INTEGRITY IN WRITTEN AND VIDEO NEWS, featuring newsOS integration and a growing interactive community of interested and increasingly well-informed readers and viewers who help make us who we are… a truly objective news media resource with full disclosure of bias, fact-checking, voting, polling, ratings, and comments. Learn about our editorial policies and practices (below). Join us today by subscribing to either our FREE MEMBERSHIP plan, or our PLATINUM PAID SUBSCRIPTION plan; each plan offers an unparalleled suite of benefits to our subscribers. U.S. DAILY RUNDOWN:Your News, Your Voice.

Top News Stories

Public Pulse and Presidential Power: Legal Foundations and Implications of Tracking Presidential Job Approval

Presidential job-approval polling has become an integral barometer of executive performance, shaping political narratives and influencing policymaking in the United States. The Reuters “Tracking Presidential Job Approval” graphic documents fluctuations in presidential approval over time, providing real-time insight into public sentiment (Reuters, 2025). At its core, polling reflects constitutional and democratic mechanisms: surveys measure popular will under the First Amendment’s guarantee of free expression and the Election Clauses establishing representative government. Yet, the proliferation of instant polling also raises legal and societal tensions—does the constant churn of approval ratings bolster accountability or distort policymaking? This article argues that while job-approval polls serve democratic transparency, they simultaneously introduce constitutional questions about governmental legitimacy, separation of powers, and the permissible scope of public opinion in steering executive action.

Recasting Executive Authority: How Donald Trump’s Second Term Tested the Limits of Presidential Power

Presidential Power: In the first hundred days of Donald J. Trump’s second term, the White House unleashed a torrent of presidential directives that reshaped the federal bureaucracy and challenged long-standing legal constraints on executive action. Between January 20 and April 30, 2025, President Trump signed 143 executive orders—more than any president since at least 1950 over a comparable period—and revoked or rescinded hundreds of regulations issued by his predecessors, from Joe Biden’s COVID-era mandates to Lyndon B. Johnson’s landmark anti-discrimination rules for federal contractors. These sweeping directives not only reversed policies across immigration, environmental regulation, and civil-rights enforcement but also tested the constitutional boundaries of unilateral executive power.

Breaking News: Unpacking the Dismissal of Michael Flynn—Constitutional Crossroads in Executive Power and Justice

The May 2020 motion by the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) to dismiss all charges against former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn marked a watershed moment in the ongoing debate over executive authority, separation of powers, and the proper role of the Department of Justice in politically charged prosecutions. Flynn, who pleaded guilty to one count of making false statements to the FBI about his communications with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak in January 2017, saw his case abruptly upended when Attorney General William Barr, acting on a recommendation from U.S. Attorney Jeff Jensen, filed a motion to dismiss “with prejudice” the criminal information against Flynn.

Rising Tensions in Washington, D.C.: When “Globalizing the Intifada” Tests American Law and Society

Globalizing the Intifada: On May 22, 2025, the unthinkable occurred on the streets of Washington, D.C.: a pro-Palestinian activist opened fire outside the Capital Jewish Museum, murdering two Israeli-American embassy staffers—Yaron Lischinsky and Sarah Milgrim—while chanting “Free, free Palestine.” This act of political violence, framed by some as part of a global Intifada, immediately raised urgent questions about the intersection of free-speech protections, domestic counter-terrorism, and constitutional order. What does it mean, under U.S. law, when private citizens invoke international political slogans that have historically called for armed uprising? Which doctrines govern the limits of protest and when do such protests become criminal conspiracy or terrorism?

