Eighteen-year-old Julia Egler, a biological female transitioning to male, received 50 years Friday for the 2024 killings of her mother and her mother's boyfriend.

The post Transgender Teen Gets 50 Years in Plea Deal After Shooting Mom to Death appeared first on Breitbart.

Increasing numbers of Americans are deeply opposed to building more data centers.

Over the summer, Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro imposed the strictest data center rules in the country, Kathy Hochul ordered a statewide moratorium on hyperscale construction, and Greg Abbott paused new approvals in Texas pending a grid audit. At the local level, dozens of county and municipal fights have followed no reliable partisan pattern. Polling from Heatmap and Embold, collected by the anon Cremieux, shows data center popularity plummeting over the last year.

Though Cremieux argues the opposition is fundamentally driven by NIMBYism, I’m unconvinced. The polling seems to follow the pattern you’d expect if NIMBYism were the primary driver, but posing the problem as a generic national issue produces substantially less opposition. Something else is going on that NIMBYism can’t fully explain.

The arguments most central to the anti-data center cause, namely complaints about the effect on utility costs, seem to generate an outsized amount of discourse relative to their actual effect. For example, in Virginia—the world’s data center capital and the state where I live—the State Corporation Commission estimated that shifting capacity and distribution costs from households to the large-load rate class would lower a typical residential bill by about 3.4%, or roughly $5.52 a month. In other words, the effect is something on the order of a Subway sandwich in 2008.

I want to be scrupulous, because the complaints about data centers are often not literally false. Households are indeed suffering from a pecuniary externality created by increased demand. But it is hard to reconcile the mostly muted effects with the surging level of emotional response.

Americans’ growing dislike of data centers stems not from animus toward any single company or product but from a cumulative reaction to the momentous technological changes of the past couple of decades. Because AI is the latest harbinger of those changes—and offers revolutionary potential—it has inherited our culture’s immune response. This means these problems cannot be adjudicated simply by changing utility regulations or even bribing local communities.

Three further factors have combined with the populist anti-tech feeling to make AI, and by extension data centers, unusually unpopular.

First, AI faces a particularly unfavorable coalition of constituencies. Its association with California and the tech industry has deeply soured much of conservative America toward it, and its association with billionaires and big business has soured many progressives. Even many techies feel personally threatened by the technology. In other words, few natural constituencies exist outside of capital holders and lab researchers.

Second, those most aggressively advocating for data centers are not building them in their own backyards. Palo Alto, where I lived while attending grad school, has spent years fighting small-cell installations. One of the most prestigious retirement homes in the U.S., Channing House, recently fought to have wireless equipment removed from its roof. In January, the city of Palo Alto wrote to the FCC opposing a rule that would speed up wireless approvals, while at the same time supporting the infrastructure needed to run AI-enabled services, so long as it retains the power to veto unwanted projects.

When the group that appears to benefit most from a technology is also most averse to its consequences, it is natural for the public to wonder what the tech world might be hiding. Polimath, writing in Marginally Compelling, gets closer to the underlying problem by viewing it as another front in the culture war, an outworking of long-simmering discontent with tech culture.

Third, much of the tech world itself seems increasingly concerned about the existential risk AI might pose to humanity. For example, earlier this month Jacob Coxon, a researcher who spent three years doing pretraining work at OpenAI and then Anthropic, publicly resigned, writing that both companies were racing toward self-improving superintelligence and “gambling with our lives.” Evan Hubinger, an alignment lead at Anthropic, replied that he agreed and put the odds of AI killing everyone within the decade above 10%. From talking to my friends at these labs, the modal person really does seem to think they are summoning the machine god. That prospect naturally feeds public opposition to AI.

Taken together, these factors help explain the public’s anger. The lines of the current debate have already hardened, and the grievances far predate the specific events of the day. Any actions seen as forcing data centers on voters who do not want them will only aggravate them further.

But the centers will be built regardless. Demand is so enormous, and suitable locations are sufficiently plentiful, that only a small number of permissive communities, such as Loudoun County, are needed. If localities want to opt out, I see little reason to stop them.

However, the industry could take an important step if it wants to win broad American support.

Specifically, Big Tech should make a visible effort to build data centers near the communities where its executives and employees live. This would give them a way to begin convincing Americans that data centers are an asset worth having, not a liability worth dodging.

