Update on Today’s Supreme Court Order

 The Supreme Court delivered a significant ruling regarding the Department of Homeland Security's SAVE system, allowing states to verify the citizenship status of registered voters. This update outlines the implications for the upcoming elections and the voluntary cybersecurity measures proposed by CISA.

1. Supreme Court Ruling:

The Court issued an unsigned order that stays a previous injunction, permitting the use of the modified SAVE (Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements) system.

States and localities can now access the SAVE database, which includes Social Security and immigration data, to verify voter citizenship.

2. Impacts on Election Procedures:

Citizenship verification is available for election officials considering audits, although many states may opt not to use these tools.

No mass removal of voters is authorized, and any checks must provide voters an opportunity to correct any discrepancies before being removed from rolls.

3. September 14 Decision:

A prior ruling allowed states to continue using existing mail voting procedures without new requirements for USPS portals or ballot envelopes, ensuring that mail voting will follow current state laws.

4. CISA's Voluntary Plan:

On September 24, CISA released a security plan for enhancing election infrastructure, offering services like vulnerability scans.

However, key measures, such as ensuring robust audits and replacing voting equipment, cannot be enforced for the upcoming election.

5. Limited Impact of New Measures:

The verification process allows for initial checks but often leads to flags that require further manual investigation, often resulting in confirmed citizenship after review.

The suggested CISA upgrades may help improve security but cannot address all vulnerabilities in time for the elections on November 3.

The Supreme Court's recent order permits state-level verification of voter citizenship while maintaining protections against last-minute purges. Meanwhile, CISA's cybersecurity plan offers limited options for improving election security before the November elections, highlighting ongoing challenges in ensuring the integrity of voter registration systems and voting processes.

https://scsafeelectionsgroup.substack.com/p/update-on-todays-supreme-court-order?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=783972&post_id=217426833&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=true&r=6dl2nb&triedRedirect=true&utm_medium=email

The Why of Food Emancipation

 Agronomy, once central to American life, is now largely forgotten as food production has shifted to industrial processes and supermarket culture. This transformation has distanced people from understanding where their food comes from. This summary reflects on Joel Salatin's book, which highlights the need for a return to traditional farming methods.

1. Decline of Agronomy: Historically, agronomy shaped daily life and community well-being, but now many people are disconnected from food production, typically viewing it as a factory process instead of a craft.

2. Misconceptions About Farming: Some individuals consider farming as an archaic skill, unaware of its significance. The author reminisces about personal farming experiences and emphasizes the importance of returning to these roots.

3. Loss of Traditional Farming: The decline of small farms is attributed to heavy regulations and government controls aimed at suppressing competition. The book argues that this has harmed health, freedom, and community connections.

4. Call to Action: Salatin advocates for "food emancipation," promoting the dismantling of regulations that stifle small farmers and traditional practices. He believes this could lead to a resurgence of local farming, improving food quality and community health.

5. Salatin's Perspective: As an experienced farmer, Salatin offers real-life insights into agriculture, contrasting with the overly theoretical views of many policymakers and academics. His practical experience gives weight to his arguments.

6. Consumer Awareness: The author suggests that understanding food production is essential, as many consumers unknowingly support industrial practices that are detrimental to public health. The current food system favors processed foods over fresh, local produce.

7. Historical Context: The book discusses how regulations initially intended to protect consumers have instead facilitated industrial monopolies, echoing insights from historical critiques of food production.

Joel Salatin's book serves as a powerful reminder of the value of local farming and the dangers of correlating food production with industrialism. He advocates for restoring freedom in agriculture to enhance health and independence in society. The message is clear: returning to agronomy is essential for a healthy and free lifestyle, and readers are encouraged to consider his passionate arguments for embracing traditional farming practices. 

https://brownstone.org/articles/the-why-of-food-emancipation/

Corporatist Medicare for All?

 Polls show that many Democrats and over a third of Americans support “Medicare for All,” a proposal to have the federal government cover all healthcare expenses while allowing privately-owned hospitals, drug companies, and medical practices to continue operating. By being the sole payer, the government could impose its plan on these businesses, potentially leading to a fully socialized healthcare system.

