GET THE APP
Thursday, April 2, 2026

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
War

‘Reevaluating Everything’ — U.S. NATO Ambassador Confirms Trump Could Exit Alliance.

PULSE POINTS

❓WHAT HAPPENED: U.S. Ambassador to NATO Matthew Whitaker suggested that the United States could leave NATO, confirming similar comments made by President Donald J. Trump and some of his Cabinet members.

👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: Matthew Whitaker, President Trump, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Secretary of War Pete Hegseth, and members of NATO.

📍WHEN & WHERE: Remarks were made on Wednesday, April 1, 2026.

💬KEY QUOTE: “I think that it’s very clear right now that President Trump is evaluating and reevaluating everything,” said Matthew Whitaker.

🎯IMPACT: The comments raise questions about the future of U.S. involvement in NATO and its broader commitments to European allies in light of their refusal to assist with the ongoing military operations against Iran.

IN FULL

U.S. Ambassador to NATO Matthew Whitaker on Wednesday confirmed that President Donald J. Trump is considering the possibility of the United States leaving the alliance. “I think that it’s very clear right now that President Trump is evaluating and reevaluating everything,” Whitaker said. “Whether that is our involvement with NATO, whether that is our support to the European effort in Ukraine, or whether that is anything else the United States is doing.”

The National Pulse reported earlier on Wednesday that the President has signaled a strong possibility of withdrawing the United States from NATO, criticizing the alliance for not joining his military efforts against Iran. Trump described NATO as a “paper tiger” and said he was “never swayed” by the alliance.

Whitaker, who served as Acting Attorney General during Trump’s first term, made the remarks as other Cabinet secretaries, including Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Secretary of War Pete Hegseth, have questioned the merits of the alliance in light of NATO members refusing to help the U.S. amid the Iran war.

Hegseth told reporters that “[a] lot has been shown to the world about what our allies would be willing to do for the United States of America when we undertake an effort of this scope. When we ask for additional assistance… we get questions, or roadblocks, or hesitation.”

“Why are we in NATO?” Rubio posited during a recent television interview. “You have to ask that question. Why do we send trillions of dollars and have all of these American forces stationed in the region, if in our time of need, we won’t be allowed to use those bases?”

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
China Spying

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
Samuel Martin
NatSec

FBI Declares ‘Major Incident’ Following Cyberattack by Chinese Hackers.

PULSE POINTS

❓WHAT HAPPENED: The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) declared a suspected Chinese hack a major incident under the Federal Information Security Modernization Act (FISMA).

👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: Chinese hackers, U.S. officials, and FBI personnel.

📍WHEN & WHERE: The breach was reported to Congress in March.

🎯IMPACT: FISMA-designated “major incidents” are rare, meaning the breach poses significant risks to U.S. national security.

IN FULL

The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) has classified a recent cyber intrusion, believed to be carried out by Chinese hackers, as a “major incident” under the Federal Information Security Modernization Act (FISMA). FISMA guidelines classify a “major incident” as an intrusion that compromises personal data and presents risks to the national security, foreign relations, public confidence, or civil liberties of Americans.

The FBI first alerted Congress to suspicious activity on March 4, reporting that the affected system contained law enforcement-sensitive material. Although officials did not initially identify the source of the intrusion, investigators now suspect the operation was linked to China.

Under FISMA, federal agencies must notify lawmakers within seven days of discovering a cyberattack likely to cause significant harm to U.S. national security. FISMA-designated “major incidents” are uncommon and only happen a few times per year.

Officials said the compromised system contained data including “returns from legal process, such as pen register and trap and trace surveillance returns, and personally identifiable information pertaining to subjects of FBI investigations.” Pen register and trap-and-trace devices allow law enforcement agencies to monitor phone calls and websites visited by any device connected to the Internet. This information can be used by foreign intelligence to identify targets of criminal investigation and FBI surveillance.

China has carried out a number of major cyberattacks against the U.S. in recent years. Last July, The National Pulse reported that Chinese hackers had exploited vulnerabilities in Microsoft SharePoint software, breaching multiple U.S. agencies, including the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA). The same year, U.S. energy officials uncovered undocumented communication devices in Chinese-made solar inverters and batteries, raising fears of remote cyberattacks that could disrupt America’s power grid.

In 2024, under the former Biden-Harris government, a state-sponsored actor from China also breached the U.S. Treasury Department.

