As the Iran strikes stretch into a third week, the Trump administration has threatened legacy media outlets over their coverage of the conflict.

On Sunday, President Trump took to Truth Social to blast the legacy media for their “FAKE NEWS” coverage of the last two weeks, suggesting a degree of cooperation between some American media outlets and the Iranian propaganda machine.

‘The Radical Leftwing Press knows this full well, but continues to go forward with false stories and LIES.’

“Iran has long been known as a Master of Media Manipulation and Public Relations. They are Militarily ineffective and weak, but are really good at ‘feeding’ the very appreciative Fake News Media false information. Now, A.I. has become another Disinformation weapon that Iran uses, quite well, considering they are being annihilated by the day,” Trump wrote.

Trump gave several examples of the types of imagery and videos he claims are generated by artificial intelligence, including Iranian “Kamikaze Boats shooting at various Ships at Sea,” several U.S. refueling planes having been “struck down and badly damaged,” and the “USS Abraham Lincoln Aircraft Carrier, one of the largest and most prestigious Ships in the World, burning uncontrollably in the Ocean.”

Trump called these stories “FAKE NEWS, generated by A.I.” He further explained of the USS Abraham Lincoln: “Not only was it not burning, it was not even shot at — Iran knows better than to do that!”

RELATED: Trump demands other nations clear Strait of Hormuz, claims NATO’s future at stake

Photo by Kyle Mazza/Anadolu via Getty Images

Citing two U.S. officials, the Wall Street Journal reported Friday that “five U.S. Air Force refueling planes were struck and damaged on the ground at Prince Sultan air base in Saudi Arabia.” The article, which appears to have been updated on Saturday at 12:18 p.m. ET, went on to say that the tankers were “damaged but not fully destroyed.”

Trump went on to suggest the severity of punishment that he believes is warranted for the “dissemination of false information”: “In a certain way, you can say that those Media Outlets that generated it should be brought up on Charges for TREASON for the dissemination of false information! The fact is, Iran is being decimated, and the only battles they ‘win’ are those that they create through AI, and are distributed by Corrupt Media Outlets. The Radical Leftwing Press knows this full well, but continues to go forward with false stories and LIES.”

Federal Communications Commission Chairman Brendan Carr made similar statements Saturday, stressing that it was time for the media to “correct course.” He also reposted a previous Truth Social post from Trump insisting that “the New York Times and The Wall Street Journal (In particular), and other Lowlife ‘Papers’ and Media actually want us to lose the War. Their terrible reporting is the exact opposite of the actual facts!”

Carr wrote: “Broadcasters that are running hoaxes and news distortions — also known as the fake news — have a chance now to correct course before their license renewals come up. The law is clear. Broadcasters must operate in the public interest, and they will lose their licenses if they do not.”

“Time for change!” he added.

Many of Trump’s Democrat opponents and members of the media have since spoken out against his calls for punishing the “fake news” media.

On Friday, CNN chairman and CEO Mark Thompson issued a statement about the outlet’s reporting:

We stand by our journalism. Politicians have an obvious motive for claiming that journalism which raises questions about their decisions is false. At CNN our only interest is in telling the truth to our audiences in the U.S. and around the world and no amount of political threats or insults is going to change that.

California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) weighed in on Carr’s post on Saturday: “If Trump doesn’t like your coverage of the war, his FCC will pull your broadcast license. That is flagrantly unconstitutional.”

Sen. Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.), who has been under fire for months over his involvement in a video encouraging military service members and intelligence personnel to “refuse illegal orders,” likewise criticized the threats from the Trump administration: “When our nation is at war it is critical that the press is free to report without government interference. It is literally in the Constitution. This is overreach by the FCC because this Administration doesn’t like the microscope and doesn’t want to be held accountable.”

Rep. Ted Lieu (D-Calif.) told Carr: “Take your fascist s**t and shove it.”

The Wall Street Journal and the New York Times did not respond to a request for comment from Blaze News.

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

​Politics, Trump, Donald trump, Iran war, Fcc, Brendan carr, Federal communications commission, Media, Legacy media, Uss abraham lincoln, Trump administration, Fake news media, Gavin newsom, Mark thompson, Mark kelly, Ted lieu 

The White House has reportedly obtained intelligence that Iran’s new supreme leader could be gay, sparking a hilarious response from President Donald Trump.

