Category: Judicial Watch
Ilhan Omar accuses ICE of ‘racially profiling’ her son during traffic stop
Democrat Rep. Ilhan Omar of Minnesota was quick to play the race card after her son was pulled over by ICE in a traffic stop Sunday.
Omar’s son was pulled over by ICE after making a stop at Target, and he was asked to produce his identification, according to the congresswoman’s account. Despite Omar’s accusations of racial profiling, her son was let go by ICE after producing his passport.
‘There’s nothing worse than when a person comes in and does nothing but b***h.’
“They are racially profiling,” Omar said of the ICE raids in Minnesota. “They are looking for young men who look Somali that they think are undocumented.”
“Yesterday, after he made a stop at Target, he did get pulled over by ICE agents,” Omar added. “Once he was able to produce his passport ID, they did let him go.”
RELATED: ‘The voices in her head are not real’: Senator Kennedy issues a hilarious rebuke of Jasmine Crockett
Christian Monterrosa/Bloomberg via Getty Images
Omar’s political allies quickly came to bat for her and her son, doubling down on the narrative that he was pulled over for racial reasons. Notably, neither law enforcement nor the congresswoman have clarified why her son was pulled over in the first place.
“Congresswoman Omar’s son was pulled over by ICE while he was following the law, on his way home from Target,” failed Democrat vice presidential candidate Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz said in a post on X. “This isn’t a targeted operation to find violent criminals, it’s racial profiling.”
Despite the left decrying alleged racial motivations, President Donald Trump has maintained his criticisms of Omar and Somali migrants in Minnesota, citing their lack of assimilation and the disproportionally high rates of fraud.
“There’s nothing worse than a person that comes in and does nothing but b***h,” Trump told Blaze News in the Oval Office Friday, “and comes from a place where she shouldn’t be telling us what to do. She shouldn’t be telling us. And everybody agrees with me.”
“What’s happening in Minnesota with Somalia, where billions of dollars are being stolen like candy from a baby, we’re not going to let that go on.”
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
FBI stops radical pro-Palestinian New Year’s Eve terror plot: Report
Federal authorities reportedly disrupted a New Year’s Eve terror plot by arresting several alleged members of a pro-Palestinian extremist group.
The FBI told Fox News Digital that the bureau captured four alleged members of an extremist subgroup of the Turtle Island Liberation Front.
‘The group also planned to target ICE agents and vehicles.’
FBI Director Kash Patel described the arrested individuals as members of “a radical offshoot” that is “motivated by pro-Palestinian, anti-law-enforcement, and anti-government ideology.”
According to Patel, the suspects were planning coordinated improvised-explosive-device attacks on New Year’s Eve at five locations across Los Angeles, California.
Federal agents arrested the suspects in Lucerne Valley, where they were allegedly preparing to test explosive devices ahead of the attack, Fox News Digital reported.
The arrested individuals were charged with conspiracy and possession of a destructive device.
Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images
Patel announced that FBI New Orleans arrested a fifth individual believed to be tied to the subgroup who was also allegedly planning a separate attack.
The FBI director credited investigators and law enforcement partners for saving “countless lives.”
FBI Los Angeles is expected to hold a press conference on Monday to provide additional details to the public.
RELATED: How Trump can dismantle far-left extremist networks
Pam Bondi. Photo by Alex Wong/Getty Images
“After an intense investigation, the Department of Justice, working with our @FBI, prevented what would have been a massive and horrific terror plot in the Central District of California (Orange County and Los Angeles),” Attorney General Pam Bondi stated. “The Turtle Island Liberation Front — a far-left, pro-Palestine, anti-government, and anti-capitalist group — was preparing to conduct a series of bombings against multiple targets in California beginning on New Year’s Eve. The group also planned to target ICE agents and vehicles.”
“PROTECT THE HOMELAND and CRUSH VIOLENT CRIME. These words are not slogans, they’re the investigative pillars of this FBI,” FBI Deputy Director Dan Bongino said.
“Thank you to our dedicated law enforcement and DOJ partners for the collaborative effort. God bless America, and all those who defend Her [sic].”