Despite generally negative views of federal agencies, the popularity of this type of healthcare reform raises questions. Many Americans may not grasp the economic arguments against socialism or examples of socialized healthcare problems, yet they recognize that federal bureaucracies are not effective or affordable. Their key concern, as noted in a Kaiser Family Foundation poll, is the high out-of-pocket costs of private health plans. A significant portion of the population fears they cannot afford necessary healthcare, indicating a potential appeal to proposals like “Medicare for All.” However, framing this reform as just an extension of Medicare benefits misleads many about its potential impact.

Currently, the federal government covers only about 31% of total healthcare costs, while state and local governments contribute 16%. Transitioning to a fully socialized healthcare system would likely worsen current issues. This does not minimize the public's real concerns about healthcare affordability, which stem from market-distorting government privileges, subsidies, and regulations that inflate healthcare costs. Since the late 1800s, lobbying by organizations such as the American Medical Association has limited the number of doctors and controlled drug prices, resulting in Americans paying significantly more for healthcare compared to other developed countries.

The insurance sector, often criticized, actually has low profit margins and mainly transfers costs from healthcare providers to consumers. To effectively reduce healthcare costs, attention should shift to Big Pharma and its monopoly through patents and regulations, which inflate prices. Abolishing these privileges and introducing competition could lower costs. Additionally, removing licensing barriers to medical professions could enhance access to healthcare. Private insurance companies could work to ensure standards without government-imposed restrictions.

Opponents of private healthcare may argue that a single-payer system could implement cost controls, but there are no guarantees that this would happen in practice. Concentrating purchasing power in the hands of the government might not prevent privileged interests from continuing to benefit at consumer expense. The government, through programs like Medicare and Medicaid, has contributed to inflated healthcare demand and costs. Unconditional benefits lead to higher spending and unhealthy lifestyles without consideration for costs.

Furthermore, true improvements in living standards depend on personal savings and responsibility, which government programs like Medicare have diminished over time. Since the introduction of Medicare in the 1960s, America’s savings have plummeted, indicating an urgent need for economic reforms. Instead of pursuing a “Medicare for All” approach, a shift towards reducing government involvement in healthcare—illustrated by the idea of “Medicare for None”—is necessary for future economic health and growth. 

https://mises.org/mises-wire/corporatist-medicare-all

Is Congress Building a Public Case Against Jack Smith Prior to an Indictment?

 Jack Smith, the special counsel appointed by Attorney General Merrick Garland, is set to testify before the Senate Judiciary Committee regarding allegations of his abuse of authority. The hearing will examine his actions, including obtaining cell phone records of Republican lawmakers.

Smith, disqualified from his position, will face questions about his conduct during an upcoming Senate hearing.

A report from the House Judiciary Committee criticizes Smith's team for violating constitutional protections by accessing the cell phone records of multiple Republican officials.

Smith's investigations, which led to criminal indictments of former President Donald Trump, were also targeting significant Republican figures in relation to the events of January 6.

Smith claimed that some lawmakers represented a "flight risk," a controversial justification for non-disclosure orders allowing him to collect their data without their knowledge.

The report suggests that the Department of Justice (DOJ) had intentions to indict powerful Republicans if Trump lost the 2024 election.

Recent disclosures reveal misconduct by Smith’s team and an apparent willingness by federal judges to support his aggressive legal tactics.

Upcoming congressional discussions may lead to possible charges against Smith, including falsifying statements to Congress.

The hearings aim to hold Smith accountable for his actions and evaluate the constitutionality of his conduct. The outcomes could significantly impact the political landscape as Republican senators prepare to confront Smith regarding his methods. Moreover, the implications of the DOJ's investigations continue to unfold, suggesting a deepening conflict surrounding the January 6 events. 

https://www.declassified.live/p/is-congress-building-a-public-case?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=1666532&post_id=217433326&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=true&r=6dl2nb&triedRedirect=true&utm_medium=email

Canada’s Illiberal Export

 Collin May's book, "From Cancel Culture to Incarceration Culture," explores the evolution of cancel culture in Canada, a phenomenon where individuals face social and professional punishment for their views. Drawing from his own experiences, May argues that this culture has morphed into a more serious issue.

1. Personal Experience: Collin May, a former head of the Alberta Human Rights Commission, faced backlash for a book review he wrote years earlier. Critics accused him of promoting Islamophobia, leading to his forced resignation. This incident illustrates the dangers of cancel culture in Canada.

