For years, Americans have treated the Supreme Court like the nation’s principal.

Every cultural dispute eventually finds its way to Washington, where nine unelected justices are expected to settle questions that neighbors, legislators, parents, and communities no longer seem willing — or able — to resolve themselves.

A free people cannot forever outsource self-government to nine justices in Washington. Sooner or later, our democracy requires citizens to do the hard work themselves.

The Supreme Court’s recent 6-3 decision upholding state laws protecting women’s sports changed more than athletic policy. It reminded America how the Constitution was designed to work.

Much of the public conversation has focused on biological sex and transgender participation in women’s athletics. Those are important questions. But beneath the headlines lies something more significant: The court exercised judicial restraint. Instead of imposing one national standard, it returned much of the debate to the states.

That may prove to be the ruling’s greatest contribution.

Federalism is one of the Constitution’s forgotten masterpieces. The founders never intended America to function as one enormous county governed from Washington. They understood that a nation as large and diverse as ours could remain united because many decisions would be made closer to the people.

California may choose one approach. Texas another. Massachusetts another still.

Citizens remain free to debate, persuade, vote, and, if they wish, relocate to states whose laws better reflect their convictions. That’s the wisdom of our federal constitutional system.

Uniformity has never been America’s highest political virtue. Liberty has.

Federalism has costs. Different states will establish different athletic policies. National competitions may become more complicated. Families moving across state lines may encounter different eligibility rules. Critics are right that legal diversity can create confusion.

But confusion is not democracy’s greatest threat. Centralized power is.

RELATED: Women’s sports finally got a reality check

Oliver Contreras/AFP/Getty Images

Freedom is rarely lost in one dramatic moment. It is surrendered gradually as authority migrates from local communities to distant institutions. The Constitution deliberately resists that impulse because power is safest when it remains close to the people who must live under it.

That principle deserves defending regardless of where one stands on this particular question.

The dissent by Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson rested on constitutional and statutory interpretation. Lawyers will debate those arguments for years.

Still, their votes raise an unavoidable question.

Three accomplished women reached a legal conclusion on an issue directly affecting women and girls that many female athletes believe weakens the very protections women’s sports were created to provide.

The issue carries added significance because Justice Jackson’s 2022 confirmation hearing became a defining cultural moment when she declined to define the word “woman,” explaining that she was “not a biologist.” Whether one agreed with her answer or not, the exchange symbolized a culture increasingly uncertain about concepts previous generations regarded as self-evident.

A civilization begins to lose confidence long before it loses arguments.

Women’s sports were never created to diminish men. They were created to protect women.

Biological differences in strength, speed, endurance, bone density, and muscle mass are measurable realities. Separate women’s competitions were established not because women are inferior but because fairness requires meaningful opportunities for women to compete, succeed, and excel.

That principle has served female athletes well for decades.

It also raises an obvious question: Must fairness for transgender athletes require sacrificing fairness for women?

Perhaps America has accepted a false choice.

Athletics already recognizes that fairness sometimes requires separate categories. We separate competitors by age because maturity matters. We separate them by weight because size matters. We celebrate the Paralympics because physical ability matters.

We separate men’s and women’s sports because biology matters.

RELATED: The Supreme Court finally confirmed what I knew all along

SAUL LOEB/AFP/Getty Images

None of those distinctions is considered discrimination. They are considered fairness.

Rather than forcing one protected group into another’s category, America should consider developing meaningful transgender athletic divisions: state championships, collegiate scholarships, national tournaments, and professional opportunities designed specifically for transgender competitors.

That would expand opportunity without diminishing opportunity.

Surely innovation is better than endless litigation.

The court’s decision did not end America’s debate. The conversation now belongs where representative government intended it to be: in state legislatures, school boards, athletic associations, coaches’ offices, and living rooms across America.

As a Christian, I believe Scripture teaches that humanity is created male and female. I also recognize that many Americans do not share that conviction.

That’s precisely why federalism is vital. It allows citizens with profoundly different worldviews to govern themselves through democratic institutions while remaining united under one Constitution.

