"The Best Mix Of Hard-Hitting REAL News & Cutting-Edge Alternative News On The Web"
June 28, 2025
White House Celebrates 'Big Win' After U.S. Supreme Court Limits Local Activist District Judges From Issuing Nationwide Injunctions That Counteracts Presidential Authority
On June 27, 2025, The White House published the articleA BIG WIN: Supreme Court Ends Excessive Nationwide Injunctionscelebrating the legal wins SCOTUS has granted not only to the Trump Administration but to the last 5 presidential terms of lawsuits where the local activist judges were directly counteracting the legal actions of the duly elected President. The case,Trump v. CASA, Inc. (24A884)is about birthright citizenship and was filed in the states of Washington and New Jersey. SCOTUS wrote:
Because universal injunctions likely exceed the equitable authority that Congress has granted to federal courts, the Court grants the Governments applications for a partial stay of the injunctions entered below regarding the implementation and enforcement of President Trumps Executive Order No. 14160, but only to the extent that the injunctions are broader than necessary to provide complete relief to each plaintiff with standing to sue.
Attorney General Bondi stated the "birthright citizenship" case will be decided in October, 2025. In the interim, they are focusing on removing illegal aliens from our country. In addition, these criminals can now legally be deported to 3rd countries that will accept them. President Trump reminds us that the "birthright citizenship" law was written to legitimize the children of slaves after the Civil War. It was NEVER meant to legitimize the children of illegals in our country.
AG Bondi stated five courts are responsible for 35 out of the 40 "nationwide" injunctions: California, Washington, Massachusetts, Maryland, and DC. With today's SCOTUS decision, those "nationwide" injunctions are struck down and the Trump Administration can proceed with enacting the will of the people.
Parents challenging the Montgomery County Board of Educations introduction of certain LGBTQ+-inclusive storybooks, along with the Boards decision to withhold parental opt outs from that instruction, are entitled to a preliminary injunction.
Schools discovered that when they gave the parents the option to remove their children from being exposed to LGBTQ+ perversion, the vast majority of parents withdrew their children. So, the schools doubled down by removing the ability of parents to withdraw their children which resulted in the lawsuit SCOTUS just ruled upon. Now parents have the national right to opt their children out of the LGBTQ+ perversion and the woke schools can no longer force our children to be exposed to this perversion against the wishes of the parents.
The first, Barbara v. Trumpon birthright citizenship was filed in District Court D, New Hampshire with docket #1:25-cv-00244. This lawsuit was filed on behalf of 3 non-US-citizens currently residing in the US:
"Barbara" a Honduran citizen living in New Hampshire since 2024 with a pending asylum application. Her husband is also NOT a US citizen or lawful permanent resident. Barbara is currently pregnant and wants her child to be a US citizen.
"Susan" a Taiwanese citizen currently residing in Utah. She has a student visa but no information is given on its status since she's been here 12 years. Her husband is not a US citizen or lawful permanent resident. She "worries" that her most recent child will be denied citizenship because her parents are not US citizens although her 3 other children are US citizens regardless of their parent's non-US-citizen status simply because they were born in the US.
"Mark" is a Brazilian citizen currently residing in Florida. He has been here 5 years and is applying for lawful permanent status due to family ties. His wife, who is NOT a US citizen, recently gave birth to their child.
The lawsuit then attempts to identify the "impact" to their plaintiffs and "other families." It claims children born of persons in the US illegally are "entitled" to US citizenship. It claims the EO would create a "subclass" (as if their parents aren't already in the "subclass" of ILLEGAL ALIENS). It claims the EO disproportionately affects "children of color." It correctly identifies that the children will be subject to the SAME Immigration Laws as their ILLEGAL parents to include arrest, detention, and deportation. Just because their parents did not take them "home" to the country of their citizenship does NOT make deporting them to a country where they have never visited unjust. The list of things the children born to ILLEGAL ALIENS won't be able to have/do goes on and on in the filing.
This lawsuit is absolutely absurd, in my opinion. How many other countries allow people in their country illegally to give birth to "citizens" of their country and then use the birth of that child to skip the legal immigration process?
The other lawsuit with an update at LAWFARE is theAFL-CIO v. Department of Laborwhich was filed February 5, 2025 in District Court, DC with docket #1:25-cv-00339 had their preliminary injunction request denied. The suit claims DOGE is moving so fast they are violating laws. They claim that DOGE will be granted access to sensitive data violating the Privacy Act as well as the Administrative Procedure Act. The temporary restraining order they seek has been denied. The lawsuit is full of lefty language and hyperbole about what DOGE will/can do with the information they are being given. What the lawsuit focuses on is Mr. Elon Musk being a "civilian" in charge of the operation. What they seem to forget is that DOGE is a governmental organization under the purview of the President.
The lawsuit claims that government employees sensitive data will be revealed. BUT, when I worked for the school district, my employment information, including my salary (along with everyone else employed by the school district) was PUBLISHED IN THE NEWSPAPER! When I and other teachers questioned the publication of our PERSONAL data, we were informed we were government employees and the PUBLIC had a RIGHT to know what our salaries were. Yet this lawsuit now claims the PUBLIC DOES NOT have a right to know this information?
Restrict DOGE from having access to Department of Labor files
Find DOGE guilty ofnot acting "in accordance to law" by threatening termination for not following lawful DOGE orders as well as to find the DOGE orders "unlawful"
Find DOGE guilty ofnot acting in accordance with the Confidential Information Protection and Statistical Efficiency Act.
Find DOGE guilty ofnot acting in accordance with the Privacy Act.
Find DOGE guilty of making rules without proper procedure
Also named Count 6 (but is actually Count 7), find DOGE's actions as "arbitrary and capricious"
My goodness! No wonder the PI was denied! The sheer amount of hyperbole included in this lawsuit should have it tossed out before it even saw the inside of a courtroom!
Finally, on June 27, 2025, the White House published the articleICYMI: Cheapest Summer Gas Prices in Four Yearswanting everyone to know that we are seeing the cheapest summertime gas prices since 2021. I don't know about 2021; but, I do have evidence that this is true between 2023 and 2025. I have done a bit of traveling over the past few years. When I could, I stopped for gas at Sam's Club where I have an account. When I saw the title of this article, I went to Sam's online and pulled my gas receipts as far back as I could (2023). While I have gas prices from the other stations I used, I did not record which stations they were. I just recorded the price and how many gallons I purchased. Different stations have different methods of computing gas prices. Over the past 3 years, I got gas at Sam's Club in NV, TX, and TN. I visited other states, but did not obtain gas at Sam's Club. Here are the Sam's Club yearly averages:
As you can see from the chart above, in the 3 states where I used Sam's Club to obtain gas, the prices dropped from year to year with the lowest prices over this 3 year period currently in 2025. So, I have to agree with the White House on gas prices going down. On the other hand, if you are in an area where prices have not gone down, I'd be wondering if you are in a liberal run city/state and suggest you start looking for price gouging or state/county/city increases in taxes on fuel!
ANP Fundraiser:
Dangerous, Derogatory, Harmful, Unreliable!
Those are some of the exact words used by Googles censors, aka 'Orwelliancontent police,' in describing many of our controversial stories.Stories later proven to be truthful and light years ahead of the mainstream media. But because we reported those 'inconvenient truths' they're trying to bankrupt ANP.
