Judges Blister Trump’s Thugs For Blatant Extra-Constitutional Violations:
“A federal judge appears likely to side with Mark Kelly in the Democratic senator’s case alleging the Pentagon is violating his First Amendment rights through its effort to punish him over his urging of US service members to refuse illegal orders.
During a high-stakes hearing in Washington, DC, on Tuesday, Senior US District Judge Richard Leon seemed troubled by the Trump administration’s suggestion that he take the unprecedented step of expanding existing loopholes to First Amendment protections for active-duty service members to also cover retirees such as Kelly.
“You’re asking me to do something the Supreme Court or the DC Circuit has never done,” Leon told a Justice Department lawyer defending the Pentagon’s efforts. “That’s a bit of a stretch.”
The First Amendment issues featured prominently during Tuesday’s proceeding, with Leon at one point asking whether he even needed to wade into the other “novel” legal questions at the center of the lawsuit to issue the type of order Kelly has requested.
“I’m not sure the court has ever seen a First Amendment case of this nature involving a sitting US senator and a retired service member,” he said.But Leon appeared unconvinced by that argument and agreed with Kelly’s claim that the alleged “chilling effect” could eventually be widespread.
Noting that the Arizona senator is not the first retired service member to serve in Congress and speak out against the Pentagon, he expressed concern that all retired service members in the House or Senate would be unable to properly legislate if they can’t offer their opinions.
“Is it your position that they’re not supposed to offer their position” on military matters, he asked Bailey. “How are they supposed to be able to do their job?”
A federal judge on Monday blocked the end of protections that have allowed roughly 350,000 Haitians to live in the U.S., dealing President Donald Trump’s immigration agenda another legal, though perhaps temporary, setback.
U.S. District Judge Ana Reyes in Washington granted a request to pause the termination of Temporary Protected Status for Haitians while a lawsuit challenging it proceeds. The termination, which was set for Tuesday, “shall be null, void, and of no legal effect,” she wrote.
Reyes said in an 83-page opinion that plaintiffs were likely to prevail on the merits of the case, and that she found it “substantially likely” that Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem preordained her termination decision because of “hostility to nonwhite immigrants.”
The judge, an appointee of President Joe Biden, said Noem did not have “unbounded discretion” and was required to consult with other agencies on conditions in Haiti. The ruling cited Noem’s own words three days after announcing an end to Haitian protections, calling for a travel ban from Haiti and “every damn country that has been flooding our nation with killers, leeches, and entitlement junkies.”
A federal judge in Oregon has temporarily limited federal officers’ use of force on peaceful protesters outside the Immigration and Customs Enforcement building in Portland.
The decision Tuesday applies only outside the federal facility in Portland.
U.S. District Court Judge Michael Simon’s ruling blocks federal officers from using “chemical or projectile munitions,” including pepper balls, tear gas and other crowd control munitions “unless the specific target of such a weapon or device poses an imminent threat of physical harm to a law enforcement officer or other person.”
This follows an unprovoked firing of tear gas into a peaceful ‘Labor Against ICE’ rally in Portland:
Federal officers use crowd control munitions as demonstrators protest outside the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement building in Portland on Jan. 31, 2026. The demonstration at the ICE facility was part of an earlier protest, dubbed “Labor Against ICE,” which began this afternoon at Elizabeth Caruthers Park in Portland’s South Waterfront neighborhood.
Eli Imadali / OPB
“Our nation is now at a crossroads,” Simon wrote in the 22-page temporary restraining order. “We have been here before and have previously returned to the right path, notwithstanding an occasional detour. In helping our nation find its constitutional compass, an impartial and independent judiciary operating under the rule of law has a responsibility that it may not shirk.”
The judge’s ruling also blocks federal officers from firing munitions or using weapons directed “at the head, neck, or torso of any person, unless the officer is legally justified in using deadly force against that person.”
In a statement, Portland Mayor Keith Wilson praised the judge’s ruling.
“Federal agents have used unconscionable levels of force against a community exercising their constitutional right to free expression,” Wilson said. “Peaceful civic participation isn’t a threat, and these new restrictions on federal agents are an important first step in ending the violence and harm we’ve witnessed in our community.”
Portland has been under a sort-of ‘low-key’ ICE siege for months now.
Which reminds me, I simply can’t wait for the thin gruel that Chuck Schumer ‘gets’ in his negotiations with Trump on placing limits on ICE. Ask for next-to-nothing, get even less.
We Have Our Brand New Energy Mascot!:
Climate activists criticized the latest attempt by the administration to boost the image of the dirtiest fossil fuel. Illustration: Guardian Design / Getty Images
Have I mentioned lately that satire is dead?
Tobacco Tax Increases–The Right Way To Go In Delaware?:
Under his income package, the state would rake in $81 million more money by increasing some business formation fees, raise the cap on money generated from abandoned assets and take in another $18.9 million in higher tobacco fees.
Some organizations, like the American Lung Association, American Heart Association and the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, have cheered the move to raise tobacco prices. But some tax experts say that tobacco taxes aren’t ideal for raising state revenue because they are regressive and rely on a shrinking consumer base.
Adam Hoffer is director of excise tax policy at the Tax Foundation, a nonpartisan tax policy nonprofit organization.
He said excise taxes are different from broad funding sources like income taxes, sales taxes and property taxes, because they are specialty charges put on a targeted set of goods.
Tobacco, alcohol and fuel have been historically known as the “big three” excise taxes, but it has widened over recent years to include recreational marijuana products and sports betting.
Hoffer and other tax policy experts say one of the concerns with states relying on excise taxes is that they generate the most amount of money from the people who can least afford it.
Kids, we all know that being ‘non-partisan’ is not the same as ‘having no agenda’. But my question is: Why not push for higher tax brackets on those making the most money? Now is pretty much the best time to do this. Yeahyeah, I know, rhetorical question.
What do you want to talk about?