Time to Elect a Conservative Pope

The Phyllis Schlafly Report
By John and Andy Schlafly

The 20-day clock began running on Easter Monday for a conclave to convene to select a successor to Pope Francis. Liberals around the world are intensely focused on this process, and conservatives should be too.

Fortunately, the conclave meets, discusses, and votes entirely in secret, just as our Constitutional Convention was in 1787 to write our U.S. Constitution. This denies the liberal media the exaggerated influence that it has over nearly everything else.

The convening cardinals take an oath of confidentiality and seclusion in the Sistine Chapel, below the depiction by Michelangelo of God’s creation of Adam on the ceiling. None of our Founding Fathers breached their oath of secrecy during our Constitutional Convention, and none of the cardinals in a modern conclave has, despite leakers in every government today.

The deliberations are face-to-face and the casting of ballots is in-person, not by proxy or mail-in voting that have recently undermined American elections.

Only twice in this century has there been a conclave, which is comprised of cardinals who are less than 80 years old. They total 120 now, most of whom were appointed by Pope Francis himself.

The rules of the conclave are to cast one ballot the first evening to gauge initial preferences, without expecting anyone to prevail immediately. Then balloting is done multiple times each day, with a new pope typically announced within a few days.

Ballots are burned with only their smoke emanating for public view from the rickety chimney: black smoke means no winner has yet prevailed, while white smoke announces to the world that a new pope has been chosen.

A two-thirds majority is required to elect a new pope. The cardinals are housed in the same spartan quarters where the ascetic Pope Francis lived, which has been compared to a mere three-star hotel with modest meals to prevent them from getting too comfy.

President Trump announced that he and First Lady Melania will attend the funeral of Pope Francis at the Vatican, which is scheduled for Saturday. In further exercise of his leadership, President Trump has also ordered flags to be flown at half-mast in respect for the leader of 1.4 billion Catholics worldwide.

President Emmanuel Macron of France announced that he too will attend, as will the Chancellor of Germany. Prince William will represent the King of England, along with the U.K. Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer.

The conclave follows within two weeks of this funeral, and could be a make-or-break moment for the traditional dominance by Italians who had been selected as pope for 450 years until Pope John Paul II, who was surprisingly picked as the first Polish pope in 1978. Pope Francis was an Argentinian of Italian descent.

Pope John Paul II was a shining example that the conclave should follow today. Picked for his strong values and immense charisma, he then became instrumental in overcoming communism in all of Eastern Europe and was an invaluable ally of President Ronald Reagan.

Today’s crises of transgender activism, rampant immorality, and an imploding birth rate threaten the entire world, including the Catholic Church. Atheism and other rivals to Christianity are growing faster in some communities, and religion has all but disappeared in many aspects of the Western world.

Pundits expect a more conservative successor to Pope Francis to be chosen. The Catholic Church is booming throughout Africa, where the cardinals are so conservative that some openly criticized liberal statements by Pope Francis at the risk of being disciplined by him, which he declined to do in light of their tremendous success in evangelizing there.

The Latin Mass, a favorite of many conservative Catholics, was marginalized under Pope Francis but could find a resurgence under his successor. The word “conclave” itself comes from the Latin for “with a key.”

Africa has surpassed North America in its number of cardinals who will participate in this conclave, and it is unlikely that an American will be chosen as the next pope. Conservative Cardinal Raymond Burke, once the archbishop of St. Louis, would be an excellent choice.

The presiding cardinal will be the Italian Pietro Parolin, having an optimal age of 70, who was sharply critical of same-sex marriage in Italy. But African cardinals, such as Robert Sarah (age 79) from Guinea, are more conservative and could be a bolder choice as Pope John Paul II successfully was.

Cardinal Sarah vocally opposed blessings on same-sex couples, in defiance of Pope Francis. The 76-year-old African Cardinal Peter Turkson of Ghana, is also a leading contender.

A sentiment in the last conclave was to pick a pope from South America, which resulted in the election of Pope Francis. This time, it might be Africa’s turn and that would result in a turn to the right, too.

John and Andy Schlafly are sons of Phyllis Schlafly (1924-2016) and lead the continuing Phyllis Schlafly Eagles organizations with writing and policy work.

These columns are also posted on PhyllisSchlafly.com, pseagles.com, and Townhall.com.

More Trump than Trump at the White House

The Phyllis Schlafly Report
By John and Andy Schlafly

A surprise visit by the president of El Salvador to the White House on Monday was like a breath of fresh air from south of our border. Nayib Bukele, recently reelected by a landslide as Latin America’s most popular leader, was more Trump than Trump in defying media demands to return to the U.S. a Salvadoran whom Trump recently deported.

Federal judge Paula Xinis had ordered the return to the U.S. of the deported Salvadoran, to which Trump’s Attorney General Pam Bondi replied that it is “up to El Salvador if they want to return him.” Identified as Kilmar Abrego García, he had been allowed in 2019 to remain in the U.S. based on his alleged fear of retaliation by a gang in his homeland.

