Dr. Nicole Saphier, President Donald Trump's third nominee for surgeon general, moved a step closer to confirmation after a Senate committee voted to advance her nomination on Wednesday. Saphier, a radiologist and former Fox News Channel contributor, was advanced out of the...

The latest fuel feeding the Diddy Outrage Machine involves reports that the disgraced rap mogul is living large in the hoosegow.

The post Nolte: Sean ‘Diddy’ Combs Enjoys Liquor, Massages, Cellphone While Behind Bars, Report appeared first on Breitbart.

Tennessee's execution of Christa Gail Pike for a murder she committed at age 18 was halted Wednesday about an hour before it was set to begin, as a federal appeals court sought to review whether her allegations of childhood sexual abuse and rape were fully considered at her sentencing.

Wednesday on Fox Business Network's "Mornings," Sen. Rick Scott (R-FL) spoke out about socialism, a key component of the GOP's messaging for the 2026 election cycle.

The post Rick Scott: ‘If Socialism Worked, Then Everybody Would Be Wanting to Move to Havana Right Now’ appeared first on Breitbart.

The FTC is opening a wide-ranging investigation into Anthropic, OpenAI and other AI companies, examining whether their technology poses dangers to American consumers.

The post FTC Launches Probe into Anthropic, OpenAI, Other AI Labs over Consumer Risks appeared first on Breitbart.

Gun Owners of America and other plaintiffs are suing Jacksonville over firearm restrictions at city-owned venues, arguing they violate Florida’s firearm preemption law.

The post GOA Sues Jacksonville, Florida, Over Illegal Gun-Free Zones At City-Owned Venues appeared first on The Truth About Guns.

There’s nothing Congress likes better than not legislating. The legislative process in theory still takes place in Congress, but the results, which have the name and form of law, are in reality not law, properly understood. Legislative policy is still made in America, but it overwhelmingly takes forms other than laws enacted by Congress according to the process set forth in Article I of the Constitution. By conferring legislative power on others and leaving vital public issues unaddressed through congressional action, members of the legislature are effectively failing to carry out their constitutionally designated duties.

The importance of this change in the American political system cannot be overstated. Delegation—Congress’s abdication of its core legislative function—is key to understanding both the modern Congress and the crisis of constitutional government in America. Congress’s regular use of delegation has led to two seismic consequences: institutional failure on a massive scale and, more fundamentally, a transformation in the very character of the American regime.

Congress and the Legislative Power

The Constitution’s first substantive provision in Article I states that “All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States.” The Legislative Vesting Clause reflects the belief that the legislative power is distinct from other powers. A specific institution, Congress, is entrusted with a specific power: the legislative power, or the power to make laws.

So what is a law? In Federalist 62, James Madison defines it as “a rule of action,” while Alexander Hamilton similarly holds in Federalist 75 that laws are prescribed “rules for the regulation of society.” A law, properly understood, authoritatively communicates to its subject what he must do and must not do. By implication, law also communicates to its subject what he may do, but is not required to do.

As the powers of government are fundamentally distinct by nature, each power under the Constitution has a discrete characteristic. In the case of the legislative power, that characteristic is deliberation. In the Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle asserts that deliberation is a particular kind of thought; “We deliberate,” he writes, “about things that are up to us and are matters of action.”

Ultimately, deliberation is the active form of prudence, or practical judgment. The deliberator must prioritize competing, or mutually exclusive, goals and determine which takes priority. The choice will favor one course of action over another or seek to balance or compromise between multiple courses of action. The deliberator’s choice reflects the regime’s priorities and how best to achieve them in a given situation.

Progressivism, Delegation, and the Administrative State

Congressional delegation of legislative power began almost by accident, in response to a concrete problem, and with little theoretical reasoning surrounding it. Near the end of the 19th century, widespread concern about the corruption of railroads, especially regarding rates, led to calls for federal intervention. The Interstate Commerce Act of 1887 created the Interstate Commerce Commission and charged it to set “reasonable and just” rates, while prohibiting what the act called “personal discrimination”: granting special rates, or free transportation, to favored individuals.

