Quote:This case is before the Court based on Plaintiffs’ emergency motion to enforce settlement agreement (Doc. 32). Upon due consideration of the motion, the declarations submitted by Plaintiffs (Docs. 32-1, 32-2, 34-1), Defendants’ response in opposition (Doc. 42) and its attachment, Plaintiffs’ reply (Doc. 43), and the amicus brief filed by the League of Women Voters and the Electronic Privacy Information Center (Doc. 37-1), the Court finds that the motion is due to be granted for the reasons that follow....
And now having reviewed Judge Sooknanan’s order and the counter-arguments in Defendants’ response (and their briefing in Judge Sooknanan’s case), the Court makes explicit what was implicit in the approval of the settlement agreement—the modifications to the SAVE system, including the bulk-upload and SSN-search features, do not violate the Social Security Act or the Privacy Act.
Moreover, in this Court’s view, the interests that the amici were purportedly vindicating in Judge Sooknanan’s case are far outweighed by Plaintiffs’ sovereign interests in ensuring that non-citizens are not on their voter rolls, that unlawfully present aliens are not receiving professional licenses, etc.
Conclusion
In sum, for the reasons stated above, it is ORDERED that:
Plaintiffs’ emergency motion to enforce settlement agreement (Doc. 32) is GRANTED, and Defendants shallimmediatelycomply with the court-approved settlement agreement in this case by reinstating Plaintiffs’ access to the bulk-upload and SSN-search features in the SAVE system.
DONE and ORDERED this 7th day of July, 2026.
T. KENT WETHERELL, II
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
womp, womp.
(This post was last modified: 07-08-2026 07:51 AM by GoodOwl.)
Another big win out of the 5th Circuit. DHS’s change in legal position on illegal alien detention restored the policy set by Congress and rejected a misreading of the law that perpetuated open borders for decades. It’s not too late to take a $2,600 check and a free flight home. DHS.GOV/CBPHOME
Quote:The full Fifth Circuit has issued an extraordinary precedential order making clear that illegal aliens do not have a constitutional right to roam free in the United States during their removal proceedings.
The Fifth Circuit ruling against these men means that everyone detained within its jurisdiction who entered the country without a visa — no matter how long ago, no matter their 'family ties' or supposed 'community roots' — can now be held during their immigration proceedings without any way to challenge this detention. Illegals are criminals by the very nature of being in this country illegally, overstaying visas or walking across the borders. They do not have the right to anything but being arrested, detained, have their criminal illegality assessed to their permanent record and deported as soon as possible. They do not have rights under the US Constitution, which are reserved for legal Citizens and legal foerign nationals with permission to be here only. Thus, illegal aliens have no constitutional right to challenge whether their imprisonment is justified. Full stop.
Another big win out of the 5th Circuit. DHS’s change in legal position on illegal alien detention restored the policy set by Congress and rejected a misreading of the law that perpetuated open borders for decades. It’s not too late to take a $2,600 check and a free flight home. DHS.GOV/CBPHOME
Quote:The full Fifth Circuit has issued an extraordinary precedential order making clear that illegal aliens do not have a constitutional right to roam free in the United States during their removal proceedings.
The Fifth Circuit ruling against these men means that everyone detained within its jurisdiction who entered the country without a visa — no matter how long ago, no matter their 'family ties' or supposed 'community roots' — can now be held during their immigration proceedings without any way to challenge this detention. Illegals are criminals by the very nature of being in this country illegally, overstaying visas or walking across the borders. They do not have the right to anything but being arrested, detained, have their criminal illegality assessed to their permanent record and deported as soon as possible. They do not have rights under the US Constitution, which are reserved for legal Citizens and legal foerign nationals with permission to be here only. Thus, illegal aliens have no constitutional right to challenge whether their imprisonment is justified. Full stop.
it. is. that. simple.
everything else is nothing but static in the airwaves...
