The jury in the Lindsay Clancy murder trial is once again deadlocked over whether the former mother of three should be given a pass due to hysteria and hormones. 

The indecision followed five days of deliberations and two notes from jurors saying they could not agree. On Wednesday, Judge William Sullivan gave the panel a Tuey-Rodriguez instruction, Massachusetts’ last-resort charge telling a deadlocked jury to reach a verdict or else it’s an automatic mistrial.

Clancy, 36, a former labor-and-delivery nurse, was charged with three counts of first-degree murder in the January 24, 2023, deaths of her children – Cora, 5; Dawson, 3; and Callan, 8 months – at the family’s home in Duxbury. She has not disputed that she killed them. The question for the jury of nine women and three men was whether she was criminally responsible.

The killings

Evidence at trial showed Clancy spent part of that morning on ordinary errands of motherhood, including a pediatrician visit for Cora and playing in the snow. She then asked her husband, Patrick Clancy, to leave for takeout and a pharmacy run. While he was gone, she strangled the three children with exercise bands in the basement. She cut her wrists and neck and jumped from a second-story window. The fall left her paralyzed from the waist down; she has appeared in court in a wheelchair.

Patrick found her injured in the yard, then found the children. Cora and Dawson were pronounced dead that day. Callan died days later. All three deaths were ruled ligature strangulation. Clancy later said a voice told her it was her last chance: kill the children so she could kill herself.

What the jury was asked to decide

Prosecutors conceded she was mentally ill, but is still responsible for the killings. Assistant District Attorney Jennifer Sprague told jurors Clancy planned the killings, sent her husband out of the house, and checked how long the errands would take. They pointed to her functioning that day as proof she could form intent. Sprague called the killings “a choice.” First-degree murder in Massachusetts can rest on deliberate premeditation, extreme atrocity or cruelty, or both. That conviction is life without parole.

Defense attorney Kevin Reddington argued she lacked criminal responsibility because of postpartum psychosis and bipolar illness, worsened by psychiatric medications and missed warning signs. Under Massachusetts law, the Commonwealth has to prove criminal responsibility beyond a reasonable doubt. Clancy had been hospitalized and discharged about three weeks before the killings.

Jurors heard more than 80 witnesses and saw more than 300 exhibits. For each child’s death they could choose first-degree murder, second-degree murder, manslaughter, not guilty, or not guilty by reason of lack of criminal responsibility. Second-degree murder is life with the possibility of parole. A lack-of-responsibility finding typically means commitment to a state psychiatric hospital with periodic reviews and no fixed release date. As noted above, a hung jury would be a mistrial.

Lindsay Clancy’s attorney says Clancy would not be able to “emotionally handle” another trial.

— Leading Report (@LeadingReport) September 2, 2026

Arrest outside the courthouse

The deliberations themselves became part of the story. On Tuesday afternoon, as the jury left after reporting it could not agree, Massachusetts State Police arrested Dawn Light, 56, of Sutton, outside the Plymouth courthouse. She was charged with aggravated intimidation of a witness, juror, or person furnishing information in a criminal proceeding, and was arraigned Wednesday in Plymouth District Court, where she pleaded not guilty and was released on personal recognizance. Her attorney, Jennifer White, called the episode a complete misunderstanding and said Light had only wanted to see Clancy. The judge ordered Light to stay away from the courthouse, have no contact with jurors or witnesses, and release no photographs connected to the case.

Dawn Light, the retired nurse who is facing 20 years in prison for allegedly intimidating Clancy jurors, giggles when asked how she feels now that she’s a celebrity.

Reporter: How do you feel that you’re a celebrity now?

Light: *Giggles*

Zero remorse.pic.twitter.com/vdnvrQvO0R

— Collin Rugg (@CollinRugg) September 2, 2026

Prosecutors said troopers were told someone may have been filming jurors in the courthouse parking lot. They found Light in a car parked in a restricted area and asked whether she was photographing anyone. “She was adamant she was not,” Assistant District Attorney Nicole Piacentini said, according to NBC Boston. “She stated she was waiting to see if Lindsay Clancy would come out of the building.” An initial search of Light’s phone turned up nothing, investigators said, but the deleted folder held images of people later confirmed to be jurors, taken from her vantage point in the car.

Light told CT Insider she had been trying to record Clancy and lowered her phone when she realized the person on camera was not the defendant. She said a court employee asked for her license and phone; she handed over the license and refused the phone, and troopers were called. “That’s the long and the short of it,” she said. “I don’t know how I intimidated anyone.”

BREAKING: The woman accused of filming jurors in the Lindsay Clancy trial is in serious legal trouble.

Prosecutors say 56-year-old Dawn Light filmed jurors outside the courthouse and entered a restricted area despite a court order prohibiting jurors from being photographed or… pic.twitter.com/Pz0yx2sQ22

— Fox News (@FoxNews) September 2, 2026

Light is a retired nurse with no prior criminal history. Before deliberations resumed Wednesday, Sullivan questioned each juror individually at sidebar about whether they had seen or heard anything that would affect their ability to decide the case fairly.

A bizarre mini civil war of sorts has erupted among rival Ukrainian security agencies, complete with a wild street shootout and police standoff which has threatened to create more political scandal for President Zelensky – whose office has issued a statement – in an unprecedented saga which seems straight from the plot of a Lioness episode.

