The Supreme Court dropped the long-awaited decision in Louisiana v. Callais, and we’re already seeing its impact. SCOTUS Earthquake This week, the Supreme Court delivered an important decision in Louisiana v. Callais, ruling that Louisiana’s congressional map unlawfully relied on race when drawing district lines. For years, the Left has used the Voting Rights Act as a weapon to pressure states into race-based redistricting schemes, even when doing so conflicts with the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments. This only serves to distort representation and further divide the country. The Court rejected that approach and clarified that race cannot be the primary factor in drawing congressional districts absent evidence of intentional, current discrimination. The decision is a major reminder that election maps should be drawn around communities, geography, and legitimate state interests—not racial quotas or partisan demands disguised as civil rights enforcement. Heritage Action supports efforts to protect election integrity, restore constitutional limits, and ensure that voters are represented as citizens—not sorted into districts based on race. We are glad to see that states are already taking action to use this ruling to redraw maps to better represent their citizens. Read our official statement: >> Heritage Action Applauds Supreme Court Decision in Louisiana v. Callais, Restoring Equal Protection Under the Law Reconciliation Update Both the House and Senate have adopted a budget resolution, which unlocks the budget reconciliation process to end the Democrats' shutdown of the Department of Homeland Security. But there’s a catch. The current plan would finally end the blockade on ICE and CBP funding; however, it would also show Democrats that their obstructionist tactics can be successful. That only serves to encourage Chuck Schumer and his radical left base to continue their shenanigans. That’s why Congress should also move a more comprehensive reconciliation package that aggressively reduces federal deficits and scores key wins on a whole host of conservative priorities. The reconciliation process is inherently complex and difficult to execute. That’s why after funding ICE and CBP, Republicans must immediately prepare reconciliation 3.0 before the 4th of July. Reconciliation should be leveraged to meaningfully advance conservative priorities like eliminating waste, fraud, and abuse from government programs. Greater fiscal discipline must remain a central objective of any reconciliation proposal. KEY VOTE: Farm Bill Edition This week Heritage Action issued a Key Vote in support of an amendment that prevents SNAP recipients from purchasing soda with your tax dollars. More than 11% of Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP, aka food stamps) goes toward unhealthy food and sugary drinks. If that’s what “nutrition assistance” means, we might as well set up the Administration for Roast Beef and Yellow-cake-uranium Sandwiches (ARBY’S). We could even bring back Richard “Rachel” Levine to be the agency head! All joking aside, soft drinks alone were purchased to the tune of $8.9 billion with SNAP funds in 2025. That is the largest category purchased on SNAP behind the meat, poultry, and seafood category—the centerpiece of a traditional meal. Wild stuff. The American taxpayer is funding America’s sugar addiction, putting Americans at an increased risk of health problems. It is already bad enough that our tax dollars created the problem, but our taxes also pay for the “solution.” Most SNAP recipients are also on Medicaid or another government healthcare program. Since sugary food and drinks like soda lead to adverse health effects such as obesity, diabetes, and heart problems, we are essentially paying for SNAP users to drink their soda and develop diabetes too. To us, that is not stewarding taxpayer dollars well. Heritage Action Key Voted Representative Keith Self’s (R-TX) Farm Bill amendment to add soda to the list of ineligible products for purchase with SNAP funds; however, it failed to pass. View our scorecard to see how your representative voted and hold them accountable for their actions. Thank you, Karen! After 13 incredible years with Heritage Action, our beloved State Director based in Florida, Karen Jaroch, is retiring! Karen has embodied the joyful warrior spirit in her work alongside Sentinels and advocating in state legislatures in the Gulf of America states. Karen is looking forward to spending time with her grandchildren and influencing the next generation. She will also continue her activism with Heritage Action as a Sentinel. Thank you for all your contributions to the Republic, Karen! - The Heritage Action Team Join the fight to advance the conservative agenda. Heritage Action | 214 Massachusetts Avenue NE, Suite 400 | Washington, D.C. 20002