Trump reportedly burst into laughter after being briefed that Iran’s Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei may be gay, according to the New York Post.

Notably, homosexual conduct is a capital offense in Iran.

Others found it amusing as well, including a senior intelligence official who “has not stopped laughing about it for days,” the Post reported.

Mojtaba’s late father, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who was killed in a targeted airstrike conducted by the United States and Israel, reportedly had reservations about his son’s suitability to lead Iran due to his potential homosexuality.

RELATED: ‘Couldn’t find her reservation’: Trump hilariously roasts Elizabeth ‘Pocahontas’ Warren in private dinner

Photo by Joe Raedle/Getty Images

Two intelligence sources told the Post that Mojtaba had a “long-term sexual relationship” with his childhood tutor, while another intelligence source said he had an affair “with a person who formerly worked for the Khamenei family.”

Education in Iran is almost always strictly segregated by gender with very limited exceptions.

Although American intelligence agencies don’t have photographic evidence to confirm Mojtaba’s alleged homosexuality, one source said the intel was “derived from one of the most protected sources the government has.”

“The fact that this was elevated to the highest of high levels shows you there’s some confidence in this,” another source told the Post.

The White House did not provide comment to Blaze News.

RELATED: Trump offers hilarious rebuttal to Tim Walz’s absurd Civil War analogy

Photo by Hamed JAFARNEJAD / ISNA / AFP via Getty Images

Notably, homosexual conduct is a capital offense in Iran, with some gay Iranians having been publicly executed.

“If there was ever a time where it was OK to out somebody, it would be when it’s a leader of a repressive Islamic theocracy that hangs gay people by cranes,” one source told the Post.

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

​Donald trump, White house, Gay, New york post, Ayatollah ali khamenei, Mojtaba khamenei, Iran, Iran war, Politics 

President Donald Trump announced that White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles has been diagnosed with early-stage cancer.

Trump shared the news in a Truth Social post Monday, praising Wiles for her leadership in the administration and her commitment to the American people. Trump also said that her prognosis is “excellent” and that she will continue to serve in the White House during her treatment.

‘She will win this battle with grace.’

“Susie Wiles is an incredible Chief of Staff, a great person, and one of the strongest people I know but, unfortunately, she has been diagnosed with early stage breast cancer, and has decided to take on this challenge, IMMEDIATELY, as opposed to waiting,” Trump said.

“She has a fantastic medical team, and her prognosis is excellent! During the treatment period, she will be spending virtually full time at the White House, which makes me, as President, very happy!”

RELATED: Trump’s hilarious response after intel reportedly tells him Iran’s new supreme leader might be gay

Eva Marie Uzcategui/Bloomberg via Getty Images

Trump went on to call Wiles one of his “closest and most important advisors,” saying he and first lady Melania Trump will be “with her in every way.”

“Her Strength and her Commitment to continue doing the job she loves, and does so well, while undergoing treatment, tells you everything you need to know about her,” Trump said.

“We look forward to working with Susie on the many big and wonderful things that are happening for the benefit of our Country!”

RELATED: Karoline Leavitt announces pregnancy news: ‘My heart is overflowing with gratitude to God’

Yuri Gripas/Abaca/Bloomberg via Getty Images

White House Deputy Chief of Staff James Blair also praised Wiles for her dedication to Trump and the administration, particularly through the most challenging moments.

“Susie led President Trump’s team through illegitimate indictments, domestic spying by the former administration, rigged federal prosecutions, illegal law enforcement raids, general lawfare, assassination attempts, & more,” Blair said in a post on X. “As with the rest, she will win this battle with grace.”

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

​Donald trump, Susie wiles, Breast cancer, White house, Trump administration, James blair, Politics 

It’s not just James Talarico’s recent win against Rep. Jasmine Crockett (Texas) in the Democrat primary for Senate that has turned Talarico into one of the most talked-about politicians in the state.

After first being elected to the Texas House in 2018, he gained national attention when clips of his speeches went viral online — especially his opposition to legislation involving the Ten Commandments in public school classrooms.

“How did this person with all of these kooky beliefs rise to such prominence?” BlazeTV host Allie Beth Stuckey asks on “Relatable.”

