrote. “At that point, Santos-Zacaria sought protection from removal, including withholding of removal based on the likelihood she would be persecuted in Guatemala.”

(Read more from “Supreme Court Opinion Uses Female Pronouns to Refer to Transgender Woman” HERE)

Photo credit: Flickr

Delete Facebook, Delete Twitter, Follow Restoring Liberty and Joe Miller at gab HERE.

Biden’s Latest Effort to Make Everything You Need More Expensive

/0 Comments/in , /by

The Supreme Court saved consumers billions of dollars from higher prices when, less than a year ago, it struck down the Environmental Protection Agency’s Clean Power Plan rule, which would have shut down hundreds of coal and gas power plants nationwide.

Now, under President Joe Biden’s direction, the EPA is back with a new regulatory scheme designed to accomplish the same result through more direct means. The end result should be the same. The Supreme Court will again strike down Biden’s illegal usurpation of congressional power, saving consumers billions of dollars in higher energy costs.

The last time the EPA tried to shut down coal and gas power plants, it used the 1970 Clean Air Act to establish an industrywide carbon cap-and-trade system for electricity production. This Clean Power Plan did not identify how specific power plants should cut carbon emissions, but the plan required them to do so and created a market for them to offset emissions by investing in clean power or buying carbon emission allowances. The scheme closely resembled a cap-and-trade plan that Congress had just rejected. Seven years later, in West Virginia v. EPA, the court invalidated the CPP, holding that the Clean Air Act was not intended to create an industrywide cap-and-trade regime for any one pollutant and that the EPA was exceeding its statutory authority by creating one for carbon.

This time, the EPA has abandoned its cap-and-trade approach and is instead following more closely to the original design of the Clean Air Act. Under this, the EPA may identify a “best system of emission reduction” for a pollutant and then force power plants to adopt it. This usually means installing a proven pollution control technology. (Read more from “Biden’s Latest Effort to Make Everything You Need More Expensive” HERE)

Photo credit: Flickr

Delete Facebook, Delete Twitter, Follow Restoring Liberty and Joe Miller at gab HERE.

Justice Sonia Sotomayor Didn’t Recuse Herself From Cases Involving Publisher That Paid Her $3M: Report

/0 Comments/in , /by

Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor didn’t recuse herself from multiple cases involving a book publisher – Penguin Random House – which paid her more than $3 million since 2010, according to a report.

The copyright infringement cases, in which Penguin Random House stood to suffer financial damage if the court ruled unfavorably, were not taken up by the high court but justices voted on whether or not to hear the cases.

Altogether, Sotomayor earned $3.6 million from Penguin Random House and its subsidiaries for agreeing to let them publish her 2013 memoir, “My Beloved World,” and numerous children’s books since then, the Daily Wire reported on Thursday.

The same year that her memoir came out, Sotomayor voted on whether the high court should take up Aaron Greenspan v. Random House.

Her liberal colleague at the time, Justice Stephen Breyer, recused himself from the case, having also received money from Penguin Random House. (Read more from “Justice Sonia Sotomayor Didn’t Recuse Herself From Cases Involving Publisher That Paid Her $3M: Report” HERE)

Photo credit: Gage Skidmore via Flickr

Delete Facebook, Delete Twitter, Follow Restoring Liberty and Joe Miller at gab HERE.

That’s Why Leftists Weren’t Arrested Outside the Homes of Supreme Court Justices

/0 Comments/in , , /by

New training documents from the U.S. Marshals Service show law enforcement agents were discouraged from arresting leftist protestors outside of the homes of Supreme Court Justices last year. The raucous protestors, who showed up in the aftermath of the Dobbs leak — which revealed Roe v. Wade would be overturned — repeatedly broke the law.

18 U.S. Code § 1507 – Picketing or parading

Whoever, with the intent of interfering with, obstructing, or impeding the administration of justice, or with the intent of influencing any judge, juror, witness, or court officer, in the discharge of his duty, pickets or parades in or near a building housing a court of the United States, or in or near a building or residence occupied or used by such judge, juror, witness, or court officer, or with such intent uses any sound-truck or similar device or resorts to any other demonstration in or near any such building or residence, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.

In a letter to U.S. Marshals Service Director Ronald Davis, House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan is revealing the details.

“In in May 2022, some Supreme Court justices faced relentless protests at their homes, seemingly intended to influence the Court’s decision. Although federal law prohibits picketing near the residence of a federal judge with the intent to influence the judge’s official duties, recent evidence indicates that the U.S. Marshals protecting the justices were directed to ‘not’ conduct arrests ‘unless it was absolutely necessary.’ As the Supreme Court and the justices continue to face a barrage of unrelenting attacks, we write to you requesting documents and information relating to this matter,” Jordan wrote. (Read more from “That’s Why Leftists Weren’t Arrested Outside the Homes of Supreme Court Justices” HERE)

Delete Facebook, Delete Twitter, Follow Restoring Liberty and Joe Miller at gab HERE.

Justice Alito Has ‘Good Idea’ of Who Leaked Dobbs Opinion; Suggests Motive Was Assassination

/0 Comments/in , , /by

Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito said that he has a “pretty good” idea who was behind the leak of the court’s decision on overturning Roe v. Wade — and that the leak made the justices targets for possible assassination.

