Submitted by Maryland Freedom Caucus
Annapolis Democrats spent months insisting there was nothing to see here. On Tuesday, a Maryland judge told them otherwise — in writing, and in language sharper than anyone expected.
The bottom line: a circuit court judge just ruled that House Bill 2100, the constitutional amendment Governor Wes Moore and legislative Democrats rammed through a two-day special session to pave the way for wiping out Maryland's last Republican congressional seat, was placed on the November ballot unlawfully.
This is the story of how we got here.
The Setup: A Map They Already Lost Once
In 2021, Maryland Democrats were hell-bent on maximizing their control of the state at every level. Already the most gerrymandered state in the union, they drew an 8-0, all-Democrat congressional map which now-Vice Chair of the Maryland Freedom Caucus, Delegate Kathy Szeliga, took to court. Judge Lynne Battaglia struck it down in a 95-page opinion grounded in the Maryland Constitution and Declaration of Rights. The current 7-1 congressional delegation is the product of both parties compromising in 2022.
In pursuit of a potential 2028 presidential run, Governor Wes Moore began pressuring legislative leaders to eliminate the state's last Republican seat — held by Congressman Andy Harris (MD-1), who also chairs the House Freedom Caucus. The House of Delegates passed a bill to do exactly that in February, HB 488, but it stalled and died in the Senate. Senate President Bill Ferguson worried it would invite a court to reaffirm Judge Battaglia's 2022 ruling and hand Republicans an even more favorable map. He held his ground even after House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries showed up in Annapolis to lean on him personally.
Then the political ground shifted. When the U.S. Supreme Court narrowed how far the Voting Rights Act can justify race-based congressional districting, several states began eyeing mid-cycle redistricting — Maryland among them. Not to be outdone by Gavin Newsom, Governor Moore called a special session for August to finish what he couldn't in February: eliminate Congressman Harris through a constitutional amendment designed to make sure Judge Battaglia's ruling could never stand in the way again.
The Special Session: Two Days, One Outcome Predetermined
While most of the Maryland General Assembly was on summer vacation, the Maryland Freedom Caucus was at work — researching, planning, and preparing. Before July 31, our strategy to defeat the redistricting amendment was already set. We had found a problem in the Democrats' plan that no one else seemed to catch: Senate Bill 29, signed into law in May 2026.
SB 29 amended Maryland's election law to include real reforms for ballot questions — plain language, no legal jargon, a policy statement telling voters exactly what would change if a measure passed. It also set a hard deadline: ballot language for a constitutional amendment had to be submitted to the Secretary of State by July 1 in an election year, giving the public a 15-day comment period to weigh in. For a special session that didn't convene until August 3, that meant Democrats had already blown their own deadline by more than a month.
Roughly fifty minutes before the committee hearing on HB 2100 — with the outcome predetermined despite overwhelming opposition registered to testify — Democrats slipped in a clause designed to nullify that deadline entirely. The clause, a non obstante provision, stated that "notwithstanding any other provision of law," the language they'd written would go straight to the ballot in November.
When pressed on it, in committee and on the floor, House Democrats' answer amounted to this: they write the rules, so the rules don't bind them. They ignored parliamentary procedure, the single-subject requirement, and the very election law they had codified themselves — all to ram through a measure that would let them rewrite congressional districts whenever and however they wanted.
The bill passed both chambers by August 4, 2026, and was on its way to the ballot — until the Maryland Freedom Caucus, together with Senate Minority Leadership, filed suit on August 6, represented by the legal team at the Oversight Project. It wasn't a random pairing. Several members of that legal team are Marylanders themselves — people with a personal stake in whether their own state's Constitution means anything, not just outside lawyers parachuting in for a headline case.
The Lawsuit: Not Just "They Missed a Deadline"
The complaint, Howell v. Maryland State Board of Elections, was built on the legislature's own paper trail. It argued four things: that Democrats missed deadlines mandated by current election law; that they misrepresented the non obstante clause as a mere "technical" update; that they violated the single-subject rule by combining a constitutional amendment with an unrelated procedural override; and that the ballot language itself — having bypassed the required comment period and plain-language standard — was written in a way that misled voters.