Attorney David Evans Power Point Senator Budd Introduces Bill to Identify Medicaid Spending Resulting from Marijuana Use https://ncfamily.org/senator-budd-introduces-bill-to-identify-medicaid-spending-resulting-from-marijuana-use/?sm_guid=OTY4OTU0fDYzMDQ2MzM5fC0xfGphbmUuYmlsZWxsb0BnbWFpbC5jb218ODY4MTg3NHx8MHwwfDMxMjgyMTI4N3wxMDg2fDB8MHx8MTc5Njg5MHww0 April 29, 2026 AnnaScott Cross Last week, Senator Ted Budd (R-NC) introduced the Marijuana Impact on Medicaid Act. This bill would require the Secretary of Health and Human Services to collect data on Medicaid spending on hospital care and emergency room visits that result from marijuana use. “The health consequences tied to marijuana use are serious, leading to increased risk for heart attacks, strokes, psychotic disorders, and further addictions. When legislating on this issue, Congress needs to put the health and safety of the American people first, full stop. This is exactly why lawmakers need access to reliable data that details Medicaid spending associated with marijuana abuse. Millions of Americans rely on Medicaid healthcare benefits, and my legislation will ensure Congress understands the dangers of this drug and its impact on federally funded health programs,” said Senator Budd. “We enthusiastically support this important piece of legislation which advances public awareness of marijuana’s costs to society. Senator Budd’s bill calls for an accounting of taxpayer-funded health programs and the impact of normalizing this dangerous drug on their costs—and that’s long overdue. In study after study, significant data appear linking marijuana to serious physical and mental health issues like heart attacks and schizophrenia. Enough is enough,” said Kevin A. Sabet, CEO, Smart Approaches to Marijuana. The Dangers Involved in Marijuana Use There are many health risks associated with marijuana use, including: Cannabinoid Hyperemesis Syndrome, which involves excessive vomiting and abdominal pain; Nearly double the risk of a car crash; Increased chances of psychosis; Worsened mental health problems; and Various lung conditions. In North Carolina alone, there has been an increase in hospitalizations for young men who have used marijuana. In addition, a study published in 2022 found that marijuana users were 22% more likely to visit an emergency department or be hospitalized compared to non-users. NC Family has written for years about the harms of marijuana. The Bottom Line As debates about Medicaid continue, it is important that lawmakers accurately assess where the taxpayer’s money is going. With many states legalizing marijuana and President Trump working on reclassifying it as a less dangerous drug, it is important to consider the costs that will inevitably come from increased access to this dangerous drug.

A Perfet Mother's Day Present Security and Peace of Mind knowing Mom can protect herself. We will pick a winner at the Land of Sky Gun and Knife Show in Asheville on Sunday, May 10th at 3:30PM. Ruger Security-380 Tickets are ($6.00) Only 300 tickets to be sold for this great conceal carry gun. Get your tickets! (Need not be present to win. Read the newsletter here: https://ashevilleteaparty.org/so/e8PtUwDTd?languageTag=en&cid=d7551458-24b1-4a4f-8f88-56b6c0b8cae4

Action Item! Matt Morse video podcast: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RUjE__7GDEY John Thune is not going to push the SAVE America Act across the finish line. So where are the 27 US Senators who can oust him from Pres Pro Tem of the US Senate so we can put America First! 85% of Americans want this! Infuriating! Great explanation of what can be done to thwart this RINO's obstruction.