Join Pulse+ to comment below, and receive exclusive email 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
Economy
News

U.S. Energy Security Boosted by New Polar LNG Alaskan Energy Project.

PULSE POINTS

❓WHAT HAPPENED: Polar LNG announced its launch and the appointment of Joel Riddle as President and CEO.

👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: Joel Riddle, Polar LNG, and the U.S. energy sector.

📍WHEN & WHERE: Wednesday, Prudhoe Bay, Alaska’s North Slope.

💬KEY QUOTE: “Polar LNG is uniquely positioned to bring this resource online—delivering reliable energy for Alaska and a strategic supply for the United States that strengthens energy security, supports American leadership, creates new jobs, and provides trusted energy to our allies.” – Joel Riddle

🎯IMPACT: The project aims to strengthen U.S. energy leadership and create economic opportunities in Alaska.

IN FULL

Polar LNG has officially launched and named industry veteran Joel Riddle as its President and Chief Executive Officer. The company is moving forward with a nearshore liquefied natural gas (LNG) project at Prudhoe Bay on Alaska’s North Slope. The initiative is intended to accelerate the development of Alaska’s large untapped natural gas reserves for market, while creating American jobs and strengthening U.S. energy dominance.

“Alaska’s North Slope holds one of the most significant undeveloped natural gas resources in the world,” stated Joel Riddle, President & CEO of Polar LNG, adding: “Polar LNG is uniquely positioned to bring this resource online—delivering reliable energy for Alaska and a strategic supply for the United States that strengthens energy security, supports American leadership, creates new jobs, and provides trusted energy to our allies.”

Notably, Polar LNG’s strategic location in Alaska positions it on one of the shortest LNG shipping routes from North America to major Asian markets. For instance, it is roughly 3,600 miles from Japan, compared with more than 10,000 miles from the U.S. Gulf Coast. This will allow it to become an important energy exporter to allied economies throughout the Pacific, whose existing supplies via the Strait of Hormuz have been exposed as highly vulnerable by the Iran war.

Image by Richard Martin.

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
Media
TECH

NYT Dismisses Writer Amid AI Plagiarism Controversy.

PULSE POINTS

❓WHAT HAPPENED: The New York Times severed ties with a freelance writer after discovering he used artificial intelligence (AI) to assist in writing a book review, which included unattributed similarities to a review published in The Guardian.

👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: Freelance writer Alex Preston, The New York Times, and The Guardian.

📍WHEN & WHERE: The incident came to light following a January book review and was addressed by the NYT in March with an editor’s note.

💬KEY QUOTE: “Reliance on AI and inclusion of unattributed work by another writer is a serious violation of The Times‘s integrity and fundamental journalistic standards.” – NYT spokesman

🎯IMPACT: The case has heightened concerns about AI’s role in journalism and its potential to undermine trust in major publications.

IN FULL

The New York Times has cut ties with freelance writer Alex Preston after it was revealed that he used artificial intelligence (AI) to assist in drafting a book review. Published in January, Preston’s essay included sections that closely resembled a review of the same book written by Christobel Kent and published in The Guardian last August. The issue was flagged by a reader who noticed the similarities between the two separate reviews of Watching Over Her by Jean-Baptiste Andrea.

Following an internal investigation, Preston admitted to using an AI tool to draft the review and failing to identify the plagiarized sections. Subsequently, the freelance writer expressed regret, stating he was “hugely embarrassed” and described his actions as a “serious mistake.”

A spokesman for the newspaper stated, “Editors have appended a note to a book review written earlier this year by a freelance critic, who told The Times after publication that he had used an AI tool to assist him in producing the piece. This tool produced similarities to a book review published in The Guardian, which our editors’ note makes clear. For staff journalists and freelance writers alike, reliance on AI and inclusion of unattributed work by another writer is a serious violation of The Times‘s integrity and fundamental journalistic standards.”

The National Pulse previously reported that Sports Illustrated nearly closed down after being rocked by a scandal the magazine initially tried to deny, involving the use of AI-generated content published under the bylines of fictitious journalists. Additionally, in 2023, Axel Springer SE laid off around one-fifth of the staff at Bild—Europe’s highest-circulation newspaper—with their workflow being handled by AI tools instead. Likewise, CNN has also engaged in layoffs, with staff being replaced by AI.

This past March, The National Pulse revealed that Google had begun testing a feature that rewrites article headlines without seeking publishers’ permission or even notifying them. The trial expands on earlier artificial intelligence (AI) tools, such as AI Overviews, which condense articles into short summaries.

