GET THE APP
Wednesday, December 10, 2025

WE ARE 100% INDEPENDENT AND READER-FUNDED. FOR A GUARANTEED AD-FREE EXPERIENCE AND TO SUPPORT REAL NEWS, PLEASE SIGN UP HERE, TODAY.

1 hour ago
News
UK
World

French Presidential Frontrunner Meets Farage, Pledges Joint Action to Stop Migrant Boats.

PULSE POINTS

❓WHAT HAPPENED: France’s populist presidential frontrunner, Jordan Bardella, met with Reform Party leader Nigel Farage in London, England, to discuss border policies and potential cooperation to address illegal immigration.

👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: Jordan Bardella, leader of France’s National Rally (RN) party, and Nigel Farage, leader of Britain’s Reform Party.

📍WHEN & WHERE: The meeting took place in London on Tuesday.

💬KEY QUOTE: “If I am head of the French Government tomorrow, France will no longer be a country of mass immigration.” – Jordan Bardella

🎯IMPACT: Bardella’s policies could significantly alter France’s immigration stance, potentially affecting Channel crossings and Anglo-French relations.

IN FULL

Jordan Bardella, president of France’s National Rally (RN) party and the current favourite to win the 2027 presidential elections, held talks in London with Reform Party leader Nigel Farage, focusing on boat migrants crossing the English Channel illegally.

Bardella promised full French cooperation to end the small boats crisis, including joint naval patrols and allowing British Border Force vessels to perform pushbacks into French waters. He attacked the present French policy of refusing to accept returned boats, saying: “I can’t defend the notion of pushbacks and then refuse to allow Great Britain to do the same.” The Frenchman dismissed the failed “one-in, one-out” migration deal put together by President Emmanuel Macron and Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer as a political “smokescreen” and predicted that Farage “will be the next Prime Minister.”

Outlining his own agenda for France, Bardella said he would move asylum processing to French embassies and consulates abroad, give French nationals absolute priority for social housing and welfare, make France “the least attractive country for mass immigration in Europe,” and ensure the “systematic expulsion of foreign offenders and criminals.”

Farage, posting after the meeting, wrote: “Over lunch with Jordan Bardella today, I made it clear that the future of Anglo-French relations depends on the UK being able to carry out pushbacks into French waters.” He described Bardella’s stance as highly encouraging.

Both men presented the London meeting as practical preparation for when they are in power, with Bardella hailing Farage as a “pioneer” who won Britain’s freedom from the European Union (EU). Polls currently give Bardella 35–37 percent in the first round of next year’s French presidential election, almost guaranteeing him a place in the second round run-off. Longtime National Rally frontwoman Marine Le Pen cannot run in the election, having been banned from doing so in a widely criticized lawfare case.

Farage’s Reform Party has also been leading national polls for the next British general election, which must be held no later than 2029, for months.

Image via Jordan Bardella.

Join Pulse+ to comment below, and receive exclusive e-mail analyses.

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.
Pulse Ad
Pulse Ad
More From The Pulse

WE ARE 100% INDEPENDENT AND READER-FUNDED. FOR A GUARANTEED AD-FREE EXPERIENCE AND TO SUPPORT REAL NEWS, PLEASE SIGN UP HERE, TODAY.

8 minutes ago
News

Trump DOJ Dismantles Race-Based ‘Disparate Impact’ Rules.

PULSE POINTS

❓WHAT HAPPENED: The Department of Justice (DOJ) issued a final rule eliminating “disparate impact” liability from its Title VI regulations.

👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: The DOJ, Attorney General Pam Bondi, and Assistant Attorney General Harmeet K. Dhillon.

📍WHEN & WHERE: December 9, 2025, United States.

💬KEY QUOTE: “For decades, the Justice Department has used disparate-impact liability to undermine the constitutional principle that all Americans must be treated equally under the law.” – Pam Bondi

🎯IMPACT: This move restores the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to its original meaning, requiring evidence of intentional discrimination in Title VI cases.