Posted on Wednesday, April 29, 2026 |n a 6-3 decision on Wednesday, the Supreme Court narrowed the ability of states to draw legislative districts based on race. The ruling limited a key provision of the Voting Rights Act in a move that could allow some Republican-controlled states to draw more favorable U.S. House maps for the GOP. The case specifically centered on Louisiana’s 2024 U.S. House map, which had been redrawn to add a second majority-black district. The Court said that the new map constituted an unlawful racial gerrymander. “Correctly understood, Section 2 does not impose liability at odds with the Constitution, and it should not have imposed liability on Louisiana for its 2022 map,” Justice Samuel Alito wrote in the majority opinion. “Compliance with Section 2 thus could not justify the State’s use of race-based redistricting here.” The Court’s decision notably did not strike down Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, which prohibits voting practices or procedures that discriminate on the basis of race, color, or membership in language minority groups. Critics of Section 2 have long held that it violates the Constitution’s equal protections clause by sorting voters based on race. Nonetheless, liberal Justice Elena Kagan wrote in her dissent that the verdict rendered Section 2 “all but a dead letter.” As Mike Davis, President of the Article III Project, explained, for states to draw district lines explicitly based on race, they have to prove that they are remediating intentional discrimination. “Unless you can show intentional racial discrimination, the courts need to stop getting involved,” Davis said. “No more DEI districts.” During oral arguments last year, Justice Brett Kavanaugh and other conservative justices appeared open to the argument from those challenging Louisiana’s map that Congress intended for a “sunset period” for Section 2, allowing it to weaken over time. Opponents of Section 2 have argued that while it may have been necessary when the law was passed in 1965 to redress intentionally anti-black racial gerrymandering, it is no longer necessary. The ruling could allow Republicans to pick up as many as a dozen seats in states that have racially gerrymandered districts that would appear to conflict with the Court’s decision. Although it is unclear how many of the maps could be changed in time for this year’s midterm elections, the decision could have enormous ramifications for control of the U.S. House in 2028 and beyond. “The American people don’t want to see Americans segregated by race in their congressional maps, which is exactly what was happening in Louisiana,” RNC Chairman Joe Gruters said in a statement. “Today, the Supreme Court reaffirmed a basic constitutional principle: the government cannot discriminate on the basis of race when drawing congressional maps.” Shane Harris is the Editor-in-Chief of AMAC Newsline. You can follow him on X @shaneharris513. by Shane Harris https://amac.us/newsline/politics/breaking-supreme-court-strikes-down-racial-gerrymandering-in-major-victory-for-gop/?utm_objective=website_traffic&utm_source=email&utm_campaign=amac&utm_medium=daily_news_am&utm_content=bsc043026&dderh=aa085185c24d38098bf9b36bbb2af211

https://thefederalist.com/2026/04/28/the-american-left-is-in-thrall-to-political-violence-it-has-to-be-destroyed/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=the-american-left-is-in-thrall-to-political-violence-it-has-to-be-destroyed&utm_term=2026-04-28 In the immediate aftermath of the fourth assassination attempt on President Trump this past weekend at the White House Correspondents’ Dinner, we heard the familiar chorus of voices in the corporate media and political establishment calling for calm, for unity, for lowering the temperature, toning down the rhetoric. We heard the same thing after Charlie Kirk’s assassination last September, and after Trump was shot in the face by a would-be assassin on the campaign trail in July 2024. As always, the people saying this pretend it’s a “both sides” problem, that the political left and right are both at risk of becoming dangerously violent, and that for the sake of our democracy we all need to calm down. What nonsense. There is only one side in America today that has a persistent and very real-world problem with political violence, and everyone knows it’s the left. It’s the left that has produced four would-be assassins of President Trump. It’s the left that produced Charlie Kirk’s assassin and the sneering online hordes who celebrated his murder. It’s the left that produced Luigi Mangione, who allegedly killed UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson in cold blood, and overnight became a folk hero to his fellow travelers. The left riots and burns down cities in a way that makes Jan. 6 look tame, and the corporate press justifies it as a form of political speech. The left regularly threatens conservative speakers and events, forcing organizers to provide a level of security that liberal events never need. The left foments violence not just by spreading false propaganda about conservatives but by funding the supposed right-wing extremists they warn about, as the recent federal criminal indictment of the Southern Poverty Law Center has shown. Surveys consistently find a shocking