Details of the fresh incident, aspects of which may still be unfolding, are murky but widespread videos and local reports say the overnight firefight left wounded in the streets of Kiev. It appears to have started when authorities were investigating an alleged Russian Federal Security Service (FSB) plot against a Russian opposition figure fighting alongside Ukraine forces. But the investigators came upon uncooperative Ukrainian agents among Ukraine’s military intelligence (HUR).

Ukraine’s Prosecutor General’s Office indicates that SBU officers (Security Service of Ukraine, which is also sometimes referred to as SSU) came under armed attack by “one of the units of the Defense Forces of Ukraine” while carrying out investigative actions at 10 Shumskoho Street. Some pundits have suggested that a “Russian terror cell” was involved, but so far Ukrainian official statements and media have described what appears a Ukrainian on Ukrainian assault.

Officials said a search at the location turned chaotic when “a group of individuals launched an armed attack on an SSU investigative and operational team.”

Another regional media source further details that the “SBU said its officers were conducting urgent investigative measures to collect and document evidence in a pre-trial investigation into a terrorist attack allegedly being prepared by Russian intelligence services.” 

Were they looking for a Russian ‘double agent’? It seems that’s what is being described in the emerging media accounts.

Some sources say a standoff ensued for many hours in the capital’s Dniprovskyi district, during which time the SBU dispatched its elite ” Special Operations Center Alpha”. The situation appears to have resolved only once all armed entities jointly agreed to lay down their weapons.

Reports that Officers from the Security Bureau of Ukraine (SBU) opened fire against officers from Ukraine’s military intelligence agency (GUR). Some sources say that possibly at least 10 officers are receiving treatment for bullet wounds…

IN UKRAINE 🇺🇦 a shootout occurred between 2 law enforcement agencies.

Officers from the Security Bureau of Ukraine (SBU) opened fire against officers from Ukraine’s military intelligence agency (GUR). At least 10 officers are receiving treatment for bullet wounds.

The conflict… pic.twitter.com/Me6vZetSlv

— Joel The Dane 🇩🇰🇺🇦 Данський Козак #NAFO (@JoelTheDane) September 2, 2026

It seems that the SBU has taken control of the situation, and has the upper hand over the military intelligence side at this time:

Some of those who resisted were injured in the incident. The attackers have been detained.

Initial investigative actions have established that the detainees belong to a unit from Ukraine’s defence forces. Weapons and documents have been seized from them.

Thus far, Western mainstream media has paid scant attention to it, and typically ignores or at least under-reports such internal scandals in Ukraine.

Local Ukrayinska Pravda has issued the following timeline and outline of events, via Yahoo News:

•  On 1 September, the Russian Volunteer Corps said that its deputy commander for combat operations, Stepan Kaplunov, had been abducted by unknown individuals in the courtyard of a residential building. [The Russian Volunteer Corps is a military and political organisation established in 2022 that consists of Russian volunteers who have been fighting for Ukraine since 2014] 

•  On 2 September, the SSU said that, jointly with DIU, it had foiled a terrorist attack against a leader of a Russian opposition political nationalist movement who had arrived in Ukraine. DIU released a similar statement, but it was later deleted. 

•  Police cordoned off Shumskoho Street in Kyiv’s Dniprovskyi district, where the standoff between the SSU and DIU took place. 

•  Ukrainska Pravda learned that representatives of the State Bureau of Investigation and the head of the SSU’s Special Group Alpha had arrived at the scene. 

•  The SSU said that its officers came under armed attack while conducting investigative actions in a case concerning a terrorist attack being plotted by Russia’s Federal Security Service (FSB). 

•  The Prosecutor General’s Office has launched a pre-trial investigation. 

Unconfirmed reports of a fatality…

It’s 10 hours later and the standoff in Kiev between SBU (Ukrainian secret police, internal security agency) and GUR (military intelligence/JSOC) is still hot. There have been multiple firefights throughout the night and morning. At least one dead and two injured are being… https://t.co/GzlFY8bEcZ pic.twitter.com/I58XM0vleP

— Russians With Attitude (@RWApodcast) September 2, 2026

Meanwhile, Zelensky’s office has directly acknowledged and addressed the episode. Kyrylo Budanov, Head of the President’s Office and former head of Defense Intelligence of Ukraine, vowed that a transparent investigation is urgently taking place.

“The State Bureau of Investigation will now deal with the situation. It is important to ensure a thorough and impartial investigation, but no one has the right to abduct servicemen with impunity, open fire in the streets of our cities, or issue or carry out criminal orders,” he stated.

Authored by Michael Lebowitz via RealInvestmentAdvice.com,

The S&P 500’s Shiller CAPE ratio just hit 41. Since 1881, the market valuation has been more expensive under CAPE only once. That was during the final months of the dot-com bubble. At the same time the CAPE is ringing warning bells, the PEG ratio, which measures price relative to expected earnings growth, is at its lowest level in at least three decades, possibly its cheapest reading ever.

One market valuation says run for cover while another says bargain. Both market valuation tools use data from the same 500 S&P companies but interpret the market completely differently.

Confusing, yes, but the disagreement between the two charts comes down to one question: Is the past a better predictor of the future than the wisdom of Wall Street?

To answer our question, we’ll first summarize what each ratio measures, then dig into expected growth versus historical growth, the culprit behind the big difference in the two graphs.  

CAPE Isn’t Perfect

The P/E ratio is one of the most quoted market valuation gauges for stocks and stock indexes. While valuable, it rests on one bold and often wrong assumption: future earnings will match past earnings. In other words, it doesn’t capture how earnings may change.