Another big win out of the 5th Circuit. DHS’s change in legal position on illegal alien detention restored the policy set by Congress and rejected a misreading of the law that perpetuated open borders for decades. It’s not too late to take a $2,600 check and a free flight home. DHS.GOV/CBPHOME
Quote:The full Fifth Circuit has issued an extraordinary precedential order making clear that illegal aliens do not have a constitutional right to roam free in the United States during their removal proceedings.
The Fifth Circuit ruling against these men means that everyone detained within its jurisdiction who entered the country without a visa — no matter how long ago, no matter their 'family ties' or supposed 'community roots' — can now be held during their immigration proceedings without any way to challenge this detention. Illegals are criminals by the very nature of being in this country illegally, overstaying visas or walking across the borders. They do not have the right to anything but being arrested, detained, have their criminal illegality assessed to their permanent record and deported as soon as possible. They do not have rights under the US Constitution, which are reserved for legal Citizens and legal foerign nationals with permission to be here only. Thus, illegal aliens have no constitutional right to challenge whether their imprisonment is justified. Full stop.
it. is. that. simple.
everything else is nothing but static in the airwaves...
Quote:UPDATE: America First Legal has just filed with the US SUPREME COURT to fix the botched 2020 Census, which favored blue states and unfairly withheld Electoral Votes from GOP states SCOTUS should do the right thing and ORDER it be fixed. This comes as 2030 will be absolutely BRUTAL for Democrats, as red states have surged in population and the GOP could soon be able to win the presidency with several fewer states than they needed in 2024 or 2028
America First Legal: “The Constitution calls for an ‘actual enumeration’ of the people so Congress can accurately allocate representatives among the states. The Census Bureau failed in 2020 to complete this count."
“We are asking the Supreme Court to step in to hold the Bureau to this Constitutional standard. Americans deserve to have their voices heard through accurate representation in Congress.” pic.twitter.com/RKRdlSXMK1 — Eric Daugherty (@EricLDaugh) August 8, 2026
JUST IN: The 5th Circuit Court of Appeals has nearly UNANIMOUSLY ruled AGAINST Planned Parenthood, which could result in the organization being forced to pay out up to $1.8 BILLION
That'd effectively BANKRUPT Planned Parenthood
Plaintiffs allege Planned Parenthood kept taking Medicaid money (and did not give it back) after Texas and Louisiana decided they should no longer be allowed to participate in the program
If the court finds Planned Parenthood actually illegally billed Medicaid, the penalties could be absolutely MASSIVE, with some estimates reaching as high as $1.8 billion.
Planned Parenthood, the nation's largest abortion corporation, continued submitting claims for its services to Medicaid programs in Texas and Louisiana even after those states disqualified it from those programs.
Now, under a federal false claims case fight, its very future is in doubt.
It's because it could be held liable for $1.8 billion in damages, and even for a corporate giant as big as Planned Parenthood, that would sting.
It is Law360 that confirmed a ruling by the full 5th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals had rejected Planned Parenthood's demand for immunity in the case.
And the details were reported by the Gateway Pundit.
The report said the ruling was a "major setback" for Planned Parenthood Federation of America which could face an order to repay the nearly $2 billion to taxpayers.
That's the result after the appeals court rejected the company's interlocutory appeal for lack of jurisdiction.
The case now returns to the federal district court in the Northern District of Texas, where Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk already had rejected the company's insistence it is immune.
The case falls under the federal False Claims Act and was triggered by explosive 2015 undercover videos released by the Center for Medical Progress.
The Pundit explained, "Those videos captured Planned Parenthood officials discussing the harvesting and potential sale of aborted baby body parts.
"In the undercover video, Dr. Ann Schutt-Ainé, Chief Medical Officer of Planned Parenthood Gulf Coast, and Tram Nguyen, RN and Vice President of Abortion Access at Planned Parenthood Houston, are seen discussing the gruesome details of their procedures.
