…is a sea turning rough from fossil fueled boats, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is 357 Magnum, with a post on Supreme Court striking down Hawaii law restricting concealed carry.
Read: If All You See… »
…is a sea turning rough from fossil fueled boats, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is 357 Magnum, with a post on Supreme Court striking down Hawaii law restricting concealed carry.
Read: If All You See… »
I’m actually surprised we didn’t get this sooner (via Green Jihad)
Using a link you can read if you want
In his battle to clean the murky waters of the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool, President Donald Trump has tried draining, painting, hydrogen peroxide and what the Interior Department describes as “high-tech nanobubble ozone technology.” But he has seemingly overlooked two of the most important factors that experts say are driving unsightly — and sometimes dangerous — profusions of algae: pollution and climate change.
Algae thrive in warm, still waters, causing populations to explode as global temperatures rise, said environmental engineer Steve Chapra, an emeritus professor at Tufts University.
Short-term measures like those Trump has pursued may temporarily reduce algae populations in some water bodies, Chapra said. But unless they grapple with warming and nutrient pollution, any efforts to address these blooms in the Reflecting Pool and elsewhere are doomed to fail in the long run.
The consequences could be profound, because the problems presented by blooms go far beyond aesthetics, he added. They can disrupt aquatic food chains, deplete oxygen in water bodies and even produce deadly toxins.
“It’s probably the biggest water quality problem in the world,” Chapra said. “The Reflecting Pool is the canary in the coal mine.”
Wow, that sure ramped up to Category 5 Doom, eh?
The Credentialed Media is not taking this well, as you could expect
Supreme Court undermines TPS program, putting 147,000 immigrants in Texas at risk of deportation
The Supreme Court ruled Thursday that the Trump administration can revoke Temporary Protected Status for immigrants from Haiti and Syria. The 6-to-3 ruling puts more than 1.3 million immigrants under TPS across the United States, including roughly 147,000 in Texas, at imminent risk of arrest and deportation.
Writing the conservative majority’s opinion in Mullin v. Doe, Associate Justice Samuel Alito said TPS functions entirely at the discretion of the president and is not subject to review by the courts.
“Congress created TPS in 1990 to provide short-term humanitarian relief for aliens who cannot safely return to their home countries,” Alito wrote. “Although designed to afford temporary relief, TPS designations in practice have often lasted for decades,”
Alito added that Haitian immigrants had received a TPS designation after the 2010 earthquake in the Caribbean country.
“The Supreme Court is signaling that lower courts should not interfere with the executive’s authority, that when Congress grants a broad discretionary power to grant temporary status, the president should also have the same power to revoke the temporary status,” said Josh Blackman, a professor of constitutional law at South Texas College of Law Houston. “I think this is a very important case of presidential power.”
First off, they are not immigrants: they are foreign aliens who were allowed into the U.S. temporarily. That’s the whole of their legal status. Second, how quickly till a wackjob federal judge comes out with a ruling which blocks ending TPS for some group in total avoidance of the SCOTUS ruling?
Seth Chandler, who teaches constitutional law at the University of Houston Law Center, said the ruling has dramatic consequences for Texas, which hosts one of the largest concentrations of TPS holders in the U.S.
“It basically streamlines the ability of the Trump administration to revoke TPS status, not just for the Haitians and Syrians who were litigating in the case the Supreme Court decided today, but with respect to Hondurans, Nepalis, Afghans, and perhaps critically for Houston, potentially Venezuelans as well,” Chandler said.
There does come a point when TPS ends, Democrats. It is not permanent.
The decision came down immediately after another immigration-related decision, which allows the Trump administration to enforce its “wait in Mexico” policy for asylum seekers.
As to that
(AIC) U.S. law provides that any person who is physically present in the United States or who “arrives in” the United States may apply for asylum. Congress further directed that immigration officers must “inspect” any noncitizen who “arrives in” the United States to determine if they should be admitted to the country — a function U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) officers carry out thousands of times per day at ports of entry. (snip)
Today, the Supreme Court blessed the practice of metering, overturning a 9th Circuit decision which had found that CBP had an affirmative obligation to process people who arrive at ports of entry but who have not yet stepped on U.S. soil after CBP officers have blocked their passage. The Court found that there was a difference between “arrives in” and “arrives at” the border, and declared that only those individuals who have physically set foot in the United States have a right to be inspected and apply for asylum.
In other words, we do not have to let them in no matter how loud they yet “asylum”.