tolerance for political violence among left-leaning Americans that simply is not present on the right. A YouGov poll last year found a whopping 42 percent of self-described liberals believe political violence is sometimes justifiable (only 9 percent of conservatives said the same). An April 2025 Rutgers University study on political violence found that 56 percent of self-identifying left-wing respondents justified murdering Trump, while 50 percent said the same of Elon Musk. If these numbers were reversed, and showed massive support for political violence on the right, it’s all the corporate press would talk about. As it is, the press won’t even admit the left’s predilection for political violence, even though the reality of it is borne out nearly every week — and not just in the form of trans mass shooters targeting Christian schoolchildren and churches. When Jimmy Kimmel’s show was briefly suspended last year following Kimmel’s vile commentary on Kirk’s assassination (including his false assertion that Kirk’s assassin was MAGA), a man shot up an ABC affiliate station in Sacramento. To be clear, the alleged shooter (a former legislative director for the California Federation of Teachers) was outraged at ABC for suspending Kimmel, not at Kimmel for lying about Kirk’s assassin. Speaking of Kimmel, a few days before Cole Allen allegedly burst into the WHCD venue to kill Trump, Kimmel aired a fake WHCD routine in which he pretended to host the dinner. As part of the routine he said, “Mrs. Trump, you have a glow like an expectant widow.” After the assassination attempt, First Lady Melania Trump rightly called out Kimmel, saying, “People like Kimmel shouldn’t have the opportunity to enter our homes each evening to spread hate.” (The president and first lady both called on ABC to fire Kimmel for his violent rhetoric.) Kimmel isn’t even an outlier on the American left. He’s representative — a normie leftist. Minutes after the assassination attempt at the WHCD, Lincoln Project co-founder Steve Schmidt blamed Trump for almost getting murdered, saying the president is “poisoning the rhetoric” in America, and that he’s a “vile and disgusting man.” The idea that Trump has it coming is a mainstream view on the left. Tune into CNN or The View, and you will hear versions of this violence-inspiring rhetoric spewing forth from the mouths of supposedly respectable, establishment liberals. And yet somehow whenever there’s a high-profile act of political violence from the left — this time not from a nutjob but a man who simply believes all the mainstream left’s conspiracy theories about Trump and decided to act on them — we get the same brain-dead “both-sides” scolding from figures on the establishment right. This time around, it was Princeton professor and professional nice guy Robert P. George, who took to X the day after the assassination attempt to ask if everyone, “right or left, MAGA or anti-MAGA, Republican or Democrat,” could just “stop catastrophizing and trying to get everyone on your side worked up into a rage?” What we need to do, George insisted, is talk it out and make sure we don’t demonize each other. “We need to argue with our political adversaries — passionately perhaps — but with respect for their humanity and dignity. We don’t need to destroy them. That mustn’t be our aim.” The left is manifestly trying to destroy the right, to kill prominent conservatives and Republicans. But Professor George insists you mustn’t destroy them first, just argue with them. It takes a certain trained submissiveness to respond to recurring leftist political violence in this country with such extreme supineness. It’s as if George thinks we’re in an argument with people who simply want a marginally higher tax rate, and things have gotten a little heated. In reality, we’re in a life-or-death contest with bloodthirsty radicals who would very much like to terrorize us without end and orphan our children if they can. It’s not “catastrophizing” to say that, it’s simply to acknowledge what’s actually happening. When ordinary Democrats and liberals publicly celebrated the murder of Charlie Kirk, it’s not “demonizing” anyone to point out that such behavior is in fact demonic and dangerous and has no place in a civilized society. To admit that most of our institutions are complicit in the creation of violent terrorists and would-be assassins is a plain admission of the truth. Under these circumstances, yes, we need to destroy them, we need to stop them. If that means dismantling institutions controlled by the left, then we must dismantle them. If we have to change the law to do that, or apply the law to its fullest possible extent, then by all means we need to do that. To paraphrase Aragorn, war is upon us whether we would risk it or not. We are not going to argue these people out of their commitment to political violence. They are resorting to unjust force, and only just force will stop them. Anything less means allowing them to carry on a campaign of violence and terror against us and our families. Maybe Professor George, ensconced in his ivory tower, is OK with that. He knows they will not come for him. Not at first, anyway. But I’m not OK with it. And you shouldn’t be, either. John Daniel Davidson is a senior editor at The Federalist. His writing has appeared in the Wall Street Journal, the Claremont Review of Books, The New York Post, and elsewhere. He is the author of Pagan America: the Decline of Christianity and the Dark Age to Come. Follow him on Twitter, @johnddavidson. assassination attempts Charlie Kirk assassination Jimmy Kimmel