That last point matters most. The text for Question 3 on the State Board of Elections website says the amendment will merely "clarify" that Maryland's legislative-district rules — requiring districts to be compact and respectful of natural boundaries — do not apply to congressional districts. But a judge already ruled otherwise, back in 2022. That’s not a clarification at all, it's the elimination of a barrier that stood between Democrats and total control.
Oral Arguments: The State's Defense Was "The Rules Don't Apply to Us"
Tuesday morning, August 25, we argued our case before Judge Robert Thompson in Circuit Court for Anne Arundel County. Attorney Jeffrey Clark argued for the Oversight Project. Assistant Attorney General Daniel Kobrin argued for the State.
Attorney Jeffrey Clark argued for the Oversight Project and knocked it out of the park. The team's command of the record, from the SB 29 timeline down to the exact language of the ballot question, was the product of weeks of meticulous preparation, not a rushed filing. For a legal team with Maryland roots of its own, this case was never just a job.
Kobrin's argument boiled down: SB 29's deadlines only bind the process when the Secretary of State drafts the ballot question. When the legislature writes the language itself, apparently, the deadlines evaporate. In his own words to the court: "There's no blackout period set by the constitution."
6/ Kobrin says the General Assembly can draft the language itself, and the election deadlines for questions wouldn’t apply.
“There’s no blackout period set by the constitution,” Kobrin said.
Read that argument again. It isn't a claim that Democrats complied with the law. It's a claim that the law simply doesn't apply to the people who wrote it, provided they cut out the middleman.
The Ruling: Three Ways to Lose
On Wednesday, Judge Robert J. Thompson didn't split the baby. He granted the plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment, denied the State's, and enjoined the Board of Elections from placing Question 3 on the November ballot — stayed pending the State's expected appeal to the Supreme Court of Maryland.
🚨Oversight Project Secures Massive Win in Howell v. Maryland State Board of Elections
We are grateful to have pursued this fight alongside members of the @MDFreedomCaucus and Members of the Maryland Senate as we fight to defend transparency, due process, and the integrity of… pic.twitter.com/fXouyIgXxE
Ground one: Thompson rejected the State's "we wrote it ourselves so the deadline doesn't count" theory outright: "Because the legislature did not follow the very laws it enacted, the court finds the enactment of HB2100 to be legally deficient."
Ground two — the one that should actually sting: the judge ruled that the ballot question's use of the word "clarifies" is misleading. The court found nothing in the record supporting the idea that Maryland's compactness rules were ever understood to exclude congressional districts — because Judge Battaglia had already settled that question in 2022. Thompson's opinion states that "clarifies" is "intentionally misleading, and this should disqualify the ballot question as currently written."
Ground three: the ballot question illegally bundled two different subjects — the districting-standards change and a brand-new grant of jurisdiction to the Maryland Supreme Court — into a single question, violating the state's single-subject requirement for referred amendments.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Maryland Freedom Caucus: Court Rules HB 2100 Unlawful — Case Now Heads to Maryland's Supreme Court
ANNAPOLIS, MD — One day after oral arguments in Howell v. Maryland State Board of Elections, Judge Robert J. Thompson of the Circuit Court for Anne Arundel… pic.twitter.com/URQLPULFOL
What Happens Now
The injunction is stayed while the State appeals to the Supreme Court of Maryland, meaning Question 3 remains on the ballot for the moment. The fight moves to the state's highest court.
But the finding already on the books doesn't go away: a Maryland judge has now ruled, in writing, that the word Democrats used to sell this amendment to voters was intentionally misleading. That's not an opposition talking point. That's a court record.
None of this happens without the Oversight Project. Their legal team's work on this case was top-notch from the first filing to the final argument — professional, exhaustively prepared, and, for several team members, personal. These are Marylanders who understood exactly what was at stake for their own state, and it showed in every page of the brief and every minute in that courtroom.
Read our press release here: Today, the Oversight Project, a proud member of the @Phase2Deport and the leader of the Redistricting and Election Protection for American Integrity and Representation (REPAIR) Initiative, secured a massive litigation victory in Howell v. Maryland.… https://t.co/NzkzXOYpNF pic.twitter.com/3TtPbd2H69
— Oversight Project (@ItsYourGov) August 26, 2026Delegate Matt Morgan, Chair of the Maryland Freedom Caucus, put it plainly: "A chamber that holds a supermajority is still a chamber bound by the law." Apparently, on Wednesday, a judge agreed.
