Yet another populist presidential candidate has been banned from running in upcoming presidential elections in the European Union (EU). Romania’s Central Election Bureau has barred Diana Sosoaca, a Member of the European Parliament (MEP) and leader of the S.O.S. Romania Party, from the race.
The commission cited her opposition to Romania’s memberships in both the European Union and NATO as the basis for this decision, noting the country’s constitution mandates these affiliations.
Newsletter
Need to Know.
Your free, daily feed from The National Pulse.
Thank You!
You are now subscribed to our newsletter.
Sosoaca had recently filed her candidacy while rallying supporters. This marks her second disqualification from a major election following a similar ban last November. She responded on social media, claiming the decision proves that Romania is a democracy in name only, and announced plans to appeal.
This decision comes shortly after the exclusion of another right-populist candidate, Calin Georgescu, who was barred for similar reasons. Georgescu won the first round of the presidential elections before the race was annulled and reset by the courts, supposedly because Russia had been funding TikTok videos supporting his candidacy.
Georgescu was once again leading the polls, but allegations of disseminating false information and incitement against constitutional order saw him barred from participating in the do-over.
❓WHAT HAPPENED: A Republican lawmaker has filed impeachment articles against a federal judge who temporarily blocked President Donald J. Trump’s control of the National Guard in California during pro-illegal immigrant riots in Los Angeles.
👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: Rep. Randy Fine (R-FL), U.S. District Court Judge Charles Breyer, President Donald J. Trump, and California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D).
Newsletter
Need to Know.
Your free, daily feed from The National Pulse.
Thank You!
You are now subscribed to our newsletter.
📍WHEN & WHERE: The resolution was filed on Friday, June 27, 2025, following riots in Los Angeles earlier this month.
💬KEY QUOTE: “The goal is to get judges to do their jobs. If we’re not going to try to hold accountable the ones that aren’t, then they have no incentive to stop,” said Rep. Fine.
🎯IMPACT: The resolution highlights GOP frustration with repeated judicial interference in Trump’s executive actions.
IN FULL
Rep. Randy Fine (R-FL) has filed a resolution to impeach U.S. District Court Judge Charles Breyer for temporarily blocking President Donald J. Trump’s federalization of the California National Guard during riots in Los Angeles. Fine criticized the judge’s decision as “political.”
The riots in Los Angeles were sparked by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) raids in Hispanic and Latino neighborhoods, where activists clashed with law enforcement and burned cars in protest. Trump bypassed California Governor Gavin Newsom (D) to deploy the National Guard, citing inadequate action by state officials to protect federal law enforcement and restore order.
Judge Breyer’s temporary order earlier this month ruled that Trump’s actions exceeded his statutory authority and violated the Tenth Amendment. “His actions were illegal—both exceeding the scope of his statutory authority and violating the Tenth Amendment to the United States Constitution,” the court opinion stated. Breyer ordered control of the National Guard to be returned to California.
However, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals overturned Breyer’s ruling last week, affirming that Trump was within his authority to federalize the National Guard. Breyer’s decision has drawn scrutiny from House Republicans, who have increasingly voiced frustration over judicial interference in Trump’s executive actions.
Fine acknowledged the long odds of removing Breyer but defended the impeachment resolution as a necessary step. “I think it’s worth doing. I don’t know that we can pass it, I don’t know that the Senate would remove him from office, but I think failing to avail ourselves of the remedies that the framers intended was a mistake,” he said.
Join Pulse+ to comment below, and receive exclusive e-mail analyses.
show less
show more
By Popular Demand.
The National Pulse Now has an on-site comments section for members. Sign up today and be part of the conversation in our community of almost 15,000.
WE ARE 100% INDEPENDENT AND READER-FUNDED. FOR A GUARANTEED AD-FREE EXPERIENCE AND TO SUPPORT REAL NEWS, PLEASE SIGN UP HERE, TODAY.
❓WHAT HAPPENED: Former New York governor Andrew Cuomo reportedly plans to run as an independent candidate in New York City’s mayoral race after losing the Democratic primary to Zohran Mamdani.
👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: Andrew Cuomo, Zohran Mamdani, Eric Adams.
Newsletter
Need to Know.
Your free, daily feed from The National Pulse.
Thank You!
You are now subscribed to our newsletter.
