▶️ SUPREME COURT: A CONSTITUTIONAL TURNING POINT?
SUPREME COURT: A CONSTITUTIONAL TURNING POINT?
lll
he Supreme Court began its November sitting this week in what is already shaping up to be a blockbuster term, both on the regular oral argument docket and the emergency docket. The latter has taken on huge significance as lower federal court trial judges in forum-shopped district courts have issued an unprecedented number of nationwide injunctions against President Trump’s executive actions.
I say “forum-shopped” because a large number of the roughly 400 cases that have been filed against the administration since January 20 have been brought in jurisdictions in which all (or nearly all) of the judges were appointed by Democrat presidents. All 11 of the sitting active judges on the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts, for example, were hand-picked by Democrats; one by Bill Clinton, five by Barack Obama, and another five by Joe Biden. The five judges serving on the First Circuit Court of Appeals, which oversees that court, are likewise entirely stacked with Democratic appointees—three by Obama and two by Biden.
Even before the term began on the first Monday in October, the Supreme Court was already checking what increasingly appears to be rogue rulings by anti-Trump lower court judges who are essentially second-guessing the president’s executive decisions dealing with foreign aid and other spending cuts, deportations, federal law enforcement, and administrative agency personnel firings—all core areas of executive authority.
In Department of State v. AIDS Vaccine Advocacy Coalition, for example, the high court stayed a lower court decision ordering the government to spend billions in foreign aid funds that ran directly contrary to the president’s foreign policy goals. In Noem v. Perdomo, the Court stayed a district court injunction barring ICE officers from using four categories of evidence highly indicative of illegal immigrant status as they enforce immigration laws. In Noem v. National TPS Alliance, the Court stayed a lower court order blocking the removal of temporary protected status for Venezuelan nationals. And in Trump v. Boyle and Trump v. Slaughter, the Court stayed lower court decisions ordering the reinstatement of three Consumer Product Safety Commissioners and a Federal Trade Commissioner, all of whom Trump had fired.
Those two latter cases, together with Trump v. Cook, which involves Trump’s firing of a Federal Reserve Board member, may prove to be the most significant of the term, as the Court asked the parties to include in their briefs whether a nearly century-old New Deal-era case, Humphrey’s Executor v. United States, should be overturned. That case upheld restrictions on the president’s authority to remove officials at so-called “independent” agencies, paving the way for the unelected and unaccountable bureaucracy we now describe as the “Deep State.”
And that is just the beginning of the consequential cases that will be heard. Perhaps the most significant from a financial and foreign policy perspective is Learning Resources v. Trump, which considers whether President Trump has the statutory or constitutional authority to impose tariffs. Cases involving elections, gun rights, culture wars, property rights, law enforcement, Trump’s deployment of the National Guard in crime-ridden American cities, and immigration enforcement are all also on the Court’s schedule.
Several election cases will undoubtedly get a lot of attention as the country heads into the increasingly critical 2026 midterms. Bost v. Illinois State Board of Elections, heard on October 8, addresses whether candidates have standing to challenge the legality of state election laws. Louisiana v. Callais, also heard last month, involves a challenge to a court-mandated racially gerrymandered redistricting map in Louisiana. National Republican Senatorial Committee v. Federal Election Commission, which will be heard on December 9, involves a First Amendment challenge to severe restrictions on political parties’ ability to coordinate campaign expenditures with their candidates. All three may have a significant impact on how the 2026 election is conducted.
