Monday, February 16, 2026

New York’s Winter Shows That Mamdani Is Not a Socialist, but a Devout Muslim

New York’s Winter Shows That Mamdani Is Not a Socialist, but a Devout Muslim

AP Photo/Yuki Iwamura

If there was ever a doubt as to where Zohran Mamdani’s true allegiance lies, it should be clear to everyone by now that he is not actually a socialist; he is, in fact, a devout Muslim with Islamic allegiances trumping any other political value.

Socialism, by definition, means to take care of everyone. Although the elite in a socialist society live extremely well, and everyone else lives poorly, the concept created by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels seeks to eliminate the perceived inefficiencies, irrationalities, unpredictability, and crises that socialists traditionally associate with capital accumulation and the profit system. In essence, socialism is supposedly, according to its supporters, the safety net and pathway to ensure that everyone is taken care of, has a standard of living, and is safe.

Mamdani ran on a campaign that he is a socialist who just happens to be Muslim. But he took his oath of office on a Quran, which is at its roots antithetical to the socialist value system. With the harsh winter that New York has been experiencing, we have seen his devotion to Islamic values over those of Marx and Engels.

While socialism is theoretically committed to the well-being of all people in society, the Quran teaches something entirely different. The primary text of Islamic theology is extremely clear: all infidels are to be converted, enslaved, or killed. The only people who matter to the observant Muslim are other observant Muslims who are dedicated to the goal of the Quran: a worldwide caliphate run by Sharia law. That includes Christians, Jews, and even other Muslims who are not observant and seeking to establish a worldwide caliphate.

The harsh winter New York has been experiencing has shown Mamdani’s true colors, and they are not socialist. The New York Post reported on Tuesday that 18 homeless people have died outside because of the weather. Even before his inauguration, Mamdani committed to reversing his predecessor’s policy of clearing out homeless encampments. At the time, he said that this policy was in order to ultimately provide them with real housing, but as we have seen over the last week, this was never his intention.

Rather, it is clear that his intention is and has always been to let the infidel die.

Brian Stettin, who was a senior adviser in former mayor Eric Adams’ administration, made it simple and clear when he told the Post, “When a person is in imminent danger, there is no debate. Whatever ideological divides we have should not have any impact on these policies during a ‘Code Blue.'”  And former city Comptroller Scott Stringer expressed it well, saying, “The question is: Is it ideology or incompetence for the lack of action? Saving lives is the most important thing you can do as an elected official. The standard has to be in this extreme weather, ‘Can they survive the night?”

Many Americans are taking Mamdani to task for being cruel and heartless. They are mistaken. As Robert Spencer has so eloquently taught countless times, including before Congress, Islam is not a religion of peace. It is not a religion seeking to take care of everyone who is not Muslim. It is devoted to the purpose of creating a worldwide caliphate. By allowing homeless infidels to die, Mamdani is simply living by his theological standards in practice.

The lesson here is not just about Mamdani and New York. We already knew that this man was dangerous to American society with his “socialist” values. The greater lesson is for the rest of America to recognize that we cannot continue to elect Muslims into political office. As difficult as that is to say, it is true, as the Quran is directly antithetical to American values and goals. Islam is not a religion of peace, nor is it a “Chinese menu” that you can pick and choose from. From the Islamic theological point of view, either you accept Islam completely, including what should be done to all infidels, or you are yourself an infidel who must be converted, enslaved, or killed.

All Americans better wake up and realize that the enemy is already within, or we will undoubtedly, God forbid, have more cities facing the tragedies that New York is now dealing with.

https://pjmedia.com/rabbi-michael-barclay/2026/02/11/new-yorks-winter-shows-mamdani-is-not-a-socialist-but-a-devout-muslim-n4949379?utm_source=pjmediavip&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl_pm

Watchdog Says Fulton County Had More Votes Without Ballots Than Biden’s ‘Win’

Watchdog Says Fulton County Had More Votes Without Ballots Than Biden’s ‘Win’

AP Photo/Brynn Anderson

Among the 2020 election evidence the FBI seized in Fulton County comes the revelation that over 17,000 digitally tallied votes apparently have no actual ballots to match. So says a Georgia election watchdog.