2. Political Correctness in Canada: May highlights that Canada has stricter regulations than the U.S. regarding free speech. These include strong human-rights tribunals and a culture that allows bureaucrats to enforce ideological conformity.

3. Impact of Apologies: The book discusses the psychological aspects of cancel culture, particularly why targets often apologize even when they believe they are innocent. Apologies can frequently be used against them, intensifying their punishment.

4. Participants in Cancellation: May identifies three key players in any cancellation event: the target, those who seek to cancel, and the institutions that enforce punishment, which he terms "institutional betrayal."

5. Emergence of Incarceration Culture: May suggests that cancel culture has evolved into "incarceration culture," where ideologically driven penalties, such as loss of professional licenses, become more common. This represents a serious escalation beyond social media backlash.

6. Prosecutorial Democracy: The concept of "prosecutorial democracy" refers to the government and administrative bodies enforcing ideological conformity through coercive means rather than democratic discourse.

Collin May's work sheds light on the troubling trends in cancel culture, particularly in how it can transcend social stigmatization to impose serious consequences through institutional powers. His insights serve as a warning about the growing control of ideological enforcement in society. 

https://www.city-journal.org/article/collin-may-cancel-culture-book-canada

Worst of Worst: ICE Arrests Thursday Include Murderers, Sexual Predators, and Robbers

  On September 25, 2026, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) announced the arrest of dangerous illegal aliens, referred to as the "worst of the worst." These arrests include individuals convicted of serious crimes, highlighting ICE's ongoing efforts to remove threats from American communities despite opposition.

ICE arrested five illegal aliens on Thursday who have been convicted of severe crimes:

J. Jesus Ceja-Barajas (Mexico) - Convicted of murder in California.

Zam Muan Lian (Burma) - Convicted of three counts of sexual assault in Tennessee.

Adony De La Cruz-Cruz (Dominican Republic) - Convicted of robbery in New York.

Obiageriaku Jane Iheanacho (Nigeria) - Convicted of first-degree assault and vulnerable adult abuse in Maryland.

Roberto Bejarano-Cruz (Mexico) - Convicted of drug possession with intent to distribute in Texas.

Despite a significant increase in assaults against ICE personnel, Secretary of Homeland Security Markwayne Mullin emphasized the agency's commitment to enforcing the law and deporting illegal aliens. He stated that ICE’s actions are vital for protecting the American people from dangerous individuals.

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) maintains a "Worst of Worst" website featuring profiles of over 40,000 criminal illegal aliens with serious convictions.

ICE continues its mission to remove dangerous criminal illegal aliens from U.S. communities, asserting that their enforcement efforts are crucial for public safety, despite facing increased violence and criticism from sanctuary state advocates.

https://amgreatness.com/2026/09/25/worst-of-worst-ice-arrests-thursday-include-murderers-sexual-predators-and-robbers/

SCOTUS allows Trump admin. to use the SAVE program to verify citizenship of voters

 The United States Supreme Court has allowed the federal government to use the Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements (SAVE) database to check voter eligibility temporarily. This decision comes after a district judge had blocked its use.

1. Background of the Case: The case, Department of Homeland Security v. League of Women Voters, involved a lawsuit by the League of Women Voters, which argued that using the SAVE system violated the confidentiality protections of the Social Security Act.

2. Supreme Court Ruling: The Supreme Court issued a temporary stay on the lower court's ruling, allowing the federal government to use the SAVE program while the appeal is ongoing. It did not make a final ruling on the merits of the case.

3. Government's Argument: The DHS believes that the SAVE program is essential for verifying voter eligibility and preventing noncitizen voting. The majority opinion highlighted a federal law that supports the DHS's authority to request social security information.

4. Dissenting Opinion: Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, alongside Justices Kagan and Sotomayor, dissented, arguing that the potential disenfranchisement of lawful voters is a significant harm.

This Supreme Court decision enables the federal government to continue using the SAVE database during the appeal process, advocating for preventing unlawful voter registration while recognizing the concerns raised about voter confidentiality. 

https://www.oann.com/newsroom/scotus-allows-trump-admin-to-use-the-save-program-to-verify-citizenship-of-voters/