Culture war cases always get a lot of attention, and this term already has several. Chiles v. Salazar, argued on October 7, involves a First Amendment challenge to Colorado’s Minor Conversion Therapy Law, which prohibits mental health professionals from providing clients under the age of 18 with therapy that attempts to “convert” LGBTQ youth to heterosexuality or traditional gender identity. West Virginia v. B.P.J. and Little v. Hecox both involve challenges to state efforts to ban men from women’s sports, though argument dates have not yet been set. First Choice Women’s Resource Center v. Platkin, which will be argued on December 2, will address a technical issue about federal versus state court jurisdiction. The underlying issue is a First Amendment challenge to an onerous subpoena issued by the pro-abortion Attorney General of New Jersey to a pro-life pregnancy center seeking its donor records and communications. Finally, in Trump v. Orr, the Court will consider seeking a stay of a district court order requiring the State Department to use preferred sexual identity rather than biological sex on passports. And though we are still awaiting a decision on whether the Court takes the case, Davis v. Ermold seeks to overturn the Supreme Court’s 2015 decision finding a constitutional right to same-sex marriage.
Gun rights cases, too, always generate a lot of interest, and so far there are three in this term. The question presented in Wolford v. Lopez is whether the Ninth Circuit erred (that used to be enough to predict a reversal!) in upholding a Hawaiian law prohibiting concealed-carry permit holders from carrying firearms on private property that’s open to the public, absent express permission by the property owner. U.S. v. Hemani involves a Second Amendment challenge to the federal statute that prohibits firearm possession by those who are unlawful users of or addicted to a controlled substance. Neither has yet been scheduled for oral argument. The third case, Barrett v. United States, was argued on October 7. While technically a double jeopardy case instead of a Second Amendment case, Barrett involves whether a criminal defendant can be sentenced under both Section 924(c) (prohibiting use of a firearm in the commission of a violent or drug crime) and Section 924(j) (when such use results in a death).
Two cases involve private residential property and the old adage that “a man’s home is his castle.” In Pung v. Isabella County, Michigan (argument not yet scheduled), a property owner whose $195,000 home was sold at a fire-sale price of $75,000 at a foreclosure auction to pay a mere $2,000 overdue tax bill (which, it turned out, was not owed at all) sued on both Fifth Amendment Takings Clause and Eighth Amendment excessive fines grounds for the full market value that was taken rather than just the fire-sale price. Case v. Montana, heard on October 15, involves a challenge to a warrantless entry and search of a private home that officers suspected, but did not have probable cause to believe, that an emergency situation (potential suicide) existed.
Other cases involving law enforcement are also on the docket. Scheduled for argument on December 1 is Urias-Orellana v. Bondi, which addresses how much deference must be given to a determination by the Board of Immigration Appeals that a given set of undisputed facts does not qualify for suspension of deportation. And already pending on the Court’s emergency docket are Trump v. Illinois, which seeks a stay of a lower court order blocking the deployment of troops in Chicago, and Castro v. Guevara, which seeks a stay of the Fifth Circuit’s mandate to deport a mother and 7-year-old child to Venezuela.
With President Trump’s aggressive immigration enforcement efforts, as well as his deployment of the National Guard in various cities, we can expect several more cases hitting the Court’s docket—regular or emergency—before the term ends next June.
There are also several other very significant cases currently awaiting a decision on whether the Court will take them up. Trump v. Washington and Trump v. Barbara, for example, involve challenges to the president’s executive order on birthright citizenship. Allen v. Caster challenges whether the deliberate use of race to create majority-minority districts is unconstitutional. West Virginia Citizens Defense League v. ATF and National Rifle Ass’n v. Glass involve Second Amendment challenges to federal and state laws that ban the sale of firearms to 18-20 year olds. Foote v. Ludlow School Committee challenges a school’s encouragement and facilitation of a child’s gender transition without parental knowledge or consent. And Noem v. Al Otro Lado involves whether someone stopped on the Mexican side of the border must be deemed to have “arrived” in the U.S. for purposes of being able to apply for asylum.
