Free Republic

President Donald Trump is responding to the decision by a New York appellate court Thursday to throw out the bogus $515 million fraud case brought against him by Attorney General Letitia James. Here is Trump's full reaction, which he posted on Truth Social: TOTAL VICTORY in the FAKE New York State Attorney General Letitia James Case! I greatly respect the fact that the Court had the Courage to throw out this unlawful and disgraceful Decision that was hurting Business all throughout New York State. Others were afraid to do business there. The amount, including Interest and Penalties, was over $550...

An appellate court has thrown out the $500 million civil fraud penalty against former President Donald Trump in the high-profile case brought by New York Attorney General Letitia James.......The panel upheld findings that Trump and his company were liable, affirming that James acted within her authority and that injunctive relief to curb Trump Organization practices was appropriate.The ruling leaves liability intact but eliminates the massive financial penalty.

A New York state appeals court voided a more than $500 million civil fraud penalty imposed on President Donald Trump. The appeals court said “injunctive relief” ordered by the trial judge in the case was “well crafted to curb defendants’ business culture” at the Trump Organization. But the order that “directs that defendants pay nearly half a billion dollars to the State of New York, is an excessive fine that violates the Eighth Amendment of the United States Constitution,” the appeals court said.

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has just ruled that a man born in New York City in 1950 is NOT an American citizen. The court affirmed what the Constitution’s framers and generations of Americans have always understood: the Fourteenth Amendment does not grant automatic citizenship to children born in the U.S. to foreign diplomats.

The question of whether a public official in the United States can undermine the U.S. Constitution without violating their oath of office is complex, as it hinges on the nature of the oath, the definition of “undermine,” and the legal and practical mechanisms for assessing violations. Drawing on your prior questions about the oath of office (specifically in Indiana), socialism, communism, abortion, and ballot access, this response analyzes the issue through constitutional principles, legal standards, judicial precedents, and practical considerations. The answer will clarify whether actions that undermine the Constitution inherently breach the oath and under what circumstances they might...

Our Constitution, perhaps the greatest document in human history behind the Bible, is not quite perfect. In 2025, we can see things that might have been added. Number one is probably term limits. Another would be a prohibition on deficit spending outside of war. And maybe they could have added something about judges being responsible for the crimes the criminals they release into society commit… No doubt there are countless things we could sit here 250 years later and think of that the Founding Fathers could have added, but didn’t because they couldn’t see into the future. One thing they...

A public official’s ability to advocate for a form of government other than a Constitutional Republic without violating their Oath of Office depends on the specific oath they took, the legal framework governing their role, and the context of their advocacy. Below, I’ll break this down systematically, focusing on the United States as the context, since the term "Constitutional Republic" strongly suggests a U.S.-centric question. 1. Understanding the Oath of Office In the U.S., public officials—such as elected officials, judges, and federal employees—typically swear an oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States. For example: The Presidential...

After the great rebuke of 2024, many Democrats seem to think their party needs to become more moderate. But there’s another theory potent on the American left that believes Donald Trump’s election shows not just that American democracy is in danger, but that it doesn’t really work at all. What the country needs isn’t just a new policy agenda; it might need the kind of constitutional revolution — from adding new states, to packing the Supreme Court — that some Democrats already flirted with under Joe Biden. That’s the kind of argument that my guest today, Osita Nwanevu, makes in...

It is inconceivable to me that we do not hold people accountable before they run for office. True the Ballot is in the process of being established to change that. The link above is to a website under construction. It gives a good idea of what this is about. Starting in St. Joseph County, Indiana, anyone who took the oath of office will be put on notice: We know who you are, and your name will be publicly available as to your grade in taking and passing our examination or ignoring it as if the oath is a mere technicality...