📍WHEN & WHERE: The Democratic primary results were announced Tuesday night in New York City; Cuomo has until Friday to decide whether to withdraw from the independent ballot.
💬KEY QUOTE: “There is a need for a new generation of leadership,” Mamdani insists.
🎯IMPACT: Cuomo’s expected independent run could reshape the dynamics of the race, while Mamdani’s progressive platform has drawn both support and criticism.
IN FULL
Former New York governor Andrew Cuomo has reportedly decided to run as an independent candidate for New York City’s mayoral race. This announcement comes days after he lost the Democratic primary to Zohran Mamdani, an avowed socialist and Islamic extremist originally from Uganda.
Cuomo, 67, conceded the primary to Mamdani but appears unwilling to withdraw from the race altogether, potentially splitting the liberal vote. Incumbent Eric Adams, elected as a Democrat but running for reelection as an independent, could split this vote even further.
Former Governor Cuomo is expected to run on a “Fight and Deliver” ballot line. Mamdani’s campaign leans on younger voters, focusing on left-progressive economic policies such as rent freeze and tax hikes on the wealthy, rather than his more contentious beliefs in defunding the police and “decarcerating” prisoners. “There is a need for a new generation of leadership,” he insists.
Join Pulse+ to comment below, and receive exclusive e-mail analyses.
show less
show more
By Popular Demand.
The National Pulse Now has an on-site comments section for members. Sign up today and be part of the conversation in our community of almost 15,000.
WE ARE 100% INDEPENDENT AND READER-FUNDED. FOR A GUARANTEED AD-FREE EXPERIENCE AND TO SUPPORT REAL NEWS, PLEASE SIGN UP HERE, TODAY.
❓WHAT HAPPENED: The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) announced the termination of Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for Haitians.
👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: DHS Secretary Kristi Noem and Haitian nationals currently under TPS.
Newsletter
Need to Know.
Your free, daily feed from The National Pulse.
Thank You!
You are now subscribed to our newsletter.
📍WHEN & WHERE: Announced Friday, takes effect September 2.
💬KEY QUOTE: “This decision restores integrity in our immigration system and ensures that Temporary Protective Status is actually temporary.” – DHS spokesman
🎯IMPACT: More than 500,000 Haitians with TPS are affected and encouraged to use DHS resources to return to Haiti.
IN FULL
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) on Friday announced the termination of Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for Haitians, which will take effect on September 2. A notice from DHS stated that Secretary Kristi Noem had determined the situation in Haiti no longer justified the continuation of TPS for migrants from the country. The decision was based on an assessment that environmental conditions in Haiti had improved sufficiently for safe return.
“This decision restores integrity in our immigration system and ensures that Temporary Protective Status is actually temporary,” a DHS spokesman said, adding: “The environmental situation in Haiti has improved enough that it is safe for Haitian citizens to return home. We encourage these individuals to take advantage of the Department’s resources in returning to Haiti, which can be arranged through the CBP Home app. Haitian nationals may pursue lawful status through other immigration benefit requests, if eligible.”
Currently, more than 500,000 Haitians hold TPS. Consequently, Sec. Noem’s decision clears the way for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to begin deportations after the September deadline. In the meantime, DHS is encouraging Haitians impacted by the TPS determination to utilize existing resources for their return to Haiti.
Haitians granted TPS by the former Biden government became a point of political contention during the 2024 election. Large numbers of Haitian nationals were settled in small towns across the United States, resulting in cultural clashes, increased crime, and consternation among American citizens.
Join Pulse+ to comment below, and receive exclusive e-mail analyses.
show less
show more
By Popular Demand.
The National Pulse Now has an on-site comments section for members. Sign up today and be part of the conversation in our community of almost 15,000.
WE ARE 100% INDEPENDENT AND READER-FUNDED. FOR A GUARANTEED AD-FREE EXPERIENCE AND TO SUPPORT REAL NEWS, PLEASE SIGN UP HERE, TODAY.
❓WHAT HAPPENED: The Trump administration is reviving and expanding fines for illegal immigrants of up to $1,000 per day.
Newsletter
Need to Know.
Your free, daily feed from The National Pulse.
Thank You!
You are now subscribed to our newsletter.
👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: President Donald J. Trump, Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Kristi Noem, Assistant DHS Secretary Tricia McLaughlin, Department of Justice (DOJ).