“How can I return him to the United States?” El Salvador President Bukele responded to the liberal media. “I smuggle him into the United States or what do I do? Of course, I’m not going to do it. The question is preposterous.”

Bukele’s charming graciousness at the White House stood in stark contrast with other foreign visitors. Bukele declared that it is an “honor to be here” and that “we’re very eager to help” President Trump reduce terrorism and all crime.

Bukele praised Trump’s work on the border as “remarkable.” Bukele himself has achieved a sharp reduction in crime in El Salvador, which he attributes in part to prayer.

Trump effusively praised Bukele prior to their meeting, in a posting on Truth Social. “President Bukele has graciously accepted into his Nation’s custody some of the most violent alien enemies of the World and, in particular, the United States,” Mr. Trump posted.

Trump’s Department of Justice has informed Judge Xinis of El Salvador’s unwillingness to return this illegal alien to the United States. Attorney General Bondi pointed out to the press that this alien was in our country unlawfully, so what’s the big fuss about trying to return him to his homeland?

It is unclear what Judge Xinis’ next move will be, and she held a hearing late Tuesday afternoon to indicate that she would elaborate on her court order for the Trump Administration to “facilitate” the return of Garcia from El Salvador. Courts rarely order a president to do something, particularly something that may not even be within the president’s power to do, and whatever she orders will surely be appealed back to the Supreme Court.

Courts do not have any way to enforce their orders without the support and cooperation of the Executive Branch, as run now by President Trump. So far he has promised to obey the law, but many federal courts have been continuing to issue orders that test Trump’s willingness to cooperate, and deportation pits federal courts directly against Trump’s authority as president.

Last weekend in Maine, a federal court ordered Trump to restart federal funding of Maine schools despite how they are defying his Executive Order against transgender athletes playing in girls’ sports. This was the focus of a sharp exchange between Trump and the Democrat Maine governor during a luncheon at the White House seven weeks ago.

Subsequently a federal judge ordered Trump to jump through some bureaucratic hoops before even trying to cut off this federal money from Maine schools. Neither Trump nor our country has the time for that as transgender activism swiftly marches ahead.

A total of 11 states have announced that they will not comply with directives from Trump’s Department of Education to stop using DEI or else lose federal funding, which sets up additional lawsuits against presidential authority.

In Ecuador, voters just elected their own conservative equivalent of Trump on Sunday. The liberal media laments how successful the conservative movement is in sweeping across Central and South America today.

Less than a generation ago, the countries south of our border were fertile ground for the spread of communism. Hugo Chavez rose to become a communist dictator in 1998 in Venezuela and ruined it before succumbing at a young age to cancer, as hospitals in communist countries including Cuba were ill-equipped from the poverty that communism causes.

The news show 60 Minutes analyzed the backgrounds of the group of Venezuelans and El Salvadorans deported by Trump to El Salvador, and about a dozen have been charged with murder, rape, assault, or kidnapping. More than one-fifth of the group has a criminal record somewhere, although mostly for non-violent crimes.

Courts are forcing our president to spend an inordinate amount of time on the fate of a few hundred illegal aliens who never should have been here in the first place. Recent surveys show that most American citizens are concerned about the economy, and it is not helping to keep illegal aliens here when jobs are scarce for Americans.

John and Andy Schlafly are sons of Phyllis Schlafly (1924-2016) and lead the continuing Phyllis Schlafly Eagles organizations with writing and policy work.

These columns are also posted on PhyllisSchlafly.com, pseagles.com, and Townhall.com.

Lawfare Versus Trump and Our Country

The Phyllis Schlafly Report
By John and Andy Schlafly

The Left has filed more than 170 lawsuits against President Trump despite his commanding margin of victory last November. Lawsuits by liberal nonprofits frustrate the will of the People by blocking Trump’s ability to deport dangerous foreigners, downsize government, and end the funding of harmful projects.

On Monday night, the Supreme Court gave Trump a partial victory on his deportation of Venezuelan gang members, but included enough loopholes for the Left to continue its interference with his executive authority. The Court properly tossed out Democrat-appointed D.C. federal judge James Boasberg’s class-action certification for illegal aliens, but allowed immigration groups to sue in Texas instead.

The Court invited individual lawsuits to be brought on behalf of every single person whom Trump tries to deport. Lawsuits take years to litigate, and the practical result is that only a handful could be deported.

An essentially infinite amount of money and free legal time is available on the Left to try to thwart Trump at every turn. Biden, Obama, and Clinton filled the federal judiciary with hundreds of judges who welcome these lawsuits.

The response by Judge Boasberg on Tuesday was alarming. He ordered the submission of additional briefs in the Venezuelan deportation case, rather than dismiss it for lack of jurisdiction as the Supreme Court held.

In a separate ruling Monday, the High Court suspended an order by another Obama-appointed judge requiring the government to bring back an alien deported to El Salvador. Newly confirmed Solicitor General John Sauer won his first case right out of the gate when Chief Justice Roberts quickly granted Sauer’s emergency application for a stay of the order requiring Trump to bring back an alleged MS-13 gang member from El Salvador.