This is tremendously important because Joe Biden “won” Georgia in 2020 by a mere 11,000 votes. The allegation not only casts doubt on the 2020 presidential election results, but also on the security of our election systems ahead of a crucial midterm election. Not only Georgians but all Americans should be concerned about this case and the strong possibility that Biden actually did not win that state in 2020.

And what about other states? If even one county in a single state had election-altering issues, the high likelihood is that others did as well. In fact, in my own state of Arizona, there is evidence that there were multiple illegal ballot types being counted in the 2020 results, among other serious problems. And if these problems are not addressed, they will come back to bite us in another election.

Real Clear Investigations senior reporter Paul Sperry posted on X on Feb. 10, “Georgia election watchdog Garland Favorito of Atlanta-based VoterGA.org just told me that the FBI raid of Fulton County's ballot warehouse will show that ‘Fulton certified [mostly Biden] votes for which they have no ballots. There are 17,852 certified votes for which they have no digital ballot images and likely no ballots.’ In 2020, Biden's margin over Trump in Georgia was a narrow 11,779 votes.”

For Our VIPsThe Dem Senator Who Hates Voter ID But Wants IDs for Campaign Events

In other words, if Favorito's claim turns out to be true, the number of illicit votes cast in Fulton County exceeded the margin by which Joe Biden won the state.

The impact of a stolen election is incalculable. The 2020 election results changed not only America but the world forever. All the wars that broke out as foreign governments and terrorist entities realize how weak the Biden administration was, all of the domestic crises, the massive influx of illegal aliens, the lost jobs, the many judges (including a Supreme Court justice) appointed, the many children permanently mutilated with “transgender treatments” — it would be impossible to list all the tragic results here. 

I am currently reading in Daniel Greenfield’s fascinating historical work, Domestic Enemies: The Founding Fathers' Fight Against the Left, about the origins of the Democrat Party and how it always depended on fear, lies, election fraud, bribery, and corruption to gain and retain power. And from the very beginning, Democrats always espoused one or more policies as key parts of their platform that were directly in contradiction to the principles laid forth in our Founding documents. 

Some things never change, but one thing that ought to change — for the better — is Republicans’ determination to crush the election fraud apparatus. We keep trying to tell ourselves that leftists deep down have similar goals and standards of integrity to us, but this is simply not true. Just as Democrats are proud of dismembering unborn babies and chopping off teenagers’ breasts, so they also — along with some RINO allies — do not believe it is wrong to rig elections so long as it benefits them. 

https://pjmedia.com/catherinesalgado/2026/02/11/watchdog-says-fulton-county-has-more-votes-without-ballots-than-bidens-win-n4949373?utm_source=pjmediavip&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl_pm

From Wallace to Walz

From Wallace to Walz

by Scott Johnson in HistoryIllegal immigrationMinnesotaTim Walz

The resistance to the enforcement of immigration law by state and local authorities bears just about all the hallmarks of the resistance to desegregation by George Wallace and others who adhered to the doctrine of “massive resistance.” It’s a point John, Bill, and I have each made in our own way. I traced the roots back to the Confederacy in “Inside the battle of the Twin Cities.”

Last week Wall Street Journal Main Street columnist Bill McGurn took a look at legal issues raised by the January 18 anti-ICE Cities Church riot in Saint Paul. Now in this week’s column he turns to the doctrine of massive resistance to the enforcement of immigration law promulgated by the state and local authorities in “Minnesota Burning.” He takes as his theme the line that runs from George Wallace to Tim Walz. He writes:

The battle between federal agents trying to enforce the law and Minnesota state officials working to ensure that it can’t be enforced has a more immediate precedent that might surprise Gov. Walz and the rest of Minnesota’s ICE resisters.

