A U.S. District Court in Maine issued a ruling April 11 ordering the federal government to release funding to Maine that was frozen over the state’s decision to disregard an executive order and allow transgender athletes in women’s sports.

Conflict between the state and federal government began after President Donald Trump issued the order titled “Defending Women from Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government” on his first day back in the White House for a second term.

The Epoch Times’ Travis Gillmore reports that in a 70-page ruling, Judge John A. Woodcock Jr. ordered the Department of Agriculture and its secretary, Brooke Rollins, to “immediately unfreeze” any money held back because the state chose not to follow the president’s executive action.

Agencies are also barred from withholding future funding on similar grounds.

Meanwhile, the court distanced itself from the debate over transgender athletes.

“In ruling on the state’s request, the court is not weighing in on the merits of the controversy about transgender athletes that forms the backdrop of the impasse between the state and the federal defendants,” Woodcock wrote in his decision.

He went on to explain that the decision was based on the Agriculture Department’s failure to follow regulatory protocols when withholding the funding.

“In fact, the federal defendants have not argued in this case that the relevant federal laws and regulations for terminating federal funding of state programs do not apply to this situation, nor do they claim that they complied with the applicable federal law in the events resulting in this litigation.”

The Trump administration argued that the court did not have proper jurisdiction to hear the case, and that Maine did not “allege irreparable harm.”

Tensions boiled over during a February meeting with governors at the White House, when Trump and Maine Gov. Janet Mills sparred over the issue in a heated back-and-forth.

When Maine opted not to prohibit transgender athletes from competing against women, Rollins sent a letter April 2 to Mills alerting her that the Agriculture Department was “freezing Maine’s federal funds for certain administrative and technological functions in schools,” according to the court ruling.

In its lawsuit filed on April 7, Maine said it was unable to access approximately $3 million.

The state told the court the money was used for programs that helped provide meals to schools, childcare facilities, and disabled adults.

In Rollins’s April 2 letter to Mills saying the funds had been frozen, the agriculture secretary said the pause “does not impact federal feeding programs or direct assistance to Mainers; if a child was fed today, they will be fed tomorrow.”

State officials celebrated the ruling and said it would help protect nutritional programs meant to benefit at-risk populations.

“This temporary restraining order confirms the Trump administration did not follow the rule of law when it cut program funds that go to feed schoolchildren and vulnerable adults,” Maine Attorney General Aaron Frey said in a statement. 

“This order preserves Maine’s access to certain congressionally appropriated funds by prohibiting an unlawful freeze by the administration.”

The Epoch Times reached out to the White House for comment.

Submitted by Gun Owners of America,

The Department of Justice is currently pursuing criminal charges in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, for possession of a  handgun equipped with a pistol stabilizing brace, in the case U.S. v. Taranto.

In response, Gun Owners of America and our friends at the Firearms Regulatory Accountability Coalition (FRAC) are urging the Department of Justice to drop that charge,  which sets a dangerous precedent for the millions of Americans who possess up to 40 million such firearms.

In 2021, the Biden Administration tasked the ATF with targeting and cracking down on firearms equipped with accessories known as “pistol braces.” 

These accessories were originally designed to allow disabled gun owners to “brace” a handgun against their forearm, aiding in shooting longer and heavier firearms with one hand. 

For years, ATF approved the devices for use on pistols of all kinds, and promised that the mere attachment of such accessories to handguns did not transform them into short-barreled rifles.  That was until the Biden Administration decided to target pistol braces for elimination at the behest of anti-gun billionaire donors. 

According to a study from the Congressional Research Service, up to 40 million of these firearms are in private ownership throughout the country. But that wasn’t going to stop Biden’s Department of Justice and ATF from working to make owners of these pistol-brace-equipped firearms into felons with the stroke of a pen.

To do this, ATF decided to reclassify virtually all pistols with stabilizing braces as “short-barreled rifles” falling under the regulation of the 1934 National Firearms Act and requiring registration. 