For the CAPE valuation, the assumption is similar, but instead of using the most recent one year of earnings to assess value, it uses ten years of earnings. This better smooths earnings, reducing the impact of short periods of economic volatility.  But it has the same vulnerability, assuming the future will be just like the past.

P/E tends to be most useful for comparing companies with similar earnings growth, but it is less useful when analyzing high-growth companies or those with the potential to change their growth trajectory.

Despite its flaws, the CAPE valuation strongly correlates with future market returns, as shown in the graph below comparing CAPE valuations and forward ten-year S&P 500 returns. While the CAPE provides a good indicator of expected returns over the full next ten years, it doesn’t provide a roadmap for the monthly and annual returns that make up the period.

The PEG Ratio

The PEG ratio builds on the P/E ratio framework but uses future earnings growth estimates instead of prior realized earnings. Because it uses estimates, it can change rapidly.  

The PEG ratio calculation is the forward P/E divided by the expected 3–5-year earnings growth.

To better appreciate today’s PEG ratio, we break down the numerator, forward P/E, and the denominator, G (3-5-year growth estimates).

Forward P/E

The numerator in the PEG ratio is the forward P/E. Instead of using the trailing twelve months of earnings as in the traditional P/E ratio, the forward P/E uses earnings estimates for the coming twelve months. Thus, its value depends heavily on how well Wall Street can predict earnings for the coming 12 months.  

We can analyze the effectiveness of one-year earnings forecasts in a couple of different ways.

First, we can compare the trailing 12-month P/E to the forward P/E and imply expected earnings for the next year. We can then compare the implied earnings with actual earnings. Using this method, the top two charts below show that Wall Street almost always overestimates earnings and by a wide margin at times.

The second way to grade Wall Street’s forecasting ability is to compare final one-year forecasts with those made at the start of the period. The graph below reinforces the graphs above: Wall Street tends to overestimate earnings.  EPS estimates were reduced in nine of the ten years spanning 2016 through 2025.  However, the trend has changed with 2026 and 2027 estimates trending higher than original forecasts.

G: 3- 5 Year Expected Earnings Growth

Forecasting earnings for just 12 months forward is extremely difficult for Wall Street professionals. Accordingly, forecasting three- to five-years of earnings growth (G in the PEG ratio) is much trickier and more error-prone.

(Note: for this article, we use four-year expected earnings growth to balance out the three-to-five-year range of estimates.)

To assess the effectiveness of longer term forecasts, we can use historical PEG and forward P/E ratios to back out an implied four-year growth rate. As we did with one-year estimates, we then compare that to the actual four-year growth that ensued.

The graph below shows there is very little correlation between four-year earnings growth estimates and actual growth. As we saw with one-year estimates, the market overestimated earnings far more often than it underestimated them.

Deciphering Today’s PEG Ratio

The graph below shows the market PEG valuation and its two components- forward P/E and 3-5 year earnings estimates.

The middle graph shows the forward P/E (the numerator) is stretched, indicating a relatively expensive valuation. Despite the forward P/E, the PEG ratio in the top graph is cheap because the longer-term earnings growth estimate shown in the bottom graph is at its highest level since at least 1995. The takeaway is that the PEG ratio is cheap entirely because of strong earnings-growth forecasts.

The G Is Concentrated

The hardest part of analyzing the “G” in the PEG ratio is the abnormal divergence in recent earnings trends and earnings expectations between a few large tech companies and the large majority of other S&P 500 companies.

Second-quarter earnings results exemplify this problem. In a mid-July summary of the quarter, with roughly a third of the stocks in the index still to report, FactSet reported the Magnificent 7 was growing earnings 31.1% year over year versus a blended rate near 25% for the index. Only a few weeks later, on August 7, the quarter’s growth rate more than doubled to 50.4%.

Most of that acceleration traced back to two companies. Alphabet and Amazon, both large earnings contributors, reported significant non-operating gains. Alphabet reported a $98 billion mark-up in its equity portfolio primarily due to SpaceX, and Amazon added a $53 billion gain largely from Anthropic. Strip out those gains, and FactSet’s blended growth rate for the S&P 500 falls from 50.4% to 32.0%. Two companies, out of five hundred, are worth eighteen full percentage points of index earnings growth.

This leads to a big question. Can ten or so large-cap technology companies carry earnings growth for a 500-company index? Hyperscalers are on pace to spend roughly $700 billion on AI infrastructure in 2026 and are projected to top $1 trillion in 2027. That spending shows up today as reported capex and, eventually, as revenue for a small number of companies selling the chips, the cloud capacity, and the construction and power systems supporting it. It does not contribute much to the earnings growth for the other companies in the index.

Is The Market Rich Or Cheap?

Think of this market valuation conundrum between PEG and CAPE like your favorite sports team that’s been mediocre for a decade. Ten years of results argue that your expectations for next season should be minimal.  But during the offseason, the team signed a few all-stars, and a reasonable fan would bump up their expectations regardless of the last ten years.

The historical losing record is real, and so is the upgraded roster. The substantial growth estimates are making a big bet that the new players will significantly help the team. The question investors need to ask is whether they will help generate more wins than the market expects.

So, how should investors think about today’s stock market valuations? The answer likely sits between rich and cheap. If earnings keep growing rapidly alongside AI spending, the market, in aggregate, may be fairly priced despite CAPE’s warning. But a recession, or a slowdown in planned AI spending, is a real risk to that outcome.

That said, while the optimism embedded in the PEG ratio carries downside risks, we must also consider that AI’s productivity gains will eventually spread to other S&P 500 companies. The open questions are when, how much, and most importantly for pricing today’s market, how that eventual payoff compares to what’s already priced in.