📍WHEN & WHERE: United States, rule to be published June 28, 2025.
💬KEY QUOTE: “President Trump and Secretary Noem are standing up for law and order… Financial penalties like these are just one more reason why illegal aliens should use CBP Home to self-deport now before it’s too late.” – Tricia McLaughlin
🎯IMPACT: The policy signals a renewed crackdown on illegal immigrants, enabling DHS to fine violators immediately, potentially altering migrant behavior and undermining activist-led opposition to deportation enforcement.
IN FULL
The Trump administration is seeking to expedite fines for illegal immigrants—up to $1,000 per day—under a new rule seen by ABC News and set to be published in the Federal Register. The proposed regulation eliminates the current 30-day notice requirement, permitting immediate financial penalties against violators.
Jointly proposed by the Departments of Justice (DOJ) and Homeland Security (DHS), the rule covers migrants who enter the U.S. illegally, defy final orders of removal, or fail to leave voluntarily after a judge’s directive. The fines range from $100 to $500 for illegal entry, up to $10,000 for ignoring a deportation order, and $1,000 per day for failing to comply with removal.
“DHS believes that the nature of the failure-to-depart and unlawful entry penalties supports the need for more streamlined procedures,” the rule reads. Trump first introduced the policy during his first term, but the Biden government paused it. Trump reinstated it after taking office in January.
“The law doesn’t enforce itself; there must be consequences for breaking it,” explained Assistant DHS Secretary Tricia McLaughlin. “President Trump and Secretary Noem are standing up for law and order and making our government more effective and efficient at enforcing the American people’s immigration laws. Financial penalties like these are just one more reason why illegal aliens should use CBP Home to self-deport now before it’s too late.”
According to DHS, migrants who use the Customs and Border Protection’s CBP Home app to leave the country voluntarily will have their fines waived. As of June 13, the department has issued 10,000 fine notifications under the reactivated policy.
Join Pulse+ to comment below, and receive exclusive e-mail analyses.
show less
show more
By Popular Demand.
The National Pulse Now has an on-site comments section for members. Sign up today and be part of the conversation in our community of almost 15,000.
WE ARE 100% INDEPENDENT AND READER-FUNDED. FOR A GUARANTEED AD-FREE EXPERIENCE AND TO SUPPORT REAL NEWS, PLEASE SIGN UP HERE, TODAY.
❓WHAT HAPPENED: President Donald J. Trump criticized Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei for claiming victory in the conflict with Israel, calling the statement false and abandoning plans to lift sanctions on Iran.
👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: President Trump, Grand Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, and the governments of Iran, Israel, and the United States.
Newsletter
Need to Know.
Your free, daily feed from The National Pulse.
Thank You!
You are now subscribed to our newsletter.
📍WHEN & WHERE: Statements were made this week, with Trump posting on Truth Social and Khamenei speaking publicly and on X.
💬KEY QUOTE: “I SAVED HIM FROM A VERY UGLY AND IGNOMINIOUS DEATH, and he does not have to say, ‘THANK YOU, PRESIDENT TRUMP!'” – Donald Trump.
🎯IMPACT: Trump ceased negotiations on sanction relief for Iran, citing the Supreme Leader’s hostile rhetoric and false claims.
IN FULL
President Donald J. Trump has denounced Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei‘s claim that Iran had emerged victorious in its recent conflict with Israel. Trump described Khamenei’s statement as a “lie” and outlined the significant damage sustained by Iran during the conflict.
“Why would the so-called ‘Supreme Leader,’ Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, of the war torn Country of Iran, say so blatantly and foolishly that he won the War with Israel, when he knows his statement is a lie,” Trump posted on his Truth Social platform. He further detailed the destruction of three Iranian nuclear sites by the U.S. and his decision to spare Khamenei’s life despite his location being known.
“I knew EXACTLY where he was sheltered, and would not let Israel, or the U.S. Armed Forces, by far the Greatest and Most Powerful in the World, terminate his life. I SAVED HIM FROM A VERY UGLY AND IGNOMINIOUS DEATH, and he does not have to say, ‘THANK YOU, PRESIDENT TRUMP!'” he wrote.
Trump also revealed that he “demanded that Israel bring back a very large group of planes, which were heading directly to Tehran, looking for a big day” in the final hours of the war. “Tremendous damage would have ensued, and many Iranians would have been killed,” he stressed.
