How tradition empowers women

Michael Knowles says in a short new video:

Did Phyllis Schlafly prove that tradition empowers women?

Apr 28, 2026 #PhyllisSchlafly #MichaelKnowles #Tradition

History reveals that women have always played significant roles in their communities and political spheres, long before modern movements took shape. Phyllis Schlafly stands as a prime example of someone who successfully balanced raising a large family with monumental political influence, effectively leading the opposition to the Equal Rights Amendment. This perspective argues that recognizing and embracing the unique, inherent strengths of womanhood is the true path to avoiding disadvantage. It challenges the modern narrative by suggesting that tradition and domestic roles are not barriers, but rather complementary to a woman's public and professional potential.

I made my point though, which is that you say throughout history, including long before feminism ever came onto the scene, women did plenty of things, you know, in addition to just being barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen, right? They had uh they were involved in their community. They had side hustles, as you put it. Um, so so they did all these things. I mean, I think of the most famous anti-feminist American of the 20th century. It was Phyis Schlafley. Phyllis Schlafley had six kids. She was a housewife. She uh said the only person whose permission she needs for her political activism is her husband's which irritated feminists to no end. She's one of the most important political figures of the whole century.

She single-handedly killed the Equal Rights Amendment, traveled all over the country, one of the most vaunted figures in the American right. Uh she she was able to do a lot of things in public, but she recognized that her particular role that her husband never could have, that no man on earth ever could have, even if he kids himself, is to have children, to be a woman, to be graceful, to to do the things that men can't do. And so she can do she can do things beyond that as well. But uh if if you erase the particular advantages of women, then women are are put at a disadvantage.

Is SCOTUS Ducking Transgender School Cases?

The Phyllis Schlafly Report
By John and Andy Schlafly

If anyone feels that the transgender issue has been won by conservatives, think again. In the past eight days the U.S. Supreme Court has ducked not one, but two, important cases in which public schools encouraged students to socially transition to the opposite sex without their parents’ knowledge or consent.

Social transitioning means adopting a name, pronoun, clothing, and gender expression suitable to the opposite sex. Many public schools have a policy of reinforcing such behavior by students and concealing it from their parents.

The latest denial of cert by SCOTUS was on Monday, on a petition by parents which had been supported by many amicus briefs. Nearly half the states joined a brief in support of parents to be informed and have control over what public schools are doing to push their children toward transgender behavior.

In just the last two years, the Supreme Court has turned away five transgender cases in which parents object to the secret transitioning of their children in public schools. This latest denial by SCOTUS arose from a lawsuit initiated by Florida parents, in which the Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit sided with the public school despite the swing vote on the three-judge panel describing the school’s treatment of the parents as “shameful.”

In that case, a 13-year-old girl had delays in development and struggled with learning, and began doubting her gender. Her parents hired a private therapist and informed the school that they were opposed to social transitioning.

But even in Republican Florida, school officials were allowed to meet secretly with the child, label her as “nonbinary,” mandate that all school personnel refer to her as “they” or “them,” allow her to use boys’ bathrooms, and prohibit anyone from informing her parents. The school rejected the parents’ objections, denied their request to participate in this process, and refused the parents’ request for school records of meetings with their own daughter.

The school was acting pursuant to a parental-exclusion policy, which the Eleventh Circuit held was “executive” conduct that parents could not prevail against. In an opinion that the swing judge sided with but said “makes no sense,” the Court held that parents must first prove that an infringement on their rights “shocked the conscience” to compel a school to comply with the parents’ request.

A week earlier, the Supreme Court likewise refused a petition by two Massachusetts parents who had “repeatedly directed their public middle school not to interfere with the upbringing and mental healthcare plan for B.F., their eleven-year-old daughter.” Despite the parents’ objections, “school officials followed district protocol and secretly facilitated B.F.’s social gender transition anyway” and treated her “as though she were nonbinary.”

The entirely Democrat-appointed First Circuit panel sided with the public school by holding that an 11-year-old’s desires had priority over parental rights, and that this transgender issue supposedly did not concern her mental health. The public school even provided counseling to facilitate the gender transition of the child despite the parents’ objections, and the First Circuit sided with the school.

With these two latest denials of cert, the Supreme Court has now denied petitions for its review from anti-parent decisions by the First, Fourth, Seventh, Tenth, and Eleventh Circuits. In each case, often over dissent by a conservative appellate judge, the federal judiciary sided with schools as they secretly transition children without the knowledge or even over the objection of the parents.

