Monday morning on the Tennessee Star Report, host Michael Patrick Leahy welcomed all-star panelist Crom Carmichael to the studio who weighed in on the unconstitutionality of the looming Senate impeachment trial of citizen Donald Trump.
Read the full story
A Tennessee high school student has filed a lawsuit against Overton County School District (OCS) for banning her Biblical shirt while allowing other free speech. The shirt read: “HOMOSEXUALITY IS A SIN – 1 Corinthians 6:9-10.”Â
OCS claimed that the student’s shirt violated Livingston Academy dress code policy. Although the policy doesn’t define “offensive messages” or “sexual connotations,” Principal Richard Melton determined that the student’s shirt fell under those criteria.
At the top of the third hour, Leahy and Carmichael discussed the current lawsuit within the Supreme Court regarding the little known and unregulated Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.
Read the full story
On Friday’s Battleground State Report with Steve Gill and Michael Patrick Leahy – a one hour radio show from Star News Digital Media in the early stages of a national weekend syndication rollout – the two hosts discussed the concept in Maine’s new “rank voting” system, who’s behind it, why it’s being implemented and how, and what it stands to gain for the Democrats. Gill and Leahy go into mind bending depth on the complexity of this concept and how it stands to challenge the interpretation of the Constitution. Gill: I know this whole Maine thing is a bit confusing but so we’re trying to walk through it because this may be what the Democrats try to impose in other states to give themselves an edge. They’re trying to automatically put felons back in the ability to vote because overwhelmingly about sixty to seventy percent of felons will vote for the Democrats. They’re trying to bring in more illegal aliens to vote in this country because that helps the Democrats. And this rank voting system, which rank means stink, as well as ranking the votes it applies in both standards is another way that Democrats may be able to set up a system where they…
Read the full story
by Dr. Carol M. Swain A federal judge in San Francisco has blocked President Trump’s November 8 directive stipulating that requests for asylum must be made at a port of entry. The judge’s action follows a jaw-dropping November 1 lawsuit from lawyers representing 12 Honduran migrants. They filed suit in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia opposing President Trump’s announced asylum policy. The petition accused the President of unconstitutional abuse of the caravanners’ rights to exercise “their lawful right to seek asylum in the United States.” At the time, the plaintiffs were more than 500 miles from the U.S. border. Are their claims valid? Let’s look at the facts. First, do the Central American migrants meet the basic criteria for protection under the existing asylum statute? Second, has the President overstepped his authority by issuing a directive that applicants must apply at a port of entry? If both answers are no, then perhaps President Trump is correct in his handling of the matter. Then we would owe him a national thank-you. If the answers are yes, we would have a major problem of a president overstepping his authority. Reacting to what he described as an invasion, President…
Read the full story
by Jeremy Dys They came from many walks of life, the 49 boys of Prince George’s County, Maryland. Several were laborers like George Washington Farmer and William Lee–one white, the other African-American. One, Ernest Pendleton Magruder, was a well-known surgeon. Another, Henry Lewis Hulbert, a Medal of Honor recipient of a previous war, would again display such bravery that he would earn a Distinguished Service Cross. Educated or not, white or black, rich or poor, their diverse backgrounds mattered little as they died on foreign soil in the final months of the “war to end all wars.” Their bodies were interred under small grave makers, including crosses, in cemeteries far too distant for their families to ever visit. So, in 1925, a local post of The American Legion—now the largest veterans service organization in the country with approximately 2.2 million members—erected the Bladensburg World War I Veterans Memorial to honor the 49 Bladensburg-area men who gave their lives serving in the U.S. Armed Forces during WWI. But the cross-shape of the monument is too much to bear for some humanists, who have sued to have the memorial deemed unconstitutional. Late last year, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the…
Read the full story
by Hans von Spakovsky President Donald Trump’s announcement Tuesday that he is preparing an executive order to end birthright citizenship has the left and even some conservatives in an uproar. But the president is correct when he says that the 14th Amendment to the Constitution does not require universal birthright citizenship. An executive order by Trump ending birthright citizenship would face a certain court challenge that would wind up in the Supreme Court. But based on my research of this issue over several years, I believe the president’s view is consistent with the view of the framers of the amendment. Those who claim the 14th Amendment mandates that anyone born in the U.S. is automatically an American citizen are misinterpreting the amendment in a manner inconsistent with the intent of the amendment’s framers. Universal birthright citizenship attracts illegal immigration. By granting immediate citizenship to anyone born on U.S. soil, regardless of the legal status of the parents, we reward and encourage illegal and exploitative immigration. Most countries around the world do not provide birthright citizenship. We do so based not upon the requirements of federal law or the Constitution, but based upon an erroneous executive interpretation. That should be…
Read the full story