GET THE APP
Monday, September 21, 2026

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

December 17, 2025
Lawfare

Federal Judge Allows White House Ballroom Construction to Continue… For Now.

PULSE POINTS

❓WHAT HAPPENED: A federal judge declined to temporarily halt the construction of President Donald J. Trump’s White House ballroom following a lawsuit from the National Trust for Historic Preservation.

👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: U.S. District Court Judge Richard Leon, the Trump administration, and the National Trust for Historic Preservation.

📍WHEN & WHERE: The decision was announced on Tuesday; construction plans involve the former White House East Wing in Washington, D.C.

🎯IMPACT: The Trump administration must submit construction plans to federal review panels by the end of December, while the preservation group continues its legal challenge.

IN FULL

A federal judge has declined a request to temporarily halt construction of a White House ballroom initiated by President Donald J. Trump. The lawsuit, brought by the National Trust for Historic Preservation, sought an emergency restraining order to stop the project.

The ruling, issued by U.S. District Court Judge Richard Leon—a George W. Bush appointee—found that the National Trust for Historic Preservation failed to demonstrate that “great and certain” harm would occur if construction proceeded. He noted that the anticipated below-ground work is not set to begin until January, with above-ground work scheduled for April. However, Judge Leon cautioned that President Trump should be prepared to reverse any below-ground construction if it results in alterations to the existing above-ground structure.

While construction on the ballroom is cleared to continue for now, Judge Leon indicated that he intends to hear arguments early next year on whether to issue a longer-term preliminary injunction halting the project. Additionally, he stressed that the Trump administration is to abide by its commitment to submit construction plans to the National Capital Planning Commission before the end of the year.

The National Trust for Historic Preservation filed its lawsuit on Friday, arguing that the administration bypassed legal requirements for consultation with the National Capital Planning Commission and the Commission of Fine Arts. The group contends these consultations are typically required before making significant changes to federal property.

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
Media
News

Fox News Joins White House Boycott After Trump Bans ‘Fake News’ CNN, MS NOW, and POLITICO.

Corporate media outlets are joining forces against President Trump after he revoked the White House access of CNN, MS NOW, and POLITICO.

PULSE POINTS
❓ WHAT HAPPENED: Fox News has joined other corporate news outlets in suspending White House television pool coverage after President Donald J. Trump announced a ban on CNN, MS NOW (formerly MSNBC), and POLITICO for corruption and spreading “fake news.” White House pool coverage provides shared media access to White House events.
📺 DETAIL: The boycott affects planned coverage of President Trump’s scheduled events, including appearances at the White House and the United Nations. CNN, which had been designated as the TV pool provider for September 21, was blocked from doing so by the ban, and other outlets have refused to make alternative arrangements. Fox News is joined by ABC News, CBS News, and NBC News in solidarity with CNN, MS NOW, and POLITICO against the Trump administration.
💬 KEY QUOTE: “The public has a vital interest in receiving accurate, independent information about its government. No administration should restrict a news organization because it objects to its reporting.” – White House television pool statement
🎯 IMPACT: CNN, MS NOW, and POLITICO have announced plans to sue the Trump administration, arguing that the ban violates their First Amendment rights. The Trump administration is likely to argue that First Amendment protections for press freedom do not extend to a corporate media right to automatic access to the White House, which is not available to journalists generally. President Trump has said the banned outlets are peddling “fake news” in a manner that is “corrupt, purposeful, pervasive, fully coordinated, and totally out of control,” presenting a threat to national security.
📺 FLASHBACK: This is not the first time the Trump administration has clashed with media outlets, previously barring the Associated Press (AP) for its partisan decision to continue referring to the Gulf of America as the “Gulf of Mexico,” despite its redesignation by the federal government.

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

show less

Corporate media outlets are joining forces against President Trump after he revoked the White House access of CNN, MS NOW, and POLITICO.

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.

1 hour ago
News
Politics

Populist AfD Wins Another German State Election as Ruling Party Suffers Historic Defeat.

