The Minnesota Senate rammed through sweeping gun control measures on Friday, after deliberately sidelining the state’s largest pro-Second Amendment organization with just 6 minutes of testimony, while gun control supporters got 32 minutes of speaking time on the flagship gun ban bill. 

The Democrat-controlled Senate Judiciary and Public Safety Committee, chaired by Sen. Ron Latz (DFL), advanced S.F. 3655 – a near-total ban on semiautomatic rifles and magazines holding more than 10 rounds – on a strict 6-3 party-line vote. Latz admitted they “prioritized individual testifiers over organizations” – yet anti-gun groups still got slots while the state’s biggest 2A voice was frozen out.

Before allowing input from the public, the Minnesota Gun Owners Caucus – representing tens of thousands of law-abiding citizens – warned the public yesterday that committee staff had already told them the hearing schedule was “full” – effectively blocking them from offering in-person testimony on the core bills: the semi-auto ban, the magazine ban, repeal of state preemption (opening the door to a patchwork of local gun laws), and new carry restrictions at the State Capitol and schools.

The largest & most effective gun rights group in Minnesota was just told we can’t testify against most of the gun control bills tomorrow.

Why?

Because the schedule is “full.”

Apparently, there’s plenty of room for gun control activists and other testifiers, but not the people… pic.twitter.com/NJqhnB3BXb

— MN Gun Owners Caucus (@mnguncaucus) March 12, 2026

Caucus Director of Government Relations & Advocacy Anna Leamy did manage to testify on a secondary privacy bill (S.F. 3836, which would expose permit-to-carry holder data to harassment and passed on a voice vote). She stood firm when Latz tried to grill her on the partisan ties of the “Violence Prevention Project” pushing for taxpayer-funded gun-control propaganda. But on the bills that actually matter – the ones that would turn everyday hunters, sport shooters, and self-defense gun owners into felons – the largest gun rights group in Minnesota was effectively silenced.

Senator @RonLatzMN attempted to grill our Anna Leamy, challenging her testimony about the partisan alignment of the Violence Prevention center, who are trying to get a $1 million blank check from MN taxpayers to push for gun control. Anna stood firm, because she’s right.

The…

— MN Gun Owners Caucus (@mnguncaucus) March 13, 2026

“This isn’t democracy. That’s rigging the hearing,” the caucus stated bluntly before today’s vote — and the numbers proved them right.

Because SCOTUS hasn’t ruled clearly on semi-automatic rifle bans and magazine bans – so they pull this crap.

— MN Gun Owners Caucus (@mnguncaucus) March 13, 2026

These bills are textbook draconian. S.F. 3655 doesn’t just target so-called “assault weapons”; it criminalizes nearly every modern semiautomatic rifle and standard-capacity magazine in common use. Grandfathering is a joke: current owners face registration, home inspections by law enforcement, storage mandates, and transfer bans. 

The Bills

SF 3655 (Semiautomatic Military-Style Assault Weapons and Large-Capacity Magazines Ban)

Bans manufacture, import, transfer, ownership, or possession of “semiautomatic military-style assault weapons” (e.g., AR-15, AK-47 variants and similar rifles/pistols/shotguns with features like pistol grips, folding stocks, threaded barrels, or detachable magazines) and large-capacity magazines (>10 rounds or parts to make them). Current owners can grandfather items by certifying/registering with state/local authorities by Feb 1, 2027 (fee required, renew every 3 years), with strict storage rules, limited use (e.g., no hunting, only on private property or ranges), no transfers (except surrender/destruction), and possible inspections. Violations are felonies (up to 5 years prison/$25,000 fine). Effective August 1, 2026. Exceptions for law enforcement/military.

SF 3836 (Firearm Permit Data Classification and Retention)

Makes data on revocation, suspension, or voiding of a permit to carry a firearm public (previously more protected). Also makes permit data public if the holder dies by suicide with a firearm or from police use of force. Extends retention requirements for these records (e.g., 6 years for denied/revoked/voided permits or specified death cases). General active permit application/purchase data remains private; sheriffs must purge non-essential inactive records annually except in these cases. No broad public release of current permit holder lists.

Democrats hold the trifecta in Minnesota. Gov. Tim Walz and his DFL allies have been itching to push this agenda since taking full control. Today they showed exactly how they plan to do it: limit debate, stack the clock, and steamroll constitutional rights while pretending it’s “public safety.”