Washington, D.C., is the transgender capital of the world and the Supreme Court justices and their clerks are immersed in that culture. The percentage of law students who are transgender also continues to climb, who become law clerks at the Supreme Court to do most of the work in screening cases for review.

The Supreme Court did intervene in an emergency appeal from a case in California, to reinstate a district court injunction against a California law that prevented public schools from notifying parents about their child’s gender identity or sexual orientation. Captioned Mirabelli v. Bonta, this case continues to be litigated in federal court in California and does not directly affect the rest of the country.

This case is based on a “religious obligation to raise their children in accordance with those beliefs,” the 6-3 Supreme Court wrote in temporarily siding with the parents. California’s opening brief is due on July 6 in the left-leaning Ninth Circuit, which has previously held against parents.

It was this same Ninth Circuit that infamously declared two decades ago that a parent’s right over her child’s upbringing “does not extend beyond the threshold of the school door.” Phyllis Schlafly then led such an uproar against that arrogant denial of parental rights that the court extraordinarily amended its decision to reword its much-criticized statement. SCOTUS then denied cert in that case, 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.

Is Political Feminism Finished?

The Phyllis Schlafly Report
By John and Andy Schlafly

Political feminism is the push to elect women to high office, such as the U.S. Senate and the Presidency. Two out of the last three Democrat nominees for president have been women, and their campaigns ended in crushing failures.

In Maine, the very formidable two-term Governor Janet Mills appeared to be a shoo-in for the Democrat nomination to run against the incumbent Republican Susan Collins. Kamala Harris won this deep-blue state by 7 points in 2024, and traditionally that margin increases in the midterm elections in favor of the party not in control of the White House.

Mills faced off against Trump himself at an event held for governors at the White House early last year, when Trump called out Maine on the transgender issue. Mills told Trump that she would see him in court, to the thrill of liberals nationwide.

EMILYs List, the preeminent group supporting feminist candidates, praised Mills as “the first woman to be elected as a district attorney in New England,” and the only female attorney general and governor in Maine history. She won her last election in 2022 by 13 points, which was the largest margin for a statewide Democrat there since 1988.

Her opponent is a political newbie named Graham Platner, who is an oyster farmer with a checkered past that includes a Nazi-linked tattoo and posts unsympathetic to women on Reddit. EMILYs List says that “Graham Platner’s comments blaming victims of sexual assault are unacceptable and disqualifying.”

But Platner is a progressive endorsed by Bernie Sanders, the senator for nearby Vermont. Progressives seem to be taking control of the Democrat Party away from liberal feminists.

The latest polling shows Platner with a phenomenal 33-point lead over Mills. Platner is so far ahead for the June 9th primary that he is starting to steer his campaign ads to target his November opponent, Susan Collins, rather than focus on Mills.

Meanwhile, after just a few months on the job the approval rating of Virginia’s new Democrat Governor, Abigail Spanberger, has plummeted below 50%. The pollster State Navigate observes that she is the “most historically unpopular governor at this point in the most recent Virginia governors’ terms.”

The feminist wife of California Governor Gavin Newsom, Jennifer Siebel Newsom, is not helping his presidential ambitions. She insists on being called “First Partner" rather than the traditional title of “First Lady,” in order to push the DEI mindset.

She’s accused some Christians of “living in this silo, this evangelical, conservative silo that, ultimately, is just pulling us back as a country to a time and a place where we don't deserve to be, and we’re not going to be.” Her husband tried to shut churches down in California during Covid, while allowing some businesses to remain open, and the Supreme Court ruled against that.

Jennifer Newsom added, “young women and fathers of daughters are awake now, and they’re woke, and they’re not going to let us go back.” Gavin Newsom and his woke wife are struggling in early polling among contenders for the 2028 Democrat presidential nomination, trailing behind Kamala Harris who lost last time.

Meanwhile, there is backlash by young men against feminists in South Korea, where birth rates have plummeted to the lowest in the world, thereby endangering the long-term survival of the country. A survey last year found that roughly 50% of men in their 20s and 30s agreed with the statement that “There needs to be a movement that honors masculinity and advocates for men’s rights.”

Over the last half-century feminists have passed many laws that continue to cause harm today. These include programs that profit from turning women against men, and family court procedures that deprive men of their rights of fatherhood.