IN FULL

The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) has announced a final rule that eliminates all “disparate impact” liability from its Title VI regulations. This significant change restores the original intent of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits discrimination based on race, color, and national origin in federally funded programs and activities.

Previously, policies that were race-neutral could be challenged if they resulted in different outcomes among racial groups. This “disparate impact” standard did not require proof of intentional discrimination, only statistical disparities. In most cases, the demonstration of “disparate impact” would result in DOJ litigation or regulatory action.

The new rule, issued late Tuesday, mandates that all future Title VI cases handled by the DOJ will now require evidence of intentional discrimination and not simply a statistical demonstration of “disparate impact.” In April, President Donald J. Trump issued an Executive Order directing his administration to end the use of the “disparate impact” standard, with White House officials contending the policy forced government agencies, schools, and private companies to make race-based decisions out of fear of legal action.

Addressing the end of the “disparate impact” standard, Attorney General Pam Bondi stated, “For decades, the Justice Department has used disparate-impact liability to undermine the constitutional principle that all Americans must be treated equally under the law.”

Assistant Attorney General Harmeet K. Dhillon noted that the previous regulations encouraged lawsuits without evidence of actual discrimination.

Image by Steve Fernie.

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.

41 minutes ago
Corruption
Immigration

Tim Walz Promises More Somali Immigration to Minnesota Amid Billion-Dollar Fraud Scandal.

PULSE POINTS

❓WHAT HAPPENED: Minnesota Governor Tim Walz (D) pledged to bring more Somali immigrants to his state amid backlash over a major welfare fraud case tied to the Somali community.

👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: Governor Walz, Washington Governor Bob Ferguson (D), and attendees at a Seattle fundraising luncheon.

📍WHEN & WHERE: December 9, 2025, at a fundraising luncheon in Seattle, Washington.

💬KEY QUOTE: “Instead of demonizing our Somali community, we’re going to do more to welcome more in.” – Tim Walz

🎯IMPACT: Gov. Walz and state officials face intensified scrutiny amid a federal investigation into welfare fraud in Minnesota and whistleblower claims of a cover-up.

IN FULL

Minnesota Governor Tim Walz (D) pledged to bring even more Somali immigrants to his state during a speech at a Tuesday fundraising event for Washington Governor Bob Ferguson (D) in Seattle. “Instead of demonizing our Somali community, we’re going to do more to welcome more in,” Walz said, despite his administration facing increasing federal scrutiny over its handling of widespread social services fraud—connected to the Somali community—which saw an alleged $1 billion in taxpayer dollars stolen.

The failed Democrat vice presidential nominee criticized federal immigration enforcement actions in Minnesota, claiming “our neighbors are being demonized” and that the state’s immigrant community was being “terrorized” by the Trump administration. Walz echoed a favorite far-left trope, stating illegal immigrants in his state were “literally picked up off the streets” by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents.

“These folks better not ever mistake our kindness for our weakness because we are going to defend our neighbors,” the Minnesota Democrat said, in an apparent warning to federal immigration officials and the Trump administration. The luncheon, held at the Washington State Convention Center, was attended by over 1,000 supporters, with some paying up to $2,500 for a table. Walz received a standing ovation.


The Walz administration in Minnesota is facing mounting allegations that it actively ignored evidence of rampant welfare fraud schemes perpetrated by Somali immigrants in the state.

The National Pulse reported last week that whistleblowers with the Minnesota Department of Education claim state officials first uncovered evidence of fraud involving the Feeding Our Future nonprofit organization in July 2019. However, the whistleblowers allege Gov. Walz and state officials backed down from investigating the group after intense pushback from Feeding Our Future’s leaders, who accused state officials of discrimination against Minnesota’s Somali community.

Image by Gage Skidmore.

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.
Pulse Ad
Pulse Ad

WE ARE 100% INDEPENDENT AND READER-FUNDED. FOR A GUARANTEED AD-FREE EXPERIENCE AND TO SUPPORT REAL NEWS, PLEASE SIGN UP HERE, TODAY.