What is already a blockbuster term in the making may become even more so in the coming months as new cases are added to the docket. ✪
▶️ JB SHURK: ZOHRAN THE BARBARIAN TAKES NYC
JB SHURK: ZOHRAN THE BARBARIAN TAKES NYC
jjj
ow that New Yorkers have elected a terrorist-sympathizing communist to run their city, I think we can all agree that the barbarians are inside the city gates. Along with Mayor Sadiq Khan of London, Mayor Zohran Mamdani of New York City represents the foreign face of major Western metropolises. What’s next? Should we expect an imam to take over Vatican City as the next pope?The Islamification of the West is happening everywhere.
Anybody who experienced the 9/11 Islamic terror attacks firsthand should feel queasy about what just happened in New York. Anybody who sacrificed years to fight Islamic extremism “over there” so that we wouldn’t be forced to fight anti-American zealots “over here” will surely feel an excruciating sensation akin to a swift kick to the nether regions. What was the point of the decades-long “Never forget!” mantra if its invocation ultimately left Americans with collective amnesia? Did American soldiers shed blood so that we could hand the financial capital of the world over to our civilizational enemies?
This will not end well. Zohran the Barbarian and Genghis Khan are just the beginning of Islam’s full-on conquest of the West. In London, Islamic pedophiles rape little boys and girls, and the great Khan does nothing. Islamic terrorists stab Brits and random tourists in the streets, and con man Khan blames Muslims’ murderous impulses on “Islamophobia” and “white supremacy.” Surely the Karl Marx-quoting Mamdani will want to prove that his own brand of crazy is on par with that of Grand Imam Khan’s steady exsanguination of London. If — God forbid — New York City were ever to suffer another 9/11, we won’t have Mayor Giuliani rallying New Yorkers to “see something, say something.” We’ll have a Hamas supporter lecturing Americans that “globalizing the intifada” is a good thing!
Americans in Dearborn, Michigan, are forced to hear Islamic calls to prayer booming from mosques’ outdoor loudspeakers several times each day. There are so many Somalis in Minneapolis that the whole city is Somali-town and native Minnesotans are the exotic foreigners living in Little America neighborhoods. The people who settled Michigan and Minnesota were tough, self-sufficient, devout Christians. They wouldn’t recognize the areas that have been handed over to non-Christian foreigners who have no intention of assimilating to American culture. The deep thinkers inside Washington, D.C.’s Deep State have spent the last several decades transplanting entire villages from the Middle East and Asia into the American heartland. Nobody should be surprised when those deadly decisions give America a heart attack.
Whenever I write about the danger of Islamic conquerors taking over the West, the pro-jihad brigades come out in force to denounce me as a “bigot” and “hater” before heading out on their suicide bomber runs. I don’t care. How many more examples do Americans and Europeans need before they understand that Islam is incompatible with the West? Freedom and personal liberty have no home in the Muslim world. Freedom of religion and free speech have no home in the Muslim world. Women’s rights do not exist in the Muslim world.
There is a reason why communists and Islamic supremacists find it so easy to work together while they undermine the West: Both support the creation of a totalitarian state empowered to dictate the day-to-day decisions of citizen-slaves. The Islamo-fascists have no problem turning a blind eye to the lifestyles of the LGBTQ crowd, so long as the “gays for Palestine” morons are successful in criminalizing Christianity as an impermissible form of discriminatory “hate speech.” Once the “Bake the cake!” harpies succeed in de-Christianizing the Christian West, the jihadis can start throwing proud pronoun people from the roofs of any buildings their suicide bombers have not already destroyed. With the Christians gone, nobody will remain to plead for the lives of those idiots whom Islamists no longer find politically useful.
However bad you might think the Islamic conquest in America has become, it is exponentially worse in the United Kingdom and across continental Europe. The elite ruling class over there has signed its death warrant because a majority-Muslim Europe will have no use for white aristocrats with historic pedigrees.
Various spellings of “Muhammad” are the most popular names for baby boys in England and Wales. Does anyone think Prince William will have a long reign when a near-majority of his kingdom hail from foreign lands and express allegiance to foreign states? It surely won’t take long for Britain’s Islamic conquerors to conclude that it makes much more sense to have one of their own sitting on the throne.