Summary

CAPE uses historical realized data to value stocks.  You can debate whether the past decade is a fair guide for valuing stocks, but you can’t debate whether the earnings in CAPE’s denominator are real; they are.

PEG asks you to rely on one-year and three-to-five-year earnings estimates.  This leaves the obvious question of how much current forecasts deserve to be trusted. The historical answer, as we showed, is not very much.

Nine of the last ten annual EPS estimates were revised lower before they were finished. Thirty years’ worth of four-year growth estimates show no statistical relationship to the growth that followed.

However, today’s outlook is trickier than in the past, as the expected growth making today’s PEG ratio look so cheap is disproportionately concentrated in a small handful of companies. That earnings growth concentration hinges on AI, a powerful innovation that could be an economic game changer.

PEG says market valuations are cheap while CAPE says they are expensive. CAPE is a report card on what already happened. PEG is a bet on what happens next. Keep that distinction in mind, and the two market valuation charts stop contradicting each other.

Hackers were able to gain access to approximately 5,000 Dropbox accounts last month after exploiting a flaw in Lenovo’s email verification process to register fraudulent Lenovo IDs. 

According to a notification sent to the affected users, “an issue with Lenovo’s email verification process allowed an unauthorized party to register a Lenovo ID using your email address” – in some cases, users didn’t even have Lenovo accounts. The hackers then used the fraudulent Lenovo ID to access the Dropbox account associated with the same email address without needing the login password, BleepingComputer notes. 

The accounts were accessed August 4th through the 21st. 

so dropbox got hacked (never had a Lenovo account, haven’t been to UK) pic.twitter.com/UoYRaJFuEC

— yoni | parser.eth (@yonilevy) August 31, 2026

Users reported receiving strange notifications “about two weeks ago,” urging them to change their password and activate two-factor authentication (2FA). 

“One odd thing at the time: the Dropbox login page had started offering ‘Continue with SSO’ for my email even though I never created a Lenovo ID,” according to one person. 

Lenovo told BleepingComputer that the issue was connected to a legacy integration between Lenovo ID and Dropbox, which was used “to improperly authenticate certain Dropbox accounts.”

“Upon identifying the issue, Dropbox and Lenovo worked collaboratively to promptly mitigate the risk,” the spokesperson continued. 

Dropbox forced all sessions authenticated via Lenovo ID to expire, and added a new login requirement forcing users to use their Dropbox account password instead. 

Authored by Jill McLaughlin via The Epoch Times,

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) arrested nearly 2,200 illegal immigrants during an enforcement sweep in New York dubbed “Operation Rotten Apple,” officials announced Sept. 1.

Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers participated in the operation from from July 27 to Aug. 29, arresting 2,197 illegal aliens across the state, including murderers, rapists, pedophiles, drug traffickers, and violent assailants, according to DHS.

“Thanks to the hard work of the men and women of ICE and our federal partners, Operation Rotten Apple did what sanctuary politicians in New York City and the state of New York refuse to do: made the Empire State safer,” said Secretary Markwayne Mullin said in a statement.

New York Field Office Director Kenneth Genalo said federal immigration officers were harassed, threatened, targeted, and terrorized during the operation by local residents and community members.

The state’s sanctuary policies allow criminals to be released back into the community instead of being handed over to federal immigration agencies, Genalo said during a press conference on Sept. 1. This forces federal immigration officers to locate the immigrants in their neighborhoods, at work, or in public spaces, he said.

“Local and state politicians continue to stand at podiums like this one and mislead the public about what these policies do,” Genalo said. “And when elected officials excuse, minimize, or even celebrate the behavior, as they did in this case, they place a target on the back of the officers doing their jobs. ICE officers will not be intimidated by political rhetoric, sanctuary policies or street-level threats. Public safety is not optional. It is our duty.”

New York’s sanctuary policies have resulted in the release of 13,621 criminal illegal immigrants back onto the streets of New York, according to DHS.

Gov. Kathy Hochul rejected the accusations made by federal officials.

“New York works with federal law enforcement every day to take dangerous criminals off the streets,” Hochul posted on X. “So spare us the theatrics.”

Hochul also accused the federal government of not fully funding law enforcement in the state.

The illegal immigrants arrested included Bogdan Detrovich Gren from Ukraine. Gren was convicted of kidnapping, abduction resulting in death, criminal possession of a weapon, and murder.

Columbia national Andreas Bernal Chiquito was also arrested. His criminal history includes arrests for sexual conduct against a child and injury to a child less than 17.

Noel Celestino Lopez Martinez, an illegal alien from Mexico, was arrested. Martinez’s history includes an arrest for first-degree rape and forcible compulsion.

Palvinder Singh, an illegal immigrant from India, was arrested during the operation as well. His criminal past includes a rape conviction in Germany.

Carlos Mendez-Acosta, an illegal alien from Venezuela, was arrested. His has been convicted of rape in the past.

Also arrested was Chhun Kim Pril, a Cambodia national who has a past conviction for drug trafficking.

Tonight at 7pm ET, two prominent voices on opposite ends of the Iran debate will face off as constitutional lawyer and professor Alan Dershowitz debates  the world’s most famous libertarian, Dave Smith, over the U.S.-Israeli war with Iran.

Just days ago was the six month-mark for the conflict that has become considerably larger than the initial strikes on Iran’s nuclear program in June of last year during “Midnight Hammer”.