"In one particularly harrowing exchange, Schutt-Ainé said, 'You told me about the proposition, and so now every time I do a D&E [dilation and evacuation abortion], I'm like, 'Oh, there's some lungs, there's some kidneys.""
The ruling "could put Planned Parenthood, a prolific abortion vendor, on the hook for up to $1.8 billion."
The fight is over the corporation's use of Medicaid funds in Texas and Louisiana.
Jennie Bradley Lichter, president of March for Life, told Fox News Digital at the time the "stakes couldn't be higher" and that the lawsuit could bankrupt Planned Parenthood, a nonprofit with hundreds of clinics across the country.
"Planned Parenthood is facing a repayment obligation of close to $2 billion because it continued to fill its coffers with taxpayers' money even after two states had already disqualified it," Lichter said. "If that obligation stands, it will strike a serious — even existential — blow to Planned Parenthood's national operations and potentially change the abortion landscape in this country forever."
The two states had disqualified Planned Parenthood from Medicaid cash in response to activist David Daleiden releasing video footage showing Planned Parenthood staff discussing selling aborted fetal tissue, the report said.
The imagery "set off a firestorm in the pro-life movement and caused it to ramp up its efforts to weaken the nonprofit," the report said.
The abortion giant's response was to sue Texas and Louisiana, and it initially won an injunction allowing it to keep getting tax money.
But that decision was reversed on appeal.
Then the newest case, seeking to claw back the millions of dollars Planned Parenthood had collected, was launched. A whistleblower filed a qui tam lawsuit under the federal False Claims Act and corresponding state laws, alleging the abortionists knowingly submitted false claims and failed to return millions in improperly collected Medicaid payments.
Under the law, treble damages and per-claim penalties are possible.
The report at the time noted a lawyer for the abortionists, Susan Manning, claimed the case was an attempt to put them out of business. Only a sick mind would even attempt to classify the Murder of innocent children as "a business."
This was one of the worst appellate decisions in modern history - two woke judges from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit said the Olympus Spa, a Korean female-only nude bathhouse in Washington state, must admit males who "identify" as female. The full circuit refused to review the decision, essentially affirming it. Now it is being appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court (where it would truly shocking if the spa lost).
Patricia G. Barnes@PatriciaGBarnes
Aug 10
The Olympus Spa argues U.S. Supreme Court precedent protects the right to associate with others in pursuit of "a wide variety of political, social, economic, educational, religious and cultural ends." It says the Olympus Spa helps females "achieve spiritual renewal and to pass on Korean cultural values and traditions through the practice of centuries-old ritual." It will be forced to close if it loses. https://adfmedia.org/wp-content/uploads/...tition.pdf
Patricia G. Barnes@PatriciaGBarnes
Aug 10
My selection for one of the worst appellate decisions of the decade:
Bottom Line: Korean Spas Where Girls And Women Are Nude Must Admit Men
From injusticeatwork.com
Benjamin Rush@Benjami65337121
Aug 11
I knew it was the 9th circus before I read it.
Quote:Derek Chauvin was unjustly convicted of murder, therefore he should be freed. The facts show that he was not the cause of death, nor did he at any time intend for a death to occur. Whatever else he may be, he is not a murderer. That is the truth. — Elon Musk (@elonmusk) August 19, 2026
Chauvin filed a new petition seeking to vacate his state murder conviction in the Memorial Day 2020 death of Floyd, who was stopped by police after attempting to pass a counterfeit bill while high on a fatal overdose of drugs he had already taken previously that was the actual cause of his death.
According to the body-cam video released from the incident, Chauvin and other police involved in the arrest tried patiently for nearly 45 minutes to repeatedly ask Floyd to cooperate and exit his vehicle willingly all while Floyd continued to make excuses to let the already fatal overdose of drugs he had taken wear off in an attempt to avoid arrest and prosecution for his criminal behavior.
Floyd, a large man, resisted arrest and refused to cooperate resulting in the much smaller officers having to use force to properly detain him so he could be brought before a judge for his criminal actions which is why officers were originally called in to the scene of Floyd's crime.