In France, historic Catholic Churches regularly go up in flames, and the cheese-eating frogs managing France’s demolition spend more energy deflecting rumors of Islamic terrorism than they do investigating suspicious arson.
In Germany, Switzerland, Sweden, Norway, Denmark, and the Netherlands, parents have to be on the lookout at all times for Islamic immigrants who believe it’s culturally justified to rape small children.
The future of Europe is clear: If you’re not wearing a burqa or busy studying the Quran, your days are numbered.
As for America, we can no longer pretend that what happens in Europe stays in Europe. Muslim calls to prayer blaring from Mississippi River towns prove that the Islamification of the West is happening everywhere. If there were any doubts, Mayor Zohran Mamdani’s election should dispel them. ✪
▶️ DON SURBER: DON’T BE TOO BLUE ABOUT BLUE TUESDAY
⭐️ Jorline
DON SURBER: DON’T BE TOO BLUE ABOUT BLUE TUESDAY
lll
emocrats carried off-year elections in California, Minnesota, New Jersey, New York and Virginia on Tuesday. Blue states went Democrat. Imagine that. Outside of believing voters would reject the Virginia Democrat who wants to murder children in front of their Republican mother’s eyes, I avoided predictions. We all knew Mamdani would win the mayor’s race because the electorate there is dominated by people too stupid to escape from New York.
But conservatives got their hopes up and wound up depressed on Wednesday.
In California, Democrats who swiped control of redistricting permanently with one of their reforms a few years ago decided to circumvent the system they own in favor of direct gerrymandering. It went on the ballot. Voters approved.
Why bother with redistricting at all? Just have everyone run at-large. That way, Democrats can have all the congressmen in California.
That’s unfair? Well, over the weekend, Dilbert cartoonist Scott Adams very publicly pleaded with the White House to intervene on his behalf with his health insurance company. Years ago, presidents couldn’t do that but Obama created Obamacare to enrich the insurance companies and now presidents have that power. Adams received the care he needed on Monday.
▶️ 2 Minutes 5 Seconds
In a video to his followers, Adams quoted his mama, who said, “Try as hard as you can and do your best possible work so that you can have the best possible benefit.”
Adams said, “Why would she want me to play for a tie? No, she wanted me to win. She didn’t want me to play for a tie.”
Virginia’s election had two factors. DOGE cuts hit the DC area hard and Republicans ran a terrible candidate. Winsome Earle-Sears spent a lot of time on Fox News in her four years as lieutenant governor instead of using the time to set up a campaign staff and come up with a message that resonated with voters.
Say what you may about Mamdani, he was a dynamic candidate who electrified voters like they were touching the third rail—which is fitting given what is about to befell New York.
New Jersey’s election was peppered with Election Day shenanigans, which shows Democrats were worried they might wake up with a Republican governor again. Chris Christie was governor from 2010-2018 and before that Christine Todd Whitman was governor from 1994-2001.
But not this year. The Deep State has one of its own in the governor’s mansion as voters elected former CIA officer Mikie Sherrill.
Democrats want to use this election as psy ops against MAGA. Over at Larry Sabato’s Crystal Ball, the spin was “A year ago, the near-complete vote from early-reporting Loudoun County, Virginia, was the first major signal that Donald Trump was on the way to victory in the 2024 presidential election. Last night, Loudoun was the signal that the 2025 election, both in Virginia and elsewhere, was becoming a rout in favor of Democrats.”
But Trump didn’t carry Virginia in 2024. Or 2020. Or 2016. Hello? Virginia doesn’t matter. Ditto California, Minnesota, New Jersey and New York. Trump has won the presidency twice without them. Those four states are not up for grabs in 2028. Do not allow Democrats and their publicists at the New York Times get you down. It is a long game.
The blue spin was predictable and humorous.
