Category: Congress
America’s Silent Kidney Crisis
The New York Times investigation into “organ transplant tourism” exposes something more than merely deeply unsettling. Wealthy foreign patients are…
‘Absurd fraud’: Former Hochul minion declares NYC’s only GOP-held congressional seat unconstitutional
Democrats, ever desperate for one-party control, filed a lawsuit in October claiming that New York City’s only Republican-held congressional district was unconstitutionally drawn because it allegedly “dilutes black and Latino voting strength.”
The Staten Island plaintiffs, represented by the Washington, D.C.-based Elias Law Group, demanded that the map — which was approved by the Democrat-controlled state legislature and Gov. Kathy Hochul (D) in 2024 — be redrawn such that it’d be virtually impossible for Republican Rep. Nicole Malliotakis to defend her district.
‘This entire exercise is a cynical attempt to enact an illegal partisan gerrymander under the guise of a voting rights case.’
Jeffrey Pearlman, a justice on the New York Supreme Court who was not only appointed by Hochul but previously served as her lawyer and chief of staff, delivered the plaintiffs a win on Wednesday, claiming that the configuration of New York State’s 11th congressional district is unconstitutional.
“It is clear to the Court that the current district lines of CD-11 are a contributing factor in the lack of representation for minority voters,” wrote Hochul’s former chief of staff.
While the Democratic plaintiffs proposed new gerrymandered district lines for the Hochul judge to adopt, he noted that the New York state Constitution leaves it to the legislature to correct the law’s legal infirmities in the event that a congressional map is invalidated by a court.
Rep. Nicole Malliotakis (R-N.Y.). Photo by Drew Angerer/Getty Images.
Accordingly he ordered the New York Independent Redistricting Commission to draw a new map by Feb. 6.
Days ahead of the ruling, Malliotakis told “The Point with Marcia Kramer” that the Democratic campaign to redraw the map was “ludicrous” and “an insult to the people of Staten Island and Southern Brooklyn, who had a Democrat, by the way, Max Rose, who represented them, and they fired this individual.”
“So they had a choice here between a Republican and a Democrat, and they decided they didn’t want the Democrat representing them anymore,” continued Malliotakis. “And here comes this Washington firm saying they don’t care about the will of the voter. They’re going to set it up so a Republican can never win and it’ll always be one-party rule.”
Aria Branch, a partner at the D.C.-based Elias Law Group, claimed that the decision was “a victory for every voter in New York’s 11th Congressional District who has been denied an equal voice.”
Hochul also lauded her former underling’s decision.
“The New York State Constitution guarantees the principles of fair representation, and New Yorkers in every community deserve these protections,” stated Hochul. “The court’s decision underscores the importance of these constitutional principles and directs the congressional map be redrawn by the New York Independent Redistricting Commission so impacted communities are fully represented and have a voice in our democracy.”
House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (N.Y.) characterized the apparent effort to disenfranchise Republican voters in New York City as “the first step towards ensuring communities of interest remain intact from Staten Island to Lower Manhattan.”
Rep. Mike Lawler (R) rejected Jeffries’ framing, suggesting the Hochul judge’s order amounted to an “absurd fraud” perpetrated against those “New Yorkers who demanded independent redistricting and overwhelmingly rejected partisan gerrymandering.”
Ed Cox, chairman of the New York Republican Party, similarly condemned the ruling.
“This was a partisan ruling made by a partisan judge in a case brought by a notoriously partisan attorney,” stated Cox. “Kathy Hochul and Albany Democrats did not alter this district when they had a chance in 2024. This entire exercise is a cynical attempt to enact an illegal partisan gerrymander under the guise of a voting rights case.”
The district Hochul’s former underling deemed unconstitutional has been represented by Malliotakis since 2021, when she beat her Democratic opponent in a landslide, 63.8% to 35.8%.
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
Democrats want to impeach Trump — but John James and Michigan can stop them, new ad says
Rep. John James, a Michigan Republican running for governor, has launched a new ad tying the fate of Trump’s second term and the America First agenda to James’ home state of Michigan.
On Thursday, James released an ad titled “Impeached,” claiming that Michigan, with its open U.S. Senate seat and four competitive House races, is “ground zero” in the fight to keep Congress under Republican control.
Recent polling indicates that James holds a commanding lead in the Republican primary and a slight edge in the general election in November.