Failing to comply with ATF’s reclassification and registration scheme could have landed gun owners in prison for ten years in addition to a $250,000 fine. 

But thanks to numerous lawsuits from groups like Gun Owners of America, FRAC, and others, Biden’s pistol brace rule is currently enjoined by numerous courts and even vacated by one. 

Translation from legalese? Biden’s rule is no longer in effect, and ATF has been ordered not to enforce it.

But this hasn’t stopped anti-gun bureaucrats at ATF from attempting to continue to enforce the underlying legal theories that inspired the rule in the first place. 

And now, we have our first example of this in the case U.S. v. Taranto. 

Anti-gun holdovers from the Biden Administration in the DOJ & ATF know that charging an innocent gun owner with NFA violations for a pistol brace, and nothing more, is not going to stand up, so they had to find a case where someone committed other offenses serious enough that the additional charge for violating the NFA could create a successful precedent, but wouldn’t be the centerpiece of the case. 

And that’s precisely what they found in U.S. v. Taranto. 

But before we get into the details of the case, let me just point out that GOA & FRAC’s interest in this case is the NFA charge for possessing a pistol-braced handgun, nothing else. 

We state this clearly in our letter when we say: “We express no opinion on any of the other unrelated charges levied against Mr. Taranto.”

This is because Taranto’s case stems from an incident on June 28, 2023, where Taranto was stopped by the Secret Service and FBI in Washington DC and charged with the possession of a firearm, and magazines. 

But in the hours leading up to his arrest, Taranto had engaged in what charging documents describe as “erratic” behavior, was livestreaming himself and, according to charging documents, “suggested that he had outfitted his vehicle with a detonator.”

He then drove his car into DC, specifically into the Kalorama neighborhood, and into an area monitored by the Secret Service, because of its proximity to important government figures. 

When the Secret Service approached him, he fled into the woods—the officers gave chase.

And eventually, when the Secret Service arrested him, and conducted a search of his vehicle, they found a CZ Scorpion pistol equipped with a brace, and more.

Taranto was charged with numerous offenses but, interestingly, according to his inditement, Taranto’s pistol is charged as both a handgun, in violation of Washington DC’s licensing provisions, and also a short-barreled rifle, in violation of the National Firearms Act.

How can a firearm be both a rifle and a handgun at the same time?

The answer is, of course, that it isn’t, and the DOJ’s internally conflicting position shows that the government is using the NFA charge for a sinister reason and may be a sign of a larger problem.

In a brief filed by the DOJ lawyers opposing Taranto’s motion to dismiss, the U.S. Attorneys had this to say:

“ATF is not barred from continuing to enforce the underlying statute as it always has: by making case-by-case determinations about whether particular braced firearms constitute “rifles” under the statute. 

And of course, because the rule reflects ATF’s best understanding of the statute, those determinations will naturally tend to look substantially like the determinations that would follow from applying the clear framework outlined in the rule.”

Translation? 

Even though ATF is currently barred from enforcing the pistol brace rule, it claims that nothing stops it from enforcing the statute—using, of course, the same legal theories on which the rule is based.  If this sort of logic — that appeals only to bureaucrats — makes your eyes burn, you’re not alone.

This is undoubtedly a bad sign for the direction of ATF. Even though the pistol brace rule has been enjoined and vacated, ATF insists it can still charge pistol brace crimes, using the very same theories from its repudiated rule.

Even under a Trump administration, it appears that career anti-gun bureaucrats within ATF, along with some holdover prosecutors at the DOJ, just aren’t willing to give up their anti-gun agenda.

This is why GOA has teamed up with FRAC to send a letter, this time to the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Washington, DC, asking that office to investigate this federal government overreach and dismiss the pistol brace charge against Taranto.

We are hopeful that, thanks to President Trump’s executive order on protecting Second Amendment rights, this charge will be dismissed, thereby protecting millions of law-abiding gun owners from continuing ATF overreach.

