Aggregator
John Summit just proved partying isn’t dead at his NYC Experts Only Festival
‘Incredibles’ director Brad Bird talks new Netflix movie ‘Ray Gunn,’ and why it was 30 years in the making
‘Incredibles’ director Brad Bird talks new Netflix movie ‘Ray Gunn,’ and why it was 30 years in the making
Harry Kane floats trying to be an NFL kicker while playing in MLS
Mark Messier ‘horrified’ by Oilers hiring of Mike Babcock
Missouri Congressional Map Returns To Supreme Court For Third Time
Authored by Aldgra Fredly via The Epoch Times,
The dispute over Missouri's new congressional map returned to the Supreme Court for the third time, with justices considering whether the state can use the GOP-backed map in the midterm elections.
The new map could help Republicans gain an additional U.S. House seat in the Nov. 3 elections.
The Supreme Court has twice prevented the state from using the redrawn congressional map, most recently on Sept. 10, when it granted the opponents' bid to stay a federal judge's order allowing the state to use the map in the midterm elections.
People Not Politicians, the group opposing the redrawn congressional map, filed an emergency motion with the U.S. Supreme Court on Sept. 22 after the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit ruled that using the 2022 map in the Nov. 3 general elections would be unconstitutional, as the state had already used the redrawn 2025 map in the August 2026 primaries.
In a Sept. 21 ruling, the Eighth Circuit ordered U.S. District Judge Stephen Clark to enter a permanent injunction barring Missouri Secretary of State Denny Hoskins from using any congressional map other than the one the Legislature approved in 2025.
The federal appeals court stayed its ruling until Sept. 28 to allow time for a Supreme Court review.
Opponents asked the Supreme Court to block the ruling, saying it undermined the court's previous injunction blocking the use of the 2025 congressional map.
"The Eighth Circuit's order does not merely undermine this court's stay order; it requires the district court to issue a permanent injunction granting the exact same relief this court stayed in the exact same case," the motion stated.
The motion asks the Supreme Court to clarify that its Sept. 10 stay "precludes enforcement of the replacement injunction - or any additional federal court injunctions contrary to the stay order - so long as that stay remains in effect."
Opponents also argued that the Eighth Circuit lacked jurisdiction to enter the ruling.
"The Eighth Circuit cannot disrupt an imminent election after ballots have been cast by issuing relief that this court has already foreclosed and that it lacked jurisdiction to grant, all based on a merits theory of the panel's own invention," they said.
The Supreme Court gave supporters of the new map until midday on Wednesday to respond to the latest appeal.
The 2022 map, drawn by the General Assembly after the 2020 census, was designed to give Republicans a 6-2 edge. The 2025 map, drawn as part of a mid-decade redistricting, was designed to give them a 7-1 advantage.
Missouri held primary elections on Aug. 4 using the 2025 Missouri First map approved by the Republican-controlled General Assembly. President Donald Trump supported the redrawn map.
Tyler Durden Wed, 09/23/2026 - 17:40Roseanne Barr eviscerates sitcom co-star for confronting her about racist tweets: ‘Stay f–ked’
Roseanne Barr eviscerates sitcom co-star for confronting her about racist tweets: ‘Stay f–ked’
‘Palestinian Rachel Dolezal’ ripped for using ‘blaccent’ and makeup to hide true identity
Mamdani welcomes socialist Spain PM embroiled in corruption and antisemitism scandals
Trans activists inject themselves with hormones in viral stunt protesting Trump’s DOJ deal
Ex-girlfriend in twisted love-triangle slaying at Long Island yacht club learns her fate
Luka Dončić lays out Lakers championship ‘plan’ in passionate vow
Scenic California site ranked among best world travel destinations for 2027
Nikole Hannah-Jones’ failed woke experiment — Sept. 24, 2026
Senate Panel Rejects Immunity For Ex-Fauci Aide
The Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs rejected on Sept. 23 a bid to seek immunity for a longtime special assistant to Dr. Anthony Fauci.
The vote on a resolution authorizing an application for a court order compelling testimony under immunity from the assistant, who was not identified, fell short of the required two-thirds of members.
All eight Republicans, but no Democrats, voted in favor. Two Democrats would have had to cross the aisle for the resolution to be approved.
Fauci, 85, headed the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases from 1984 to 2022.
He refused to answer questions before the panel earlier in the year, citing the Fifth Amendment, prompting the committee to refer him for contempt of Congress to federal prosecutors.
The Department of Justice has not charged Fauci with any crimes.
As Zachary Stieber reports for The Epoch Times, the female assistant worked for Fauci from 2007 to 2022, according to Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), the committee's chairman.
He said her position "placed her in the flow of communications directly relevant to our investigation" into Fauci.
She recently appeared behind closed doors before the committee and invoked the Fifth Amendment, or her right against self-incrimination.
The questions senators want answered primarily deal with the destruction of government records, Paul said. A doctor who was a longtime adviser to Fauci recently pleaded guilty to conspiring to delete government records. Fauci has directed subordinates to delete emails.
Sen. Maggie Hassan (D-N.H.), who voted against the resolution, said before the vote that senators should pursue a "good-faith bipartisan approach to obtain this information" rather than rush to approve the resolution.
Republicans expressed frustration and anger that only Hassan among Democratic panel members was present during the meeting.
"I come from the private sector. To not show up to a meeting, to say 'I refuse to do my job,' is something that only happens in politics," Sen. Bernie Moreno (R-Ohio) said.
"That is outrageous."
After the vote, Paul said:
"A majority of the committee voted to seek the truth. All Republicans voted to seek the truth. We voted to protect this witness and hear her story. All we needed was two Democrats who wanted to hear her story, but not a single one of them is interested in the investigation or the truth about destruction of federal records."
Hassan said that was a mischaracterization of the Democrats' position.
Paul said he would be sending a letter to the Department of Justice requesting pursuit of the matter, and said his committee's investigation into government record destruction will continue.
Tyler Durden Wed, 09/23/2026 - 17:20