Zero Rss

Outgoing UK PM "Proud To Have The Gayest Parliament Of All Time Anywhere In The World"

Authored by Steve Watson via Modernity News,

As outgoing Kier Starmer prepares to depart amid cratering approval ratings and deep public disillusionment, his 'Pride' reception remarks this week reveal a leader more focused on cultural signalling than addressing Britain's pressing crises.

Starmer took to the stage at a Downing Street Pride reception to defend his government's LGBTQ+ record, even as scepticism grows within parts of that broad community and his wider popularity sits at dismal lows.

Starmer struck a defiant tone, insisting his administration would continue championing these issues. "I want to be clear that all lesbians, all gay, all bi and trans people - that this government will defend your rights," he declared. "We have to stand against the politics of division."

Can we please get back to having a serious country, rather than "the gayest parliament of all time anywhere in the world"? pic.twitter.com/6e7xzLIAky

— m o d e r n i t y (@ModernityNews) July 1, 2026

He praised what he called global leadership in representation, stating Westminster is "the gayest parliament... anywhere in the world" and telling attendees to "celebrate that."

We really don't care about cocks in frocks, chutney ferrets or rug munchers.

What we do care about is our daughters being groomed or our sons being stabbed and the way our country has been hollowed out by immigration. We care about our elderly, our nation's security.

— ? Humbug ????????? (@_MrsBetSlocombe) July 1, 2026

So we actually need a government focused on delivering for the country as a whole regardless of their sexual preferences but we actually get a government striving to be the gayest. It's just pathetic

— Blue G ? (@Graham93201) July 1, 2026

I'd settle for the most practical, productive and least corrupt parliament, but I guess how gay you are is the metric now. ?

— Lee Strato (@leestrato) July 1, 2026

Was it for this men died in the air, at sea, in burning deserts, freezing mountains, stinking jungles and prison camps?

— The Lion In Winter ?? (@LordOfMundane) July 1, 2026

Starmer highlighted a "full trans-inclusive ban on abusive conversion practices," describing conversion therapy as "a very sinister idea... trying to suggest that identities aren't legitimate."

As we have highlighted, under Starmer's watch, authorities advanced measures on this front that risk criminalising parents who question their child's rush toward gender transition. A draft bill on "conversion practices" carries penalties of unlimited fines and up to five years in prison. Equalities Minister Olivia Bailey framed it as protecting against abuse driven by the "false belief that being LGBTQ+ is shameful."

Critics argue the vague language could ensnare normal family discussions, exploratory talks, or references to evidence questioning youth medical transitions.

This unfolds alongside school guidance permitting social transitions for four-year-olds and exam boards embedding pro-trans messaging in subjects like GCSE Spanish. Campaigners like Maya Forstater and Helen Joyce have warned of ideological capture in education.

Elsewhere during his Pride ramble, Starmer pointed to the HIV Action Plan aiming to end new transmissions by 2030 and changes to equalise hate crime strands, and announced £21 million for global LGBTQ+ rights and a new Special Envoy, framing the fight as "global."

Starmer positioned his government as restoring the UK's reputation after predecessors damaged it: "We are here to restore it." He closed by reaffirming personal commitment: "I will always fight for respect and dignity. It didn't start when I became Prime Minister. It won't end when I don't."

These remarks come as Starmer exits following his June 2026 resignation announcement, with approval ratings plunging to joint historic lows around net -46 or worse - among the poorest for any modern prime minister. Public sentiment has turned sharply against him, reflecting frustration with a tenure marked by perceived failures on everyday concerns.

While Starmer celebrates certain milestones, a closer look at his record reveals policies that have alarmed parents, heightened security risks, strained social cohesion, and eroded basic freedoms.

Persistent Failures on Grooming Gangs

Starmer's government has drawn intense scrutiny for its handling of grooming gang scandals, where systemic issues involving organised abuse in certain communities have long demanded robust action. Public trust eroded further amid perceptions of inadequate accountability and prevention efforts.

Mass migration as a tool of undermining social cohesion

Starmer's administration continued policies seen as weaponising migration while cracking down on those noticing demographic impacts and security failures.

Former Prime Minister Liz Truss recently directly linked surges in random violence to mass migration policies, arguing left-wing approaches deliberately erode the nation state and family. Relentless stabbings and assaults have fueled fury, with responses often focusing on suppressing discussion rather than root causes.

Banning Critics While Welcoming Extremists

The government has barred anyone it disagrees with from entering the country, including Dutch commentator Eva Vlaardingerbroek shortly after she criticised Starmer, citing public good grounds despite her focus on cultural preservation.

In contrast, Starmer expressed delight at welcoming Alaa Abd el-Fattah, an activist with a track record of extreme posts including hatred toward white people, calls for violence against police and Zionists, and praise for figures like Osama bin Laden.

Starmer posted: "I'm delighted that Alaa Abd El-Fattah is back in the UK and has been reunited with his loved ones... Alaa's case has been a top priority." This occurred alongside record Channel crossings and hotel accommodations for arrivals.

Criminalising speech and humour

Britain under Starmer saw massively expanded efforts to police expression. Lucy Connolly, previously imprisoned for a post, faced threats of recall for sharing a satirical Maduro-style joke about Trump and Starmer. Probation cited it as poor behaviour after complaints of inciting violence.

Comedy writer Graham Linehan was arrested at Heathrow over three gender-critical tweets, held in a cell, and hospitalised with dangerously high blood pressure from the stress. JK Rowling condemned it as "totalitarianism."

Creating a dystopian mass surveillance apparatus

Proposals emerged to compel platforms to prioritise BBC content against "disinformation," part of broader controls including a thought police unit on migration narratives, crisis information blocking, and social media bans framed as safety measures but risking total oversight.

Starmer's exit leaves a country transformed by these priorities. As everyday Britons face rising costs, safety concerns, and restricted speech, the emphasis on niche cultural victories over national cohesion stands in stark relief.

It currently appears Stamer will simply be replaced by Andy Burnham, the former mayor of Manchester, without a leadership contest. Burnham is by all accounts even more left-wing and more focused on ideological virtue signalling causes than Starmer.

Only when a new general election is called will the British people be offered a chance to refocus on restoring seriousness, security, and the freedoms that once defined the country - before ideology supplanted reality.

Your support is crucial in helping us defeat mass censorship. Please consider donating via Locals or check out our unique merch. Follow us on X @ModernityNews.

Tyler Durden Wed, 07/01/2026 - 07:45

Container Ship Runs Aground In Hormuz Chokepoint

Hormuz vessel traffic continues to flow, but at a sharply reduced pace compared to the previous week, as US-Iran technical talks resume in Doha without senior negotiators meeting face-to-face.

Data research firm Kpler noted, "Hormuz traffic holds steady." 

Hormuz traffic holds steady

The Strait of Hormuz remained open and active on 30 June, with 34 verified crossings recorded and traffic evenly split by direction. The dataset showed a broad mix of commercial, energy-linked and support movements, while route visibility remained… pic.twitter.com/cVZHRte4Hy

— Kpler (@Kpler) July 1, 2026

The latest disruption in the strait, beyond the persistent threat of Iranian naval mines and suicide drones, was caused by a foreign container ship running aground after entering shallow waters outside the Iranian-designated shipping route.

Qatar-funded international news network Al Jazeera cites Iran's state media, which provided more details on the maritime incident early Wednesday:

A foreign container ship has run aground in the Strait of Hormuz after entering shallow waters outside ‌the shipping route designated by Iranian authorities, Iran's state media says.

The news report reiterated the Revolutionary Guard's warning that vessels should transit only through the corridor south of Iran'sLarak island, which Tehran says is the sole approved entry and exit route ‌for ships passing through the strait.

In a separate report, Bloomberg cites the Iranian Navy as saying that it "has repeatedly warned ship captains, owners and officials of global shipping companies that any entry or exit via routes other than the authorized one could lead to irreparable incidents."

Beyond the Strait, and focusing on markets, the beginning of the normalization process to reopen the critical waterway sent commodity prices sliding 9% month on month in June, as conflict fears eased following the US-Iran interim peace deal.

HSBC analyst Jamie Culling told clients:

Global commodity prices fell in June, with our index down by an average of 9% m-o-m, after having reached its highest level since Q3 2022 in May. In June, this left commodity prices up 14% year-to-date, down from 25% year-to-date in May.

The decline largely reflected the impacts of an improving outlook surrounding the US-Iran conflict, including increased traffic flow through the Strait of Hormuz (see Commodity Economic Comment: Better, but the Hormuz disruption is not over yet, 25 June 2026). After the signing of the Memorandum of Understanding between the US and Iran, traffic through the Strait of Hormuz picked up. The Brent oil benchmark fell to its pre-conflict level, reflecting an improved supply outlook.

Nonetheless, it is still early days. Transit rates through the Strait are still well below pre-war levels. Insurance is still expensive. Risks and uncertainty remain high, and the situation is fragile, highlighted by missile strikes from both sides over the past week which saw transits through the Strait of Hormuz dip (Bloomberg, 26 June).

Even as the broader news cycle has moved on and fatigue sets in, all things Hormuz, whether vessel traffic rates, insurance coverage, shipping costs, and Gulf export flows, will remain in focus this summer. The question is whether Tehran still retains full leverage over the waterway, or whether the normalization process has begun to dilute its ability to weaponize the world's most important maritime chokepoint.

Tyler Durden Wed, 07/01/2026 - 07:20

The World Is Becoming Increasingly Divided By Fertility

The world is becoming increasingly divided by fertility.

One group of countries now has too few births to naturally replace its population, while another continues to see population growth driven by higher fertility rates. This demographic divide has major implications for aging populations, labor markets, immigration, and future economic growth.

This map, via Visual Capitalist's Jeff Desjardins, shows which countries are above and below the replacement fertility rate of 2.1 children per woman, using projections for 2025 from the UN World Population Prospects 2024 Revision.

While the regional patterns are striking, several countries buck the trend.

Fertility Rates by Country

The table below lists projected fertility rates for 2025 and whether each country falls above or below the 2.1 replacement threshold.