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
When the State Polices Speech
The government may not silence conscience or conversation. The American experiment depends on this simple, yet increasingly threatened principle. And…
Trump promises ‘very serious retaliation’ after ‘ISIS attack’ that killed 2 US Army soldiers, 1 US interpreter in Syria
President Donald Trump promised “very serious retaliation” after an “ISIS attack” that killed two U.S. Army soldiers and one U.S. interpreter interpreter Saturday in Syria.
Fox News reported that a lone Islamic State gunman carried out the ambush, which also left three others wounded. Secretary of War Pete Hegseth said that “the savage who perpetrated this attack was killed by partner forces.”
‘Let it be known, if you target Americans — anywhere in the world — you will spend the rest of your brief, anxious life knowing the United States will hunt you, find you, and ruthlessly kill you.’
“We mourn the loss of three Great American Patriots in Syria, two soldiers, and one Civilian Interpreter,” Trump wrote on Truth Social, according to the cable news network. “Likewise, we pray for the three injured soldiers who, it has just been confirmed, are doing well. This was an ISIS attack against the U.S., and Syria, in a very dangerous part of Syria, that is not fully controlled by them.”
Trump added that “the President of Syria, Ahmed al-Sharaa, is extremely angry and disturbed by this attack. There will be very serious retaliation,” Fox News noted.
Trump also said Saturday to reporters outside the White House that “this was an ISIS attack on us and Syria. And again, we mourn the loss, and we pray for them and their parents and their loved ones,” the cable news network reported.
Hegseth added on X: “Let it be known, if you target Americans — anywhere in the world — you will spend the rest of your brief, anxious life knowing the United States will hunt you, find you, and ruthlessly kill you.”
Chief Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell said on X that the attack in the town of Palmyra “occurred as the soldiers were conducting a key leader engagement. Their mission was in support of ongoing counter-ISIS/counter-terrorism operations in the region. The soldiers’ names, as well as identifying information about their units, are being withheld until 24 hours after the next of kin notification. This attack is currently under active investigation.”
RELATED: Trump warns Israel about interference in Syria after deadly raid, airstrikes
The cable news network added that there are about 900 U.S. troops in Syria.
More from Fox News:
The U.S. had eight bases in Syria to keep an eye on ISIS since the U.S. military went in to prevent the terrorist group from setting up a caliphate in 2014, although three of those bases have since been closed down or turned over to the Syrian Democratic Forces.
On Monday, tens of thousands of Syrians flooded the streets of Damascus to mark the first anniversary of the Assad regime’s collapse.
Those celebrations came a year after former Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad fled the capital as rebel forces swept through the country in a lightning offensive that ended five decades of Assad family rule and opened a new chapter in Syrian history.
The Associated Press reported that Saturday’s attack on U.S. troops was the first to cause fatalities since Assad’s fall.
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
Border Patrol Chief Gives Update On When Feds Can Finally Deport Kilmar Abrego Garcia
‘We’re going to deport this individual’
Hunter Biden Laptop Update!
Judicial Watch Sues for FBI Records on Hunter Biden’s Infamous Laptop Judicial Watch Sues Boston Mayor for Details of Mariachi Band Press Conference Judicial Watch Sues for FBI Records on Hillary Clinton’s Brother, Tony Rodham Billions of Tax Dollars Spent in Failed Effort to Rebuild Afghanistan Judicial Watch Sues for FBI Records on Hunter […]
The post Hunter Biden Laptop Update! appeared first on Judicial Watch.
ROOKE: Gavin Newsom Talking About ‘Godson’ Proves He’s Not Qualified For Anything
‘if you are governing for a radical, often violent minority, that is disqualifying’
‘Send in the next guy’: Nicki Minaj savages Newsom over his desire to ‘see trans kids’
California Gov. Gavin Newsom, who polling indicates is the 2028 Democratic front-runner for presidential nomination, emphasized his support for gender ideology in a recent interview with the New York Times’ Ezra Klein.
Newsom’s radical remarks caught the attention not only of Republicans but of Trinidadian rapper Nicki Minaj, who suggested the governor’s views would alienate even mentally ill “trans” adults.
‘The Vance > The Gav Nots.’
In the interview published on Wednesday, Newsom told Klein that while he — like the supermajority of Americans — does not support male transvestites in women’s sports, he nevertheless wants “to see trans kids.”