It dates to 1964, when Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy dispatched the Federal Bureau of Investigation to Mississippi to find three young civil-rights activists who had gone missing. Their bodies were discovered six weeks later beneath an earthen dam. The men had been killed by members of the Ku Klux Klan and the local sheriff’s office. The film “Mississippi Burning,” starring Gene Hackman, was loosely based on this story.

The FBI’s lead investigator was Joe Sullivan, whom Tom Clancy called “the greatest lawman America ever produced.” Sullivan was also a colleague of my father, an FBI agent. Sullivan once told me that he’d discovered that police departments and other government institutions in Mississippi were infested with Klansmen. They were, he said, a “state within a state,” operating to nullify federal law and deprive African-Americans of their rights.

Isn’t the nullification of federal law what’s happening in Minnesota today? The attacks on ICE may be cloaked in righteousness, but it’s self-righteousness.

The historical ironies abound. Today the activists operating to force ICE to leave have zero appreciation that their defiance of federal authority puts them in the same position as George Wallace and like-minded Southern sheriffs and governors.

In 1957 President Dwight Eisenhower had to invoke the Insurrection Act to enforce federal court orders to integrate Little Rock Central High School after the Supreme Court held in Brown v. Board of Education (1954) that segregated schools were “inherently unequal.” John F. Kennedy did the same five years later to help black students trying to enter Ole Miss.

JFK did so again in 1963 at the University of Alabama. There Gov. Wallace infamously stood in the university’s doorway to prevent two black students from matriculating.

Today the same sort of clash over federal authority is playing out on the streets of Minneapolis. There the anti-ICE forces believe they can nullify the enforcement of U.S. immigration law and get ICE to abandon their city.

McGurn turns to Professor John Yoo:

“Walz and Frey have put themselves in the same constitutional camp as Bull Connor and the Southerners who led the ‘massive resistance’—as they called it then—campaign to Brown v. Board of Education,” says John Yoo, a UC Berkeley law professor who served in the Justice Department during the George W. Bush administration. “The segregationists denied that the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution gave the national government the right to finally interpret and execute federal law.

“Regardless of the policy merits of the immigration enforcement policy,” he says, “there is no doubt that immigration law is purely federal, that it gives the federal government the right to enforce it free of obstruction by the states. It leaves Trump in the same position constitutionally as those who wanted to enforce Brown upon a recalcitrant South.”

George Wallace vowed “segregation today…segregation tomorrow…segregation forever.” If only Walz were as candid as Wallace, the anti-ICE resistance could also adapt his vow to their own uses: “illegal immigration today…illegal immigration tomorrow…illegal immigration forever.”

https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2026/02/rhymes-with-segregation.php

Sunday, February 15, 2026

Trump Plans to Crush 'Horrible, Disingenuous Cheater' Dems With Voter ID EO to Lock Down Midterms, Beyond

Trump Plans to Crush 'Horrible, Disingenuous Cheater' Dems With Voter ID EO to Lock Down Midterms, Beyond

AP Photo/Alex Brandon

President Trump announced late Friday that he plans to pursue an executive order to enforce strict voter ID requirements nationwide, vowing it will happen for the 2026 midterms regardless of what happens with the Save America Act in Congress.

As RedState's Ward Clark reported, the Save America Act received a bit of a jolt in the arm with support from Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME), bringing support to 50 votes. (Filibuster-proof passage still looks tough even at 50+1 with a VP JD Vance tiebreaker).

Still, the President is not going to rely on Congress to get this thing over the finish line. And it's hard to blame him on that front.

"The Democrats refuse to vote for Voter I.D., or Citizenship. The reason is very simple — They want to continue to cheat in Elections," Trump wrote on his Truth Social media platform. "This was not what our Founders desired."

He promised to develop a legal argument that he'll articulate to the American people shortly.

"There will be Voter I.D. for the Midterm Elections, whether approved by Congress or not!" he promised.


READ MORE: Collins Commits, SAVE America Act Hits 50 Votes!

