The Extreme Legal Theory Behind Trump’s First Month in Office

By Michael Waldman, 02/20/25* 

Over President’s Day weekend, Donald Trump posted, “He who saves his Country does not violate any Law.” This is a quote attributed to Napoleon — you know, the guy who crowned himself emperor. For a long time, the trope went that people who were delusional thought they were Napoleon. No one’s laughing now.  

Less incendiary but perhaps more consequential, yesterday Trump signed an executive order that purports to seize control of independent agencies such as the Federal Trade Commission, the Federal Communications Commission, and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. These expert bodies fight monopolies, police bank safety, organize the broadcast industry, and more. They are central to the entire edifice of modern government, built up over the past 140 years, which ensures that the free market does not devolve into an abusive free-for-all. 

The new president’s power grab may get clothed in legalistic garb by the highest court in the land, and some academics and advocates will applaud the decision. Very soon, we will be hearing a lot about the “unitary executive theory.” 

The framers of the Constitution were vague about what the president could and could not do. They knew that George Washington would be the first, but beyond that, things were a bit fuzzy. Supreme Court Justice Robert Jackson wrote in 1952 that what they intended “must be divined from materials almost as enigmatic as the dreams Joseph was called upon to interpret for Pharaoh.”

Commentary: Defensive Gun Uses Show Faulty Premise of California Gun Laws

Amy Swearer | Grace McNabnay | February 18, 2025

As wildfires raged last month in California, tens of thousands of people were forced to flee their homes, often with just minutes of warning. To make matters worse, looters took advantage of the chaos and lack of police resources, showing up in droves to ransack evacuated areas—sometimes as helpless residents looked on in horror as their doorbell cameras captured the looting in real time.

Fortunately for residents of at least some evacuated areas, a handful of their armed neighbors stayed behind to protect their homes and livelihoods from would-be looters—in some cases, bravely patrolling their streets with firearms in what certainly seemed to be open defiance of the state’s public carry laws.

But for countless others, the state’s restrictive gun laws undoubtedly complicated their ability to defend their homes, at the very least compounding their anxiety by raising questions about their legal rights in a state notorious for treating lawful gun owners as the enemy of public safety. Barriers like mandatory waiting periods, meanwhile, ensured that Californians who didn’t already own guns would be kept from exercising one of their most fundamental rights precisely when it mattered most. 

‘They Stole His Practice’: Medical Board Drops Case Against Canadian Doctor Who Questioned COVID Vaccines

https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/medical-board-drops-case-canadian-doctor-covid-vaccines/?utm_id=202502 

The College of Physicians and Surgeons of British Columbia (CPSBC) earlier this month withdrew its case against a Canadian doctor who faced misconduct allegations over social media posts questioning the safety and efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines and promoting ivermectin.

The charges against Dr. Charles Hoffe of Lytton, British Columbia [pictured here], an emergency room doctor with over 30 years of experience, had been lingering since 2022.

On Feb. 5, the CPSBC informed Hoffe’s attorney, Lee Turner, that it was withdrawing its disciplinary proceedings. According to The Epoch Times, CPSBC said the process had dragged on too long. According to Castanet Kamloops, CPSBC said the circumstances around Hoffe’s citation “materially changed.”

“The material change in circumstances is the fact that the emergency phase of COVID-19 has passed,” Castanet reported.

Kansas Legislature Overrides Governor’s Veto

Senator Beverly Gossage*

By: Sherman Smith 

TOPEKA — Senate and House Republicans voted Tuesday to override Gov. Laura Kelly’s veto of legislation that bans gender-affirming care for minors, rejecting pleas from Democrats to turn attention instead to issues that would help Kansas families.

Republicans used their dominance in both chambers to summon the two-thirds majorities needed to override the veto with votes of 31-9 in the Senate and 85-34 in the House. The unscheduled votes caught Democrats off-guard.

Senate Bill 63 prohibits health care providers from providing surgery, hormones or puberty blockers to children who identify as a gender that is different from the sex they were assigned at birth. Health care providers who break the law will be stripped of their license.

It also prohibits the use of state funds for psychological treatment for transgender children, bans state employees from promoting “social transitioning” and outlaws liability insurance for damages related to gender-affirming care.

A national anti-LGBTQ+ group called Do Not Harm drafted the model legislation, which is billed as the “Help Not Harm Act.”

Kelly responded to the veto override by saying it was “inappropriate that the Legislature dictate to parents how to best raise their children.”

“It is unfortunate that the first bill the Legislature sent me this session is focused on putting politicians between Kansans and their private medical decisions instead of prioritizing solutions to issues like rising prices and the cost of groceries, which would benefit everyone,” Kelly said. “This divisive bill will undoubtedly have ripple effects that harm Kansas families, our businesses, and our economy and intensify our workforce shortage issue.”

After DEI Fight With Legislature, University Of Wyoming Launches Image Makeover

Sunday, February 16, 2025

The University of Wyoming is trying to improve its public image. 

The school has come under fire from the Wyoming Legislature over the past year for issues like diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) programs on campus. Now, the school is launching a “Wyoming First” agenda for teacher education and putting more effort into actively promoting its Wyoming-focused programs.

UW President Ed Seidel told Cowboy State Daily the school’s top priority is trying to figure out how it can help advance the state.

“We are really trying to make a statement to the state that we’re here for the state,” Seidel said. “It’s very important to us that people understand that we’re here for the whole state, no matter where you’re from, and that means every student, every town, every organization across the state.”

Last year, the Legislature cut funding for the school’s DEI office. In response, the UW Board of Trustees cut the office while still retaining some of its services.

The Canadian Experience Includes Some of the World's Most Permissive Policies Regarding Assisted Suicide & Euthanasia

The full article can be viewed here:  https://newhampshirebulletin.com/2025/02/13/new-hampshire-is-debating-legalized-assisted-suicide-heres-how-its-worked-out-elsewhere/   

Quebec became the first Canadian province to legalize assisted suicide in 2014. Since then, however, the Canadian Supreme Court has ruled it legal for all Canadians.

After multiple expansions, Canadian law includes some of the world’s most permissive policies on assisted suicide. Since 2021, a patient does not have to be terminally ill to receive the drugs in Canada, but rather may be experiencing a long and complicated condition – including disability alone – that impacts their quality of life. The law there also allows a provider to directly administer the drugs rather than require the patient self-administer. (When a provider administers the drug, it’s called euthanasia.) Some opponents have called these expansions part of a so-called slippery slope.

The practice has exploded there. Assisted dying now represents roughly 1 in 20 Canadian deaths, according to an annual report released in December by Health Canada with data from 2023, the most recent available. That’s 15,300 deaths, or 4.7% of deaths in the country. Most – roughly 96% – had a terminal illness, but a small minority – around 4% – fit into the category of illness with a natural death not “reasonably foreseeable.” The median age was 77.7.

In recent years, Canada’s assisted-suicide policies have garnered criticism for disproportionately being used by the poor and disabled.