Concerns about water and electricity are simply not what most people are worried about, and addressing them will do nothing to solve the larger problem. Since these reasons are selected ex post to justify pre-existing opposition, defeating any single point will merely invite a hundred more.

If you are opposed to data centers, my guess is that saving $5 on your monthly utility bill wouldn’t be enough to change your opinion.

The post What’s Really Fueling Anti-Data Center Sentiment appeared first on The American Mind.

South Carolina EDGE rusher Dylan Stewart is on indefinite suspension, with his future with the program pending, after he punched an Alabama player in the face on Saturday and showed disrespect to his coaches.

The post VIDEO: South Carolina Star EDGE Rusher Dylan Stewart Suspended Indefinitely After Punching Player, Ignoring Coaches appeared first on Breitbart.

The Daily Signal is a leader in conservative media with a mission to present the truth and defend traditional American values. Right now, it is looking to equip the next generation of journalists as part of its spring 2027 internship program.
               
As a current Daily Signal intern and recent graduate from the University of Minnesota, interning at the Daily Signal has become an opportunity to grow in the media world and gain firsthand experience of how a news organization functions. Being a part of a fact-driven news organization with the mission of defending the truth—and only steps away from the U.S. Capitol—is an opportunity that should not be missed.

The spring internship application deadline for the Daily Signal is Oct. 4. The program runs from Jan. 11 to April 9, 2027, with full-time or part-time positions available.

Even though the Daily Signal has operated independently from The Heritage Foundation since 2024, it maintains a special partnership with the organization’s Young Leaders Program.

The Young Leaders Program typically has around 60 interns per semester, and up to four Daily Signal interns work alongside full-time staff each day.

Former Daily Signal interns have gone on to work in the White House, The Wall Street Journal, The Daily Wire, and as press secretaries for members of Congress.

Two of my sisters completed Daily Signal internships before me, and I’m grateful to both of them for introducing me to this phenomenal program.

“My internship at the Daily Signal has been one of the most rewarding experiences of my college career,” Eleanor Berkness, a summer 2026 intern, said. “I created content that reached thousands of people, covered stories, and gained experience that prepared me for a career.”

The Daily Signal internship provides ample opportunity to write op-eds, pitch story ideas, interview public figures, and work alongside professional editors who help make stories seamless and professional.

Summer 2026 intern Karly Tucker said, “I was able to publish 12 articles, interview Freedom 250 CEO Keith Krach, and receive feedback that pushed my writing skills to grow.” She expressed gratitude for how the internship developed her writing and journalistic skills.

Personally, I also find it to be enormously refreshing to be surrounded by people with like-minded worldviews and conservative values. The camaraderie among my fellow interns is something that sets this experience apart.

Being surrounded by talented, motivated peers who challenge and learn from one another has created a collaborative environment unlike any of my previous experiences. The friendships and professional connections I’ve built have become one of the most valuable aspects of my time here. I get excited to come to work every day to learn from professionals and find ways to make a positive difference in the conservative movement.

In addition, interns interact directly with Daily Signal readers and communicate with them on behalf of the organization. With nearly one million newsletter subscribers, interns are exposed to a range of perspectives via emails and phone calls and learn firsthand how every story is received. I enjoy engaging with readers and thanking them for their feedback. It has helped me sharpen my communication skills and better understand the impact of the Daily Signal’s reporting.

During the internship, interns are encouraged to attend congressional hearings on topics that will shape future policy and learn from witnesses which help decide the future trajectory of that policy. Recently, I went to a Senate hearing on Flock cameras and heard from senators and witnesses from across the country.

Interns also attend weekly lectures that help build critical thinking and sharpen their understanding of conservative policy and current events. Being taught by successful conservative leaders and experts builds a strong foundation for every class of interns.

Become part of the spring 2027 intern class. You can find the application and details on how to apply at this link:

The Young Leaders Program | The Heritage Foundation

Transgender actor Elliot Page has been featured partially nude on the cover of the first ever issue of New York Magazine's "Men's Style" issue.

The post Trans Elliot Page Featured on Cover of New York Magazine’s Inaugural ‘Men’s Style’ Issue appeared first on Breitbart.

In an interview that aired on Monday's broadcast of FNC's "Fox & Friends," Edward Paltzik, the attorney for Lindsay Clancy-holdout juror Michael Desronvil, discussed his client's decision to force a mistrial.