2 hours ago
Immigration

The State Department Has Revoked 85,000 Visas Under Trump.

PULSE POINTS

❓WHAT HAPPENED: The Trump administration has revoked 85,000 visas across all categories since January, according to a State Department official.

👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: President Donald J. Trump’s administration, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, and the State Department.

📍WHEN & WHERE: The revocations date from late January to December 9, 2025.

💬KEY QUOTE: “These are people who pose a direct threat to our communities’ safety, and we do not want to have them in our country.” – State Department official

🎯IMPACT: Visa revocations have doubled compared to last year, with terrorism, overstays, DUIs, assault, theft, and public safety threats among the causes.

IN FULL

The Trump administration has rescinded 85,000 visas across all categories since President Donald J. Trump’s inauguration in January, the State Department revealed on Tuesday. The revocations include 8,000 student visas and more than double the numbers for 2024.

“Some of the top reasons why we revoked the visas were DUIs, assaults, and theft, which together account for almost half of the revocations in the past year,” a State Department official said regarding the revocations. They added: “These are people who pose a direct threat to our communities’ safety, and we do not want to have them in our country.”

The State Department announced in November that it had pulled 80,000 visas so far. Among the causes for the revocations were terrorism, overstays, DUIs, assault, theft, and public safety threats. The agency also reiterated its use of social media vetting during visa screenings, advising applicants to maintain public profiles during the vetting process.

On September 15, Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced the department would move to revoke the visas of foreign nationals who celebrated the assassination of Turning Point USA (TPUSA) founder Charlie Kirk. “Visa revocations are underway. If you are here on a visa and cheering on the public assassination of a political figure, prepare to be deported,” Sec. Rubio wrote in a post on X (formerly Twitter). In October, the State Department confirmed at least six foreigners celebrating the assassination had their visas revoked.

Meanwhile, the Trump administration announced last week that it would begin restricting visa approvals for Nigerian nationals who are believed to have engaged in violence against Christians.

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.

3 hours ago
Crime
UK

Afghan Charged With Rape of Underage Teens.

PULSE POINTS

❓WHAT HAPPENED: An Afghan migrant has been charged with the rape of two teenage girls in England.

👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: Sultani Bakatash, a 28-year-old Afghan national, and two girls aged 14.

📍WHEN & WHERE: The alleged incidents occurred in Bolton, Greater Manchester, with the arrest taking place on Sunday, December 7.

💬KEY QUOTE: “This is a deeply concerning report, and our priority is supporting the two young girls and their families at this traumatic time.” – Chief Superintendent Helen Critchley

🎯IMPACT: The case highlights ongoing concerns about safeguarding young girls and public safety amid ongoing mass migration.

IN FULL

An Afghan migrant, Sultani Bakatash, aged 28, has been charged with serious sexual offences against two 14-year-old girls in Bolton, Greater Manchester. He faces two counts of rape of a girl under 16, one count of sexual assault, and one count of assault by penetration. Greater Manchester Police arrested Bakatash in the early hours of Sunday, December 7, after receiving a report of a rape at an apartment in the Middle Hulton area.

Authorities allege he contacted the girls online before meeting them in person. Both victims are receiving support from specialist officers, and police say no one else is being sought in connection with the incident. Bakatash has been remanded in custody and appeared at Manchester and Salford Magistrates’ Court on December 9.

This case adds to ongoing concerns about crimes involving asylum seekers, many of whom come to Britain illegally by boat, with tens of thousands housed in taxpayer-funded hotels across the country, sometimes close to schools. Reports indicate hundreds of migrants in such accommodations have faced charges for serious offences, including rape and sexual assault.

Separate incidents have involved asylum seekers accused or convicted of sex attacks on children, with one case involving a migrant who stabbed a migrant hotel worker to death earlier this year.

Image by Metro Centric.