Why Are Democrats Trying to Protect Illegals at Polling Places? GOP Senator Demands Answers


In a fiery follow-up, President Trump blasted Democrats for opposing an issue that a vast majority of the American people on all sides of the political spectrum support, referring to the resistance party as "horrible, disingenuous cheaters."

He urged Republicans to vociferously embrace voter ID as a winning message.

"Republicans must put this at the top of every speech — It is a CAN’T MISS FOR RE-ELECTION IN THE MIDTERMS, AND BEYOND!" Trump insisted.

"This is an issue that must be fought, and must be fought, NOW! If we can’t get it through Congress, there are Legal reasons why this SCAM is not permitted," his post continued. "I will be presenting them shortly, in the form of an Executive Order."

Already anticipating the pushback such an order would generate, the President expressed hope that the Supreme Court would view his order through the lens of trying to save the nation through secure elections. He went on to explain exactly why voter ID is so important to secure the midterms and what will happen if Democrats win bigly.

It should frighten every American.

"These Corrupt and Deranged Democrats, if they ever gain power, will not only be adding two States to our roster of 50, with all of the baggage thereto, but will also PACK THE COURT with a total of 21 Supreme Court Justices, THEIR DREAM, which they will submit easily and rapidly when they immediately move to terminate the Filibuster, probably in their first week, or sooner," Trump said.

"Our Country will never be the same if they allow these demented and evil people to knowingly, and happily, destroy it."

No lies detected.

Voter ID is a non-controversial issue. Americans want it. Even Democrat voters want it. And, despite Democrats suggesting minorities and women aren't bright enough to clear the hurdles to secure identification, every demographic wants it.

According to a Pew Research poll last summer, 83% of Americans favor requiring all voters to show government-issued photo ID to vote, including 95% of Republicans and 71% of Democrats. Just 16% of Americans are in opposition.

CNN data guru Harry Enten explained that the people are on board with Nikki Minaj and that support runs "across races."

“The bottom line is this: Voter ID is NOT controversial in this country. A photo ID to vote is NOT controversial in this country. It is not controversial by party, and it is not controversial by race," Enten said. "The vast majority of Americans agree.”

In a sane world, a bill like the Save America Act would zip through both chambers of Congress and be on the President's desk in short order. Instead, hampered by Democrats who seek to allow fraud to run rampant and Republicans who oftentimes struggle to find a spine to fight back, it has to be dragged across the finish line by the President. 

https://redstate.com/rusty-weiss/2026/02/14/trump-plans-to-crush-horrible-disingenuous-cheater-dems-with-voter-id-eo-to-lock-down-midterms-beyond-n2199147?utm_source=rsmorningbriefingvip&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl

Let’s Rip Democrats Apart for Fun (and Because They’re Truly Awful)

Let’s Rip Democrats Apart for Fun (and Because They’re Truly Awful)

AP Photo/Lynne Sladky

What a time to be alive, and by that I mean it’s really stupid. Not the time, per se, but a whole bunch of people in it who get attention, lie like crazy to the public, and make a lot of money while doing it. They aren’t all Democrats, but most are, and all deserve a swift kick in the ass, so put on our steel toe boots and give them one, shall we?

I thought the Super Bowl sucked. The game was boring for the first three quarters, and by the time anyone started scoring it was all over. The halftime show was garbage, not because Bad Bunny sucks – I think he does, but I know that most people don’t like the music I like either (or else you would’ve heard about them and they’d be rich musicians rather than just recovering alcoholics) – but because it was stupid. It sounded like the same song for 15 minutes and the non-stop repeating of about 8 words, coupled with a bunch of people grinding crotches. Innovative! 

Watching morons like Ana Navarro almost cry on The View over watching a show with more in common with what should be flushed than applauded only cemented by opinion. “There was so much culture,” white people sobbed. I’ve never been to Puerto Rico, and don’t really care to go, but I have to assume they’ve come up with a little more than straw hats and self-hernia exams. Maybe I’m wrong, but I don’t really care.

The songs were stupid. Seriously, read the English translations of the lyrics and it’s like something a 13-year-old girl would write in her dream journal about her crush, only if she recently suffered a concussion. I’ve had belches with more substance. 