Sauer has arrived in D.C. just in time as the emergency appeals to the Supreme Court in the next 60 days may decide the ability of Trump to enact the mandate of the People who elected him. After the Supreme Court refused to stay an injunction against one of Trump’s defunding orders, last Friday night a 5-4 ruling allowed Trump to cut off a small amount of educational funding to states.

On March 24, Biden-appointed Judge Deborah Boardman had issued a 68-page preliminary injunction that prohibited the Departments of the Treasury, Education, and OPM from sharing data with DOGE, which is Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency in charge of downsizing. The court surprisingly invoked the 51-year-old Privacy Act of 1974 to interfere with federal agencies sharing information with each other.

Quickly appealed by the Trump Administration to the Fourth Circuit, a fortunate random selection of 2 Republicans and 1 Democrat were assigned to this case and they issued a stay of the activist ruling pending appeal. Next a Democrat-appointed panel judge requested a hearing en banc, which was defeated by an 8-7 vote such that the good decision stands.

But Democrats have a commanding 7-4 active-judge majority on the D.C. Circuit, where many of the challenges to Trump go on appeal. In a nearly unprecedented move, the D.C. Circuit just went en banc to reverse a panel decision that had allowed Trump to fire a member of the National Labor Relations Board, and a member of the Merit Systems Protection Board.

Even left-leaning Politico called this order by the D.C. Circuit as “highly unusual.” This tees up another case for Sauer to argue in the Supreme Court, perhaps on an emergency basis, in order to restore the authority of the president to fire high-ranking federal officials.

On Tuesday the Supreme Court held in favor of Trump by staying an injunction against his firing of 16,000 federal probationary workers. By a 7-2 margin, the High Court found that the plaintiff organizations lacked standing to object to these terminations, such that these firings can proceed.

The Leftist lawfare is “popping up every single day, trying to control his executive power. ... It’s basically a game of whack-a-mole with these District Court judges ... But that’s why we’re appealing all of these cases ... up to the Supreme Court,” Attorney General Pam Bondi told Fox News Sunday.

On Tuesday morning, the ACLU quickly filed a new lawsuit in New York to invoke the right established by the Supreme Court on Monday night for illegal aliens: a right of habeas corpus to challenge their detention. But their detention is only temporary before they would be deported and attain freedom back in their homeland.

John Sauer, the man who overcame the lawfare against candidate Trump such that he could be elected president, is the new Solicitor General in charge of cases before the Supreme Court. He is certainly going to be very busy in appealing and overturning the activist rulings by Democrat-appointed lower court judges against Trump’s program to Make America Great Again.

John and Andy Schlafly are sons of Phyllis Schlafly (1924-2016) and lead the continuing Phyllis Schlafly Eagles organizations with writing and policy work.

These columns are also posted on PhyllisSchlafly.com, pseagles.com, and Townhall.com.

Supreme Court’s Getting Busy

The Phyllis Schlafly Report
By John and Andy Schlafly

Suddenly the Supreme Court has a pile of cases that could decide the future of the MAGA movement, on everything from deportation to transgender policy to firing federal workers. The queue stacks up at the High Court with appeals of judicial activist rulings against Trump.

Liberals are shrewd enough to file their lawsuits against Trump in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth, First, and D.C. Circuits, which rule for them nearly every time. The anti-Trumpers then hedge their bet by filing multiple identical lawsuits within additional left-leaning Circuits, while meticulously avoiding the Republican-dominated Fifth and Eighth Circuits.

While a candidate, Trump heroically overcame lawfare against him which has blocked presidential candidates in Brazil, Romania, and most recently in France. “That sounds like this country,” Trump complained about the French judge who recently banned Marine Le Pen from running for president while “she was the leading candidate.”

The Ninth Circuit just ordered Trump to allow transgender soldiers to remain in our military. The Democrat-majority Ninth Circuit denied a request by Trump to stay a ruling by a federal court in Tacoma, Washington, that blocks Trump from eradicating the transgender culture that has crept into our Armed Services.

San Francisco is a venue favored by liberals for their lawfare against Trump, and one of the many Democrat-appointed judges there just blocked the revocation of temporary protected status (TPS) for 350,000 Venezuelans. Through this TPS status, which should never have been granted by the Biden Administration, Trump is being prevented from deporting these non-citizens back to their homes.

It is onward from these activist courts to the Supreme Court, which traditionally has deferred to the president on military issues, as he is the commander-in-chief of the Armed Forces. But the Supreme Court has been wobbly on the transgender issue, and Chief Justice Roberts may seek a compromise middle ground where there is none.

On Tuesday, Democrats controlling 23 states and Washington, D.C., filed a new lawsuit against Trump’s Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and its Secretary, RFK Jr., over their cancellation of $12 billion in funding. “The COVID-19 pandemic is over, and HHS will no longer waste billions of taxpayer dollars responding to a non-existent pandemic that Americans moved on from years ago,” HHS announced.