Again, this case—and GOA’s interest—has nothing to do with Mr. Taranto, but instead with the millions of other gun owners who possess firearms equipped with pistol stabilizing braces. If the DOJ pushes forward with this criminal charge against Taranto, then all of us are at risk.

Beijing has remained very quiet this week regarding the economic fallout from President Trump’s deepening trade war. In contrast, U.S. media outlets have reported that U.S. companies have canceled or reduced orders for heavily tariffed goods from China—signaling a pullback in shipments likely to translate into economic pain for Chinese suppliers. 

Such developments include…

• Amazon Cancels Orders, Walmart Pulls Forecast As Tariffs Take Hold

• Chinese Sellers On Amazon Panic After Trump’s Tariff Bazooka

… are poised to ripple through China’s export-driven economy. While official data lags in months and quarters, early, high-frequency data could soon emerge—particularly mobility data, which often serves as a real-time proxy for logistics and manufacturing activity. 

The latest high-frequency indicators from Goldman—covering consumption, mobility, production, investment, and broader macro activity—are dated as of April 3, coinciding with President Trump’s “Liberation Day” tariff blitz targeting China and other global trading partners.

As of Friday, the U.S. effective tariff rate on Chinese goods stands at 145%, with China’s at 125%. Notably, the April 3 high-frequency data does not capture the latest wave of tariff-related disruptions.

Just before Liberation Day, the traffic congestion index in major cities across China was tracking 3% lower year-over-year and remained below both 2024 and 2019 levels for this time of year. One can’t help but wonder how congestion will be affected as Chinese suppliers face mounting pressure from canceled or reduced U.S. shipments. 

In a separate report, BloombergNEF presented similar congestion data for 15 major cities, showing a decrease in congestion levels for this time of year compared with 2024,23 levels. Again, the data has not been exposed to post-Liberation Day and the surge in tariffs and order cancelations.  

Data from BloombergNEF also showed that China’s city-level road congestion was down 6.3% in March compared to the same period last year. The next update will likely show a further slowdown.

Back to the Goldman data, the report probably has one of the most important charts. Can consumer sentiment go any lower?

China consumer confidence as of January. Where does this go in March/April? https://t.co/RR8xX0BwLD pic.twitter.com/RvxLbeE7B3

— zerohedge (@zerohedge) April 11, 2025

The concern moving forward is that the next update of high-frequency congestion data may show further deterioration as reports continue to come in about Chinese factories receiving order cancellations. 

Trump’s blanket tariffs will force Chinese factories that flood America with low-end goods into a major dilemma: either find new markets to exploit, shift production ex-China, or wind down factory lines – all options appear negative in the short run. 

Pay attention to Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent’s comments this week: “Trump goaded China into a bad position.” 

NEW: Scott Bessent says Trump didn’t just raise tariffs—he set a trap, and China walked right into it.

This is what 4D chess looks like.

Markets are rebounding after President Trump slapped a 125% tariff on Chinese imports while giving a 90-day pause to other countries.

The… pic.twitter.com/M9KMreyWeG

— The Vigilant Fox 🦊 (@VigilantFox) April 9, 2025

Bessent explained, “The US has an edge here: They’re the surplus country – their exports to the US are five times our exports to China.” 

The more I hear from Scott Bessent the more I am impressed with him.

On China “they can raise their tariffs but so what”
pic.twitter.com/nFfyazuw2d

— Shawn Farash (@Shawn_Farash) April 9, 2025

.  .  .  

Via The Libertarian Institute 

Israeli military sources speaking to the press revealed the lack of progress Tel Aviv has made toward one of its core goals in Gaza: eliminating Hamas. The armed wing of the Palestinian group reportedly retains 75% of its tunnel network, 40,000 fighters and the ability to produce its own weapons.

According to Haaretz, an Israeli defense official explained that Hamas still has significant military capabilities despite 18 months of fighting in the Strip. Israeli military analysts now estimate that Hamas has 40,000 fighters.