I watched it because A) it’s my job to talk about what’s going on in the world, B) because I could ignore it while I took down our Christmas tree (yes, I’m aware of the date, but I’ve got two kids who beg every time I mentioned putting it away and they were upstairs, indifferent to both the game and the halftime show, so I took advantage of my opportunity). 

I don’t speak Spanish, so I have no idea what the lyrics were, though I could tell they were repeated A LOT. No matter how fast the baby talk spewed from his mouth, you can’t make “I’m gonna take them all to the VIP, the VIP, hey. Say hello to auntie. Let’s take a selfie, say ‘cheese,’ hey. Let the ones I already f*cked smile. In a VIP, a VIP, hey Say hello to auntie Let’s take a selfie, say ‘cheese.’ Let those who have already forgotten about me smile,” sound anything other than stupid, no matter the language.

Speaking of stupid and language, Spanish wasn’t the only language used to convey idiocy. While they hate it because white people came up with it, Democrats still use English to communicate their dumbassery to their army of flying monkeys more than any other. And no, that’s not a commentary on the video that had Democrats pretending to be offended because it portrayed a bunch of liberal politicians as primates, including the Obamas. 

How dare anyone treat the Obamas the same way they treated George W. Bush for 8 years? Everyone must be treated the same, except some people need to be treated differently based on their skin color. 

Yeah, that’s actually what Democrats are saying, and have always said. They have never changed their objectives (power for them), only their tactics. Segregation and treating people differently out of racial hatred to hold on to power worked for them until it no longer did, now they preach segregation and treating people differently out of racial tolerance and diversity to hold on to power.

Sometimes reality is the best parody…

The Left brings this disconnect to the debate around voter ID. To them, voting is important, so sacrosanct, that any effort to ensure the integrity of that vote is forbidden. Go ahead and try to square that circle.

Of course, they claim voter fraud never happens, which is undercut by all the cases of voter fraud that are uncovered every year. That the media refuses to tie them all together, treating each as an isolated event and not part of a bigger picture, tells you everything you need to know – people not trying to hide anything don’t hide things. 

Rather than try to find the few Americans who both can’t prove who they are and want to vote and help them get a photo ID to protect the integrity of voting, Democrats would rather those people (if they exist) not be able to work, bank, travel, enter a federal building, drink or have any semblance of a normal, productive life. Such compassion, and all to avoid protecting the integrity of voting. Weird, right?

To put the cherry on top of the hypocrisy cake, Democrats are going to filibuster the SAVE Act to bring security to voting. The filibuster that Democrats repeatedly called a “relic of Jim Crow” when they were trying to get rid of it when they controlled the Senate, to block what Democrats now call “Jim Crow 2.0.” 

Of course, Democrats would know a lot about Jim Crow, since it was an invention exclusively of their design, so…

These people are awful, they truly are, and worse than anyone could ever convey. This is all in just one week; a few days, really. No matter how much contempt you hold these people in, it is not enough and never could be.

https://townhall.com/columnists/derekhunter/2026/02/10/lets-rip-democrats-apart-for-fun-and-because-theyre-truly-awful-n2671001?utm_source=thdailyvip&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl&utm_content=ncl-DegZu2gKc9&_nlid=DegZu2gKc9&_nhids=ncyGZH9gh1kbls

When It Comes to Climate and Energy, Let’s Retire the Politics of Fear

When It Comes to Climate and Energy, Let’s Retire the Politics of Fear

In the latest example of the scare tactics favored by climate change alarmists, it was announced last month that 2025 “was the third-warmest in modern history, according to Copernicus, the European Union’s climate change monitoring service,” as reported by NBC News.

The story added, “The conclusion came as no surprise: The past 11 years have been the 11 warmest on record, according to Copernicus data. In 2025, the average global temperature was about 1.47 degrees Celsius (2.65 Fahrenheit) higher than from 1850 to 1900 — the period scientists use as a reference point, since it precedes the industrial era in which massive amounts of carbon pollution have been pumped into the atmosphere.”