Authored by Naveen Athrappully via The Epoch Times,

Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) beneficiaries sued the Department of Agriculture on March 11 over the issuance of waivers to five states restricting certain types of foods that can be purchased under the program.

On May 19 last year, Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins issued a waiver to Nebraska that bans SNAP recipients in the state from buying soda or energy drinks. As of March 4 this year, the Department of Agriculture (USDA) has approved similar waivers for 22 states in total.

In addition to soda and energy drinks, the additional waivers prohibit the purchase of fruit and vegetable drinks with less than 50 percent natural juice, as well as candy, unhealthy drinks, soft drinks, prepared desserts, sugar-sweetened beverages, and processed foods and beverages. Different states ban one or more of these items.

In the lawsuit, filed at the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, plaintiffs argued that the USDA’s actions amount to “authorizing a patchwork of state-by-state food prohibition regimes.”

“These changes deprive SNAP recipients and their families of the food they need to maintain their health and employment, and in some cases, to survive,” the lawsuit alleged. “Individuals with chronic illnesses are losing access to products they need to manage blood sugar or sustain diets they need to maintain baseline health care needs.

“Families must choose between using scarce cash to purchase restricted items or foregoing essential household expenses such as rent, utilities, or transportation. These harms are tangible, ongoing, and irreparable.”

The lawsuit specifically challenges SNAP waivers issued for Colorado, Iowa, Nebraska, Tennessee, and West Virginia, the states in which the five plaintiffs reside.

In 2018, the USDA had rejected similar food restriction proposals on SNAP purchases. According to the lawsuit, this was because the agency concluded that the restrictions would force the government to draw arbitrary lines among food products, limit food choices for households without clear evidence of health benefits, impose significant burdens on retailers, and increase administrative costs.

“Even though the challenged waivers present the same defects USDA previously recognized, they were approved without any attempt to address, let alone resolve, those concerns,” the complaint stated.

By approving the five waivers, the defendants are in violation of the Administrative Procedures Act and the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008, the lawsuit claims.

Plaintiffs have asked the court to deem the food restriction waivers as unlawful.

The Epoch Times reached out to the USDA for comment but did not receive a response by publication time.

SNAP Restrictions and Health

While announcing SNAP waiver approvals for six states in December 2025, Rollins justified the need for food restrictions as a way to improve people’s health.

“President Trump has made it clear: we are restoring SNAP to its true purpose—nutrition. Under the MAHA initiative, we are taking bold, historic steps to reverse the chronic diseases epidemic that has taken root in this country for far too long,” Rollins said in a Dec. 10 statement.

“With these new waivers, we are empowering states to lead, protecting our children from the dangers of highly-processed foods, and moving one step closer to the President’s promise to Make America Healthy Again.”

Rollins and Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. are strong advocates of banning food items deemed unhealthy from SNAP as part of the Make America Healthy Again agenda. Kennedy said he hopes that all states will have asked for, and received approval for, SNAP restrictions by the end of 2026.

In June 2025, Kennedy called on all state governors to exclude sugary drinks from the SNAP program. “Taxpayer dollars should never bankroll products that fuel the chronic disease epidemic,” he said at the time.

A study published on Dec. 8, 2024, in Frontiers in Public Health found that consuming more sugary drinks was linked to a higher risk of developing cardiovascular diseases than eating sweet food items such as pastries.

“Liquid sugars, found in sweetened beverages, typically provide less satiety than solid forms—they make you feel less full, potentially leading to overconsumption,” Suzanne Janzi, the study’s co-author, said in a statement.

“Context also matters—treats are often enjoyed in social settings or [for] special occasions, while sweetened beverages might be consumed more regularly.”

The waivers have already been implemented in eight states: Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Louisiana, Nebraska, Oklahoma, Utah, and West Virginia.

The waivers will come into effect in the remainder of the year in Arkansas, Colorado, Florida, Hawaii, Missouri, North Dakota, Ohio, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, and Virginia.

The waivers are set to be implemented in 2027 or 2028 in three states: Kansas, Nevada, and Wyoming.

In his first public statements of the war, Ayatollah Mojtaba Khamenei stressed Thursday that “the Strait of Hormuz must remain closed.” Or rather, it is clearly closed to all but those countries Tehran gives approval to.

Simultaneously Iranian state TV circulated rare “on the ground” direct reporting from the Strait of Hormuz. In fact, they had a correspondent literally in a fast-boat narrating what he saw in terms of surrounding stranded tankers.