Chancellor Friedrich Merz’s CDU has suffered more unprecedented losses in Germany’s state elections, raising questions about his leadership as the populist Alternative for Germany (AfD) advances.

PULSE POINTS
❓ WHAT HAPPENED: Germany’s Alternative for Germany (AfD) party has scored another major state election victory, emerging as the largest party in Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania as Chancellor (Prime Minister) Friedrich Merz’s Christian Democratic Union (CDU) suffered a historic defeat. The AfD won around 38.2 percent of the vote, narrowly ahead of the left-wing Social Democratic Party (SPD). The CDU, formerly led by Angela Merkel, fell to just 4.9 percent and failed to clear the five percent threshold required to secure seats in the state legislature.
📺 DETAIL: The result marks the first time the CDU has failed to enter a state legislature in the history of Germany’s post-war Federal Republic. The AfD’s victory follows its breakthrough in Saxony-Anhalt two weeks earlier, reinforcing its growing electoral strength in eastern Germany. In Berlin, the AfD also recorded a strong showing relative to the area’s political demographics, finishing third with 16.3 percent of the vote, behind the CDU and Die Linke (The Left), which pushed the ruling party into second place. Merz described the Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania result as a “disaster” but rejected calls to step aside as Chancellor and party leader, insisting he would continue pursuing his government’s economic reforms. Despite winning the most votes in Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania, the AfD is unlikely to be part of the state government, because the establishment and far-left parties have ruled out cooperating with it in any way—a political “firewall” critics describe as anti-democratic.
💬 KEY QUOTE: “Friedrich Merz is the wrong Chancellor for the CDU, and he is dragging the party down with him.” – AfD leader Alice Weidel
🎯 IMPACT: The AfD’s latest regional victory signals continued growth for the party, particularly in eastern Germany, while putting additional pressure on Chancellor Merz and the establishment parties to respond to voter dissatisfaction.

Image by Michael Lucan.

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

show less

Chancellor Friedrich Merz's CDU has suffered more unprecedented losses in Germany's state elections, raising questions about his leadership as the populist Alternative for Germany (AfD) advances.

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
Bonkers Britain
Media
News

Memory Holed: BBC Mass Deletes Popular Comedy Series Because It No Longer ‘Works Today.’

The BBC has removed 11 sketches from That Mitchell and Webb Look on its iPlayer service, claiming that they no longer “work today,” sparking debate over censorship.

PULSE POINTS
❓ WHAT HAPPENED: The BBC has edited That Mitchell and Webb Look for its 20th anniversary on iPlayer, removing 11 comedy sketches it deems inappropriate for 2026.
📰 DETAIL: The decision was reportedly made in consultation with show creators David Mitchell and Robert Webb, best known for the sitcom Peep Show, although they have not publicly commented on the edits as of the time of publication. The cut sketches featured blackface—presented in a critical manner—and Mitchell wearing a burka, as well as references to racial stereotypes, with the BBC insisting, “This is a 20-year-old sketch show; in consultation with the programme makers, we have included the ones that still work today and not the ones that don’t.”
💬 KEY QUOTE: Comedian Dom Joly described the cuts as “classic BBC overkill” and “hysterical censorship” in comments to the British press.
🎯 IMPACT: The move has reignited debates over censorship in Britain, where sharing “grossly offensive” content is a crime even in private WhatsApp groups, and the preservation of even relatively recent historical media.
👀 FLASHBACK: The censorship of That Mitchell and Webb Look follows a similar pattern seen after the Black Lives Matter disorder in 2020, which spread to Britain with low-level riots and the vandalization of statues of Winston Churchill, Abraham Lincoln, and others, with shows like Little Britain being edited to censor comedy sketches touching on race.

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

show less

The BBC has removed 11 sketches from That Mitchell and Webb Look on its iPlayer service, claiming that they no longer "work today," sparking debate over censorship.

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
Lawfare
Media
News

MS NOW, CNN, POLITICO Sue Trump Admin Over White House Ban.