That arrangement requires something increasingly rare.

Not outrage. Not hashtags. Not judicial shortcuts. Persuasion.

Justice Clarence Thomas, writing separately, argued that biological sex is binary and immutable and warned that denying this reality tells “a lie to the public.” I agree with him.

But whether one agrees with every word or not, his opinion reflects a broader concern: Law cannot remain untethered from objective reality forever. Reality has a stubborn habit of refusing to yield to ideology.

The Supreme Court did not solve America’s cultural divisions. It reminded us whose responsibility they are.

That is the forgotten genius of federalism.

A free people cannot forever outsource self-government to nine justices in Washington. Sooner or later, our democracy requires citizens to do the hard work themselves.

Perhaps the future of women’s sports — and constitutional government itself — depends on whether we still remember how.

​America, Christians, Clarence thomas, Female athletes, Scotus, Scripture, State laws, State legislatures, Supreme court, Trans athletes, Women’s sports, Opinion & analysis 

On Wednesday, July 8, President Donald Trump left Turkey, where he was attending a NATO summit in Ankara with other world leaders to discuss security issues, including the conflict involving Iran. Before the plane departed, reporters who attended the summit were told something odd: Lower your window shades.

When asked about the unusual request, President Trump nonchalantly explained that it was likely due to security reasons.

“You’re probably on a dangerous flight because of the sleazebags that we have to deal with. … I’m number one on [Iran’s] list,” he remarked casually.

Glenn Beck found this moment deeply significant.

As someone who’s received many credible threats over the years, Glenn believes that Trump’s detached comments indicate he’s “made peace” with the deadly implications of having a giant target on his back.

“He is finding a way that he can compartmentalize this and go on with his life and be out in public,” Glenn speculates.

He notes that Trump took his fancy Qatari-gifted Boeing 747-8 to Turkey but returned on the traditional Air Force One, likely because it’s far more heavily armored and equipped with full military-grade protections.

“Turkey shares a border with Iran. Iran has drones and ballistic missiles,” Glenn says, adding that the Qatari plane was sent ahead without Trump on it because “it wasn’t safe bringing [Trump] home past Iran’s front door.”

But Glenn sees this moment as far more than a security footnote. It also reveals how Trump is mentally preparing for the very real possibility that Iran will try to assassinate him and what the deadly difference is between open war and covert murder.

“Now, if Iran killed Trump, if they used a missile and it was executed by the army, it’s not an assassination. … If they bring a guy in out of a uniform and they just have a rocket … and they point it up at the sky and they take [Trump’s plane] out, then it’s murder, it’s terror, and it’s an assassination,” he explains, noting that either scenario would culminate in steep consequences for Iran.

“Four months ago at the beginning of this war, America and Israel killed the top guy, supreme leader, and we called that a strike, an operation, practically a Tuesday,” Glenn continues. “And the president said it out loud that he got Khamenei before Khamenei could get him — same verb pointed both directions.”

“Whose hand is on the trigger” is of paramount importance, he argues, because it determines the difference between “war and murder,” “the soldier and the assassin.”

“[The killing of Khamenei] was done by the uniformed forces of nations in daylight in a war. What Iran has tried to do to Trump was hire a man, cash for killing, arranged in the dark to be carried out by a hired hand who would slip out of the country before the deed was done,” Glenn contrasts. “Not a soldier — an assassin; not a war — murder.”

“The entire point of the laws of war, the thing that separates us from the pit, is that even killing has limits,” he explains. “Who? How? When? In the open or in the dark?”

How we answer these questions determines whether we remain a civilized nation that still believes in rules — even in war — or whether we descend into the kind of lawless chaos our enemies thrive on.

To hear more, watch the video above.

Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn’s masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis, and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

​The glenn beck program, Glenn beck, Donald trump, Air force one, Iran 

The sitting government in the United Kingdom is looking to implement more control over the internet before it leaves office.

The next general election in the United Kingdom is set for 2029, which leaves Prime Minister Keir Starmer and his Labour Party plenty of time to continue down the road of online dominance.