Toxicology results showed he had taken a fatal overdose of fentanyl and other drugs prior to the interaction with police.
In the petition, Chauvin’s legal team is requesting a court order declaring that the assignment of authority of the case to Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison was “illegitimate” and a violation of his due process rights.
Additionally, they’re asking for a court order declaring that the failure of the Hennepin County District Court to convene a grand jury before any charging decision and the failure of prosecutors to secure an indictment also violated Chauvin’s due process rights.
Quote:In a 6-3 decision, the Supreme Court handed the Trump administration a victory on Monday, allowing it to enforce President Donald Trump’s "election integrity" executive order restricting mail-in voting ahead of the November midterms.
The high court lifted an injunction that had blocked the order in 23 states that challenged it after the administration appealed in July.
The U.S. Postal Service and Justice Department said they would immediately implement the revised mail-ballot restrictions after the ruling.
Most immediately, the ruling clears the path for the U.S. Postal Service to check its distribution of mail-in ballots against a list of citizens maintained by the Department of Homeland Security. But it’s also a significant political victory for the Trump administration as it has advocated against the widespread use of mail-in-voting, citing what it believes is a heightened vulnerability to tampering and voter fraud.
Trump’s original executive order looked to eliminate any ambiguity. Titled "Preserving and protecting the integrity of American elections," it directed federal agencies to compile citizenship-based lists of eligible voters and ordered the U.S. Postal Service to deliver mail-in ballots only to people appearing on those approved lists.
"Several Federal laws, including 18 U.S.C. 1015 and 611, prohibit foreign nationals from registering to vote or voting in Federal elections. Yet States fail adequately to vet voters’ citizenship, and, in recent years, the Department of Justice has failed to prioritize and devote sufficient resources for enforcement of these provisions," the executive order reads.
Where critics of the order saw a federal effort to dictate the terms of state-run elections, the court on Monday sided with the administration, stating that the way the executive order was made put requirements only on federal agencies.
In essence, the order didn’t put any new requirements on the states themselves.
"[It] directs the Secretary of Homeland Security to take appropriate action to create and distribute State Citizenship Lists. This provision is an internal directive from the President to a subordinate. It imposes no obligations on the States, so they ‘suffer no concrete harm from’ it, and without concrete harm, there is no standing," the court wrote.
Quote:The President recently issued an Executive Order regarding election integrity. A group of States sued the Govern-ment in the District of Massachusetts, contending that the Order unconstitutionally infringes on their authority to ad-minister elections. The District Court agreed and enjoined the Government from implementing the Order. In doing so, the District Court rejected the Government’s argument that it lacked jurisdiction over the States’ claims because the States lack standing to bring them. The Government has asked us to stay the injunction, arguing that it is likely to succeed on the merits of its jurisdictional argument, that the injunction is causing it irreparable harm, and that the equities do not favor leaving the injunction in place while the Government’s appeal is pending. We agree and grant the stay.
Quote:JUST IN: Judge Talwani has lifted her order blocking the USPS rule on mail-in ballots for the 2026 elections. Talwani, clearly frustrated by the SCOTUS decision, whined she has no choice and implies SCOTUS based its ruling on 'flawed premises'.
Quote:In sum, the court finds that, in light of the Supreme Court's decision in Trump v. California, Plaintiff Organizations are not likely to prevail
On March 31, President Trump signed Executive Order 14399, Ensuring Citizenship Verification and Integrity in Federal Elections. The order did two things Democrats cannot stand:
1. Directed DHS, working with the Social Security Administration, to compile state-by-state lists of confirmed U.S. citizens age 18 and older.
2. Directed the Postal Service to stop treating federal ballot mail like a free-for-all and transmit mail-in and absentee ballots only under uniform security rules, including official Election Mail markings, unique Intelligent Mail barcodes, and state-submitted lists of the voters receiving those ballots.