In 2015 the Obama Administration fully placed women in combat roles in our military. Our ground troops and warships, which are now in harm’s way near Iran, are coed with women and men.

Phyllis Schlafly warned 50 years ago that ratification of the Equal Rights Amendment would result in court-ordered taxpayer-funded abortions, and she successfully blocked that terrible idea from ever becoming part of the U.S. Constitution. Feminists pretended that Phyllis did not know what she was talking about, but time has proven her correct.

On Monday, a 4-3 decision by the Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court ordered taxpayers of our fifth-largest state to start funding abortions there, based on its state ERA. The court used the same contorted logic that Phyllis predicted would be used by feminists to force the public, against the conscience of many, to pay for abortions.

As a state court decision grounded in state law, the U.S. Supreme Court cannot overturn this on appeal. Advocates for ERA back in the 1970s insisted this would not happen, and yet it just did.

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.

The Bible Belongs in Public School Readings

The Phyllis Schlafly Report
By John and Andy Schlafly

A strong education includes reading from the greatest works of all time. A full understanding of history requires knowledge of the books that influenced leaders, thinkers, and decision-makers.

The Texas State Board of Education has released its tentative 53-page list of about 300 literary works that will be part of the public school curriculum for grades K through 12. Many familiar classics are on this list, including Charlotte’s Web, Animal Farm, and the humorous story by Mark Twain about the amazing jumping frog, which are for students prior to high school.

This list results from the enactment of HB1605 back in 2023, and will not take effect until 2030. A full seven years from the passage of this reform to its implementation is appalling.

The biblical excerpts on this reading list, which is not yet final, include the Golden Rule (which is not solely from the Bible), the Parable of the Prodigal Son, and the Road to Damascus, for Kindergarten through 3rd grade. Then there is a gap until 7th grade, when recommended readings include the Book of Psalms and the tale of Jonah and the Whale.

For high school, Bible readings are passages from David and Goliath, Lamentations, the Tower of Babel, Ecclesiastes, and the Book of Job. The Board should be criticized for recommending almost nothing from the New Testament.

The loudest protests are from those who oppose including anything at all from the Bible in public school reading lists. The Bible is the most influential and widely read book ever, and continues to rank first in readership annually.

The Bible should be listed #1 in every bestseller list, but it is kept off those lists because it wins every time. People are misled by weekly bestseller lists omitting the Bible at the top, which is the hottest seller now and has been ever since the invention of the printing press more than 500 years ago.

Sales of the Bible have been increasing, too, soaring to high levels with Gen Z who are even more interested in the Bible than older generations have been. In 2025, Bible sales reached new record highs in the U.S. and U.K., as U.S. sales totaled over 19 million copies, double the number sold in 2019.

In light of this, it is straightforward to include passages from the Bible on any list of required readings for public schools. Stories like the parable of the Prodigal Son, which is unique to the Bible and cannot be found in any prior works, are often cited and every educated person should be familiar with them.

There are threats of lawsuits to block the inclusion of any part of the Bible in a public school curriculum. Any such lawsuits will fail.

The Bible has been incorporated into great speeches like President Lincoln’s “House Divided” speech, where he used that Gospel metaphor to argue against slavery. Many of the greatest scientists of all time, such as Isaac Newton and Louis Pasteur, were avid readers of the Bible.

No one is forced to believe in the Bible or in any other reading assigned in school. Works by Leftists, such as Arthur Miller’s Death of a Salesman, are routinely assigned to high school students and they are expected to understand, analyze, and repeat the themes of these controversial writings.

Unfortunately, too much liberal propaganda remains on this list for high school students, during their formative years. The Texas Board recommends Arthur Miller’s The Crucible, which uses the Salem Witch Trials in 1692 as an allegory for the congressional investigations of communism in the 1950s, after which Miller himself was held in contempt (later reversed) for refusing to identify the communists he knew.

Books that promote the LGBTQIA+ agenda are commonly assigned to students today, and are more controversial to most parents than anything in the Bible. The books preferred by liberals and atheists are also far less influential or quoted than the Bible is, and thus less likely to prepare a student to become a knowledgeable adult.

A significant segment of our society quotes from the Bible or cites biblical figures frequently, and students should receive an education that enables them to understand these references. When someone hears a suggestion that he “turn the other cheek,” he should have been educated to understand immediately what that biblical expression means.