‘This is the opposite of “British freedoms.”‘

Last year, the U.K. decided it was time to roll out mandatory digital ID, saying it would protect against illegal employment and stop the infiltration of its borders.

This June, a social media ban on children under 16 years old was announced, backed by that implementation of online ID, which would then force users to prove their age or face an invasion of their camera rolls.

As Blaze Media reported, the idea was to “prevent predators” from exploiting victims, with anyone refusing to submit their ID unable to “take, share, or view nude content.”

Now, the push for further government control of the online world seems to be coming out in full force, especially considering culture secretary Lisa Nandy’s green paper on misinformation, reminiscent of 2019.

Nearly seven years ago, YouTube began its open-air boosting and deboosting of content based on “authoritative” sources. This meant that select news companies would have their content always listed at the top of searches, while independent creators would be pushed down or shadow banned entirely.

Instead of using the term “authoritative,” Nandy’s paper cites “trustworthy” news sources nearly 30 times, which would be placed in “prominence” — mentioned almost 60 times — over other sources online, by decree of government.

RELATED: At America 250, Democrats unveil new surveillance state blueprint

Matthew Chattle/Future Publishing/Getty Images

That brings beleaguered subjects to virtual private networks, thought to be the next target for the U.K. government. VPNs allow users to fake their locations, avoiding data detection and restrictions while making their browsing more private.

This may seem like a small issue, but VPNs are integral to online privacy in the U.K., according to many dissidents.

“VPNs are one of the few remaining tools ordinary British citizens have to protect their online privacy from both the state and big tech,” said Lewis Brackpool, director of investigations for right-wing party Restore Britain.

“Banning them would effectively hand the government near-total visibility into what people read, watch, and say online. This is the opposite of ‘British freedoms,'” Brackpool added.

Brackpool is not the only person who shares this view; in a scathing review of the Labour Party’s handling of online content, outlet Spiked reported that 30 people are arrested every day in England and Wales over social media posts deemed to be “grossly offensive.”

That totals more than 10,000 arrests per year.

RELATED: NANNY STATE: UK’s pointless teen social media ban a fitting legacy for hapless, hated Keir Starmer

Dan Kitwood/Getty Images

Some in the Labour Party have denied that a VPN ban is coming, including Baroness Liz Lloyd, who holds the title parliamentary under-secretary of state for the digital economy.

There is “limited evidence on children’s use of VPNs,” Lloyd said this week, per Birmingham Live. She added that the government has no plan to ban them.

However, the Labour Party still launched a consultation to “confront the full range of risks children face online,” which included the options to limit VPN use if it “undermines safety protections and changing the age of digital consent.”

A VPN ban is not about stopping serious criminals; they will still use encrypted apps and offshore services, Brackpool says.

“It’s more about making it harder for normal people to bypass censorship, access unfiltered news, or organize against government policy.”

Brackpool, who has arguably set the tone in the U.K. in keeping the government accountable for its alleged media propaganda push, said that banning VPNs is another way for the state to say, “We don’t trust you with your own internet. We’ll decide what you can access.”

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

​News, United kingdom, Censorship, Vpn, Digital id, Tech 

Christopher Nolan’s upcoming adaptation of “The Odyssey” is already generating plenty of controversy, as conservatives are pointing out that the casting of the film is “woke.”

“Christopher Nolan went from making a more realistic “Batman,” which is something that I really enjoyed, especially the first “Batman,” “Batman Begins,” to now making a movie about Greece starring black people,” Dave Landau tells co-host Stu Burguiere on “Stu and Dave Do America.”

The film stars Lupita Nyong’o as Helen of Troy, which both Stu and Dave point out is historically inaccurate for ancient Greece.

“There’s a huge African-American population in ancient Greece,” Stu jokes. “People don’t realize that.”

“I will say, like, historical accuracy is sort of a weird thing. … You go back in the day, maybe some of these people didn’t exist in these civilizations, but this is a fictional story,” he continues. “I mean, you know it’s a myth, right?”