Tyler Durden Thu, 08/27/2026 - 20:05An Atlanta elementary school teacher has created a designated “fart corner” where students can pass gas without leaving class or interrupting lessons, according to NBC.
Second grade teacher Candy Sydney Browning calls the area the “gas station,” while the specific spot is known as the “gusty winds area.” Students can quietly get up, walk to the corner, take care of business and return to their seats without asking permission.
Sydney Browning came up with the idea after noticing that bathroom trips and students reacting to classmates passing gas were taking time away from lessons. She had already started encouraging students to use the restroom before lessons so they would not need to leave as often. Passing gas, however, created another distraction. Students would point fingers, move away from one another and announce who they thought was responsible.
Rather than treating it as something embarrassing, Sydney Browning wanted students to understand that passing gas is simply a normal bodily function. “It’s normal,” she told them. “But you have to excuse yourself.” Creating a specific area gave students a discreet way to do that without stopping the lesson.
They do not need to raise their hands or ask for permission, which means Sydney Browning can continue teaching while the student briefly steps away.
NBC writes that the idea soon became a normal part of classroom life. Sydney Browning said the first student to use the station attracted a few smiles and curious looks from classmates. However, no one pointed fingers or made fun of him, and eventually students stopped paying attention altogether.
“It just became a norm,” she told TODAY. She said the station has become so ordinary that she sometimes forgets it is even there.
After Browning shared the setup on TikTok, the unusual classroom rule received widespread attention. Thousands of viewers reacted to the idea, with some praising it as a clever way to normalize bodily functions while keeping students focused. Several teachers said they wanted to introduce similar areas in their own classrooms, while others shared that they already had their own versions of a designated fart area.
Not everyone was convinced. Some commenters worried that students who use the corner frequently could feel embarrassed or become targets for teasing. Others questioned whether children could really ignore a classmate walking across the room specifically to pass gas. Sydney Browning believes making the practice routine is exactly what prevents it from becoming a bigger issue. When adults and students stop treating it as something shocking or funny, it becomes less interesting.
Tyler Durden Thu, 08/27/2026 - 19:40By Charles Kennedy of OilPrice.com,
President Donald Trump’s investment accounts sold between $500,000 and $1 million of ExxonMobil stock on April 7, the same day Trump announced a ceasefire in the Iran war and hours before Exxon shares opened 6.5% lower, according to financial disclosures reviewed by CBS News.
Exxon closed at $163.91 on April 7 before Trump announced the ceasefire that evening and opened at $153.52 the following morning. The transaction was one of hundreds of thousands of dollars in purchases and sales involving Exxon, Chevron, ConocoPhillips and other oil and gas companies during the first half of 2026, according to filings with the Office of Government Ethics as reported by CBS News.
Those trades continued through a war that sent oil prices sharply higher and delivered some of the strongest earnings for U.S. oil majors since 2022. ExxonMobil and Chevron ultimately earned a combined $26.5 billion in the second quarter as the Iran war and disruption to oil flows through the Strait of Hormuz drove crude prices and refining margins sharply higher. Exxon reported $14.5 billion in net income, more than double its year-earlier profit and its best result in four years, while Chevron reported record net income of $12.2 billion, nearly five times its year-earlier result. Trump subsequently accused the companies of making “too much money” and demanded that they cut fuel prices.
CBS reported that Trump’s accounts executed roughly 3,600 stock and securities trades worth between $212 million and $695 million during the first quarter alone. Democrats on the Joint Economic Committee estimate that his oil and gas holdings increased in value from between $13 million and $46 million at the start of the year to between $17 million and $61 million by mid-August. The estimate does not include trades made during 2026.
The White House said Trump does not direct the trades. Spokesman Davis Ingle told CBS that the portfolio is managed independently by third-party financial institutions using computer-based model portfolios and that Trump and his family cannot influence when securities are bought or sold.
Trump has not placed his assets in a blind trust, and federal law does not prohibit presidents from owning or trading individual stocks. His energy holdings remain a small portion of a fortune Forbes estimates at more than $6 billion.
Tyler Durden Thu, 08/27/2026 - 19:15