Clearly it’s also meant to intimidate the United States and the West – a form of psychological warfare – at a moment when extreme uncertainty lingers over global oil markets. 

The footage is possibly the first such local ‘from the scene of the crisis’ reporting – given the whole area has been on de facto lockdown under continued threat of Iranian missile and drone attacks, also given new reports the strait is being mined by the IRGC Navy.

The country’s ambassador to the United Nations Amir Saeid Iravani has said, “Iran fully respects and remains committed to the principle of freedom of navigation under the law of the sea.” However, he stressed that “the current situation in the region, including in the Strait of Hormuz, is not the result of Iran’s lawful exercise of its right of self-defense. Rather, it is the direct consequence of the destabilizing actions of the United States in launching aggression against Iran and undermining regional security.”

As for the fresh ‘inside the Strait’ view offered by the Iranian war correspondent below, PressTV describes the dramatic clip as “A field documentary from the heart of the Persian Gulf and the Strait of Hormuz, which shows vessels that remain silent – yet are targeted by the IRGC if they shift even a few meters.”

A field documentary from the heart of the Persian Gulf and the Strait of Hormuz, which shows vessels that remain silent—yet are targeted by the IRGC if they shift even a few meters.

Follow https://t.co/B3zXG73Jym pic.twitter.com/XBqz6bWwq0

— Press TV 🔻 (@PressTV) March 12, 2026

Authored by Jeff Eager via RealClearPolitics,

Seattle, which is home to Amazon and Microsoft, currently employs some 193,000 well-compensated Washingtonians working in the tech sector. One major reason that Seattle emerged as the first big tech hub outside of California is obvious: It is the only West Coast state with no state income tax. Its state constitution forbids an income tax. High wage workers and entrepreneurs seeking a piece of the relatively laid back, outdoors-focused Pacific Northwest lifestyle can move to Washington without taking a state-mandated pay cut.

For the progressive Democrats who dominate state politics in the Pacific Northwest, money in the pockets of anyone other than the government and its political allies is wasted. To grab more of it, legislative Democrats in Washington are pushing through an income tax in the guise of a “millionaire’s tax” that would levy a 9.9% tax on incomes over $1 million. Just yesterday, as the “millionaire’s tax” neared the finish line in the Washington legislature, former Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz announced he and his wife have relocated from Seattle, where they lived for 47 years, to Miami. Florida has neither a state income tax nor a state income tax masquerading as a “millionaire’s tax.”

The constitutionality of the bill rests on progressives’ expectation that the Washington Supreme Court will completely abandon decades of precedent deeming income taxes unconstitutional. The expectation may not be unfounded: Five of nine justices were appointed by Democratic governors. Democrats also voted down an amendment to forbid applying an income tax to lower income levels, signaling the “millionaire’s tax” is likely to become a “thousandaire’s tax” if Democrats get their way.

What makes this proposed tax truly egregious, however, is its attempt to stop voters from having any say in it. The Democrats’ tax bill includes a necessity clause that precludes a voter referendum that could overturn the new income tax. So long as the majority-progressive-appointed state Supreme Court goes along, progressives will have upended 90 years of constitutionally prohibited income taxes while shielding it from a vote of the people.

Additionally, Washington progressives have taken a brazen step to undermine local governance in the state. The state house just passed a bill giving unelected bureaucrats appointed by the governor the power to remove any elected sheriff in the state based on vague guidelines, overriding local voters’ ability to select their own law enforcement. The move is an effort to exert progressive control of sheriffs in rural parts of the state who have questioned unpopular and difficult-to-enforce laws, such as COVID restrictions and gun regulations.

Not to be outdone by its neighbor to the north, Oregon’s progressive governance is also thumbing its nose at the will of the voters. The Beaver State, which has made itself into an economic backwater, has long levied high state income taxes, driving businesses and people who earn money for a living out of state. (The state’s second largest business, the $12 billion Dutch Brothers coffee chain, left the state last year, taking its corporate tax revenue with it.) The state’s economy, always tenuous, is now crumbling. Oregon’s unemployment rate of 5.2% is third worst in the nation, better than only California (5.5%) and New Jersey (5.4%). Layoffs since the beginning of 2025 are comparable to job losses during the Great Recession.

Oregon progressives charge forward undaunted. The Democratic legislative supermajority voted in February to disconnect Oregon’s tax code from the federal code so the state can continue to tax job-creating business investment at the higher rate eschewed by D.C. Republicans’ Big Beautiful Bill. The disconnect will not help attract the investors needed to stabilize Portland’s cratering downtown real estate market, where values, when buyers can be found, are a fraction of what they were five years ago. Investors recently rated Portland as the worst place in the country to invest in real estate other than Hartford, Connecticut. 