The ad suggests that if Congress falls into the hands of the Democrats after the 2026 midterms, Trump will be “impeached” and his “Cabinet dragged before hearings led by AOC and Rashida Tlaib,” referring to Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) and Rep. Tlaib (D-Mich.).
In the ad, James, currently a Michigan congressman who has “backed President Trump every time,” makes the pitch to MAGA Michiganders that his election to be their next governor is vital to protecting Trump and his ability to continue implementing his policies: “If you care about President Trump, you must stand up for John James.”
In a press release given to Blaze News, James’ spokeswoman Hannah Osantowske stated: “This ad makes the stakes unmistakable. If Republicans lose Michigan, Democrats will move to impeach President Trump and grind the America First agenda to a halt. John James is the conservative fighter who can win — and who Michigan families can trust to hold the line.”
As of Thursday morning, Trump has made no endorsement in the Michigan gubernatorial Republican primary, though he previously endorsed James’ Senate and congressional campaigns and even referred to the Iraq War Army aviation officer as “legendary.”
Osantowske told Blaze News that James is “committed to earning” Trump’s endorsement once again. “John James is a proven winner. President Trump likes winners, and he remembers those who’ve been loyal,” she added.
Recent polling indicates that James holds a commanding lead in the Republican primary and a slight edge in a hypothetical three-way matchup against Democrat Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson and Democrat-leaning independent Mike Duggan in the general election in November.
The RealClearPolitics average currently has James ahead by 3.5 points.
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
Senators Urge DOJ To Probe ISIS-Linked Somali ‘Nonprofit’ After Omar Tried To Earmark $1M For It
Notably, Generation Hope MN founder Abdirahman Warsame’s older brother, Abdirizak Mohamed Warsame, was arrested in 2015 for alleged preparing to move to Syria to join ISIS, a terrorist organization.
46 House Republicans Help Democrats Defeat Measure Defunding ‘Activist’ Judges Boasberg, Boardman
Forty-six House Republicans joined their Democrat colleagues on Wednesday in defeating a bill amendment that would have stripped funding from two activist judges and the D.C. federal courts. Proposed by Rep. Chip Roy, R-Texas, as an amendment to an appropriations package considered by the House for the 2026 fiscal year, the measure sought to cut […]
Thune-Aligned Super PAC Sets Off-Year Fundraising Record With $180 Million Haul
The Senate Leadership Fund (SLF) in 2025 shattered its off-year fundraising record, pulling in $180 million as Republicans gear up for the midterm elections, the group announced Monday.
The post Thune-Aligned Super PAC Sets Off-Year Fundraising Record With $180 Million Haul appeared first on .
Washington, DC, has become a hostile city-state
The District of Columbia wasn’t supposed to be like this. Hard as it is to believe today, the capital was set apart as its own district not to make it an untouchable bureaucratic citadel, but to make it work for all Americans. Unattached to any one state and free from the control of any one constituency, our government was supposed to serve the whole country.
Decades of misunderstanding, however, have muddled this design. Federalization gives us a fighting chance of restoring it.
Perhaps the most prudent solution would be to subsume the District’s entities into the federal government.
Under the Articles of Confederation, the federal government resided in Philadelphia until a military mutiny prompted it to leave. With this in mind, the framers proposed an optional federal district.
Under the proposal, Congress could create a capital and be vested with “exclusive” legislative authority over it. This would put the government in a position to contemplate and sympathize equally with all Americans. The states approved. And so the framers’ proposal was ratified under Article I, Section 8, Clause 17 of the Constitution. Congress then placed the capital along the Potomac River, and D.C. was organized in 1801.
Confusion soon followed. Congress tried many approaches to local governance and settled on a semi-independent model, enacted as the D.C. Home Rule Act of 1973. This established a congressionally appointed judiciary and a popularly elected city council, mayor, and attorney general. Under home rule, D.C. could make its own law, albeit with congressional oversight.
The founders warned us about this model, however. They anticipated that self-governance would embarrass, impede, and endanger the federal government.
This failure predates Trump
Trump derangement syndrome has only vindicated this position. In 2017, D.C.’s attorney general joined litigation against Trump’s so-called Muslim ban. Then in 2020, D.C. painted a “Black Lives Matter” memorial along 16th Street NW, flipping an urban bird at the Trump White House. And in 2025, the District’s attorney general protested Trump’s public safety initiative, contesting his right to seize the Metropolitan Police Department and deploy the National Guard across the city.