The America First leader noted that he had been considering lifting sanctions on Iran to aid in its recovery, but abandoned these plans following Khamenei’s remarks. “Iran has to get back into the World Order flow, or things will only get worse for them,” Trump warned.
Khamenei claimed that the Islamic Republic delivered a “hand slap to America’s face” and dismissed the bombing of its nuclear sites as “showmanship.” He also claimed that Israel had been “practically knocked out and crushed” by Iran during the conflict.
❓WHAT HAPPENED: Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-SD) has cancelled a Friday vote on President Donald J. Trump’s ‘One Big Beautiful Bill’ after a number of key provisions were determined to violate the Byrd Rule by the Democrat-appointed Parliamentarian. Senate Republicans are now aiming for a vote over the weekend after more changes to the legislation are made.
Newsletter
Need to Know.
Your free, daily feed from The National Pulse.
Thank You!
You are now subscribed to our newsletter.
👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: Senate Republicans, Majority Leader John Thune, President Trump, and the Senate Parliamentarian.
📍WHEN & WHERE: The reconciliation legislation was originally slated to move to the Senate floor on Friday, June 27, 2025.
🎯IMPACT: The delay could jeopardize President Trump’s July 4 deadline to sign the ‘One Big Beautiful Bill’ into law. If the Senate is unable to make changes to comply with the Parliamentarian’s rulings, key provisions could be stripped from the legislation.
IN FULL
Senate Republicans are delaying a final vote on the ‘One Big Beautiful Bill‘ until this weekend as lawmakers scramble to make changes to the legislation in order to conform to rulings issued by the Senate Parliamentarian on Byrd Rule compliance. Earlier this week, Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-SD) had aimed for a Friday vote on the bill.
The rush to revise provisions in the reconciliation bill to conform to the Byrd Rule likely means the Senate will not be able to move a final version of the legislation to the floor until at least Saturday afternoon, barring any further rulings from the Parliamentarian. The National Pulse reported on Thursday that Thune had ruled out several maneuvers to overrule the Parliamentarian, as well as the possibility of firing her outright.
Notably, despite pulling the Friday vote, Thune is allowing a roll call vote this evening on a War Powers Resolution aimed at constraining President Trump’s ability to take any further military action against Iran’s nuclear weapons program. The lack of urgency shown by Senate Republican leaders has rankled pro-Trump lawmakers in both legislative chambers. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) slammed Thune in a post on X (formerly Twitter) on Friday, writing, “The UN-ELECTED Parliamentarian is no different than the radical far left judges and Jerome Powell!!!! Thune needs to over rule her or FIRE HER!!!”
Meanwhile, Senator John Kennedy (R-LA) was even more blunt in a mediainterview, stating: “We need to start voting… and the jackassery has to stop.”
❓WHAT HAPPENED: President Donald J. Trump has broken off trade talks with Canada after America’s northern neighbor announced it would implement a digital services tax on U.S. technology companies.
👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: President Donald J. Trump, Canada, the United States, and U.S. technology companies.
Newsletter
Need to Know.
Your free, daily feed from The National Pulse.
Thank You!
You are now subscribed to our newsletter.
📍WHEN & WHERE: Announced Friday, June 27, 2025, on Trump’s Truth Social platform.
💬KEY QUOTE: “We have just been informed that Canada, a very difficult Country to TRADE with, including the fact that they have charged our Farmers as much as 400% Tariffs, for years, on Dairy Products, has just announced that they are putting a Digital Services Tax on our American Technology Companies, which is a direct and blatant attack on our Country,” President Trump wrote.
🎯IMPACT: President Trump indicated the U.S. would retaliate against the Canadian tax on U.S. technology companies by imposing a new round of tariffs on Canadian businesses.
IN FULL
President Donald J. Trump announced on Friday that the United States is ending all trade negotiations with Canada “effective immediately” after the country announced it would impose a digital services tax on American technology companies. The United States and Canada had been engaged in protracted trade talks for weeks, with the negotiations being frustrated by the steep tariffs America’s northern neighbor imposes on U.S. farmers.