Before October 7, 2023, Hamas was estimated to have between 20,000 and 30,000 fighters under arms. Near the end of the Joe Biden administration, the US intelligence community estimated the group had lost 15,000 men during the Israeli onslaught, but had recruited the same number of new troops.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has stated that one of his top goals in Gaza is to eradicate Hamas. However, the war has decimated the civilian population of Gaza.

Most Gazans have been displaced multiple times, at least 50,000 have been killed – per Palestinian health sources – and countless deaths of deprivation have been reported.

Tel Aviv and Washington maintain that all of the fatalities caused by the Israeli war and blockade are the responsibility of Hamas.

The Israeli defense officials reported that despite some protests, Hamas retains its popularity and is firmly in charge of Gaza. Its armed wing, the al-Qassam Brigades, still has the capability to produce arms and rockets.

Last week, Hamas fired several rockets into Israel, leaving one person injured.

While Hamas has a significant fighting force, Israeli officials said the militants have not been engaging with Israeli troops. Tel Aviv says the fighters are hiding among civilians or in tunnels.

⚡️Israeli army calls on citizens of Gaza to evacuate from eastern Khan Yunis pic.twitter.com/WT8eckDASM

— War Monitor (@WarMonitors) April 11, 2025

Hamas also retains a significant portion of its tunnel network. The officials said the IDF has only managed to destroy 25% of the group’s underground facilities so far. Defense Minister Israel Katz explained that some of the tunnels connecting Gaza with Egypt remain intact.

Authored by Naveen Athrappully via The Epoch Times,

American homeowners need to earn about $50,000 more than the typical renter to be able to afford monthly mortgage payments, according to new data from real estate brokerage Redfin.

“Americans need to earn $116,633 per year to afford the median-priced home for sale, 81.8 percent more than the $64,160 needed to afford the typical apartment for rent,” Redfin said in an April 10 statement.

In 2024, a person looking to buy a typical U.S. home could do so with earnings of about $110,808, $5,825 lower than this year. The amount needed to rent remained about the same.

According to the brokerage, a home is considered affordable when the homeowner spends no more than 30 percent of their income on the monthly housing payment.

Home prices have been going up at a swift pace with Freddie Mac-backed 30-year fixed-rate mortgage rates remaining above the 6 percent level for all of 2024 and 2025.

Redfin said an individual needed to earn just $63,925 to afford the typical home for sale in 2021. The latest data indicate an increase of more than 82 percent in the income required to purchase a home since then, based on current market conditions. The amount needed for a typical rental was then $54,520.

Mortgage rates have been undergoing considerable fluctuations recently, with broader economic uncertainty following President Donald Trump’s tariffs strategy to level the playing field for American exports.

The implementation of reciprocal tariffs was announced on April 2.

Rates jumped over the 7 percent level Friday, according to data from aggregator Mortgage News Daily.

The volatility in rates has been supported by corresponding movements in the U.S. Treasury bond yields.

The 10-year treasury yield has been on the increase since April 4, when it closed at 3.99 percent. As of April 11, it is at 4.50 percent.

Inflation Fears

When the 10-year Treasury yield increases, mortgage rates tend to follow. According to Mortgage News Daily, the yield saw its biggest week-over-week increase since 1981, indicating a subsequent uptick in mortgage rates, which have now crossed the 7 percent level.

Economic uncertainty has caused market turbulence with investors worrying about a possible spike in inflation. This has resulted in bond prices falling. Bond prices have an inverse relationship to treasury yields. Hence, yields have risen, lifting mortgage rates.

Defying market expectations, producer prices registered an unexpected drop in March, suggesting a lower chance for increased inflation.

The White House commended the inflation report in an April 10 statement, stating that it was “the first drop in consumer prices in several years.”

U.S. consumer optimism declined in April, according to the latest University of Michigan sentiment survey. Inflation fears had risen to the highest level in more than four decades, owing mainly to tariff uncertainty and the falling stock and bond markets.