One might overlook these obstructions if the District’s fierce independence enabled it to ensure safe and efficient self-governance. But that doesn’t describe D.C. In 2023, a Senate staffer traversing the northeast part of the city was knocked to the ground and repeatedly stabbed in the head and chest. Then in May 2025, two embassy interns were murdered outside the Capital Jewish Museum. The following month, a congressional intern was fatally shot in the Mount Vernon Square neighborhood.
Nor is partisanship the only problem. D.C. behaves almost as poorly when Democrats wield federal power. In April 2024, pro-Palestinian protesters erected an encampment at George Washington University (a federally chartered school). City officials refused to remove the protesters for two weeks even though their disruptions interfered with students’ final exam preparations.
Bringing the capital to heel will ultimately require legislation. There’s already a proposal to repeal home rule. It’s a great start, but the proposal doesn’t detail how D.C. would operate afterward — not a promising omission when Congress tends to be so ineffective.
Perhaps the most prudent solution would be to subsume the District’s entities into the federal government. Then Congress need not work from a blank slate by creating new bodies for local governance. Instead, D.C.’s city council could become an advisory body to recommend local laws. This would meet the Constitution’s requirement that Congress make the laws without requiring it to fuss over the minutiae of local governance.
This idea won’t appease locals who want equal electoral representation to that enjoyed by other Americans, if not greater. We know that D.C. residents (or, more accurately, the Democrats in their ears) seek D.C. statehood. But if it’s a state they’re after, then they should entertain retrocession or repeal the District’s charter. Illegitimatizing the Constitution to preserve the mock state is not the way to go.
Forcing the issue through the courts
Knowing that Democrats in Congress will object on these grounds to any discussion of federalization, we should use litigation to force a solution on this matter. The difficulty with litigation is finding a plaintiff — a D.C. resident who believes in a federal capital and whose case wouldn’t be easily dismissed by local judges seeking to avoid the issue. But with so many conservatives currently serving in D.C. under the Trump administration, now might be the time to bring a suit.
The right litigant has two ways to attack home rule — challenge D.C.’s lawmaking power or neutralize its prosecutorial authority. The lawmaking approach likely faces two objections. First, judges might question how Congress’ ultimate legislative authority under home rule meaningfully differs from exclusive authority under the Constitution. Second, they might raise the constitutional liquidation theory, which posits that the post-enactment tradition fleshes out constitutional indeterminacies.
RELATED: Six questions Trump and conservatives can no longer dodge in ’26
Photo by Joe Raedle/Getty Images
Neither objection holds water. For one thing, exclusive legislative authority means what it says — one body enacts the law. Using D.C.’s city council as a think tank wouldn’t violate this principle, because only Congress would oversee legislation from introduction to enactment. But home rule fails because Congress shares its authority with another body. In fact, a law could exist under home rule without Congress touching it at all. The Constitution doesn’t envision such an anomaly.
Relatedly, liquidation presupposes that a constitutional provision is ambiguous. But here, the framers couldn’t have written a clearer provision. Congressional authority over D.C. is exclusive; that means only Congress can exercise it. And so even though Congress has handed lawmaking power to D.C. on multiple occasions, viewing this abdication as indicative of the Constitution’s original meaning would only sanction congressional laziness and cowardice.
A limited win that still matters
The prosecutorial approach would open a more straightforward path to a more limited victory. The pitch is simple: The D.C. attorney general is a federal creation. And yet he is elected and can sue the federal government at will. This flouts the appointment process, as well as the president’s power to remove officers and direct executive-branch entities. Now would be the perfect time to press this argument, as the Supreme Court aims to clarify the president’s removal power later this term and the D.C. Circuit recently questioned whether “the District possesses an independent sovereignty that can give rise to an Article III injury from actions of the federal government.”
The only issue is that D.C. could still make law. But some of that law will be unenforceable if the attorney general cannot prosecute. Hence, a small win — but a win nonetheless.
Congress has subverted the Constitution by entertaining home rule. The results have been ugly and will get uglier. District residents will grow increasingly radical in their demands for self-governance. The framers, in their wisdom, didn’t create a sovereign D.C. — they bequeathed us a federal city to preserve a neutral national government. We should restore that vision.
Editor’s Note: A version of this article was published originally at the American Mind