Three corporate media outlets have filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration, alleging First Amendment and due process violations after they were banned from the White House.

PULSE POINTS
❓ WHAT HAPPENED: CNN, MS NOW (formerly MSNBC), and POLITICO announced a lawsuit against the Trump administration after they were barred from the White House. The corporate media outlets allege that the ban violates their First Amendment rights, as well as due process protections under the Fifth Amendment.
📺 DETAIL: The lawsuit claims that the White House revoked press credentials without notice or an opportunity to appeal, accusing the administration of retaliation for unfavorable news coverage. President Donald J. Trump explained on Monday that his administration was not attacking the free press, but “corrupt” organizations intentionally spreading “FAKE NEWS,” which he characterized as an endemic disease. The administration is likely to argue that the First Amendment does not grant corporate media outlets a right to be part of the White House press corps, which is not open to all journalists or regular citizens by default.
💬 KEY QUOTE: “The White House is not instituting an assault on the Free Press, something which I cherish. It is instituting an assault on the FAKE NEWS, something that has grown like Cancer in our beloved United States of America. It is corrupt, purposeful, pervasive, fully coordinated, and totally out of control. It is a threat to our National Security, and must be stopped, NOW!” – President Donald J. Trump
🎯 IMPACT: If successful, the lawsuit could allow the media outlets to force their way back into the White House. Conversely, a ruling in favor of the Trump administration could make it clear that First Amendment protections for a free press do not extend to a constitutional right to White House access for the corporate media.
📺 FLASHBACK: In a similar case, the Associated Press was banned from the White House press pool last year over its use of “Gulf of Mexico” instead of “Gulf of America.” While a district judge initially ruled the ban unconstitutional, an appeals court sided with the Trump administration, and the AP remains excluded from the press pool.

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

show less

Three corporate media outlets have filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration, alleging First Amendment and due process violations after they were banned from the White House.

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.

3 hours ago
Crime
Election Integrity
News

DHS is Investigating 1,620 Voter Fraud Cases Involving Noncitizens.

The Department of Homeland Security has launched a significant investigation into potential voter fraud involving noncitizens, with over 150 arrests already made.

PULSE POINTS
❓ WHAT HAPPENED: The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is investigating 1,620 cases of voter fraud involving noncitizens, according to DHS Secretary Markwayne Mullin. The department has already made 151 arrests and is examining an additional 300,000 cases based on state voter roll data.
📺 DETAIL: In an interview with Fox News, Mullin explained that the cases are being scrutinized by comparing voter rolls with data on illegal immigrants, legal permanent residents, and citizens to determine voting legality. Mullin emphasized that cases of illegal voting effectively cancel out the votes of legally registered citizens. He also noted that the investigations’ findings support President Donald J. Trump’s claims of voter fraud in past elections.
💬 KEY QUOTE: “We’re scrubbing [states’ voter rolls]. We’re comparing them to those that are in the country illegally, those that are legal permanent residents, and those that are citizens… Every single vote that we talk about, that was at the hands of an illegal, canceled out a citizen that was legally registered and able to vote,” Mullin said.
🎯 IMPACT: The DHS investigations highlight the Trump administration’s ongoing concerns about election integrity and the potential for illegal voting to undermine the democratic process. The scale of the cases under review underscores the need for electoral reforms, such as the SAVE America Act, although the Democrats have consistently resisted in Congress and at the state level. Significantly, academic research indicates that foreign nationals vote illegally in sufficient numbers to alter election outcomes, in ways that tend to favor the Democrats.

Image by Joe Mabel.

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

show less

The Department of Homeland Security has launched a significant investigation into potential voter fraud involving noncitizens, with over 150 arrests already made.

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.

September 19, 2026
Immigration
News

Democrat Senate Candidate Says She Would Trade Five Americans for One Illegal Alien.

Democrat Senate candidate Hallie Shoffner’s remarks on preferring illegal immigrant workers over Americans have invited backlash in Arkansas.