Punitive rates of income taxation are not enough for Oregon Democrats. For the past year, they’ve tried to muscle through the largest tax increase in state history. It is a deeply unpopular package consisting of fuel tax increases to pay for more unionized transportation workers and a doubling of the state payroll tax to fund public transportation – even though the state is shedding jobs at an historic rate and such a massive payroll tax will only make things worse.

Those increases, which would hit consumers’ wallets directly, fomented a tax revolt among Oregon’s left-leaning and normally placid electorate. It took Gov. Tina Kotek and the backroom persuasion of the Service Employees International Union two legislative sessions, including the longest special session in state history, to eke out passage of the tax increases in the face of overwhelming public opposition.

Kotek then waited to sign her signature bill to try to deprive opponents of the ability to collect signatures to repeal it. That tactic backfired spectacularly; opponents collected nearly 250,000 signatures from an electorate of 3 million voters in weeks, setting the tax hike on a path to near-certain defeat this November.

Not having learned their lesson, Oregon Democrats are again trying to frustrate voter involvement by moving the date of the repeal vote from November to May, so that Kotek, who is up for reelection, and other Democrats, need not appear on the same ballot as their radioactive tax increase. This is in spite of the fact that the voter repeal petition signed by so many Oregonians specifically said the ballot measure was to be voted on in the November election. 

Pacific Northwest progressives’ crusade against allowing the voters a direct say in their schemes is ironic. In 1902, Oregon was one of the first states in the union to adopt voter initiatives and referenda to supplant, in the eyes of that era’s progressives, the corrupt and elite legislators blocking the popular will. Washington state joined not long after.

Yet, today’s progressives are the elites in Washington and Oregon, dominating every function of state government and culture. Their rule depends on seizing an ever-increasing share of the resources of private citizens to distribute among progressives’ sprawling and union-dominated political coalitions.

And despite their obvious policy failures and responsibility for crumbling state economies, Pacific Northwest progressives have decided that the will of the people no longer matters. Voters cannot be permitted to stand in the way of the elite definition of “progress.”

Jeff Eager is an attorney, former mayor of Bend, Oregon, and author of “Oregon Roundup” on Substack.

The national media has begun to take note this week that the Iran War is expected to dominate the midterm conversation. This is especially after Republican Sen. Rand Paul’s recent warnings. As we reported, he said days ago midterm elections could be “disastrous” if the Iran war persists into a quagmire. 

“Already, we are behind the eight ball as far as the electoral process,” Paul had told Fox Business. “I think if you add in high gas prices, high oil prices, and if we are still bombing Iran with kinetic action — people don’t want to call it war — if there’s still kinetic action that causes oil to be over $100, I think you’re going to see a disastrous election,” the libertarian senator added. 

If the war continues into the summer and even the fall, this would further raise real concern for US Vice President JD Vance as he eyes the 2028 presidential election. The longer it goes, the more likely that Republican voters would turn on the White House.

Since Trump’s Operation Epic Fury started, there are reports that Vance has canceled some public appearances.

But there were some instances Friday and this week of him being in front of the camera, fielding some difficult questions from reporters. Importantly, he avoided a particular question over his personal views of the Iran war. Here’s how it went:

US Vice President JD Vance is pressed several times by reporters today to respond to comments made by President Donald Trump earlier this week that he was less enthusiastic about launching a war with Iran.

“The president and I and the entire senior team are talking about the options” in the Situation Room, Vance responds.

“It’s important for the president of the United States to talk to his advisers without” those advisers “running their mouths,” he adds, without directly answering the question or denying the premise.

Reports have mounted of Vance expressing concern about the US finding itself in a protracted conflict with Iran.

One thing is for sure: just like Trump, Vance had while on the campaign trail eloquently articulated the need to stay out of foreign quagmires which don’t ultimately serve Washington’s interest or which can be deemed America First. 

Vance smiles as a reporter points out that Trump said he was relatively unenthusiastic about striking Iran pic.twitter.com/YPJ8633KIw

— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) March 13, 2026

Like Trump, he has critiqued America’s ‘forever wars’ in places like Iraq or Afghanistan. And of course, recent history shows that Bush’s 2003 Iraq invasion and long bloody occupation was a big reputational black eye for the Republican Party for many years after, paving the way for an Obama presidency from 2009 to 2017.