" ... The 2020 Census overcounted the population of several Democrat-leaning states and undercounted the population of several Republican-leaning states. While the agency admitted this was an error, plaintiffs in the case of University of South Florida College Republicans et al. v. Lutnick allege that its method of sampling led to the inaccuracies in the Census—and, ultimately, to the wrong apportionment of seats in Congress. ..." Read more here: https://www.dailysignal.com/2026/01/01/census-battle-could-change-political-power-in-congress/?utm_source=TDS_Email&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=breaking-james-comey-indicted-again-report&_bhlid=d2f4035f3e5216c9c440d2d50c9bd8dfc5fef242

NC Family Policy Council 4/22/2026 Latest Abortion Numbers: What the Changing Landscape Means for North Carolina April 22, 2026 By Adamo Manfra For nearly fifty years, Roe v. Wade stood as a decisive barrier to meaningful pro-life protections across the country. That changed in 2022, when Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization returned the question of abortion policy “to the people and their elected representatives.”   In the years since, the legal and practical landscape of abortion in the United States has shifted dramatically. States have moved in very different directions, creating a patchwork of laws that reflect deep moral and political divides. But as new data shows, while the landscape is changing, the continued pervasiveness of abortion remains tragic and deeply sobering.   A Changing Map, Not Yet a Declining Number A recent report from the Guttmacher Institute estimates that the total number of clinician-provided abortions in the United States remained essentially unchanged between 2024 and 2025. After a 6% rise from 2023 to 2024 (1,059,610 to 1,123,600), there was a less than 1% rise in 2025 to 1,125,930. Nonetheless, this was the highest number of abortions nationwide since 2009. And, sadly, given that the data excludes “abortions that are not provided by US clinicians (including those provided through community health networks, international clinics, websites or other means),” if anything, “these findings represent an underestimate of the total number of abortions nationally.” In other words, the end of Roe has not yet translated into a sustained national decline in abortion. Instead, it has reshaped where and how abortions occur.   A Varied Legal Landscape Since Dobbs, states have been able to adopt their own abortion laws. As a result, different states have adopted substantially different policies limiting or allowing abortion, reflecting stark political contrasts on the pro-life issue. We now have a wide range of state policies: Twelve states now have laws that provide full 9-month protections Four states have heartbeat protections North Carolina and Nebraska have set limits at twelve weeks At the same time: Nine states and Washington, D.C., have no gestational limits Fifteen states allow abortion until fetal viability Five additional states permit abortion at 20 weeks or later This patchwork has created a new reality: access to abortion increasingly depends not just on whether it is legal, but where a person is willing—and able—to go. That reality is especially evident in North Carolina.   North Carolina: A Regional Destination With the passage of SB 20—Care for Women, Children, and Families Act in 2023, our state took an important step by limiting most abortions after twelve weeks. At the same time, however, this policy has made North Carolina one of the least restrictive states in the Southeast, with only Virginia being less restrictive. The result is clear in the data: North Carolina, like the United States more broadly, saw minimal change in abortion numbers after passage. Worse yet, because North Carolina’s laws are less restrictive than many of our neighboring states, we have become a regional destination for abortion. North Carolina is the second highest in the nation—behind only Illinois—in the number of abortions provided to patients traveling from out of state. Women are coming here from across the region, including Alabama, Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, Tennessee, and Texas. In fact, more than one-third of all abortions performed in North Carolina in recent years have been for out-of-state patients. And while Illinois has seen a decline in such travel, North Carolina has experienced an increase of more than ten percent between 2023 and 2025.   Put simply, policies matter—and ours are shaping not just what happens within our borders, but across the Southeast.   The Deeper Shift: Telehealth and Chemical Abortions At the same time, another transformation is underway—one that is less visible, but just as significant. Nationally, interstate travel for abortion has begun to decline. But this is not primarily because fewer abortions are taking place. Instead, it reflects a growing reliance on chemical abortions, increasingly obtained through telehealth and online distribution.   