“It is Greek mythology, I understand that, and you want a lot of the people to be Greek, but at the same time, I don’t really care,” Dave says, though he points out there are some choices he doesn’t quite agree with.

“For example, he put in rapper Travis Scott,” he explains.

Nolan also cast “Elliot” Page as Greek soldier Sinon.

“This is part of a long-term process where, you know, Ellen Page is trying to convince us that she’s a he. And, you know, unlike a lot of the people I see walking around that are trans, she’s putting the work in, right?”

In one photo of the cast, Page, who is 5’1″, stood in front of her other cast members in a suit.

“It looks like a suit you would get for a ring bearer,” Dave comments.

“And you’d be like, ‘It’s fine. It’s for one day, and if we keep it, you can grow into it,’” he jokes.

“That’s exactly what it looks like,” Stu laughs. “You know, a couple things I noticed … she looks like a kid that is, you know, trying to wear a suit for the first time around all these adults. And also it’s, like, a huge suit on her.”

Want more from Stu and Dave?

To enjoy more of Stu and Dave’s lethal blend of wit, humor, and insightful commentary subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

​Batman, Christopher nolan, Dave landau, Ellen page, Elliot page, Greece, Lupita nyongo, Stu burguiere, The odyssey, Trans, Travis scott, Stu and dave do america 

The United States has a new senator after the sudden and unexpected death of Lindsey Graham, a Republican senator for South Carolina.

Graham’s term will be finished out by his sister, Darline Graham Nordone, who was appointed by Republican South Carolina Gov. Henry McMaster.

‘To Lindsey, I miss you more than I can even put into words. But I’m going to do this. I got it.’

Nordone accepted the appointment in a news conference Monday with McMaster in Columbia, South Carolina.

“I want to thank the governor for selecting me to serve the remainder of Lindsey’s term,” she said. “It is such an honor. Lindsey has always been there for me, and now I will be there for him.”

Graham’s death was announced early Sunday morning.

“It is such a privilege to get to finish some of his important work, and I promise to work hard over the next several months to support the president and carry forward the efforts of my brother on behalf of the citizens of South Carolina and the United States,” Nordone continued.

“I know Lindsey thought the world of his staff and colleagues, and with their support, I feel confident. I think this is what Lindsey would have wanted, and I plan to honor him in this way,” she said.

“Now, to Lindsey, I miss you more than I can even put into words. But I’m going to do this. I got it. Thank you.”

Long before his decades-long career in the Senate, Graham lost his mother and father within 15 months in his early 20s. He took on the role of raising and caring for his sister, who was 13 years old at the time. He later became her legal guardian.

“Lindsey assured me that he was going to take care of me, he was going to be there for me,” she said about her brother in 2014. “He never let me down. Never. I don’t see how he did it, to take on the responsibility of raising a little sister.”

A preliminary medical report found that Graham died of an aortic dissection caused by arteriosclerotic cardiovascular disease.

RELATED: Lindsey Graham and Elon Musk feuded over Ukraine and electric car subsidies

Graham had been a vocal opponent of President Donald Trump but became an ally of his after he won the presidency.

“Senator Lindsey Graham, one of the greatest people and Senators I have ever known, is dead!” Trump wrote in a post on social media. “He was always working, and was a true American Patriot. Lindsey will be greatly missed!!!”

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

​Lindsey graham, South carolina, Darline graham nordone, Us senate, Politics 

Longtime GOP Sen. Mitch McConnell (Ky.) broke nearly a month of silence on Sunday, releasing a statement to update the public on his health after spending weeks in the hospital.

McConnell, 84, said he was hospitalized after suffering “a fall” that left him “briefly unconscious.” He dismissed speculation that the incident was caused by a more serious condition, saying, “I didn’t have a heart attack or a stroke. I don’t have any tumors or hemorrhages.”

‘A short, unedited video of Senator McConnell speaking directly to the people he represents would answer far more questions than another written statement and a single still photograph.’

“I’ve also had to deal with a mild case of pneumonia,” McConnell added.