Americans have been standing on the sidelines, unsure of making home purchases due to the persistently elevated mortgage rates.

When rates went down consecutively for three weeks, the number of mortgage purchase applications went up.

“Mortgage applications increased by 20 percent to its highest level since September 2024, driven by purchase and refinance applications picking up in a volatile week where economic uncertainty caused rates to drop across the board,” Mortgage Bankers Association Vice President Joel Kan said in an April 9 statement.

Home buying has been picking up pace in the United States since the start of April. As part of this, new property listings are rising.

“Tariffs are coming up for the first time. I hosted an open house over the weekend, and some of the younger buyers were concerned about how they’re going to impact the housing market,” Desiree Bourgeois, a Redfin Premier agent in Detroit, said in an April 10 statement.

“They’re hearing the words ‘tariffs’ and ‘recession,’ and it’s making them nervous that if they buy now, the value of their home will decline, and they don’t know whether mortgage rates will go up or down. There’s a lot of uncertainty out there, with buyers trying to understand how their purchase would fit into their personal finances and the broader economic puzzle.”

The median home sale price is $386,500, as of April 6, Redfin said, with the asking price at $426,910 and a monthly mortgage rate of $2,813.

There were almost a million active market listings with 100,661 new listings.

In a rare moment, Ukraine’s military as well as President Zelensky have announced that a Western-supplied F-16 fighter jet was shot down Saturday while conducing operations over Ukraine. Zelensky confirmed the pilot’s death in an announcement. 

The Ukrainian Air Force (UAF) command has identified the that 26-year-old fighter pilot Pavlo Ivanov was killed during a combat mission in an F-16 Viper fighter aircraft.

Ukraine has not released details or the location of the plane downing, but both Russian and Ukrainian military bloggers have described the F-16 Viper was struck by a surface-to-air missile.

There’s been some speculation that it may have been a ‘friendly fire’ incident – but these details aren’t known at this point. The military’s statement said that the country’s F-16 pilots operate “in incredibly difficult conditions” and that the pilot died while “defending his native land from the occupiers,” according to a translation.

This only the second officially revealed downing of a Western-supplied F-16. “Saturday’s loss is only the second confirmed F-16 loss that Ukraine has faced, delivering a symbolic blow to Kyiv’s forces,” Newsweek writes.

“The F-16 aircraft are more advanced than the Soviet-era aircraft Ukraine’s forces had been using for much of the ongoing Russia-Ukraine war that began in February 2022. The aircrafts delivery from European allies was also hoped to change the battlefield calculus,” the report notes.

A Ukrainian Air Force message said there will be an investigation: “All the circumstances of the tragedy are being established by an interdepartmental commission,” it said.

Zelensky’s message posted to social media in English and Ukrainian began as follows:

Today, Captain Pavlo Ivanov was tragically killed during an F-16 combat mission. The guy was only 26. My condolences to his family and to all of Pavlo’s brothers-in-arms.

The first known downing of an F-16 over Ukraine happened last summer:

It is the second confirmed death of a Ukrainian F-16 pilot. On August 26, 2024, Oleksii “Moonfish” Mes, was killed when he was reportedly responding to a Russian missile attack.

He had visited the United States in 2022 to lobby for the aircraft to be sent to Ukraine. In May 2023, the Biden administration allowed other countries to provide Kyiv with the U.S.-made aircraft.

The F-16 program has been ultra controversial as pilots were hastily trained in both Europe and the United States. Moscow has complained that F-16s are actually capable of carrying NATO nukes, and so has warned a mishap could lead to WW3.

How many experienced F-16 pilots does Ukraine have left? pic.twitter.com/3BSOoaO3TL

— Gabe (@GabeZZOZZ) April 12, 2025

Russia has vowed to destroy the F-16s both in the air and on the ground, and as even in the recent past warned that if they take off from neighboring countries then those European bases are fair game for attack. This would certainly spark direct conflict with the Western military alliance.

Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

Colorado Gov. Jared Polis (D), signed a bill into law on April 10 requiring people to obtain a permit and undergo safety training before they buy certain guns.

The legislation also bans the purchase and sale of devices that enable guns to be fired rapidly, including bump stocks.

“For folks who haven’t had any gun safety training, it’s very important that they get that, and this bill will make sure that people will get that education on how to operate the weapons safely and—just as important—how to store them safely,” Polis said at a press conference on Thursday.

Senate Bill 25-003, the legislation, is set to take effect on Aug. 1, 2026.

Under the law, people cannot buy semiautomatic rifles or semiautomatic shotguns with detachable magazines unless they’ve completed hunter education training offered by the Colorado Parks and Wildlife and a “basic firearms safety course.”

Local sheriffs must sign off on completion of the course, with applicants also undergoing a background check and vowing not to violate state laws on guns.

Individuals who violate the law face a class 2 misdemeanor on the first offense and a felony charge on subsequent offenses.

Dealers found to have violated the law shall have their licenses revoked.

State Rep. Andy Boesenecke, a Democrat who co-sponsored the bill, said in a statement after the signing that the legislation “will help save lives and prevent future tragedies in Colorado.”

Everytown for Gun Safety, which advocates for gun restrictions, was among the organizations praising the bill.

“Colorado’s new law is the definition of common sense: If you want to buy a military-style rifle that can kill dozens without needing to reload, you need to get a permit that requires passing a background check and taking a safety course,” John Feinblatt, president of the group, said in a statement.

Other groups said the bill infringes on constitutional rights.

Ian Escalante, executive director of Rocky Mountain Gun Owners, said in a video that the bill is “the worst, most sweeping gun restriction in U.S. history.”

Escalante said the group is reviewing its legal options.

“We’re not going to stand for it. We’re not going to allow Jared Polis … and the legislature to force us to buy back our right to purchase the most commonly-used rifle in America,” he said.

The U.S. Supreme Court in 2024 struck down a federal ban on bump stocks.

Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-Colo.) also criticized the Colorado legislation.

“SB25-003 converts our constitutional rights into a privilege—one that becomes only accessible to those who can afford it,” she wrote on social media platform X.

Boebert and other Republicans called on the U.S. Department of Justice to sue Colorado over the law.

Not very much happened at the much-anticipated ‘indirect’ meeting between Iranian and US delegations in Oman on Saturday. While Tehran has been emphasizing the indirect nature of the dialogue, President Trump and his top officials have been calling these ‘direct’ talks.

The main ‘positive’ is that the two sides didn’t yell each other out the room, or make new accusations – instead they agreed to keep the diplomatic engagement going. 

“Iran and the United States will hold more negotiations next week over Tehran’s rapidly advancing nuclear program, Iranian state television reported Saturday at the end of the first round of talks between the two countries since President Donald Trump returned to the White House,” The Associated Press reports as the meeting wrapped up.

As for whether they were ‘direct’ or not, Iranian state did say that Trump regional onvoy Steve Witkoff and Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi “briefly spoke in the presence of the Omani foreign minister” at the end of the talks.

This does indeed mark the first direct interaction between the Islamic Republic and the Trump administration. It is Trump during his first term who pulled the US out of the 2015 JCPOA nuclear deal (in April 2018).

The Iranian side has announced  that the next round of talks will take place April 19, in a clear sing that both sides could be ready to do a new deal. This is precisely what Trump has demanded – the inking of a new nuclear deal – while threatening military action against Tehran. Trump has also warned that Israel might ‘lead’ such strikes on nuclear facilities.

According to more details from Muscat, Oman on Saturday:

American officials did not immediately acknowledge the Iranian reports, which Tehran likely speeded out to its public ahead of a possible Trump post on a social media. But declaring that the two sides spoke face-to-face — even if briefly — suggests the negotiations went well.