Country Total Fertility Rate (TFR) Above or Below 2.1
(Replacement Rate) Chad 5.94 Above Somalia 5.91 Above DR Congo 5.90 Above Central African Republic 5.81 Above Niger 5.79 Above Mali 5.42 Above Angola 4.95 Above Burundi 4.68 Above Afghanistan 4.66 Above Mozambique 4.62 Above Mauritania 4.56 Above Mayotte 4.50 Above Tanzania 4.47 Above Benin 4.42 Above Yemen 4.41 Above Nigeria 4.30 Above Sudan 4.19 Above Cameroon 4.19 Above Ivory Coast 4.17 Above Togo 4.07 Above Uganda 4.06 Above Congo 4.05 Above Guinea 4.04 Above Equatorial Guinea 4.04 Above Burkina Faso 4.00 Above Zambia 3.97 Above Madagascar 3.84 Above Ethiopia 3.81 Above Gambia 3.80 Above Liberia 3.79 Above Comoros 3.76 Above Samoa 3.75 Above Senegal 3.71 Above South Sudan 3.71 Above Guinea-Bissau 3.68 Above Zimbabwe 3.62 Above Sierra Leone 3.61 Above Eritrea 3.61 Above Rwanda 3.59 Above Gabon 3.54 Above Malawi 3.53 Above Vanuatu 3.53 Above Sao Tome and Principe 3.53 Above Pakistan 3.50 Above Solomon Islands 3.47 Above Uzbekistan 3.45 Above Ghana 3.30 Above French Guiana 3.29 Above Nauru 3.25 Above Palestine 3.19 Above Iraq 3.17 Above Namibia 3.17 Above Tuvalu 3.14 Above Kenya 3.12 Above Kiribati 3.09 Above Tonga 3.07 Above Papua New Guinea 3.03 Above Tajikistan 2.99 Above Kazakhstan 2.95 Above Marshall Islands 2.82 Above Israel 2.75 Above Kyrgyzstan 2.75 Above Egypt 2.71 Above Guam 2.71 Above Micronesia 2.71 Above Eswatini 2.68 Above Algeria 2.67 Above Syria 2.66 Above Botswana 2.66 Above Lesotho 2.64 Above Turkmenistan 2.63 Above Saint Martin (French part) 2.63 Above Haiti 2.59 Above Mongolia 2.58 Above Djibouti 2.58 Above Jordan 2.57 Above Tokelau 2.57 Above Timor-Leste 2.56 Above Cambodia 2.51 Above Bolivia 2.50 Above Oman 2.48 Above Niue 2.46 Above Honduras 2.45 Above Paraguay 2.39 Above Guyana 2.37 Above Laos 2.36 Above Saudi Arabia 2.29 Above Northern Mariana Islands 2.28 Above Guatemala 2.26 Above Libya 2.25 Above Fiji 2.25 Above American Samoa 2.25 Above Lebanon 2.21 Above Suriname 2.21 Above Faroe Islands 2.20 Above South Africa 2.19 Above Dominican Republic 2.19 Above Morocco 2.18 Above Nicaragua 2.18 Above Western Sahara 2.15 Above Réunion 2.13 Above Bangladesh 2.11 Above Indonesia 2.10 Above Panama 2.09 Below Monaco 2.09 Below Myanmar 2.08 Below Seychelles 2.08 Below United States Virgin Islands 2.07 Below Venezuela 2.06 Below Guadeloupe 2.05 Below Belize 2.01 Below Cook Islands 2.00 Below Martinique 1.97 Below New Caledonia 1.95 Below India 1.94 Below Peru 1.94 Below Nepal 1.94 Below Sri Lanka 1.94 Below Greenland 1.91 Below Philippines 1.88 Below Vietnam 1.88 Below Gibraltar 1.88 Below Mexico 1.87 Below Palau 1.86 Below Tunisia 1.80 Below Montenegro 1.80 Below Ecuador 1.79 Below Georgia 1.79 Below Bahrain 1.78 Below Dem. People's Republic of Korea 1.77 Below El Salvador 1.75 Below St. Vincent & Grenadines 1.75 Below Bulgaria 1.74 Below Moldova 1.72 Below Romania 1.71 Below Armenia 1.71 Below Brunei 1.71 Below Qatar 1.70 Below Barbados 1.70 Below Falkland Islands 1.69 Below Iran 1.67 Below Azerbaijan 1.66 Below New Zealand 1.65 Below France 1.64 Below Australia 1.64 Below St. Helena 1.64 Below United States 1.62 Below Turkey 1.62 Below Colombia 1.62 Below Aruba 1.61 Below Brazil 1.60 Below Ireland 1.60 Below Slovenia 1.58 Below Antigua and Barbuda 1.58 Below Slovakia 1.57 Below Maldives 1.55 Below United Kingdom 1.54 Below Liechtenstein 1.54 Below Malaysia 1.53 Below Kosovo (under UNSC res. 1244) 1.53 Below Isle of Man 1.53 Below Portugal 1.52 Below Denmark 1.52 Below Trinidad and Tobago 1.52 Below Cayman Islands 1.51 Below St. Kitts & Nevis 1.51 Below Argentina 1.50 Below Hungary 1.50 Below Serbia 1.50 Below Kuwait 1.50 Below Bosnia and Herzegovina 1.50 Below Cape Verde 1.50 Below Iceland 1.50 Below French Polynesia 1.48 Below Czechia 1.47 Below Croatia 1.47 Below North Macedonia 1.47 Below Dominica 1.47 Below Russia 1.46 Below Germany 1.46 Below Grenada 1.46 Below Cuba 1.45 Below Bonaire 1.45 Below Montserrat 1.45 Below Netherlands 1.44 Below Sweden 1.44 Below Switzerland 1.44 Below Bhutan 1.44 Below Turks and Caicos Islands 1.44 Below Sint Maarten 1.43 Below Norway 1.42 Below Bermuda 1.41 Below Luxembourg 1.40 Below Wallis & Futuna 1.40 Below Belgium 1.39 Below Uruguay 1.39 Below St. Lucia 1.38 Below Jersey 1.38 Below Cyprus 1.37 Below Estonia 1.37 Below Guernsey 1.37 Below Bahamas 1.36 Below Latvia 1.35 Below Anguilla 1.35 Below Greece 1.34 Below Jamaica 1.34 Below Canada 1.33 Below Austria 1.33 Below Albania 1.33 Below Poland 1.31 Below Costa Rica 1.31 Below Finland 1.30 Below Saint Pierre and Miquelon 1.28 Below Japan 1.23 Below Spain 1.23 Below Belarus 1.22 Below Lithuania 1.22 Below Italy 1.21 Below United Arab Emirates 1.21 Below Mauritius 1.21 Below Thailand 1.19 Below San Marino 1.16 Below Chile 1.13 Below Malta 1.11 Below Andorra 1.10 Below Curacao 1.07 Below British Virgin Islands 1.06 Below China 1.02 Below Ukraine 1.00 Below Singapore 0.96 Below Puerto Rico 0.94 Below Taiwan 0.86 Below St. Barthélemy 0.83 Below South Korea 0.75 Below Hong Kong 0.74 Below Macao 0.69 Below The Great Fertility Divide

The divide is strikingly regional.

Europe is entirely below replacement fertility, joined by most countries across the Americas and East Asia. Meanwhile, most African countries, along with parts of the Middle East, Central Asia, and Southeast Asia, remain above the replacement threshold.

The map also reveals several notable exceptions.

Geographic Pockets That Buck the Trend

While regional patterns are remarkably consistent, several countries stand out as exceptions to their neighbors:

• Central America: Honduras, Nicaragua, and Guatemala all have fertility rates just over replacement. On both the north and south sides, virtually every other country in the Americas is below replacement.
• Africa: Tunisia is the sole country in continental Africa with a rate under 2.1.
• South America: There are two pockets of higher fertility: Peru and Paraguay, and the Guianas (Guyana, Suriname, and French Guiana).
• Middle East: UAE, Qatar, and Bahrain are below 2.1, while surrounding nations in virtually every direction are above replacement.
• South/Central Asia: A strip of connected countries, from Pakistan all the way up through Kazakhstan to Mongolia, has higher fertility. Bangladesh also stands out as higher fertility.
• Southeast Asia: Laos and Cambodia stand out as above replacement. Indonesia is the only country with exactly a 2.1 fertility rate, equal to replacement.

Most of these outliers are countries at different stages of the demographic transition than their neighbors.

Their fertility rates remain above or below replacement while surrounding countries have already moved in the other direction, creating pockets that stand apart from the broader regional pattern.

If you enjoyed today’s post, see Japan’s birthrate collapse over the last 60 years in this visualization on Voronoi.

Tyler Durden Wed, 07/01/2026 - 06:55

The US Should Exit The UN

Authored by Wendy McElroy via The Brownstone Institute,

The future of the United Nations (UN) is in play, largely because of its refusal to censure Iran—a member nation.

In May, Secretary of State Marco Rubio reprimanded the UN:

“If you’re telling me that the international community and hundreds of countries cannot rally behind that, then I don’t know what the utility of the UN system is.” 

Severing all ties to the UN could require an act of Congress, but the US is moving in this direction. On February 4, 2025, Executive Order 14199 directed the US to withdraw from 31 UN organisations. A great deal hinges on how highly Rubio still prizes America’s permanent seat on the UN Security Council which comes with a veto.

The UN is often viewed as an ineffectual bureaucracy that occasionally does some good. It is nothing so benevolent. Its origins may have been well-meaning, but the current UN has become what it claims to oppose. The US should leave the UN altogether and immediately, especially since its unjust policies are likely to get worse…and soon.

The UN’s Original Mission

The UN Charter (1945) opens,

WE THE PEOPLES OF THE UNITED NATIONS DETERMINED…to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person, in the equal rights of men and women…  

The Preamble of its Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948) states, 

Whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world,

Article 2 of the Declaration provides, 

Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex…

‘All human beings are equal’ is the basis of Western justice, whether the equality is under nature, God, or law. Instead of pursuing equality, however, the UN is now a woke and corrupt actor that creates inequality and division. The UN’s financial malfeasance, the sexual abuse by field personnel, its demonization of the West…are well documented in the 104-page report From Watchdogs to Ideologues: How Politicized UN Rapporteurs Are Subverting Human Rights by the Geneva-based NGO UN Watch. 

The UN’s demonstrated commitment is to social justice or a wokeness rooted in equity, not equality. Equity seeks the redistribution of wealth and power to those who are considered oppressed from those who are considered oppressors. Equity is the opposite of equality under the law.

Consider its treatment of men who clearly are not viewed as equal to women, as the UN’s mission claims. An obvious example is the prominent presence of the UN Women commission that claims to be “the global champion for gender equality.” The commission identifies its goal as ensuring “every woman and girl lives up to her full potential.” No mention of men or boys. No comparable UN Men agency, although males are included peripherally by recognizing a need to train them to oppose patriarchy. The United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) explains, 

UNFPA works with men and boys around the world to advance gender equality and end violence. These programmes are encouraging men and boys to abandon harmful stereotypes, embrace respectful, healthy relationships, and support the human rights of all people, everywhere.

Men face many of the same global problems as women, however, including poverty, lack of education, violence, disease and harmful stereotypes. Men also face unique problems, including male-only conscription, paternity fraud, false rape accusations, and longer sentences for the same crimes. Nevertheless, compared to the UN’s emphasis on women, men are virtually ignored. And deliberately so.

The UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) is considered by many to be the international bill of rights for women. Again, no comparable agency exists for men. The FAQ of one CEDAW branch speaks of substantive justice for women. 

Substantive justice judges fairness by results rather than a process; it favors the equitable distribution of rights, not equal rights. CEDAW states, “The concept of substantive equality arose out of the recognition that formal equality may not be sufficient to ensure that women enjoy the same rights as men. An ostensibly gender-neutral policy, while not excluding women per se, may result in a de facto discrimination against women.” 

Instead, in the name of equality, the UN discriminates against men. It denounces the “poison of patriarchy,” decries the manosphere, and discusses the anti-gender movement. The anti-gender movement is defined as groups with an agenda of harming radical feminist and LGBTQIA+ policies. Even questioning these policies or advocating parallel ones for men seems to be anti-gender. 