Pragmatic Leadership at the Border: Four-Time Las Cruces Mayor Ken Miyagishima Enters 2026 New Mexico Gubernatorial Race

The May 27, 2025 announcement by former four-term Las Cruces mayor Ken Miyagishima that he will run for the Democratic nomination for governor of New Mexico underscores mounting public frustration over crime, homelessness, and educational shortfalls while raising profound legal and constitutional questions about state authority, border enforcement, and executive power. Miyagishima, known colloquially as “Mayor Ken,” has built his résumé on pragmatic governance—expanding vocational training for nonviolent offenders, backing state-supported housing loans, and advocating “orderly border enforcement” alongside economic collaboration with Mexico. Yet his flirtation with invoking the 1798 Alien Enemies Act—a statute dormant for two centuries—illuminates deeper tensions between state-level crime-fighting prerogatives and the federal government’s exclusive control over immigration and national security.

Disparate Impact Doctrine Under Siege: Analyzing the Legal and Societal Ramifications of President Trump’s Executive Order

On April 23, 2025, President Donald J. Trump signed Executive Order 14121, titled "Restoring Equality of Opportunity and Meritocracy." The directive reconfigures the federal government’s approach to civil rights enforcement by eliminating the use of disparate-impact liability as a basis for identifying discrimination in federally administered programs. In essence, the order mandates that only intentional discrimination—rather than policies that produce disproportionate harm to protected groups—will be actionable under civil rights statutes moving forward.

Dismantling Oversight: The Legal and Policy Implications of the Department of Education’s Retreat from Book Ban Enforcement

In March 2025, President Donald Trump issued an executive order directing Education Secretary Linda McMahon to initiate the dismantling of the U.S. Department of Education (DOE). This directive, while requiring congressional approval for full implementation, signaled a significant shift in federal education policy. A particularly contentious aspect of this initiative is the potential elimination of the Department's Office for Civil Rights (OCR), which has historically played a pivotal role in enforcing civil rights within educational institutions. The OCR's recent dismissal of 11 complaints related to book bans and the rescission of guidance on the matter have raised concerns about the federal government's commitment to protecting students' rights to access diverse literature.​

Supreme Court Wades Into Fiercest Free Speech Fight of the Decade: Mahmoud v. Taylor Could Redefine Parental Rights in Education

The United States Supreme Court's deliberation in Mahmoud v. Taylor represents a significant juncture in the ongoing discourse surrounding the intersection of religious liberty and LGBTQ+ representation within public education. Originating from Montgomery County, Maryland, this case centers on a group of parents—comprising Muslim and Christian families—who challenge the school district's decision to include LGBTQ+-themed storybooks in elementary curricula without providing opt-out provisions for religious objections.

Earth Day 2025 and the Legal Crossroads of Climate Policy: Fossil Fuel Phaseout, Executive Power, and the Constitutional Debate

On April 22, 2025, Earth Day demonstrations unfolded across the United States, culminating in a crescendo of civil and legal pressure directed at President Joe Biden’s administration. Climate activists, Indigenous leaders, and environmental justice groups convened in Washington, D.C., demanding a full-scale federal commitment to a fossil fuel phaseout. Central to their rallying cry was a demand for the revocation of fossil fuel project approvals and the implementation of a binding executive mandate toward a decarbonized energy system.

Unleashing the Most Disruptive Trade Shift: How U.S. Tariffs Triggered the Worst IMF Forecast Revision in Years

In April 2025, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) significantly downgraded its forecast for U.S. economic growth, projecting a slowdown to 1.8% for the year, a notable decrease from the previous estimate of 2.7%. This revision is largely attributed to escalating trade tensions following the implementation of tariffs by the U.S. administration. The IMF also raised its U.S. inflation forecast to approximately 3%, about a one-percentage-point increase from earlier projections. (Investopedia)

Tennessee Delivers Boldest Legislative Shake-Up of 2025: Lawmakers Dismantle DEI, Target Immigrant Education, and Expand Vouchers in Historic Session

The 2025 legislative session of the Tennessee General Assembly concluded with the passage of several contentious bills, reflecting a broader national discourse on civil rights, immigration, and education. Among the most debated were laws targeting diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives, measures affecting undocumented immigrants' access to public education, and the expansion of school voucher programs. These legislative actions have sparked intense discussions about the balance between state authority and individual rights, the role of public education, and the treatment of marginalized communities.