The press release originally included a photo of the senator in a hospital bed alongside his wife, Elaine Chao. The image was later removed from the statement before being re-uploaded separately to McConnell’s website.

Yet, rather than easing speculation surrounding McConnell’s health, this recent development has only seemed to fuel further uncertainty.

Former Republican Utah Rep. Jason Chaffetz shared his own skepticism, writing, “Let’s see you say it. A written statement is far different than saying it on camera.”

In a lengthy X post, Kylie Jane Kremer, former producer for Fox’s Sean Hannity, expressed her frustration with the press release she claims ”still doesn’t answer the fundamental questions about Mitch McConnell’s health.”

“Tax payers have paid McConnell’s salary and healthcare costs for over 49 years! A short, unedited video of Senator McConnell speaking directly to the people he represents would answer far more questions than another written statement and a single still photograph.”

Kremer also addressed Scott Jennings’ unverified claim that he and McConnell “talked for just shy of 20 minutes … about IRAN, UKRAINE, the unfolding situation in MAINE, my visit to the TR Presidential Library, and even a little bit of Senate history.”

“Yet when those claims have been questioned, no independent evidence of those conversations has been made public,” Kremer said.

RELATED: Mitch McConnell’s replacement might be chosen in court first

Sen. Mitch McConnell’s office

On June 14 — the day McConnell was hospitalized — EMS dispatch audio published by an independent journalist suggests medics performed CPR on an “unconscious” individual in “cardiac arrest” at McConnell’s home address. The senator, however, is not mentioned by name in any recordings.

The press release comes just one day after the unexpected passing of Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.). The cause of death has been attributed to an aortic dissection. Graham was 71 years old.

McConnell’s office did not respond to Blaze News’ request for comment regarding the removal and subsequent reposting of the photograph.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

​Politics, Mitch mcconnell 

A federal judge issued a sharp rebuke against the Trump administration over the settlement that was intended to establish the anti-weaponization fund.

U.S. District Judge Kathleen Williams said Monday that President Donald Trump had committed self-dealing when he sued the Internal Revenue Service for leaking his tax files and reached a settlement with the agency.

‘The facts before this Court demonstrate there was never adverseness between the Parties; there was never a case or controversy.’

Williams said the case “was brought for an improper purpose — to gain the imprimatur of judicial legitimacy for a ‘settlement’ that had no viable basis in law or fact” in her 56-page ruling.

That settlement was reached in May 2026 after the president agreed to drop his $10 billion lawsuit against the IRS. It set up a $1.776 billion fund that critics said the president would use to benefit and enrich his supporters and political allies.

“In sum, the facts before this Court demonstrate there was never adverseness between the Parties; there was never a case or controversy; and there was never a question as to who would prevail,” Williams continued.

She accused Trump of “improperly” employing the lawsuit “to justify a particular award in this matter — access to taxpayer funds and exemption from audits and other investigations — which was accomplished by leveraging control over Defendants.”

Williams similarly excoriated the Department of Justice for “abdicating its responsibility to zealously defend the interests of the United States” by agreeing to the settlement.

She also pointed to the $1.776 billion figure as evidence that the settlement amount had more to do with branding than it did a “deliberate and thoughtful” account of damages.

A spokesperson for the president’s legal team released a statement about the ruling.

“The IRS wrongly allowed a rogue, politically motivated employee to leak private and confidential information about President Trump, his family, and the Trump Organization to the New York Times, ProPublica, and other left-wing news outlets, which was then illegally released to millions of people,” the statement reads. “President Trump continues to hold those who wrong America and Americans accountable.”

RELATED: Clinton judge brazenly gives White House ultimatum over Trump’s anti-weaponization fund

The ruling is likely to worsen the chances of Attorney General Todd Blanche being approved by the U.S. Senate. He is scheduled to appear at the congressional hearing Thursday.

Williams was appointed by former President Barack Obama.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

​Antiweaponization fund, Federal judge, Internal revenue service, Lawsuit, Settlement, Trump administration, Politics