I’m debating Alan Dershowitz tonight on the Iran war at 7pm ET hosted by Zerohedge moderated by @MarioNawfal

— Dave Smith (@ComicDaveSmith) September 2, 2026

After Israel and the United States launched their offensive in February, with major reporting (including in Israel) suggesting that it was Israel who killed Iran’s Supreme Leader, the conflict has expanded into a prolonged war that has severely disrupted shipping out of the Strait of Hormuz for now over half a year. While actual bombing intensity has fluctuated as several peace attempts lapsed, it has picked up in recent days.

Dershowitz: “Bomb Iran”

Dershowitz had been making the case for military action against Iran’s nuclear facilities well before the current war began.

He argued on his podcast “Dershow” in April 2025 (before Midnight Hammer) that bombing Iran’s nuclear facilities was “absolutely essential to saving lives and to promoting peace in the Middle East and around the world.”

Dershowitz argued that allowing Iran to acquire nuclear weapons would trigger a regional arms race and that Israel could not safely rely on deterrence. While he preferred a negotiated agreement, he ultimately concluded that military action was the only realistic alternative if Iran would not accept a deal permanently eliminating its nuclear capabilities.

“Bomb, bomb Iran. Not the people of Iran, not the people of Tehran, just the military targets, just the areas where they’re developing nuclear weapons.”

Months later, that debate is no longer hypothetical, so we look forward to hearing from Dershowitz specifically what Trump should do now?

Dave Smith And Anti-war Crowd Break With Trump

Smith backed Trump in 2024, in significant part because he believed Trump represented a better alternative to the interventionist foreign policy establishment (exemplified by Liz Cheney campaigning with Kamala Harris). But the Iran war fractured the coalition of anti-war voters who supported Trump.

By March, Smith was publicly arguing alongside Joe Rogan and Tucker Carlson that Trump had betrayed his base by taking the country into another Middle Eastern war.

For Smith, Iran was the final break. For Dershowitz, it was not only justified but something he had explicitly advocated before the first bombs fell.

Tonight at 7pm ET, they’ll debate whether the war was necessary, what it has accomplished, and where President Trump should go from here. Watch live on the ZeroHedge homepage, X feed, and YouTube channel.

Authored by Chase Smith via The Epoch Times,

The House is expected to vote this week on a proposed constitutional amendment that would fix the size of the Supreme Court at nine justices. The number of justices is currently set by statute, which Congress can change by simple majority. If ratified, the amendment would place the figure in the Constitution, where changing it would require another amendment.

The measure, H.J. Res. 1, was introduced by Rep. Andy Biggs (R-Ariz.) and consists of a single sentence: “The Supreme Court of the United States shall be composed of nine justices consisting of one chief justice and eight associate justices.”

Under Article V of the Constitution, a proposed amendment must pass both the House and the Senate by a two-thirds vote before going to the states. The resolution gives states seven years from the date of submission to ratify it, and ratification requires the legislatures of three-fourths of the states – 38 of 50.

Some Democrats have been pressing for a larger court. Rep. Al Green (D-Texas) introduced legislation on May 4 to increase the court from nine justices to 13, and other prominent Democrats such as former Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg, former Vice President Kamala Harris, and Rep. Jim Clyburn (D-S.C.) have all recently floated a larger court.

Green’s bill has no cosponsors and has not moved out of the Judiciary Committee. Earlier versions of the Judiciary Act, sponsored by Rep. Hank Johnson (D-Ga.) in 2021 and 2023, also proposed a 13-justice court and did not receive a committee vote. The committee report on H.J. Res. 1 cites those bills as the reason for acting, saying a recent set of expansion proposals makes it necessary to fix the number in the Constitution.

House Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R-La.) listed the resolution among the week’s floor items in his weekly schedule preview, alongside a separate resolution from Rep. Jeff Crank (R-Colo.) condemning socialism and the Democratic Socialists of America.

“Radical left Democrats and the [Democratic Socialists of America] want to politicize and restructure the Supreme Court, effectively destroying the constitutional safeguards our Founders put in place,” Scalise’s office wrote in the preview. “For years, Democrats have called for packing the Supreme Court with more left-wing judges and now the [Democratic Socialists of America] is going even further by calling to abolish the Supreme Court and replace it with a judicial system subordinate to Congress.”

Biggs said in a June statement after the resolution cleared committee that the court had become a target.

“Our nation’s founders built a system of checks and balances to protect citizens from concentrated power – a central part being the U.S. Supreme Court, whose duty is to defend the rights and freedoms of every American, not to serve as a political tool for any party,” Biggs said. “The judiciary was designed to be the quiet guardian of liberty, insulated from the passions of the moment. Unfortunately, special interests have been increasing their attacks on the Court, threatening to pack this iconic American institution to ensure favorable outcomes for their causes.”

House Democratic Caucus Chair Pete Aguilar (D-Calif.) told reporters on Tuesday that he would vote against the resolution and characterized it as a message vote timed to the midterm elections.

“This is such a fake issue that Republicans are putting on,” Aguilar said. “The American public aren’t asking about this. I went around the country, the vice chair did a bunch of travel, I did a bunch of travel. Nowhere, ever, are people saying, ‘You know what we should do? We should cap the number of Supreme Court justices.'”

Aguilar said he expected the resolution to reach the floor on Wednesday and that he would oppose it.

“I understand that Republicans are gonna try to put up votes – socialism vote, Supreme Court justices,” he said. “These are all just kind of show votes. Assuming that this passes a rule, I’ll vote no, because this is just a complete show vote.”