RFK Jr. has proven to be one of Trump’s finest Cabinet picks, firing 10,000 employees from the bloated HHS bureaucracy while shifting it away from its hidden agenda to promote the pharmaceutical industry. Vaccine stocks fell on Monday after the departure last Friday of the FDA official who oversaw the rollout of Covid-19 vaccines.

This week the Court is already tackling the issue of deporting illegal aliens to Venezuela, as Chief Justice Roberts ordered a speedy response by 10 a.m. on Tuesday from the plaintiffs who persuaded Judge James Boasberg to block deportations by Trump. Already before the High Court are cases concerning Trump’s suspension of funding of DEI programs in schools, his termination of birthright citizenship, and his firing of probationary federal employees.

The acting Solicitor General Sarah Harris, who formerly clerked for Justice Clarence Thomas, wrote in her brief to the Supreme Court, “Does a single district-court judge who likely lacks jurisdiction have the unchecked power to compel the government of the United States to pay out (and probably lose forever) millions in taxpayer dollars?”

“This court should put a swift end to federal district courts’ unconstitutional reign as self-appointed managers of executive branch funding and grant-disbursement decisions,” she argued.

Meanwhile, the abortion shield law enacted by the State of New York has resulted in a court clerk there refusing to register a judgment obtained by Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton against a New York abortion provider. The judgment is based on a New York physician prescribing chemical abortion pills to someone in Texas contrary to Texas law.

The blue states of California, Colorado, Maine, Massachusetts, New York, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Washington have all enacted laws to shield their abortionists who expand their services into red states that restrict abortion. When there is enforcement of pro-life laws against out-of-state abortion providers, the blue states refuse to allow the registration of judgments from other states.

Louisiana has issued a criminal indictment against the same New York abortionist on charges of illegally prescribing chemical abortion to a teenager in Louisiana. The Democrat New York Governor refuses to extradite the defendant to Louisiana.

These pro-abortion shield laws violate the Full Faith and Credit Clause of the U.S. Constitution, which commands states to recognize each other’s court rulings. Not since before the Civil War has there been such open defiance by one group of states against another, and the Supreme Court will be asked to resolve this, too.

John and Andy Schlafly are sons of Phyllis Schlafly (1924-2016) and lead the continuing Phyllis Schlafly Eagles organizations with writing and policy work.

These columns are also posted on PhyllisSchlafly.com, pseagles.com, and Townhall.com.

Election Integrity Gains at State Level

The Phyllis Schlafly Report
By John and Andy Schlafly

With many elections decided today by fewer than 1% of votes, election integrity has become more important than ever. Republican state legislatures should be taking decisive action to end opportunities for election fraud.

Wyoming leads the way by requiring proof of citizenship to register to vote, as Trump seeks. Previously Kansas and Arizona enacted similar laws but those have been blocked or tied up in court, and Wyoming should prepare to provide evidence of election fraud in court when its new law is challenged.

On Thursday, Wyoming HB 156 became law to ensure that voters there have presented proof of their American citizenship and residency before casting a ballot. Wyoming’s Republican Gov. Mark Gordon feebly declined to add his signature to this legislation, which became law regardless.

But also on Thursday in Texas, a liberal federal judge tossed out an election integrity law enacted in 2021 to reduce fraud in connection with mail-in ballots. Voters over 65, which is a large percentage of the voting public, and those with disabilities are allowed to cast their votes by mail in Texas without giving a reason.

The Texas legislature added a requirement that voters include an ID number to ensure that the ballots were legitimately mailed in by the person listed on it. The good law also required anyone assisting the voter to sign an oath under penalty of perjury to ensure its integrity.

In states having Republican trifectas, where Republicans control both chambers of the legislature and the governor’s office, a total of 66 election-related laws have been enacted. Nearly three times that many are working their way through the legislatures this spring.

In addition to Wyoming, other states leading on this issue are Arkansas, Utah, Mississippi, and South Dakota. The Arkansas Senate deserves particular credit for recently passing bills to improve the integrity of the process for putting an issue on the ballot for voter approval to become a law.

The Arkansas Secretary of State observed that out-of-state groups having lots of money “are able to get almost any issue on Arkansas ballots.” Nearly half the states continue to be vulnerable to the misuse of their ballot initiative process by out-of-state and even foreign billionaires to enact laws.

On the fundamental issues of abortion, marijuana, and gambling, liberals are enacting their agenda in predominantly conservative states by using hired petition gatherers to obtain signatures to qualify for the ballot. Then liberals outspend conservatives by 10-to-1 or more to pass these measures as new laws with a flood of television and internet advertising.

The conservative states need to reform this process, which is a relic from the Progressive Era early in the 20th century when state legislatures were overly influenced by corporate interests. The ballot initiative process was supposed to be a counterweight for the people to push back against corporate spending to enact laws in the legislatures.