“I have a trans godson,” Newsom said. “There’s no governor that’s signed more pro-trans legislation than I have, and no one has been a stronger advocate for the LGBTQ community.”
The “godson” whom the Democratic governor referenced in this and other defenses of his trans alliance is billionaire oil heir Natalia Williams, the 33-year-old great-granddaughter of oil tycoon J. Paul Getty who had her breasts removed and now calls herself Nats Getty.
Newsom’s goddaughter is “married” to male transvestite Giselle Getty, formerly Gregory Lazzarato.
An X account managed by the Republican National Committee said in a response to the governor’s comments subsequently shared by the GOP, “Gavin Newsom gushes about how he wants to see the gender mutilation of children.”
RELATED: ‘Not medicine — it’s malpractice’: Trump HHS buries child sex-change regime with damning report
Photo by Bob Riha Jr./Getty Images
Minaj was evidently among the multitude of people sickened by Newsom’s statement, writing, “Imagine being the guy running on wanting to see trans kids. Haha. Not even a trans ADULT would run on that. Normal adults wake up & think they want to see HEALTHY, SAFE, HAPPY kids.”
“GavOUT,” Minaj continued. “Send in the next guy, I’m bored.”
Minaj followed up her tweet with a message suggesting that Newsom thinks he’s Tom Cruise, but the difference is that “his next mission IS impossible.”
Normalcy advocate Robby Starbuck noted that if Minaj is going to troll Newsom “from now until 2028 then he has a big problem because Gavin’s counting on the black vote and Nicki has a big enough megaphone to let them know how evil Gavin’s policies are. Dude lets 13 yr old girls get their breasts cut off in his state.”
Newsom has ratified numerous bills pushing the radical trans agenda in his state, including:
- SB-107, making California a so-called sanctuary for child sex-rejecting mutilations;
- AB-1084, making it easier for transvestites to obtain inaccurate identification documents;
- AB-223, requiring any petition for a change of sex identifier by a minor to be kept confidential by the court; and
- AB-1955, banning school districts from requiring school officials to inform parents if a child begins to identify as “transgender.”
A Pew Research Center survey revealed earlier this year that 56% of Americans support a ban on sex-rejecting medical procedures for minors.
Whereas Minaj is highly critical of Newsom, she’s clearly sweet on the 2028 Republican front-runner, Vice President JD Vance.
“Vance is an assassin,” she wrote. “Don’t debate him. On anything. Quick as a computer. Maybe quicker. He’s the best blend I’ve ever seen of us&them.”
In a separate message, Minaj noted, “The Vance > The Gav Nots.”
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
‘Naked judicial activism’: Judge issues restraining order on ICE in Kilmar Abrego Garcia deportation case
The high-profile deportation case of Kilmar Abrego Garcia is once again in the spotlight after an “activist” judge once again temporarily threw a wrench in the Department of Homeland Security’s work.
On Friday, U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis issued an order barring immigration enforcement officials from detaining and deporting Garcia.
‘This order lacks any valid legal basis, and we will continue to fight this tooth and nail in the courts.’
Judge Xinis, who was appointed by former President Barack Obama, upheld requests from Garcia’s lawyers for a temporary restraining order against Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials, Newsweek reported.
Garcia was freed from immigration detention on Thursday after months of being in limbo, the Associated Press reported.
RELATED: Kilmar Abrego Garcia’s days in the US may be numbered after court’s latest ruling
Photo by Alex Wong/Getty Images
“For the public to have any faith in the orderly administration of justice, the Court’s narrowly crafted remedy cannot be so quickly and easily upended without further briefing and consideration,” Xinis wrote.
Garcia’s attorney, Simon Sandoval-Moshenberg, celebrated the news of the restraining order and his client’s release.
“Yesterday’s order from Judge Xinis and now the temporary restraining order this morning represent a victory of law over power,” Sandoval-Moshenberg said.
Department of Homeland Security Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin, who allegedly faced death threats from twin brothers from New Jersey earlier this week, told Newsweek that the decision was “naked judicial activism.”
“This order lacks any valid legal basis, and we will continue to fight this tooth and nail in the courts,” McLaughlin added.
Garcia, an illegal alien and alleged MS-13 associate living in Maryland, was deported to an infamous Salvadoran prison earlier this year before being returned to the United States for continued processing of his case.