“He was first elected as a Texas House representative in 2018 after he defeated Republican Cynthia Flores. And he rose to prominence a couple of years ago, when he went viral for his videos of speeches on the Texas House floor opposing the legislation to display the Ten Commandments in Texas classrooms,” she explains, before playing a clip of Talarico explaining why he is against the Ten Commandments in classrooms.

“Forcing our religion onto Hindu, Buddhist, Sikh, and atheist students is not love. Forcing teachers to put up a poster in their classrooms against their wills is not love. Love does no harm to a neighbor,” Talarico said.

“I bet he would argue, though, that Christian teachers could be forced to call a child by the wrong preferred pronouns or could be forced to teach things about the acceptance of LGBTQ ideology even though it opposes their worldview,” Stuckey comments.

Stuckey also points out that in order to understand Western civilization or American history, children should be taught about Christianity.

“You can’t understand America without understanding Christianity, without knowing the Bible, without understanding the Ten Commandments,” she says. “So even just from a literary or historical educational perspective, displaying the Ten Commandments, I think, is really foundational in understanding the country that we live in.”

Want more from Allie Beth Stuckey?

To enjoy more of Allie’s upbeat and in-depth coverage of culture, news, and theology from a Christian, conservative perspective, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

​Relatable with allie beth stuckey, Relatable, Allie beth stuckey, The blaze, Blazetv, Blaze news, Blaze podcasts, Blaze podcast network, Blaze media, Blaze online, Blaze originals, James talarico, Ten commandments, Jasmine crockett, Texas senate, Christianity 

The New York Times has sounded the alarm over Republican officials partnering with Turning Point USA to expand the group’s presence in schools — and BlazeTV host Sara Gonzales isn’t letting the “Karen” behind it get away with it.

“Every once in a while, I like to check in on the enemy, the enemy of the people. Yes, I do mean the New York Times,” Gonzales says, before playing an audio clip of one of the New York Times’ podcasts, “The Headlines.”

In the episode, the host explains that a “growing coalition of Republican officials” are “pushing to expand the influence of Turning Point USA in schools.”

“The partnerships do not appear to involve taxpayer money, and they’re not mandates. But critics have raised concerns about the state’s embrace of them, considering Kirk’s hard-right views, his dissemination of conspiracy theories, and his criticism of gay and transgender rights. They say the state partnerships could be seen as a kind of government seal of approval,” the host explained.

“I regret to inform you it gets worse,” Gonzales comments.

“They did a write-up on this.”

In the article, she notes that Charlie Kirk is portrayed as the villain “even in death.”

“You have Karen, the appropriately named Karen Svoboda,” Gonzales says, reading from the article, “executive director of Defense of Democracy, a liberal group that opposes conservative influence in public schools, argued that the partnerships amounted to a sort of state-sponsored imprimatur promoting one political viewpoint.”

“Ms. Svoboda also accused Turning Point of being a divisive force in schools, noting that Mr. Kirk was critical of gay and transgender rights. A Turning Point club at a high school, she said, ‘would be offensive and probably even a little scary for kids who were members of the queer community at school, and families that are dealing with that,’” the article continued.

“Now, as you know … I like to give everyone a chance … to come on and try to defend these bats**t-crazy viewpoints. So we reached out to Karen, who initially agreed to come on the show today, until she realized who she was agreeing to do it with,” Gonzales comments.

“If you’re not willing to defend your bats**t-crazy views, I guess you don’t care about democracy at all. Now, I would remind you that we do not have a democracy,” Gonzales says, adding, “but this is your buzzword. You own the buzzword, and you can’t defend it at all.”

Want more from Sara Gonzales?

To enjoy more of Sara’s no-holds-barred takes on news and culture, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

​Sara gonzales unfiltered, Sara gonzales, The blaze, Blazetv, Blaze news, Blaze podcasts, Blaze podcast network, Blaze media, Blaze online, Blaze originals, New york times, Charlie kirk, Charlie kirk assassination, Turning point usa, Defense of democracy, Republicans, Democrats, Trans rights, Lgbtqia agenda 

These days, it feels like war is everywhere I turn. Culture wars on social media. Actual war on the news. Spiritual war invisibly raging all around. War inside me. Even the piling dishes and the toys that never stay tidy can feel like a kind of war.