Today, ballot measures have become the opposite, whereby big money by liberals is buying the laws they want and lining their own pockets by legalizing gambling and other bad behavior. Online sports gambling was legalized in Missouri last November by a margin of less than 3,000 votes, based on $43 million spent in support and only $9 million in opposition.

Arkansas Senate Bill 207 requires petition signature-gathering canvassers to inform, verbally or in writing, potential signatories that petition fraud is a Class A misdemeanor. This would help reduce the fraudulent collection of signatures to place a proposed law on the ballot.

Arkansas SB 208 requires that petition signers show a photo ID, which the canvassers must use to verify a signatory’s identity. Otherwise, signatures may not be gathered and included toward the minimum amount needed to place the measure on the ballot.

Arkansas SB 209 commands that the Secretary of State not recognize and count signatures on a petition for which there is a preponderance of evidence that the canvasser violated any law in collecting signatures. SB 210 requires that signatories read or have the title read to them, before signing a petition.

Finally, Arkansas SB 211 requires the canvasser to submit a sworn statement indicating compliance with all the signature-gathering laws. Without the sworn statement, the Secretary of State is ordered not to count the signatures gathered by that canvasser.

The Republican supermajorities in the legislatures in Ohio, Missouri, and elsewhere should follow this lead taken by the Arkansas Senate. Marijuana was recently legalized by ballot initiatives in Ohio and Missouri over objection by the elected representatives of the people, but the legislatures and courts in conservative states could end this misuse of the initiative process.

The Arkansas Supreme Court set the example last fall concerning harmful ballot initiatives. It properly excluded from the ballot both the marijuana and abortion-on-demand ballot initiatives that Missouri and Ohio allowed.

John and Andy Schlafly are sons of Phyllis Schlafly (1924-2016) and lead the continuing Phyllis Schlafly Eagles organizations with writing and policy work.

These columns are also posted on PhyllisSchlafly.com, pseagles.com, and Townhall.com.

Trump Has Options Against Judicial Overreach

The Phyllis Schlafly Report
By John and Andy Schlafly

On Tuesday President Trump called for the impeachment of a federal judge, to which Chief Justice Roberts retorted by urging an appeal instead. Roberts is apparently panicked about the prospect of many impeachments raining down on federal judges based on shocking decisions.

The recent interference by a federal court in D.C. with President Trump’s deportation of Venezuelan gang members is an egregious overreach by the federal judiciary. Presidents, not judges, are elected to protect national security against a foreign invasion.

Impeachment is not the only option available to Trump and Republicans in Congress to provide a check-and-balance against the federal judiciary as established by our Constitution. Founding Father Alexander Hamilton described the judiciary as the “least dangerous” branch because the other two branches decide what power to give it, and what rulings to enforce.

Congress has defunded the enforcement of improper judicial decisions in the past, and has withdrawn jurisdiction entirely from federal courts over many topics. Why should a federal court even have authority over a decision by a president to deport dangerous illegal aliens?

Hamilton wrote in Federalist No. 78 that federal judges have “no influence over either the sword or the purse; no direction either of the strength or of the wealth of the society; and can take no active resolution whatever. It may truly be said to have neither FORCE nor WILL, but merely judgment; and must ultimately depend upon the aid of the executive arm even for the efficacy of its judgments.”

In other words, it is entirely up to President Trump whether and how to enforce a decision by a federal court. It is also entirely up to Congress whether and how to fund federal courts, define the scope of their jurisdiction, and finance the implementation of any judicial decisions.

Yet District Court Judge James E. Boasberg ordered the Trump Administration to provide details by noon on Tuesday about the deportation of Venezuelan gang members, including flight information. But the Department of Justice (DOJ) announced on Tuesday that it would not comply with Judge Boasberg’s demand for more information.

Newly confirmed Attorney General Pam Bondi and other DOJ attorneys told Boasberg “there is no justification to order the provision of additional information, and that doing so would be inappropriate” because DOJ feels Boasberg’s “oral statements were not independently enforceable.” Trump’s DOJ has already appealed and stated they “should not be required to disclose sensitive information bearing on national security and foreign relations until that motion is resolved.”

Trump’s DOJ had requested immediate reassignment to another judge because of his “highly unusual and improper procedures—e.g. certification of a class action involving members of a designated foreign terrorist organization in less than 18 hours with no discovery and no briefing from the Government.”

DOJ’s appeal has gone to the D.C. Circuit, which is dominated by Democrat-appointed judges likely to rule against Trump. From there, it will go to the U.S. Supreme Court as part of the appellate process that Chief Justice Roberts requests be followed.

The Federalist Papers as quoted above are the best source for interpreting the Constitution because its ratification was achieved based on these writings. House Republicans would do well to quote and act on what Alexander Hamilton said about how to curb the federal judiciary.

On Tuesday Congressman Brandon Gill (R-TX) immediately filed articles of impeachment against federal Judge Boasberg for interfering with this deportation of Venezuelan gang members to El Salvador. They are reportedly being held in a prison there under a contract with the United States to take illegal aliens.