Asked whether Democrats who have called for adding seats put the party at odds with its own leadership, Aguilar said expansion is not what the caucus is pushing.

“The argument among folks in our party is we want to reform the court, but we’ve said very clearly that that should be a code of ethics that they actually follow,” he said. “There needs to be real reform within the government side of what we do, and that’s every branch of government. Democrats have been loud and clear about that, and we continue to advocate for that, and we will when we’re in the majority.”

Aguilar’s framing tracks what House Democratic leaders said in May, when Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) and Caucus Vice Chair Ted Lieu (D-Calif.) each said judicial reform would be a priority if Democrats win the majority in November. Lieu said at the time that a Democratic majority would “usher in massive Supreme Court reform,” and Jeffries listed “massive judicial reform” alongside electoral and campaign finance reform. Neither specified what changes they would seek.

Judiciary Committee Debate and History

The House Judiciary Committee approved the resolution on June 3 by a vote of 15-8. No Democrat on the committee voted to report the resolution to the floor.

In dissenting views filed with the committee report, Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), the committee’s ranking Democrat, criticized the vote as being about giving up congressional power rather than the number of justices.

“The question H.J. Res. 1 presents is not really about whether nine should suddenly become a magic number of justices for the Supreme Court,” Raskin wrote. “It’s about whether this Republican-controlled Congress – which has already surrendered congressional war powers, congressional taxing and tariff powers, and congressional spending powers to a president desiring to be a king – should now permanently relinquish another constitutional power that the Framers gave to us in Article I.”

Raskin also accused the Supreme Court of being “profoundly partisan and lopsided” and wrote that the measure is meant to freeze the current court in place, pointing to the handling of two vacancies during President Barack Obama’s and President Donald Trump’s first terms.

He said that the amendment has no realistic path to becoming part of the Constitution.

Congress has changed the court’s size several times, according to a Congressional Research Service report cited by the Judiciary Committee.

The Judiciary Act of 1789 created a six-member court. Congress voted in 1801 to reduce it to five, but that change never took effect – the law applied only once a seat came open, and Congress repealed it before any vacancy occurred.

Several statutes over the following decades changed the number again, reaching 10 justices during the Civil War, the largest the court has ever been. Congress cut the number to seven in 1866, again through attrition rather than removing sitting justices, then set it at nine in 1869. That was the last time Congress changed the court’s size.

The report, “‘Court Packing’: Legislative Control over the Size of the Supreme Court,” says scholars disagree about why Congress made those changes, with some pointing to practical needs such as caseload and others arguing they were driven by political considerations.

The committee report says that during the period when the court’s size moved with the number of circuits, justices were also responsible for hearing cases in the lower federal courts, and that once that practice ended, there was no longer a reason to change the court’s size as new lower courts were created.

By Ethan Howland of UtilityDive

The Midcontinent Independent System Operator – the second largest US grid operator after PJM Interconnection – on Friday proposed a set of requirements large loads must meet before they can connect to the grid, including ramping and ride-through specifications.

The “interconnection reliability requirements” framework aims to improve MISO’s visibility into large load “characteristics and behavior, support reliable planning and operational decision-making, and establish scalable and technically justified expectations proportional to demonstrated reliability risk,” the grid operator said in its filing with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.

The proposal is a part of MISO’s response to FERC’s mid-June “show cause” orders requiring major grid operators to set rules that meet certain criteria for adding data centers and other large loads to the grid. MISO said it plans to make additional proposals by a Nov. 16 deadline.

MISO’s proposal follows similar actions at the Electric Reliability Council of Texas and the PJM Interconnection aimed at setting reliability standards for large loads after several incidents where data centers suddenly tripped offline, raising concerns about grid stability.

On average, electric demand was relatively flat between 2009 and 2024, growing by about 0.5% a year, MISO told FERC. Now, the grid operator expects 1% to 2% annual growth through 2044, with higher growth rates in the near term, according to MISO, which runs the grid and wholesale power markets from Louisiana to Minnesota.

MISO’s proposal defines “large loads” as those larger than 50 MW, and “computational loads” as large loads that include at least 25 MW of demand from information technology equipment, such as servers, storage and networking hardware.

The separate computational load classification will allow MISO to target certain requirements just to data centers, the grid operator said.

“Computational loads may exhibit rapid and coordinated changes in demand, significant power-electronic behavior, and distinct responses to transmission system disturbances,” MISO said.

MISO’s proposed reliability framework sets requirements for its transmission customers that take service on behalf of large loads. It covers four main areas:

• Visibility requirements

To improve MISO’s visibility into large loads on its system, transmission customers must provide MISO with basic information and modeling data on large load facilities, according to the proposal. They must also provide real-time and day-ahead load forecasts for the facilities.

The information is needed “to support planning studies, operational assessments, and accurate representation of large loads behavior and system impacts,” MISO said.

• Phasor Measurement Unit requirements

The PMU requirements set monitoring expectations for computation loads through high-resolution, time-synchronized measurements, according to MISO.

“PMU data provides MISO with greater visibility into facility behavior during system disturbances and rapid operating changes, supporting model validation, performance verification, disturbance analysis, and identification of potential dynamic interactions with the transmission system,” MISO said. 

• Ramp requirements

MISO said its proposed ramp requirements address the rate at which computational loads may increase or decrease electric use during stable-state transitions. 

“Managing rapid changes in demand helps reduce real-time supply-demand imbalances, sudden change in transmission power flows, and associated operational impacts, while supporting more reliable system operation,” MISO said.