As usual, our most affordable and reliable fuel sources were blamed.

“The primary reason for these record temperatures is the accumulation of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, dominated by the burning of fossil fuels,” according to Samantha Burgess, the “strategic lead on climate” for the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts, which operates Copernicus, according to the report.

Sometimes it feels like the climate change crusaders are oblivious to everything going on around them. For decades, they’ve been resorting to the same tired strategies to convince us that doom and gloom are just around the corner if we don’t change our ways. What they ignore is that their tactics aren’t working – more people than ever are tuning them out.

Americans in particular have grown wise to the predictions that don’t come true and the demands that don’t make sense. In fact, so badly has science become blatantly politicized that the number of people who have a great amount of trust in science keeps shrinking.

That fact was backed up by a recent Pew Research Center report that found that “Americans’ confidence in scientists remains lower than it was prior to the start of the COVID-19 pandemic.” To many of us, it is now obvious that the inconsistent guidance on Covid and many pandemic edicts that were later found to be ineffective and even misleading demonstrated that science was not above being overtly politicized.

While the Pew study noted a Democrat-Republican disparagement regarding trust in science (Democrats trust it more, Republicans less), only 28 percent of all U.S. adults said they have “a great deal” of confidence in scientists “to act in the public’s best interest.”

I recently noted the welcome admission by manmade climate change believer Noah Kauffman, a senior research scholar at Columbia University’s Center on Global Energy Policy, who, writing for The Atlantic, said flatly that “the full effects of climate change are unknowable, and a more constructive public discussion about climate policy will require getting more comfortable with that.” Whether in regard to vaccines, dietary guidelines or climate change, in recent years science has too often found itself at the center of partisan political debates and lost the trust of many Americans by appearing to support certain causes over others based on ideology rather than pure scientific data.

But we can’t afford to let that happen when it comes to making energy decisions. Why? Because no one can deny that affordable energy is the key to economic prosperity for American households and businesses.

When energy costs are low, manufacturers can produce goods at a lower cost, resulting in more competitive products domestically and internationally.

When fuel is affordable – whether diesel, gasoline or jet fuel – all modes of transportation, including airlines, trucking and shipping companies, can charge less, resulting in savings for all consumers.

Heating, cooling and transportation costs represent the most significant share of most families’ budgets. When energy costs are reasonable, household spending on other goods and services increases, not only helping individual families but contributing to overall economic growth.

In addition to everything else, there is real damage caused by manipulating science in a way that puts climate over people. It puts people in danger and keeps them in poverty – and ultimately only a privileged few will benefit.

Consider the billions the Biden Administration doled out to political cronies on its way out the door in the name of the climate cause. Consider also the Obama Administration giving a half billion dollars to Solyndra, the solar panel company accused of engaging in “a pattern of false and misleading assertions,” only to see it go bust – all at the expense of hardworking, taxpaying Americans.

That’s why it’s important to remove the manipulation of the energy sector from the politicization that has infiltrated the scientific community. Americans should not be pawns in the effort to frighten our people or our government into abandoning our most reliable, affordable and increasingly clean energy sources.

There’s a better way. By passing the Affordable, Reliable, Clean Energy Act (ARC-ES), Congress can codify into law the guarantee that Americans will always have access to low-cost energy, regardless of the effort of progressive political groups to weaponize science in order to funnel tax dollars to prop up “alternatives.”

Anyone can manipulate data to come up with horrifying “what if” scenarios designed to frighten or intimidate people into making their preferred choices. That’s not how to make public policy. We need to pass ARC-ES to move past the days when the science that fewer people trust is manipulated to justify changes in energy policy that few people want. When it comes to science, let’s trade the politics of panic for the integrity of facts.

https://www.realclearenergy.org/articles/2026/02/06/when_it_comes_to_climate_and_energy_lets_retire_the_politics_of_fear_1162953.html

Trump Is Set to Make the 'Largest Act of Deregulation in the History'

Trump Is Set to Make the 'Largest Act of Deregulation in the History'

The White House

The Trump administration is set to repeal an Obama-era scientific finding that serves as the legal basis for federal greenhouse-gas regulation, marking the largest rollback of regulations in U.S. history. 