According to data shared by ARK Invest, annual written output by AI exceeded that of humans in 2025. Projections suggest AI could surpass the entire written record of human civilization by the end of this decade.

Image by Adam Jones.

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.

5 hours ago
Immigration
Politics

Trump Demands Congress Deliver Major DHS Funding Bill by June Deadline.

PULSE POINTS

❓WHAT HAPPENED: President Donald J. Trump announced Wednesday afternoon that his administration is working with Republican leaders in the House and Senate to draft a second budget reconciliation bill aimed at funding the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) for the remainder of his second term.

👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: President Trump, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY), Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-SD), Senate Republicans, and Senate Democrats.

📍WHEN & WHERE: The funding lapse has lasted 47 days as of April 2026. Discussions are ongoing in Washington, D.C., with potential legislative action by June 1.

💬KEY QUOTE: “I am asking that the Bill be on my desk NO LATER than June 1st.” – Donald Trump

🎯IMPACT: The budget reconciliation process could bypass Democratic opposition, but it may extend the funding lapse and require significant spending cuts to succeed.

IN FULL

President Donald J. Trump announced Wednesday afternoon that his administration is working with Republican leaders in the House and Senate to draft a second budget reconciliation bill aimed at funding the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) for the remainder of his second term. The move, if successful, would bring to an end the Senate Democrat-led partial government shutdown that has withheld funding for DHS, including core subagencies like the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) and the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), for 47 days so far.

“[W]e are going forward to fund our incredible ICE Agents and Border Patrol through a process that doesn’t need Radical Left Democrat votes, and bypasses the Senate Filibuster (which should be repealed, IMMEDIATELY!), working in close conjunction with House Speaker Mike Johnson and Senate Leader John Thune,” President Trump wrote in a post on Truth Social. He continued, “I am asking that the Bill be on my desk NO LATER than June 1st.”

“In the meantime, we will continue to use funding from THE GREAT BIG BEAUTIFUL BILL, which is giving Record Tax Rebates to Citizens all over the Country, to ensure that ICE and Border Patrol Agents are paid ON TIME, and IN FULL, as we have been doing for them throughout the Democrat Shutdown,” the President added.

Since the partial government shutdown began in late February, multiple Republican attempts to pass DHS funding in the Senate have been defeated by Democrats. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) has leveraged the chamber’s 60-vote cloture rule to end debate and exert veto power over any DHS appropriations package unless Republicans agree to progressive-backed provisions that would effectively gut President Trump’s immigration enforcement actions.

By using the budget reconciliation process, Senate Republicans would be able to sidestep the Democrats’ use of the filibuster and adopt DHS funding by a simple majority vote. Notably, Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-SD) had previously floated using budget reconciliation to pass certain election integrity provisions in the SAVE America Act. However, the lack of revenue provisions in the election integrity bill would likely result in the Senate parliamentarian ruling them out under the Byrd Rule, which prohibits non-budgetary provisions in reconciliation bills.

Republican leaders quickly announced they will back President Trump’s plan, with Sen. Thune stating, “In the coming days, Republicans in the Senate and House will be following through on the President’s directive by fully funding the entire Department of Homeland Security on two parallel tracks: through the appropriations process and through the reconciliation process.”

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.

5 hours ago
Crime

Fundraiser for Ukraine and Immigration Services Indicted for Multi-Million Fraud Scheme.

PULSE POINTS

❓WHAT HAPPENED: A federal grand jury indicted a Buffalo Grove woman on fraud charges, alleging she swindled $3.5 million while falsely claiming to support immigration services and aid projects for Ukraine.

👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: Tatian Bazer, a 40-year-old resident of Buffalo Grove, Illinois, and at least six victims in the Chicago area.

📍WHEN & WHERE: The alleged fraud occurred from December 2021 through February 2026, primarily in the Chicago area. The grand jury indictment was handed down on Tuesday, March 31, 2026.

🎯IMPACT: Bazer faces seven counts of wire fraud and two counts of impersonating federal law enforcement, with potential sentences of up to 20 years per fraud count and three years per impersonation count.

IN FULL

A federal grand jury on Tuesday indicted Tatian Bazer, a 40-year-old woman from Buffalo Grove, Illinois, on fraud charges. Federal prosecutors allege she defrauded victims of $3.5 million by claiming the funds were for immigration services and aid projects for Ukraine, while instead using the money for personal expenses.