In the case of the Iran war, which Trump has called an “excursion” – if the US can’t find a way to extricate itself soon while giving off perceptions of ‘victory’ – then it could prove politically very costly not just for Republicans in the midterms but even for the future presidency in 2028 and beyond.

Vice President JD Vance on what he told President Trump before the Iran War began:

“It’s the most classified space anywhere in the world. I hate to disappoint you, but I’m not gonna tell you what I said in that classified room.” pic.twitter.com/F8pzKDdhNe

— The American Conservative (@amconmag) March 13, 2026

This would especially be the case if US action in Persia morphed into a ground war. With such foreign interventions and ‘wars of choice’ – the pattern is the longer the conflict goes, the more unpopular it becomes among voters at home.

In 2009, Gen. Anthony Zinni (US Marine and retired head of US Central Command) warned about getting into war with Iran:

“If you follow this all the way down, eventually I’m putting boots on the ground somewhere. And like I tell my friends, if you like Iraq and Afghanistan, you’ll love Iran.”

Remembering Gen. Anthony Zinni’s 2009 warning about a war with Iran:

“If you follow this all the way down, eventually I’m putting boots on the ground somewhere. And like I tell my friends, if you like Iraq and Afghanistan, you’ll love Iran.” pic.twitter.com/2ObGZg4cdU

— Matt Duss (@mattduss) March 13, 2026

There have been several reports this week, and as Operation Epic Fury is about to enter week three, that Trump’s advisers are looking for a politically expedient offramp, even though the Commander-in-Chief himself hasn’t shown signs the US will back off its military campaign.

With Vance, if he can give off public signs that he is indeed “skeptical” over the Iran war, then this might actually help him among many MAGA voters.

In the meantime, probably moments like the below won’t help things…

TRUMP: “When (the war) is over the economy will bounce right back.”

KILMEADE: “When are you gonna know when it’s over?”

TRUMP: “When I feel it in my bones.” 🤔 🤷🏼 pic.twitter.com/vAmKZ0Pgrj

— The Tennessee Holler (@TheTNHoller) March 13, 2026

New Mexico’s $70 billion sovereign wealth fund is making a major push to attract advanced technology industries to the state, betting that sectors such as nuclear fusion, defense systems, and advanced manufacturing can generate both financial returns and local economic growth, according to Bloomberg.

A centerpiece of the effort is a proposed $1 billion research and manufacturing campus by startup Pacific Fusion near Albuquerque. The company is working to commercialize nuclear fusion, the reaction that powers the sun and stars, though practical power generation remains years away. To help support the effort, the New Mexico State Investment Council has committed hundreds of millions of dollars to venture capital funds that invest in fusion companies, signaling that capital will be available if firms choose to build and expand in the state.

The strategy reflects a broader overhaul of New Mexico’s in-state investment program. Over the past three years, the fund has allocated about $1.8 billion to dozens of venture capital managers willing to invest in local opportunities, with roughly one out of every five private-equity dollars directed toward the initiative since 2022.

Officials say the goal is to back industries where New Mexico has structural advantages, including aerospace, national security technology, and energy innovation. The state hosts major federal research hubs such as Los Alamos National Laboratory and Sandia National Laboratories, as well as Spaceport America, where Virgin Galactic conducts commercial spaceflight operations. These facilities, combined with large tracts of sparsely populated desert land, have made the state attractive to startups developing capital-intensive technologies that require testing space and specialized infrastructure.

Bloomberg writes that defense technology is emerging as another pillar of the investment strategy. Startup Castelion, founded by former engineers from SpaceX, is building a large manufacturing campus in Sandoval County aimed at scaling production of hypersonic strike weapons. Such systems, capable of traveling at extremely high speeds and maneuvering in flight, are becoming a priority for the U.S. military as rival powers develop similar capabilities. The project is expected to generate hundreds of jobs and significant economic activity in the region, illustrating how venture-backed defense startups are increasingly tied to national industrial policy.

The initiative also aligns with a broader shift in venture capital toward sectors tied to national security, supply chains, and heavy industry. As the U.S. government emphasizes competition with China and the rebuilding of domestic manufacturing capacity, investors are channeling more money into energy infrastructure, aerospace systems, and defense technologies rather than purely software companies. For states with abundant land and research institutions, this shift may create new opportunities to host large-scale technology projects.