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.
Pulse Ad
Pulse Ad

WE ARE 100% INDEPENDENT AND READER-FUNDED. FOR A GUARANTEED AD-FREE EXPERIENCE AND TO SUPPORT REAL NEWS, PLEASE SIGN UP HERE, TODAY.

4 hours ago
Religion
UK

Teacher Suspended for Telling Muslim That Britain Is a ‘Christian State.’

PULSE POINTS

❓WHAT HAPPENED: A London primary (elementary) school teacher was banned from working with children after telling a Muslim student that Britain is a “Christian state.”

👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: The teacher, the Free Speech Union, the Metropolitan Police, and the local safeguarding board.

📍WHEN & WHERE: The incident occurred in London, with the teacher being suspended in March 2024 and dismissed in February 2025.

💬KEY QUOTE: “This teacher lost his job and almost ended up being barred from the profession for life just because he pointed out to a class of Muslim schoolchildren that the national religion of England is Anglicanism.” – Lord Toby Young

🎯IMPACT: The teacher successfully appealed the ban and now works part-time, but his career has been significantly derailed.

IN FULL

A London primary (elementary) school teacher was dismissed after telling a Muslim pupil that Britain is a Christian country. The teacher made the remark while enforcing the school’s policy that Islamic religious activities at the non-faith school be confined to a designated prayer room. He reportedly explained to a group of students that, because the King is the head of the Church of England, “Britain is still a Christian state,” and also suggested that students seeking additional accommodations for Islamic practices could consider a nearby Islamic school.

The situation began when the teacher found several boys washing their feet in the bathroom sinks. When he addressed them, he spoke about British values of tolerance, although he reiterated that “Britain is still a Christian state.” The comments triggered a safeguarding review, despite being literally true, with the King’s coronation oath including a vow to “maintain the Laws of God and the true profession of the Gospel” and the House of Lords including Anglican bishops, among other constitutional provisions enshrining Christianity as the state religion.

The local safeguarding board concluded that the remarks had caused “emotional harm” to the child involved. London’s Metropolitan Police initially had its child abuse team examine the incident as a possible hate crime, although the inquiry was eventually dropped. The teacher was suspended in March 2024, and by February 2025, he had been dismissed for gross misconduct.

With assistance from the Free Speech Union, the teacher is now taking legal action against the local authority. Lord Toby Young, the organisation’s director, said, “This teacher lost his job and almost ended up being barred from the profession for life just because he pointed out to a class of Muslim schoolchildren that the national religion of England is Anglicanism.”

“Things have reached a pretty pass in this country if a teacher can be branded a safeguarding risk because he says something that is incontestably true,” he added.

Recent data indicates that Christianity in Britain is undergoing significant changes, particularly among younger generations. According to research, an increasing number of young adults are returning to church, and among Christians, more now identify with the Roman Catholic Church than with the Anglican Church of England. Attendance among 18 to 24-year-olds has risen sharply, with Catholic parishes in particular seeing notable growth.

Image via the Foreign, Commonwealth, and Development Office.

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.

16 hours ago
Crime
News

Trump Admin Warns Chicago to Comply on Safety or Lose Federal Funds After Brutal Train Attacks.

PULSE POINTS

❓WHAT HAPPENED: A man allegedly set a young woman on fire on a commuter train in Chicago, Illinois, prompting federal authorities to demand updated safety measures from the Chicago Transit Authority.

👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: The victim, Bethany MaGee, and the alleged attacker, Lawrence Reed, along with federal and local officials, including Federal Transit Authority Administrator Marc Molinaro.

📍WHEN & WHERE: The attack occurred on November 17, aboard a Blue Line L commuter train in Chicago.

💬KEY QUOTE: “I will not accept the brutal assault of an innocent 26-year-old woman as an inevitable cost of providing public transportation.” – Marc Molinaro

🎯IMPACT: Federal funding for Chicago’s public transportation could be at risk if updated safety measures are not implemented by December 19.