Impeachment of federal judges was the approach used by President Thomas Jefferson, but it was unsuccessful. President Andrew Jackson adopted a different style of simply declining to enforce a court ruling he considered improper, as Alexander Hamilton envisioned.

The Constitution does not require the executive branch, over which the president presides, to enforce decisions that he feels are improper or unconstitutional. Our Founders intentionally dispersed power among the three branches of government as a safeguard against the judiciary or any other branch of government asserting more power than it should.

President Abraham Lincoln said, “If the opinion of the Supreme court covered the whole ground of this act, it ought not to control the co-ordinate authorities of this Government. The Congress, the executive and the court, must each for itself be guided by its own opinion of the Constitution.”

That was Lincoln’s response to the Supreme Court’s ruling in the Dred Scott case that sided with slave owners and denied all rights to blacks. “Each public officer, who takes an oath to support the Constitution, swears that he will support it as he understands it, and not as it is understood by others,” Lincoln said while repudiating that horrible decision.

John and Andy Schlafly are sons of Phyllis Schlafly (1924-2016) and lead the continuing Phyllis Schlafly Eagles organizations with writing and policy work.

These columns are also posted on PhyllisSchlafly.com, pseagles.com, and Townhall.com.

DOJ: Investigate the Unexplained 6.3M Dem 2020 Votes

The Phyllis Schlafly Report
By John and Andy Schlafly

The Department of Justice has more than 10,000 attorneys standing around looking for something legitimate to do, now that the Trump Administration has shut down their liberal lawfare against conservatives. Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) has cost-cutters in every federal agency except, apparently, the DOJ.

Some of the high-flying DOJ projects, including prosecuting candidate Trump and two of his loyal employees in Florida, have been properly cancelled. This and other dismissals, including calling off the time-consuming DOJ prosecution of New York City Mayor Eric Adams, have left an army of DOJ attorneys with little to do.

So here’s an idea for something DOJ should investigate: the unexplained spike in 6.3 million votes that magically appeared out of nowhere to be counted for Joe Biden in 2020, which disappeared again in 2024.

Trump was credited with 74.2 million votes in 2020, which increased to 77.3 million in 2024. That 4% growth in votes reflects the overwhelming crowds and enormous enthusiasm that he generated.

But the Democrat nominee for president reportedly received 65.9 million votes in 2016, unexpectedly claimed 81.3 million votes in 2020 (an implausible 23% increase in four years), and yet only 75.0 million votes four years later in 2024. Trump has correctly pointed out that mail-in voting, which was its highest in 2020, is particularly vulnerable to election fraud.

“Anytime you have a mail-in ballot, there is going to be massive fraud,” Trump said to Dr. Phil McGraw during last year’s campaign. The Utah legislature recently enacted a bill to end the irresponsible practice of mailing a ballot to every registered voter, which large Democrat-controlled states exploit.

While the unexplained 2020 surge in Democrat votes may not by itself prove fraud, it is a big enough spike to be suspicious. 6.3 million unexplained votes exceed the total vote count for both sides in our largest city.

It is not as though the DOJ lacks the time or resources to investigate potential election fraud. Its overfunded $46 billion annual budget is being protected and replenished by Republicans’ Continuing Resolution this week.

Election integrity should be a priority in this spending. Investing merely one-tenth of 1% of DOJ’s annual budget on getting real answers about the bizarre spurt in Democrat votes in 2020 is needed.

Some attribute this sharp rise in Democrat ballots in 2020 to relaxed voting requirements due to Covid. But only if that were combined with substantial fraud could a 6.3M surge for the Democrat side be attained, and that fraud needs to be uncovered and prosecuted.

Americans need to be assured that 6.3 million unexplained votes won’t be counted for a future Democrat presidential candidate. Indeed, making sure that such phantom votes do not magically reappear from nowhere in a future election should be first on the priority list of Trump's DOJ.

Yet here we are, nearly a half-year after the 2024 results have been counted and compared to the 2020 numbers, and no analysis explains this mystery. While the media insist that no specific evidence of fraud was proved in the 2020 election, Democrats blocked independent signature verification of mail-in ballots and instead are prosecuting citizens who challenged the reported results.

While campaigning in Pennsylvania last fall, Elon Musk was asked if he believed there was election fraud in 2020. He indicated yes by observing that there were anomalies that remain unexplained.

An AI program could check for handwriting similarities on the flood of mail-in ballots included in the 2020 results, of which state officials refused to allow a transparent independent audit. It did not take long for Musk’s team to find Social Security recipients who are absurdly 160 years old, and just as quickly Musk’s team could find fraudulent ballots counted for Dems in 2020.

Private citizens and Trump's presidential advisors in 2020 should not continue to face criminal trials by Democrat prosecutors while DOJ looks the other way and does nothing about this.

Some say the overvotes were mostly in blue states like California and New York, which do not matter to the Electoral College outcome. But central to the goal of election integrity is to stamp out fraud everywhere, including fraud that falsely tilts the popular vote.

