The Supreme Court majority (6-3) has granted the DOJ request to put on hold a Boston-based US District Judge ruling that DHS policy to remove illegal aliens to so-called third countries is unlawful.  The process of rapid deportation will continue while the matter is called before the Supreme Court for oral arguments in December (ruling in ’27).

[SOURCE LINK]

The three DEI Justices, Sotomayor, Jackson and Kagan did not support the ruling.  They would have denied the ability to deport illegal aliens to third-party countries.

REUTERS – […] The Supreme Court previously sided with the administration in the legal challenge, suspending a preliminary order that Murphy issued earlier in the case halting the removals. In another win for the administration, the Supreme Court subsequently lifted limits the judge had imposed to protect a group of men from being sent to South Sudan.

(more…)

In 1986, the federal government built a computer database called SAVE, Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements. The purpose was simple – when a noncitizen applies for public benefits the state govt can check whether the applicant was legally in the country. The SAVE system worked. Nobody talked about it for 39 years.

In March 2025, President Trump signed an executive order expanding SAVE’s use. The order told DHS to use the SAVE system to verify citizenship of registered voters and people registering to vote. The order instructed the Social Security Administration to share its records with DHS for that purpose.

Two months later, DHS launched the modified version. Two changes: (1) it now checks Social Security numbers against SSA databases. (2) it allows state and local authorities to run bulk searches; the entire voter roll at once.

Blue states sued. Slowly the cases went through the lower courts, then the appellate courts, until finally the Supreme Court ruled 6-3 the SAVE system can be used in the midterm election [RULING HERE]. “While the ruling gives the Department of Homeland Security authority to use the database ahead of the midterms, the court’s conservative majority noted that the impact of the ruling was blunted by another federal law — the National Voter Registration Act — which prohibits states from purging voters within 90 days of the election.” {ABC link}

If the states use the SAVE system, but do not purge their voter rolls for 2026 based on the results, the system still can be of value. “the justices’ action came so close to the upcoming election that the records can only legally be used on a case-by-case basis — and not for the type of bulk voter-roll matching that some states want to conduct.” {Politico link}

(more…)

President Trump expresses the frustration many Americans are feeling with the Lawfare tactics to block sovereign national policy, and the Supreme Court acquiescence.

PRESIDENT TRUMP – “Republicans just got another bad decision from the United States Supreme Court, one that the Court System took forever to give, and then blamed it, in part, on no time left to implement a solution to our totally CORRUPT and out of control Mail-In voting “disaster,” which is a laughing stock all over the World, and where we are the only country that has to endure such a Nation Destroying SCAM.

Justices Alito and Thomas, legends both, strongly disagreed with this horrible, highly political, ruling. It is a big loss for Republicans, and America itself, and makes cheating by the Radical Left “Dumocrats,” on Mail-In Ballots, a much easier thing to do – And now they have an open field to do so!

The Supreme Court has really let our Country down! Certain Justices are petrified of these crazed and depraved Democrats and are totally unable to show the courage necessary to save our America.

Their horrible decision on Tariffs will be costing the U.S.A., for many years to come, Trillions and Trillions of Dollars. They didn’t even state, “money paid does not have to be paid back,” much to the benefit of entities that truly hate our Country, and have been RIPPING IT OFF FOR YEARS, unnecessarily costing us, immediately, Billions of Dollars.

Likewise, the Supreme Court’s Decision on Birthright Citizenship is a complete and total disaster for America, and has already led to massive corruption with respect to “citizenship” in our Country. The damage done to America is incalculable, and they know this, just as everyone else does – It is an irreparable and unrecoverable harm! The Court’s inability and unwillingness to do the right thing for our Country will go down, in a very negative way, in the annals of History.