The growing Progressive movement latched on to delegation and gave it a principled argument. The people and their elected representatives, the Progressives maintained, are handicapped in the legislative policymaking process in two main ways. First, policymaking in modern, industrial nations is more complex and requires more technical knowledge than ever before—which is precisely what the people and their representatives lack. In “The Study of Administration,” Woodrow Wilson argues that “Directly exercised, in the oversight of the daily details and in the choice of the daily means of government, public criticism is a clumsy nuisance, a rustic handling delicate machinery.”

The second problem with allowing the people and their representatives to legislate directly on complex, technical subjects is that it is hard to keep the overarching goal in view. Everyone wants clean air, but as David Schoenbrod notes in Power Without Responsibility, crucial questions must be answered such as “How clean?” and “At what cost?” For example, to achieve a certain level of clean air, are we willing to tolerate massive increases in energy costs? How about rolling blackouts? What are the national security implications of our policies? Are we willing to allow our nation to become dependent on foreign energy sources?

In a sophisticated, modern society, then, another model of legislative policymaking is needed. This involves partitioning legislative power into two separate activities. Wilson explains that “The distinction is between general plans and special means.” The task of the people and their representatives is to declare the purposes they want the state to accomplish in a particular policy area. Devising and implementing the means to achieve these ends is to be left to a commission of experts, who can apply their expertise to a given policy area.

Over time, the federal courts ratified congressional delegation and integrated it into the constitutional order. In 1928, the Supreme Court asserted that so long as “Congress shall lay down by legislative act an intelligible principle to which the person or body authorized to fix such rates is directed to conform, such legislative action is not a forbidden delegation of legislative power.” The “intelligible principle” test effectively means that, so long as a reviewing judge can reasonably discern what Congress wanted the administrative entity to do, the delegation is legitimate. It remains the standard to this day.

Institutional Failure

Delegation has allowed members of Congress to satisfy their ambitions, upon which the constitutional system of separation of powers depends, by means the Constitution has largely precluded.

Serving multiple terms as an elected representative can be a significant challenge. The member will have cast numerous votes and taken many public positions over the course of his career, some of which are bound to be controversial. These votes and positions therefore provide plenty of fodder for potential challengers, who can offer voters a real alternative to the incumbent.

Delegation offers legislators a way out. As Morris P. Fiorina has described, delegation allows a member to take positions on broad issues that are popular with voters. He then votes for legislation, which instructs the bureaucracy to devise and implement rules to achieve a popular goal. Congress transfers to the bureaucracy the odium incurred by whoever makes the difficult choices that impose costs and burdens on others. Members get credit for achieving a noble, crowd-pleasing goal, while the bureaucracy absorbs the blame for creating the burdensome rules and regulations necessary to achieve it.

Delegation has altered the distribution of incentives for members of Congress in a second way. As Fiorina notes, the growth of the administrative state creates ever-increasing opportunities for individuals to get caught in the web of bureaucracy. When they do, the individual needs someone on the inside to help him, and his congressman is perfectly positioned to provide that service. By helping his constituents, a congressman builds goodwill, which translates into votes. This is why individual members allocate a significant portion of their staffing resources to constituent services.

As the nation has become increasingly polarized ideologically and as Congress has effectively abandoned control of the federal budget, which gives the individual member influence with the bureaucracy, members have increasingly engaged in catering to the ideological predilections of their districts. In response to constituent pressure, they take strident public positions on major issues, and thus build support within them.

Regime Change

In any political system, knowing where the legislative power is located and how it is exercised is critical for understanding the nature of that regime. The American Founders created a republic rather than a pure democracy, and thus legislative power is exercised by the people’s elected representatives. Congress, like all the other institutions of our government, is a creature of the Constitution. The American Congress can legislate only on subjects, and in ways, specified in the Constitution. The Constitution therefore does not simply create a republic; it creates a constitutional republic.

The Progressives despised the founders’ constitutionalism. They saw it as unable to cope with modern policy issues and as an inaccurate description of how political systems actually operate. As an operating principle, they substituted for the separation of powers a system that Frank J. Goodnow called “politics and administration.” Politics, including all political institutions, were to be brought into ever-closer contact with the will of the people. The president would represent the whole country, while Congress would be an assembly of the various local interests within the community.