PULSE POINTS
❓ WHAT HAPPENED: Hallie Shoffner, a Democrat candidate for the U.S. Senate in Arkansas, declared her preference for illegal immigrant farm workers over American workers during a podcast interview, sparking significant backlash.
💬 KEY QUOTE: “Every farmer will tell you at one point, we did, or still do, employ undocumented [sic] immigrants, and it’s absolutely ridiculous that these folks are being rounded up because they’re hardworking people. They’re some of the best people we know, and honestly, we’d trade five Americans for just one of them because of how hard they work,” Shoffner said.
🎯 IMPACT: Shoffner’s comments have drawn criticism the public and from her opponent, Senator Tom Cotton, who argue that such views undermine American workers. They are likely to harm her campaign in a predominantly conservative state.
📰 DETAIL: Shoffner, who recently closed her farm due to high costs, is challenging Cotton as a supposedly moderate Democrat, but is now facing renewed scrutiny over her extreme pro-illegal immigration stance. Her campaign has attracted attention from Democrat donors, especially after one poll showed her leading Cotton by three points.
👀 FLASHBACK: Republicans have historically won U.S. Senate races in Arkansas by significant margins, with Cotton defeating his 2020 opponent by 33 points.

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

show less

Democrat Senate candidate Hallie Shoffner's remarks on preferring illegal immigrant workers over Americans have invited backlash in Arkansas.

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.

September 19, 2026
Bonkers Britain
News
Religion

Church of England Withdraws Interfaith Award Given to Pro-Bin Laden Imam on 9/11 Anniversary.

The Church of England has rescinded an interfaith honor given to an Islamic cleric who once praised Osama Bin Laden following widespread backlash.

PULSE POINTS
❓ WHAT HAPPENED: The female Archbishop of Canterbury has rescinded an interfaith award for an Islamic cleric who praised Osama bin Laden. 
📺 DETAIL: On the 25th anniversary of the 9/11 terrorist attacks, Archbishop of Canterbury Dame Sarah Mullally, the senior bishop of the Church of England and symbolic head of the global Anglican Communion, gave Imam Hafiz Muhammad Tahir Mehmood Ashrafi the Hubert Walter Award for “reconciliation and interfaith cooperation.” Ashrafi was awarded for his supposed “longstanding support for religious minorities in Pakistan.” However, soon after the award was granted, it was revealed that Ashrafi had referred to Osama bin Laden as “Saifullah,” an honorific Islamic title meaning “the sword of God,” during Islamic protests against the decision to award author Salman Rushdie with a British knighthood back in 2007. Rushdie is under an Iranian fatwa for his novel, The Satanic Verses, which Muslims regard as blasphemous, and was seriously injured in an assassination attempt in 2022. In response to news of Rushdie’s knighthood at the time, the imam said: “If a blasphemer can be given the title ‘Sir’ by the West despite the fact he’s hurt the feelings of Muslims, then a mujahid [jihadist] who has been fighting for Islam against the Russians, Americans and British must be given the lofty title of Islam, Saifullah.” A spokesman for Ashrafi has since claimed that the imam’s comments were taken out of context. Since 2007, Imam Ashrafi has been chairman of the Pakistan Ulema Council, an organization of Islamic scholars, which has allegedly supported extremist actions. “It is obscene, and almost beyond parody, that the Archbishop of Canterbury has awarded an Osama Bin Laden apologist an interfaith award on the anniversary of 9/11. This demonstrates appallingly poor judgment and is an insult to the victims of 9/11 and their families. Interfaith engagement must not mean overlooking support for extremism,” commented Alejandro Sanchez, spokesman for the National Secular Society. Lambeth Palace, the Archbishop’s seat in London, confirmed that the imam’s award was withdrawn on Thursday.
💬 KEY QUOTE: “Why, oh why, is the Archbishop of Canterbury giving an award to a man who praised Osama Bin Laden just a few years after the Twin Towers?” said Reform UK leader Nigel Farage on GB News.
🎯 IMPACT: The incident has intensified scrutiny of the Church of England’s leadership and its naive approach to interfaith relations with Islam, with calls for a re-evaluation of its priorities. This represents another controversy for the Church of England. Dame Sarah, a pro-abortion woman, was appointed to the senior office earlier this year, sparking criticism that the English established church was straying from Christian teaching and causing many traditionalist Anglican churches to break away from it. The same month, it installed pro-diversity graffiti in one of its cathedrals, sparking criticism from Vice President JD Vance. “It is weird to me that these people don’t see the irony of honoring ‘marginalized communities’ by making a beautiful historical building really ugly,” said the Vice President at the time.