By 2023, more than 60 percent of clinician-provided abortions were chemical. Telemedicine-only clinics accounted for roughly 10 percent. And according to data from #WeCount, telehealth abortions have surged from under 4 percent in April 2022 to more than 28 percent by June 2025. North Carolina has not been immune to this trend, with telehealth abortions exceeding 17 percent by mid-2025.   Just as concerning is the growing availability of abortion pills through online vendors that operate with little to no meaningful oversight. This shift makes enforcement more difficult, weakens existing safeguards, and raises serious concerns about both legality and safety.   A Policy Response: Addressing the New Reality Recognizing these challenges, state lawmakers have introduced HB 553—Ensuring Patient Safety with Mail Order Meds.This legislation seeks to address the rise of mail-order abortion drugs by extending North Carolina law to out-of-state providers and holding individuals and organizations accountable even when operating beyond state lines. It also would establish criminal penalties for violations and help ensure that abortion-inducing drugs not approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) could not be distributed.   Importantly, the bill would automatically align with federal safety determinations. If the FDA were to revoke or restrict approval of drugs like mifepristone based on their ongoing safety review, the distribution of those drugs in North Carolina would no longer be permitted. This stands in sharp contrast to efforts in some states to shield access to these drugs regardless of federal guidance.   Beyond legal questions, the rise of chemical abortion raises serious concerns about women’s health. Research from the Ethics and Public Policy Center highlights safety concerns associated with mifepristone: approximately one in seven women experience a serious adverse event or require additional medical intervention within 45 days of taking mifepristone.   This highlights a critical point: as abortion increasingly moves outside traditional clinical settings, the risks may become harder to track, regulate, and address.   Moving Forward: The Role of North Carolina The latest data tells a complex story. Abortion in America has certainly not disappeared. Unfortunately, it may still be on the rise. While legislation has made abortion more geographically concentrated in some places, it has also become more decentralized through telehealth and mail-order access. Still, there is evidence that policy decisions matter.   North Carolina’s experience shows that even incremental changes—like those enacted through SB 20—can shape regional patterns and influence real outcomes. That should both encourage and challenge us: Encourage us, because progress is possible; Challenge us, because progress requires action, persistence, and perseverance.   If we hope to build on that foundation—to enact policies that protect both women and preborn children in an increasingly complex landscape—it will require informed, engaged citizens who are willing to speak clearly and compassionately on behalf of life.   The landscape is changing. The question now is whether we will continue to shape it. NC Family remains committed to advancing policies that protect life, and we are grateful for all of you who join us in advocating for the fundamental right to life.

https://myemail.constantcontact.com/NC-Senate-District-46-Newsletter.html?soid=1130799882206&aid=6CoaKqwLyzQ The following is from an April 17th, 2026 newsletter from Sen Warren Daniel. Appreciate the update. Now Senator Daniel needs to get H958 moving, out of committee and passed. It is NC SAVE America Act! H958 Election Law Changes Action Alert: https://www.nceit.org/post/h958-election-law-changes-sponsors-cosponsors-house-rep-lookup ) ELECTION INTEGRITY UPDATE On April 16, the State Board of Elections announced that it will soon check the citizenship of all registered voters in North Carolina against federal databases to identify and remove any non-U.S. citizens from the voter rolls. The board approved new rules at its meeting today for a process that must be followed before a voter is removed. Voters’ names, dates of birth, and the last four digits of Social Security numbers will be run through the federal Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements (SAVE) database, which will provide information on any possible noncitizens. The State Board recently entered into a Memorandum of Agreement with U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services for this purpose. ( https://www.ashevilleteaparty.org/post/state-board-to-check-voter-rolls-to-identify-remove-non-u-s-citizens ) In March, the federal courts upheld the NC Voter ID law. This was a seven-year court battle over a provision that put into action a constitutional amendment that was approved by over 60% of the voters in North Carolina. (   https://www.carolinajournal.com/federal-judge-upholds-nc-voter-id-law-two-years-after-trial/ ) Also in March, a federal judge agreed that NC could safeguard same-day registration ballots with the new voter verification provisions of SB747. Senator Warren T. Daniel | NC Senate | 919-715-7823 | warren.daniel@ncleg.gov STAY CONNECTED Share This Email Share This Email Share This Email