DOJ sits on its hands while Republicans continue to be prosecuted in Georgia, Arizona, Wisconsin, and Michigan for questioning the 2020 election. Only DOJ has the authority to supersede the Democrat prosecutors in those swing states, to get the evidence that defendants need.

Even the weak Georgia Senate is stronger than the DOJ on this issue today. That body recently passed a bill allowing defendants to recover attorneys’ fees when wrongly prosecuted, as Republican objectors to Georgia’s 2020 election results have been, including Trump himself.

John and Andy Schlafly are sons of Phyllis Schlafly (1924-2016) and lead the continuing Phyllis Schlafly Eagles organizations with writing and policy work.

These columns are also posted on PhyllisSchlafly.com, pseagles.com, and Townhall.com.

Some Federal Workers already Work in Person

If you missed the Pres. Trump speech, read the read the CNN transcript with embedded fact checks:

We ordered all federal workers to return to the office. They will either show up for work in person or be removed from their job.

[CNN fact check] More than half of federal workers were already working from the office full- or part-time when Trump took office,

That is reassuring. At least half of them do work in the office, at least part-time.

World Realigns Based on Social Issues

The Phyllis Schlafly Report
By John and Andy Schlafly

The stunning realignment of world powers unfolding before our eyes is largely due to social issues, not economic or geopolitical ones. Europe and NATO are run by liberals who want to embrace the transgender ideology and hold gay pride parades, while Russia has said “nyet” to that while enacting pro-life laws instead.

The liberal hatred of Russia predates the war in Ukraine, and many of the thousand-strong anti-JD Vance protesters who lined narrow snow-covered Vermont roads on Saturday were motivated by social issues. Some waved LGBTQ flags while others were part of transgender activism, both of which Russia prohibits and would exclude from territory it annexes.

In 2020, Russians amended their Constitution to ensure that marriage remains only “the union of a man and a woman,” and in 2022 Russia broadened its ban on “LGBT propaganda” to include adults. Transgender treatment is not allowed in Russia, while transgender adults cannot adopt children.

On November 30, 2023, the Supreme Court of Russia held that the “international public LGBT movement” is “extremist.” Displaying the LGBTQ rainbow flag in Russia can result in fines and imprisonment.

Pandering to liberals’ hatred of Russia’s social policies, Obama refused to attend its Winter Olympics in 2014 and spoke disparagingly of the country. In December 2016 Obama insulted Russia as a “smaller” and “weaker country,” which fails to “produce anything that anybody wants to buy except oil and gas and arms.”

Democrats falsely insisted that Trump’s presidential victory over Hillary Clinton was due to Russia, and Democrats used their fiction to disrupt two years of Trump’s first administration. Ukrainian president Zelensky, who refuses to allow an election to replace him, campaigned in Pennsylvania for Democrat Kamala Harris against Trump last fall.

The Left cannot accept any victory by Russia. When Vice President JD Vance told Zelensky at the White House that his regime is “going around and forcing conscripts to the front lines because you have manpower problems,” Zelensky did not deny it.

Rep. Victoria Spartz (R-IN) is the only member of Congress born in Ukraine. She recently described Zelensky’s government as “worthless,” and observed that “the American people want to see what we’re getting in return” for the hundreds of billions of dollars we’ve sent there.

We should stop arming Ukraine to fight for NATO’s liberal social agenda. On Sunday, Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) wisely declared, “If NATO’s moving on without the U.S., we should move on without NATO. Time to leave.”

This echoes what Phyllis Schlafly said against NATO in 2016, when she wrote that NATO repudiates George Washington’s advice “to steer clear of permanent alliances with any portion of the foreign world.” Phyllis repeatedly warned against our entanglement through NATO in foreign wars in 1996, 1998, and 1999, during the wars of NATO aggression in Bosnia, Kosovo, and Serbia.

It is not the moral duty of the United States to intervene in every foreign war. As Trump says, the Ukraine-Russia war would have been over quickly if the United States had not propped Zelensky up with aid that thereby prolonged it.

On Monday, Trump properly halted the delivery of military aid by the U.S. to Ukraine, after Zelensky harmfully declared that peace with Russia is “still very, very far away.” “This is the worst statement that could have been made by Zelensky, and America will not put up with it for much longer!” the president responded on TruthSocial.

There was in excess of $1 billion in arms and ammunition scheduled for delivery to Ukraine. Trump was right to withhold that, at least until Zelensky makes a good-faith effort toward ending a war that has killed or wounded more than a million people.

“We should spend less time worrying about Putin, and more time worrying about migrant rape gangs, drug lords, murderers, and people from mental institutions entering our Country - So that we don’t end up like Europe!” Trump tweeted on Sunday.

Russia is more like conservative states in the U.S. on social issues than Europe and Zelensky are, as Russian laws reject the trans agenda and abortion-on-demand as many states here do. Yet on Friday, Zelensky warned Trump that our country “will feel it in the future” as the next victim of Russia if we decline to continue fighting it in Ukraine.