Simultaneously, real power would be put in the hands of administrators. Legislative power—the power to make rules for the regulation of society—would be transferred from the people’s representatives and given to experts who were to be substantially insulated from the electoral process. Additionally, Goodnow explains that these experts would also exercise the traditional executive and judicial powers, and what he ambiguously terms “administrative” powers.

While the Progressive system may appear to be more democratic, the reality is anything but. Powers vested in the officers of the separate branches would be delegated to a new elite class, specially qualified to rule and largely placed beyond electoral control.

The regime the Progressives sought to create, whatever their protestations to the contrary, is an aristocracy. It is not a traditional aristocracy of land, birth, and titles, but an aristocracy of the credentialed, those who attended elite universities have the training and experience to deal with the complexities of modern government and modern social problems.

Our present political reality is far from the Progressive model. Instead of being a technical and scientific elite, a self-selecting aristocracy of the competent, our ruling class has hardened into exactly that: a class. This class is defined by three salient characteristics: first, our elites have contempt for those whom they govern. Second, our elites are not very good at ruling. Finally, our elites rule in their own interest, rather than that of the country as a whole. The aristocracy has collapsed into an oligarchy.

If Congress is to be compelled to return to legislating, the motive force must come from outside. The electorate will not do it; the issue is far too obscure and procedural to resonate with most voters. Perhaps the president could do it, but only if Congress becomes so unhappy with presidential action that it decides to legislate for itself. Nevertheless, the advantages of delegation for congressmen are still too great. That leaves the federal courts, which could force members of Congress to legislate by ending their toleration of delegation. Justice Samuel Alito’s concurrence in Gundy v. U.S. suggests the possibility that the Court might be ready to resurrect the non-delegation doctrine.

The future of constitutional republicanism in America—and therefore of American liberty—depends upon restoring Congress, as the people’s elected representatives, to its constitutional legislative function.

The post Congress and the Collapse of Constitutional Republicanism in America appeared first on The American Mind.

Las Vegas Aces star A'ja Wilson went off the rails Tuesday and charged at a man sitting on the side lines who yelled and pointed at her.

The post WATCH: WNBA’s A’ja Wilson Angrily Confronts Fan in the Stands in Chaotic Scene appeared first on Breitbart.

Iowa Democrat gubernatorial candidate Rob Sand defended the Green New Deal and opposed an Iowa bill defining sex as "either male or female as observed or clinically verified at birth.”

The post Iowa Democrat Governor Candidate Rob Sand Called Himself ‘Extremely Liberal,’ Defended Green New Deal appeared first on Breitbart.

Assistant Attorney General Colin McDonald told Newsmax on Wednesday that the Justice Department has charged 17 defendants in a 28-day sweep targeting Social Security benefit fraud.

Far-left Rep. Jasmine Crockett (D-TX) said she will not address anything "negative" after receiving backlash following her Fueling Individual Rights Everywhere (FIRE) PAC leaving Senate candidate James Talarico off its endorsement list.

The post Jasmine Crockett Says She Won’t Address Anything ‘Negative’ After Leaving James Talarico Off PAC’s Endorsement List appeared first on Breitbart.

Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., announced Wednesday that he will introduce legislation to establish federal safeguards for AI-powered surveillance cameras. The announcement follows a Senate hearing on the technology and comes amid privacy and national security concerns, CBS News...

‘This is some rich shit’

NASCAR driver Jennifer Jo Cobb has been fined $850,000 by a North Carolina court over an affair she reportedly had with a woman's husband.

The post Court Fines Female NASCAR Driver $850K for Affair with Woman’s Husband appeared first on Breitbart.

Israeli defense technology company Smart Shooter has won a three-year Department of War contract to supply rifle-mounted systems designed to counter drones, with an ordering ceiling of $150 million.

Disgraced hip-hop mogul Sean "Diddy" Combs is living a privileged life in federal prison, NBC News reported.

(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that a federal court unsealed the key search warrant records behind the Biden FBI’s September 2022 seizure of Mike Lindell’s cell phone (In the Matter of the Search of a Person Located in the District of Minnesota (No. 22-mj-742 (TNL))). The records, unsealed at the request of Judicial Watch and Mike Lindell, show that the Biden FBI used private litigant Dominion Voting Systems’ then-pending $1.3 billion defamation lawsuit against Mike Lindell and others (a lawsuit that had been settled as to Lindell earlier this year) as well as other information from Dominion as part of its justification for seeking the warrant.