This Supreme Court is bullied and cajoled by the Radical Left into making decisions that have set America back at least a hundred years. These are not the people I interviewed to serve on the United States Supreme Court, they are merely a shell of their original selves, a Court that is costing the United States Trillions of Dollars with shockingly bad rulings that are of such magnitude that it won’t be easily possible for our Country to recover or heal.

It is a Court that will go down as having rendered some of the most destructive, hurtful, and damaging decisions in our Country’s history. It is not easy for me to write this criticism of the United States Supreme Court – it will likely cost me dearly for years to come – but I feel it my obligation and duty, as President, to do so for the America we love! Thank you for your attention to this very important matter. God bless the U.S.A.”

~ President DONALD J. TRUMP

(more…)

Somehow Chief Justice John Roberts found that a single person who walks past the White House every month and doesn’t like the proposed appearance of the ballroom has some standing to sue and block construction. Go figure. Roberts also decided that the Obamacare mandate wasn’t a tax.

Roberts joined with the minority DEI judges in his position [RULING HERE]. However, the majority decision was against the woman having standing to sue. Therefore, the lawsuit was dispatched and the building can continue.

SCOTUS BLOG – […] On Monday, a divided court granted the government’s request for a stay, permitting construction to move forward while the litigation continues in the lower court. The majority’s opinion focused primarily on its conclusion that the National Trust likely does not have standing to challenge the project. The trust had submitted a declaration from Alison Hoagland, a member who lives in Washington, D.C., and said that she visits the area where the White House is located approximately once per month. Hoagland, who has “expertise in historic architecture,” claimed that the project caused “‘injuries’ to her ‘aesthetic, cultural, and historical interests’ because she finds the ‘scale,’ ‘height,’ and ‘massing’ of the government’s design distasteful.” But those are not the kind of “concrete” and specific injuries required to bring a lawsuit, the majority explained.

(more…)

When the South Carolina congressman travelled to Wisconsin in 2024 to visit with poll workers and not candidates, no one seemed curious about the intent.  When South Carolina had the opportunity to redistrict that same congressman, the professional republicans in the palmetto state protected him.

Now the organizer of the AME Church network of poll workers appears on NBC to say at the first available opportunity the Democrats should pack the court with another four leftist judges to ensure all of the constitutional restraints are removed from the judiciary.  Yep, that’s James Clyburn.

Clyburn begins his remarks in this segment by decrying Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas for not adhering to the manipulative racial expectations of his position.  Clyburn then advocates for adding as many justices as needed in order to advance his agenda.  WATCH:

[Transcript] – KRISTEN WELKER: Welcome back. Joining me now is Democratic Congressman James Clyburn of South Carolina. Congressman Clyburn, welcome back to Meet the Press.

REP. JAMES CLYBURN: Well, thank you very much for having me back.

(more…)

The same federal judge who had her injunction overturned by the Supreme Court has again blocked the United States Postal Service requirement for mail-in ballots.  The Lawfare communists refiled their lawsuit today, the judge ruled within hours. [Ruling Here]

The issue is at the core of leftist manipulation of elections as the blue states refuse to comply with DHS and Social Security cross-checks for voter eligibility prior to sending out mail-in ballots.  The blue states do not want their voter rolls cross-checked to verify citizenship status and voter eligibility. We can only guess the number of illegal aliens on the voter rolls.

(VIA AP) – A federal judge on Thursday halted — at least for now — attempts to implement President Donald Trump’s executive order limiting mail voting.

The move stalled the directive for a second time only about a week before the first mail ballots are due to be sent out for the rapidly approaching midterm elections. U.S. District Court Judge Indira Talwani blocked the government from implementing the order for two weeks.

The case could soon be appealed back to the Supreme Court, days after the justices handed down a procedural decision that allowed the administration to move ahead.

(more…)

At the core of the issue is the administration executive order that requires states to send their voter rolls to the U.S. Postal Service for mail service for mail-in ballots.  The USPS would then cross-check with DHS and Social Security records to ensure each of the names and addresses were eligible to vote before mailing them a ballot.