IN FULL

A horrific attack aboard a Chicago Blue Line train on November 17 has prompted urgent federal scrutiny of the city’s transit and public safety systems. Authorities say 50-year-old Lawrence Reed poured gasoline on fellow passenger Bethany MaGee, 26, and set her on fire while the train was in service. MaGee survived but suffered severe burns. Reed, who was arrested the following morning, now faces federal terrorism charges that could result in a life sentence.

At the time of the attack, Reed was on electronic monitoring related to an active battery case stemming from an August incident in which he allegedly assaulted a hospital social worker. His criminal record spans more than 60 cases dating back to 1993, including multiple violent offenses. Federal Transit Administration Administrator Marc Molinaro sharply criticized the circumstances that allowed Reed to be free despite his history, calling it “unconscionable” in a letter sent to Mayor Brandon Johnson (D) and Illinois Governor J.B. Pritzker (D). Molinaro ordered the Chicago Transit Authority to submit updated safety reforms by December 19.

The Blue Line attack has become a flashpoint in a broader political battle over crime and governance in the city of Chicago. President Donald J. Trump seized on the case to accuse the city’s leadership and judicial system of endangering residents through lenient policies. “They burned this beautiful woman riding in a train. A man was arrested 72 times. Think of that. And they’ll let him out again,” Trump said in recent remarks.

The attack follows months of escalating tensions between the Trump administration and Chicago’s Democratic leadership, including the withholding of $2.1 billion in federal infrastructure funds over concerns related to public safety and race-based contracting.

Chicago has also drawn national attention for immigration controversies. A Joe Biden-appointed judge recently ordered the release of more than 600 migrants detained during the “Midway Blitz” operation, prompting criticism from conservative lawmakers who argue that the city’s leadership is opposed to immigration laws. Mayor Johnson has defended his administration’s approach, previously calling the term “illegal alien” “racist.”

CTA officials confirmed receipt of Molinaro’s demand letter and stated that they will provide a formal response by the federal deadline. Neither Johnson nor Pritzker has issued detailed comments on the federal safety directives or on potential changes to monitoring and supervision policies highlighted by Reed’s case.

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.
Pulse Ad
Pulse Ad

WE ARE 100% INDEPENDENT AND READER-FUNDED. FOR A GUARANTEED AD-FREE EXPERIENCE AND TO SUPPORT REAL NEWS, PLEASE SIGN UP HERE, TODAY.

16 hours ago
Immigration
Politics

Pritzker Enacts Law to Expand Protections for Illegal Immigrants in Illinois.

PULSE POINTS

❓WHAT HAPPENED: Illinois Governor J.B. Pritzker (D) signed HB 1312, a bill aimed at shielding illegal immigrants from deportation and limiting civil immigration enforcement in certain state institutions.

👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: Governor J.B. Pritzker, community advocates, White House Deputy Press Secretary Abigail Jackson, and Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin.

📍WHEN & WHERE: The bill was signed on Tuesday at Little Village in Chicago, Illinois.

💬KEY QUOTE: “With my signature today, we are protecting people and institutions that belong here in Illinois.” – Gov. Pritzker

🎯IMPACT: The law creates new protections for illegal immigrants, restricts civil arrests near courthouses, and imposes privacy rules on institutions such as hospitals and universities.

IN FULL

Illinois Governor J.B. Pritzker (D) signed HB 1312 on Tuesday at Chicago’s Little Village. The radical law aims to shield illegal immigrants from deportation by limiting civil immigration enforcement at courthouses, hospitals, day cares, and university campuses. It also allows people to sue officers if they believe their constitutional rights were violated.

“With my signature today, we are protecting people and institutions that belong here in Illinois. Dropping your kid off at day care, going to the doctor, or attending your classes should not be a life-altering task,” Gov. Pritzker said in a press release. The governor also used the bill signing to criticize  President Donald J. Trump and Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Kristi Noem, claiming they appealed to “lesser instincts.”

The law prohibits civil arrests in and around courthouses for those attending certain state proceedings. It also strengthens privacy rules at hospitals, requiring policies governing interactions with law enforcement, and restricts universities and day care centers from sharing immigration status unless required by law. Institutions are required to adopt protocols for handling federal agents by early 2026.

