A federal judge appointed by President Biden has issued a temporary block on the Defense Department's new policy regarding transgender service members.
According to Breitbart News, U.S. District Judge Ana Reyes granted a preliminary injunction against Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth's directive that would bar transgender individuals from serving in the military without a waiver.
The ruling comes in response to a lawsuit filed by 20 plaintiffs who are currently serving or attempting to enlist in the military. Judge Reyes has given the Trump Justice Department until March 21 to appeal her decision. The case stems from President Trump's executive order issued on January 27, 2025, which prohibited transgender individuals from enlisting or serving in the military.
The executive order emphasized longstanding Department of Defense requirements that service members must be free of medical conditions requiring excessive treatment time. Secretary Hegseth implemented this policy through a February 7 directive that halted the accession of individuals with gender dysphoria and paused gender transition-related medical procedures.
A subsequent Pentagon memo issued on February 26 gave military services 30 days to begin separating troops diagnosed with gender dysphoria who did not receive waivers. The policy would affect approximately 4,200 service members diagnosed with gender dysphoria out of roughly two million active-duty and reserve forces.
Judge Reyes strongly criticized the ban in her ruling, emphasizing equal protection rights and citing studies showing positive outcomes of gender-affirming treatments.
A recent review by the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs detailed the costs associated with gender dysphoria treatment. Between 2015 and 2024, the Department of Defense spent $52 million on various treatments.
The spending breakdown included over $15 million for psychotherapy, approximately $3.1 million for hormone therapy, and more than $14.3 million for surgical procedures. These figures represent a significant increase from previous reports.
This financial data has become a focal point in discussions about military healthcare spending and readiness requirements.
The Justice Department immediately responded to the ruling, characterizing it as judicial overreach. White House officials expressed similar concerns about the scope of judicial authority over military matters.
Stephen Miller, White House Deputy Chief of Staff for Policy and Homeland Security Advisor, publicly questioned the extent of district court judges' authority over Armed Forces decisions. Secretary Hegseth showed support for Miller's position by reposting his social media statement.
The Pentagon's response has focused on maintaining operational readiness while adhering to legal requirements during this period of policy uncertainty.
The federal court's ruling temporarily blocks the implementation of the Trump administration's transgender military ban while legal proceedings continue. Judge Ana Reyes granted the preliminary injunction after reviewing evidence from 20 service members and potential recruits affected by the policy. The Justice Department faces a March 21 deadline to appeal the decision, with the potential for extended legal battles ahead.
Steve Bannon, former White House chief strategist, reveals controversial plans for President Donald Trump's potential run beyond constitutional term limits.
According to NewsNation, Bannon disclosed during a Tuesday interview that he and his team are actively developing strategies to enable Trump to seek a third term in 2028, despite existing constitutional restrictions.
The revelation came during Bannon's appearance on NewsNation's "CUOMO" show, where he expressed unwavering confidence in Trump's future political prospects. He compared this ambitious endeavor to Trump's current 2024 comeback campaign, suggesting that they have overcome greater challenges in the past.
When confronted about the constitutionality of his proposal, Bannon maintained his stance as a proponent of democratic values. He drew parallels between the current political climate and the transformative era of Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1932, highlighting what he perceived as a significant realignment in American politics.
Bannon emphasized the growing support for populist-nationalist policies among diverse demographic groups. He pointed to increasing backing from African-American and Hispanic communities as evidence of this shifting political landscape.
The former strategist firmly rejected suggestions that his plans involved revolutionary tactics or governmental overthrow. Instead, he characterized their efforts as a common-sense approach to reforming the administrative state.
Despite acknowledging significant disagreements with Elon Musk on various issues, including transhumanism, technology, and immigration policies, Bannon praised Musk's contributions to their cause. He highlighted Musk's financial support for voter outreach initiatives and the merger of different political movements.
The implementation of the Department of Government Efficiency, nicknamed DOGE, has emerged as a contentious topic. Bannon described it as a deliberate disruption of existing administrative structures, acknowledging its controversial nature while defending its effectiveness.
Bannon directed sharp criticism toward federal judges who have blocked Trump administration policies. He specifically targeted those who have impeded immigration enforcement efforts, suggesting their impeachment might be necessary.
His strongest objections centered on judicial interference with the implementation of the Alien Enemies Act. He argued that such interventions inappropriately constrain presidential authority in military and security matters.
These criticisms align with broader attempts to reform various government institutions, including the Justice Department, FBI, intelligence community, and Pentagon.