Obviously, the blue states -Democrat States- are refusing to comply with the USPS rule, the reason is simple.  A significant number of the blue state registered voters are not eligible voters (illegal aliens etc.)  If the states allowed cross-checking of their voter rolls the American people would see just how many illegal voters are registered; this would significantly reshape the U.S. election.  The scale of the issue is up for debate.

That said, the anxiety forms the baseline of opposition where blue states are suing in every court possible to stop the postal service requirement. The Trump executive order also directs the Postal Service to block delivery of mail-in ballots entirely from states that refuse to share voter lists with the federal government.

Today the Supreme Court ruled 6-3 [RULING HERE] that lifted one of the lower court injunctions that was filed as a lawsuit in Massachusetts. The court ruled that Boston-based Judge Indira Talwani (Obama appointee) engaged in “a string of speculations to find this suit justiciable.”

[SOURCE]

The three DEI justices (Brown-Jackson, Kagan, Sotomayor) all dissented from the majority opinion, because of course they did.

WASHINGTON – […] More than 20 blue states sued to block Trump’s order, saying it threatens to upend their planning for the midterms in November and intrudes on their authority to administer elections.

(more…)

Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts has stayed (removed) the lower court injunction blocking the White House from proceeding with Ballroom construction.  The White House can now continue building the ballroom and national security complex.

[SOURCE]

{Background Story Here}

(more…)

The White House has filed a petition with the Supreme Court asking for an immediate administrative stay of the DC District Court injunction blocking construction of the Ballroom and Military complex [SEE FILING HERE].

The baseline argument is very solid on several grounds, including standing. A single complaint from a woman who walks by the White House once per month and holds the opinion of the complex as an eyesore is not standing to block the construction. Additionally, several agencies of the Executive Branch stand in support of the construction on presidential security, safety and national security grounds.

[SOURCE]

The structure extends five stories deep into the ground, and is built with hardened concrete, steel, and rebar; protective missile-resistant columns, roofs, and beams; drone proof ceilings and roofs; and bullet, ballistic, and blast-proof glass. … The Project includes bomb shelters, state-of-the-art hospital and medical facilities, protective partitioning between all areas of the building, top secret military structures and equipment, military-grade venting, a single integrated air conditioning and heating system, sniper nests, and a drone port on top, elevated by the structure of the ballroom, to protect the White House and surrounding region from aerial attacks — “one of the nation’s largest emerging threats.”

President Trump has shared additional attachments to the filing, via Truth Social:

Secretary of State Marco Rubio: “In my work with heads of state and foreign ministers, I am frequently hosted in reception facilities that are visually impressive and reflective of the wealth and beauty of the nations I am visiting. In the United States, by contrast, we currently lack the ability to hold large events of a similar magnitude on White House grounds for those same heads of state and foreign dignitaries.

(more…)

Supreme Court Justices Amy Coney Barrett and Elena Kagan appeared on Capitol Hill to request a ten percent increase in Supreme Court budget spending.  The intent is to hire additional security to protect themselves from the outcome of their rulings.

Justice Barrett talked about the harrowing threats to herself and her family as the Court wants to bolster security.  The overall appearance before congress is slightly ironic considering the increase in threats is a direct consequence of court rulings that have opened borders, blocked deportation, stalled law enforcement, granted illegal aliens rights to citizenship and generally undermined our nation’s domestic tranquility.

Sorry, but my opinion on the matter has adjusted to new information.  The Supreme Court should have to live in the reality of the world they judicially create. No additional public security should be afforded.  They have a security detail that supersedes any security level a taxpaying American citizen might be afforded.

No expanded security details should be afforded to government employees, just to avoid the consequences of their ideology.

Mrs Barrett and her family can carry self-defense firearms, wear protective vests and worry about their security in the parking lot of the local supermarket just like we do.  Not to be obtuse, but the Constitution equally applies.

(more…)