Earlier, I stated the UN’s policies are likely to get worse and soon. Secretary-General Antonio Guterres steps down on December 31, 2026. The leading contender as his replacement is the aggressively woke Michelle Bachelet, who launched UN Women and served as its Executive Director from 2010 to 2013. After this, she acted as United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (2018 to 2022).

In between stints at the UN, Bachelet served two terms as President of Chile. A prominent member of the Socialist Party of Chile, she mandated 50% female representation in her Cabinet and instituted political quotas to boost women’s presence in government, as well as establishing a Ministry of Women and Gender Equality; again, no comparable Ministry of Men exists.

And, again, the equality pursued was equity because it applied privileges to women. 

While at the UN, some of the global initiatives championed by Bachelet included: 

• Safe Cities Free of Violence Against Women and Girls to address sexual violence in public spaces. The word “sexual” is key. Even the U.N. admits men experience more physical violence in public (81%) compared to women (19%). It is not clear the rate at which men experience sexual violence, however, as men report such abuse at a far lower rate than women.

• Fund for Gender Equality to provide money exclusively to women to empower them at the grassroots level. Males can access other U.N. gender funds but only in order to dismantle gender inequality, not to empower themselves. Men are to act as gender allies and “agents of change.”

• Increasing Women’s Access to Justice in Post-Conflict Societies to support transitional justice and women’s human rights in conflict and post-conflict zones. 

Everyone has the right to discriminate peacefully on his own time and dime. But the UN is primarily funded by mandatory assessed and voluntary contributions from its member nations; that is, by tax dollars extracted from individuals, half of whom are men and many who are dissenting women, like me. 

The good news: there are rumors of the UN’s financial collapse since some member states—most prominently the US—are withholding their contributions. The US alone owes $2.196 billion to the regular budget and $1.8 billion to separate peacekeeping operations, which amounts to about one-quarter of UN funding. Without it, the UN will be sorely diminished in status.

Good. And if the UN does collapse, then better.

Tyler Durden Wed, 07/01/2026 - 06:30

Supreme Court Strikes Down Trump's Birthright Citizenship Executive Order

The Supreme Court on Tuesday struck down President Donald Trump's executive order curbing birthright citizenship. 

President Donald Trump signs an executive order in the Oval Office of the White House in Washington, D.C., on January 20, 2025. (Jim Watson/AFP/Getty Images)

In a massive 194-page, 5-4 ruling, the Court affirmed a District Court ruling, holding that Executive Order 14160 - Trump's attempt to deny automatic citizenship to children born in the U.S. to parents who are undocumented or only temporarily present - violates the Fourteenth Amendment's Citizenship Clause. Chief Justice Roberts wrote the majority opinion, joined by Sotomayor, Kagan, Barrett, and Jackson.

Justice Kavanaugh provided the sixth vote against the order while explicitly rejecting the majority's constitutional theory, arguing the EO fails only because it conflicts with a 1940s immigration statute - leaving the door open for Congress, not the Constitution, to revisit the question.

BREAKING: The Supreme Court has ruled that the children of illegal aliens and foreign nationals born in the U.S. count as American citizens.

Roberts and Barrett joined all the liberals.

Disgusting. pic.twitter.com/FStIm0J3R3

— Greg Price (@greg_price11) June 30, 2026

Polymarket had it right on SCOTUS Birthright decision (it wasn't even close) pic.twitter.com/aIXK1g9kcz

— zerohedge (@zerohedge) June 30, 2026

In response to the ruling, President Trump wrote that it was "too bad for our Country," but that Republicans can "easily make up for it in Congress through Legislation..."

Background

Birthright citizenship - the principle that nearly everyone born on U.S. soil automatically becomes a U.S. citizen - has stood as a foundational element of American law and identity for more than 150 years. Its modern constitutional anchor is the Citizenship Clause of the 14th Amendment, ratified in 1868 after the Civil War: "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside."

The clause was enacted primarily to overturn the Supreme Court's 1857 Dred Scott v. Sandford decision (which denied citizenship to black people) and to guarantee citizenship to formerly enslaved people and their descendants. It established a clear rule of jus soli (citizenship by birth on the soil) with narrow historical exceptions, such as children of foreign diplomats or members of invading armies.

Original intent. Four Justices just threw it out. pic.twitter.com/OtGZOqCoY4

— NoNonsense2 (@NoMoNonsense2) June 30, 2026

The Supreme Court's landmark 1898 decision in United States v. Wong Kim Ark cemented this broad understanding. Wong Kim Ark, born in San Francisco to Chinese parents who were legal residents but ineligible for naturalization under then-existing exclusionary laws, was ruled a U.S. citizen. Justice Horace Gray's majority opinion affirmed that the 14th Amendment codifies "the ancient and fundamental rule of citizenship by birth within the territory, in the allegiance and under the protection of the country," applying to children of resident aliens without regard to race or the precise immigration status of the parents (beyond the traditional exceptions).

For well over a century, this interpretation has governed practice: federal agencies, courts, and both political parties treated birth on U.S. soil as conferring citizenship almost universally, regardless of whether a parent was undocumented, a temporary visa holder, or a lawful permanent resident.

The Modern Challenges

In recent decades, conservatives, immigration restriction advocates, and President Donald Trump have advanced a narrower reading. They argue that "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" requires a deeper form of political allegiance or domicile - essentially limiting automatic citizenship to children of U.S. citizens or lawful permanent residents. In short: the clause was chiefly meant for freed slaves and their children, that extending it to children of undocumented immigrants creates "anchor babies," encourages illegal immigration and birth tourism, and imposes costs on the country. They point to certain 19th-century commentaries and historical practices in other nations as support.

On January 20, 2025 - his first day in office for his second term - President Trump signed Executive Order 14160, "Protecting the Meaning and Value of American Citizenship." The order directs federal agencies not to recognize U.S. citizenship for children born in the United States after February 20, 2025, in two main scenarios:

• The mother was unlawfully present in the U.S. and the father is neither a U.S. citizen nor a lawful permanent resident (LPR/green card holder); or
• The mother's presence was lawful but temporary (e.g., student, work, or tourist visa) and the father is neither a citizen nor LPR.

The administration maintains this is consistent with the 14th Amendment's original meaning and with the statutory codification in 8 U.S.C. § 1401(a), which largely tracks the constitutional language.

The Path to the Supreme Court

The order never took effect. Federal district courts in multiple jurisdictions quickly struck it down as unconstitutional, with one judge describing it as "blatantly unconstitutional." In June 2025, the Supreme Court addressed related procedural issues in Trump v. CASA (and companion cases), ruling 6-3 that district courts generally lack authority to issue universal/nationwide injunctions. This narrowed some protections but left the core constitutional question unresolved.

Today's SCOTUS case, Trump v. Barbara (No. 25-365), stemmed from a class-action lawsuit filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Hampshire. Plaintiffs include families challenging the order on behalf of themselves and a nationwide class of affected children. One named representative is "Barbara," a Honduran asylum applicant whose child was due in late 2025; other plaintiffs include individuals on temporary visas (e.g., a Taiwanese student whose daughter was born in April 2025) and a Brazilian applicant for permanent residence whose son was born in March 2025. The district court issued a preliminary injunction and provisionally certified a nationwide class, finding the plaintiffs likely to succeed on the merits. The Supreme Court granted certiorari before judgment from the First Circuit.

During oral arguments held April 1, U.S. Solicitor General D. John Sauer defended the order - emphasizing historical sources, the role of "domicile" in Wong Kim Ark, and contemporary policy concerns. Plaintiffs' counsel Cecillia Wang urged the Court to reaffirm Wong Kim Ark as establishing a fixed, bright-line rule rooted in text, history, and longstanding practice.

One of the most destructive and outrageous decisions in the long history of the Supreme Court. American citizenship is not the birthright of the world. It belongs only and solely to Americans. No provision of the Constitution can be read to require our national self-obliteration. https://t.co/qZuwzZq5tr

— Stephen Miller (@StephenM) June 30, 2026

Questioning from the justices spanned the ideological spectrum and focused heavily on Wong Kim Ark, the meaning of "subject to the jurisdiction thereof," and whether the government's proposed limitations could be squared with precedent and the amendment's text. Observers noted significant skepticism toward the administration's position, with several justices highlighting the breadth of the 1898 ruling and questioning efforts to distinguish it or limit its application based on parental status. A decision was widely expected by the end of the Court's term (June 30, 2026) or shortly thereafter.

Tyler Durden Wed, 07/01/2026 - 05:55

Kremlin Confirms Rare Talks To Import Gasoline Amid Drone Strike Mayhem

Russia has confirmed its government is currently in negotiations with other countries to purchase gasoline while desperately seeking to stabilize its domestic market after months drone mayhem out of Ukraine.

"Discussions are actively being held," Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said at a press briefing Tuesday, though without specifying which countries. "If agreements can be reached at acceptable price points, then [imports] will move forward," he added.

File image: UBN

The development is surprising given that Russia remains the world's second-largest crude oil exporter and third-largest supplier of refined petroleum products - and yet it is now facing the somewhat humiliating prospect of importing gasoline.

Last week, Reuters dropped a bombshell citing industry insiders who revealed that Moscow has been in backroom talks to import a staggering 50,000 metric tons of AI-92 grade gasoline from neighboring Kazakhstan. India has also been mentioned in reports.

President Putin just over the weekend estimated Russia's total gasoline reserves to be at at 1.7 million metric tons, which would constitute a 4% decline compared to the same period last year. Politico notes further:

Deputy Prime Minister Alexander Novak has described imports as one of the government's key tools for stabilizing the market, while Russian lawmakers last week approved tax changes creating subsidies to help finance gasoline purchases from abroad.

Putin had further in a speech and separate interview belatedly acknowledged Sunday that his country is facing a "certain shortage" of fuel following weeks of ramped-up drone warfare coming out of Ukraine, which has chiefly targeted oil refineries and domestic supply facilities, including in the Moscow region.

"As for strikes against critical infrastructure in general, and energy infrastructure in particular, of course, these attacks on our infrastructure facilities create problems," Putin said. "That's obvious."

"Right now we're observing a certain shortage, but it's not critical," he added. He also made wide-ranging public remarks at a major summit of the ruling 'United Russia' party.

Some Western pundits have agreed that the situation is not yet critical, and that a fuel squeeze has been a long-running Ukrainian goal of its intensified drone attacks...

From October 2025 (for perspective): "Ukrainians hope [drone campaign] will persuade Putin to end the war at last...Increasingly severe gasoline shortages have hit multiple regions of Russia...half of the stations in Russian-occupied Crimea stopped selling gasoline..." pic.twitter.com/VILpIKhRK8

— Mark Ames (@MarkAmesExiled) June 30, 2026

A state of emergency for all citizens was also declared in Crimea last week - with fuel only being provided to military and state entities at this point.

Putin further acknowledged in his recent comments that small, slow-moving drones have proven a problem for Russia's anti-air defense systems, which were conventionally designed to intercept large fast projectiles like missiles or warplanes.

This has been big on Russians' minds, as this month they beheld unprecedented scenes of massive smoke plumes overtaking Moscow's skyline, as a key refinery there burned. 

Tyler Durden Wed, 07/01/2026 - 05:45

Police Flee During Riots In The Hague After Morocco Knocks Netherlands Out Of World Cup

Via Remix News,

After Morocco knocked the Dutch national football team out of the World Cup, rioting broke out this morning in The Hague, with dramatic footage showing Dutch motorcycle police fleeing from Moroccan supporters. Police also deployed water cannons to control the crowd and at least a dozen people were reportedly arrested.