Steve Bannon's revelations about potential strategies for extending Trump's presidency beyond constitutional limits represent a significant development in American politics. The former White House strategist's plans, while still undisclosed, suggest a willingness to challenge fundamental aspects of American democracy.
These developments occur against the backdrop of increasing political polarization and institutional reform efforts. The coming months may provide further clarity on how Bannon and his associates intend to pursue their controversial agenda while maintaining their claimed commitment to democratic principles.
The Hollywood power couple Ryan Reynolds and Blake Lively face mounting legal tensions with actor-director Justin Baldoni over alleged harassment claims and career sabotage.
According to CNN, Reynolds has filed a motion to be removed as a defendant from Baldoni's $400 million defamation lawsuit, arguing that his involvement stems merely from expressing constitutionally protected opinions.
The legal battle intensified after Baldoni accused Reynolds of participating in a coordinated effort to destroy his career and hijack creative control of the film "It Ends With Us." Reynolds' attorneys maintain that their client's only connection to the dispute is his role as a supportive spouse to Lively, who separately filed sexual harassment claims against Baldoni.
Reynolds' legal team emphasizes that their client genuinely believes Baldoni's behavior reflects predatory conduct. The motion argues that such characterization falls under protected speech, regardless of the impact on Baldoni's reputation.
Baldoni's lawsuit specifically addresses two instances where Reynolds allegedly called him a "predator," including a conversation with a WME executive. The talent agency subsequently dropped Baldoni as a client, though they deny any influence from Reynolds or Lively in this decision.
The dispute extends beyond verbal accusations, with Baldoni claiming Reynolds mocked him through the character Nicepool in the upcoming "Deadpool & Wolverine" film. Reynolds' attorneys dismiss this as "thin-skinned outrage over a movie character."
The conflict originated from tensions during the production of "It Ends With Us," where Baldoni claims Lively attempted to seize creative control. He alleges Reynolds, despite having no formal role, secretly rewrote scenes and made unauthorized script changes.
Baldoni's attorney, Bryan Freedman, responded to Reynolds' dismissal request with strong criticism. He stated:
Mr. Reynolds was a key player in the scheme, defaming Justin around Hollywood, strong-arming WME into dropping Justin as a client, and trying to destroy Justin's career however possible. His fingerprints have been all over this smear campaign against Justin and the Wayfarer team since day one.
Reynolds' legal representatives countered these allegations, with his attorneys arguing that having opinions about Baldoni's character is constitutionally protected. They maintain that the lawsuit lacks legal merit.
The case is scheduled for trial in March 2026, with both parties showing no interest in settlement discussions. If Reynolds' motion for dismissal fails, he could face court testimony in what promises to be a highly publicized legal battle.
Steve Sarowitz, Baldoni's business partner at Wayfarer Studios, allegedly threatened to spend up to $100 million to "ruin" both Lively and Reynolds. This threat appears to have escalated the already tense situation between the parties.
The ongoing dispute has attracted significant media attention, particularly after Reynolds' recent appearance on "Saturday Night Live's" 50th anniversary special, which Baldoni's team referenced in their statements.
Ryan Reynolds faces potential removal from Justin Baldoni's $400 million defamation lawsuit, stemming from allegations of career sabotage and creative control disputes over the film "It Ends With Us." The legal battle intertwines with Blake Lively's sexual harassment claims against Baldoni, filed in December with the California Civil Rights Department. The outcome hinges on whether Reynolds' motion for dismissal succeeds, with the judge's decision potentially determining if one of Hollywood's biggest stars must testify in a trial set for March 2026.
A Buddhist death row inmate's final hours sparked an unusual alliance between a conservative justice and liberal colleagues at the nation's highest court.
According to CNN, the Supreme Court declined to halt Louisiana's execution of Jessie Hoffman, who claimed the state's nitrogen gas method would interfere with his Buddhist meditation practice, despite an unexpected dissent from conservative Justice Neil Gorsuch joining liberal justices.
The controversial case centered on Hoffman's argument that the execution method would prevent him from performing meditative breathing, a practice his legal team emphasized had deep spiritual significance in Buddhism. The Supreme Court's decision highlighted ongoing tensions between religious freedom protections and state execution protocols. Hoffman was executed Tuesday evening after the court's ruling.
The case's unique circumstances drew attention to the intersection of religious rights and execution methods. Supreme Court precedent has shown flexibility regarding religious accommodations for death row inmates, as evidenced by a 2022 ruling allowing a Texas inmate's spiritual adviser to pray aloud and touch him during execution.