IOW, the federal government should not be hauling ballots across the country to names that have never been checked against federal citizenship and identity records.
That is not “voter suppression.” That is the bare minimum in a country that has spent six years watching Democrats mass-mail ballots, harvest them, and then scream “democracy” and "racissss" when anyone asks for a list.
womp, womp. Of course, the Left won't stop tryingn to continue to steal elections and have millions of illegals voting, but this is a victory for the Rule of Law against the Left.
A federal appeals court has ruled that the U.S. Constitution does not guarantee a right to clean municipal drinking water or accurate information from public officials about water contamination. The full U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ruled Friday against four residents of Jackson, Mississippi, who alleged that city officials exposed them to lead and other contaminants through the city's troubled water system and misled residents about whether the water was safe to drink. Put that in your cup and drink it....
(08-14-2026 09:51 AM)b2b Wrote: Nice. Baylor University buying dead baby parts from the biggest abortion clinic in the Western Hemisphere.... located in Texas.
Texas. All hat, no cattle.
And this is supposed to be a Christian University.
Another big win out of the 5th Circuit. DHS’s change in legal position on illegal alien detention restored the policy set by Congress and rejected a misreading of the law that perpetuated open borders for decades. It’s not too late to take a $2,600 check and a free flight home. DHS.GOV/CBPHOME
Quote:The full Fifth Circuit has issued an extraordinary precedential order making clear that illegal aliens do not have a constitutional right to roam free in the United States during their removal proceedings.
The Fifth Circuit ruling against these men means that everyone detained within its jurisdiction who entered the country without a visa — no matter how long ago, no matter their 'family ties' or supposed 'community roots' — can now be held during their immigration proceedings without any way to challenge this detention. Illegals are criminals by the very nature of being in this country illegally, overstaying visas or walking across the borders. They do not have the right to anything but being arrested, detained, have their criminal illegality assessed to their permanent record and deported as soon as possible. They do not have rights under the US Constitution, which are reserved for legal Citizens and legal foerign nationals with permission to be here only. Thus, illegal aliens have no constitutional right to challenge whether their imprisonment is justified. Full stop.
Did they clear this with Tanq first?
He is an attorney and has assured me that Illegals should have due process and are subject to our laws.
He is an expert at least according to him so I will have to assume he knows the legalese he spews.
Another big win out of the 5th Circuit. DHS’s change in legal position on illegal alien detention restored the policy set by Congress and rejected a misreading of the law that perpetuated open borders for decades. It’s not too late to take a $2,600 check and a free flight home. DHS.GOV/CBPHOME
Quote:The full Fifth Circuit has issued an extraordinary precedential order making clear that illegal aliens do not have a constitutional right to roam free in the United States during their removal proceedings.
The Fifth Circuit ruling against these men means that everyone detained within its jurisdiction who entered the country without a visa — no matter how long ago, no matter their 'family ties' or supposed 'community roots' — can now be held during their immigration proceedings without any way to challenge this detention. Illegals are criminals by the very nature of being in this country illegally, overstaying visas or walking across the borders. They do not have the right to anything but being arrested, detained, have their criminal illegality assessed to their permanent record and deported as soon as possible. They do not have rights under the US Constitution, which are reserved for legal Citizens and legal foerign nationals with permission to be here only. Thus, illegal aliens have no constitutional right to challenge whether their imprisonment is justified. Full stop.
Did they clear this with Tanq first?
He is an attorney and has assured me that Illegals should have due process and are subject to our laws.
He is an expert at least according to him so I will have to assume he knows the legalese he spews.
So had he been given the L for this already or does it add to his world record total?
Quote:The Supreme Court on Monday rejected the trump administration’s emergency bid to enforce new U.S. Postal Service (USPS) restrictions on mail-in ballots ahead of the 2026 midterm elections, leaving a lower court’s nationwide block in place.