That warning of our American president by a foreign official was both unjustified and insulting, and Trump properly admonished Zelensky for it. “Don’t tell us what we’re going to feel. We’re trying to solve a problem,” Trump responded.

Trump continued, “You’re in no position to dictate that. Remember this, you’re in no position to dictate what we’re going to feel. We’re going to feel good. We’re gonna feel very good and very strong,” and Trump’s right due to his strong leadership.

John and Andy Schlafly are sons of Phyllis Schlafly (1924-2016) and lead the continuing Phyllis Schlafly Eagles organizations with writing and policy work.

These columns are also posted on PhyllisSchlafly.com, pseagles.com, and Townhall.com.

Trump Trounces Liberal Gov on Transgender Issue

The Phyllis Schlafly Report
By John and Andy Schlafly

The federal government has been sending billions in taxpayer dollars to states for their public schools, including Maine. Maine does not have to accept this money but if it does, then it has to comply with the conditions attached just as households can place conditions on charities that receive their donations, or donate the money elsewhere.

At the recent governors’ meeting at the White House, President Trump politely asked Maine’s Gov. Janet Mills if she is “not going to comply with” his executive order protecting girls’ sports against boys viewing themselves as transgendered, as he had heard from the media. She indicated that she would not comply, and argued instead that she is “complying with state and federal law” by allowing transgendered teenagers, born as male, to play in girls’ sports.

Trump responded that “we are the federal law” in reference to how the executive authority under the Constitution is vested in the president, and how Trump had cited the federal statute enacted by Congress. Trump then continued, “you better do it, you better do it, because you’re not going to get any federal funding at all if you don’t.”

“And, by the way, your population, even though it’s somewhat liberal, although I did very well there, your population doesn’t want men playing in women’s sports.” Mills interrupted Trump by brusquely saying, “See you in court,” and was photographed smiling smugly at her table.

“Good, I’ll see you in court, I look forward to that, that should be a real easy one,” said Trump. Then Trump added one of his trademark zingers that infuriates the Left, “And enjoy your life after governor because I don’t think you’ll be in elected politics.”

This 57-second confrontation in which Trump rebuked the entrenched liberal Maine Governor illustrated how much better Trump is than any other Republican politician. Who else would have stood up against a tough, bossy liberal woman attorney as Trump just did?

At issue is whether federal transgender policy should be carried out and enforced by elected leaders – or whether a small dissenting minority can use the courts to overcome the will of the majority. The federal government headed by Trump can and should use funding as a lever to enforce compliance by states and schools that receive the funding.

Trump’s Department of Education immediately opened an investigation into Maine schools, showing that he will follow through on this and all his campaign pledges. Nine days earlier, on February 12, Trump’s Education Department announced that it will also investigate the interscholastic athletic leagues in Minnesota and California for violating Trump’s ban on allowing boys to compete unfairly in girls’ sports.

A week earlier, Trump’s Education Department gave notice that it is investigating the Massachusetts interscholastic league and the University of Pennsylvania and San Jose State University, about this same issue. Virtually every state has an association that governs high school sports, and the league in Washington State has been considering setting up a program separate from girls’ sports for transgender athletes.

On February 20 Trump’s Department of Education also issued a statement applauding the conformance by the interscholastic athletic leagues in New Hampshire and Wisconsin with Trump’s executive order banning men in women’s sports. These are two important presidential swing states, and New Hampshire holds the first-in-the-nation presidential primary.

Trump’s shutting down of the “transgender insanity,” as he accurately describes this, is part of his overall block on federal funding of woke ideologies. On Feb. 13 Trump’s Education Department announced the termination of over $350 million in grants to promote wokeness.

The amount of federal spending on boondoggles in public education is staggering. In the small state of Maine alone, the federal government wastes more than $280 million annually in funding its public schools, which “ranked dead last on a list compiled by U.S. News comparing the quality of public high schools between states.”

Liberals have run Maine public schools into the ground. “During the 1990s, Maine typically ranked first or second on the NAEP” exams, but school policies in Maine have ruined its public schools since then, reports The Maine Wire.

Maine Gov. Mills remains defiant. The day after the public confrontation, Gov. Mills issued a written statement claiming that Trump is violating the Constitution by using federal funds to enforce compliance with his executive order, and that she is standing up for the “rights of transgender Mainers” based on the Maine Human Rights Act passed in 2021.

But missing from Mills’ statement is any recognition of the rights of girls to fair competition in school sports, as thousands of girls are being denied the right to a level playing field by the transgender invasion. Once popular, Mills’ disapproval rating surpassed her approval rating even prior to her meeting with Trump.

John and Andy Schlafly are sons of Phyllis Schlafly (1924-2016) and lead the continuing Phyllis Schlafly Eagles organizations with writing and policy work.

These columns are also posted on PhyllisSchlafly.com, pseagles.com, and Townhall.com.