Ashton Pittman of the Mississippi Free Press was ecstatic that Democrats flipped two state Senate seats. Republicans in January will lead that body 34-18. His headline? “Mississippi Democrats Break Republican Senate Supermajority: ‘We Are a Battleground State.’”
Jamelle Bouie of the New York Times declared, “As a presidential candidate, Donald Trump is a phenomenally effective vote-winner, capable of turning out millions of otherwise infrequent voters to deliver the White House and Congress to the Republican Party. But as president, Trump has been an albatross around the neck of his party.“
“Consider his record as party leader. In the 2017 elections, Republicans suffered sharp defeats in the Virginia and New Jersey governor’s races, with Virginia Democrats sweeping all three statewide offices and winning a majority in the state General Assembly. The following year, in the 2018 midterm elections, Democrats won a landslide victory in the House of Representatives, their largest since 2006. Trump came close to victory in the 2020 presidential but may have contributed to the Republican Party’s defeat in the Georgia Senate runoff election, handing the Democratic Party full control of Washington for the first time since 2011.”
Obama lost 63 House seats and control of that body as well as 7 Senate seats in his first midterm. But the Democrat spinning wheel goes round and round.
However, Mamdani’s election is scary. New Yorkers vowed to never forget 9/11 but 24 years later, Democrats have used lawfare to bankrupt America’s mayor and replace him with an Uganda-born Indian who is a Muslim-loving communist.
Mambo Italiano tweeted:
▶️ 30 Seconds
Somebody did something. Make no mistake, Mamdani is no gift to anyone but the devil.
Steve Bannon nailed it. This may be the first time I have ever quoted him, but he said, “Tonight should be a wake up call to the populist nationalist movement under President Trump. These are very serious people, and they need to be addressed seriously.”
He’s worried because he has seen what electing a Muslim mayor of London has done to England. Police arrest people who wave the British flag.
More from Bannon:
First off, all those people that said he wasn’t going to win the primary and he was great to run against, I think, have been proven wrong. This is not a debating society.
Tonight, what you saw out of Mamdani is something you’ve never seen this entire race. I mean, that’s an angry guy. That was in your face, and particularly the president’s face, up in his grill, and the president responded: “And so it begins.”
People better understand they have a fight on their hands. This guy is a serious guy. I’ve said this from the beginning—I said early in the primary.
Forget the Republican Party in New York—that’s a joke—but the national Republican Party and some of the smartest strategists do not realize the power of the Working Families Party and the [Democratic Socialists of America] for ground game. Modern politics now is about engaging low-propensity voters, and they clearly turned them out tonight, and this is kind of the Trump model. This is very serious.
10 years ago, Democrats mocked Trump and thought nominating him would ensure Hillary’s election. Don’t goof on Mamdani’s election.
The real threat to the Republic is in the hands of the Supreme Court which heard on Wednesday the challenge to Trump’s tariffs. Justices have in their hands the ability to destroy the economy and his presidency. Don’t think they have the will to do so just to get Trump? The same players behind the covid pandemic panic are pushing this. And remember, this is the same court that refused to hear his challenges to the shady 2020 election vote counting.
Democrats won big in blue states on Tuesday. Trump needs to work to prevent them from taking red territory next year. We all do. ✪
▶️ USDA SEC ROLLINS: SNAP WILL BE DRASTICALLY REFORMED
USDA SEC ROLLINS: SNAP WILL BE DRASTICALLY REFORMED
lll
ecretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins said Sunday on “Fox & Friends Weekend” thousands of illegal migrants have been taken off the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), and there will be drastic reform to ensure those who are truly vulnerable receive benefits.
Concerns about maintaining SNAP benefits began in October 2025 as the government shutdown stretched out. Notably, a handful of Democrats sued the Trump Administration to use a contingency fund to continue the food aid. Highlighting how the argument over the benefits shed light on who is receiving SNAP, Rollins was asked to discuss reports of illegal immigrants being eligible for SNAP.