• Ride-through requirements

The proposed measures set minimum disturbance performance requirements for computational loads during voltage and frequency disturbances to reduce the risk of unnecessary disconnection or customer-initiated rapid reductions in demands during system events, MISO said. 

MISO’s proposal includes grandfathering provisions to provide certainty to existing and nearly complete commercial arrangements for large loads. MISO asked FERC to let its proposal take effect on Dec. 4.

MISO plans to file additional large load-related proposals, including for additional transmission products and associated study processes, protections against cost shifts and the treatment of generation service to “electrically proximate” large loads, MISO said.

Oil prices were volatile but are trading around unchanged this morning, but still near the highest closing level in five weeks (WTI topped $92 overnight) as hostilities broke out again between the US and Iran, renewing the threat to energy exports from the Middle East.

The US conducted a second day of strikes on the Islamic Republic overnight, with President Donald Trump threatening more attacks if Tehran responded. Within hours, Iran retaliated against Jordan, Bahrain and Kuwait, countries that host American forces.

“The market is now clearly pricing in a direct military confrontation, while the prospect of a negotiated solution has diminished,” said Arne Lohmann Rasmussen, chief analyst at Global Risk Management in Copenhagen.

“This is a worse combination for the energy market than the situation we faced just a few days ago and even in April. Today, inventories are even more depleted.”

Priecs pared some gains this morning on Venezuela news and more much-debated news from Secretary Wright about ‘shadow’ flows through the Strait.

API

• Crude -2.6mm

• Cushing

• Gasoline +348k

• Distillates -265k

DOE

• Crude -4.45mm (+60k exp)

• Cushing +80k

• Gasoline -1.17mm

• Distillates +796k

US Crude stocks declined for the first time in five weeks (more than expected and more than API reported) while Gasoline stocks continued to drawdown and Cushing saw a de minimus build. Distillates stocks did see a build (good news) for the first time in five weeks…

Distillate supplies on the East Coast are now at record lows, while supplies on the West Coast are the lowest since May 2025. The vast majority of heating oil demand in the US occurs in the Northeast, so this is less than ideal with just a month to go before heating season starts.

Another brutal week for gasoline imports, which fell to 370,000 barrels a day last week. That’s below levels for the same time in 2020. There’s just not a lot of relief for markets desperate for more supply.

Amid all the clamor that Venezuela will be used to refill it, the SPR saw yet another drawdown last week (-3.12mm barrels) for the biggest overall crude draw since July…

The SPR is now at its lowest level since 1982…

US Crude production surged back to record highs…

Refinery crude refinery runs soared to the highest in seven years, as oil processing in both the Gulf Coast and Midwest moved higher, with the Midwest at an all-time record high. Runs on the Gulf Coast are the highest for this time of the year. 

WTI holding around $90…

The return to a hot war has once again thrust shipping through the vital Strait of Hormuz into jeopardy, as the two sides remain at loggerheads and diplomatic efforts yield few results.

Iran is assessing the aftermath in terms of casualties and damage in the wake of the new flare-up in fighting, after the US launched a series of deadly attacks on the Islamic Republic Tuesday, focused in the south and Hormuz Strait area, and Tehran in expected fashion retaliated with drone-and-missile strikes against Gulf nations and Jordan.

Iran says the total death toll from the new American assault has risen to 18, especially following a an alleged mass casualty strike at a wedding celebration. It reportedly happened in happened Hormozgan province Tuesday night, with authorities having announced five were killed, including a child, and with at least 50 more wounded.

Regional media reports, “Six-year-old Amir Mohammad Karimi was among those killed, it said, adding that those wounded had been transferred to hospital in the nearby city of Minab.”

“Earlier, Reza Shahidiyan, the governor of Sirik county, told the IRIB state broadcaster that 63 people had been injured, including 50 women and children,” the report continues. “Other Iranian reporting has cited as many as 68 wounded.”

Tehran officials, as well as Iran’s Red Crescent Society, have made formal requests to global bodies, including the International Criminal Court, to take legal action for the civilian deaths and alleged war crimes.

BBC has cited the Pentagon as saying it is aware of reports about the strike but that US forces never targeted civilians.

🚨 🇮🇷 A U.S. attack on a wedding ceremony in Sirik, in southern Iran’s Hormozgan province, killed four people, including a child, the provincial Red Crescent’s managing director said, according to Tasnim. The province’s deputy governor for security earlier reported 50 wounded.… pic.twitter.com/eoHMkD2jJA

— Drop Site (@DropSiteNews) September 1, 2026

As for known targets from the Iranian response, which saw an initial ballistic missile wave target US bases in Jordan, some of the following has emerged:

• Camp Titin & Prince Hassan Base (Jordan): ballistic strikes.
• Erbil Bases (Iraq): Combined missile/drone.
• Ali Al Salem (Kuwait): HQs & drone ramps hit.
• US Naval Base (Bahrain): Casualties & destroyed aircraft reported.

Videos which purport to show some of these strikes, particularly against NSA Bahrain (certainly not for the first time, as it’s already suffered significant damage), have been widely circulating but remain unconfirmed.