“We have just been informed that Canada, a very difficult Country to TRADE with, including the fact that they have charged our Farmers as much as 400% Tariffs, for years, on Dairy Products, has just announced that they are putting a Digital Services Tax on our American Technology Companies, which is a direct and blatant attack on our Country,” President Trump wrote in a post on Truth Social. He continued: “They are obviously copying the European Union, which has done the same thing, and is currently under discussion with us, also. Based on this egregious Tax, we are hereby terminating ALL discussions on Trade with Canada, effective immediately.”
“We will let Canada know the Tariff that they will be paying to do business with the United States of America within the next seven day period. Thank you for your attention to this matter!” Trump added.
In recent weeks, the Trump White House has made significant progress in bilateral trade negotiations with a number of countries. After announcing a global 10 percent tariff in April, the United States has struck trade agreements with both the United Kingdom and China. Additional talks with key trade partners like India and Japan remain ongoing, and agreements with both nations appear imminent.
Join Pulse+ to comment below, and receive exclusive e-mail analyses.
show less
show more
By Popular Demand.
The National Pulse Now has an on-site comments section for members. Sign up today and be part of the conversation in our community of almost 15,000.
WE ARE 100% INDEPENDENT AND READER-FUNDED. FOR A GUARANTEED AD-FREE EXPERIENCE AND TO SUPPORT REAL NEWS, PLEASE SIGN UP HERE, TODAY.
❓WHAT HAPPENED: The U.S. Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of a key provision of the Affordable Care Act, commonly referred to as “Obamacare.”
👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: The ruling was issued by the Supreme Court in a 6-3 decision, with Justice Brett Kavanaugh authoring the opinion. Other justices in the majority included John Roberts, Sonya Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, Amy Coney Barrett, and Ketanji Brown Jackson.
Newsletter
Need to Know.
Your free, daily feed from The National Pulse.
Thank You!
You are now subscribed to our newsletter.
📍WHEN & WHERE: The ruling was handed down in Washington, D.C. on June 27, 2025, with the case focusing on the appointment and oversight of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force.
💬KEY QUOTE: “The Health Secretary may review recommendations from the task force before they take effect,” the court ruled, acknowledging the oversight role of the Health Secretary.
🎯IMPACT: An estimated 150 million Americans benefitted from the preventive healthcare provision in 2020 alone, which includes services like cancer screenings and immunizations.
IN FULL
The United States Supreme Court has ruled that a crucial provision of the Affordable Care Act (ACA), often referred to as “Obamacare,” is constitutional. The case specifically examined the appointment process for members of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force, a panel responsible for determining which preventive health services private insurance companies must cover at no cost to patients. Notably, this task force is responsible for having implemented Obamacare’s contraception mandate.
The court’s decision, authored by Justice Brett Kavanaugh and supported by five other justices, also clarified that members of the task force can be removed at will by the Health Secretary, currently Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Additionally, the Health Secretary has the authority to review the task force’s recommendations before they are implemented. However, the case specifically revolved around the provision of PrEP, a pre-exposure prophylaxis for HIV, which some plaintiffs argued violated their religious beliefs.
The plaintiffs, represented by former Texas Solicitor General Jonathan Mitchell, received backing from Republican and conservative groups. Despite this, the Obamacare provision was defended by the Biden government, with significant opposition to ending the provision coming from public health groups, hospitals, and Democratic attorneys general. The case continued under the Trump administration following the 2024 presidential election.
The Supreme Court has now ended one of the last significant legal challenges to Obamacare, suggesting any future attempts to undo the law through the courts will prove unfruitful.
❓What Happened: The U.S. Supreme Court upheld a Texas law requiring pornography websites to verify user age, delivering a win for Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton.
Newsletter
Need to Know.
Your free, daily feed from The National Pulse.
Thank You!
You are now subscribed to our newsletter.
👤Who’s Involved: Justices of the Supreme Court, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton; Free Speech Coalition (plaintiff), Texas children, pornographers.
📍When & Where: Supreme Court of the United States, decision issued June 27, 2025.
💬Key Quote: “[F]rom the late 19th century onward, this Court has consistently recognized the government’s power to proscribe obscenity… In addition to their general interest in protecting the public at large, States have a specific interest in protecting children from sexually explicit speech.” – Justice Clarence Thomas.
🎯Impact: The ruling reinstates a Texas law requiring age verification for pornographic websites, sets a precedent for other states, and signals a broader shift toward state authority over regulating content online.