The video of the Dutch police fleeing prompted a sharp reaction from anti-immigration political leader Geert Wilders, who wrote: "Sweep those streets clean and ship the riffraff with their families off to Morocco. This is our country. Get lost!"

Veeg die straten schoon en zet het reltuig met familie uit naar Marokko. Dit is ons land. Wegwezen! #NEDMAR #Schilderswijk https://t.co/IR8pLKIcnO

— Geert Wilders (@geertwilderspvv) June 30, 2026

Moroccans gathered in the streets, blocking traffic, and chanting with Moroccan flags. Some supporters danced on car roofs. Many of them are Dutch citizens and second- and even third-generation citizens.

Police regrouped and conducted baton charges, deployed water cannons, and made targeted arrests. A spokesperson said that water cannons were deployed after police were targeted with stones and fireworks.

JUST IN: Dutch police use batons on migrants celebrating Morocco's win over the Dutch national team in the World Cup

Dozens of arrests reported in The Hague after rioting broke out. Water cannons have also been deployed.

Follow: @RMXnews pic.twitter.com/LYVeC5Ua79

— Remix News & Views (@RMXnews) June 30, 2026

JUST IN: Bottles fly at police and water cannons are deployed in The Hague after Morocco defeats the Netherlands in the World Cup.

Apparently, these 2nd- and 3rd-generation migrants are not big fans of the Dutch national team. Dozens have been arrested.pic.twitter.com/5i5qskRr6W

— Remix News & Views (@RMXnews) June 30, 2026

With the Moroccan football team advancing in the World Cup, police across Europe are likely to be nervous about upcoming football games involving the North African team.

In previous years, Moroccan victories at football sporting events have led to mayhem and mass riots. In fact, it was already in 2022 that Wilders was urging mass deportations in reactions to major riots following victories of the Moroccan national team.

Read more here...

Tyler Durden Wed, 07/01/2026 - 05:00

Heat Mortality Surges In Europe

Heat-related mortality in Europe has surged over the last couple of decades.

As Statista's Katharina Buchholz reports, according to the latest available data published by the Lancet Countdown 2025 Report, between 2012 and 2021, 5.5 people per 100,000 population died of heat-related causes per year on the continent.

This is almost double the annual rate observed between 1992 and 2021.

You will find more infographics at Statista

Similarly rapid surges were observed over the same time period in Asia-Pacific as well as in the Americas.

However, heat deaths stayed on a lower level in these regions and reached only an annual 3.4 and 2.1 in 100,000, respectively, during the last decade.

All three continents in question have an aging population, making heatwaves more deadly as it is older people who predominantly succumb to heat-related causes.

But Europe is also less prepared than other continents for a changing climate as its many temperate regions have not built for the heat and have traditionally neither been equipped for it, may that be in terms of air conditioner ownership or knowledge of ways to stay cool.

Hotter (and younger) regions of the globe have not seen the same developments in heat-related mortality, even though they do experience consistently higher levels of it.

In Sub-Saharan Africa, North Africa and the Middle East as well as South and Southeast Asia, brutal heatwaves claim the lives between nine and 14 people per 100,000 every year.

In all three regions, this figure has changed by at most 10 percent since the 1990s.

Tyler Durden Wed, 07/01/2026 - 04:15

Ukraine's Desperate Propaganda Campaign While Russia Advances Along The Entire Front

Authored by Larry Johnson via Sonar21.com

Volodymyr Zelensky and his Western backers have launched a desperate 40-day "campaign of terrors" — which includes a mix of military escalations and a massive information/psyops operation designed to portray Russia as collapsing and Putin as facing an imminent uprising or coup. The goal is to force Russia into a ceasefire. Western audiences are being flooded with social media and regular media articles that paint a dire picture of Russia’s military campaign, while touting Ukraine’s incredible accomplishments. It is all a load of crap, but that is all the West has left in its quiver as Russia’s campaign of attrition continues to pulverize Ukraine.

The Western-led propaganda campaign consists of the following elements:

• Information Warfare — Heavy push of 24/7 propaganda about Putin’s “imminent downfall,” including staged videos of supposed Russian soldiers announcing a mutiny.
• Fake Psyops — Coordinated attempts to stoke panic in Russia (e.g., false claims of fuel/gas shortages, which were partly caused by panic buying triggered by the rumors).
• Symbolic Actions — Staged drone flag-drops (e.g., on the Kinburn Spit near Crimea) meant to symbolize Russian retreat and collapse — quickly debunked and mocked.
• Broader Objective — Combine these narratives with actual strikes on Russian infrastructure to create the impression of regime instability, pressuring Putin politically.

Now for the reality. Yes, Ukraine has hit some Russian refineries and created some spectacular visuals of billowing smoke and fire. However, this is nothing more than military political theater that is intended to distract from Ukraine's setbacks all along the front. As a side note, Russian oil exports have increased during this same period, putting to bed the narrative that Russia’s oil industry in suffering catastrophic losses.

via Reuters

Here is a summary of Russian activity, starting in the Northern section of the front:

Sumy Direction

In the Sumy direction, the “North” assault groups advanced on 19 sectors, and some units of Ukraine’s 104th Territorial Defense Brigade abandoned their positions in Bachevsk. Russian forces continued active operations along the border, conducting strikes on Ukrainian positions and logistics. They reported repelling multiple Ukrainian attempts to cross into Russian territory and inflicting significant losses on enemy manpower and equipment. Russian soldiers are now only a few kilometers from Sumy itself.

Kharkiv Direction

Russian troops advanced in several sectors north and northeast of Kharkiv. The MOD reported the liberation of additional border settlements and improvement of tactical positions. Russian Geran drones conduct a series of high-precision strikes on gas infrastructure in Kharkiv region overnight. A gas distribution station near Panyutino was struck — disabling gas storage tanks, gas pumping plants, and a gas treatment facility. The Skvortsovskaya gas treatment system near Kosogorovka was also hit.​​ Ukrainian counterattacks were repelled, with Russian artillery and aviation playing a key role in degrading enemy capabilities.

Donetsk Direction (Primary Focus)

Donetsk remains the main direction of Russian offensive operations. Russian troops are steadily advancing on the Pokrovsk axis, with Russian forces capturing multiple settlements and pushing toward key logistical nodes. The most notable achievement is in Konstantinovka, where Russian units have taken control of most of the city and disrupted Ukrainian supply lines. With both Pokrovsk and Konstantinovka gone, Russia controls the two southern and eastern approaches that previously buffered the Kramatorsk-Sloviansk agglomeration. The H-32 Pokrovsk-Konstantinovka highway and the T-0504 Bakhmut-Pokrovsk highway — both of which Russian forces had been fighting to seize specifically to link these two axes — now forms a contiguous corridor under Russian control, allowing logistics and force concentration to flow directly toward Druzhkivka and Kramatorsk without contesting two separate urban battles.The Russians also are advancing around Chasiv Yar and Toretsk, including gains in urban fighting and elevated positions.

Overall, the Russian MOD described consistent liberation of territory, high daily Ukrainian losses, and effective use of glide bombs, drones, and artillery to support ground advances.

Dnipropetrovsk Oblast (Dnipro region)

In the Dnipropetrovsk direction, the 36th Guards Motorized Rifle Brigade captured Bogodarivka, the third settlement in three days since crossing the Dnieper River. Russian forces continue conducting regular long-range strikes (missiles and drones) on military-industrial targets, energy infrastructure, and logistical hubs in the oblast. Key targets included defense factories, repair facilities, and rail nodes supporting the Ukrainian front.

Zaporizhzhia Direction

In the Zaporozhye area, Russian forces have blocked a Ukrainian bridgehead in Aleksandrovka and have reached the southern outskirts of Pokrovskoye. After Russian forces took control of Novy Donbass, they advanced towards Shevchenko and Svetloye, isolating Ukrainian forward positions with drones. Russian forces maintain pressure through artillery, drone strikes, and localized assaults, destroying Ukrainian strongholds and equipment while holding defensive lines.

Kherson Direction

Operations remained largely positional along the Dnipro River. The Russian MOD highlighted successful strikes on Ukrainian crossings, logistics, and manpower concentrations on the right bank. Russian units conducted raids and maintained control over left-bank positions.

In other words, the Russian summer offensive is underway and Ukraine, despite its propaganda offensive, is retreating to the west.

*  *  *

Disclaimer: Contributor posts published on Zero Hedge do not necessarily represent the views and opinions of Zero Hedge.

Tyler Durden Wed, 07/01/2026 - 03:30

These Countries Are Building The Most Small Modular Nuclear Reactors

The U.S. is leading the world in small modular nuclear reactor (SMR) development with 28 siting announcements, as of 2026.

This graphic, via Visual Capitalist's Cody Good, in partnership with the National Public Utilities Council, shows which countries are building the most SMRs.

The U.S. Leads Global SMR Development

With 28 siting announcements, the U.S. has more SMR projects in development than the next four countries combined.

 

Source: The Nuclear Energy Agency

Only 78 of 129 SMR designs being tracked by the NEA are publicly reported in the digital dashboard. The rest have either requested not to be included or are not under active development.

Across the U.S., national laboratories lead in siting announcements (7), followed by a three-way tie among utilities, universities, and SMR developers (5 each).

Why Small Modular Reactors Matter

SMRs are a critical clean-energy technology that are cheaper and more flexible than traditional nuclear power generation.

• Small: SMRs can produce up to 300 MWe, far less than traditional reactors, which typically produce around 1,000–1,400 MWe. 
• Modular: SMRs are designed for mass factory manufacturing to reduce cost and build time.
• Reactor: The four main reactor types are light water reactors, fast neutron reactors, graphite-moderated high temperature reactors, and molten salt reactors.

Their compact, modular design enables easier transport and deployment ideal for data centers or remote sites where grid connection is costly or unnecessary.

The Role of SMRs in the Future of Power

As electricity demand accelerates, SMRs are becoming an increasingly important part of conversations around grid reliability, energy security, and clean firm power. 

For utilities and policymakers, tracking where these projects are emerging can help inform planning, policy, and long-term strategy.

Tyler Durden Wed, 07/01/2026 - 02:45

Will Denmark Really Ban The Islamic Call To Prayer?

Via Remix News,

Denmark’s government, led by the center-left Social Democrats, has once again announced plans to pursue a nationwide ban on the public broadcast of the Islamic call to prayer via loudspeakers. This now amounts to the third time the center-left government is trying to ban the call to prayer.

Immigration and Integration Minister Morten Bødskov stated that the government is investigating a legal framework to prohibit amplified calls to prayer from mosques.

“The call to prayer should not ring out above the Danish rooftops. It has no place in Denmark; one should not wonder if one is in a suburb of Islamabad when walking around the country,” he told the press.

However, this is the third attempt by the ruling party, with previous efforts in 2020 and 2025 failing to pass. Will the third time be a charm?

One of the major hurdles is that Danish law protects religious freedom, and any blanket national ban on amplified calls to prayer has raised concerns about violating the rights of Muslims. The government needed to investigate whether such a prohibition could withstand legal scrutiny when balanced against residents’ rights to a quiet environment. Past efforts stalled during this review process without advancing to enforceable legislation.