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
This Supreme Court case could reverse a century of bureaucratic overreach
Washington is watching and worrying about a U.S. Supreme Court case that could very well define the future of American self-government. And I don’t say that lightly. At the center of Trump v. Slaughter is a deceptively simple question: Can the president — the one official chosen by the entire nation — remove the administrators and “experts” who wield enormous, unaccountable power inside the executive branch?
This isn’t a technical fight. It’s not a paperwork dispute. It’s a turning point. Because if the answer is no, then the American people no longer control their own government. Elections become ceremonial. The bureaucracy becomes permanent. And the Constitution becomes a suggestion rather than the law of the land.
A government run by experts instead of elected leaders is not a republic. It’s a bureaucracy with a voting booth bolted onto the front to make us feel better.
That simply cannot be. Justice Neil Gorsuch summed it up perfectly during oral arguments on Monday: “There is no such thing in our constitutional order as a fourth branch of government that’s quasi-judicial and quasi-legislative.”
Yet for more than a century, the administrative state has grown like kudzu — quietly, relentlessly, and always in one direction. Today we have a fourth branch of government: unelected, unaccountable, insulated from consequence. Congress hands off lawmaking to agencies. Presidents arrive with agendas, but the bureaucrats remain, and they decide what actually gets done.
If the Supreme Court decides that presidents cannot fire the very people who execute federal power, they are not just rearranging an org chart. The justices are rewriting the structure of the republic. They are confirming what we’ve long feared: Here, the experts rule, not the voters.
A government run by experts instead of elected leaders is not a republic. It’s a bureaucracy with a voting booth bolted onto the front to make us feel better.
The founders warned us
The men who wrote the Constitution saw this temptation coming. Alexander Hamilton and James Madison in the Federalist Papers hammered home the same principle again and again: Power must remain traceable to the people. They understood human nature far too well. They knew that once administrators are protected from accountability, they will accumulate power endlessly. It is what humans do.
That’s why the Constitution vests the executive power in a single president — someone the entire nation elects and can unelect. They did not want a managerial council. They did not want a permanent priesthood of experts. They wanted responsibility and authority to live in one place so the people could reward or replace it.
So this case will answer a simple question: Do the people still govern this country, or does a protected class of bureaucrats now run the show?
Not-so-expert advice
Look around. The experts insisted they could manage the economy — and produced historic debt and inflation.
The experts insisted they could run public health — and left millions of Americans sick, injured, and dead while avoiding accountability.
The experts insisted they could steer foreign policy — and delivered endless conflict with no measurable benefit to our citizens.
And through it all, they stayed. Untouched, unelected, and utterly unapologetic.
If a president cannot fire these people, then you — the voter — have no ability to change the direction of your own government. You can vote for reform, but you will get the same insiders making the same decisions in the same agencies.
That is not self-government. That is inertia disguised as expertise.
A republic no more?
A monarchy can survive a permanent bureaucracy. A dictatorship can survive a permanent bureaucracy. A constitutional republic cannot. Not for long anyway.
We are supposed to live in a system where the people set the course, Congress writes the laws, and the president carries them out. When agencies write their own rules, judges shield them from oversight, and presidents are forbidden from removing them, we no longer live in that system. We live in something else — something the founders warned us about.
And the people become spectators of their own government.
RELATED: Judges break the law to stop Trump from enforcing it
Photo by Jim WATSON / AFP via Getty Images
The path forward
Restoring the separation of powers does not mean rejecting expertise. It means returning expertise to its proper role: advisory, not sovereign.
No expert should hold power that voters cannot revoke. No agency should drift beyond the reach of the executive. No bureaucracy should be allowed to grow branches the Constitution never gave it.
The Supreme Court now faces a choice that will shape American life for a generation. It can reinforce the Constitution, or it can allow the administrative state to wander even farther from democratic control.
This case isn’t about President Trump. It isn’t about Rebecca Slaughter, the former Federal Trade Commission official suing to get her job back. It’s about whether elections still mean anything — whether the American people still hold the reins of their own government.
That is what is at stake: not procedure, not technicalities, but the survival of a system built on the revolutionary idea that the citizens — not the experts — are the ones who rule.