▶️ 5 Minutes 34 Seconds
“There’s been a lot of miscommunication out there on the program, but this is one of the first things we did when I walked in. Day One of USDA, February 13th, is we sent letters to every governor in America being very clear that no illegal aliens can use SNAP. Zero, zero, zero,” Rollins said. “We asked every state for the first time in history — and this was in February — to send us their data and let us, with DOGE [Department of Government Efficiency] and a war room, actually start going through this data to better understand how this explosion of SNAP benefits happened under Joe Biden. We increased almost 40% on this program in just a couple of years under the Biden Administration.”
“And since we have asked for that data, 29 states have complied. Of course, almost all the red states, couple blue states, too. But in that data — and I haven’t talked about this yet, publicly — in that data we have found — we studied about $100 billion in spend— we have found thousands and thousands of illegal use of the [Electronic Benefit Transfer] EBT card,” Rollins added. “We have been moving people off of SNAP. We’ve got almost 700,000 people, I think, we’ve moved off just since the president took office. We’ve arrested about 118 people. So this has been ongoing.”
Democrats California Gov. Gavin Newsom and his attorney general, Rob Bonta, announced the state would be joining a handful of other Democrat-led states such as Arizona and Massachusetts in suing the Trump Administration for alleged “unlawful refusal” of SNAP benefits.
The U.S Department of Agriculture (USDA) posted a notice Monday that SNAP benefits will be paused starting Nov. 1, while calling out Democrats who keep voting for the government shutdown to continue. The USDA announcement reportedly follows a memo stating the agency would not use $5 billion in contingency funds to pay for SNAP benefits, as those funds are “not legally available” for that purpose, according to Reuters.
By Friday, however, two federal judges ruled the Trump Administration must tap into a contingency fund to continue the benefits.
Rollins continued, stating how the national spotlight on SNAP exposed the “broken and corrupt” program, and detailing other issues discovered with the program.
“But to your point, what this conversation has allowed is a national spotlight on a broken and corrupt program. We found one guy in six different states getting a benefit. We found about 5,000 people that are dead who are still getting benefits,” Rollins said. “It is time to drastically reform this program so that we can make sure that those who are truly needy, truly vulnerable, are getting what they need and the rest of the corruption goes away and we can serve the American taxpayer.”
“So we want to, number one, most important, get the government open, make sure the people that really need this money are going to get it,” Rollins said. “But guess what? There’s a new sheriff in town. His name is Donald Trump and this program will be reformed. We will hold people accountable and we will be able to help those who really need it.”
According to a U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) memo obtained in September 2025, federal officials were directed to scrutinize and weed out migrant applicants deemed more likely to become dependent on government services and programs.
While data on illegal migrants and SNAP usage is limited, USDA data from 2022 shows the program provided benefits to 1.465 million noncitizens, with an additional 2.2 million children living with noncitizens also receiving SNAP benefits, according to the Economic Policy Innovation Center (EPIC). Data pulled by EPIC shows California led the nation in this regard, providing 273,000 food stamps to noncitizens in fiscal year 2022, followed by Florida with 238,000, and New York with 218,000.✪
▶️ COMPANIES HIT THE BRAKES ON EV PRODUCTION
COMPANIES HIT THE BRAKES ON EV PRODUCTION
ccc
n recent weeks, automakers and other companies in the vehicle space are pulling back their investments in electric vehicles (EVs), including laying off workers in multiple states. The moves come in the wake of Republicans’ One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which repealed incentives for consumers to buy electric cars.
GM in particular is set to lay off 1,200 workers from its Detroit plant and another 550 from its Ultium Cells plant in Ohio.
Meanwhile, another 850 are being temporarily laid off from the Ohio Ultium Cells plant and another 710 being temporarily let go from an Ultium factory in Tennessee.
While those layoffs were the largest that were recently announced, they’re not the only ones.