Still, the approach carries risks. Earlier versions of New Mexico’s local investment program struggled to deliver returns and lost more than $500 million on past deals, raising concerns about mixing economic development goals with investment decisions. State officials say the redesigned program is intended to avoid those pitfalls by prioritizing financial performance while still encouraging venture firms to consider opportunities within New Mexico. Early results show modest returns so far, though most of the investments remain too young to fully evaluate.

Ultimately, the state is betting that attracting companies at the frontier of emerging technologies could reshape its economic landscape. Projects such as Pacific Fusion’s proposed campus and Castelion’s weapons facility illustrate the ambition behind the strategy: using the state’s oil wealth to seed industries that could define the next generation of energy and defense technology, while positioning New Mexico as a hub for advanced innovation.

Authored by Steve Watson via Modernity.news,

When a 7-year-old’s heartfelt sketch promoting equality gets twisted into “racism” by leftist school officials, it’s a chilling sign of how far indoctrination has gone—now finally overturned in a resounding First Amendment victory.

This case exposes the hypocrisy at the heart of progressive education: punishing a child for daring to change “Black Lives Matter” into a message of universal value, all while claiming to champion inclusion.

In 2021, at Viejo Elementary School in California, a first grader identified as BB created a simple drawing after her class learned about Martin Luther King Jr. and “Black Lives Matter.” The artwork showed four oval shapes in shades from orange to brown, representing friends holding hands, with the words “Black Lives Mater” above and “any life” below.

A 7-year-old California girl drew four oval figures in colors ranging from orange to brown — her friends holding hands — and wrote “any life” above them. Her school principal called it racist. Now a federal appeals court has ruled she had a First… https://t.co/Bo88Q46X9U

— The Washington Times (@WashTimes) March 11, 2026

BB gifted it to a black classmate in a show of friendship. The child thanked her and showed no signs of offense. But the child’s mother complained to Principal Jesus Becerra, writing, “My husband and I will not tolerate any more messages given to our daughter because of her skin color. As the administrator we trust you know the actions that need to be taken to address this issue.”

Becerra confronted BB, telling her the drawing was “not appropriate” and “racist,” according to her account. He allegedly forced an apology, banned her from recess for two weeks, and prohibited her from giving drawings to classmates—without notifying her parents.

BB didn’t even fully understand “Black Lives Matter,” but added “any life” because she believed “all lives matter.” This innocent twist on the slogan clashed with the school’s apparent BLM doctrine, turning a gesture of friendship into a so called ‘microaggression’.

The family eventually sued the Capistrano Unified School District in 2023, but a lower court dismissed the case, with U.S. District Judge David O. Carter ruling that BB’s drawing “trampled on her classmate’s right to be left alone in school” and, remarkably, that First Amendment protections didn’t apply to such young students.

2/ B.B. was in first grade when she drew this picture after a classroom lesson on MLK. The principal called it “racist” and “inappropriate,” banned her from giving out drawings, and made her sit out of recess for two weeks. The family challenged these unfair punishments. pic.twitter.com/H3uyNgwyr9

— Pacific Legal 🗡⚖️ (@PacificLegal) March 10, 2026

More about the 9th circuit decision: https://t.co/5pnd0v9kCL

— Pacific Legal 🗡⚖️ (@PacificLegal) March 10, 2026

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reversed that nonsense on March 10 of this year, affirming that constitutional rights don’t vanish at the school door—even for first graders. “In sum, elementary students’ speech is protected by the First Amendment,” the three-judge panel stated in an unsigned opinion.

The court referenced the 1969 Supreme Court case Tinker v. Des Moines, emphasizing that schools must prove actions are necessary to prevent disruption. 

“Age is relevant as younger students are more vulnerable than students who are approaching adulthood. But, as all students, including elementary school students, have First Amendment rights, the school has the burden, under the Tinker balancing test, of showing that its actions were reasonably undertaken to protect the safety and well-being of its students,” the judges ruled.

This sends the case back to the lower court to examine if Becerra’s response was justified. He denies calling the drawing inappropriate or racist and claims no punishment occurred, but the appeals decision puts the onus on the school to back that up.

Pacific Legal Foundation, representing BB pro bono, celebrated the win. “The First Amendment requires schools to meet a demanding standard before punishing student speech,” said PLF attorney Caleb Trotter.

“The court made clear that schools cannot simply label a child’s message inappropriate and impose discipline without showing that punishment was necessary to prevent disruption,” Trotter added.