According to the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Northern District of Illinois, Bazer solicited six-figure contributions and loans from victims, providing them with falsified records like fake wire transfer receipts and fraudulent checks to conceal her actions. The fraud is believed to have spanned from December 2021 to February 2026.

The indictment also alleges that Bazer impersonated Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) agents, a prosecutor, and a criminal defense attorney after learning she was under investigation. These actions were allegedly intended to reassure victims that their money would be returned. Some victims even provided her with loans to help resolve a fabricated shoplifting arrest.

Prosecutors claim the funds Bazer obtained were used for personal purchases, including luxury watches. When victims sought repayment, she allegedly sent them altered images of bank records and wire transfers to give the impression that she had the means to repay them. However, investigators say she had no intention of doing so.

Bazer has been charged with seven counts of wire fraud and two counts of impersonating a federal law enforcement officer. Each wire fraud count carries a maximum sentence of 20 years in federal prison, while the impersonation charges could result in up to three years each. She has pleaded not guilty in federal court in Chicago.

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.

6 hours ago
UK
War

Iranian Drone Strike Destroys British Oil Facility.

PULSE POINTS

❓WHAT HAPPENED: Iranian drones struck a British-owned oil facility in Iraq, which was destroyed in the ensuing fire.

👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: The Islamic Republic of Iran, the United Kingdom, Iraqi authorities, oil facility workers, and American forces in the region.

📍WHEN & WHERE: Wednesday morning in Erbil, a province in northern Iraq.

💬KEY QUOTE: “The repeated bombardment and the scale of the fire have left nothing inside the depot untouched by flames.” – Omid Xoshnaw, Iraqi Governor of Erbil

🎯IMPACT: The attack destroyed significant quantities of motor oil, as the Iran war is already causing energy shortages.

IN FULL

A British-owned oil facility in Iraq was destroyed by an Iranian drone strike early Wednesday morning, just hours after Iran warned it might treat British sites as legitimate military targets. Omid Xoshnaw, Governor of Erbil, the province in northern Iraq where the British facility was based, said: “The repeated bombardment and the scale of the fire have left nothing inside the depot untouched by flames.”

Three Iranian Shahed drones struck the facility while a fourth drone was intercepted before it could cause any damage. No injuries were reported among the workers, but the facility, which stored automotive motor oil, was destroyed in the ensuing fire.

Firefighters attempted to contain the blaze but were forced to withdraw after further drone activity was reported at 8:40 AM and 10:20 AM, preventing them from safely continuing the operation. “We arrived on the scene, but we could not put out the fire because of imminent threats of more drones,” explained Jawhar Omar of the Erbil fire brigade.

At least 30 drone strikes have been reported across the region overnight. HKN, an American oil company operating near Duhok, a city in the Erbil province, suffered damage in its second attack since late February. In response, U.S. fighter jets patrolled the skies above northern Iraq.

Seyed Ali Mousavi, Iran’s ambassador to the United Kingdom, warned that Iran would strike its facilities if the British government allows the U.S. to use its bases to conduct strikes on Iran. “This is a very important matter we are considering. This is a very important matter for our self-defense,” said Mousavi.

Image by Tasnim News Agency.

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.

7 hours ago
Immigration

Trump Admin Closes U.S.-Canada Border Road.

PULSE POINTS

❓WHAT HAPPENED: The Trump administration announced the closure of a key road connecting the U.S. and Canada to enhance border security.

👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: The Trump administration, Alberta officials, and the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS).

📍WHEN & WHERE: The nine-mile Border Road, connecting Montana and Alberta, will close on July 1.

💬KEY QUOTE: “Regardless of the line on the map, you’ll have farmers on both sides of the border, you’ll have family friends on both sides of the border. I think obviously that will continue.” – Alberta Transportation Minister Devin Dreeshen

🎯IMPACT: The closure ends 80 years of free movement, impacting farming communities and prompting Alberta to plan a replacement road.

IN FULL

The Trump administration has announced the closure of the nine-mile Border Road, which connects Montana and Alberta, Canada, effective July 1. The move is part of broader efforts to tighten U.S. border security and address concerns about smuggling and unauthorized crossings.

Notably, the closure marks the end of over 80 years of free movement along this stretch of highway, which has been a vital link for farming communities on both sides of the border. While the Trump administration has not commented directly on the Border Road closure, the decision aligns with the President’s previous commitments to enhance border security. In 2025, Trump highlighted concerns over fentanyl trafficking, noting that seizures at the northern border had increased, though they remained lower than those at the southern border.