But every now and then, a sunbeam pierces the thundercloud and silences the cacophony for a brief moment, allowing me to breathe and recenter. Sometimes it’s a timely sermon, other times a gentle breeze and birdsong. Coffee with a dear friend can do the trick.

‘String Cheese’ ministers to my weary soul by reminding me that what I call trials are actually gifts.

But this week, it was “American Idol” contestant Hannah Harper’s song “String Cheese.”

The name is silly; the lyrics are anything but. Right from the start — “I warm my morning coffee up for the third time” — I was smiling, nodding along in quiet recognition. Then the line, “Babies crying, it’s pure chaos, but I don’t miss a beat,” hit, and my eyes filled. Tears streamed until the final note.

And I’m certainly not the only one reaching for the tissue box. Harper’s anthem about the realities of motherhood has touched the hearts of millions in the six weeks since it went viral.

On February 2, the 25-year-old Missouri mother of three — dressed in a homemade patchwork mid-length dress, her strawberry curls pinned atop her head — proved her talent for both singing and song-writing when she auditioned for the 24th “American Idol” contest by performing her original song.

It was an unsurprising unanimous yes from judges Carrie Underwood, Luke Bryan, and Lionel Richie — and seemingly from America herself. “String Cheese” has racked up millions of views (and tears), peaked at No. 14 on Billboard’s Country Digital Song Sales chart, and has already become one of the most viewed Idol audition moments in the show’s history.

Suffering through the storm

It’s not like there’s a shortage of music that tugs on our heartstrings, so what about Harper’s country-style ballad is resonating with so many Americans?

I think there are two main reasons.

The first is that there’s something for nearly every woman in this song.

For the new mom under the black cloud of postpartum depression, whose motherhood feels more like a curse than a blessing, “String Cheese” offers the kind of encouragement only empathy can provide. Harper vulnerably confessed in her audition that the song was inspired by her struggles with postpartum depression.

“My youngest is 1, and shortly after he was born, I had postpartum depression, and so I was sitting on my couch … I was just having a pity party, praying that the Lord would calm my spirit. … I got up off the couch, and I quit throwing a pity party … so I wrote this song,” she told the judges.

“Some days I wanna cry, run away and hide / But I worry about their every need,” goes one verse.

Any mother who’s been in the throes of PPD knows this feeling in her bones. The sleep deprivation, the hormonal landslide that occurs after birth, the endless needs, ceaseless crying, and lack of time to meet your own basic needs start to amount to something truly terrifying.

Suddenly, the walls begin to close in, and your biological self-defense mechanisms start screaming at you to flee. But something even stronger — a deep, primitive force that almost scares you — compels you to stay even as you wither. The mere thought of your child’s needs being met by anyone other than you is enough to keep you rooted to his or her side.

So you stay, and you suffer until the storm eventually passes.

RELATED: The viral country anthem that has girlboss Twitter melting down and trad women cheering

Astrida Valigorsky/WireImage | Getty Images

When ‘touched out’ turns existential

The song also offers a beautiful perspective to the overwhelmed mother, just trying to make it through another day of nonstop demands, tantrums, obligations, and messes.

“When I’m overwhelmed and touched out

They come climbin’ up on the couch

Sayin’, ‘Mama, can you open my string cheese?'”

Sometimes a simple snack request when you’re just trying to catch your breath is the drop in the bucket that tips the scale. For me, it’s seeing tiny, sticky fingerprints on a surface I just cleaned. Every mom has that thing that takes her from typical stress levels to existential crisis.

It’s tempting sometimes to fantasize about the days when life will be easier, quieter, and cleaner, but Harper sends mothers to their knees with this reminder:

“One day I’ll be alone with a hot fresh cup of joe,

Wishing that someone would just drop by.

And I’ll sit and reminisce on times that I sure miss

Scattered toys and a baby on my hip.

I thought finding peace in the quiet’s what I wanted,

But I’d do anything to go back to being needed.”

For the mom struggling to keep her head above the rising tide, “String Cheese” is not only the promise that she won’t drown but that the water isn’t as deep as she thinks. In fact, there will come a day, and soon, when she will long for the feeling of waves lapping at her chin.

Saved from waste

And finally, this tearful anthem is for the woman who is afraid of motherhood. Maybe she feels she doesn’t have the resources — financial, time, emotional, or otherwise — to be a good mom. Maybe she’s bought the feminist lie that motherhood is an unwelcome burden, a barrier to her personal ambitions and dreams, or simply more effort than it’s worth.

