In yet another escalation of Europe's war on free speech, Finland's supreme court considers whether to punish a bishop and member of parliament for quoting the Bible. Lower courts cleared them of all charges.

For those who remember the City of Grants Pass case, where the Supreme Court held that (obviously) cities can enforce generally applicable anti-camping bans on the public roads and sidewalks without violating the Eighth Amendment, it may not surprise you to learn that the Grants Pass decision is effectively a dead letter in many jurisdictions. Plaintiffs and federal judges have found many other theories to stop cities from cleaning up the streets and sidewalks. Consider this case from Berkeley -- not exactly a bastion of conservatism! Berkeley wants to remove a large homeless encampment because, among other reasons, there was an outbreak of Leptospirosis. Well, a federal judge in San Francisco has ruled that removal of tents and RVs are subject to...the Americans with Disabilities Act! Think about how crazy that is. The ADA requires reasonable accommodations for disabled persons so that they can enjoy City programs and services. But what the judge has effectively ruled is that ADA claimants are entitled to reasonable accommodations from generally applicable laws. That's like says there is an ADA exemption for murder or theft. Obviously that's preposterous. Generally applicable laws are not programs from which one can exempt one's self by claiming to be disabled. The judge also ruled that by removing tents, the City is creating a danger under the state-created danger doctrine and thereby violates due process. I don't know of any case where enforcing generally applicable laws has been held to create a danger. Again, these doctrines aren't intended to allow exemptions from general legal prohibitions. How long do cities and their residents have to live like this? How long until we recognize that allowing several individual federal judges to play God-King-Legislator is unsustainable? By the time this gets up to the Supreme Court, it will have been over a decade since the original Boise decision that disabled cities from enforcing camping bans under the Eighth Amendment. Over a decade where cities and their residents couldn't adopt reasonable policies. THIS is why the SHADOW DOCKET exists. Because federal judges keep doing crazy things, and it's only a matter of time before they get overturned. In the meantime the public health and safety, and our democracy, suffers for years and years.

Does this mean that companies can now start giving IQ and skill tests to job applicants again? Thus destroying the need for a worthless college diploma as proxy?

🔥Hot off the presses: @TheJusticeDept issued an opinion today explaining that disparate-impact liability under federal employment law is *unconstitutional*. This is an earthquake in federal civil rights law. If right, this is the foundation to overturn that pernicious regime.

The whole opinion is necessary reading. But I always appreciate a nice summation conclusion. This single paragraph helps to contextualize everything that came before. Read while it's hot!

No to Todd Blanche for Attorney General nationalreview.com/2026/06/n…

The data out of Oregon really are astonishing. A phenomenon once observed in about 1 in 20,000 adult men and 1 in 50,000 adult women (DSM-5) is now being diagnosed and medically treated in at least 1 in 250 17-year-old girls in Oregon.

After the drastic change in guidance to no longer keep allergenic foods away from babies until 1 to 3 years of age and instead introduce them by 6 months of age, the prevalence of egg allergy among children fell by more than 17% in a new study published Monday in the journal JAMA Pediatrics. cnn.it/4v50rM0