Furthermore, many areas of the country have already banned the call to prayer, such as the biggest city, Copenhagen. These areas have achieved this through existing local noise bylaws or municipal regulations, reducing the urgency for a sweeping national law. This has historically made a new nationwide framework harder to justify or pass.

One attempt to ban the call to prayer was also reportedly interrupted by parliamentary elections, which led to a shift in government priorities at the time.

Denmark is arguably the Scandinavian nation most hostile to mass immigration, with the left-wing parties there considered to have right-wing policies on the issue. However, parties to the right, which call for remigration and even stricter action, argue that legal migration, including from Third World and Muslim countries, has been steadily increasing under the left-wing Social Democrat government.

The current immigration minister, Bødskov, is actually considered “softer” on immigration than his predecessors, such as Rasmus Stoklund and Kaare Dybvad Bek, who were known for their harsher rhetoric against mass immigration. His tough public statements are often viewed as necessary political positioning to align with the party’s established tough stance towards immigration under Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen, rather than his personal views on the subject.

Nevertheless, it remains unclear how far Bødskov is willing to go or if this announcement is more political posturing. The Danish government is reviewing legality, including compatibility with religious freedom protections in the constitution. The current effort would move beyond local noise regulations to a national prohibition, but no final bill has been introduced yet, and implementation details, such as the exact scope and potential penalties, are still at the discussion phase.

While this renewed push builds on Denmark’s stricter immigration and integration policies, including a recent ban on Islamic full-face veils like the niqab and burqa, it remains to be seen if the government can pull this new proposal off.

Read more here...

Tyler Durden Wed, 07/01/2026 - 02:00

Empire At 250: Can The Principles Of 1776 Survive The American Police State?

Authored by John & Nisha Whitehead via The Rurtherford Institute,

“The people are the only legitimate fountain of power.”

- James Madison

This is a year of strange anniversaries.

Two hundred and fifty years ago, a band of revolutionaries declared their independence from a king.

America’s founders rejected concentrated power. They denounced standing armies. They distrusted government secrecy. They risked their lives to escape a ruler who could tax without consent, wage war without accountability, and govern without meaningful restraint.

Twenty-five years ago, after the attacks of September 11, 2001, America embarked on a very different journey.

The federal government claimed extraordinary emergency powers. Surveillance expanded. Wars multiplied. Executive authority grew. Constitutional safeguards were weakened in the name of security.

One anniversary marked a revolt against empire. The other marked the normalization of it.

Now, as America prepares to celebrate 250 years of independence, we are confronted with a bitter irony: the republic born in rebellion against empire has become an empire in everything but name.

Worse, the U.S. government is violating the very principles that justified the American Revolution.

Graft, grift and corruption. Endless wars. Profiteering. Trillions squandered abroad while the nation sinks deeper into debt at home.

A government that governs increasingly by executive order and emergency decree. A government that wastes taxpayer money with impunity, rewards political loyalty over constitutional fidelity, installs loyalists in positions meant to serve the public, dismantles safeguards against corruption, shields insiders from scrutiny, and treats accountability as an inconvenience.

National states of emergency that never seem to end. Efforts to nullify constitutional guarantees such as birthright citizenship. Expanded death penalty powers. A growing willingness to bypass Congress, sidestep constitutional restraints and rule by fiat.

Surveillance programs that track where we go, what we buy, who we know, what we say and what we believe. Fusion centers, facial recognition, license plate readers, AI-assisted monitoring, financial tracking, intelligence-sharing agreements and a sprawling security apparatus that treats privacy as a loophole and dissent as a threat.

Military action undertaken without congressional authorization. National Guard deployments that blur the line between civilian government and military authority. The militarization of policing. Federal agents arresting people at courthouses. Protesters treated as security threats. Legal residents threatened with deportation because of their political speech and associations. Immigrants and asylum seekers swept up in raids, detained, deported or disappeared into a bureaucratic maze before courts can fully review the legality of what has been done.

Whistleblowers, journalists, activists and critics targeted for speaking truth to power. Expanding “extremist” classifications that increasingly encompass lawful speech, political dissent and ideological opposition rather than criminal conduct.

This is not freedom.

This is the architecture of a police state.

Nor is this merely the accumulated rot of past administrations.

Republican and Democratic presidents alike helped build the machinery of permanent emergency. They expanded the surveillance state, normalized undeclared wars, empowered the military-industrial complex, deferred to intelligence agencies, and taught Americans to accept secrecy, suspicion and fear as the price of safety.

Donald Trump inherited that machinery.

Then he weaponized it.

No modern president has done more to expose the danger of allowing so much power to accumulate in one office.

Trump did not invent the imperial presidency, but he has shown what happens when a president treats constitutional limits as obstacles, dissent as disloyalty, the courts as irritants, Congress as irrelevant and federal power as a personal weapon.

Nor has he hidden his intentions. From efforts to consolidate authority within the executive branch to the installation of loyalists whose allegiance appears directed more toward a president than the Constitution, the Trump Administration has tested the limits of executive power in ways that would have alarmed the generation that fought the Revolution.

We have also witnessed growing efforts to sideline due process protections, weaken the ancient safeguard of habeas corpus, expand detention powers, and normalize the notion that constitutional rights can be suspended whenever government officials invoke national security, immigration enforcement or emergency necessity.

This is what happens when a government built for emergencies never leaves emergency mode.

The danger is no longer hypothetical.

The tools of authoritarianism exist.

The police state machinery exists.

The surveillance apparatus exists.

The permanent war powers exist.

The question is who controls them—and what remains to stop them.

The American Revolution was not fought over minor policy disagreements. It was fought over the danger of unaccountable power. The colonists objected to a king who could deploy troops, impose taxes, conduct searches, punish dissent and wage war without meaningful consent of the governed.

The Declaration of Independence was not merely a list of grievances.

It was an indictment.

King George III had made the military superior to civilian authority. He had maintained standing armies without consent. He had cut off trade, imposed taxes, obstructed justice and transported colonists overseas for trial.

Time and again, the Declaration returned to the same central complaint: concentrated power had become a threat to liberty.

The Revolution was not fought over a tax on tea.

It was fought over the danger of a government that had placed itself above the people.

When the framers later gathered to draft the Constitution, they did so with those lessons fresh in mind.

The founders understood that power is inherently expansive. Given enough time, every government seeks more authority, more secrecy and more control.

That is why they created a constitutional system in which power was divided. The branches were intended to restrain one another. No person was to be trusted with too much authority.

Yet history shows how quickly constitutional restraints weaken in times of fear.

John Adams signed the Alien and Sedition Acts and criminalized political dissent.

Abraham Lincoln suspended habeas corpus.

Woodrow Wilson prosecuted anti-war activists.

Franklin Roosevelt ordered the internment of more than 120,000 Japanese Americans.

Richard Nixon weaponized federal agencies against political opponents.

Each expansion of executive power was justified as necessary.

Each left constitutional scars.

Then came September 11, 2001.

In the months and years that followed, Congress passed the USA PATRIOT Act, vastly expanding government surveillance powers. The Department of Homeland Security was created. Military tribunals were revived. Warrantless surveillance became commonplace. Watchlists multiplied. Fusion centers spread across the country. Indefinite detention became normalized.

War abroad justified surveillance at home.

Terror threats justified government secrecy.

National crises justified executive emergency powers.

What began as a response to a terrorist attack gradually became a governing philosophy.

Twenty-five years later, the emergency state has become embedded in the architecture of government.

Every crisis expands executive power.

Every war contracts liberty.

Every emergency leaves behind powers that rarely disappear.

This is how tyranny rises and freedom falls.

Presidents of both parties have inherited extraordinary powers and expanded them further. Congress has repeatedly surrendered responsibilities it was meant to exercise. Courts have increasingly deferred to executive claims involving national security, immigration and emergency authority.

The result is a government that often functions by executive decree rather than representative self-government.

Executive orders increasingly substitute for legislation. National emergencies become permanent governing authorities. Constitutional guarantees such as birthright citizenship are challenged by presidential decree rather than constitutional amendment. Congress is bypassed. Courts are treated as obstacles. Separation of powers becomes a formality rather than a safeguard.

The presidency has evolved into something the framers would scarcely recognize.

What Donald Trump has done is expose the fatal flaw in the system Americans allowed to be built after 9/11: once government is handed the machinery of permanent emergency, all that remains is for the wrong person to seize the controls.

For decades, Americans were told not to worry.

We were told surveillance powers would only be used against terrorists.

We were told emergency powers would only be invoked during genuine crises.

We were told national security authorities would remain subject to constitutional limits.

We were told the Constitution’s checks and balances would hold.

We were told no president would ever be allowed to exercise such powers without meaningful restraint.

They were wrong.

And we were wrong to trust power to restrain itself.

The lesson is the same one the founders learned from bitter experience: power granted in the name of necessity rarely remains confined to necessity.

Every emergency becomes a precedent.

Every precedent becomes a power.

Every power becomes permanent.

The founders also warned against standing armies and perpetual war.

Having lived under military occupation, they understood that governments organized around war inevitably become organized around power.

What they feared was not merely the presence of soldiers but the rise of a permanent warfare state—a government that uses conflict, fear and national security as justification for expanding its authority.

Today, those dangers extend beyond foreign battlefields. National Guard units are increasingly federalized and deployed domestically. Military tactics, equipment and personnel continue to flow into civilian law enforcement. The line separating the soldier from the police officer grows fainter with each passing crisis.

Look around.

The United States has spent much of the last quarter century engaged in military operations somewhere in the world. Wars are launched without formal declarations. Emergency powers become permanent. Defense budgets swell while domestic needs go unmet. Intelligence agencies operate with extraordinary secrecy. Technologies developed for foreign battlefields migrate into local police departments and domestic surveillance programs.

Today, even as the Trump Administration and its so-called War Department continue to pound the war drums, Americans are once again being told to trust government officials operating behind closed doors, often with little public debate and even less accountability.

The founders understood a simple truth: governments that prepare constantly for war eventually begin treating their own citizens as potential enemies.

That is the logic of empire.

Enemies abroad justify surveillance at home. War powers abroad justify police powers at home. National security becomes the excuse for secrecy, militarization, censorship, detention and control.

Perhaps nowhere is this more evident than in the rise of the surveillance state.

Long before shots were fired at Lexington and Concord, colonists were outraged by writs of assistance—general warrants that allowed British agents to search homes, businesses and personal property without meaningful justification.

Those abuses helped inspire the Fourth Amendment.

Today, government agents no longer need to kick down your door to invade your privacy.

Your cell phone tracks your movements. Your vehicle reports your location. Your purchases reveal your habits. Your social media activity exposes your associations. Your digital footprint creates a detailed record of your life.

Government agencies can access location data, financial records, license plate readers, facial recognition databases and vast stores of personal information, often with little transparency and even less oversight.

Meanwhile, Congress continues to renew and expand surveillance authorities while intelligence agencies deepen information-sharing arrangements with domestic and foreign partners. Americans are increasingly monitored not because they are suspected of wrongdoing, but because technology has made mass surveillance possible and government has found it useful.

