R Magic Brow

The U.S. Supreme Court sided Monday with President Donald Trump against a collection of Democrat-controlled states who sued to oppose his executive order restricting mail-in ballots.The highest court of the land found in a partisan 5-3 ruling that the states did not have standing to sue against the president's order and overturned a lower court order to block the restrictions in 23 states.'Only Democrat politicians and operatives would be upset about lawful efforts to secure American elections.' "This internal directive does not regulate the States' voter registration processes," read the order from the Supreme Court. "Nor does it impinge on the States' authority 'to create and enforce a legal code' for elections."However, the majority ruling warned that not all measures taken by the executive to implement the order will be necessarily lawful."On that score, time will tell," the majority said.The court's three liberal justices dissented from the ruling.The executive order from March directed the Department of Homeland Security to tabulate a list of citizens eligible to vote. It then called on the U.S. Postal Service to only accept ballots from people on the list.U.S. attorneys general from several Democrat states sued to stop the order on the basis that it would disenfranchise some voters who could vote lawfully."Only Democrat politicians and operatives would be upset about lawful efforts to secure American elections and ensure only eligible American citizens are casting ballots," read a statement from White House spokesperson Abigail Jackson in April.In her dissent Monday, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson accused the president of seeking to "foment chaos ahead of the November elections."Justice Sonya Sotomayor said the ruling only "postpones" the adjudication of the president's order."Today's decision does not address whether the President's attempts to interfere with States' administration of the November 2026 elections are lawful," wrote Sotomayor in a dissent joined by Justice Elena Kagan.RELATED: Appeals court unanimous in pivotal ruling on undated or misdated mail-in ballots "Nor does it suggest that the Executive Branch has any constitutional or statutory authority to implement the President's directives," they added.New York Attorney General Letitia James agreed with Sotomayor in her own statement on the ruling."This decision is a painful setback, but it will not be the final word," she wrote. "The right to vote is sacred, and no administration should be allowed to put that right in jeopardy by making it harder for eligible voters to cast their ballots."Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

A Thursday night WNBA game between the Atlanta Dream and the Los Angeles Sparks was briefly interrupted when one fan gave the players a blast from the recent past.Strangely enough, green dildos were thrown onto WNBA courts last season in the middle of games. Now a fan is bringing the viral trend back by launching yet another sex toy onto the court.In a video of the incident, Sparks star Cameron Brink kicked the toy away after it dropped in front of Jihyun Park, who was in the middle of a free throw. Dream star Angel Reese then pointed out the perpetrator, who was trying to flee the scene of his crime.Security was able to stop the man from leaving, but BlazeTV host Jason Whitlock doesn’t see the trend going away anytime soon.“I’m saying this in all seriousness. I have a source that says that will not be the last dildo thrown in the WNBA games as we close out the regular season and that dildos may start appearing in other sports,” Whitlock says, stifling laughter.“This is a protest of the heat that Sophie Cunningham’s been taking and the whole transgender issue,” he continues. “I’m seriously saying that, because I was told by this source yesterday ... ‘dildos will fly tonight,’ and they did,” he explains.“And they say they’re not going away,” he adds.Steve Kim notes that Reese was on top of it.“I’ve seen political assassination attempts where people weren’t that adamant about pointing out the shooter,” Kim says.“It’s really too bad she wasn’t in Dallas back in ‘63. We would have found out who killed JFK,” he adds.Want more from Jason Whitlock?To enjoy more fearless conversations at the crossroads of culture, faith, sports, and comedy with Jason Whitlock, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