On September 7, 2022, the FBI obtained a warrant from U.S. Magistrate Judge Tony N. Leung to search “the person of Michael Lindell,” seize his phone, and use his fingerprints or face to unlock it. The FBI already had nearly two years of Lindell’s phone and Apple account records. The FBI obtained warrants to track Lindell through his phone’s location a week before the warrant for the phone seizure was issued.

According to Lindell, as he was returning from a hunting trip in Iowa on September 13, 2022, four plainclothes FBI agents in three unmarked vehicles surrounded him at a Hardee’s drive-through lane in Mankato, Minnesota. The unmarked vehicles had followed Lindell all the way from Iowa. They took his phone and questioned him about Dominion voting machines.

The unredacted portion of the 80-page affidavit shows how central Dominion was to the government’s case. The FBI told the court:

Lindell has a personal financial motive to find evidence undermining the integrity of Dominion machines, as he is facing substantial litigation from Dominion based on Lindell’s disparaging statements about the machines.

The unsealed affidavit also:

• listed interviews with, and records from, Dominion witnesses among its principal sources;
• relied on “Dominion officials” for the claim that copies of Mesa County, Colorado’s election system contained “proprietary Dominion data and software;”
• devoted a section to Lindell’s public statements “Linking His Ongoing Litigation Against Dominion to the Mesa County Incident;” and
• authorized agents to seize everything on Lindell’s phone relating to “any Dominion computerized voting system.”

The affidavit further alleged that the phone held evidence of identity theft, damage to a protected computer, and conspiracy. The allegations were tied to the May 2021 copying of Mesa County’s Dominion election system, and the affidavit relied mainly on Lindell’s phone contacts with, and payments to, a redacted individual. Despite the affidavit’s claim that there was probable cause to believe a crime was committed, the FBI never charged Lindell or anyone else.

The newly unsealed records also show that, as recently as March 2026, the Justice Department sought to keep evidence of the FBI’s coordination with Dominion secret by requesting another one-year extension of the seal, arguing that disclosure would “prejudice the government’s ongoing investigation.” On July 30, 2026, lawyers for Judicial Watch and Lindell told the Justice Department that they would move to intervene and unseal. The Justice Department responded that it “would move on its own to unseal those materials,” and it did so on August 17 after redacting certain sections of the documents. The affidavit and application were placed on the public docket on August 28.

Judicial Watch and Lindell then identified nine additional sealed docket entries and filed a consent motion to unseal them. The motion noted that “America has a long history of distrust of secret proceedings.” U.S. Magistrate Judge Jon T. Huseby granted the motion on September 14, 2026, and the remaining records, including the sealing petitions, were subsequently made public.

“It is a travesty that the prior administration relied on information provided by a private litigant in existing litigation to obtain a warrant to seize the telephone of an opposing litigant,” said Mike Lindell.

“These unsealed court documents show Mike Lindell is a victim of Biden FBI lawfare and abuse,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “Dominion Voting Systems was suing Mike Lindell for $1.3 billion, and the Biden FBI chose to rely on this private lawsuit as a reason for armed federal agents to seize his phone at a fast-food drive-through. All of this, and Lindell was never charged with anything. Thanks to Judicial Watch, Americans can now see how the Biden FBI weaponized federal law enforcement against a prominent critic of the 2020 election.”

The unsealing is part of Judicial Watch’s investigation into whether federal law enforcement agencies abused their powers to target allies of a political opponent. Judicial Watch is also suing the Justice Department for records about its investigations of Lindell (Judicial Watch Inc. v. U.S. Department of Justice (No. 25-cv-03850)). It has also moved to unseal warrant materials targeting Rudy Giuliani, Victoria Toensing, and Michael Caputo.

Barbara Podlucky Berens of Berens & Miller, P.A., in Minneapolis, together with Michael Bekesha and Sean O’Donnell of Judicial Watch, represent Judicial Watch and Lindell in this matter.

###

The post Judicial Watch Victory: Federal Court Unseals Secret FBI Warrant Records Targeting Mike Lindell appeared first on Judicial Watch.