The talks began at around 3:30 p.m. local. The two sides spoke for over two hours at a location in the outskirts of Oman, ending the talks around 5:50 p.m. local time. The convoy believed to be carrying Witkoff returned to Muscat, the capital of Oman, before disappearing into traffic around a neighborhood that is home to the U.S. Embassy.

Baghaei in follow-up stated that “The objective of the Islamic Republic of Iran is very clear — we have only one goal, and that is to safeguard Iran’s national interests.”

“We are giving a genuine and honest opportunity to diplomacy, so that through dialogue, we can move forward on the nuclear issue on one hand, and more importantly for us, the lifting of sanctions,” he added. No one is in the mood for war (though perhaps Israel?).

The US president Donald Trump is expected to achieve today what no other president has ever achieved since July 1776: Prevent Iran from having nuclear weapon, a decision that has never been taken by Iran before.

Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Arachgi headed to Oman today.

— Elijah J. Magnier 🇪🇺 (@ejmalrai) April 12, 2025

“Look, this is just a beginning. So it is natural that, at this stage, both sides will present their foundational positions through the Omani mediator,” Baghaei continued. “Therefore, we do not expect this round of negotiations to be lengthy.”

Witkoff had previewed to The Wall Street Journal just ahead of the trip, “I think our position begins with dismantlement of your program. That is our position today.”

He added: “Where our red line will be, there can’t be weaponization of your nuclear capability.” However Iran has maintained all along that its program is only for peaceful nuclear energy to meet the nation’s power needs, and further several Ayatollah’s have declared nuclear weapons to be ‘unIslamic’.

But recent conflict with Israel means Tehran is likely eyeing escalation of its program, possibly seeing in this the only final deterrent to Israel, and the potential for US-led regime change (as happened in neighboring Iraq and Afghanistan).

Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

A federal judge on April 11 declined to prevent Department of Homeland Security agents from conducting immigration raids at churches.

“At least at this juncture and on this record, the plaintiffs have not made the requisite showing of a ‘credible threat’ of enforcement,” U.S. District Judge Dabney Friedrich of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia wrote in an opinion.

The ruling came in a case brought by religious groups, including the Mennonite Church USA.

The federal government’s new policy, announced after President Donald Trump took office, rescinded a policy labeling churches and schools as sensitive places, making it easier for agents to carry out immigration enforcement at these locations.

The groups said the policy unconstitutionally interferes with their exercise of religion.

“Immigration agents already have begun exercising this newfound authority to snare worshippers and other visitors at Plaintiffs’ places of worship, inflicting grave harm on Plaintiffs’ ability to freely exercise their religious beliefs and to assemble,” the plaintiffs said in a motion for a preliminary injunction, or an order blocking the policy. “Absent preliminary relief, these enforcement activities in and near sacred spaces will multiply and so, too, will the intense burden this government action places on Plaintiffs’ religious exercise.”

Government lawyers said in a filing in response that the groups’ only outlined possible injury from future immigration raids, which was insufficient to prove standing. They also said that “those speculative harms are outweighed by the Government’s strong interest in immigration enforcement and avoiding interference with discretionary law enforcement decisions.”

Friedrich noted that just one enforcement action has taken place at one of the plaintiffs’ churches, with another four reporting immigration agents having conducted surveillance at or near their premises. She said that the evidence presented by the parties showed that churches and other places of worship are not being singled out as special targets by DHS agents.

“Absent evidence of specific directives to immigration officers to target plaintiffs’ places of worship, or a pattern of enforcement actions, the Court finds no credible threat of imminent enforcement,” she wrote. “Accordingly, the plaintiffs lack standing to assert a pre-enforcement challenge.”

Friedrich also said that the religious organizations have not shown that drops in attendance are linked to the new policy, as opposed to the government’s broader effort to arrest illegal immigrants. Evidence exists indicating congregants are staying home not to avoid agents at churches, but because agents may be in their neighborhoods, she said.