Read: Sniffles: Supreme Court Ruling Allows Ending Of TPS For Haitians And Syrians »
OK, perhaps it’s a bit hyperbolic to think that all those Brits over here in the US for the World Cup would declare asylum as “climate refugees”, but, it would be funny as hell
Britons ordered to remove air conditioning from homes in 40C heat under Net Zero crackdown
Britons have been ordered to remove air conditioning from their homes – despite the country baking in up to 40C heat this week – under a fresh Net Zero crackdown.
Planning officials at councils have told residents to take down their cooling units over concerns about carbon dioxide emissions.
They say AC, despite the heat, should serve only as a “last resort”.
The crackdown comes from building regulations which demand “active cooling” is used only after all “passive cooling” methods, like opening windows or running fans, have been exhausted.
I wonder if AC via the heatpumps the UK government is attempting to force on the peasants would be acceptable?
But permission becomes mandatory in specific scenarios, including properties in conservation areas – with separate regulations applying to flats, leasehold properties, and shared buildings.
This creates situations where units are fitted believing they comply with rules, only for council enforcement teams to turn up and demand their removal.
One Londoner received orders to “permanently remove” two cooling units from the rear of their property, The Telegraph revealed.
Camden Council’s planning inspectors determined there was “no justification” for the equipment, ruling it breached the authority’s “cooling hierarchy” policy.
Can you imagine someone from the Government showing up at your residence and telling you to take your AC out? You’d tell them to fuck right off, and fuck off while fucking off.
Londoners are at greater risk of enforcement action.
The capital’s borough councils have incorporated rules derived from Sir Sadiq Khan’s “London Plan” into their local planning frameworks.
Brits should all be asking if the government people who are forcing this have removed their own air conditioning, and that they need to prove it. Because I bet they haven’t.
Meanwhile
It’s wild that the people who vote for all this get enraged when they get it.
Read: Britons Apply For US Asylum As UK Elites Tell Them To Take AC Out »
…is a fish species that will soon die out from carbon pollution, you might just just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Watts Up With That?, with a post on “ecocide”
Read: If All You See… »
They just can’t help themselves, and, of course, this violates the Supreme Court ruling in Trump v CASA on nationwide injuctions
A federal judge, appointed by former President Barack Obama, has permanently enjoined an executive order by President Donald Trump that sought to reinforce election integrity by requiring proof of American citizenship to vote in federal elections, among other reforms.
On Tuesday, Judge Denise Casper, appointed to the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts by Obama in 2010, ruled that Trump’s executive order demanding that the Election Assistance Commission include a proof-of-American-citizenship requirement in its national mail voter registration form is unconstitutional.
“The Court DECLARES that §§ 2(a), 3(d), 4(a), 7(a) and 7(b) of the Executive Order are unconstitutional and void because they are ultra vires and violate the separation of powers under the United States Constitution,” Casper writes:
The Court PERMANENTLY ENJOINS Defendants, except President Trump, from taking any action to implement or enforce § 2(a) of the Executive Order or otherwise taking any steps to require documentary proof of citizenship as part of the federal mail-in voter registration form provided for in 52 U.S.C. § 20508.
This means a quick trip through the courts, where her “ruling” will most likely be shot down by a court of appeals, and, if not, make it to the Supreme Court. Another wacko from DC ruled the same way back in late October of 2025, so, why bother with another ruling? So if we apply CASA, that means no proof of citizenship only in DC and Massachusetts. Places that overwhelmingly vote Democrat anyhow.
Among other claims, Casper writes that there is no evidence that Trump’s executive order is necessary because “widespread” fraud in American elections seemingly does not exist.
“On the other hand, there is no evidence in this record of widespread ‘illegal voting, discrimination, fraud, and other forms of malfeasance and error’ within American elections, which the Executive Order purports to safeguard against,” Casper writes.
Bank robberies are also rare, but, they’re against the law.
Read: Wacko Judge Blocks Trump EO On Proof Of Citizenship To Vote »
Nothing like a good old fashioned case of climahypocrisy
In a visit to Capitol, Jessie Diggins and other Olympians push for climate change solutions
Olympian Jessie Diggins visited Capitol Hill with her four medals in hand Wednesday to advocate for clean air, clean water and a healthy planet.