Justice Gorsuch, known for strongly defending religious rights, expressed concern about the lower court's handling of Hoffman's religious claims. His alignment with the court's liberal justices underscored the case's complex constitutional implications.
The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals' decision to dismiss Hoffman's religious argument without detailed explanation drew criticism from Gorsuch. He suggested the case deserved more thorough consideration at the appellate level.
Gorsuch's dissenting opinion stated:
Perhaps that claim ultimately lacks merit. But the Fifth Circuit's unexplained omission leaves this court poorly positioned to assess it.
The conservative justice's stance reflected his consistent approach to religious liberty cases, even when such positions aligned him with the court's liberal wing. His dissent highlighted the growing importance of religious freedom claims in death penalty cases.
The Supreme Court's divided response revealed ongoing internal disagreements about balancing state execution procedures with inmates' religious rights. These tensions continue to shape death penalty jurisprudence in American courts.
Hoffman's execution proceeded despite his legal team's efforts to secure religious accommodations. The state of Louisiana carried out the death sentence as planned, marking the end of a case that began with his 1996 conviction for murdering Mary "Molly" Elliott.
His attorney, Cecelia Kappel, reflected on her client's life and transformation while in custody. She emphasized Hoffman's roles as a father and husband, along with his demonstrated capacity for personal growth during his incarceration.
The execution highlighted ongoing debates about religious accommodations in capital punishment cases. It also demonstrated the Supreme Court's evolving approach to balancing constitutional rights with state execution protocols.
The death row inmate's Buddhist faith played a central role in his final legal battle against Louisiana's execution protocol. Jessie Hoffman, convicted of the 1996 murder of Mary "Molly" Elliott, argued that the state's nitrogen gas execution method would prevent his religious practice of meditative breathing. The Supreme Court's decision allowing the execution to proceed, despite objections from Justice Gorsuch and the court's liberal justices, highlighted the ongoing tension between religious rights and state execution procedures. jurisprudence.
Pete Marocco's tenure at the United States Agency for International Development comes to an abrupt end following a controversial restructuring effort.
According to ABC News, Marocco, who spearheaded the widespread dismantling of USAID, announced his departure on Tuesday night through an email to State Department staff, declaring his return to his previous position as Director of Foreign Assistance.
The move follows a court ruling that deemed the administration's efforts to dismantle USAID unconstitutional, dealing a significant blow to the Trump administration's plans to drastically reduce the agency's operations and influence.
Under Secretary of State Marco Rubio's direction, Marocco assumed the role of USAID deputy administrator in early February. Working alongside Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency, he initiated sweeping changes that included massive employee layoffs and the termination of funding for more than 80% of the agency's programs.
The transformation also involved abandoning the agency's Washington, D.C. headquarters, signaling a dramatic shift in USAID's operational capacity. These actions prompted immediate legal challenges from various stakeholders concerned about the impact on global humanitarian efforts.
Critics argue that the dismantling efforts would severely diminish American influence abroad and negatively affect vulnerable populations who depend on U.S. aid for basic necessities like healthcare and food security.
Following Marocco's departure, the State Department confirmed that two political appointees would take over the deputy administrator responsibilities. Jeremy Lewin, 28, will serve as USAID COO and Deputy Administrator for Policy and Programs, while Ken Jackson will assume the role of USAID CFO and Deputy Administrator for Management and Resources.
Lewin's appointment has raised eyebrows due to his limited government experience. Despite graduating from Harvard Law School in 2022 and co-authoring opinion pieces with constitutional law expert Laurence Tribe, his primary professional experience comes from a brief stint at a Los Angeles law firm.
His law firm biography claimed extensive experience advising high-level global policymakers, including the U.S. President, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, and senior members of the G7 and UN. However, these claims remain unverified.
In his farewell message to staff, Marocco defended his actions at USAID, stating:
It's been my honor to assist Secretary Rubio in his leadership of USAID through some difficult stages to pivot this enterprise away from its abuses of the past. Now that USAID is under control, accountable and stable, I am going to return to my post as the Director of Foreign Assistance to bring value back to the American people.
Later, in an official statement released through the State Department, he added:
The crisis-level issues that had plagued USAID were far worse than we anticipated. It has been an honor and a privilege to help restore accountability and transparency at USAID.
Pete Marocco's exit from USAID marks a significant moment in the agency's ongoing transformation under the Trump administration. His departure as deputy administrator comes amid legal challenges to the agency's dismantling, with a judge recently declaring the restructuring efforts unconstitutional.