Image by Neil Turner for Lambeth Palace.

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

show less

The Church of England has rescinded an interfaith honor given to an Islamic cleric who once praised Osama Bin Laden following widespread backlash.

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.

September 19, 2026
Crime
News
UK

Afghan Migrant Sentenced for Raping Underage Teenagers.

An Afghan man who lured two 14-year-old girls to his flat, intoxicated them, and sexually assaulted them has been sentenced to 14 years in prison, but he may not be deported.

PULSE POINTS
❓ WHAT HAPPENED: An Afghan migrant in the United Kingdom has been imprisoned for a theoretical 14 years for raping two underage girls.
📺 DETAIL: Sultani Bakatash, a 29-year-old migrant from Afghanistan, was sentenced to 14 years in prison after being convicted of raping and sexually assaulting two 14-year-old girls in his flat in Bolton, England. Bakatash lured the girls through Snapchat, plied them with vodka, and sexually assaulted them while they were lapsed in and out of consciousness. The incident took place in December last year. One victim managed to escape and sought help from a neighbor, who alerted the police. Bakatash fled the scene but was arrested two days later. Bakatash was convicted of two counts of rape, one count of sexual assault, and one count of assault by penetration, after pleading not guilty. In addition to his supposed 14-year sentence, which he will be unlikely to serve in full, Bakatash was given another two years on license, and has been barred from contacting any child under 16 years old, albeit only for 20 years. Concerningly, he received Indefinite Leave to Remain (ILR), similar to permanent residency in the U.S., after arriving in the country back in 2021, meaning it could be difficult to deport him.
💬 KEY QUOTE: “You encouraged them to keep drinking… so they would become so drunk they would not be able to stop you having sex with them,” said Judge Kenderik Horne during the sentencing.
🎯 IMPACT: The assaults caused severe psychological harm to the victims. Bakatash could be deported, although no final decision has been made. However, the judge noted that Bakatash’s work with the British Army in Afghanistan could prevent this. This represents a recurring trend of Afghan migrants assaulting minors in Britain, with Afghans having per capita the highest rate of sexual offending of any nationality in the country.
📺 FLASHBACK: This is far from the only case of its kind. Last month, another Afghan migrant, Abdul Shinwari, was charged with the rape and sexual assault of a 17-year-old girl in Manchester, England. That same month, Abdul Khan, another Afghan, was sentenced for grooming and raping a 13-year-old girl. Khan, who is believed to be 28-years-old, falsely claimed to be a 14-year-old boy.

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

show less

An Afghan man who lured two 14-year-old girls to his flat, intoxicated them, and sexually assaulted them has been sentenced to 14 years in prison, but he may not be deported.

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.

September 18, 2026
Immigration
Lawfare
News

DHS Chief Warns Immigration Lawyers Abusing the Asylum System to Expect Consequences.

The Department of Homeland Security has issued a letter to immigration attorneys as part of a broader effort to combat fraudulent asylum claims and prevent delays to deportations.