Last month, EV-maker Rivian told staff it would let go of about 4.5 percent of its workforce. Reuters reported that this represents more than 600 jobs.
“With the changing operating backdrop, we had to rethink how we are scaling our go-to-market functions,” Rivian CEO RJ Scaringe said.
Meanwhile, Freudenberg e-Power Systems said this week it would close two EV battery facilities in Michigan, laying off 324 workers.
“We have reached this difficult decision due to the decrease in demand for heavy-duty electric and hybrid electric vehicles in North America,” the company said in a statement.
The moves come after this year’s tax and spending bill eliminated a tax credit for consumers that brought down EV prices by up to $7,500. The credit expired at the end of September.
GM, whose spokespeople did not immediately respond to a request for comment, cited in a recent note to investors government policies and specifically the end of incentives as part of a need to reassess its electric vehicle strategy.
“With the evolving regulatory framework and the end of federal consumer incentives, it is now clear that near-term EV adoption will be lower than planned,” said the letter from CEO Mary Barra last month ahead of the layoff announcement.
“That is why we are reassessing our EV capacity and manufacturing footprint. The work, which is ongoing, resulted in a special charge in the third quarter, and we expect future charges,” Barra said.
Meanwhile, Shawn Fain, president of the United Autoworkers union, criticized both the company and the government.
“Last week, GM raised its expected annual profits to $13 billion dollars. This week, they announce layoffs…. The company continues to post billions in profits every year,” he said.
“Going into negotiations, we knew — and the company knew — that the electric vehicle transition was going to be volatile. The cutting of federal subsidies for EVs has only made that volatility worse,” he added.
Stephanie Valdez Streaty, director of industry insights at Cox Automotive, said federal policies, especially the end of the tax credits, are a major factor in the layoffs. “It’s been significant in slowing EV demand,” Valdez Streaty said.
However, she also noted other factors impacting automakers more generally that may be playing a role. “You also have tariffs that are going on. You have chip shortages…there’s [an] aluminum fire that hurt production…there’s all these different things that are going on that are just amplifying or magnifying the navigation manufacturers have to do in terms of production,” she said.
Mike Madowitz, principal economist at the Roosevelt Institute, said that while some of these layoffs could be transferred to other jobs, including equivalent jobs related to gas-powered cars, they’re coming at a tough time for manufacturing more broadly.
“It’s pretty hard to not notice that manufacturing employment has been falling basically ever since we had tariffs announced,” Madowitz said.
“If you’re making the multi-decade commitments that you do when you’re investing in auto and battery plants, you have to think harder about your ability to export stuff from America,” he added. ✪
▶️ OP-ED: LET THEM BURN IT DOWN
OP-ED: LET THEM BURN IT DOWN
nnn
ohran Mamdani’s victory in the New York City mayoral race this week is a clear moment. Voters chose a 34-year-old Democrat Socialist promising frozen rents, higher taxes on the wealthy, more public spending, etc. You know, all the things communists promise before their overblown Marxism takes control. That is now the experiment New York City residents asked for.
As GOP House Speaker Mike Johnson (LA-04) explained:
▶️ 1 Minute 15 Seconds
Say what you want about protests, think pieces, and cable-news freakouts. Elections have consequences. Democracy means handing people what they vote for. If Democrats across our cities insist on doubling down on big government fixes and cultural priorities that chafe with ordinary New Yorkers, then maybe the rest of the country should stop propping up those failing models. Let them have their socialist lab. Watch what it does to schools, budgets, public safety, and the urban fabric. Then leave.
This is not an invitation to despair. It is an argument for strategic exit. For decades, conservative thinkers have warned that some left-leaning cities are trending toward policies that discourage investment, drive up crime, and hollow out middle-class opportunity. If those places want to try a full-throated experiment in redistribution and centralized solutions, let them see it to the end.