A prostitution sting in Ohio nabbed the owner of the San Francisco 49ers, whose family is worth billions of dollars, according to police.46-year-old Jed York was arrested at about 9:30 a.m. on Sunday morning at the Wheat Hill Mobile Home Community in East Palestine.York agreed to donate the $160 confiscated during the arrest to the Mahoning Valley Human Trafficking Task Force.Police say York responded to a known prostitution website in Columbiana County, Ohio, and ordered up a prostitute for $140, according to the New York Post.While on the way to meet what he believed to be a prostitute for a sexual tryst, York was instead arrested by an agent from the Mahoning Valley Human trafficking Task Force.A representative for the trailer park said in a statement on Facebook that York was pulled over at the business, but that the trailer park was not part of the prostitution sting."This news of this arrest in our quiet community is just as shocking to us, as to the rest of you," the trailer park manager added. "While we support law enforcement in their efforts. We really have no other knowledge of the situation."York was initially arrested on charges of engaging in prostitution as well as possession of criminal tools, but the prostitution charge was reduced to disorderly conduct.He was ordered to pay a fine of $1,150 and to serve two days in jail after pleading no contest. York also agreed to donate the $160 confiscated during the arrest to the Mahoning Valley Human Trafficking Task Force.A spokesperson for the NFL told Forbes only that the league was "aware of the matter, which will be reviewed under the personal conduct policy."RELATED: Owner of adult bookstores in Texas allegedly ran prostitution and money laundering ring The 49ers told Forbes the incident was a "legal matter" that was resolved and the team would not be providing any further comment.The York family is believed to be worth about $8.5 billion, primarily from the valuation of the team.Jed York is originally from Youngstown, Ohio. He is married to Danielle Belluomini and has two sons with her.Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Anti-white agitpropist Karen Attiah appears to have gotten the last laugh with the Washington Post, despite dancing on the grave of Turning Point USA founder Charlie Kirk after he was assassinated last September.A private labor arbitrator, Sarah Miller Espinosa, has ordered Jeff Bezos' newspaper not only to hire back Attiah but to compensate her with back pay and lost benefits.'We cannot tolerate the risk your performance poses to The Post.'According to the Sept. 11, 2025, termination letter that Attiah shared online, the Washington Post fired Attiah for "gross misconduct.""Your comments on social media regarding the death of Charlie Kirk violate The Post's social media policies, harm the integrity of our organization, and potentially endanger the physical safety of our staff," said the letter. "Among other requirements, the Company-wide social media policy mandates that all employee social media postings be respectful and prohibits postings that disparage people based on their race, gender or other protected characteristics."The paper flagged two posts Attiah made on the liberal X knockoff Bluesky just hours after Charlie Kirk's death.In the first, she wrote, "Refusing to tear my clothes and smear ashes on my face in performative mourning for a white man that espoused violence is.... not the same as violence." In the second, she wrote, "Part of what keeps America so violent is the insistence that people perform care, empty goodness and absolution for white men who espouse hatred and violence."Attiah also wrote: "For everyone saying political violence has no place in this country… Remember two Democratic legislators were shot in Minnesota just this year. And America shrugged and moved on"; and "If anything, the rush to coddle violent white men is self-protective — that we know they are not used to feeling vulnerable and mortal — and will react violently out of fear. And we will all suffer."RELATED: The truth did not kill Jason Arday Joe Raedle/Getty Images"The poor judgment exhibited by your public comments regarding Charlie Kirk arise against the backdrop of documented performance concerns, which have been raised with you," said the Post's termination letter. "Given these concerns, and in light of your recent unacceptable Bluesky posts, we cannot tolerate the risk your performance poses to The Post."When faced with potential consequence over her actions, Attiah masqueraded as a victim.Attiah claimed in a Substack post that she was fired for "speaking out against political violence, racial double standards, and America’s apathy toward guns."After suggesting that she was "being silenced" for doing her job, the agitpropist proceeded to smear Kirk again, accusing the dead father of two of, among other things, attacking black women "as a group" and endangering academics by "putting them on watch lists."Attiah, a member of the Washington Post Guild, filed a challenge to her firing and retained the representation of the Democracy Defenders Fund, co-founded by former Obama official Norm Eisen. Eisen and the rest of the legal team claimed in a Sept. 24 letter to the Post that Attiah "spoke truthfully and forcefully about matters of vital public concern, and her performance is worthy of praise — not condemnation — for speaking difficult truths at a challenging time."The matter was ultimately decided on Aug. 20 in arbitration.Espinosa, the arbitrator, stated that the interpretation that Attiah's posts disparage white men "is unsupported by the actual words, as well as the context, of the Grievant's posts"; that "the Washington Post failed to establish the Grievant engaged in gross misconduct"; and the paper lacked a good and sufficient cause to fire Attiah.Eisen said of the order, "The Post tried to pass off retaliation as discipline, but the rule of law has exposed it for what it truly is: wrongful termination. This is a landmark decision for every journalist who refuses to be silenced."Attiah said, "This decision confirms what we’ve said from the start: I was doing my job as an opinion journalist, and doing that job is not misconduct."A spokesperson for the Post told Blaze News that the paper respects the arbitration process and declines to comment further.Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!