The leadership transition to Jeremy Lewin and Ken Jackson, along with Marocco's return to his previous role as Director of Foreign Assistance, raises questions about the future direction of American foreign aid and its impact on global humanitarian assistance.
Bella Bautista, a man living as a woman, has made a surprising announcement regarding the Miss Georgia USA pageant.
According to Breitbart, Bautista, who held the title of Miss Buckhead USA 2025, has decided to relinquish his crown and withdraw from the upcoming Miss Georgia USA competition.
Bautista cited a misalignment between the pageant’s affiliations and his personal values as the reason for stepping down. In an Instagram post, he expressed his initial hope to break barriers and inspire others but ultimately felt the organization’s actions did not support his mission for inclusivity. The announcement comes amid ongoing legal proceedings between Bautista and the pageant organizers, though details remain undisclosed.
Bautista’s decision sparks mixed reactions
Social media users were quick to respond to Bautista’s announcement, with opinions sharply divided. One user applauded the decision, stating that women’s competitions should remain exclusive to biological women. Another echoed similar sentiments, emphasizing the importance of preserving spaces for women.
Bautista’s participation would have marked a historic moment as the first transgender contestant in the Miss Georgia USA pageant. However, his withdrawal has reignited debates over transgender inclusion in gender-specific events. The controversy is further fueled by recent legislative developments in Georgia, including the passage of the Riley Gaines Act, which restricts transgender women from competing in women’s sports.
Legal and legislative battles intensify
Bautista’s decision comes amid ongoing legal disputes with the Miss Georgia USA organizers, though specifics remain confidential. In his Instagram post, he hinted at forthcoming revelations, stating, “The truth will unfold, and justice will be served very soon.”
The pageant is produced by Greenwood Productions, led by Kim Greenwood, a former Miss Tennessee USA and a public supporter of President Donald Trump. The organization has not commented on Bautista’s withdrawal but previously emphasized its adherence to eligibility requirements set by the Miss Universe Organization.
Bautista, a self-described collegiate athlete, has been vocal about his opposition to the Riley Gaines Act. In January, he testified before the Georgia Senate, arguing against the bill, which aims to ban transgender athletes from women’s sports. Despite his efforts, the legislation passed in a 9-3 vote and is now awaiting further action in the state House of Representatives.
The broader debate over transgender inclusion
Bautista’s case highlights the ongoing national conversation about transgender rights and inclusion in gender-specific spaces. The Riley Gaines Act, named after a former collegiate swimmer who advocated for protecting women’s sports, has become a focal point in this debate. Gaines gained prominence after competing against Lia Thomas, a transgender swimmer, during her college career.
Bautista’s testimony before the Georgia Senate underscored his frustration with lawmakers, whom he accused of fearmongering and harming one community to protect another. His pleas, however, were unsuccessful in halting the bill’s progress.
What lies ahead for Bautista and the pageant
Bella Bautista’s withdrawal from the Miss Georgia USA pageant marks a significant moment in the ongoing debate over transgender inclusion. His decision, driven by a misalignment of values, has sparked widespread discussion and highlighted the complexities of this issue.
As legal proceedings continue, Bautista remains hopeful that the truth will come to light. Meanwhile, the Miss Georgia USA pageant, produced by Greenwood Productions, moves forward with its preparations, adhering to the guidelines set by the Miss Universe Organization.
The broader conversation about transgender rights and inclusion in gender-specific spaces shows no signs of slowing down, with legislative battles like the Riley Gaines Act continuing to shape the landscape.
Fox News host Kayleigh McEnany made a heartfelt announcement on Monday that left viewers surprised.
As reported by Breitbart News, McEnany revealed that she and her husband, former Mets pitcher Sean Gilmartin, are expecting their third child, due in June. The couple shared the news during a segment on Outnumbered, where McEnany displayed an ultrasound and expressed her joy over the pregnancy.
McEnany described the experience as a “special time,” noting that she has been pregnant during both Christmas and Thanksgiving. She also shared how their daughter, Blake, has been excitedly interacting with her growing belly, often saying, “Let me kiss the baby.” The Fox News co-host emphasized her faith, referencing Bible verses to highlight the significance of the pregnancy.
During the segment, McEnany quoted Jeremiah 1:5, which states, “Before I formed you in the womb, I knew you,” and Luke 12:7, which speaks of God’s intimate knowledge of every individual. She explained that these verses were not just about her baby but a reminder of God’s love for everyone.
