Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Conservative Media Blasts ‘Skullduggery’ in NC Redistricting Battles

North Carolina continues to hold pride of place as Ground Zero in the national debate over partisan gerrymandering. And a conservative news site based in Charlotte is out with a provocative assessment of the latest developments in state and federal courts, where fresh but separate battles are churning along over both the congressional map and state legislative boundaries.

"The Left's latest skullduggery could have a devastating impact on public confidence in an electoral system already fraught with partisan bickering and scandal, according to state GOP leaders," Liberty Headlines reports. And if Democratic judges "manipulate the State Constitution to expand their party's power in the legislative branch, we are looking at a full-blown constitutional crisis," it quoted state Sen. Ralph Hise, chairman of his chamber's Redistricting and Elections Committee, as asserting. "That's the end of the rule of law."


Common Cause is the lead plaintiff in a suit seeking to compel another redrawing of state House and state Senate maps, after an earlier lawsuit by the advocacy group resulted in maps that helped Democrats score significant, but not takeover, gains in Raleigh in the midterm election. The group got a boost when voters elected a new state Supreme Court justice, Anita Earls, who was once a litigator arguing for a redistricting overhaul in the state.

Common Cause is also lead plaintiff in another case, to be argued before the Supreme Court in coming months, arguing that North Carolina's map of 13 House districts is an unconstitutionally partisan gerrymander. (With one race still in limbo because of suspected election fraud, the delegation has just three Democrats again this year even though the party garnered 48 percent of the statewide vote in House races last fall.)

"Even assuming liberal Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg is healthy and present for the decision, the swapping of chronic swing-voter Anthony Kennedy for the (presumably) more conservative Brett Kavanaugh likely shifts the high court to the right," Liberty Headlines concludes. "Kennedy had sided with the court's liberal wing in previous redistricting cases.


Read More

Is the U.S. at "War" with Iran?

A woman sifts through the rubble in her house in the Beryanak District after it was damaged by missile attacks two days before, on March 15, 2026, in Tehran, Iran.

(Photo by Majid Saeedi/Getty Images)

Is the U.S. at "War" with Iran?

This question is not an exercise in double-talk. It is critical to understand the power that our Constitution grants exclusively to Congress, and the power that resides in the President as Commander-in-Chief of the military.

The Constitution clearly states that Congress has the power to declare war. The President does not have that power. The War Powers Resolution of 1973 recognizes that distribution of power by saying that a President can only introduce military force into an existing or imminent hostility if Congress has declared war or specifically authorized the President to use military force, or there is a national emergency created by an attack on the U.S.

Keep ReadingShow less
Healthcare Jobs Surge Mask a Productivity Crisis—and Rising Costs
person sitting while using laptop computer and green stethoscope near

Healthcare Jobs Surge Mask a Productivity Crisis—and Rising Costs

Healthcare and social assistance professions added 693,000 jobs in 2025. Without those gains, the U.S. economy would have lost roughly 570,000 jobs.

At first glance, these numbers suggest that healthcare is a growth engine in an otherwise slowing labor market. But a closer look reveals something more troubling for patients and healthcare professionals.

Keep ReadingShow less
A large group of people is depicted while invisible systems actively scan and analyze individuals within the crowd

Anthropic’s lawsuit against the Trump administration over a Pentagon “supply-chain risk” label raises major constitutional questions about AI policy, corporate speech, and political retaliation.

Getty Images, Flavio Coelho

Anthropic Sues Trump Over ‘Unlawful’ AI Retaliation

Anthropic’s dispute with the Trump administration is no longer just about AI policy; it has escalated into a constitutional test of whether American companies can uphold their values against political retaliation. After the administration labeled Anthropic a “supply‑chain risk”, a designation historically reserved for foreign adversaries, and ordered federal agencies to cease using its technology, the company did not yield. Instead, Anthropic filed two lawsuits: one in the Northern District of California and another in the D.C. Circuit, each challenging different aspects of the government’s actions and calling them “unprecedented and unlawful.”

The Pentagon has now formally issued the supply‑chain risk designation, triggering immediate cancellations of federal contracts and jeopardizing “hundreds of millions of dollars” in near‑term revenue. Anthropic’s filings describe the losses as “unrecoverable,” with reputational damage compounding the financial harm. Yet even as the government blacklists the company, the Pentagon continues using Claude in classified systems because the model is deeply embedded in wartime workflows. This contradiction underscores the political nature of the designation: a tool deemed too “dangerous” to be used by federal agencies is simultaneously indispensable in active military operations.

Keep ReadingShow less