The drawing itself—a colorful symbol of unity—has become an icon in the fight against overreach.

This incident highlights how leftist dogma infiltrates classrooms, where straying from approved narratives like BLM invites backlash. Schools plastered with BLM posters and lessons pushed one viewpoint, then branded a child’s attempt at broader equality as offensive—exposing the intolerance beneath the surface.

Becerra’s actions smack of ideological enforcement, prioritizing political correctness over a 7-year-old’s pure intentions. It’s a reminder that radical leftist influences in education aim to stifle free thought early, molding kids into compliant echo chambers.

Yet this ruling pushes back, reinforcing that individual liberty trumps bureaucratic control. Parents now have stronger ground to challenge such abuses, ensuring schools teach facts, not force-fed propaganda.

BB’s story is a triumph of innocence over indoctrination. Her drawing wasn’t racist—it was the opposite, a child’s vision of true equality. The court victory safeguards that spirit, proving the Constitution protects even the youngest voices.

Your support is crucial in helping us defeat mass censorship. Please consider donating via Locals or check out our unique merch. Follow us on X @ModernityNews.

The second week of the U.S.-Israeli war against Iran is coming to a close, with no visible off-ramp yet emerging, even as the White House continues to project victory. Goldman now expects the disruption in the Strait of Hormuz to persist for three weeks, a timeline that suggests further intensification of what the IEA has already described as an unprecedented global energy shock.

Focusing on the Strait of Hormuz chokepoint, data from UBS and Goldman desks show that flows through the critical waterway remain muted by the end of the week.

Current situation in the Hormuz and Gulf area:

Oil & gas tankers passing through the Strait of Hormuz, in number of ships, entering and exiting the Gulf

Crude loadings by ports in the Middle East (Mb/d)

Iran’s crude loadings by port (Mb/d)

Map of oil & gas infrastructure in the Persian Gulf

Iranian attacks on vessels (direct & attempted)

Map of ships’ locations when struck in the Gulf region since early March

Summary of attacks on energy infrastructure

In addition to UBS, Goldman’s tracking of Persian Gulf exports also shows limited activity through the strait.

The estimated total hit to oil flows from the Persian Gulf stands at 16 mb/d (16 times larger than the peak April 2022 hit to Russian oil production).

According to S&P Global, only 22 tankers crossed the Strait of Hormuz since March 1, with most tankers operating with AIS signals off.

With an incoming energy shock, the analysts show which countries have the largest buffers, as well as the countries with the least.

Details on the 32-nation IEA SPR dump.

Both notes only suggest that paralysis in the critical waterway is set to persist into next week. Even if the IRGC’s conventional military capabilities have been severely degraded, the more immediate threat to commercial vessel traffic in the waterway is the IRGC’s asymmetric warfare, which includes low-cost kamikaze drones and naval mines.

More in the full notes available to pro subs.

Authored by James Howard Kunstler,

Don’t lose your shit over mines in the Strait of Hormuz and the oil price shooting up. Iran has many thousands of mines. But something has to lay them out in the water. Iran has no more naval ships. They have small boats. The US can see everything moving on the surface, or sitting at docks. We are blowing them up methodically. The news outlets who want the US to fail in this operation (because: Trump) want you to think that we had no plan for dealing with this problem. That’s not so.

There are very few mines actually laid so far. Tankers are not going through the Strait of Hormuz because their captains are nervous. Their ships and their cargos are worth millions and the insurance costs millions. So, they’re waiting in place, hanging back. The US still has work to do destroying Iran’s shoreline defenses of missile and drone launch sites. Iran is firing all they’ve got left. Whenever they launch something, we see the geo-location on our satellites and radars. The mobile launchers are a little trickier because, obviously, they shoot and move. But they don’t always move fast enough, and there isn’t an endless supply of them.

The US Navy decommissioned its four Avenger-class minesweeper ships in the Persian Gulf in September, 2025, but replaced them with more agile Littoral Combat Ships (LCSs) capable of countering submarines and clearing mines. Two LCS ships — USS Santa Barbara and USS Canberra — quietly deployed in March 2025.

An LCS uses an Airborne Laser Mine Detection System and an Airborne Mine Neutralization System via helicopter. In the water, it uses mine-hunting sonar and the Unmanned Influence Sweep System — all operated from unmanned surface vessels. The unmanned sweep vehicle triggers magnetic, acoustic, or combination mines, with the LCS at a safe distance.