Two short lines are the timely message this startlingly large population of women need to hear:

“I never knew this is what my 20s would look like,

But they saved me before I had the chance to waste my life.”

The moment when a mother first looks in her baby’s face, something remarkable happens: All the things she once fretted over — time, money, preparedness, even happiness — lose their power, and a life without that child becomes unthinkable. The career, the travel bucket list, the free time, the clean house, the bank account, the mental stability all take their rightful place behind the tiny, wriggling creature in her arms. She knows that to have everything she ever dreamed of — but not the child — would be exactly as Harper says: a waste of life.

With the exception of the gospel, this is the most important message young women in America need to hear today.

Three women

I think “String Cheese” hits me so deeply because I am all three of these women. I’ve been the new adult in my early 20s, terrified of motherhood, barely capable of caring for myself, unsure that a swanky downtown loft and a cool-girl job that allowed me to travel wasn’t the better path. I’ve been the newly married woman in my mid-20s, wondering how on earth we’d afford a baby.

I’ve been the new mom, crushed by the reality of caring for a newborn who didn’t sleep, nurse, or stop crying for months and months and months (and then some more months).

Today, I am the mom who is just trying to make it through another day of work, meeting the emotional and physical needs of an almost 2-year-old who never stops moving (and still doesn’t sleep that great), housekeeping, and the ceaseless task of keeping tummies full.

“String Cheese” ministers to my weary soul by reminding me that what I call trials are actually gifts.

But it does something else for me too. It pulls my gaze in the right direction: down. Down to the blue eyes and the chocolate-smudged mouth that says “mama” 800 times a day.

And that’s the second reason this song is striking such a chord with so many Americans right now — women and men alike. Every day we watch the world grow more dystopian, as wars rage overseas, political divides deepen at home, and AI swallows entire industries whole. We fret over our children’s futures, yet in that very worry, we often overlook one of their most basic needs: our full attunement. This song adjusts our posture in the most simple but profound of ways.

Win or lose, Hannah Harper is already an American idol. In one simple song, she has reminded us that the most profound victories aren’t won on distant battlefields or in viral debates. They’re won right here in the ordinary, messy, sacred trenches of the home, where a child’s small request for string cheese is really a divine invitation to love fiercely, stay present, and choose joy amid the storms.

​Motherhood, Faith, String cheese, American idol, Hannah harper, Christianity, Lifestyle, Culture, Entertainment, Children, Down here 

President Donald Trump seeks to enlist the international community in helping the United States clear the Strait of Hormuz and suggested that a lackluster showing by NATO members may place the alliance’s future in doubt.

Trump said in a Truth Social post on Saturday, “The United States of America has beaten and completely decimated Iran, both Militarily, Economically, and in every other way, but the Countries of the World that receive Oil through the Hormuz Strait must take care of that passage, and we will help — A LOT!”

‘Whatever it takes.’

“The U.S. will also coordinate with those Countries so that everything goes quickly, smoothly, and well,” continued Trump. “This should have always been a team effort, and now it will be — It will bring the World together toward Harmony, Security, and Everlasting Peace!”

After the U.S. and Israel again bombed Iran last month, Tehran effectively closed the Strait of Hormuz in what War Secretary Pete Hegseth said on Friday was an act of “sheer desperation” that people “don’t need to worry about.”

According to Lloyd’s List Intelligence, 16 commercial vessels have been attacked in and around the Strait of Hormuz since the outset of the conflict. The attacks, effected largely with surface-to-surface missiles but also with the use of drones and mines, have killed numerous crew members and forced others — at least in the case of the Safeen Prestige, a container ship flying under the flag of Malta — to abandon ship.

The strait’s corresponding closure has proven globally consequential, as roughly one-fifth of the world’s oil normally transits the strait, which lies between Iran and Oman and links the Persian Gulf with the Gulf of Oman.

RELATED: The most honest phrase you’ll hear all week

Photo by Nikolas Kokovlis/NurPhoto via Getty Images

Energy prices have skyrocketed in recent weeks. The price of Brent crude, for example, was over $100 per barrel ahead of market opening on Monday. U.S. gas prices are reportedly at their highest level since Oct. 7, 2023.