IN FULL
The Supreme Court upheld a Texas law requiring age verification for accessing online pornography on Friday, June 27, delivering a 6-3 victory to Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton and setting a precedent for similar legislation in 19 states. The ruling, penned by Justice Clarence Thomas, rejected arguments from the so-called Free Speech Coalition and pornographers that the law—H.B. 1181—infringes on privacy rights, affirming Texas’s power to protect minors from explicit content.
“[F]rom the late 19th century onward, this Court has consistently recognized the government’s power to proscribe obscenity,” Justice Thomas wrote for the majority, adding: “In addition to their general interest in protecting the public at large, States have a specific interest in protecting children from sexually explicit speech.”
The ruling affirms that the “power to require age verification is within a State’s authority to prevent children from accessing sexually explicit content,” and “H.B. 1181 is a constitutionally permissible exercise of that authority.”
The decision reverberates beyond Texas, impacting laws in states like Louisiana, Utah, and Arkansas, where similar measures to protect children from pornography are in place. The ruling also bolsters Paxton, an ally of President Donald J. Trump currently attempting to primary Republican-in-name-only Texas Senator John Cornyn.
Join Pulse+ to comment below, and receive exclusive e-mail analyses.
show less
show more
By Popular Demand.
The National Pulse Now has an on-site comments section for members. Sign up today and be part of the conversation in our community of almost 15,000.
WE ARE 100% INDEPENDENT AND READER-FUNDED. FOR A GUARANTEED AD-FREE EXPERIENCE AND TO SUPPORT REAL NEWS, PLEASE SIGN UP HERE, TODAY.
The United States Supreme Court ruled six to three on Friday in favor of a group of Maryland parents seeking opt-outs to prevent their children from being exposed to LGBTQ books and materials “designed to ‘disrupt’ children’s thinking about sexuality and gender.” According to the Montgomery County, Maryland School Board, teachers are not required to notify parents when using LGBTQ materials, prompting the parents to sue and seek an injunction against the policy.
“Today, we hold that the parents have shown that they are entitled to a preliminary injunction. A government burdens the religious exercise of parents when it requires them to submit their children to instruction that poses ‘a very real threat of undermining’ the religious beliefs and practices that the parents wish to instill,” Justice Samuel Alito wrote for the majority. “And a government cannot condition the benefit of free public education on parents’ acceptance of such instruction. Based on these principles, we conclude that the parents are likely to succeed in their challenge to the Board’s policies.”
Newsletter
Need to Know.
Your free, daily feed from The National Pulse.
Thank You!
You are now subscribed to our newsletter.
“The practice of educating one’s children in one’s religious beliefs, like all religious acts and practices, receives a generous measure of protection from our Constitution,” Alito explained, adding: “And this is not merely a right to teach religion in the confines of one’s own home. Rather, it extends to the choices that parents wish to make for their children outside the home. It protects, for example, a parent’s decision to send his or her child to a private religious school instead of a public school.”
“Specifically, until all appellate review in this case is completed, the Board should be ordered to notify them in advance whenever one of the books in question or any other similar book is to be used in any way and to allow them to have their children excused from that instruction,” the ruling concludes.
The United States Supreme Court ruled six to three on Friday in favor of a group of Maryland parents seeking opt-outs to prevent their children from being exposed to LGBTQ books and materials "designed to 'disrupt' children’s thinking about sexuality and gender." According to the Montgomery County, Maryland School Board, teachers are not required to notify parents when using LGBTQ materials, prompting the parents to sue and seek an injunction against the policy.
show more
By Popular Demand.
The National Pulse Now has an on-site comments section for members. Sign up today and be part of the conversation in our community of almost 15,000.
Share Story
FacebookTwitterWhatsappTruthTelegramGettrCopy Link
Real News Fan? Show It!
Many people are shocked to learn that because of active censorship, we currently have to spend more time making sure you can even see The National Pulse, than on producing the news itself. Which sucks. Because we do this for the truth, and for you.
But the regime doesn’t want you being informed. That’s why they want us to go away. And that will happen if more people don’t sign up to support our work. It’s basic supply and demand. So demand you get to read The National Pulse, unrestricted. Sign up, today.
We don’t sell ads, and refuse corporate or political cash. It all comes down to you, the reader. I hope you can help.