The Texas State Board of Education expressly states that students can opt out of any Bible reading based on religious or moral beliefs. It seems that Democrats are not really concerned about the rights of a few families who will be free to opt out, but instead are protesting that students whose parents want them to read from the Bible will be allowed to do so as part of public school curricula.

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.

Wanted: An Unconfirmable Attorney General

The Phyllis Schlafly Report
By John and Andy Schlafly

With the sudden departure of Pam Bondi last week, President Trump is searching for a new Attorney General. He may be looking for a new Deputy AG as well.

Under current Federal law, President Trump has the power to appoint an attorney to fill these crucial offices in an interim or “acting” capacity for up to 210 days without Senate confirmation.

A glance at the calendar reveals that this year’s midterm elections are set for November 3, 2026, which is exactly 210 days from today. Coincidence? We think not.

The next Attorney General and Deputy AG should be someone who is willing and able to accomplish the MAGA goals within that 210-day time frame, or he’ll be another failure. These 210 days (30 weeks) could be virtually all the time that remains on the clock for the second Trump administration.

No one passes a basketball to a player who ignores dwindling time on a shot clock. No coach installs a quarterback after the final two-minute warning who ignores the game clock.

The liberal media and even some of Trump’s advisers are telling him that he needs to choose a new Attorney General who is confirmable by the Senate, but that is malarkey. Trump needs an Attorney General who will get the job done before the midterms, such as someone who could not be confirmed by the weak sisters in the Senate.

Before a nominee could even be voted on by the full Senate, he would have to pass the gauntlet of the Senate Judiciary Committee, where Republicans hold a 1-vote margin that several of Trump’s best nominees have failed to clear. The RINO lame duck Sen. Thom Tillis (R-NC) is on that committee, and he should not be allowed to block a strong nominee.

Certain types of attorneys should be ruled out of consideration immediately. The next Attorney General should not come from a major Establishment law firm, should not be a former lobbyist or lobbyist wannabe, and should not be a former federal prosecutor.

If the next Attorney General is afraid of liberals, Congress, or the media, then he will fail to make badly needed changes at the Justice Department. MAGA still awaits a prosecution of ringleaders among more than 200 Justice Department employees who wrongfully persecuted Trump.

Many excellent candidates would do a terrific job at saving our country from the Swamp. Former Rep. Matt Gaetz, Ed Martin, Mike Davis, and Sidney Powell would be superb choices without worrying about Tillis and other RINOs.

President Abraham Lincoln did not win the Civil War by appointing an insider to lead the Union Army. After D.C.-favored generals like George McClellan failed to get the job done, it was the outcast, probably unconfirmable U.S. Grant who ultimately won the war.

Even if eventual confirmation could be assured, we don’t have time to waste on a long and agonizing confirmation process, with the clock winding down for the midterms. The next Attorney General should not subject himself to browbeating by liberals, as when Markwayne Mullin had to make a damaging retreat from Trump’s deportation agenda before he could be confirmed as Secretary of Homeland Security (which includes ICE).

The ideal candidate would be someone who views D.C. and the liberal media with contempt, as Trump does. Anyone who seeks praise on Capitol Hill or by the press should not apply for this job that requires wrestling with Swamp creatures.

If the next Attorney General cannot get the job done for MAGA in 210 days, then he should not be appointed. Coaches do not give the ball to players who ignore the game clock as it winds down to zero.

There is probably no confirmable candidate for the top two positions in the Justice Department who will fulfill the MAGA goals that Trump promised in 2024. If a majority of the senators approve of a candidate, then he is unacceptable to MAGA.

In 2020, the Senate-approved Attorney General Bill Barr abruptly quit his office early to avoid post-election issues, and then obtained a book deal for his memoir entitled “One Damn Thing After Another.” That failure would probably happen again if Trump picks a confirmable candidate to lead the DOJ.

Nearly everyone liked by senators in D.C. is angling to make a buck for himself, as many senators themselves are, too. Several have left the Senate to cash in with private equity firms, while others take lucrative corporate jobs as Barr did after being Attorney General under President George H.W. Bush.

Installing MAGA leadership at DOJ was one of the key pledges made to the American people in 2024, which helped elect Trump and other Republicans. The vacancy at the position of Attorney General makes it possible now to honor that pledge.

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.