PULSE POINTS
❓ WHAT HAPPENED: The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has issued a warning to the American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) regarding the legal consequences of enabling fraudulent asylum claims.
📺 DETAIL: The warning was issued to the immigration lawyers on Wednesday. “Asylum offers protection to aliens who have fled their countries due to persecution by the government on account of a protected ground… To be eligible for asylum, an alien must show that he is a ‘refugee’ as defined in 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(42)(A), meaning that he is unable or unwilling to return to his country because of persecution or a well-founded fear of persecution on account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion,” warned DHS’ James Percival, who emphasized the discretionary nature of asylum. He criticized the misuse of asylum claims for economic reasons or to delay deportation, noting that many migrants from the Western Hemisphere do not meet the legal threshold for asylum. “Filing a frivolous asylum application generally renders an alien permanently ineligible for most forms of relief and other immigration benefits… The Department will vigorously pursue all available remedies against anyone engaging in this conduct,” he added in his letter to AILA, threatening fines for attorneys found guilty of enabling fraudulent claims.
💬 KEY QUOTE: “We have been abundantly clear: If immigration attorneys commit fraud for their clients, the attorneys will be fined,” said James Percival, DHS General Counsel.
🎯 IMPACT: This warning signals a significant escalation in the Trump administration’s efforts to combat fraud in the immigration system. It also demonstrates that the administration is conscious of how the legal system can be weaponized by partisan and ideologically motivated lawyers to stall progress in enforcing U.S. immigration laws.
📺 FLASHBACK: Back in March, it was revealed that immigration attorneys had flooded the legal system with approximately 24,400 habeas claims amid the federal government’s crackdown on illegal immigration. While the U.S. Constitution provides the writ of habeas to prevent American citizens from being detained without justification, it has been weaponized to force bond hearings for illegal immigrants detained by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). The Supreme Court was set to clarify the constitutionality of bond hearings for non-citizens, but this was derailed by Democrat New York Governor Kathy Hochul after she pardoned an illegal migrant convicted of assault earlier this month.

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

show less

The Department of Homeland Security has issued a letter to immigration attorneys as part of a broader effort to combat fraudulent asylum claims and prevent delays to deportations.

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.

September 18, 2026
News
Politics

Netflix Co-Founder and Wife Donate Millions to Oppose Voter ID Initiatives.

Reed Hastings and his wife, Patty Quillin, have contributed a combined $2.5 million to block a voter ID measure in California, signaling greater involvement in Democrat and Democrat-aligned politics after stepping down as Netflix chairman.

PULSE POINTS
❓ WHAT HAPPENED: Netflix co-founder Reed Hastings and his wife, Patty Quillin, have donated $2.5 million to oppose California’s Proposition 39, a ballot measure to implement voter ID.
📺 DETAIL: Hastings contributed $1 million earlier this month to a “No on 39” campaign, while Quillin donated $1.5 million at the end of August to a similar campaign linked to the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU). Proposition 39 would require voters to show a government-issued photo ID for in-person voting, and mail-in voters would be required to provide the last four digits of their ID number on ballot envelopes. This follows polling suggesting that the “No” campaign has a slight lead with 55 percent. Supporters of the Proposition argue it is a necessary step to combat election fraud and restore trust in California’s election process. Notably, Proposition 39’s wording has been accused of being deliberately worded in a way that will encourage Californians to vote against it in November.
💬 KEY QUOTE: “Rob Bonta knows that Prop 39 is likely to pass because it is a bipartisan solution to Voter ID and is supported by a supermajority of Democratic, independent, and Republican voters. Knowing he can’t defeat our bipartisan solution to Voter ID in a fair election, he has decided to rig the vote against Prop 39 with a false title claiming it prohibits citizens from voting!” said Assemblymember Carl DeMaio (R-San Diego).
🎯 IMPACT: This represents another major Democrat-aligned political investment by Hastings, who spent $3 million to support Governor Gavin Newsom (D) during the 2021 recall election. Hastings announced back in April that he would not seek re-election to Netflix’s board, having stepped down as CEO back in 2023. Hastings stated that he intended to focus on “philanthropy and other pursuits.” As such, it is possible that Hastings, as well as Quillin, will become more involved in Democrat and Democrat-adjacent politics.

Image by cellanr.

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

show less

Reed Hastings and his wife, Patty Quillin, have contributed a combined $2.5 million to block a voter ID measure in California, signaling greater involvement in Democrat and Democrat-aligned politics after stepping down as Netflix chairman.

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