Patrick De Haan, head of petroleum analysis at GasBuddy, noted on Sunday, “Americans today will spend $300 million more on gasoline than they did 30 days ago.”

On Saturday, Trump specifically expressed hope that China, France, Japan, South Korea, and Britain “will send Ships to the area so that the Hormuz Strait will no longer be a threat by a Nation that has been totally decapitated.”

Trump told the Financial Times the next day that it is “only appropriate that people who are the beneficiaries of the Strait will help to make sure that nothing bad happens there.”

“If there’s no response or if it’s a negative response, I think it will be very bad for the future of NATO,” added Trump, who told U.K. Prime Minister Keir Starmer on March 7 that he didn’t need the help of British aircraft carriers.

“We have a thing called NATO,” Trump told the Times. “We’ve been very sweet. We didn’t have to help them with Ukraine. Ukraine is thousands of miles away from us … but we helped them. Now we’ll see if they help us. Because I’ve long said that we’ll be there for them but they won’t be there for us. And I’m not sure that they’d be there.”

When asked what kind of help is needed, the president said, “Whatever it takes.”

It appears that some nations are not in a rush to help.

Japanese Prime Minister Sane Takaichi said her nation, which has begun releasing oil reserves, has yet to make “any decisions whatsoever about dispatching escort ships,” reported the Independent.

Australian Transport Minister Catherine King said her country “won’t be sending a ship to the Strait of Hormuz,” adding that “we know how incredibly important that is, but that’s not something we’ve been asked or we’re contributing to.”

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

​Strait of hormuz, Hormuz, Iran, Oil, Gas, War, Conflict, Missiles, Tehran, Donald trump, Israel, Mines, Drones, Bombing, Energy, Tankers, Politics 

Qualified immunity, a doctrine the Supreme Court created in 1967, bewilders ordinary citizens who run headlong into it after government officials trample their constitutional rights. In plain English, the doctrine often blocks lawsuits against officials unless a prior court decision “clearly established” that the specific conduct at issue violated the Constitution. That standard leaves many victims without a remedy and lets many constitutional wrongs go unanswered.

That is not right. The Constitution exists to protect individual rights, not to insulate officials who violate them from accountability.

Qualified immunity can turn constitutional protections into paper rights — recognized in theory, unavailable in practice.

Recent years have also supplied fresh reasons to question the doctrine’s scope. Abuses tied to the weaponization of law enforcement and the criminal justice system have come to light with unsettling regularity. Think of Crossfire Hurricane, where senior officials used a discredited dossier — commissioned by Hillary Clinton’s campaign and funded through political channels — to pursue surveillance warrants and to monitor an opposing campaign before and after the 2016 election.

Or consider Arctic Frost, the childishly named operation (Arctic Frost is a type of orange, as in “Orange Man Bad”) that targeted hundreds of Americans, including one of the co-authors (Eastman) and relied on sweeping demands for private communications and records in search of a predicate offense in hopes of derailing President Trump’s 2024 campaign.

Episodes like these, and others, zero in on a basic question: When government power crosses constitutional lines, who answers for it?

Qualified immunity often supplies the answer: nobody.

Now the Supreme Court appears to be taking an unusual look at the doctrine — at least if its recent handling of three qualified immunity petitions offers any clue.

What’s different this time

In prior years, the court has frequently disposed of qualified immunity petitions quickly, sometimes through summary action with no explanation. This term looks different. Three cases involving qualified immunity have sat on the court’s docket far longer than the usual pattern would suggest. The justices have repeatedly requested responses and, in several instances, called for lower-court records. The court has also rescheduled cases for conference after conference without issuing a decision.

That process does not prove the court plans to revisit the doctrine. But it does suggest heightened attention.

Case 1: Smith v. Scott

The petition for writ of certiorari in Smith v. Scott was filed nearly a year ago. The case arises from a tragic encounter that began as a call for help. A 65-year-old man contacted police because he believed intruders lurked outside his apartment. Officers arrived, found no intruders, and then attempted to handcuff him. The encounter escalated. Officers restrained him on the ground, and an officer allegedly applied pressure that impeded his breathing until he died.

