BOISE, ID — A federal court dismissed a lawsuit that sought to let a commercial daycare exclude Idaho children based on their parents’ private medical decisions, delivering Attorney General Raúl Labrador and the State of Idaho a complete win in defense of the Idaho Medical Freedom Act.
The Idaho Medical Freedom Act, signed by Governor Little in April 2025, prohibits businesses, schools, and government entities from denying a service, a job, or access to a public building because of a private medical decision a person made for themselves or their child. Businesses remain free to run their operations, and to speak their minds, on every other front.
“Parents make medical decisions for their children. A daycare does not,”said Attorney General Labrador.“The Legislature protected that choice in the Medical Freedom Act, and the court upheld it. Daycares can tell parents what they believe about vaccines and health, but they cannot turn a child away because of a parent’s medical decision. That decision belongs to families, and I’m pleased the court agreed.”
Before getting into the details it is worth noting, the indications of this historic victory were visible recently when the German people, not the politicians, the people, completely rejected the government claim that Russia was behind the drone issue at the Leipzig airport. The propaganda effort backfired spectacularly. The best campaigner for the opposition was Chancellor Friedrich Merz himself.
The Alternative for Deutschland (AfD) party has won a historic election, stamping a desire for commonsense back into the German political system. The AfD platform nationally is very simple: Normalization of German-Russian relations, a halt to all immigration, the recommissioning of the Nord Stream 1 and 2 gas pipelines and an exit from the European Union. In short, a return to sovereignty and economic commonsense.
Germany’s Alternative for Germany scored a victory in today’s Saxony-Anhalt election, with exit polls showing the party winning 44.5 percent of the vote and finishing well ahead of its rivals. Yes, the result marks the strongest performance by a conservative nationalist party in a German state since World War II.
The U.S. Bureau of Labor and Statistics (BLS) has released the August jobs report [DATA HERE]. The pundits and analysts are stunned as the results of +162,ooo jobs added is three times their expectations.
The prior months also had strong upward revisions as June was revised up by 11,000, from +20,000 to +31,000, and the change for July was revised up by 44,000, from -23,000 to +21,000. With these revisions, employment in June and July combined is 55,000 higher than previously reported.
The Department of Justice’s Office of Legal Counsel has issued a legal opinion clarifying that when a state chooses to participate in the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) and the Supplemental Security Income (SSI) programs, all agencies within that state — not only those that administer TANF or SSI benefits — must report individuals known to be not lawfully present in the United States to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).
“Congress wrote this requirement plainly,” said Assistant Attorney General T. Elliot Gaiser of the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel. “When a state chooses to participate in TANF, it accepts the obligation to report illegal aliens in the United States.
Tax dollars intended to help vulnerable Americans should not perversely encourage illegal entry into the United States, but rather should reinforce our laws and our borders.”
“Our clarification does not impose new obligations on states,” said Deputy Assistant Attorney General Joshua Craddock of the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel and author of the opinion. “It simply restores the original meaning of the statute Congress enacted and ensures that DHS receives the information it is legally entitled to. States that accept TANF funding must abide by federal law, and failure to comply may lead to serious consequences, including loss of program funding.”
First, Americans enjoyed the right to buy food directly from the farmer, slaughtered on the farm, since the beginning of the nation, and federal law recognized that explicitly until 1967, exempting all farm-to-table direct sales from all inspection & processing laws. The custom exemption laws were meant to expand that exception to religious communities, but has been construed by the bureaucracy to be limited to that group instead.
Second, the food inspection laws that effectively give BigAg a monopoly on processing, creating a costly barrier for small farmers, were never intended to regulate the small farmer at all. The food inspection laws were designed to regulate grocery store sold food from slaughterhouses.
Third, the law only prohibits the sale of food unapproved by a federal inspector if that food is required to be inspected by law in the first place.
Fourth, the inspection law references food sold in commerce and send to a slaughtering house; what was intended to only regulate slaughterhouses has been misconstrued by bureaucrats to require all meat to go to slaughterhouses instead.
Fifth, the discretion afforded the Secretary under the law, the original limited intention of the word “commerce”, the original limited intention of slaughterhouse-specific inspection regime, the original intention of a broader custom exemption, and the Constitutional constraint on the meaning & application of these laws affords the President the authority to make on-site slaughtered beef available for direct farm-to-table, farmer-to-customer sales, as the law long intended and the Constitution protects.
Barnes can be wacky sometimes, like trying to convict Tyler before the trial. On matters like this, though, I trust him to tell the truth as he knows it. ABN
‘Organizations that abuse taxpayer money to prop up political causes for the benefit of donors should not receive federal agency grants.’
A coalition of more than two dozen state attorneys general is asking the Trump administration and Congress to suspend federal grants to a national science organization for its ongoing left-wing climate activism.
In a Thursday letter to several Trump cabinet secretaries and congressional committees, the 25 Republican AGs raised concerns about recent actions by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM). The academies — which receive taxpayer-funded federal grants —have sought to advance leftist policies in recent years, as the Capital Research Centerreported.
One avenue of activism highlighted by the state AGs is the NASEM’s role in the controversial fourth edition of the Reference Manual on Scientific Evidence, which the nonprofit produced alongside the taxpayer-funded Federal Judicial Center (FJC). While designed to provide objective guidance to federal judges on science-related matters before the bench, the manual was found to contain a “Reference Guide on Climate Science” stacked with references and citations to left-wing climate activists and advocates.
And consumers will have the right to buy that food RETURNED TO THEM. These rights do not belong to the government. Growing and selling your own food is an inalienable right. Period. ABN
New York’s Amish community is issuing an ultimatum to state bureaucrats: leave us alone or we’re packing up our buggies for greener pastures.
The threat has been sparked by a vaccine mandate fight that the 25,000 strong religious community is taking all the way to the Supreme Court.
It takes place as state Health Department officials continue to slap thousands in fines on tiny, one-room parochial Amish schools which have refused to comply with a Cuomo-era vaccine decree.
BERLIN. According to Forsa’s current „trend barometer“ for the news channels ntv and RTL, the AfD is in first place in eastern Germany (excluding Berlin) by a large margin. From the Baltic Sea to the Ore Mountains, 43 percent would vote for the opposition party if there were federal elections on Sunday.
Behind them are the Left Party with 16 percent and the CDU with 13 percent. The Greens and the SPD are tied with nine percent each. All other parties remain below the five percent threshold, including the FDP with three percent.
The United States Department of Justice has released a formal Office of Legal Counsel memorandum opinion clarifying that law-abiding Americans may carry constitutionally protected firearms into publicly accessible post offices for self-defense without violating federal criminal law. The opinion, dated August 12, 2026, and authored by Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General Lanora C. Pettit, interprets 18 U.S.C. § 930(a), the longstanding prohibition on possessing firearms or other dangerous weapons in federal facilities, as not reaching ordinary self-defense carry in post offices open to the public.
Section 930(a) makes it a federal crime to knowingly possess a firearm in a federal facility, defined as a building or portion thereof owned or leased by the federal government where federal employees regularly perform official duties. Post offices clearly qualify under this definition. However, subsection (d)(3) creates an explicit exception for the “lawful carrying of firearms or other dangerous weapons in a Federal facility incident to hunting or other lawful purposes.”
The OLC concludes that self-defense constitutes a paradigmatic “lawful purpose.” Critically, the opinion holds that no special nexus is required between the reason a person enters the post office and the reason for carrying the firearm. Simply entering a public post office while lawfully armed for self-defense falls within the statutory exception.