WATCH: Footage reportedly showing Iran’s Shahed-136 drone hitting the U.S. 5th Fleet HQ in Manama, Bahrain this morning. pic.twitter.com/SR5ELmeS8i

— Clash Report (@clashreport) September 2, 2026

In the Strait of Hormuz, the Revolutionary Guard has announced that two foreign ⁠oil ⁠tankers hit sea mines and are on fire after attempting to transit the waterway earlier in the day Wednesday. The IRGC said it occurred while the vessels used an “illegal route” through the the strait, state TV reports. Simultaneously Al Jazeera issued the following:

Bahri, a shipping company in Saudi Arabia, says two Filipino crew members were killed on board the SIDR vessel in an “incident” while transiting Hormuz.

As for the broader US naval blockade on Iranian ports, Reuters outlines that “Iran has gone about seven weeks without shipping meaningful crude exports through the Strait of Hormuz, as a U.S. naval blockade succeeds where years of sanctions failed by cutting off one of Tehran’s main sources of foreign-currency earnings.”

The commentary adds: “Unlike ‌previous sanctions campaigns, when Iranian crude continued reaching buyers despite restrictions, the current blockade has stopped fresh crude cargoes reaching China, Tehran’s only major remaining oil customer, increasing pressure on government finances and foreign-currency reserves.”

The world is now witnessing the seventh month of a “3-4 week” war, and the White House is still pushing this ‘the Iranian people will rise up’ narrative. According to a late Tuesday Trump Truth Social Post:

I’m not trying to force Iran to the bargaining table, as ABC Fake News reported. I couldn’t care less if they sign a worthless, to them, agreement. I like our position now much better, with almost total control of the Hormuz Strait, and their economy totally collapsing. They are just playing out the inevitable. When are the Iranian people going to rise up and fight? President DJT

In the opening days of Operation Epic Fury it must be recalled that Trump claimed “help is on the way!” – and yet now amid a stalemated situation US bases across the region have been degraded and destroyed.

Where is Secretary of State Marco Rubio these days?…

I think Bessent is talking about the Trump administration here…

Things are getting rough behind the scenes clearly. 🇺🇸 https://t.co/Z5j40klgEG

— Philip Pilkington (@philippilk) September 2, 2026

US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent is meanwhile touting that the US is ‘cutting off the head of the snake.’

“When I was a kid in South Carolina, we lived near a swamp, and as a result, we’d end up with a lot of poison snakes in our yard. And you would take either a rake or a machete, or a paddle from a boat, and you cut the head off,” he said Tuesday.

“But the snake, the tail kept wiggling, and you had to bury the head of the snake because the head of the snake was still poisonous, and there was venom there. So we are burying the head of the Iranian snake,” he continued. “The snake doesn’t know it’s dead yet, but it will stop wiggling when the sun goes down.” But as yet, there are no signs of a rapidly collapsing state system, and there are no masses rising up in the streets.

Iranian leadership is vowing not to back down, but to continue inflicting pain on Washington, on the military, economic, and political fronts.

Parliament speaker goes off…

Minab school: children massacred.
Lamerd sports hall: kids slaughtered.
Kouhestak wedding: children killed with families.

If a power acts like Satan, picks targets like Satan, and kills like Satan, it’s Satan.

Shields a junior Satan that does the same? It’s THE Great Satan.

— محمدباقر قالیباف | MB Ghalibaf (@mb_ghalibaf) September 2, 2026

Iranian Parliament Speaker Ghalibaf on Wednesday has declared Iran does not reject negotiations but views them as a tool in its broader confrontation with the US and Israel, Tasnim reports. He is reiterating US must fulfill its commitments before Iran “takes steps” to reopen Hormuz – which suggests Tehran has not altogether abandoned the possibility of getting back to the negotiating table.

More Latest Developments

• US President Trump posted “I’m not trying to force Iran to the bargaining table, as ABC Fake News reported. I couldn’t care less if they sign a worthless, to them, agreement. I like our position now much better, with almost total control of the Hormuz Strait, and their economy totally collapsing. They are just playing out the inevitable.”
• US Treasury Secretary Bessent said Iran doesn’t control the Strait of Hormuz and the US took out Iranian radar along the strait, as well as got 17mln bbls of crude out on Monday. Bessent said that China pays Iran in yuan and when yuan cannot be converted to dollars, Iran starves, while he said they are in an acceleration phase of Iran bankruptcy and maybe Iran will lash out more kinetically.
• US Central Command said forces successfully completed a wave of strikes against Iranian military targets on September 1st in which they struck targets including air defence sites, radar systems, maritime assets and facilities, mine laying capabilities, and communications sites.
• US strikes on Iranian targets on Tuesday included two Iranian government tankers under a new ‘tanker for tanker’ approved by US President Trump to deter Iranian attacks on tankers, according to Axios. Furthermore, US officials said around 100 targets were attacked during the strikes, while it was separately reported that the US assessed Iran was planning to expand attacks against commercial ships.
• Pakistan’s foreign ministry said Army Chief Munir visited Tehran and generated substantial momentum on the Strait of Hormuz issue and that Pakistan is positive about all parties returning to the negotiating table.
• Iran’s IRGC said two tankers were blown up and stopped a few hours ago after striking mines in the Strait of Hormuz. IRGC also warns of additional penalties for shipping companies.
• IRGC said it targeted US bases in Erbil, Iraq with missiles and drones. Iran’s army also launched drone attacks on the US base in Bahrain, while Kuwaiti air defences confronted attacks by hostile drones. Additionally, the IRGC said it attacked a US Marines base in Jordan known as Camp Tibtain with missiles and claimed that a large number of US forces were killed in the attack. However, US and Jordan officials reported no casualties.
• Russia has been secretly helping Iran develop advanced supersonic cruise missiles, according to FT.