Critics of the bill, including White House Deputy Press Secretary Abigail Jackson, slammed the move. “If Pritzker the Slob focused on fixing crime in his own state instead of defending criminal illegal aliens, Illinois residents would be much safer,” Jackson said in a statement. She added that cracking down on crime and deporting criminal illegal immigrants “should not be a partisan issue.”

DHS Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin also criticized the legislation, stating that it violates the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution. “By signing this law, Pritzker violated the Supremacy Clause, his oath he took as Governor to ‘support the Constitution of the United States,’” McLaughlin said.

Image by Gage Skidmore.

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.

17 hours ago
Crime
News
Politics

Mamdani Defends Choice of Convicted Armed Robber for NYC Public Safety Role.

PULSE POINTS

❓WHAT HAPPENED: New York City Mayor-elect Zohran Mamdani (D) appointed a convicted armed robber, Mysonne Linen, to his public safety transition team.

👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: Zohran Mamdani, Mysonne Linen, and the Until Freedom organization.

📍WHEN & WHERE: The announcement was made on November 26 via Instagram; Mamdani addressed the decision on December 9.

💬KEY QUOTE: “We will take all of their experiences and their analysis into account as we build a city for each and every person.” – Zohran Mamdani

🎯IMPACT: The decision has prompted increased scrutiny of Mamdani’s incoming team.

IN FULL

New York City mayor-elect Zohran Mamdani (D) has defended appointing Mysonne Linen, a 49-year-old former armed robber, to advise him on criminal justice policy as part of his mayoral transition team. Mamdani described the inclusion of Linen among the more than 400 New Yorkers across 17 committees as an effort to draw on “diverse experiences and analyses from New Yorkers,” adding, “We will take all of their experiences and their analysis into account as we build a city for each and every person.”

Linen spent seven years in state prison after being convicted in the late 1990s of two armed robberies involving Bronx taxi drivers. Prosecutors say that in 1997, he struck one driver with a beer bottle during a robbery, and in 1998, held another driver at gunpoint, allegations both victims testified to. Linen’s defense at the time argued he had no motive, claiming he was focused on a budding music career. He had reportedly worked as a songwriter for prominent artists such as Lil’ Kim and Mase. Ultimately, he served seven years of a possible 25-year sentence and maintains that he was wrongfully accused.

The appointment of Linen, co-founder of the organization Until Freedom, has stirred sharp criticism. Some law enforcement groups and political opponents argue that entrusting criminal justice policy to someone with a serious felony conviction undermines the credibility of the incoming administration.

Mamdani, a 34-year-old Democratic Socialist and Ugandan immigrant, will assume office on January 1, 2026, having won office on a sweeping “affordability” platform that included rent freezes, fare-free public transit, universal childcare, city-owned grocery stores, and a plan to build 200,000 affordable housing units. To fund these proposals, he has called for steep tax increases on corporations and “whiter” neighborhoods.

Some of his proposals have already met resistance from state leadership. Democrat Governor Kathy Hochul, who had backed Mamdani’s candidacy, is reportedly weighing whether to raise the state corporate tax rate despite her longstanding opposition to tax hikes, as New York faces an estimated multibillion-dollar budget shortfall.

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.
Pulse Ad
Pulse Ad

WE ARE 100% INDEPENDENT AND READER-FUNDED. FOR A GUARANTEED AD-FREE EXPERIENCE AND TO SUPPORT REAL NEWS, PLEASE SIGN UP HERE, TODAY.

17 hours ago
1A
SCOTUS

Supreme Court Considers Striking Down Campaign Finance Limits in Republican-Led Case.

PULSE POINTS

❓WHAT HAPPENED: The Supreme Court heard arguments on the legality of federal limits on coordinated political spending by parties in the case NRSC v. FEC.

👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: The National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC), National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC), Vice President J.D. Vance, former Congressman Steve Chabot (R-OH), the Federal Election Commission (FEC), and court-appointed lawyer Roman Martinez.