The surveillance state has no borders. Nor does it have clear limits.

Government agencies increasingly rely on broad and elastic “extremist” classifications that often extend beyond violence or criminal conduct to encompass lawful speech, political dissent and ideological opposition.

What begins as a tool to identify dangerous actors inevitably expands into a mechanism for monitoring unpopular viewpoints. Information collected for one purpose is shared for another. Data gathered abroad finds its way home. Intelligence systems built to monitor foreign threats are repurposed to watch domestic populations.

King George’s agents needed boots and battering rams to search your home.

Today’s government can search your life without ever leaving its desk.

And then there is the matter of accountability—or rather, the lack of it.

The Declaration of Independence repeatedly condemned a government that had placed itself above the law.

That grievance remains painfully relevant.

Government officials who violate constitutional rights are frequently shielded from accountability by doctrines such as qualified immunity. Secret courts authorize secret programs. Bureaucrats operate behind layers of classification and administrative complexity. Government agencies routinely fail audits, lose records, misuse surveillance powers and exceed their authority, yet meaningful consequences remain rare.

Meanwhile, ordinary Americans face an entirely different standard.

When government officials make costly mistakes, taxpayers foot the bill.

When unconstitutional policies trigger lawsuits, taxpayers foot the bill.

When unlawful detentions result in settlements, taxpayers foot the bill.

When militarized raids, wrongful arrests, surveillance abuses and civil-rights violations generate years of litigation, taxpayers foot the bill.

Even now, Americans are being asked to absorb the financial costs of government misconduct on a staggering scale—from unlawful enforcement actions and unconstitutional executive orders to politically motivated spending schemes and settlements designed to shield those in power from scrutiny.

The public pays for the government’s mistakes while those responsible often walk away untouched. In some cases, public office itself has become a vehicle for private gain, with self-enrichment schemes, conflicts of interest and insider favoritism blurring the line between public service and personal profit.

The pattern is impossible to ignore.

Profits are privatized. Power is centralized. Accountability is deferred.

The bill is sent to the American people.

Whether it involves unlawful surveillance, unconstitutional arrests, retaliatory investigations, speech-based censorship, ICE raids that terrorize communities, warrantless tracking, civil asset forfeiture, the targeting of whistleblowers, journalists and activists, endless wars or political corruption, the pattern is the same: power protects itself.

The founders did not risk their lives because taxes were too high.

They risked their lives because government had become detached from the people, insulated from accountability and convinced that power justified itself.

Sound familiar?

The uncomfortable truth is that many of the abuses that sparked the American Revolution have returned, only this time they arrive wrapped in the language of national security, public safety, emergency management and administrative necessity.

The faces have changed. The technology has changed. The rhetoric has changed.

The danger remains the same.

Which brings us back to this strange anniversary year.

The 250th anniversary of American independence should have been an opportunity to renew our commitment to limited government, constitutional accountability and the principle that no one is above the law.

Instead, the lesson of 9/11 is being repeated in a different form.

Twenty-five years ago, fear became the pretext for permanent emergency.

Today, patriotism is becoming the backdrop for presidential spectacle, military pageantry and the celebration of the very concentration of power the American Revolution was fought to resist.

Much of the celebration has been transformed into a spectacle of power: military displays, patriotic pageantry, strongman politics and the elevation of political leaders into larger-than-life figures whose authority is expected to be admired rather than questioned.

Yet the founders did not launch a revolution so Americans could celebrate authoritarian power.

They launched a revolution to remind future generations that power is dangerous, liberty is fragile and no ruler should ever be elevated above the Constitution.

For 250 years, Americans have treated the Declaration of Independence as the nation’s birth certificate.

What we have failed to recognize is that the Declaration of Independence was also a warning: freedom is fragile, power is relentless, and no generation remains free simply because a previous generation fought for liberty.

As America approaches its 250th anniversary, the most important question is not whether the nation survived. Nations survive. Empires survive. Governments survive.

The real question, as I make clear in Battlefield America: The War on the American People and its fictional counterpart The Erik Blair Diaries, is whether the principles that inspired the American Revolution survived as well.

Thus, the question is not whether America survived 250 years.

The question is whether the principles of 1776 can survive the American police state.

Tyler Durden Tue, 06/30/2026 - 23:25

Trump Reports Over $1.4 Billion In Income From 2025 Crypto Earnings

President Trump earned more than $1.4 billion from his family's crypto-related ventures alone last year, according to a financial disclosure released Tuesday, including from his meme coin business and his family's cryptocurrency firm.

The 927-page filing, his annual disclosure for 2025 with ‌the US Office of Government Ethics, disclosed that Trump made $636 million in royalties from CIC Digital, LLC, a company that issues $TRUMP, a crypto token that he launched three days before taking office for his second term. Almost all of the come came in the form of royalties from a license agreement with Celebration Coins. Trump's meme coin reached its peak value of $74.24 within a day of launching. On Tuesday evening, its price was $1.67, down 98% since inception.

The president also reported almost $600 million in income from token sales by World Liberty Financial, a cryptocurrency company backed by the president and his family, and around $65 million from equity sales in the firm that controls World Liberty Financial. Another $196 million in equity sales of Stablecoin Holdco LLC are also listed. A crypto firm and issuer of tokens, World Liberty Financial was launched during the 2024 presidential campaign. It was co-founded by the president, his sons Eric and Donald Jr. and Zack and Alex Witkoff, the sons of U.S. special envoy and longtime Trump friend Steve Witkoff.

World Liberty Financial's ventures include USD1, a "stablecoin" pegged at $1 per coin that's designed to serve as a store of value. It also sells another crypto product, $WLF tokens, and takes 75% in net revenue from those token sales, according to the company's public reports.

The company drew scrutiny last year, after an Abu Dhabi government-owned wealth fund used the USD1 stablecoin to facilitate a multibillion-dollar investment in the massive crypto exchange Binance. The co-founder of Binance, Changpeng Zhao, received a pardon from Trump for financial crimes. The president has denied any connection between the pardon and the World Liberty Financial transaction, telling CBS News last year: "I don't know who he is."

In response to questions about the financial disclosure, White House spokesperson Anna Kelly told CBS News "there are no conflicts of interest."

I analysed the 900+ pages of the Trump financial disclosure report.

He extracted 1.1 BILLION from crypto, divided like this:

> $635.1M → TRUMP memecoin
> $236.3M → WLFI token sales
> $196.9M → Sale of ownership interests in the USD1 stablecoin venture
> $65.6M → Sale of… pic.twitter.com/F9Uaf1HbCV

— dethective (@dethective) June 30, 2026

"This is the same, tired narrative that Democrats have pushed against President Trump, his family, and his administration for a decade," Kelly said. "President Trump only acts in the best interests of the American public – which is why they overwhelmingly re-elected him to this office, despite years of lies and false accusations against him and his businesses from the fake news media."

The 927-page filing, released Tuesday by the US Office of Government Ethics, provides a view into his sprawling empire, including income from his hotels, golf resorts and cryptocurrency ventures. 

Trump's crypto-related income vastly eclipsed his earnings from many of the real estate businesses that helped make him famous. Those included around $77 million in income from his Mar-a-Lago club, $122 million from his golf club in Doral, Florida, and upwards of $30 million apiece from golf clubs in Jupiter, Florida, Bedminster, New Jersey, and Turnberry, Scotland.

The filing offers a detailed accounting of the various other ways the president's name generates money. An ethics official noted that Mr. Trump received a 45-day extension to file the report and "paid late filing fees related to transactions not previously reported" on earlier disclosures.

Trump, who’s worth an estimated $7.6 billion according to the Bloomberg Billionaires Index, valued more than two dozen assets at more than $50 million, including Mar-a-Lago; his Turnberry, Scotland, golf resort; and his stake in Trump Media & Technology Group Corp., which owns his Truth Social platform.

The president reported $4.7 million in royalties from "Trump Watches," along with payments from Trump-branded sneakers, fragrances and guitars. Trump Restaurants LLC, a New York-based entity wholly owned by one of the president's holding companies, reported nearly $2.9 million in food and beverage sales, according to the filing.

And his books continued to pay out - including roughly $1.9 million from "Save America" and smaller sums from "The Art of the Deal," "Letters to Trump," "A MAGA Journey" and an edition of the Bible in collaboration with singer Lee Greenwood.

First lady Melania Trump's ventures also appear. The filing lists more than $10.7 million in net proceeds from a license agreement tied to the film "Melania," about $6 million from the sale of NFTs and other collectibles and additional proceeds from her memoir.

The president also listed several of his legal settlements with tech and media companies, including $16 million from a lawsuit against ABC, $16 million from CBS Broadcasting and CBS Interactive, $24.5 million from Meta, $22 million from YouTube and $8 million from X. Most of that money was paid to his future presidential library or the Trust for the National Mall, not to the president personally. 

As with last year's financial disclosure, Trump listed several court judgments against him as liabilities, including a penalty in a civil fraud case brought by New York Attorney General Letitia James and two multimillion-dollar judgements owed to E. Jean Carroll, who accused the president of sexual abuse and defamation. (Trump has denied those allegations.)

The civil fraud judgment was tossed out last year by a panel of appellate judges who found the requirement for him to pay nearly $527 million in fines plus interest was "excessive," though they left non-financial penalties intact. The Supreme Court this week declined to hear Trump's appeal of the jury verdict in the Carroll cases.

Officials disclose the values of their holdings in broad ranges with “over $50 million” the highest, which means that they can’t be used to calculate an individual’s net worth.

The Trump Organization has said that the president’s holdings are independently managed by third-party financial institutions who have control over all investment decisions, with trades executed through automated processes. Trump, his family members and his company play no role in making transactions, according to a spokeswoman.

Trump’s disclosure also showed that he has a new pledged-asset line with Charles Schwab Corp.’s banking business that totals more than $50 million. The line of credit has an interest rate of 3.9%, according to the filing. A spokesperson for the financial firm had no immediate comment.

Last but not least, the document also show Trump reported receiving 10 tickets to the soccer World Cup finals in July from FIFA head Gianni Infantino valued at $15,000, 10 tickets to the US Open tennis tournament from sponsor Rolex worth $25,000, as well as 10 tickets to Super Bowl LIX in New Orleans estimated at $50,000.

Vice President JD Vance also disclosed assets for him and his wife, Usha Vance, worth more than $7 million.

The full filing is below (pdf link)

Tyler Durden Tue, 06/30/2026 - 23:06

Israel Tests Upgraded Laser-Guided Iron Dome System After Harsh 'Lessons' Of Iran War

Israel's famed Iron Dome air defense system has undergone a significant upgrade, and the country's defense ministry is hailing new successful advanced tests, touting that it is now immensely better at countering aerial threats such as cruise missiles and drones.

Israeli officials are tacitly admitting that a major overhaul was needed based on lessons learned both in the June 2025 aerial war with Iran and the Iranian retaliatory attacks in the opening month of Operation Epic Fury.

By pretty much all accounts both within and outside Israel, Iran's missiles - some of them reportedly hypersonic - inflicted severe damage on Israeli cities, bases, and infrastructure. A key Tel Aviv military-intelligence headquarters in the heart of Tel Aviv was also struck, possibly on several occasions.