America’s most decorated cross-country skier is part of “Protect Our Winters,” an athlete-driven environmental group that sent a coalition to Washington to meet with lawmakers Tuesday and Wednesday. The group is most concerned with how the Environmental Protection Agency has weakened key climate, water and pollution regulations since President Donald Trump returned to office.
“I don’t want to stick my head in the sand and ignore the world burning,” Diggins said in an interview. “I feel like I have a responsibility to use my voice to advocate for change. And so that’s why it’s so important to me, because I want my great-grandkids to be able to build a snowman and try cross-country skiing someday, and be able go hiking and fishing and camping in the summer, and breathe clean air. I want that for them very badly.”
Diggins retired from professional ski racing this year after earning bronze in the women’s 10?kilometer interval start at the 2026 Milan Cortina Winter Olympics. Many skiers expressed concern during these Olympic Games about climate change and the accelerating melt of the world’s glaciers. A warming world jeopardizes the future of their sport.
Diggins lives in Massachusetts. Did she drive an EV or take the train? Or a fossil fueled airplane? She and the rest of the athletes who went to Italy during the totally normal Modern Warm Period all took fossil fueled flights.
It’s not the typical lobbying group. Professional ski mountaineer Brody Leven only owns a suit to go to Washington with Protect Our Winters. But, he said, they are the ones who can hopefully bring people together around policy solutions to climate change.
“We’re good at looking at adversity in the face and still moving forward,” he said. “And we’re good at knowing something is going to be hard and trying to do it anyways.”
They met with Democrats and Republicans. Olympians Jaelin Kauf, Gus Schumacher, Bea Kim, Julia Kern and Olivia Giaccio were involved, Protect Our Winters said.
Did any of them take the train or EV? Leven came from Utah, as does Kauf. Then we have, in order, Alaska, California, Vermont, and Utah. And not one article I’ve read that is not from the AP, as above, nor the AP article above asked them how they traveled nor mentions their fossil fueled travel.
Read: Olympians Take Long Fossil Fueled Trips To D.C., Complain About ‘Climate Change’ »
I dearly love how many Credentialed Media outlets go with this
Supreme Court sides with Trump administration in immigration case dealing with green card holders
The Supreme Court sided with the Trump administration Tuesday in an immigration case dealing with the government’s power over green card holders accused of crimes.
Orange Man Bad. Oh, wait
The 6-3 decision centers on an immigration officer’s 2012 decision to put lawful permanent resident Muk Choi Lau on immigration parole when he returned from a short trip to China because he had been accused of a counterfeiting crime.
Wait, 2012? Was Trump president back then?
Lau argued that overstepped the officer’s authority, and the decision wrongly allowed the Department of Homeland Security to swiftly begin deportation proceedings after he pleaded guilty to selling counterfeit clothes in New Jersey.
The high court disagreed. “Border officers did not have the burden to establish by clear and convincing evidence that Lau had committed a crime involving moral turpitude,” Justice Clarence Thomas wrote in the opinion.
Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson disagreed, writing that the decision to put Lau on immigration parole effectively sentenced him to “immigration limbo” before he’d been convicted of any crime.
“I worry that the Court has now handed the Government a massive blank check,” she wrote in a dissent joined by her two liberal colleagues.
Dumbest justice ever. She yammers about things that are not part of a legal decision.
(Cornell) In September 2007, Muk Choi Lau, a Chinese national, was admitted to the U.S. as an LPR. In May 2012, Lau was charged with third-degree trademark counterfeiting in New Jersey. Before he went to trial, Lau temporarily left the country. Upon his return to the U.S. in June 2012, Lau was not admitted to the U.S. but instead was paroled due to his pending charge. Later, Lau pled guilty to the counterfeiting charge and was sentenced to two years’ probation. In 2014, DHS sought to remove Lau, alleging that since Lau had committed a crime of moral turpitude, he was ineligible to be admitted into the United States upon his return to the country. Lau challenged DHS’s removal efforts, claiming that as an LPR, he was presumptively already admitted into the United States when arriving from his time abroad.
More at that link, and, yes, the Trump DOJ did argue against Lau, as is their job. But, it started under Obama. Obviously, Sotomayor and Kagen voted in favor of the criminal alien.
Read: Supreme Court Sides With Obama Admin On Deporting Green Card Holders »
I’ve been a constant at the gym for about 13 years, average 3-5 times a week, an hour to an hour and a half each time. Here are Random Thoughts in no particular order
And, best of all, enjoy yourself.
Read: Teach’s Rules(ish) Of Gym »