📍WHEN & WHERE: Arguments took place on Tuesday at the Supreme Court in Washington, D.C.

💬KEY QUOTE: “The parties have been weakened overall, and this case… starts to restore the strength of parties,” said Justice Brett Kavanaugh.

🎯IMPACT: A decision could reshape campaign finance laws and is expected by mid-2026.

IN FULL

The Supreme Court on Tuesday examined the legality of federal caps on coordinated political spending by parties, a case that could further alter campaign finance restrictions. The dispute, NRSC v. FEC, challenges limits imposed by the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971, which regulates financing for federal campaigns.

For the current election cycle, coordinated spending limits range from $61,800 to $123,000 for House races and up to $3.7 million for Senate races. The plaintiffs, including Vice President J.D. Vance, former Congressman Steve Chabot (R-OH), the National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC), and the National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC), argue that these limits violate the First Amendment. A federal appeals court previously upheld the caps, relying on a 2001 Supreme Court ruling.

During oral arguments, Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, and Brett Kavanaugh seemed inclined to strike down the limits. Kavanaugh expressed concerns about the weakening of political parties compared to outside groups like super PACs, stating, “The parties have been weakened overall, and this case… starts to restore the strength of parties.”

Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Amy Coney Barrett questioned lawyers sparingly, while Justice Neil Gorsuch remained silent. Liberal justices, including Sonia Sotomayor, warned that removing the caps could lead to corruption. Sotomayor criticized the court’s past rulings on campaign finance, saying, “Every time we interfere with the congressional design, we make matters worse.”

Roman Martinez, the court-appointed lawyer defending the restrictions, argued that overturning the caps could unravel decades of campaign finance law. He cautioned, “You’re going to be deluged with petitions, the dominoes are going to fall, and you’re going to have to reconstruct campaign finance law from the ground up.” The court is expected to issue its decision by mid-2026, ahead of next year’s congressional midterm elections.

Image by Billy Wilson.

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.

18 hours ago
SCOTUS

Trump Addresses Thomas, Alito Retirement Speculation.

PULSE POINTS

❓WHAT HAPPENED: President Donald J. Trump expressed hope that U.S. Supreme Court Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito remain on the bench during an interview released on Tuesday.

👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: President Trump and Supreme Court Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito.

📍WHEN & WHERE: The comments were made during an interview released on Tuesday.

💬KEY QUOTE: “Well, I hope they stay, ’cause I think they’re fantastic, OK? Both of those men are fantastic.” – Donald Trump

🎯IMPACT: The Supreme Court’s 6-3 conservative majority, including three Trump appointees, remains a significant factor in shaping U.S. policies.

IN FULL

President Donald J. Trump expressed his admiration for Supreme Court Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito, stating his hope that both remain on the bench. During an interview with POLITICO’s Dasha Burns, Trump remarked, “Well, I hope they stay, ’cause I think they’re fantastic, OK? Both of those men are fantastic.”

The Supreme Court currently holds a 6-3 conservative majority, bolstered by three justices—Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett—appointed during Trump’s first term. This majority has played a pivotal role in rulings on immigration enforcement and federal agency reforms.

Speculation about retirements has surfaced, but neither Justice Thomas, 77, nor Justice Alito, 75, has announced any plans to step down. Reports from Reuters and The Wall Street Journal last year indicated that both justices intend to remain on the bench, with sources close to Alito noting that his decisions are not politically motivated.

Justice Thomas, the longest-serving member of the current court, was nominated by former President George H. W. Bush in 1991. Justice Alito joined the court in 2006 after being nominated by former President George W. Bush. Historically, justices such as Stephen Breyer, Anthony Kennedy, and John Paul Stevens served well into their eighties or beyond before retiring.

Trump also criticized Democratic efforts to pack the court with ideological progressives, stating, “I will say this, the Democrats want to pack the court. They want to have 21 justices. That would be a terrible thing for this country.”

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.
Pulse Ad
Pulse Ad