In a brief order, the court said the government was "unlikely to succeed on the merits" for purposes of obtaining emergency relief and had not shown that the legal and practical considerations warranted a stay.
The rules would require federal ballot mail to be sent in envelopes bearing an election-mail logo, capable of being scanned by high-speed equipment and carrying a barcode unique to each voter.
Quote:The Alabama Supreme Court has dismissed a lawsuit that challenged U.S. Sen. Tommy Tuberville’s ability to run for governor.
In a ruling Oct. 9, justices said they do not have jurisdiction over the question of Tuberville’s residency, and that political parties, not courts, need to decide who can run for office.
Tuberville is on the ballot as the Republican nominee for governor Nov. 3.
“State-facilitated voter fraud is unacceptable in the United States of America,” said Attorney General Todd Blanche. “If found responsible in a court of law, the State of California will have seriously undermined confidence in our electoral system and violated laws that protect our nation’s representative system of government. The Department of Justice will continue working to uncover cases of voter fraud, hold fraudsters accountable, and restore trust in American elections.”
“It is unlawful for noncitizens to vote in federal elections,” said Secretary Markwayne Mullin of DHS. “The Department of Homeland Security and our federal partners reviewed publicly available California voter-registration files and compared relevant records with federal immigration data to identify alien registrants. This preliminary analysis has identified a significant number of individuals in California who are likely noncitizens and appear to be registered to vote; the analysis and review remain ongoing. This is completely unacceptable — as even one noncitizen vote cancels out the ballot of an American citizen and undermines our elections. DHS is committed to identifying unlawful voting, protecting the integrity of federal elections, and ensuring that only eligible American citizens elect America’s leaders.”
“The law is clear, aliens in the United States cannot vote in federal elections,” said Acting Deputy Attorney General Trent McCotter. “What our complaint alleges is that California is facilitating unlawful voting by knowingly allowing noncitizens to vote. This needs to stop.”
“California election officials were given an opportunity to remove noncitizens from their voter rolls and to sequester ballots returned from suspected ineligible voters. They refused,” said First Assistant U.S. Attorney Bill Essayli for the Central District of California. “We are taking California to federal court to demand that the votes of American citizens not be diluted by noncitizens.”
Homeland Security Investigations (HSI), in coordination with federal partners, analyzed publicly available voter-registration records to identify potential indicators that aliens may have registered to vote, cast ballots, or received election-related mail. The Department of Justice has filed a complaint against the State of California alleging that these individuals, who are likely noncitizens, registered to vote and/or voted in a federal election. HSI and its federal partners used multiple data-enrichment and verification methods to assess whether the individuals identified were likely aliens.
Quote:For these reasons, we REVERSE the district court’s denial of a preliminary injunction and REMAND with instructions to enter a preliminary injunction enjoining the State of California, its Governor, and its Attorney General from applying or enforcing § 10 of the No Vigilantes Act, S.B. 805, 2025 Gen. Assemb., Reg. Sess. (Cal. 2025) (codified at Cal. Penal Code § 13654), against the United States, federal agencies, and federal officers.
REVERSED and REMANDED.
This ruling is a significant ruling against one of Newsom’s attempts to impose state requirements on federal enforcement operations.
“The Ninth Circuit agrees that California cannot regulate federal law enforcement,” --Brett Shumate, assistant attorney general for the Justice Department’s Civil Division
Associate Attorney General Stanley Woodward Jr. went further, declaring that the court had reaffirmed the constitutional limits on California’s authority.
“Today, the Ninth Circuit again affirms what common sense makes clear: California cannot regulate how Federal law enforcement officers carry out their jobs authorized by Congress,” Woodward wrote.
The famously liberal-leaning Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Wednesday that California cannot force plainclothes federal law enforcement officers to display identification while carrying out their federal duties.
And the three-judge panel didn’t sound particularly uncertain about its decision.
“Indeed, we conclude that the United States is certain to succeed,” the court declared. Not merely likely. Certain. Smack!