Do not pour tax dollars into bailouts or endless subsidies to prop up unsustainable models. Let policy failures be instructive, not subsidized. We continue to come into these cities after years of Democrat control has destroyed them. We rebuild, renew, and reignite belief again, only for the hopelessly ignorant to say, “Remember that colossal failure of Democrat leadership? Let’s try that again. But this time with a version of intersectionality we haven’t used yet to convince people of ‘progress.'”
And make no mistake: the result will ripple. Jewish groups, business leaders, and even parts of the public are already issuing warnings about some of Mamdani’s past statements and policy positions. Those concerns are legitimate. They matter in a pluralistic city that relies on trust, commerce, and civic cooperation. If those foundations begin to crack under the strain of ideological governance, the private sector and citizens will adapt. They always do.
So what does “leave” actually mean? It does not mean exile or surrender. It means a reallocation of people, investment, and energy to places that still prize freedom, low taxes, strong schools, and public order. Think of it as creative decentralization. If a city wants to turn itself into an ideological showcase, the rest of the country can respond by fostering new hubs where entrepreneurship thrives, where families can afford a house, and where communities are safe again. We have plenty of room here in Texas.
America offers enormous geographic slack. Small and mid-sized cities can rise. Suburbs can reimagine downtowns. Rural towns with broadband and tax incentives can lure companies and families fed up with chaos. The lesson is simple. If one place insists on policy that scares away capital, other places should compete to welcome that capital. Let failed models be proof points for what not to copy. Then sell a better offer. Show people why they should plant roots somewhere else. Do not beg a failing government to change. Build alternatives. Win back a sense of possibility.
This plan is not merely economic. It is moral. Communities flourish when people can work, worship, and build without fear. There is dignity in a stable paycheck, a safe school, and a neighbor who looks like a future, not an alarm. That dignity vanishes when public policy punishes success and rewards dependency. If the left wants to test the limits of redistribution, fine. The rest of us will answer with civic renewal. We will create cities that respect family, entrepreneurship, and free speech. We will vote with our feet and our wallets.
But propping up failure out of fear of being labeled uncharitable is a mistake. We do not owe political experiments indefinite subsidies. We owe our children stable futures. We owe our neighbors safe streets. We owe entrepreneurs a fair shot. Watching a city self-select into a model that doesn’t fit the majority of Americans is painful. Watching it teach the rest of the country how not to do things is instructive. Both are useful.
So let Mamdani govern. Let the left run their lab. Then, quietly and strategically, build alternatives. Offer lower taxes. Sharpen school choice. Rebuild neighborhoods. Attract employers with sensible rules. Invest in once-neglected towns that still believe in American possibility.
If Democrats want a crumbling, socialist, failing society in certain places, give them one. Let it be contained. Let it be visible. America will not fall because one city chooses differently. It will rise where people choose opportunity over ideology. That is the conservative playbook. That is our hope. And in the end, success will not be measured by who shouts the loudest. It will be measured by where people choose to live, work, and raise their kids.
Let them have their experiment. We will build the rest. ✪
▶️ DONATE VIA PAYPAL (DEBIT & CREDIT CARD)
ALL PayPal Transactions Are Encrypted For Card Holder Privacy & Security
▶️ DONATE VIA ZELLE (DIRECT BANK CASH TRANSFER)
ZELLE is the perfect online alternative to PayPal. It’s an incredibly simple, secure, easy, fast and FREE way to send or receive money to recipients directly from your online banking account without a middleman. Best of all, there’s NO fees.
ZELLE is a service provided by your bank and is already built in to your online banking account. You only need to activate it first before using. If you’ve already activated ZELLE in your online bank or credit union account, you can donate to The New Americanist by using our ZELLE address:
vip@thenewamericanist.com
To activate your ZELLE, follow these easy instructions (a simple two minute process):
▶️ DONATE VIA SNAIL MAIL
▶️ RSBN LIVESTREAM LINK: Trump Meets With The PM of Hungary
⭐️ TokaiseBlessedPatriot