McEnany also brought humor to the moment, joking about her tight jacket and asking, “Can I unbutton my jacket now?” Her lightheartedness added a personal touch to the announcement, making it relatable to viewers.
The announcement sparked an outpouring of congratulations on social media. One user wrote, “Congratulations Kayleigh! The Lord is Great! Praise Jesus for His grace and love and may He bless you and your family!” Another commenter described the pregnancy as “definitely the greatest gift from God.”
McEnany, who served as White House press secretary during President Donald Trump’s first term, has often been praised for her articulate and unwavering presence in the political arena. However, this announcement highlighted her role as a devoted wife and mother, adding a new dimension to her public persona.
The couple already has two children, Blake and Nash, and the upcoming addition will expand their family to five. McEnany’s announcement not only celebrated the new life but also underscored her commitment to balancing her career and family life.
Her tenure as press secretary was marked by her sharp defense of the Trump administration, and her transition to Fox News has allowed her to continue engaging with political discourse.
However, this personal milestone has shifted the focus to her family and faith, offering a glimpse into her life beyond the political spotlight.
Kayleigh McEnany’s announcement of her third pregnancy has been met with widespread joy and support. The Fox News co-host shared the news with a mix of faith, humor, and personal anecdotes, making it a memorable moment for her viewers.
McEnany and her husband, Sean Gilmartin, are preparing to welcome their third child in June, adding to their family of four.
The announcement not only highlights McEnany’s role as a mother but also reinforces her faith-centered approach to life. As she continues her career in media, this new chapter promises to bring both personal and professional fulfillment.
White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt is already drawing more attention from fact-checkers than her predecessor, Jen Psaki, ever did.
In just two months since assuming office, Leavitt has received three fact-checks from PolitiFact, surpassing the total number received by Psaki during her entire tenure, according to Fox News.
Leavitt's latest claim, "Tariffs are a tax cut for the American people," was rated "False" by PolitiFact. Chief correspondent Louis Jacobson cited nearly unanimous disagreement among economists, who typically classify tariffs as tax hikes rather than tax reductions.
PolitiFact issued Leavitt's first two checks on January 30, less than two weeks after she stepped into the role. One statement was rated "False" while the other earned a rating of "Half-True."
The early scrutiny against Leavitt was highlighted by conservative media watchdog NewsBusters, which noted the unusual pace at which PolitiFact began scrutinizing Leavitt compared to Biden-era press secretaries.
Jen Psaki, who served for sixteen months under President Biden, received only two fact-checks throughout her entire term. Psaki's first fact-check in November 2021 earned a "False" rating, with a subsequent claim about COVID-19 vaccines in January 2022 rated as "True."
Comparatively, Karine Jean-Pierre, Biden's second press secretary, received four fact-checks between May 2022 and January 2025. Jean-Pierre's record consisted of two "False" ratings and two "Mostly True" ratings.
Leavitt's pace of fact-checking aligns more closely with press secretaries from President Donald Trump's first term. Sean Spicer, Trump's initial press secretary in 2017, accumulated nine PolitiFact checks in just six months.
Sarah Huckabee Sanders, who took over following Spicer, received five PolitiFact checks, while Kayleigh McEnany, serving from 2020 to 2021, had four. The trend indicates a tendency for Trump's press secretaries to be fact-checked more frequently than Biden's.
Responding to the scrutiny of Leavitt, White House spokesperson Taylor Rogers criticized PolitiFact's methodology and accused the organization of partisan bias. Rogers stated:
PolitiFact’s so called ‘reporters’ aren’t fact checkers; they are left-wing crusaders dedicated to spinning the truth, perpetrating lies, and promoting the Democrats’ radical agenda.
Rogers further defended Leavitt's transparency and honesty, suggesting PolitiFact struggled to find genuine inaccuracies:
Karoline Leavitt has been so honest and transparent with the press that the fake fact-checkers at PolitiFact are having a hard time finding any facts to check.
PolitiFact, known for its fact-checking role on social media platforms, recently faced criticism from its own executives. The organization's executive previously criticized Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg for discontinuing third-party fact-checking on his platforms.
Karoline Leavitt, the current press secretary under President Trump, quickly surpassed Jen Psaki's fact-check count, triggering discussions about media bias and the role of fact-checking organizations. PolitiFact's rapid response to Leavitt's claims, compared to its limited engagement during Psaki's tenure, raises questions about consistency and fairness. Going forward, the intensity of fact-checking scrutiny on Leavitt may continue to be a point of contention between the White House and media analysts, influencing public perception of the administration and the media outlets.