Getty Images

Israel's censorship regimen worked in overdrive both during the June war and Operation Epic Fury, with critics charging that the true extent of Iranian projectiles evading Israel's anti-missile defenses will never ultimately be known.

But open-source videos and live-action info alone confirmed the failures on many levels of the country's multi-layered defense, including of the Iron Dome.

This is why Israel has a deep political incentive to signal both its domestic population and the world that "all is well" and that the Iron Dome has been "upgraded". According to Israeli media:

The trials were led by the Ministry of Defense's "Wall" Directorate, part of the Directorate of Defense Research and Development (DDR&D), in partnership with Rafael Advanced Defense Systems. The testing incorporated operational lessons learned during the ongoing war and recent operations against Iran.

According to the Ministry of Defense, the upgraded Iron Dome demonstrated enhanced capabilities against complex attack scenarios while introducing technological improvements aimed at handling higher volumes of incoming fire and longer-range threats.

This included the testing of the new high-power Or Eitan laser weapon system into system's command-and-control network. The laser is meant to assist as an additional layer of defense in pinpointing inbound threats.

WATCH: Israel touts successful tests of the upgraded Iron Dome, which integrates high-power laser in advanced air defense trials:

🔴 WATCH: Israel successfully tests upgraded Iron Dome, integrates high-power laser in advanced air defense trials pic.twitter.com/8d3AvFHRS4

— i24NEWS English (@i24NEWS_EN) June 30, 2026

Moshe Fattal, head of the Ministry of Defense's "Wall" Directorate, stated "The Iron Dome remains a central pillar of Israel's multi-layered defense concept. During the test, we also practiced integrating the laser system into Iron Dome's command-and-control network, taking the system's defensive capabilities to new heights."

So far Iran's ballistic missile and drone arsenal has proven quite capable at evading Israeli defenses, but perhaps in a future round of fighting Israel's upgrade will prove its worth. In the meantime Iran has already reconstituted much of its missile production capability. The Trump administration seems to have dropped its demand that Iran drop its missile program, which was obviously a non-starter in negotiations, given no country would just willingly give up its main method of defense from external attack.

Tyler Durden Tue, 06/30/2026 - 23:00

Congress Confronts MKULTRA: Testimony Warns Of Ongoing CIA Mind Control Capabilities

Authored by Steve Watson via Modernity News,

The deep state's favorite tools of control just got dragged back into the light. Today, the House Oversight Committee's Task Force on the Declassification of Federal Secrets held the first congressional hearing on the CIA's MKULTRA program since 1977.

What could have been a dusty historical review turned into a direct warning that the same machinery of mind control, memory manipulation, and behavioral experimentation may never have shut down - and could now run on far more powerful modern engines.

Rep. Anna Paulina Luna and her colleagues are doing what previous Congresses largely refused to do: forcing sunlight on one of the intelligence community's darkest chapters.

A task force investigating long-classified federal secrets will hold a hearing Tuesday focused on the CIA's controversial MK-Ultra program, a Cold War-era project that explored mind control and behavior modification. @xmanwalton

More: https://t.co/YWKKPgxuoI pic.twitter.com/Bf6r546P3N

— NewsNation (@NewsNation) June 30, 2026

The testimony made one thing unmistakable. The CIA lied to lawmakers decades ago about the program's success. Advances in neuroscience, cyber tools, and artificial intelligence have handed covert operators capabilities Sidney Gottlieb could only dream of. And American citizens remain potential targets.

Watch the first Congressional hearing on MK Ultra since 1977 https://t.co/xYTdan4aL2

— Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (@RepLuna) June 30, 2026

MKULTRA ran from the early 1950s into the 1970s. The CIA conducted roughly 149 subprojects involving LSD, hypnosis, electroshock, sensory deprivation, and psychological torture on unwitting Americans - prisoners, mental patients, soldiers, and ordinary citizens.

Most records were deliberately destroyed in 1973. When the program finally surfaced through the Church Committee and Rockefeller Commission in 1975, the agency downplayed its scope and results.

The public was told it was a failure. New testimony says that was never true.

Investigative journalist Tom O'Neill, author of Chaos, told the committee the agency actively misled Congress in 1977. He submitted documents showing the CIA's own earlier claims about LSD experiments contradicted what it later told lawmakers. O'Neill stated flatly: "I believe the agency misled Congress in 1977 when it characterized MK-Ultra as a failure."

He connected dots to figures like psychiatrist Louis Jolyon West and his ties to Charles Manson and Jack Ruby, underscoring how deeply the program reached into real-world events. The message was clear: the full story was buried on purpose.

"Congress Was Never Told The Truth" About Results Of CIA Mind-Control Experiments.https://t.co/afxqoiA51x

"Chaos" Author Tom O'Neill told a House Oversight hearing on Tuesday: "I believe the agency misled Congress in 1977 when it characterized MK-Ultra as a failure." https://t.co/M6DaZHTiCt pic.twitter.com/cbKAKYgZq3

— RealClearPolitics (@RCPolitics) June 30, 2026

One of the most disturbing revelations came from historical documents referenced during the hearing. A participant in the original program documented the ability to replace true memories with false ones without the subject's knowledge.

The exact description: "It's feasible to take the memory of a definite event in the life of an individual, and through hypnotic suggestion, bring about the subsequent conscious recall to the effect that this event never actually took place. But that a different fictional event actually did occur."

If the U.S. government could do this in the 1950s, the question hanging over the room was obvious. What can they do now with AI, brain-computer interfaces, and directed energy tools?

? MK Ultra hearing:

Participant documented he was "able to replace true memories with false memories in people without their knowledge"

He clarified:
It's "feasible to take the memory of a definite event in the life of an individual, and through hypnotic suggestion, bring... pic.twitter.com/LXd3bQD27r

— ?? ?? RyanTiedgen (@RyanTiedgen) June 30, 2026

Author and journalist Stephen Kinzer, who has extensively studied the program and its leader Sidney Gottlieb, warned that Gottlieb effectively held "a license to kill" issued by the U.S. government. Kinzer described how the CIA used "cut-outs" - universities and institutions - to conduct research while keeping its own involvement hidden.

He then delivered the core warning for today: "There have been enormous advances in cyber technology, neuroscience, and artificial intelligence. Covert agencies may have access to tools for mind control that Sidney Gottlieb could not have imagined."

O'Neill agreed. The massive investment in time, money, and research made it unlikely the capabilities were simply abandoned. The technology they built was too valuable.

WATCH journalist and author Dr. @stephenkinzer's opening statement at today's explosive MK Ultra hearing regarding the over classification of secret government programs and the CIA's quest to weaponize mind control against Americans. pic.twitter.com/UwsSJXWBce

— Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (@RepLuna) June 30, 2026

Public suspicion about whether MKULTRA-style techniques ever truly ended is not abstract. In 2024, widespread speculation erupted around the Trump assassination attempt and whether the shooter could have been influenced or programmed through evolved versions of these programs.

The CIA issued a flat denial, calling the claims "utterly false, absurd, and damaging" and insisting MKULTRA ended decades ago.

That denial landed exactly as past CIA statements have landed - with heavy skepticism from those who remember the record destruction, the lies to Congress, and the pattern of "nothing to see here" followed by later revelations.

Rep. Luna has been clear: Americans have been misdirected repeatedly and deserve transparency and accountability from the CIA. Additional MKULTRA documents are being declassified. The task force is pushing for real answers, not another round of limited hangouts.

Critics on both sides have already begun dismissing the effort. Some call it performative. Others worry it will be used as a distraction. The record shows why skepticism exists. Previous investigations produced headlines, limited document releases, and then business as usual inside the intelligence community.

This time the stakes feel different. The technology has advanced. The surveillance state has grown. The same agencies that once ran MKULTRA still operate with massive secrecy and minimal real oversight.

The hearing was never just about history. It is about whether the American people will finally demand an end to secret programs that treat citizens as expendable test subjects or potential assets.

Memory manipulation, behavioral modification, and technological mind control are not science fiction. They were government policy for decades.

The question is no longer whether the CIA once crossed every ethical and constitutional line. The question is whether those lines were ever truly redrawn - or simply moved into newer, harder-to-detect territory.

Rep. Luna and the task force have opened the door. The only acceptable outcome is full declassification, genuine accountability, and a public reckoning that makes clear no agency of the United States government has the right to experiment on its own people in secret.

Your support is crucial in helping us defeat mass censorship. Please consider donating via Locals or check out our unique merch. Follow us on X @ModernityNews.

Tyler Durden Tue, 06/30/2026 - 22:35

AI Hallucinations Are Exploding In U.S. Courts, New Study Finds

A new analysis from Laine AI suggests that AI-related errors in U.S. court filings are no longer isolated incidents but a rapidly expanding trend. Drawing on hundreds of confirmed cases, the study finds that courts are seeing a growing number of filings containing fabricated citations, inaccurate legal authorities, and other AI-generated mistakes as lawyers and self-represented litigants increasingly incorporate generative AI into their work.

The increase has been dramatic. According to the report, documented AI-related filing errors climbed from just 25 cases in early 2025 to 249 by the fourth quarter of that year, with the pace continuing into 2026. First-quarter 2026 data nearly matched the entire final quarter of 2025 despite covering only part of the year, underscoring how quickly the problem is accelerating.

Geographically, a relatively small number of states account for a disproportionate share of the incidents. California leads the nation with 97 recorded cases, followed by New York, Texas, Florida, and Illinois. Together, those five states represent roughly 40% of all documented AI-related legal filing errors, suggesting that jurisdictions with higher AI adoption are also experiencing more frequent courtroom mistakes.

The study also identifies several fast-growing hotspots. Florida experienced one of the sharpest increases, jumping from just one recorded incident in 2024 to 28 during 2025. Meanwhile, states including Washington, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Nevada, Indiana, Oregon, Oklahoma, Minnesota, Mississippi, and Illinois all began reporting meaningful numbers of AI-related filing errors after previously recording none, indicating that the issue is spreading well beyond a handful of early adopters.

Courts have responded with a wide range of sanctions. California has imposed more than $256,000 in monetary penalties tied to AI-related filing errors, accounting for roughly one-third of all fines identified in the study. However, the likelihood of receiving severe sanctions varies considerably by jurisdiction. Louisiana, Wyoming, New Mexico, and Georgia imposed serious penalties in a much larger percentage of cases than states with higher overall incident counts, highlighting significant differences in judicial approaches.

Perhaps the study's most notable finding is that most AI-related filing mistakes do not originate with attorneys. More than 60% of the documented incidents involved pro se litigants representing themselves, while lawyers accounted for roughly 37% of the cases. The authors suggest that individuals without formal legal training may be relying more heavily on AI tools without adequate review, increasing the likelihood of errors reaching the courtroom.

When AI tools were identified, ChatGPT was the most frequently named platform, though the overwhelming majority of filings either failed to specify which AI system had been used or only implied AI assistance. ChatGPT appeared in 48 documented cases, while tools such as Microsoft Copilot, Claude, Google Gemini, Perplexity, Lexis AI, and Westlaw's AI products were mentioned only occasionally. Because nearly 90% of filings did not clearly identify the software involved, the report notes that assigning responsibility to any particular platform remains difficult.