The denial means the policy will remain enforceable as the case proceeds. The court could eventually rule in favor of the plaintiffs.

A separate case challenging the same policy, lodged by Quakers in federal court in Maryland, resulted in a different U.S. judge ruling that immigration agents cannot make arrests at churches belonging to the plaintiffs.

U.S. District Judge Theodore Chuang, the judge, wrote in his order that the policy lacked “meaningful limitations or safeguards” on enforcement and “likely does not satisfy these constitutional and statutory requirements as to Plaintiffs.”

While Bill Maher may change opinions like a windsock depending on who he’s pandering to, the “Real Time” host told his mostly-Democrat audience that Donald Trump, aka Hitler-Stalin-Mussolini, was “gracious and measured” at their recent meeting last week.

We know, duh… but considering the influence Maher has on the left, his comments are interesting nonetheless.

“You can hate me for it, but I’m not a liar. Trump was gracious and measured,” Maher said. “And why isn’t that in other settings- I don’t know, and I can’t answer, and it’s not my place to answer. I’m just telling you what I saw, and I wasn’t high.”

Maher said the meeting, brokered by their mutual friend Kid Rock, wasn’t “some kind of summit.”

“I have no power. I’m a fucking comedian, and he’s the most powerful leader in the world!” he continued. “I’m not the leader of anything, except maybe a contingent of centrist-minded people who think there’s got to be a better way of running this country than hating each other every minute.”

Maher admitted that he went in ready for a fight – only to find Trump absolutely charming.

“Everything I’ve not liked about him was, I swear to God, absent. At least on this night, with this guy,” Maher, 69, said – seemingly shocked at his own admission.

“I never felt I had to walk on eggshells around him. And honestly, I voted for Clinton and Obama, but I would never feel comfortable talking to them the way I was able to talk with Donald Trump,” he continued, adding “Make of it what you will.”

“I’ve had so many conversations with prominent people who are much less connected. People that don’t look you in the eye. People that don’t really listen because they just want to get to their next thing. People whose response to things you say just doesn’t track. None of that with him,” Maher continued. “Mostly he steered the conversation to ‘what do you think about this?’ I know. Your mind is blown. So is mine.“

Maher added that Trump gave him a bunch of MAGA hats, which are stored in the same room where former President Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinsky engaged in extracurricular activities.

At one point in the dinner, Maher says Trump asked him about his thoughts on the Iran nuclear situation. After he allegedly gave Trump shit for eliminating the Obama-era nuclear deal, Trump “didn’t get mad or call me a left-wing lunatic. He took it in.”

Trump admitted he ‘lost’ in 2020 (allegedly)

According to Maher, Trump used the word ‘lost’ in relation to the 2020 presidential election.

“And I distinctly remember saying, ‘Wow, I never thought I’d hear you say that.’ He didn’t get mad. He’s much more self-aware than he lets on in public,” Maher said, adding that in private, Trump is just normal.

“Just for starters, he laughs,” Maher stated in disbelief. “I’d never seen him laugh in public. But he does — including at himself — and it’s not fake. Believe me, as a comedian of forty years, I know a fake laugh when I hear it.”

Watch:

Twelve days ago, I had dinner with President Trump, a dinner that my friend @KidRock set up because we share the belief that there has to be something better than hurling insults from 3000 miles away. pic.twitter.com/KE2t2eyBkI

— Bill Maher (@billmaher) April 12, 2025

Meanwhile, journalist Laura Loomer is jumping all over conservative “Bill Maher Simps,” while she says she had “a productive week in Cali, which included my deposition of Bill Maher,” who she’s suing for defamation.

So sick of Bill Maher Simps.

Conservatives are so desperate to be friends with people who hate them.

All I know is I had a productive week in Cali, which included my deposition of Bill Maher @billmaher.

It’s all on video and transcribed.

You won’t see me kissing his ass.

— Laura Loomer (@LauraLoomer) April 12, 2025