Today I was able to write, record, and produce seven 30-second commercials for True the Ballot. Here are the links: Commercial 1 https://youtu.be/AB9psWirDhU Commercial 2 https://youtu.be/l4diy2PXQrg Commercial 3 https://youtu.be/e4ThjCTU7fI Commercial 4 https://youtu.be/PR7R4RmHkBM Commercial 5 https://youtu.be/gYbj9G4xI2o Commercial 6 https://youtu.be/njNdkDhi6gQ Commercial 7 https://youtu.be/fT3fNfWJvX8 These are amateur productions, to be sure, but a good start. We are in the process of determining what budget is needed to conduct radio advertising in St. Joseph County, Indiana so that we can approach donors with a realistic goal. We also joined the League of Women Voters because they are diligent in documenting all public officials. It...

For months we have been working on a mechanism whereby American citizens can vote with confidence in any election. True the Ballot has just been launched out of our own pockets to vet candidates before they get on any ballot in the United States. Think about it. Why would anyone run for office or vote if they were unable to demonstrate fidelity to our founding principles? We looked at every single candidacy form of the State of Indiana. There are twenty. Not a single one of them asks a candidate about their fealty toward our nation and its principles. Using...

A federal appeals court has struck down a sweeping gag order that prevented X from notifying users when their data was sought by the US government, declaring that the order failed to meet legal standards under federal privacy law. The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals unanimously ruled in favor of X, finding that the lower court authorized nondisclosure orders without providing the specific findings required by the Stored Communications Act. [link to order] The ruling addressed a case where X had been barred from revealing to users that their personal data had been subpoenaed. The conflict began when the federal...

VIDEOLiberals really HATE the U.S. Constitution because it was designed to make us a republic with a federal system of government. They hid their disdain for the Constitution in the past by pretending they really revere the Constitution but that it must be considered to be a "living" Constitution which means they could interpret it any way they wanted. Now that the dopey "living" Constitution concept has mostly faded away they are more open in their antagonism as illustrated by Chuck Todd and his Chuck Toddcast guest proposing a new Constitutional Convention to basically GUT the current Constitution of its...

A CRASH COURSE IN ARTICLE II. Among other things, the second Trump administration is giving the political world an education in the meaning of Article II of the Constitution, the article that establishes the executive branch and lays out the president’s powers. A lot of people do not like what they are learning.“The executive power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America,” it begins. The article outlines the process for electing the president, establishes qualifications for office, creates the oath of office, and details the process for removing the president. It lists the president’s powers,...

A federal judge on Friday blocked a Washington state law requiring Catholic priests to report suspected child abuse or neglect, including any information they learn from sacramental confession, raising concerns about religious liberty. The law, Senate Bill 5375, was slated to go into effect on July 27, but was blocked Friday after Judge David Estudillo of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington granted a preliminary injunction.

In 1883, when the Pendleton Act was passed, creating the US civil service, it must have seemed like no big deal. The forgotten Chester A. Arthur was the president. The fear of being assassinated like his predecessor James Garfield convinced him to back the legislation. The case for passage: government needs professionals with institutional knowledge. Technicians were changing the world, so why not government too? Science and engineering were the rage – electricity, steel bridges, telegraphic communications, internal combustion, photography – so surely public affairs needed the same level of expertise. Who could deny that civil service could do a...

Many conservatives are celebrating a series of strong decisions from the Supreme Court, including the 6-3 U.S. v. Skrmetti decision upholding Tennessee’s ban on transgender procedures for minors. This is an incredible win, and full credit should be given to the culture warriors who fought tirelessly for this cause. Nevertheless, this temporary victory provides another opportunity to reflect on the nature and function of our current Supreme Court and our political regime more broadly. I have written recently about why the Supreme Court still poses a significant obstacle to national restoration even when it allegedly grants “wins” to conservatives. The...

The Fourth of the July, in a galaxy far, far away. Captain Kirk & the United States Constitution

Friday is #July4th, when we celebrate America’s independence and the documents that made America different, like the Constitution. But is our Constitution good enough today?

The Supreme Court will be announcing Opinions from the bench for the October 2024 term at 10:00 this morning. Scotusblog will be liveblogging as the Opinions are released and we will be following along to try to make sense of the Court's decisions. There are ten cases remaining undecided from this term. That does not include the cases on the emergency docket.