The most common errors involved outright fabrication. More than half of all recorded AI-related mistakes consisted of nonexistent cases, citations, or legal authorities presented as genuine. Misrepresenting actual legal precedent accounted for another quarter of incidents, while fabricated quotations from real cases represented roughly one-fifth. California, New York, and Texas consistently ranked among the states with the highest numbers across each category.

The report also found that over 80% of AI-related hallucinations occurred in case-law citations rather than statutes, regulations, or supporting exhibits. Because legal arguments often depend on accurately citing precedent, fabricated or inaccurate case law can undermine the credibility of an entire filing and expose litigants to sanctions. The authors conclude that AI can remain a valuable legal research tool, but only if every citation, quotation, and legal authority is independently verified before being submitted to a court.

Tyler Durden Tue, 06/30/2026 - 22:10

RFK Jr. Announces He's Ending Emergency Liability Protection For COVID-19 Vaccine Makers

Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times,

Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is ending emergency declarations for COVID-19 vaccines, treatments, and medical devices, after determining that the circumstances that resulted in the declarations are no longer in place.

The health secretary in office in early 2020 issued emergency declarations, providing liability protections for companies that made products for COVID-19 and enabling regulators to issue emergency authorizations, which have a lower evidentiary threshold than regular approval.

The declarations were extended multiple times, most recently in 2024 by then-Health Secretary Xavier Becerra through the end of 2029.

They provided broad immunity to manufacturers of the products, as well as people who administered them to others.

Becerra said in the latest extension that while the COVID-19 public health emergency expired in May 2023, COVID-19 “continues to present a credible risk of a future public health emergency” and that keeping the protections in place was necessary to keep the United States prepared for that threat.

Kennedy disagreed, writing in a notice of termination that “circumstances no longer exist to justify emergency use of drugs and biological products during the COVID-19 pandemic.”

He cited how regulators in 2025 revoked emergency authorization for COVID-19 vaccines, transitioning to typical approval for all the shots across all available ages.

“Americans deserve a regulatory system that is transparent, accountable, and rooted in the rule of law,” Kennedy said in a statement.

“By ending these COVID-19 emergency use authorization declarations, we’re reinforcing public confidence that emergency authorities are temporary and targeted.”

To terminate emergency declarations, a health secretary has to provide advance notice that would give a reasonable amount of time to companies to withdraw the products that have been generated under the declarations.

The Food and Drug Administration determined that 12 months is a sufficient period of time, according to health officials. The declarations for vaccines and drugs will thus terminate effective June 29, 2027.

The declarations for medical devices such as COVID-19 tests will only stay in place for 180 days, or until Dec. 26, 2026.

The FDA has been working with manufacturers of all products still under emergency authorization about seeking approval for continued use, and it is reasonable to conclude that manufacturers will be able to generate data that would support fresh filings to regulators, the notice stated.

Officials plan to notify Congress of the development, the Department of Health and Human Services said.

Tyler Durden Tue, 06/30/2026 - 21:45

US Lifts Restrictions On Anthropic's Fable, Mythos AI Models

The US government removed foreign access restrictions on Anthropic’s Fable and Mythos AI models, clearing it for wider distribution after the AI company resolved the Trump administration’s safety controls, less than ‌three weeks after the company was ordered to suspend access to its most advanced AI models over national security risks.

On June 12, the Commerce Department imposed an export control rule via a private letter requiring the company to obtain US permission before allowing any foreign national, regardless of location, to access those two models and before it could be sent to any destination worldwide. In response, the AI company disabled its powerful Mythos 5 AI model and Fable 5, a similar model intended for wider release.

Then after several days of discussions between Anthropic and the Trump admin, late on Tuesday, Anthropic said in a post on X that it had received notice that Commerce was lifting the curbs on access to both models. Some of the restrictions on Mythos had been eased on June 26.

We’ve received notice that the Department of Commerce has lifted export controls on Claude Fable 5 and Mythos 5.

We'll begin restoring access tomorrow, and will share an update soon.

We’re grateful to our users for their patience, and to everyone who worked with us on…

— Anthropic (@AnthropicAI) June 30, 2026

“We’re grateful to our users for their patience, and to everyone who worked with us on redeploying the models,” the company said in its post.
The key to reversing the export controls was assuaging White House officials’ concerns about limiting the ability of bad actors to circumvent the models’ guardrails.

Anthropic said it would restore access to users beginning Wednesday.

In a letter to Anthropic viewed by Bloomberg, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick said Anthropic had pledged to “proactively deter and address security risks associated with the models.” On Tuesday evening, Lutnick tweeted that "over the past two weeks, we have worked closely with Anthropic to analyze and approve Fable 5 to ensure alignment across the US Government and strengthen America’s leadership in AI."

Over the past two weeks, we have worked closely with Anthropic to analyze and approve Fable 5 to ensure alignment across the US Government and strengthen America’s leadership in AI. https://t.co/PtVJWyQ9kH

— Howard Lutnick (@howardlutnick) June 30, 2026

The department’s export control directive marked the most significant intervention by the US government to date into an AI venture’s operations and sparked legal questions over whether export controls can be used to regulate AI model access. The consequences may still have last impact, as they spotlighted governance risks for Anthropic just as the company is charting its initial public offering.

As AI influencer Alex Finn pointed out, the crackdown on both Chinese models and frontier US models will likely prompt more consumers to roll out their own local models.

Everyone on planet Earth is talking about local AI right now

And for good reason

Governments are banning models. Hardware prices are 10xing

You NEED to be getting into local AI. The number 1 questions everyone has though is which computer to buy?

Here's your answer:

You… pic.twitter.com/w3pl6RTg6K

— Alex Finn (@AlexFinn) June 28, 2026

As Bloomberg notes, the move to relax the restrictions also relieves tension that was weighing on Anthropic’s already-tenuous relationship with the Trump administration. The company is suing the Pentagon after Secretary Pete Hegseth moved in March to designate it a supply-chain risk following a messy and unsuccessful contract renegotiation process.

Tyler Durden Tue, 06/30/2026 - 21:26

xAI Rolls Out Data Center Dividend For Residents Around Memphis Colossus

xAI Memphis, Elon Musk's supercomputing and data center complex in the Memphis metro area - better known as Colossus - appears to be testing a version of the "data center dividend" for residents in the surrounding community.

The offer of Starlink service with no upfront hardware costs and a substantial monthly discount appears to be an attempt by xAI to turn local goodwill into political insulation, as AI data centers face growing scrutiny over soaring power demand, grid strain, and other neighborhood-level impacts.

"As SpaceX continues to invest in the area, SpaceX is offering our neighbors in the Memphis area no upfront hardware costs on Residential @Starlink kits for new customers and a discount on home internet service plans for both new and existing customers," Starlink wrote on X.

Starlink wrote on its website, "The discount is half the standard monthly price and is applied automatically." 

Earlier this year, @SpaceX acquired @xAI (now SpaceXAI), which operates the Colossus datacenters in Memphis.

As SpaceX continues to invest in the area, SpaceX is offering our neighbors in the Memphis area no upfront hardware costs on Residential @Starlink kits for new customers… pic.twitter.com/BfnOHHPLOx

— xAI Memphis (@xAIMemphis) June 30, 2026

xAI describes Colossus as its AI training supercomputer, built in Memphis and pitched by Musk as one of the world's most powerful AI superclusters.

The project has become a major flashpoint because of its massive electricity demand. xAI has expanded from Colossus 1 in Memphis to Colossus 2 in Southaven, Mississippi, just across the state line, and has used natural gas turbines to supply power.

Left-wing environmental NGOs and the NAACP have sued xAI and its subsidiary, MZX Tech, alleging that some natural gas turbines were operated without proper air permits and could worsen pollution in nearby communities.

xAI's data center dividend to the local community around Colossus may only suggest that other forms of dividends offered to local communities could one day include monthly utility bill credits, grid upgrades, and infrastructure improvements.

Perhaps other data center operators should take note of what xAI is doing, given that half of U.S. data centers scheduled for construction this year could be canceled or delayed as local resistance mounts.

Tyler Durden Tue, 06/30/2026 - 21:20

San Francisco Archdiocese Agrees To $395 Million Abuse Settlement

Authored by Owen Evans via The Epoch Times,

The Archdiocese of San Francisco has agreed to pay $395 million to settle more than 500 lawsuits alleging child sexual abuse by church officials, in what the plaintiffs’ lawyers described as the largest per-survivor settlement.

The plaintiffs’ attorneys said on June 29 that San Francisco Archbishop Salvatore Cordileone will have to write an apology letter to each survivor as part of the settlement.

The settlement also requires the archdiocese to implement a series of child protection and transparency reforms.

The settlement comes three years after the archdiocese filed for bankruptcy and will cover approximately 530 survivors of child sexual abuse.

It is the latest agreement over clergy sexual abuse claims. In 2024, the Archdiocese of Los Angeles agreed to a record $880 million settlement.

This settlement follows years of back-and-forth mediation between the Archdiocese and the Survivors’ Creditors Committee.

The law firm representing the survivors said the $395 million “stands as the largest per survivor settlement in any clerical bankruptcy.”

“As a part of the settlement, the Archdiocese is turning over (assigning) its rights under the insurance policies for the survivors to recover additional damages against all the insurance companies who refused to abide by their contractual responsibilities to the Archdiocese and the survivors,” it said.

“I’ve been working with survivors for decades, and I’ve never heard of anything quite as significant, as rigorous, as robust as what is being required of the Archdiocese of San Francisco,” said Jeff Anderson, an attorney representing dozens of child sexual abuse victims.

The proposed 14-point settlement plan calls for appointing an independent child protection consultant with full access to archdiocesan records, publishing findings and a more complete list of credibly accused offenders, creating a survivor-sensitive public archive, and strengthening protections for whistleblowers and reporters.

It also calls for banning mandatory nondisclosure agreements (NDAs) in abuse settlements and prohibiting private digital communications between adults and children.

Margie O’Driscoll sued the archdiocese, alleging she was sexually abused almost 50 years ago by a priest while she was a student at Marin Catholic High School in Kentfield, a community north of the Golden Gate Bridge.

“I, like every survivor, have carried this pain and shame along like a ball and chain for a very, very long time,” O'Driscoll said during a news conference.

“Ashamed and confused about what happened, scorned by the archdiocese, and sometimes not even believed by family and friends, and I think today shame is gonna change sides.”

“We believe this proposal provides a path toward fair compensation for survivors who have borne the weight of this abuse for a lifetime,” Rev. Salvatore J. Cordileone, archbishop of San Francisco, said in a June 29 statement.

The Archdiocese of San Francisco, led by Cordileone, serves more than 400,000 Catholics in San Francisco, San Mateo, and Marin Counties.

“The entire Catholic family is called to unite and share in the work of making amends through this proposed settlement. We have a moral obligation to bring some level of healing and reconciliation to those who deserve our unwavering respect, attention, and prayers,” he said.

“With stringent preventative measures and trainings now in place for decades, the hope is that this proposal will allow us collectively to move forward by continuing the important ministries to the faithful and community members that rely on our services and charity.

“While the vast majority of sexual abuse allegations associated with this bankruptcy were from many decades ago, we accept full responsibility for what happened, and I sincerely apologize to all those who have been harmed.”

Tyler Durden Tue, 06/30/2026 - 20:55