Both the district court and the Ninth Circuit denied qualified immunity. The officers then asked the Supreme Court to intervene. The respondent (Scott’s estate) initially waived a response, which commonly happens in cert-stage litigation. The court did not let the waiver stand. It called for a response after the case’s first conference last May. After a later conference, the court requested the record. Since then, it has repeatedly relisted the petition — an astounding 13 times — without resolving it.

Case 2: Zorn v. Linton

Zorn v. Linton involves a protest at the Vermont State House. Demonstrators occupied the chamber floor to protest government policy. Most left when the building closed. Shela Linton stayed and refused to leave. Officers removed her using a rear wristlock. She sued, alleging unreasonable force that caused pain, injury, and trauma.

The district court granted qualified immunity. The Second Circuit reversed and denied qualified immunity. The petition reached the Supreme Court in September. Once again, the respondent waived a response, and once again the court requested one. The case then cycled through conference after conference before the court requested the lower-court record on February 27.

This case matters for another reason. Many qualified immunity disputes involve fast-moving encounters where officers make split-second judgments. This one involves an interaction with warnings, time, and repeated opportunities to comply. It tees up an issue courts often sidestep: the obligations citizens assume when they knowingly violate a lawful order and force officers to escalate to removal. Does a protester’s refusal to leave reduce the scope of what counts as “unreasonable” force, so long as officers use measured escalation? Put differently: Were Linton’s rights even violated?

Case 3: Villarreal v. Alaniz

Villarreal v. Alaniz sits at the intersection of qualified immunity and the First Amendment. Police arrested journalist Priscilla Villarreal under a state statute that barred solicitation of nonpublic information. The reporter argued that the arrest violated her First Amendment rights.

The procedural history highlights the doctrine’s power. The district court granted qualified immunity. A Fifth Circuit panel denied it. The full Fifth Circuit later granted it en banc. The Supreme Court vacated and remanded the decision for further consideration. The Fifth Circuit again granted immunity.

Judge Andrew Oldham, in a concurring opinion, made an observation that cuts to the heart of qualified immunity’s justification. Courts often defend the doctrine by pointing to the realities of policing: officers must act quickly, sometimes under threat, with incomplete information. Oldham questioned whether that rationale “makes sense” in a case involving time to find a statute, plan an arrest, consult counsel, and investigate facts. Under those circumstances, why should immunity hinge on whether a prior case matches the fact pattern with near-photographic precision?

The cert petition was filed last July. The Supreme Court requested a response in August. It later requested the record after multiple conferences.

What the Supreme Court might do next

No outsider can know what the justices plan. But these three cases, taken together, give the Supreme Court a menu of options.

The court could reinforce qualified immunity, especially in excessive-force cases, and use the term’s docket to signal more protection for officers facing a rising tide of litigation.

The court could narrow qualified immunity — particularly in cases where officials have time to deliberate, plan, and consult — because the “split-second decision” rationale does not apply.

RELATED: The common-sense case for nationalizing US elections

Douglas Rissing via iStock/Getty Images

The court could also recalibrate the doctrine without overruling it: clarify what counts as “clearly established” law, tighten the inquiry, or distinguish between scenarios that demand rapid judgment and those that involve considered decisions.

In the abstract, “immunity from liability for violating rights” begins to resemble artificial judicial indemnification. Modern society does not grant that kind of blanket protection to most other professions. A surgeon, an engineer, or a corporate executive cannot avoid accountability because no prior case warned that the precise mistake at issue would cause harm. The law often holds them to general standards of care, not hyper-specific precedent.

Qualified immunity operates differently. It can turn constitutional protections into paper rights — recognized in theory, unavailable in practice.

Whatever the court’s destination, the road looks different this term. The extended consideration, repeated relists, and requests for records in multiple cases point to sustained attention. That alone marks a change.

If the court means to revisit qualified immunity, even in part, the consequences will ripple far beyond these three cases. Federal courts hear thousands of civil rights claims each year. The doctrine shapes whether citizens can vindicate constitutional rights at all.

At minimum, one conclusion now seems hard to avoid: The Supreme Court is looking closely. And when the court looks closely, doctrine can move significantly.

​Opinion & analysis, Supreme court, Constitution, Rights, Weaponized justice, Law and order, Qualified immunity, Pierson v. ray, Smith v. scott, Zorn v. linton, Villarreal v. alaniz, Precedent, Police, Ninth circuit court of appeals, Fifth circuit