The post ‘Zero Doubt’: Clancy Trial Holdout Juror Attorney Says Client Had ‘Mountain of Evidence’ to Back Position appeared first on Breitbart.

Supporters of women’s sports and sex-based protections have reason to celebrate. The Department of Education announced Sept. 28 that it is formally rescinding the Biden administration’s 2024 Title IX rule and reinstating the 2020 Title IX regulations promulgated under the first Trump administration.

Ongoing litigation has prevented the Trump administration from being able to formally rescind the illegal 2024 Biden regulations from the Code of Federal Regulations, even though the Education Department has been following the 2020 Trump-era Title IX regulations since January of last year.

In April 2024, the Biden administration issued final regulations rewriting the more than 50-year-old civil rights law, Title IX, to include sexual orientation and gender identity. Essentially, it allowed boys who claim to identify as girls to participate in girls and women’s sports at schools that receive federal funding.

Women’s sports advocate and former collegiate swimmer Riley Gaines said at the time, “Fifty-two years of progress and sex-based protections have been erased with the stroke of a pen.” She was right. Thankfully, many states agreed, and seven circuit courts temporarily blocked the Title IX rewrite, preventing it from taking effect in 26 states.

Several state superintendents and education commissioners in Louisiana, Oklahoma, South Carolina, and Florida also pushed back. Louisiana State Superintendent Cade Brumley stated that the Biden administration’s changes “recklessly endanger students and seek to dismantle opportunities for females.” State education leaders argued that the changes overrode state laws, compromised safety, and constituted federal overreach.

As legal challenges mounted, the Biden administration announced in December 2024 that it would withdraw the rule, citing the pending court cases and comments received during the public comment period, just weeks before President Donald Trump began his second term.

Not long after, in January 2025, a chief judge for the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky struck down and vacated the Biden regulations nationwide, ruling that they were unlawful and that the Department of Education exceeded its authority. This action left the Trump-era Title IX framework in place.

Shortly after taking office, Trump issued an executive order, “Defending Women from Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government,” that defined sex as an immutable biological classification rather than a concept based on sexual orientation or gender identity.

Earlier this year, the Department of Education also rescinded agreements with six school districts made under previous administrations regarding gender identity policies. Citing the January 2025 court ruling and the executive order, the department concluded that “Title IX is based on sex, and the schools did not violate the law.”

Today’s action concludes a yearslong legal and political battle over the meaning of Title IX. For supporters of sex-based protections, it represents the restoration of the law’s original purpose: ensuring equal educational opportunities for women and girls.

Advocates for child protection must still work from state to state, however. As our Heritage Foundation colleague Laura Hanford explains, child-welfare workers are classifying parents as “abusive” if they treat a child according to his or her sex instead of self-proclaimed “gender.” Social science research has found that affirming a child who claims to have been born in the wrong body does not resolve mental health issues underlying a child’s sexual confusion. Adults who do not caution a child confused about his or her sex could be neglecting that child—and failing to address the true reasons for the child’s distress. Conditions such as anxiety and depression can go untreated or worsen when adults focus on advocating “gender affirmation.”

So-called gender advocates claim that children will become suicidal if adults do not affirm their children. Yet no scientific evidence supports this claim, as even the ACLU acknowledged before the Supreme Court. And contrary to activist statements, new findings from the research and advocacy organization Do No Harm show that laws banning “gender-affirming care” do not increase suicide rates.

Nevertheless, Hanford explains that some courts are removing children from their homes even when there is no evidence of actual abuse. Social workers in the foster care system, meanwhile, are affirming children’s confusion about their sex.

The Department of Education’s rule change should bolster families and state officials protecting children from making irreversible medical decisions they may come to regret. In the states, policymakers must remain vigilant.

A well-intentioned attempt to retrieve a piece of memorabilia for a teammate turned into a bizarre confrontation between an NFL player and a ball boy on Sunday.

The post WATCH: Jags’ Josh Hines-Allen Has Heated Confrontation with NFL Ball Boy appeared first on Breitbart.

Iran published a written message on Monday allegedly written by "supreme leader" Mojtaba Khamenei.

The post Missing Iran ‘Supreme Leader’ Praises Women in Bizarre Written Statement appeared first on Breitbart.