The LCS vessels are armed with an 11-cell SeaRAM launcher for point defense that fires Rolling Airframe Missiles — fast, radar-guided missiles designed to knock down incoming anti-ship missiles and drones at short range. They also carry Longbow Hellfire missiles with updated software and hardware specifically to counter drones. The Longbow Hellfire uses radar-guided technology enabling it to engage targets through battlefield clutter, with a range of up to eight kilometers — giving the LCS the ability to engage drones before they get close. The LCS ships will be accompanied by Arleigh Burke-class destroyers equipped with Aegis and full missile defense suites for protection against the full spectrum of Iranian threats.

The oil markets are extremely sensitive to any changes in the oil environment, and war induces the most extreme changes.

Even outside of war, weird things happen.

April 20, 2020, was the apex of Covid-19 paranoia when everyday life was shutting down all over Western Civ.

The price of West Texas Intermediate (WTI) crude oil futures — specifically the May 2020 contract, which was expiring the very next day — crashed to an historic low of negative $37.63 per barrel.

That is, sellers were literally paying buyers to take oil off their hands. By the following day, April 21, prices had rebounded back into positive territory, though still at very depressed levels around $10–$15 per barrel.

The current situation with oil in the $100 range is not going to be a one-day event, but it won’t last forever, either, so do your deep-breathing exercises and calm down.

Of course, in America right now, a seditious news media will take every opportunity to induce exquisite anxiety in the public-at-large to deflect from the order-of-battle that President DJT is carrying out to 1) improve America’s geopolitical position and relations, and 2) to defeat the forces both external and domestic that seek to wreck the country.

Which is why you might see that the next move in the order of battle will be against the wrecking crew in our own country, including the political figures behind the decade-long conspiracy to undermine the president, the administrative rogues running the “resistance” in government agencies, the Lawfare ninjas queering the justice system, and the big money that funds the hundreds of NGOs attempting to instigate a color revolution here.

I have visions of perp walks and indictments coming in on the zephyrs of spring.

It looks just now like Majority Leader John Thune and his RINO herd will trample the SAVE Act (election reform) into failure. But consider that Mr. Trump’s FBI has had more than a month to analyze the Fulton County, Georgia, ballot evidence from the 2020 election (while only last week it seized the Maricopa County, AZ, records, and for all we know the agency also has 2020 ballot evidence from Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Nevada, too).

So, prepare for the public to be shocked and amazed at what has been discovered, and expect to see a sharp attitude change among embarrassed US Senators who will be compelled to come on-board for election reform.

Somewhere in all that, you might expect Cuba to fall — a momentous event, actually, considering the cumulative mischief Cuba’s government has provoked all over the western hemisphere since 1958. We don’t even have to do anything to make it happen, just respond in the aftermath with emergency food and fuel relief, and perhaps some help averting the vengeful slaughter of the old Castro governing network. We don’t want a bloodbath there.

The AI bubble and data center buildout have helped catapult equity markets to new highs (pre-Middle East conflict), minting a record number of 401(k) millionaires. However, beneath the surface, hardship withdrawals from 401(k) plans have also climbed to a record, reinforcing the view that the K-shaped economy is becoming more entrenched.

Vanguard’s How America Saves 2025 report shows that hardship withdrawal activity “increased to a new high” of 6% in 2025, up from 4.8% in 2024 and about 2% before the pandemic.

The increase marks the sixth straight annual rise since Congress eased the rules in 2018 by removing the requirement that participants first take a 401(k) loan. Vanguard said the median hardship withdrawal was about $1,900 for avoiding foreclosure or eviction (36%), paying medical expenses (31%), and covering tuition (13%).

“Given that it’s now easier to request a hardship withdrawal and that automatic enrollment is helping more workers save for retirement, especially lower-income workers, a modest increase isn’t surprising,” the Vanguard report said.

The report noted, “For a small subset of workers facing financial stress, hardship withdrawals may serve as a safety net that may not otherwise have been available without plan-implemented automatic solutions.”

The report shows the K-shaped economy is continuing with no end in sight as the cost-of-living crisis rages on, forcing those with the weakest financial profiles to tap into 401(k)s and retirement accounts just to stay afloat.

“Withdrawing from your 401(k) has become one of the easiest ways to access excess capital,” Shelby Rothman, founder of EnJoy Financial, told CNBC Select.

Rothman said, “Nearly half of Americans don’t have $1,000 for unexpected expenses — no emergency fund, no available credit. Nothing.”