From the Wall Street Journal

The reversal targets the 2009 “endangerment finding,” which concluded that six greenhouse gases pose a threat to public health and welfare. The finding provided the legal underpinning for the Environmental Protection Agency’s climate rules, which limited emissions from power plants and tightened fuel-economy standards for vehicles under the Clean Air Act...

The final rule, set to be made public later this week, removes the regulatory requirements to measure, report, certify and comply with federal greenhouse-gas emission standards for motor vehicles, and repeals associated compliance programs, credit provisions and reporting obligations for industries, according to administration officials.

“This amounts to the largest act of deregulation in the history of the United States,” EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin added in an interview.

While the move would not directly affect emissions standards for power plants or oil and gas facilities, the rollback is expected to affect vehicle emissions standards and could open the door for the Trump administration to target environmental regulations more broadly.

"Repealing the Endangerment Finding is an essential step toward restoring sanity to federal energy and vehicle policy. Implemented by Obama-era bureaucrats, it has been used for years to justify costly and needless mandates that have driven up the price of cars and trucks," Jason Isaac, the CEO of the American Energy Institute, said. "Ending it dismantles the legal backbone of those mandates, delivers relief to consumers, and opens the door to rolling back similar regulatory overreach across the energy sector. This action restores the Clean Air Act to its intended purpose, reins in agency power the Supreme Court has already warned against, and returns major policy decisions to the people’s elected representatives.”

Environmental groups are expected to challenge the move in court.

The Environmental Defense Fund said that reversing the finding would “eliminate some of our most vital tools to protect people from the pollution that causes climate change," and that the Trump administration is actively seeking to make air dirtier for Americans.

However, the Trump administration views the move as a necessary step toward unleashing American energy and driving down costs for consumers.

“More energy drives human flourishing,” Interior Secretary Doug Burgum said. “Energy abundance is the thing that we have to focus on, not regulating certain forms of energy out.”

"President Trump continues to deliver for the American people," James Taylor, the President of the Heartland Institute, said. "The Obama administration's Endangerment Finding was a wrong-headed, politicized determination that defied science and stifled the American people. CO2 is the gift of life for planet Earth, not a pollutant or a threat to public health and welfare."

While the move should be lauded as a great success, some warn that the move can easily be undone by future administrations.

Steve Milloy, a former Trump EPA Transition Team Advisor and Senior Fellow at the Energy & Environment Legal Institute, argued that the next step should be overturning Massachusetts v. EPA, which allowed the EPA to regulate greenhouse gases. By overturning the Supreme Court decision, the Trump administration can ensure that the EPA is not allowed to simply regulate as it sees fit, and it must instead go through Congress, and in turn, the American people.

"Rescinding the endangerment finding is great, but it’s not the ballgame. Not only does the rescission have to stand up in court, it must result in the overturning of the 2007 Supreme Court decision in Massachusetts v. EPA, where the Court wrongly ruled that EPA could regulate greenhouse gases even though Congress did not expressly authorize it," Miloy said. "The 2022 SCOTUS decision in West Virginia v. EPA held that EPA must have express congressional authorization for major regulatory programs. So, endangerment finding litigation must result in West Virginia v. EPA trumping Massachusetts v. EPA. Even if the Trump EPA wins in court with respect to rescinding the endangerment finding, without also overturning Massachusetts v. EPA,  the next Democrat-run EPA will simply re-issue the endangerment finding, and all the Trump EPA’s great work will have been erased."

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/dmitri-bolt/2026/02/10/trump-admin-to-rollback-key-obama-era-environmental-regulation-n2671039?utm_source=thdailypmvip&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl&utm_content=ncl-hCzkRX2B6D&_nlid=hCzkRX2B6D&_nhids=nclznsdDtLyqls