“Regardless of the line on the map, you’ll have farmers on both sides of the border, you’ll have family friends on both sides of the border. I think obviously that will continue,” Alberta, Canada’s Transportation Minister Devin Dreeshen stated regarding the closure. He added that the provincial government has been working with the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) regarding the closure, with Alberta allocating an estimated $8 million in Canadian dollars ($5.74 million U.S.) to alter area roadway infrastructure for continued use.

The National Pulse reported last April that President Trump’s imposition of stricter border security measures led to a 95 percent drop in illegal crossings along the U.S.-Canadian border. This reduction followed a series of tariff threats and negotiations between the two nations, which saw Canada eventually commit additional resources to help halt fentanyl trafficking and boost border security infrastructure.

Image by Wing-Chi Poon.

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.

7 hours ago
William Upton
Immigration
Lawfare

Trump Slams ‘Stupid’ U.S. Birthright Citizenship Law After Attending SCOTUS Arguments in Historic First.

PULSE POINTS

❓WHAT HAPPENED: President Donald J. Trump weighed in on the Supreme Court hearing regarding his Executive Order ending birthright citizenship after attending the oral arguments in a historic first for a sitting President.

👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: President Trump, Solicitor General D. John Sauer, American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) counsel Cecillia Wang, and Supreme Court Justices.

📍WHEN & WHERE: Wednesday, during oral arguments at the Supreme Court in Washington, D.C.

💬KEY QUOTE: “We are the only Country in the World STUPID enough to allow ‘Birthright’ Citizenship!” – Donald J. Trump

🎯IMPACT: During the course of the arguments, all nine justices expressed degrees of skepticism regarding the Trump administration’s position, namely that birthright citizenship is limited to those “domiciled” in the United States.

IN FULL

President Donald J. Trump weighed in on the Supreme Court hearing regarding his Executive Order ending birthright citizenship after attending the oral arguments in a historic first for a sitting President. “We are the only Country in the World STUPID enough to allow ‘Birthright’ Citizenship!” Trump wrote in a post on Truth Social after leaving the Supreme Court on Wednesday.

The case, one of the most complicated to be taken up by the high court in decades, stems from President Trump’s challenge to a lower court ruling that struck down his Executive Order. For just over two hours, the nine justices peppered the Trump administration’s Solicitor General D. John Sauer and the challengers’ attorney, American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) counsel Cecillia Wang, with questions regarding the scope of the order and the legal implications of domicile-based citizenship.

During the arguments, all nine justices expressed varying degrees of skepticism regarding the Trump administration’s position, namely that birthright citizenship is limited to those “domiciled” in the United States. In this legal context, only the children of individuals intending to maintain a permanent and legal presence in the United States could attain citizenship at birth. Notably, this would exclude almost all illegal immigrants.

George Washington University law professor and constitutional scholar Jonathan Turley, writing on X (formerly Twitter), remarked that the Supreme Court overall appears skeptical of the government’s arguments, but stopped short of suggesting the case will be a defeat for President Trump. “The ACLU clearly had a lock on the three liberals, but had more justices in play than the government would have hoped. We ended where we began: the odds do not favor the Administration, but there is no firm evidence of a majority,” Trurley wrote, adding, “Majorities can certainly shift in conference and in drafting. The devil is in the details and the details remain murky at best. Many justices correctly found the historical record, according to one, ‘a mess.’ Indeed, it is maddening to try to divine the intent of the drafters.”

For most of the arguments, the justices focused heavily on a series of past civil rights laws and court decisions that have formed the nebulous—and admittedly murky—legal justification for birthright citizenship as it stands today. Notably, the United States stands almost entirely alone among developed Western nations in its permissive approach to birthright citizenship.

Not a single European state allows unrestricted birthright citizenship, with most requiring either that one parent be a citizen or a legal permanent resident and, in some cases, mandating that at least one parent reside in the country for a set period. As of 2004—when Ireland abolished its expansive jus soli (“right of the soil”) laws—Europe ceased offering unrestricted birthright citizenship entirely. Canada is the only other Western nation with similar statutes granting unrestricted birthright citizenship. Meanwhile, Australia and New Zealand abolished their permissive birthright citizenship laws in 1986 and in 2006, respectively.

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.

8 hours ago
Bonkers Britain

Patriots Attacked by Far Left, Threatened With Legal Action by Local Officials for Flying National Flags.