Alito, who authored the landmark Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization decision that ruled there is no constitutional right to abortion, made the comments in an interview with The Wall Street Journal.

“I personally have a pretty good idea who is responsible, but that’s different from the level of proof that is needed to name somebody,” Alito said: “It was a part of an effort to prevent the Dobbs draft … from becoming the decision of the court. And that’s how it was used for those six weeks by people on the outside — as part of the campaign to try to intimidate the court.”

Alito said that the Supreme Court “did a good job with the resources that were available,” but said that the evidence was not strong enough for an official designation of guilt. (Read more from “Justice Alito Has ‘Good Idea’ of Who Leaked Dobbs Opinion; Suggests Motive Was Assassination” HERE)

Photo credit: Flickr

Delete Facebook, Delete Twitter, Follow Restoring Liberty and Joe Miller at gab HERE.

Republicans in Two States Block Abortion Bans

/0 Comments/in , , /by

This South Carolina Republican Just Blocked the Bill to Protect Babies From Abortions

By Life News. Earlier this week, the South Carolina state Senate had a 2nd reading vote on legislation to make South Carolina the 16th state to protect babies from abortions. Lawmakers approved the bill by a razor-thin one vote margin and the measure was poised to pass and third reading and head to Governor Henry McMaster, who would sign it into law.

But Sen. Sandy Senn (R-Charleston) had other plans.

The Republican legislator got four other GOP lawmakers together and filibustered the bill, killing it for the legislative session and making it more likely that babies will continue to be killed in abortions in one of the most conservative states in the nation.

Three attempts to end the filibuster all failed unfortunately and the state Senate adjourned without a final vote on the bill.

Senate Republican Leader Shane Massey was disappointed after the vote and said it appears impossible that the Senate will pass the Human Life Protection Act (H3774) , which would protect babies starting at conception. (Read more from “Republicans in Two States Block Abortion Bans” HERE)

_________________________________________________________

Republican Defends Killing Nebraska Bill to Protect Babies From Abortion: “I Don’t Want to Be Mean”

By Life News. A Nebraska Republican lawmaker is defending killing an abortion ban that would protect babies with beating hearts.

Nebraska could have been the next state to protect babies from abortions if not for a recalcitrant Republicans who sold out unborn children.

Republican Sen. Merv Riepe had cosponsored the measure to protect babies from abortion when their heartbeat can be detected, but yesterday he abstained from voting on the measure. That allowed a Democrat filibuster of the bill to prevail – making it so thousands of babies will continue to be killed in abortions until the legislature can try again next year.

Today he defending killing the pro-life bill and allowing babies to be killed for another year, claiming he didn’t “want to be mean.” Riepe says it shouldn’t have been a surprise when he showed signs of changing a 6-week abortion ban that he co-sponsored[.] (Read more from “Republican Defends Killing Nebraska Bill to Protect Babies From Abortion: “I Don’t Want to Be Mean” HERE)

Delete Facebook, Delete Twitter, Follow Restoring Liberty and Joe Miller at gab HERE.

SCOTUS Acts to Keep Abortion Pill Available for Now

/0 Comments/in , /by

The Supreme Court acted Friday to keep the abortion pill mifepristone widely available as a pivotal case works its way through the courts, Fox News Digital reported.

Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel A. Alito Jr. dissented. No justices appointed by former President Donald Trump publicly followed suit, the New York Times reported.

“As is common practice, the Supreme Court has decided to maintain the status quo that existed prior to our lawsuit while our challenge to the FDA’s illegal approval of chemical abortion drugs and its removal of critical safeguards for those drugs moves forward,” said Alliance Defending Freedom Senior Counsel Erik Baptist in a statement.

Baptist went on to explain that the case will continue on an expedited basis through the lower courts.

“The FDA must answer for the damage it has caused to the health of countless women and girls and the rule of law by failing to study how dangerous the chemical abortion drug regimen is and unlawfully removing every meaningful safeguard, even allowing for mail-order abortions.” (Read more from “SCOTUS Acts to Keep Abortion Pill Available for Now” HERE)

Delete Facebook, Delete Twitter, Follow Restoring Liberty and Joe Miller at gab HERE.

Justice Clarence Thomas Responds to Report Alleging He Took Improper Gifts

/0 Comments/in , /by

Associate Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas denied wrongdoing in a response to an article alleging that he accepted improper gifts from a longtime friend and conservative donor.

“Harlan and Kathy Crow are among our dearest friends, and we have been friends for over twenty-five years. As friends do, we have joined them on a number of family trips during the more than quarter century we have known them. Early in my tenure at the Court, I sought guidance from my colleagues and others in the judiciary, and was advised that this sort of personal hospitality from close personal friends, who did not have business before the Court, was not reportable,” Thomas said in a statement.

ProPublica reported that Thomas and his wife traveled on the Crows’ yacht and on their private jet on numerous occasions over Thomas’ tenure on the Court. The article quoted several ethics experts who alleged that Thomas violated disclosure rules that require judges and justices to disclose large gifts. (Read more from “Justice Clarence Thomas Responds to Report Alleging He Took Improper Gifts” HERE)

Delete Facebook, Delete Twitter, Follow Restoring Liberty and Joe Miller at gab HERE.