PULSE POINTS

❓WHAT HAPPENED: Oxfordshire County Council in England threatened the Raise the Colours group, which has been raising English and British flags on lampposts and other public infrastructure across the country, with legal action.

👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: Oxfordshire County Council, Raise the Colours group, local residents, and law enforcement.

📍WHEN & WHERE: March 24, Oxfordshire, England.

💬KEY QUOTE: “The widespread installation of flags by Raise the Colours is not a sign of patriotism. It is an act of intimidation and division…” – Liz Leffman, Leader of Oxfordshire County Council.

🎯IMPACT: The council is considering further legal action, alleging community distress and safety concerns.

IN FULL

Oxfordshire County Council in England has issued a formal notice to Raise the Colours, which has been raising English and British flags on lampposts and other public infrastructure across the country, instructing the group to cease its campaign. Liz Leffman, Leader of Oxfordshire County Council, stated: “The widespread installation of flags by Raise the Colours is not a sign of patriotism. It is an act of intimidation and division that is having a real and damaging impact on our communities.”

The council has warned that failure to comply could lead to civil or criminal proceedings. However, Ryan Bridge, co-founder of Raise the Colours, said the group “just wanted to support Oxfordshire, as they had flags taken down by the council at a cost of £51 per lamppost, adding that, far from intimidating people, they had been attacked by far-left activists.

“We were attacked verbally and physically four times in Oxford by four members of the public, verbally attacked all night and called scumbags, racists, Nazis, and fascists,” he said, adding: “I was punched, kicked and hit by a bike—I’ve paid tax into the country for years, and I believe those who attacked us are traitors to their country.”

Image by Rodion Kutsaiev.

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.

9 hours ago
Lawfare

Foreign-Born Obama Judge Rules Trump Can Face Civil Claims Over Alleged Incitement on January 6.

PULSE POINTS

❓WHAT HAPPENED: A federal judge ruled that President Donald J. Trump is not immune from civil claims related to the January 6 Capitol riot, stating his remarks at the “Stop the Steal” rally plausibly incited violence.

👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: President Donald Trump, U.S. District Court Judge Amit Mehta, Democratic members of Congress, law enforcement officers, and plaintiffs, including Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-MS).

📍WHEN & WHERE: The ruling was issued on Tuesday in Washington, D.C., regarding events stemming from the January 6, 2021, Capitol riot.

💬KEY QUOTE: “The court rightly recognizes that President Trump’s actions leading to the January 6 insurrection fell outside the scope of presidential duties,” said Damon Hewitt, president of the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law.

🎯IMPACT: The decision paves the way for a potential civil trial and establishes a precedent that could influence future cases involving presidential immunity.

IN FULL

A federal judge ruled late Tuesday that President Donald J. Trump is not immune from civil claims alleging that he incited the U.S. Capitol riots on January 6, 2021. U.S. District Court Judge Amit Mehta—born in Patan, India, and appointed by former President Barack Obama—ruled that that President Trump’s remarks during the “Stop the Steal” rally on January 6 were not covered by First Amendment protections and were tantamount to incitement.

In his determination, Judge Mehta ruled that Trump cannot claim presidential immunity for much of his conduct on January 6, including his speech and social media activity. However, the judge noted that Trump’s official acts, such as his Rose Garden remarks during the riot, remain shielded. “President Trump has not shown that the Speech reasonably can be understood as falling within the outer perimeter of his Presidential duties,” Mehta wrote in the decision.

The ruling builds on a 2022 decision by Mehta, which also rejected Trump’s immunity claims. The case has returned to his courtroom after an appeals court upheld his earlier decision. Mehta clarified that his ruling does not represent a final determination on immunity for specific acts, leaving room for Trump to reassert such claims at trial.

The lawsuit was filed by Democratic members of Congress, including Representative Bennie Thompson (D-MS)—who oversaw Congressional Democrats’ January 6 Committee—and law enforcement officers injured during the Capitol riot. The plaintiffs argue that Trump’s actions on January 6 fell outside the scope of his official duties as President. The legal team representing the plaintiffs includes attorneys from the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law.

Damon Hewitt, the group’s president, called the ruling a “monumental victory for the rule of law.” He stated, “This ruling is an important step toward accountability for the violent attack on the Capitol and our democracy.” The ruling likely reopens avenues for Democrat-led lawfare campaigns against Trump, though the Supreme Court‘s immunity ruling likely closes off the potential for most future criminal charges.

Image by Tyler Merbler.

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